Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: DBHAWTHORNE on November 03, 2014, 09:27:55 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on November 03, 2014, 05:11:22 PMI have not read through all of the pages of this thread but from the previous thread in August I wanted to re- post what I believe are key points folks should consider communicating to WDFW commissioners and staff regarding baiting:1. It provides a good opportunity for youth, disabled, senior, and new hunters in a more controlled environment (e.g., shot opportunities/lanes are clear; a hunting mentor can easily aid these youth/senior/disabled hunters etc.).2. Banning baiting will have a disproportionate effect on these youth,disabled,senior, and new hunters.3. Baiting does not impair the senses or ability of game to escape or elude hunters. Success rates and harvest are not dramatically effected by baiting in most instances.4. There are no current biological concerns with baiting deer/elk...e.g., managers are not concerned with baiting effects to ungulate populations. 5. Baiting is a safe and effective way to allow hunting on smaller parcels of private land and/or near urban areas where other methods of hunting would be ineffective or unsafe. This is another point I made back in August: It behooves those of us who want to maintain baiting to not go out of our way to alienate those hunters who have a different view on the ethics of baiting...because imo they are probably a majority or close to itThe confrontational stuff has to stop IMO. I think a fair number of hunters have legitimate concerns that could and should be addressed...to suggest those folks are anti-hunters will only fire up the opposition. We are not in a position to be making enemies. I really believe, as others have stated, that we could come up with some reasonable regulations for baiting in Washington. I have asked WDFW to consider allowing GMAC to draft regulations to address some of the concerns...not sure if they will consider it. As has been stated...a scalpel is needed here...not an axe. Perhaps with some regulation to address the more serious complaints we can go from 59% opposition to 15-20% opposition. The 59% statistic was manipulated to include people who did not want a full ban on baiting.Do you have the breakdown of what each response (%) was for all the choices? Certainly only the "absolutely ban all baiting" should be reported as the hunters opposed to baiting. Including folks who want to only restrict outfitters etc. is absurd. Also, when they say 59% of hunters...what they really mean is 59% of people who respond to a poll on the internet...not very meaningful even if they weren't lumping all the partial restriction answers together!!! Anyways...good work...we need to keep folks hounding the commission so they don't do something stupid and based on misinformation.
Quote from: idahohuntr on November 03, 2014, 05:11:22 PMI have not read through all of the pages of this thread but from the previous thread in August I wanted to re- post what I believe are key points folks should consider communicating to WDFW commissioners and staff regarding baiting:1. It provides a good opportunity for youth, disabled, senior, and new hunters in a more controlled environment (e.g., shot opportunities/lanes are clear; a hunting mentor can easily aid these youth/senior/disabled hunters etc.).2. Banning baiting will have a disproportionate effect on these youth,disabled,senior, and new hunters.3. Baiting does not impair the senses or ability of game to escape or elude hunters. Success rates and harvest are not dramatically effected by baiting in most instances.4. There are no current biological concerns with baiting deer/elk...e.g., managers are not concerned with baiting effects to ungulate populations. 5. Baiting is a safe and effective way to allow hunting on smaller parcels of private land and/or near urban areas where other methods of hunting would be ineffective or unsafe. This is another point I made back in August: It behooves those of us who want to maintain baiting to not go out of our way to alienate those hunters who have a different view on the ethics of baiting...because imo they are probably a majority or close to itThe confrontational stuff has to stop IMO. I think a fair number of hunters have legitimate concerns that could and should be addressed...to suggest those folks are anti-hunters will only fire up the opposition. We are not in a position to be making enemies. I really believe, as others have stated, that we could come up with some reasonable regulations for baiting in Washington. I have asked WDFW to consider allowing GMAC to draft regulations to address some of the concerns...not sure if they will consider it. As has been stated...a scalpel is needed here...not an axe. Perhaps with some regulation to address the more serious complaints we can go from 59% opposition to 15-20% opposition. The 59% statistic was manipulated to include people who did not want a full ban on baiting.
I have not read through all of the pages of this thread but from the previous thread in August I wanted to re- post what I believe are key points folks should consider communicating to WDFW commissioners and staff regarding baiting:1. It provides a good opportunity for youth, disabled, senior, and new hunters in a more controlled environment (e.g., shot opportunities/lanes are clear; a hunting mentor can easily aid these youth/senior/disabled hunters etc.).2. Banning baiting will have a disproportionate effect on these youth,disabled,senior, and new hunters.3. Baiting does not impair the senses or ability of game to escape or elude hunters. Success rates and harvest are not dramatically effected by baiting in most instances.4. There are no current biological concerns with baiting deer/elk...e.g., managers are not concerned with baiting effects to ungulate populations. 5. Baiting is a safe and effective way to allow hunting on smaller parcels of private land and/or near urban areas where other methods of hunting would be ineffective or unsafe. This is another point I made back in August: It behooves those of us who want to maintain baiting to not go out of our way to alienate those hunters who have a different view on the ethics of baiting...because imo they are probably a majority or close to itThe confrontational stuff has to stop IMO. I think a fair number of hunters have legitimate concerns that could and should be addressed...to suggest those folks are anti-hunters will only fire up the opposition. We are not in a position to be making enemies. I really believe, as others have stated, that we could come up with some reasonable regulations for baiting in Washington. I have asked WDFW to consider allowing GMAC to draft regulations to address some of the concerns...not sure if they will consider it. As has been stated...a scalpel is needed here...not an axe. Perhaps with some regulation to address the more serious complaints we can go from 59% opposition to 15-20% opposition.
I cant imagine the hit the small feed stores in NE WA will take if its passed.
I think the 59% number reported to the commission was from a phone survey before the most recent survey of rule alternatives. I may be wrong but I don't think the alternative rules results are out yet from that survey. We need to keep writing and participate during the public comment periods that are coming soon
