OPPOSE ANY RESTRICTION ON BAITING - EMAIL TO WDFW

[oldleclercrd]

Yeah I've been successful late season without using either one also. I've also been successful using them. It's legal to do so and I want to keep my options open. I sure hope you've NEVER used scents while hunting or that would make you a hypocrite, right?

PB doesn't like baiting but I don't think he supports restricting us from baiting.

Yep, just because it is a practice that I do not care for I will never vote to take it away from others.
The real "enemy" against hunting and the shooting sports are liberal politicians and those who continue to vote these cretins into office!  We have members of this forum who are proud of the fact that they endorse politicians that want nothing more than to take away our rights wether it be by banning baiting, the use of hounds, gun control or by appointing anti-hunting greeners as WDFW Directors.  Bottom line, the more liberal this state gets, the more liberal and anti-hunting the WDFW gets and therefore more restrictive.   Just my opinion.

PolarBear I applaud you for seeing it how it is. If the others on the fence or even against baiting stood up for hunters as a whole like you, we wouldn't be in this mess. I'll be by your (and the others) side when other opportunities are being taken away from hunters in the future.

[PolarBear]

 

[HornHoarder]

Thanks guys for bringing this to peoples attention of what is really going on here.  Email sent 

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Thanks guys for bringing this to peoples attention of what is really going on here.  Email sent 

Thank you

[LeviD1]

Do they keep making new dates for people to share their opinion on the regulation changes to eventually get a time that people aren't paying attention and wont get their vote / opinion in so it is swayed for the opposition that's against hunting? I have already shared my opinion about this 2 times to them. Seems really shady. Makes me have less and less faith in our wildlife department.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

By law baiting should be safe:

As mandated by the Washington State Legislature (RCW 77.04.012), “… the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife…”; “the department shall conserve the wildlife… in a manner that does not impair the resource…”; and “The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational… hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.”

[bobcat]

DB, great point. And I do think baiting is safe. They might possibly make certain restrictions in certain units and at certain times, but I doubt there will be an overall ban on baiting.

[huntnnw]

There is no doubt.. hunters who vote in favor of banning baiting (or any hunter right) are taking an anti-hunter position. They are sleeping with the enemy. It would be the same as if all the rifle hunters supported the anti-hunting position of getting rid of bowhunting because they believe  too many deer are wounded in that manner.

The bottom line. This isn't about baiting. This is about hunter rights. I get that some of you might not like this particular method because it doesn't fulfill your ideas on the aesthetics of the hunt but for some people it does. Imagine your favorite method of hunting being restricted. Would you be upset? How upset would you be if a majority that didn't use your method of hunting jumped on board and supported the anti-hunting position? Make no mistake about it... this is an apples and apples comparison.

For those of you riding the fence...wishing to remain neutral on the baiting issue... I understand... but I do ask that you don't remain neutral on upholding a fellow hunters rights... that lethargy and laissez-faire neutrality will one day lead to you losing the things you cherish....and if not in your time certainly in your children's time.

As far as baiting goes...it provides a unique and rewarding experience for many.... I ask that you don't take that away from your fellow hunter and instead speak out immediately against this attack on our liberty.

  Couldnt of been said any better.

[huntnnw]

To be clear: If you are seeking to restrict existing hunter rights for reasons other than sound game management principles, then you are an Anti-Hunter.

I would say I agree with that. The term Anti-Hunter is a pretty powerful word though,  and I think there could a better choice of word.

explain?? what other choice? you are the problem if you voice your opinion against this to WDFW..or atleast to me you are and many others.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

My email to WDFW:

I support the optional use of baiting for deer and elk. Objective 6 in the draft 2015-2021 Game Management Plan is to facilitate debate on this (and electronic equipment, which I’m not commenting on at this point). To be clear, I oppose any proposed ban on baiting for deer and elk.

From your website:
“The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational… hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.” It is this mandate that sets the overall policy and direction for managing hunted wildlife."

If this is part of the department's mandate why are you facilitating debate on something that could lower opportunity for hunters (particularly juvenile, disabled and senior citizens)?

Ethics:
To be clear....This is not an ethical issue. Aside from hunter safety and the issue of killing animals cleanly, quickly, and humanely, there are very few ethical issues involved in how the practice of hunting is conducted. This is an attempt to regulate the "aesthetics" of the hunt based on the personal values of a majority at the expense of a minority. I don't see anywhere in WDFW's mandate where it says you should manage the aesthetics of a hunt based on majority rule at the potential expense of recreational opportunity for hunters.

The reality of baiting and "ethics" is that it's one of the most ethical forms of hunting because it allows the hunter time to take a shot at a known distance which will increase the likelihood of a quick and humane kill.

Unique Opportunity in WA:
Baiting is not allowed in many states and rarely in the western United States. We should preserve this method of hunting because it provides a very unique opportunity for hunters to practice something that has been utilized since humans first started hunting. It is actually a selling point and something that WDFW should be proud to protect. Hunting whitetail in the big woods/mountains of the NW using bait is an experience you can't get anywhere else (other than perhaps the extreme NE corner of Oregon). I would argue that it is one of the things that makes hunting in this state great.

Economic Factors:
The banning of baiting would have a negative economic impact on the small towns, feed stores, and farmers.  We should not consider restricting something that will be economically damaging to the livelihood of people in these small communities when it is not necessary.

Disease:
Some may argue that baiting spreads disease yet we have no proof that baiting is spreading disease in Washington to the detriment of the herd health. I have a nearly a decades worth/50K plus photos of trail cam data to support the fact that the majority of animals survive from one season to the next (assuming no bad winter) with no apparent negative impact to health.

Starvation:
Another common argument is that the deer will starve to death with full stomachs. Yet again, aside from all the trail cam data I have to prove otherwise...... when this does happen (which is rare) it is primarily well after the hunting season during the months of January-March and it is when well meaning people are feeding deer during extremely bad conditions.

WDFW Feeding of Wildlife:
In addition to the above arguments it is not lost upon me that WDFW feeds wildlife during the winter (and has for decades) with little to no impact from disease or starvation. That fact alone would make any of the above unsupported "scientific" arguments against baiting hypocritical at best and completely invalid at worst.

The Data:
I am also extremely disappointed that WDFW did not break out all the data on baiting. In your reporting you combined the data that supported any kind of restriction on baiting. One of the choices was to only restrict outfitters but you combined it with the data that supported the ban on baiting. I can't imagine this manipulation of the data was by accident. This is a serious breech of trust. That being said, it's honestly irrelevant what the results are based on my previous comments above.

Harvest:
WDFW has not provided data suggesting baiting is leading to over harvesting or large scale damage to wildlife. Yet again, we have used this method for decades and the hunting has been great every year with deer numbers generally only dropping off after bad winters.

Objective 5:
Ironically, Objective 5 regarding recruitment and retention of hunters urges policies that encourage hunters to participate more frequently and consistently, and to bring those who’ve quit hunting back to the field. In a time of fee access programs by private timber companies on forest lands for which a tax break is given, and dwindling public land access, it seems the better strategy for Objective 5 is to avoid unfounded cuts in opportunity based on personal opinions of the few or the loud. Banning bait for deer and elk is just that: an unfounded cut that will result in fewer hunters in this state.

Baiting Defined:
You should probably also make it clear what you are referring to when you say "bait". The public needs to know if you are referring to scents also which fits into your current definition of baiting. I don't think the majority of deer hunters would support restricting the use of scents.

Please!!! Stop searching for reasons to interfere with hunter opportunity and spoil what provides many of us very rewarding memories in the WA outdoors.

Respectfully,

Daniel B. Hawthorne

[billythekidrock]

Very well stated.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

If I had it to do again I would add this:

Public Perception:The Public Perception on this issue is largely influenced by lack of education and misinformation spread by those opposed. The public perception is certainly damaged when WDFW promotes public debate on these methods which results in massive amounts of personal bias and misinformation that ultimately sways the opinion of those not close to this issue. Most of the public wouldn't argue against something that increases the odds of a quick humane kill but that is not the message being sent. The non-hunting public (on average) is not opposed to eating domestic animals who stand zero chance of escape.  This makes hunting by any means/method a far more humane and ethical practice than what they are using to procure their meat. While the public may be opposed to baiting due to misinformation most of them are not concerning themselves with the aesthetics of the hunt. The reality is this "public perception" concern is almost completely fabricated by the non-baiting hunters who are assuming their own personal values are more important and relevant to the public than their fellow hunters who use bait. I have educated many non-hunters on the reasons I bait and more often than not they support it once I give them my reasoning. In most cases they have never heard this reasoning before. They certainly haven't heard anything but negative from WDFW and your strategy to reduce our opportunity by restricting this method.

[boneaddict]

Not worth reading all six pages probably.   I'd rather bait bear than deer.  In fact I am not for baiting deer though you will find I wont vote against it.  I am pretty sure I am not an anti hunter.  I think anyway.

[KFhunter]

just occurred to me....


There's been some scuttlebutt about the current bear baiting ban being unconstitutional per the WA state's constitution,  in light of that I could see a one size fits all baiting ban to fix the error.

"District court judge in Jefferson County says it's unconstitutional to address bear baiting and body gripping traps (edit: use of hounds sorry) on the same initiative, it's never been challenged that I know of. 
The Department of Fish and Wildlife says no. This ruling comes from a district court with limited jurisdiction, but they do admit it will make prosecuting these cases much harder."

Partial quote from online sources.



Is this new deer baiting ban a backdoor attempt to fix that?  A one size fit's all ban on baiting?   Would that include trapping?  (remember it's illegal to trap gophers per the ban)

[pianoman9701]

I used your letter, KF. Thanks.