CURRENTLY WDFW FEDERAL AGENTS SHOOTING 15 bulls in Skagit River Unit!!!!

[Special T]

Here is ANOTHER option the WDFW could have done... They could have coordinated a Disabled hunter hunt for a few people.

I think that there were MANY options that could have been better than what they did.  MH, Disabled, General, ANY of those would be preferable to the USDA coming in and shooting them. I won't argue the merits of MH vs General Vs Disabled because it DOESN'T"T matter, none of those choices were picked. We PAID to have elk shot and donated to the food bank instead of having some one PAY for the same kind of service. 

[pianoman9701]

My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood.  I don't like special privilege for anyone.  The wildlife belong to all of us.

How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.

I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason  these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.

I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years.  I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters.  It is a certification to be sure  yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening.   I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.

So, all due respects Whit, you'd like the extra opportunity but you're not willing to do the work to get it. Sorry bud, but that disqualifies you from lots of stuff throughout life. Not pursuing the certification because of poor tag opportunities is also not the spirit intended for those who participate in the program. The rewards of tags are icing on the cake of satisfaction for work well done for wildlife and conservation. Someone who joins the program only for the tag rewards will end up disappointed and most likely be a disappointment as a MH representative. I personally don't care about getting a tag and enjoy doing the required conservation.

My disagreement here with the DFW is not about the fact that they could've used MHs to perform this task, although they should have. My disagreement is that they used hired guns instead of ANY WA hunters. My problem with the DFW stems from the fact that the wildlife decisions they make are often proof of how little importance they place on our wildlife (as opposed to fish & shellfish), and the fact that they aren't constantly asking themselves "how can we make this a win-win for our state and for the hunters who pay our bills?". Someone in that administration should've been pounding his or her fist on the table demanding that this problem be solved with hunters as a tool. Unfortunately, that will never happen with this administration.

Piano I've often enjoyed your posts and feel that if we met in person we'd get along well.... but I guess I've hit some sort of "piss on him" mode with you.

#1 I didn't pursue the MH program for tags but for all the talk of improved conservation etc.... it was not present where I was living in the NE corner of Washington.  The 3 individuals that I spoke with detailed that not once had their projects or coordinator involved them in something that they didn't spoonfeed already on private land.  As private landowners and friends of many folks with lots of ground I didn't see any impact on the public grounds in my neck of the woods.  I will concede that now that I live over on the coast and I do see more opportunities for folks to work with conservation.

#2  I currently help maintain over 2400 acres of ground bordering one of the largest tracts of public hunting land north of Spokane and spend a number of days planting crops that are solely for wildlife and to bring increased opportunity to both my family and other hunters on the 11000 acres of state ground that borders us so I'm willing to do work without reflection or reward outside my own ground and purchased state tag.

#3 I know all about investment in work will lead to opportunity I hold 3 college degrees, 9 industry certifications and taught at the university level for over 15 years so if you tag me as "he wants a cheap tag and doesn't know how to work"; you've picked the wrong guy.

#4 I've farmed for at least 20 years of my adult life (with a job in town) and know the struggles of farmers etc.... but I also see when you close rolls and make something seemingly unattainable it becomes easier for folks to judge it unfavorably or hold a grudge (see commercial fishing books in SE Alaska, flower books for Pike's Place Market) etc.... being one of the lucky ones to get in while the getting is good is great but what about the folks on down the line.  Diminished opportunity for all classes of hunters is a steamrolling trend in this state and I agree we cannot fight among ourselves to take away any potential opportunities to licensed, ethical hunters.  I wrote two letters to my local reps detailing my frustration with the DFW administration's decision in this particular case to utilize USDA shooters and the loss of opportunity to hunters such as the MH program, youth, disabled etc....

#5 I understand that the closure of the MH applicant process was recent but in light of decisions by this administration at DFW and the general lack of opportunity how do you envision this program becoming less exclusive?  I see the hunting opportunities of my boys growing up (8 and 3) diminishing over time.  I sincerely regret sometimes waiting for as long as I did to have children as they could have had better opportunities 10-15 years ago.  While I don't believe this is your attitude I've met a few "I'm a MH and I'm better than you" individuals (see above on one of the 3 that I met exploring the program) that put me off and tempered my desire to join the ranks.

Either way I despise the lack of opportunity for legal Washington hunters in this case, the destruction of private and public property and the secrecy behind the decision-makers at DFW.  I won't speak on the tribe comments at the meeting as it will not be productive but let's just say I question the science of individual comments, the agendas behind them and more closed roll opportunities *wink*

Either way I'd be happy to buy you a beverage if you are in the Seattle area sometime or over in Spokane while I'm chasing whitetail.

I'm sitting in the Clockum now waiting on some movement below me to fill my cow tag so I appreciate the blood pressure increase you gave me for a few minutes (it was cold this morning).

No problem and I'll take you up on that beverage, my treat. I was referring to that one sentence of yours which I highlighted and I get now that's not what you meant. I have no problem opening this up to every licensed hunter with an elk tag. I just want hunters to do it, not some government slob in the middle of the night. I do think if this were to go out to more than MHs, there certainly needs to be an orientation to try and avoid any fiasco and/or bad public display or image that could give us and our sport a black eye.

I think you and I are very close if not perfectly aligned on this topic.

[JLS]

not some government slob

Really?

[pianoman9701]

Poor choice of words. Sorry JLS. You were the shooter, eh?

[Bob33]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

[bigtex]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

[JLS]

Poor choice of words. Sorry JLS. You were the shooter, eh?

Not hardly.

[pianoman9701]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

Sorry Bob, I disagree.  See how I did that? I'm very clever.

[Bob33]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

Sorry Bob, I disagree.  See how I did that? I'm very clever.

[idahohuntr]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

I completely disagree with this statement.  Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc.  The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously! 

It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk.  Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin   But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.

[pianoman9701]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

I completely disagree with this statement.  Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc.  The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously! 

It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk.  Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin   But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.

  x2 Our disagreements are no excuse for the government to deny us these opportunities and use us to solve wildlife conflict.

[Bob33]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

I completely disagree with this statement.  Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc.  The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously! 

It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk.  Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin   But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.

Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.

[pianoman9701]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

I completely disagree with this statement.  Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc.  The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously! 

It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk.  Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin   But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.

Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.

That's a completely different issue from what we're addressing here. I agree that hunters get wrapped up in their own little cocoons, but this situation can't be tied to that. This is strictly due to the fact that the DFW doesn't give a damn about hunters and what they could be doing to better serve them.

[Bob33]

I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly.

And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....

I completely disagree with this statement.  Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc.  The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously! 

It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk.  Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin   But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.

Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.

That's a completely different issue from what we're addressing here. I agree that hunters get wrapped up in their own little cocoons, but this situation can't be tied to that. This is strictly due to the fact that the DFW doesn't give a damn about hunters and what they could be doing to better serve them.

What is your basis for knowing what WDFW has or has not heard about shooting elk?

[idahohuntr]

Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.

You do see the fallacy of the point you are trying to make here don't you?  Hunters are also united with one voice: "Hunt".  And don't be fooled, there is plenty of disagreement amongst anti-hunters on tactics and methods for stopping hunting.  In both groups the devil is in the details...and that is where the internal disagreements begin.