How about UNCLE TED Baiting Bear in WA

[Rhinoron247]

Just watched Uncle Ted on a Baited Bear hunt in WA.  Res hunt of course.  Kinda feel like there rubbing it in.  Just pisses me off about the whole situation.  Thought I would vent.

[rainshadow1]

He mentioned the hound/bait ban, I thought that was good. I didn't see much of it, kids were in the tub, etc. But I caught that part, and thought it was good.

All the Quiliautes/Quinaults I've ever met have been really nice folks. His guide seemed representative.

[PWN Kurt]

Where did you see it?  Was it on TV?

How did he do?  Did he take a 6 footer with his Glock?

Kurt

[huntnfmly]

I watched it also.Its not very often you see a hunting show in wa.When he talked about the hound/bait band I thought that was good also.

[JBar]

Crap! I Missed it!  I hunted with them this spring and missed seeing Ted by half a day. Wanted to see that episode bad. I guess I'll have to wait for it to re-air. I agree Rainshadow John and Phil are really nice people as were all the others I met out there. Hoping to go back next May!

[MHWASH]

I saw a large part of the show. I was a bit confused when they talked about the banning of bait and hounds, and then showed him hunting over bait. The guide then metioned permits, so mabey they have a permit that alllows baiting, much like the permits for hound hunting cougs.

 Then again it is the indians, so I don't know.

[pendoreilleadventures]

I am currently working with the kalispel tribe with one of there tribal members. to get baiting allowed on their res. reservations don't have to follow state laws only Federal laws. If the tribal council passes the resolutions then that would allow non members to hunt on reservation lands with the use of bait. the only thing you need t have is a depredation tag from the state which is free as well as Pay $250 for a tribal tag and license. and of course a guide. not sure what i am going to charge yet. That is if it all works out if it does then I will be offering hunts this spring.

[Timberlineduke]

I caught that episode too......I wasn't impressed with the bear he got.....but I thought it was neat that he exploited the fact that Washington can't bait or hound hunt bear anymore and that there is significant timber damage as a result......to bad he didn't plug the urban bear problems as well........GO DA-NUGE 

[Rhinoron247]

I don't have a problem with Ted and I don't have a problem with the hunt.  I am just pissed about the BS Bunny hugging 206 idiots that think they can dictate what the rest of us can do.  (By the way I have 206 area code on my cell).

If you haven't purchased a hunting license each year for the last 2 years you should not be able to vote on wildlife issues.   I just wish he would have really went off (A real rant) about the dumb ass bait / hound ban in this state.   

[rjm5]

Ya he hunted this spring. My buddy was hunting the same time he was, he wanted me to go so I went, don't like hunting that way but was gonna be a good friend. We got to meet Nugent while we were down there. He shot his bear on the first night then didn't see a bear for the next 4 days.

[JoshT]

First of all... Ted ain't my uncle, I can't stand that duche bag.

Second... if you want to shoot a bear... then hunt a bear. Screw dogs, and screw a bait pile... all I know is the lack of baiting and hound hunting has created a great opportunity for the general hunting public to hunt and harvest bears. You no longer need a pack of hounds, a guide, or a pile of week old donuts. Shooting bears over bait is a'kin to snagging salmon at the hatchery... you can call it whatever you want... but I don't call it hunting.

The timber companies can cry me a freakin' river about the 'timber damage'... they're damaging my right to hunt on state land... so phuck'em. If it was that big a problem... they wouldn't try to charge me $200-$500 just to access 'their land'.

And, let's not get started on the whole indian thing... those guys are a bunch of rapists. 'Native American' my ass! There is no such thing... two words for those guys... LAND BRIDGE. They can do whatever they want with the game on their Res... that includes bears. But, any self-respecting Washington sportsman should go out of their way to not only avoid those operations... but campaign against them every chance they get. Those guys flat-out STEAL game from the tax paying sportsmen of this state... STEAL IT. The Nuge hunting with an Indian operation... then yammering on about the way the State manages their game... is like bitching about Japanese taking over financial America... then driving away in a Honda.

[Machias]

"Second... if you want to shoot a bear... then hunt a bear. Screw dogs, and screw a bait pile... all I know is the lack of baiting and hound hunting has created a great opportunity for the general hunting public to hunt and harvest bears. You no longer need a pack of hounds, a guide, or a pile of week old donuts. Shooting bears over bait is a'kin to snagging salmon at the hatchery... you can call it whatever you want... but I don't call it hunting." 

What an absolute moron.

[JoshT]

What an absolute moron.

An educated response... please...

[Machias]

  You mean educated, like your original post?

Bear numbers were already high even with hounds and baiting and no one forced you to hunt in the past with hounds or bait.  You could still be a "real" hunter and hunt bears on foot before the ban.  Bear numbers were not low before.

[Machias]

I will say one thing for the ban, wounding rates have gone way up, more bears are lost after the shot then before, sows with cubs are being harvested on a regular basis, smaller immature bears are being harvested on a regular basis, not sure if I would consider those positive aspects of the ban though.

[bucklucky]

I'm with ya Machias!

[JoshT]

Hell... then maybe we should hunt deer over salt licks and use hounds to chase them down too. We'd 'wound' less deer... and everyone would shoot monster bucks... wow, sounds like a plan... NOT.

Whatever... to each their own... I just know I wouldn't be too proud of a bear I shot while it was treed by dogs (or over a bunch of syrup soaked dog food)... no matter how big it was.

[Machias]

I thought you said educated... because it's painfully obvious you have tried neither method. 

P.S.  It is currently legal to hunt deer over salt licks.  Running deer with hounds is nothing like running game that trees.  Running deer with dogs is legal in some states but does not lend it's self to being able to look your animal over and decide whether is the right size or age or if it has young ones.  In actuality we'd wound more deer if we tried hunting them with dogs, they don't tree.

[bucklucky]

Hell... then maybe we should hunt deer over salt licks and use hounds to chase them down too. We'd 'wound' less deer... and everyone would shoot monster bucks... wow, sounds like a plan... NOT.

Whatever... to each their own... I just know I wouldn't be too proud of a bear I shot while it was treed by dogs (or over a bunch of syrup soaked dog food)... no matter how big it was.

OH MY !  Must be a bunny hugger, grannola munchin, tree huggin ........ah never mind 

[Bobm]

Hound hunting is as old as hunting itself.

The two go hand in hand and should be legal.

[Curly]

Whatever... to each their own...

Josh, I'll agree with you on the "to each their own" part.  People like you is the reason why the stupid initiative passed.  If you don't want to hunt a certain way then don't.  But hunting with hounds and baiting bears were two great ways for harvesting bears and many people liked doing it.

I couldn't understand all those people voting for the ban.................just because they didn't want to hunt that way why should they restrict others from it?

[bow4elk]

I was at the senate committee hearing in Olympia and testified using data and facts I compiled from the USF&W Service, DU, RMEF, FNAWS, NWTF, B&C, P&Y, etc.  Wish I could find it because I'd post it here.

It was not opinion; it was a list of wildlife population FACTS as a direct result of hunting/conservation dollars and proactive action by the hunting community nationwide.  I also spewed financial data on the positive impact that hunting has on local economies in our state, among the basic benefit hound hunting and baiting provide the resource - better male/female identification, close range clean kills, etc.

If you were there you heard testimony from the WDFW personnel who's job it is to oversee predator managment.  Their expert (it's their day job!) testimony wasn't enough.  Public emotion won over WDFW facts and figures.  I was dumbfounded.  Why do we employ a whole state agency to manage wildlife resources, then put up critical issue in the hands of ignorant, emotional general public?!

Some woman actually stood up and said (paraphrase) "I've been a cat owner all my life and I just can't understand why anyone would want to shoot them!"  I couldn't believe my ears!  A panel of senators listening to this horsecrap on my tax dollar?!

This is precisely what happens when you put emotions before wildlife science and basic ecosystem management.

And for anyone out there who doesn't like a particular method of hunting, I have two suggestions:

1. Try it before you criticize.  Early in my hunting career I too was personally against baiting until I spent a month trying it and found that it's not easy, bears are always unpredictable and will go cold on a bait in an instant.  I have not run cats with hounds (yet), but know far too many who have to know that it is tireless, exhausting endeavor that often ends without a shot.  Bottom line, if YOU don't like it, then choose not to do it.

2. Think about the big picture with how you vote.  I choose to hunt with a bow because that's my preference and fits my view and satisfaction of hunting, but I'll fight to my grave for the rights of gun hunters because in the end, it's not about ME; it's about HUNTING as a whole.

[bucklucky]

Well said  Bow!

[JBar]

Well put Bow!

[WDFW-SUX]

Anyone know what a baited on hunt on the Rez would cost me?

Some woman actually stood up and said (paraphrase) "I've been a cat owner all my life and I just can't understand why anyone would want to shoot them!"  I couldn't believe my ears!  A panel of senators listening to this horsecrap on my tax dollar?!

Im glad that there are people like that deciding how and if we are going to be able to hunt.  Thanks for allowing the BAN WDFW way to look out for the hunters of this state,...........thanks again

[JBar]

Depending on who you booked with but it could be any where between 1400 to about 2500 for a 4 day hunt. Be careful of the cheaper guides that are advertising and do your homework. I hunted with the same guide Ted did and he was 1500.00 + 250 for the tag. Did not include meals and lodging though he did say we could do a fishing trip if we booked during one of the runs. PM if you want his number.

JBar

[huntnfmly]

Machias & bow very well put.Josh your an uneducated idiot on this point

[JBar]

Quinault spring bear

[littletoes]

Regardless of how anybody feels, the facts that Machias quoted are true.

Doesn't that speak for itself? More cubs and females are being killed now, than ever before.

JoshT, I don't know you, and you don't know me, I've seen a couple of your posts, both being abusive and attacking. You must be a kid, or just the type of person who believes his views are always best, either way your not off to a good start.

[Rhinoron247]

Thanks guys for the support on my initial rant.  Machias you hit it on the head. I am all for having an opinion on a subject but don't you dare try to cram it down my throat and force me to choose your way just because you think its right or better. 

It would be just as retarded for me to dis someone for not bait hunting.  How frick'n stupid. 

It sounds like JoshT might need to sell his Subaru and add more meat to his diet.  Just a thought?

[heavy hauler]

ok i am going out on a limb here..... i agree with josh t   about  the uncle ted stuff.the whole "spirit of the wild"  and mystical flight of the arrow "  is a bit much for me.  anyway  i am glad we live in country where we can disagree.the problem is , as hunters we need to be united,  i have never hunted with hounds  , but i wish you luck doing it.i  know better than to think its easy.  same with baiting.   the thing i have a problem with is  giving certain americans special rights because of the color of there skin.

[heavy hauler]

miles, when you  see this  argument / thread next time  are you still going to look at it? its funny , you know what people are going to say, BUT YOU STILL READ IT!   people talk about bear baiting because its important to them or they care about it.if neither is true for you then DONT READ IT!!!!!

[Machias]

Terrible Ted is a polarizing individual who does rub some folks the wrong way.  But the man is out there fighting for our hunting heritage all the time.  I have never seen someone who takes on the anti's and put them in their place better then Ted.  For that I deeply respect him and thank him for his efforts to fight our sworn enemies.

[heavy hauler]

machias,  i think ted is a bit goofy for me, but i do apprecaite what he does for us as hunters and gun owners. we have common enemies thats for sure.

[billythekidrock]

Ok guys... Most of us already know how everyone feels and why, so let's try more educating and less bitching.

[ICEMAN]

One of Einstein's great insights was to realize that matter and energy are really different forms of the same thing. Matter can be turned into energy, and energy into matter.
For example, consider a simple hydrogen atom, basically composed of a single proton. This subatomic particle has a mass of

0.000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 001 672 kg
This is a tiny mass indeed. But in everyday quantities of matter there are a lot of atoms! For instance, in one kilogram of pure water, the mass of hydrogen atoms amounts to just slightly more than 111 grams, or 0.111 kg.
Einstein's formula tells us the amount of energy this mass would be equivalent to, if it were all suddenly turned into energy. It says that to find the energy, you multiply the mass by the square of the speed of light, this number being 300,000,000 meters per second (a very large number):


= 0.111 x 300,000,000 x 300,000,000
= 10,000,000,000,000,000 Joules 

This is an incredible amount of energy! A Joule is not a large unit of energy ... one Joule is about the energy released when you drop a textbook to the floor. But the amount of energy in 30 grams of hydrogen atoms is equivalent to burning hundreds of thousands of gallons of gasoline!


If you consider all the energy in the full kilogram of water, which also contains oxygen atoms, the total energy equivalent is close to 10 million gallons of gasoline!
Can all this energy really be released? Has it ever been?

The only way for ALL this energy to be released is for the kilogram of water to be totally annhilated. This process involves the complete destruction of matter, and occurs only when that matter meets an equal amount of antimatter ... a substance composed of mass with a negative charge. Antimatter does exist; it is observable as single subatomic particles in radioactive decay, and has been created in the laboratory. But it is rather short-lived (!), since it annihilates itself and an equal quantity of ordinary matter as soon as it encounters anything. For this reason, it has not yet been made in measurable quantities, so our kilogram of water can't be turned into energy by mixing it with 'antiwater'. At least, not yet.

Another phenomenon peculiar to small elementary particles like protons is that they combine. A single proton forms the nucleus of a hydrogen atom. Two protons are found in the nucleus of a helium atom. This is how the elements are formed ... all the way up to the heaviest naturally occuring substance, uranium, which has 92 protons in its nucleus.
It is possible to make two free protons (Hydrogen nuclei) come together to make the beginnings of a helium nucleus. This requires that the protons be hurled at each other at a very high speed. This process occurs in the sun, but can also be replicated on earth with lasers, magnets, or in the center of an atomic bomb. The process is called nuclear fusion.
What makes it interesting is that when the two protons are forced to combine, they don't need as much of their energy (or mass). Two protons stuck together have less mass than two single separate protons!
When the protons are forced together, this extra mass is released ... as energy! Typically this amounts to about 7% of the total mass, converted to an amount of energy predictable using the formula .

Elements heavier than iron are unstable. Some of them are very unstable! This means that their nuclei, composed of many positively charged protons, which want to repel from each other, are liable to fall apart at any moment! We call atoms like this radioactive.
Uranium, for example, is radioactive. Every second, many of the atoms in a chunk of uranium are falling apart. When this happens, the pieces, which are now new elements (with fewer protons) are LESS massive in total than the original uranium atoms. The extra mass disappears as energy ... again according to the formula ! This process is called nuclear fission.

Both these nuclear reactions release a small portion of the mass involved as energy. Large amounts of energy! You are probably more familiar with their uses. Nuclear fusion is what powers a modern nuclear warhead. Nuclear fission (less powerful) is what happens in an atomic bomb (like the ones used against Japan in WWII), or in a nuclear power plant.

Albert Einstein was able to see where an understanding of this formula would lead. Although peaceful by nature and politics, he helped write a letter to the President of the United States, urging him to fund research into the development of an atomic bomb ... before the Nazis or Japan developed their own first. The result was the Manhatten Project, which did in fact produce the first tangible evidence of  ... the atomic bomb!

[JoshT]

Yeah, yeah... I must be a bunny hugger because I don't hunt over dogs or bait... that's it. Or... could it be that I actually have a different point of view? Anything the DFW says... needs to be taken with a pound of salt... I know those guys are lying when their lips are moving. Phony pictures of Wolves with pups in the Okanogan... Wardens who can't tell the difference between a Coho and a King... failure to stand up to 'indians' who illegaly harvest game... the list goes on and on.

Why did it happen? Because hunters don't have the clout that soccer moms do... that's why. Put it on the ballot... and I'll vote for it again... that's just me. I like hunting bears, and I feel the initiative has created an excellent opportunity for a much greater portion of the hunting public to hunt and harvest bears. I'd be all for opening particular areas to hound hunting, or issuing limited permits on a draw basis... same goes for bait.

[JBar]

Thanks for the education Iceman, I feel smarter already!

[Machias]

"I like hunting bears, and I feel the initiative has created an excellent opportunity for a much greater portion of the hunting public to hunt and harvest bears." 

Can you explain how this changed after the ban?  How was this opportunity expanded by the ban?  You could already hunt by spot and stalk, calling, happen chance, berry field watching before the ban.  Nothing expanded we lost methods.  The current methods were already an option.  If your saying because without baiting and hounds we have lots more bears, that is true, however now we only have an even larger excess, but we already had huge numbers of bears before.  It wasn't like you had to hunt with hounds or bait to harvest a bear before the ban.

[Geno]

  Just because we are all hunters does not mean we have to agree on everything.  Last time I checked I don't ever remember signing a paper after hunters ed that said I will never voice my opinion against another hunters.  Give it a rest people.

It seems to me that anytime someone expresses an opinion that may differ from our own there are a few members here that go right into the name calling or the differing opinion came from an "uneducated idiot". Our opinions make us all individuals, and we won't all agree on every topic. You all made good points on this topic, this one touched on many issues that hit a nerve with the sportsman in this state. We can agree to disagree for the sake of keeping our forums clean. I read posts every day that irritate me or differ from my opinion, I now choose to not express my opinons to avoid the dogpile from all of the members that let their emotions run rampant. I have minced words here before and now don't see how the forums benefit from us attacking each other. Let others express their opinion and try to be diplomatic with your response, it makes for a better read. Keep it clean folks.

[Curly]

What really irritates me about the Bear baiting ban and the hunting with hounds ban and the trapping ban..........and any other wildlife related Initiatives:  The general public should not even have the right to vote on them.

Why do we even have the WDFW and the biologists that set seasons, dates, methods of hunting and fishing, etc. and then citizens of the State don't even listen to the people that are placed into those positions?  If WDFW thought that certain methods of hunting or fishing need to be banned - and they have scientific data to back it up - then by all means those things should be banned. 

But to put wildlife management issues up for a vote is STUPID.  I guess we need an initiative to ban wildlife regulation initiatives.

I suppose I should not still be bitter over those initiatives after all these years but........ 

[JoshT]

I hear you Machias... I do. Problem I have is the vast area that a dog race dominates... like when a 4-wheeler rolls right through the ground you've been hunting... with total disregard for other hunters. A pack of dogs phucks up the entire mountain... or two. All of a sudden a guy without dogs is at a tremendous disadvantage... every bear for 10 square miles is freaked out... I've seen it happen. The bait... that's just personal... but then again, I don't like high fence hunting either. Bear numbers are up... but so is the number of bear hunters. I remember 10 years ago I'd almost never run into other bear hunters... now they're everywhere.

Like I said... I'd support an initiative to allow hounds/bait in certain areas, or by limited draw. I'd much rather see our efforts put forth to get the indians in check... a guy that works for me has already shot 3 elk from the Stampede/Green Water area... and he's out right now looking for another one.

[Ray]

Who's uncle ted?

By the way.. dual rights is crap. I am not against bear baiting but if there is one law of the land then it should apply to all..

[logger]

I met ted at the quinalt store this summer spent 5 months logging blowdown at lake quinalt his politics were good . as far as baitng could give a *censored* one way or the other . as far as indians getting them in check I,am all for it I am in the woods everyday I could tell you storys that would make a billy goat puke.

[ICEMAN]

One point about not having hounds chase bear, is that as a hunter without dogs, I feel like I may have a better chance on foot. I am not studied with numbers regarding success rates or saturation of bear, but I just feel like I have a better chance without the hound hunters in the woods. This is just an opinion.

On the other hand, as stated often here, we need to circle the wagons together on hunting issues. You help me, I help you. Our enemy on this one, and other issues like it, is the non-hunting public. Somehow, we need to convince them to support our causes....

[Geno]

One point about not having hounds chase bear, is that as a hunter without dogs, I feel like I may have a better chance on foot. I am not studied with numbers regarding success rates or saturation of bear, but I just feel like I have a better chance without the hound hunters in the woods. This is just an opinion.

On the other hand, as stated often here, we need to circle the wagons together on hunting issues. You help me, I help you. Our enemy on this one, and other issues like it, is the non-hunting public. Somehow, we need to convince them to support our causes....

+1
 Most of the hunters I know feel this way

[littletoes]

I've never hunted with hounds, nor over bait, but as an American, I just hate losing another "Right".
I see it as another nail in the coffin....and eventually they will be done nailin' if you can get what I mean.....


Tell me this.....are you "ok" with folks using dogs for bird hunting....then tell me what the differance is?!? It just doesn't fit into "Your" little world to hunt bear with dogs? Is that it? There just wasn't THAT many bear/dog hunters out there, but they got "US" to split up, and vote against each other, didn't they?? MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

Sure hope some of you are smart enough to get that last statement.....

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

And for anyone out there who doesn't like a particular method of hunting, I have two suggestions:1. Try it before you criticize.  Early in my hunting career I too was personally against baiting until I spent a month trying it and found that it's not easy, bears are always unpredictable and will go cold on a bait in an instant.  I have not run cats with hounds (yet), but know far too many who have to know that it is tireless, exhausting endeavor that often ends without a shot.  Bottom line, if YOU don't like it, then choose not to do it.2. Think about the big picture with how you vote.  I choose to hunt with a bow because that's my preference and fits my view and satisfaction of hunting, but I'll fight to my grave for the rights of gun hunters because in the end, it's not about ME; it's about HUNTING as a whole.   :WE really need to quit pissing on each others shoes or NONE of us are going to be able to hunt unless it is high fence hunting, and I would move to Canada first.

[bankwalker]

Whatever... to each their own...

Josh, I'll agree with you on the "to each their own" part.  People like you is the reason why the stupid initiative passed.  If you don't want to hunt a certain way then don't.  But hunting with hounds and baiting bears were two great ways for harvesting bears and many people liked doing it.

I couldn't understand all those people voting for the ban.................just because they didn't want to hunt that way why should they restrict others from it?

it would be the same as modern firearm hunters trying to get archery, and muzzlers banned because they feel it leads to more wounded animals.