SB 5632 Hunting and Fishing Licenses

[bigtex]

SB 5632 was introduced today by Senators Hatfield and Chase at the request of WDFW. The bill will make the following changes to hunting and fishing licenses:

-Will allow those who have a hunter companion card to actually kill game on behalf of the disabled hunter. Current law basically says the disabled hunter must shoot the animal and the companion can deliver a kill shot
-Institute a $20 fee for Master Hunter deer and elk tags
-Institute a $20 fee for elk and deer damage tags
-Removes the discount small game license fee for those purchasing big game and small game licenses at the same time. Currently if you buy the licenses at the same time the small game fee is $20. Under this bill the fee will be $35 for all purchases, this is the current fee if you didn't purchase it with a big game license.
-Authorizes WDFW to charge a fee for the hunt by reservation system
-Combo fishing license will increase by $1
-Saltwater, freshwater, shellfish and seaweed licenses will increase by $2
-Temporary fishing licenses will increase by $2
-Institutes a commercial fishing crewmember license as is proposed in other bills


http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5632.pdf

[trophyhunt]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

[robodad]

I don't mind paying more every year as long as there is more opportunity, if I have to pay more for less opportunity I get a little perturbed !! 

[bigtex]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

No. Under current law the disabled hunter must physically shoot/wound the animal, the companion can then deliver the kill shot.

[trophyhunt]

As far as the small fee increases, that doesn't bother me too much.  It eventually has to happen, I do wonder how long it's been though?  I don't think they should increase fee's too frequently, but if has been a few years, I get it. 

[trophyhunt]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

No. Under current law the disabled hunter must physically shoot/wound the animal, the companion can then deliver the kill shot.

That is very interesting, was not aware of that. Thanks

[bobcat]

I also thought companion hunters were already allowed to shoot the disabled person's animal. We've done it twice. 

The small game license- I was already considering not buying it, since I buy it every year and end up having no need for it. I only need it in case I see a bobcat.

This year I may do some waterfowl hunting, but I can now wait until I know I'll be doing that before I purchase the license. (Since there's no benefit to buying it early)

[trophyhunt]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

No. Under current law the disabled hunter must physically shoot/wound the animal, the companion can then deliver the kill shot.

Just read this in the 2014 hunting pamphlet; The hunter companion card allows for a person to assist or ACT on behalf of the disabled hunter. The hunter companion must be in the physical presence of the disabled hunter, not to exceed a 1/4 mile separation. While stalking or shooting an animal, the hunter and companion must have a form of reliable and direct communication.                  The way I read this, it is legal to kill and animal for the disabled hunter?  Am I reading it wrong?

[Bob33]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

No. Under current law the disabled hunter must physically shoot/wound the animal, the companion can then deliver the kill shot.

That is very interesting, was not aware of that. Thanks

I don't agree.

(a) The designated hunter companion must accompany the hunter with a disability when stalking or shooting game on behalf of the hunter with a disability.

[bigtex]

I was under the impression that the companion card that a disabled person has already allows the card holder to kill the animal for them, as long as they were together or within sight of each other?

No. Under current law the disabled hunter must physically shoot/wound the animal, the companion can then deliver the kill shot.

Just read this in the 2014 hunting pamphlet; The hunter companion card allows for a person to assist or ACT on behalf of the disabled hunter. The hunter companion must be in the physical presence of the disabled hunter, not to exceed a 1/4 mile separation. While stalking or shooting an animal, the hunter and companion must have a form of reliable and direct communication.                  The way I read this, it is legal to kill and animal for the disabled hunter?  Am I reading it wrong?

Per RCW 77.32.238 the law is:  A person with a disability holding a disabled hunter permit may be accompanied by one licensed hunter who may assist the person with a disability by killing game wounded by the person with a disability, and by tagging and retrieving game killed by the person with a disability or the designated licensed hunter companion. A nondisabled hunter shall not possess a loaded gun in, or shoot from, a motor vehicle.

The bill would change "wounded by" to on "behalf of"

[bigtex]

The problem is the WAC and RCW don't currently match up. The RCW currently says companions can only kill wounded game, the WAC says otherwise.

Problem is some officers base their judgment off the WAC, other use the RCW.

The WDFW Sergeant in my area uses the RCW. He may not cite an offender because of it, but it is a troublesome area.

[trophyhunt]

The problem is the WAC and RCW don't currently match up. The RCW currently says companions can only kill wounded game, the WAC says otherwise.

Problem is some officers base their judgment off the WAC, other use the RCW.

The WDFW Sergeant in my area uses the RCW. He may not cite an offender because of it, but it is a troublesome area.

I'd say it's confusing for sure, the regs that must of us hunters abide by say it's legal.  I hope this passes so to clear it up at least. 

[bigtex]

The problem is the WAC and RCW don't currently match up. The RCW currently says companions can only kill wounded game, the WAC says otherwise.

Problem is some officers base their judgment off the WAC, other use the RCW.

The WDFW Sergeant in my area uses the RCW. He may not cite an offender because of it, but it is a troublesome area.

I'd say it's confusing for sure, the regs that must of us hunters abide by say it's legal.  I hope this passes so to clear it up at least.

The RCW is the "law" while a WAC is a "regulation." In legal/law studies you are told the law is the more important of the two. It's very similar to the feds who have the US Code (similar to RCW) and the Code of Federal Regulations (similar to WAC.)

So in this sense you have the law saying you can't do something while a regulation says you can. Okay which is right?

[Ridgeratt]

I also thought companion hunters were already allowed to shoot the disabled person's animal. We've done it twice. 

The small game license- I was already considering not buying it, since I buy it every year and end up having no need for it. I only need it in case I see a bobcat.

This year I may do some waterfowl hunting, but I can now wait until I know I'll be doing that before I purchase the license. (Since there's no benefit to buying it early)

Well it appears you will need the small game to hunt turkeys in this state.

Those under a buck birds are looking better at the store everyday.

[Bob33]

The problem is the WAC and RCW don't currently match up. The RCW currently says companions can only kill wounded game, the WAC says otherwise.

Problem is some officers base their judgment off the WAC, other use the RCW.

The WDFW Sergeant in my area uses the RCW. He may not cite an offender because of it, but it is a troublesome area.

I'd say it's confusing for sure, the regs that must of us hunters abide by say it's legal.  I hope this passes so to clear it up at least.

The RCW is the "law" while a WAC is a "regulation." In legal/law studies you are told the law is the more important of the two. It's very similar to the feds who have the US Code (similar to RCW) and the Code of Federal Regulations (similar to WAC.)

So in this sense you have the law saying you can't do something while a regulation says you can. Okay which is right?

My guess is that the number of companion hunters convicted for killing an otherwise legal animal for a disabled hunter is zero.