How about UNCLE TED Baiting Bear in WA

[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....