by Jerry Cornfield, Washington State Standard
April 3, 2026
A federal lawsuit filed Thursday accuses the leaders of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife of attempting to silence a member of the citizen panel that oversees the agency in retaliation for her ongoing criticism of their administration.
Director Kelly Susewind and Deputy Director Amy Windrope targeted Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Lorna Smith, manufacturing allegations about her conduct to incite an investigation by the governor’s office, according to the lawsuit. The complaint contends that the probe has harmed her reputation and could lead to her removal.
“I have been outspoken,” Smith said in a statement. “The Commission cannot operate effectively and wisely if commissioners feel bullied or are hesitant or afraid to speak or vote freely.”
The suit also accuses Susewind and Windrope of making defamatory statements and unfounded allegations against attorney Claire Davis and the wildlife advocacy group she leads, in an alleged rebuke for her critical comments and numerous lawsuits the group filed against the department
“What happened here was about using the machinery of government to go after people engaging in protected speech,” said Francisco J. Santiago-Ávila, science and advocacy director for Washington Wildlife First, at a Thursday news conference. Washington Wildlife First wants to see Susewind removed from his leadership post.
Alicia LeDuc Montgomery, attorney for Davis and the wildlife group, described the actions to reporters as “state-sanctioned repression.” The conduct should be concerning to Washington’s attorney general and governor because those offices are “being asked to give cover to the defendants’ unconstitutional retaliation,” she said.
Smith, Davis and Washington Wildlife First filed their lawsuit in U.S. District Court in western Washington.
Susewind, who has served as Department of Fish and Wildlife director since August 2018, and Windrope are the only named defendants.
“I am unaware of the litigation and we can’t comment on active litigation at this time,” Susewind said in a statement.
Old wounds, new chapter
Thursday’s lawsuit is the latest flashpoint in a multi-year drama involving the commission, which is often a battleground for groups fighting over how far the state should go in protecting wildlife or allowing for hunting or fishing of various species.
It arrives days before the expected completion of an investigation ordered by Gov. Bob Ferguson, looking at whether Smith and other commissioners violated open meetings and public records laws in the course of a months-long debate ahead of a November 2021 vote to ban hunting of black bears the following spring.
Sportsmen’s Alliance, an Ohio-based organization, opposed the decision. Convinced commissioners misbehaved throughout the process, it sought their emails, texts and other communications to figure out if they failed to follow state law. The group went to court and eventually received thousands of records last year.
Susewind is a hunter, and Thursday’s lawsuit says he egged on those angered by the spring bear hunt decision. This resulted in ongoing verbal attacks at public meetings and online of Smith and other commissioners who voted for the ban.
The governor quietly hired an investigator in June 2025 to sort out if any government transparency laws were breached. This report was expected last fall, but the contract has been extended three times. It is now due April 13.
Ferguson first acknowledged the investigation in August after Susewind asked for it. The lawsuit points to a May 2025 memo by a Fish and Wildlife Department lawyer as fueling the probe and the department leaders’ campaign to quell the voices of Smith and Davis.
Susewind had Thomas Knoll Jr., a criminal justice legal liaison, review public records generated from the hunters’ group’s request and provide an “independent assessment” of potential inappropriate conduct. Susewind’s move was unusual, as the commissioners oversee his department and he answers to the panel.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Knoll concluded the behavior of Smith and Commissioner Melanie Rowland posed “serious risks” to the department, “especially when it comes to avoiding a conflict of interest and favoritism.”
The report also scrutinizes a former commissioner, Tim Ragen, who Ferguson chose to replace on the panel last year. Washington Wildlife First wanted to see Ragen kept on the commission.
Knoll expressed concerns about Smith and Rowland’s “tight relationship” with Davis, at one point saying they appeared to “have each other on speed dial.” He hinted at collusion between them.
The lawsuit says the memo is “rife with false, misleading, inflammatory, and defamatory allegations.”
It accuses Susewind and Windrope of directing Knoll to produce a document that could serve as a vehicle to chill the plaintiffs’ speech and motivate the governor to get involved. The suit alleges that the agency leaders knew an investigation would cause reputational, financial, and emotional harm to the plaintiffs, especially if it became public.
In addition to seeking damages, the plaintiffs hope that the lawsuit spurs the full commission to exercise its authority to investigate Susewind and act.
“We’ve asked the commission to remove him based on this broader pattern of mismanagement and behavior, including this most recent effort to target certain commissioners based on their viewpoints or criticism of his administration,” Santiago-Ávila told reporters.
Washington State Standard is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Washington State Standard maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Bill Lucia for questions: info@washingtonstatestandard.com.