Hunting Washington Forum

Big Game Hunting => Bear Hunting => Topic started by: fireweed on May 29, 2017, 11:42:26 AM


Advertise Here
Title: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: fireweed on May 29, 2017, 11:42:26 AM
http://www.king5.com/tech/science/environment/loophole-allows-illegal-bear-hunt-involving-dogs-every-year/441848427

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: ghosthunter on May 29, 2017, 11:51:55 AM
There is a thread on this already I think. :sry:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: singleshot12 on May 29, 2017, 12:34:13 PM
I knew a couple guys who did this. They were nothing but contract killers by the state. They bragged about killing 30+ bears a piece each Spring. Not sure what they did with all the meat either. Very pathetic.  Maybe the people who voted out baiting and hounds are having second thoughts now. Atleast the meat wasn't being wasted before the stupid ban.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 29, 2017, 02:06:22 PM
I don't think it is a loophole.  Isn't it written plainly right there in the law?  The huggers voted for it, so they said it was okay.  And like 99.99% of stuff voted on by the left, the big corporations benefit and everyone else gets the shaft.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: WA hunter14 on May 29, 2017, 02:31:49 PM
I don't think it is a loophole.  Isn't it written plainly right there in the law?  The huggers voted for it, so they said it was okay.  And like 99.99% of stuff voted on by the left, the big corporations benefit and everyone else gets the shaft.

Exactly
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Machias on May 29, 2017, 03:20:46 PM
Talk about a BS hit piece.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: snake on May 29, 2017, 04:02:20 PM
Horrible piece of journalism.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: fireweed on May 29, 2017, 04:18:27 PM
questionable slanted journalism aside, this practice gives away a big game animal--essentially wasting bears. hunters who buy tags and hunt the seasons are loosing out.  And on top of that, these timber companies CHARGE regular season bear hunters to access their damaging bears.  They even charge for spring bear season access, which was set up just for damage control. 

Every time the WDFW has us comment on seasons, my biggest gripe is that timber companies are allowed to charge regular season bear hunters, spring bear hunters, and then have the hound loophole too.  No special seasons or hound permits without free access during regular bear seasons.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: WA hunter14 on May 29, 2017, 04:43:41 PM
Do you not understand why the timber company's greatly prefer letting in a few select guys rather than a pile of boot hunters to kill off the amount of bears they need killed?
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: batch on May 29, 2017, 05:17:07 PM
Talk about a BS hit piece.

exactly
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Alan K on May 29, 2017, 05:19:59 PM
It's also not about reducing numbers, it's about removing the peeling bears. Boot hunters may or may not be harvesting a peeling bear on a spring bear hunt, in fact I'd guess that more often than not they don't simply because the peelers are living in the thick 12-18 y/o reprod. Most boot hunters harvest in younger stands where they are starting to pull on stumps or feeding on grasses. Boot hunts on the west side have terrible success rates as well. I think the spring bear permits are more of an opportunity given to the hunting community than a major aid to the timber companies.

Not wanting to allow free and unfettered access to their private property is hardly a reason for any landowner large or small to have to incur relentless property damage.

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: hunter399 on May 29, 2017, 06:16:51 PM
It's also not about reducing numbers, it's about removing the peeling bears. Boot hunters may or may not be harvesting a peeling bear on a spring bear hunt, in fact I'd guess that more often than not they don't simply because the peelers are living in the thick 12-18 y/o reprod. Most boot hunters harvest in younger stands where they are starting to pull on stumps or feeding on grasses. Boot hunts on the west side have terrible success rates as well. I think the spring bear permits are more of an opportunity given to the hunting community than a major aid to the timber companies.

Not wanting to allow free and unfettered access to their private property is hardly a reason for any landowner large or small to have to incur relentless property damage.


Boot hunter may , or may not be harvesting a peeling bear tells me you don't really know for sure.Unless you shoot the bear in the act of peeling .How do you know where most bear hunters harvest there bear,is there some kind of fact sheet I'm missing.And yes you do need to provide access or suck it up as a loss.Bears where here long before any tree farm.Its about like that guy that shot all those elk and left them to rot , cause he didn't wanna give access to his land for damage permits that the state gave him.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Humptulips on May 29, 2017, 06:39:50 PM
Any problems are a direct result of I-655 IMO.
If boot hunters can't target peelers because of the brush I bet bait hunters could.
 A hound hunter killing too many bears? I bet if it was opened up to all hound hunters WDFW would make sure they stayed within their limit.
Oh yea, Lisa Watne and HSUS suckered people into outlawing that.
Probably the two most humane and selective ways to harvest bear passed at the behest of the so called Humane Society.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: hunter399 on May 29, 2017, 07:53:15 PM
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: snake on May 29, 2017, 07:54:11 PM
"Peelers" LOL, like its a problem bear who keeps getting into peoples garbage cans. Tree bark is part of their diet this time of year. Let them run the dogs and reduce the numbers.  There are still WAY too many bear in every corner of the state.  HAHA like you can target a "Peeling" bear with dogs, good luck.LOL 
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: JeffRaines on May 29, 2017, 08:20:19 PM
Me personally, I know the huggers are never going to allow baiting or hound hunting again... so it would be really nice if they want ahead and nixed the hound hunting that is allowed currently and opened up more spring bear opportunity... maybe separate OTC tags for certain units?
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: hunter399 on May 29, 2017, 08:23:50 PM
Me personally, I know the huggers are never going to allow baiting or hound hunting again... so it would be really nice if they want ahead and nixed the hound hunting that is allowed currently and opened up more spring bear opportunity... maybe separate OTC tags for certain units?
I agree hound hunting should be for public safety,not property damage,more tags can be given untill a quota has been reached ,they don't seem to have a problem doing it this way for cougar. :dunno:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: CementFinisher on May 29, 2017, 08:32:40 PM
hunters at other hunters throats. sickening!
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: JeffRaines on May 29, 2017, 08:52:21 PM
hunters at other hunters throats. sickening!

You know as well as I do that once people see this the tree huggers are going to call for it to be banned like the rest, and looking at the past it seems like they almost always get their way so you know how its going to go... when(not if) it happens, hopefully it will open up more opportunities for spring bear hunting for the rest of us.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: GBoyd on May 29, 2017, 09:26:16 PM
It really bothers me that the agency is allowing this much population reduction. Some amount of crop damage from wildlife should be expected. I don't see any reason to go kill a ton of bears every time Weyco complains about some dead trees.

Remember, public corporations have no interest in wildlife. It costs them money to allow animals on their property. If the shareholders got their way, they would remove all the bears, deer, and elk. The reason the animals exist on that land is that we have laws protecting them. It's completely within our rights to obligate them to tolerate a little more peeling. Especially because bears are OTC and open season for half the year! It's not an easy hunt, but plenty of bears are killed within the recreational hunt.

WDFW should drastically reduce the damage permits and restrict them to the most extreme cases.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Alan K on May 29, 2017, 10:06:08 PM
Before spring bear seasons would be allowed on their property, I'd bet land owners would utilize supplemental feeding. Both cannot be used at the same time for obvious reasons, and feeding has been proven more effective at limiting damage. Depredation permits are generally sought to target the bears that insist on peeling despite having access to unlimited feed.

The purpose of these depredation permits are not in any way to replace recreational hunts, it's to reasonably limit property damage.

I know part of the OP's gripe is over free access, and by some of the posts it looks like some people think land owners are replacing 'lost' general season harvest with depredation harvest but that just isn't the case looking at the numbers. Since access permits became prevalent depredation harvest has actually steadily declined.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: buglebrush on May 29, 2017, 11:47:12 PM
Peeling can be a huge problem.  I've found entire stands if toner decimated.  Either way I am super pleased to hear they are killing bears.  This state needs to kill way way more bears!   :twocents:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: grundy53 on May 30, 2017, 06:08:54 AM
Peeling can be a huge problem.  I've found entire stands if toner decimated.  Either way I am super pleased to hear they are killing bears.  This state needs to kill way way more bears!   :twocents:
Agreed

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: headshot5 on May 30, 2017, 06:52:45 AM
Quote
Peeling can be a huge problem.  I've found entire stands if toner decimated.  Either way I am super pleased to hear they are killing bears.  This state needs to kill way way more bears!

I agree. 
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: HighCountryHunter88 on May 30, 2017, 07:21:15 AM
what everyone seems to be missing is the point that boot hunters cannot kill enough bears in a certain amount of time in a specific local... if they opened up a couple square miles around the damage open for everyone, everyone would be complaining about how crowded it is and how its a joke.. Hounds are the best tool for the job.

also, meat, hides, ect. are all to be turned in for each kill. its not going to waste.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: fireweed on May 30, 2017, 08:43:30 AM
Do you not understand why the timber company's greatly prefer letting in a few select guys rather than a pile of boot hunters to kill off the amount of bears they need killed?
Of course timber companies greatly prefer it, but bears are an asset of the people and  are supposed to be managed by the state for the benefit of everyone in the state, even if big timber is inconvenienced.   
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: singleshot12 on May 30, 2017, 12:11:53 PM
Debate about it all you want. The fact is it is a political game like everything else. The license buying boot hunter gets the short end of the stick again. This state is backwards and keeps getting worse. Huggers with their ill minded agenda's and corporate tree farms that only care about profit :twocents:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Special T on May 30, 2017, 12:15:04 PM
Debate about it all you want. The fact is it is a political game like everything else. The license buying boot hunter gets the short end of the stick again. This state is backwards and keeps getting worse. Huggers with their ill minded agenda's and corporate tree farms that only care about profit :twocents:
You would think that the department would want to sell a couple hundred more spring bear permits to bring in some more cash...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: singleshot12 on May 30, 2017, 12:19:43 PM
You would think!  But everything is so damn political that logic is gone with the wind.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: seth30 on May 30, 2017, 02:37:18 PM
My Ex wife's coworkers husband did that for the timber companies I believe.  When he told me about it, I thought it was all BS and trying to sound cool.  :bash:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Humptulips on May 30, 2017, 07:12:54 PM
I really don't blame the timber companies. Bears can easily damage 3% of the trees in a stand. add that up over 30 years and there is nothing left. Especially bad for a small land owner if a bear camps out on his land.
A guy I worked for at one time has 160 acres that abut FS land. Just off his land there is a big stump that bears den under. Every year a sow spends the winter there and when she comes out with cubs she pretty much lives off his trees. The damage has really taken a toll. He tried hound hunters but they would chase the bear back far enough to where they were required to quit it and the bear would practically beat them back after they rounded the dogs up. He killed one bear in 5 years.
Finally hired USDA to snare his land and they killed I think 5 the first year.
You can complain about the hound guys if you want but if they don't thin the bear out USDA is going to come in. I know most bear damage complaints in OR are taken care of by snaring. I know the guy that does a large percentage of it.

IMO the problem is not the hound guys or the land owners or WDFW for that matter. It is the law. Change the law and the problem gets fixed. The way it is WDFWs hands are tied.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 08, 2017, 01:56:53 PM
It isn't a loophole, as it is specifically written into the law. I am one of the hunters that targets these bears.  I don't use hounds, but I do spend hundreds of hours a year in the woods from April until the end of June. Also, I am acting as an agent of the state when I am out there.   The properties I assist with do not belong to large companies like WEYCO, Green Diamond, or Intl. Paper.  The properties I protect belong to small forest landowners, usually around 150-250 acres.  We also work very closely with WDFW conflict management specialists, as well as enforcement.  It isn't a willy nilly operation like Alison Morrow makes it out to be.  There is no pay for me for my time.  The landowners do not get reimbursed for damage like other AG producers, so it is all on us.

We are very good at what we do, it is all volunteer, and it is a *censored* ton of work.  I found damage on May 14th this year, and the next day we had that bear on the ground, 450 yards from the damage site.  When WDFW bios came to the kill site we opened the stomach and found cambium in its gut.

On one tree farm in May 2015 I found 45 trees damaged in a single day.  Left unchecked, the damage can be catastrophic to small forest land owners.  How much would 45 mature doug fir trees be worth?  How many board feet of timber is that?  Multiply that times 30-45 days of the peeling season, and the impact gets bigger, quickly.

Also remember that depredation hunting, taking out problem animals, is not meant to be a fair chase situation.  Do you want a problem cougar to be left to roam after picking off pets and livestock, or do you want it dealt with as immediately as possible?  It is a very targeted type of hunting meant to mitigate current or future damage.  Nothing more, nothing less.   

As to the bloodlust comments, well, I have an active bear on a property that has had significant damage in the past.  The thing is there has been no damage this year on this property.  In talking with the landowner the other day they asked about progress with the bear.  I told them that while there is a bear on the property, it is eating grass and other foods, and not peeling trees, so I didn't see a need to drop him.  They agreed.  If I run into him, it may be a bad day for him, but in the mean time I'll continue to check the property every other day, without pay, and see what my trail cameras reveal, and hope for no damage.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: h20hunter on June 08, 2017, 01:58:57 PM
Pretty interesting stuff there fish. Nice to have you and thanks for the input
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Rainier10 on June 08, 2017, 02:17:02 PM
Pretty interesting stuff there fish. Nice to have you and thanks for the input
:yeah:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 08, 2017, 02:20:26 PM
In addition to dealing with the depredation issues on these properties, we also act as gillies, watching over the properties while the landowner isn't there.  Over the Memorial Day weekend I had a pop-up blind, a set of shooting sticks, and a tripod chair stolen.  Did a little more exploring and found a lot of cascara trees that had been peeled.  Probably two separate issues, that just happened on the same day.  I had my cameras set for animals, not people, so I didn't get them on camera.  Added 6 more cameras, and guess what?  Caught someone up past three no trespassing signs and a gate, where they shouldn't be. 

Any ideas who this jeep belongs to? 
(http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q233/mesoas/Mobile%20Uploads/B86DBDD1-51B5-45E3-92CB-60553392223B.jpg) 

If you do, I, and WDFW enforcement, and the GHSO would like to talk to them.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: h20hunter on June 08, 2017, 02:22:19 PM
Not good.

Please share some fatty bear pics if you got 'em!
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 08, 2017, 02:28:34 PM
If WDFW and the sheriff want to talk to that guy, why not just run the plate on that jeep?
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 08, 2017, 02:53:14 PM
If WDFW and the sheriff want to talk to that guy, why not just run the plate on that jeep?

They are going to do that at some time, but they have limited time and manpower to go after property crimes.  If I had access to do so, I'd have done it already.  Property crimes are the lowest priority, and I don't blame them for prioritizing as such.  Also the picture isn't 100% clear, so there are at least 4 possibilities for the plate.  This would be someone who regularly travels in the Malone area, along the Mox-Chehalis Rd. 

 
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 08, 2017, 02:55:59 PM
Not good.

Please share some fatty bear pics if you got 'em!

I'll share some trail camera pics of the bears later.  Pics of harvested depredation bears are not shared.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: h20hunter on June 08, 2017, 02:57:45 PM
 :tup:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: bearpaw on June 08, 2017, 03:43:03 PM
Thanks for the input dogfish! :tup:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2017, 06:08:22 PM
You guys have "journalists" over there that spent a year of there life covering what we call spring bear season LOL
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dreamunelk on June 08, 2017, 07:24:12 PM
You guys have "journalists" over there that spent a year of there life covering what we call spring bear season LOL

Careful - the disease can spread to other states.  Spent a week in Idaho recently for work.  Kind of surprising the number of libs I met.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2017, 07:44:31 PM
You guys have "journalists" over there that spent a year of there life covering what we call spring bear season LOL

Careful - the disease can spread to other states.  Spent a week in Idaho recently for work.  Kind of surprising the number of libs I met.

I'm not real worried
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dreamunelk on June 08, 2017, 07:46:38 PM
You guys have "journalists" over there that spent a year of there life covering what we call spring bear season LOL

Careful - the disease can spread to other states.  Spent a week in Idaho recently for work.  Kind of surprising the number of libs I met.

I'm not real worried

Neither were we!
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 09, 2017, 12:45:22 AM
These depredation tags are for houndsmen, master hunter over bait, and fda snare guys

Correct. I am in that group of folks. 
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 09, 2017, 12:52:27 AM
You guys have "journalists" over there that spent a year of there life covering what we call spring bear season LOL

When I called her out on her poor article on cougar hunting, where she stated that hunter's killed twice the state guideline, she didn't like being challenged on facts.  He reply to me when I told her she needed to tell all the facts was, "but Andrew, that's not what we do."   

Once I saw the backchannel emails from her to folks in the WFPA, and small forest landowners, I knew it was going to be a real cluster.  She is a piece of work. 
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Stickerbush on June 09, 2017, 06:33:50 AM
Tag
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: skagitsteel on June 17, 2017, 04:47:37 PM
terrible piece of Journalism that is not supported by facts.  I don't have a problem that hired houndsmen are used in special circumstances to reduce bear populations in problem areas, However as a hunter it does frustrate me that we don't have some expanded opportunity to hunt them in the spring given that we are currently underharvesting bears in this state. 

my preffered method of bear hunting is spot and stalk, however I think it is clear the ban on hounds and bait was a political move based on people's emotions rather than actual facts. 

 I see no reason to not have atleast the entire west side of the state have an over the counter general hunt.  We have the healthiest bear population in the lower 48 and almost every other state with huntable numbers of black bears has an OTC spring tag, that makes no sense to not have one here!  I think a spring tag would help in boosting harvest numbers for bears which are underharvested in most people opinion.  I don't hunt fall bears much anymore mainly becasue of other opportunites, I would pursue them a lot more with an OTC spirng tag,I don't think I am alone in that approach either. 

More spring bear tags in units are not going to cut it because simply put spot and stalk hunting is not very effective for reducing bear numbers in a small area.  for example the North Skagit unit sees 'roughly'  5 to 7 bear harvested each year in my understanding.  I was talking to one of the WDFW guys and when they increased the number of tags from 20 to 30 a while back it did nothing to increase the number of bears harvested, just more guys driving around behind the gates.  I hunted the unit hard in 2014 and saw quite a few bears being selective in what I chose to harvest, however on average most guys had a tough hunt. 

I think a genreal tag would help keep overall populations in check, however in problem areas I don't see any other way to reduce bear numbers effectively other than special permitting for bait or hounds.  If 5 bears are hammering trees in one area, there is no way spot and stalk guys are going to be effective.  In this situation I say let them run the hounds it doesn't take away from a hunters opportunity AS LONG AS we have a general OTC spring tag.  just my  :twocents:
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Humptulips on June 17, 2017, 05:55:43 PM
A little off topic but the mention of No Trespassing signs struck a nerve with me.
I have no problem with depredation work being done by hound hunting, trapping, bait or just stalking but I do have a problem with the Department writing depredation hunt permits to landowners that close their lands to hunting by the public. The Department should have the option of refusing to issue permits if the landowner does not cooperate in allowing public hunting a chance to solve the problem.
I do not believe WDFW can do that now. On my wish list of changes I want to see in the laws.
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: dogfish on June 26, 2017, 12:28:38 PM
As far as no trespassing is concerned, I have had cameras and other gear stolen from the two properties I manage.  The landowner's maple trees were tested by someone searching for burly maple in between late deer and the beginning of this spring's depredation season, while I had no cameras in the woods.  They knock off sections of the bark with an axe or hatchet.  The landowners have had cameras stolen.  They have had people cutting trails onto the property from neighboring properties for ATV use.  We even had one elk poached up there two years ago, and we caught those folks on camera.  SMILE!  This is how open access gets shut down.  People are slobs.

One property has only a timber management easement across another person's property, making it effectively landlocked for access, having to go through two gates to get there across a landowner's property who doesn't allow any hunting on their property.  How are they supposed to make that property open to the general public? 

These properties do get hunted, as the landowners allow me to take folks I know and trust onto the land to hunt.  These properties get hunted hard from September 1-December 31.  The landowner doesn't charge for this access, I don't charge for this access, unlike WEYCO, Green Diamond, and others.  I would guess 10-12 people get access to these 250-300 acre properties annually.  I work getting kids out in the woods, and have made the properties accessible to vets, and folks with physical limitations.  It gets them access to areas where they don't have to deal with the pumpkin patch mentality where some guy sets up 50 yards away from you, for a safe and controlled hunt.

One other note, the State doesn't pay anything to these tree farmers for any damage, unlike other crop farmers.  I don't get reimbursed by the state for my expenses, and the landowners don't pay me anything for my time.  The state has one employee, Ralf, who manages the bear depredation full time from April-July.  They also have wildlife conflict specialists (1 per region) and sometimes a field assistant who spend a minimal amount of time from April-July on bear depredation.  It isn't a huge budget issue for the state.  Check out how many IT folks work for WDFW compared to the small but efficient staff they have working on bear depredation from April-July.

On average over the past 4 year's I have volunteered over 160 hours during each depredation season, and I'm exhausted at the end.  Oh, I also have a day job, and a small side business.  During hunting season I hunt the east side, but after I am done with my tags I'm out there almost every weekend acting as the ghillie for these landowners.  Easily another 100 hours annually.  Want to join me?  Sign up, become a master hunter, get your volunteer hours with me, and let's get after it. 260 hours annually, that's 6.5 forty hour weeks, volunteered, unpaid.  My annual requirement is 8. 

Otherwise, you're just pissing and moaning.         
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: bracer40 on July 03, 2017, 10:55:47 PM
Dogfish,

Thanks for the great posts. Real eye opener on an area I didn't fully understand. Sounds like you're out there taking care of business and having a good time of it...

I didn't watch the news story...I have little expectation that any tv news story  from Seattle about hunting  would be fair minded....even though I'm kinda stuck here for now

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Caseyd on August 11, 2019, 06:48:43 PM
https://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news/local/thurston-county-judge-rules-timber-farm-bear-hunts-dont-violate-state-law/281-171fa100-4e09-431b-a7ac-1582629245cf

Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Bob33 on August 11, 2019, 07:02:29 PM
https://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news/local/thurston-county-judge-rules-timber-farm-bear-hunts-dont-violate-state-law/281-171fa100-4e09-431b-a7ac-1582629245cf
:chuckle:

"I'm very disappointed and frankly quite stunned. I would not have expected this," explained Lisa Wathne, an original spokesperson for I-655. "The Department of Fish and Wildlife has been so blatantly violating the initiative that it's just stunning to me that they're being allowed to get away with this."
Title: Re: Loophole allows "illegal" bear hunt with dogs--King 5 Story
Post by: Stein on August 12, 2019, 04:01:43 PM
At least they changed the title of the story, it used to say the hunts were illegal.

It's what to expect around here, I will compliment WDFW for fighting it.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal