Should you pay Big Timber to take care of damage bears?

[bowbuild]

The department is in bed with the timber companies, it won't happen. The change to the trespass law was the kick off for everything that has happened since it's passage. Without the rewriting of the law there was no teeth to trespass.....now they can stick it to you.

A biologist told me BY LAW they are obligated to deal with problem animals. I was asking about Elk at the time. I would also like to know what law he was refering to, as I would like to read it.

Bowbuild

[headshot5]

A biologist told me BY LAW they are obligated to deal with problem animals. I was asking about Elk at the time. I would also like to know what law he was refering to, as I would like to read it.

Bowbuild

Justly so on this.  A farmer is in charge of/liable for his animals, so the WDFW should be for theirs.  I imagine it is indeed the same for bears as for elk.         

[Curly]

The department is in bed with the timber companies, it won't happen. The change to the trespass law was the kick off for everything that has happened since it's passage. Without the rewriting of the law there was no teeth to trespass.....now they can stick it to you.

Sure seemed to be the case, didn't it?  Or one big coincidence.

[pianoman9701]

The department is in bed with the timber companies, it won't happen. The change to the trespass law was the kick off for everything that has happened since it's passage. Without the rewriting of the law there was no teeth to trespass.....now they can stick it to you.

Sure seemed to be the case, didn't it?  Or one big coincidence.

I'm quite sure we will shortly hear from someone who says that's not the case. Tick, tock....

[returnofsid]

If I want to protect my own assets, I have to pay money to do so...ie. insurance, fencing, security systems, etc.  I don't have the luxury of having a security guard PAY ME for the luxury of getting to patrol my property!

If timber companies need help protecting their assets, they sure as heck shouldn't be able to CHARGE for said protection!!  Nor should they be able to PAY for said protection, using means that are illegal to the rest of our state's citizens, ie. hound hunting/baiting!

Heck, in a perfect world, for us hunters, timber companies should be required to PAY hunters AND PAY for the hunter's bear tag!  Since that's never going to happen, they should at least be required to allow free access!