Dumb A$$

[bobcat]

I'd say his sentence was pretty stiff. He lost his hunting rights for 5 years, got 6 days in jail, lost a 2007 Suburban, and paid over $12,000 in penalties, fees, and fines. All for doing something that shouldn't even be against the law. And not only that, but does the WDFW even have any proof that he killed bears with the use of bait? Apparently they didn't, as they dropped the majority of the charges. Yes they have photos of a bait pile, and photos of dead bears, but where's the proof that the bait was used in killing the bears?

No, he should not have done what he did. I'm not saying that. But I do feel the penalties were sufficient.

[Turner89]

Not that this was right in anyway shape or form but I think is BS we cant bait bears in Wa. The blues is COVERED with bears and with only a handfull of tags for a spring hunt there is only gonna be more and more and less and less Elk and Deer. Not to mention the WOLVES! Or very large coyotes! (story to that)

  I beleive bating bears is the most humane way to take a bear.

Bears do not have that big of an impact on deer and elk. Wolves have a much, much larger impact on the deer and elk. Coyotes have more of an impact than bears do.

   I came close to getting my a$$ kicked by a bear when I accidently came between him and the fawn that he had just taken out.  In the spring bears are hungry and fawns are farely easy.

[arguhl]

Stupid for breaking the law, it's horse crap we cant bait bears. My uncle just called me from Wisconsin to tell me about his bear bait tag he drew and that he wont be able to make elk season because of it. This state is so ass backwards in its wildlife management, fees, season regulations, timber practices and well everything else that this guys bear baiting shananagon is the least of our worries, to bad it attracted media attention.

[rebal69972]

You know your screwed when both side turn on you    I agree baiting should be legal but it isn't so we don't do it. Those that break the law are criminals. You can't pick and choose what laws you will fallow. It just seems that black and white to me

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Not that this was right in anyway shape or form but I think is BS we cant bait bears in Wa. The blues is COVERED with bears and with only a handfull of tags for a spring hunt there is only gonna be more and more and less and less Elk and Deer. Not to mention the WOLVES! Or very large coyotes! (story to that)

Bears do not have that big of an impact on deer and elk. Wolves have a much, much larger impact on the deer and elk. Coyotes have more of an impact than bears do.

Bears here in Central Washington are calf elk butchers along with the big cats.

 

They destroy fawns and calves.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

You know your screwed when both side turn on you    I agree baiting should be legal but it isn't so we don't do it. Those that break the law are criminals. You can't pick and choose what laws you will fallow. It just seems that black and white to me

The freedoms our country has (and used to have) exists/existed because a few good men decided to not follow the law.    (not suggesting this is one of those situations but it's much to "black and white" for me personally to make such a wide sweeping statement about laws.........civil disobedience can often be a good thing...it should happen more often...again not directly refrencing this particular scenario)

[buckfvr]

My thoughts on this, if you have a tag and the season is open, it should be up to the individual as to how he hunts.......not some non-hunter/anti hunter group that has a politician writing laws for them.   

Bears , among other predators, can be managed with a quota system......quota is reached, end of season.  Its not like baiting bear will eliminate them.  Baiting is alot of work to do it right.  Not all hunters have the time or are willing to put forth the effort to bait.

I personally, am tired of politicians and those that think they know whats best for the rest of us.  We are over managed and suffocated with the burden of obeying  laws that shouldnt be. 

[pianoman9701]

Officers say Erickson is a guy who should've known better. He worked as a manager at the Cabela's in Lacey, and should be well-versed the law against bear baiting.

Really?
Just because he manages a retail outlet he is supposed to know game laws? What a stupid statement.

I agree. Because he hunts he should know the rules. Glad they busted him, too. He broke them.

[Huntbear]

My thoughts on this, if you have a tag and the season is open, it should be up to the individual as to how he hunts.......not some non-hunter/anti hunter group that has a politician writing laws for them.   

Bears , among other predators, can be managed with a quota system......quota is reached, end of season.  Its not like baiting bear will eliminate them.  Baiting is alot of work to do it right.  Not all hunters have the time or are willing to put forth the effort to bait.

I personally, am tired of politicians and those that think they know whats best for the rest of us.  We are over managed and suffocated with the burden of obeying  laws that shouldnt be.

Well  you are preaching to the choir here... maybe get an initiative written and get it on the ballot next year to over turn the baiting laws???   

[pianoman9701]

I'd say his sentence was pretty stiff. He lost his hunting rights for 5 years, got 6 days in jail, lost a 2007 Suburban, and paid over $12,000 in penalties, fees, and fines. All for doing something that shouldn't even be against the law. And not only that, but does the WDFW even have any proof that he killed bears with the use of bait? Apparently they didn't, as they dropped the majority of the charges. Yes they have photos of a bait pile, and photos of dead bears, but where's the proof that the bait was used in killing the bears?

No, he should not have done what he did. I'm not saying that. But I do feel the penalties were sufficient.

But it is against the law and justifying his actions with this argument is fodder for the antis to say that hunters do what they want, regardless of laws.

If you don't like the laws, you can try and change them. But breaking laws you don't agree with is on you. As a hunter who fights regularly to retain my privileges and rights, I will stay beyond reproach or lose any credibility when it comes to calling the antis out on the carpet for a duel. Give them nothing.

[bobcat]

I'd say his sentence was pretty stiff. He lost his hunting rights for 5 years, got 6 days in jail, lost a 2007 Suburban, and paid over $12,000 in penalties, fees, and fines. All for doing something that shouldn't even be against the law. And not only that, but does the WDFW even have any proof that he killed bears with the use of bait? Apparently they didn't, as they dropped the majority of the charges. Yes they have photos of a bait pile, and photos of dead bears, but where's the proof that the bait was used in killing the bears?

No, he should not have done what he did. I'm not saying that. But I do feel the penalties were sufficient.

But it is against the law and justifying his actions with this argument is fodder for the antis to say that hunters do what they want, regardless of laws.

If you don't like the laws, you can try and change them. But breaking laws you don't agree with is on you. As a hunter who fights regularly to retain my privileges and rights, I will stay beyond reproach or lose any credibility when it comes to calling the antis out on the carpet for a duel. Give them nothing.

I wasn't trying to justify his actions, only trying to point out that the penalties he received were more than sufficient.
(since it seems many were saying that they let him off too easy)

[Curly]

I agree that the punishment seems adequate to me.  Now if the vehicle he had confiscated was a 1981 Suzuki instead of a 2007 Suburban, I might change my mind.

[pianoman9701]

I'd say his sentence was pretty stiff. He lost his hunting rights for 5 years, got 6 days in jail, lost a 2007 Suburban, and paid over $12,000 in penalties, fees, and fines. All for doing something that shouldn't even be against the law. And not only that, but does the WDFW even have any proof that he killed bears with the use of bait? Apparently they didn't, as they dropped the majority of the charges. Yes they have photos of a bait pile, and photos of dead bears, but where's the proof that the bait was used in killing the bears?

No, he should not have done what he did. I'm not saying that. But I do feel the penalties were sufficient.

But it is against the law and justifying his actions with this argument is fodder for the antis to say that hunters do what they want, regardless of laws.

If you don't like the laws, you can try and change them. But breaking laws you don't agree with is on you. As a hunter who fights regularly to retain my privileges and rights, I will stay beyond reproach or lose any credibility when it comes to calling the antis out on the carpet for a duel. Give them nothing.

I wasn't trying to justify his actions, only trying to point out that the penalties he received were more than sufficient.
(since it seems many were saying that they let him off too easy)

  Thanks for the clarification, BC.

[Curly]

After seeing the pic in that article I'm suddenly hungry for a doughnut.  I think I'll have to take a break and go for a doughnut.........

[opdinkslayer]

I agree with the guys that point out that the real crime is that they allowed game management issues be decided on the ballot by uninformed and emotional non hunters. Many places on the west side where bears will never be harvested without hounds or a quality bait. I wonder how the antis feel about the timber companies killing bears and leaving them to rot instead of hunters using the resource? Too many people see that and think you dump a box of doughnuts out along side the 1st gravel road out of town and its a stampede of bears from the brush to ever get it overturned. As far as that guy goes, he mite want to try to be a little more discreet about his law breaking practices next time.