Inslee reverses panel’s decision to increase cougar hunts

[bobcat]

"In April, the commission increased the cougar harvest rate in 14 areas of the state as a way to ease tensions in communities dealing with wolves.

The governor says he’s directing the commission to get public comment before putting the higher quotas in place."

Are you kidding me?? So because we have wolves in our state we should kill more cougars? I'm all for cougar hunting but that is such a stupid ass reason to raise the harvest.

 If the area can only sustain a set level of predators, a new apex predator has been inserted into the Eco system that is federally protected and can not be hunted, then that leaves the federally unprotected to take the hit in numbers to maintain the ungulate (food) supply.

 Which part do you not understand?

    Seems reasonable to me. Especially since any reason is a good reason to kill more cougars in this state. With no hounds allowed, it's unlikely we'll ever put a dent in the population anyway.

[Cthulhu]

"In April, the commission increased the cougar harvest rate in 14 areas of the state as a way to ease tensions in communities dealing with wolves.

The governor says he’s directing the commission to get public comment before putting the higher quotas in place."

Are you kidding me?? So because we have wolves in our state we should kill more cougars? I'm all for cougar hunting but that is such a stupid ass reason to raise the harvest.

 If the area can only sustain a set level of predators, a new apex predator has been inserted into the Eco system that is federally protected and can not be hunted, then that leaves the federally unprotected to take the hit in numbers to maintain the ungulate (food) supply.

 Which part do you not understand?

I understand that is happening. I don't understand how that is justifiable...

[huntnphool]

"In April, the commission increased the cougar harvest rate in 14 areas of the state as a way to ease tensions in communities dealing with wolves.

The governor says he’s directing the commission to get public comment before putting the higher quotas in place."

Are you kidding me?? So because we have wolves in our state we should kill more cougars? I'm all for cougar hunting but that is such a stupid ass reason to raise the harvest.

 If the area can only sustain a set level of predators, a new apex predator has been inserted into the Eco system that is federally protected and can not be hunted, then that leaves the federally unprotected to take the hit in numbers to maintain the ungulate (food) supply.

 Which part do you not understand?

I understand that is happening. I don't understand how that is justifiable...

 Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how this situation should be handled then?

[Skillet]

Just to be clear - you don't understand how raising the cougar harvest to offset the increased predation by an untouchable predator is justifiable? Or you don't understand how Inslee can justify pandering to the emotions of his electorate over professional advice from biologists regarding necessary predator management?

[huntnphool]

Just to be clear - you don't understand how raising the cougar harvest to offset the increased predation by an untouchable predator is justifiable? Or you don't understand how Inslee can justify pandering to the emotions of his electorate over professional advice from biologists regarding necessary predator management?

 It's perfectly clear what he/she is saying!

Are you kidding me?? So because we have wolves in our state we should kill more cougars? I'm all for cougar hunting but that is such a stupid ass reason to raise the harvest.

 Pretty obvious to me anyway!

[Skillet]

It may be clear to you phool, but I've seen enough ridiculousness on this forum to know when someone makes a strong statement and then quickly starts making breakfast...

[Cthulhu]

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

[huntnphool]

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

 I'm all ears, what is the alternative solution?

[jasnt]

They are raising the cougar harvest guide lines because of the rise I cougar population. It was the antis that said it was because we can't hunt wolves so that is the reason that they believe we want more cougars killed. Our cougar quotas were set a long time ago based on a guess of population size. They realized they were under harvesting cougar in some areas and felt it needed risen to not only help curb the ungulates depradation but also allow for genetic diversity. The only role wolves play in this is that they are lowering the sustainable habitat(food) for all predators.  Of all the predators in Washington excluding wolves cougar is the least harvested and the population can easly with stand the tiny raise in harvest in these areas. 

I have not heard back from unsworn he yet but I have been following this cougar issue for quite some time. You need to realize that these few areas normally fill there quota by dec31st or shortly after. That's huge when I comes from only boot hunters and not hound hunters.  Most people will go there whole life with out seeing a cougar yet in 117 and 113 alone I've seen 6 in the last 3 years and called in 4 more I didn't get my eyes on but they did exchange vocals with me.  These areas need an increase in harvest! Not only for the ungulates but for the cougar as well. They are depleting there food which I'll agrea are also sharing with wolves now and also they have been under harvested for years now because boot hunters don't get the option to pass on young cats and harvest only old mature toms like hound hunters can. Instead we take what few we happen upon and that means many of the cougar taken are young juveniles that may have died any way threw natural selection(starve or get killed by mature toms) that means that some of the cougar taken would have died anyway and those old mature toms are loosing there re productivity or breading there daughters.  Do some research on the subject before you have the knee jerk and realize that wsu's suggestion on cougar harvest was 12%. We have been taking 4-5% of the estamatrd population for over 10 years now

[Cthulhu]

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

 I'm all ears, what is the alternative solution?

Give farmers a small settlement to build fences worthy enough to keep them out?

[huntnphool]

It may be clear to you phool, but I've seen enough ridiculousness on this forum to know when someone makes a strong statement and then quickly starts making breakfast...

 I hear ya, waiting for CT to prove my initial assessment incorrect.................I hope I'm wrong!

[huntnphool]

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

 I'm all ears, what is the alternative solution?

Give farmers a small settlement to build fences worthy enough to keep them out?

 Farmers?

[Skillet]

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

This isn't a real discussion imho, don't take the troll bait... 

As simple and as brief as I can put it, it's not fair to the kitties.

 I'm all ears, what is the alternative solution?

Give farmers a small settlement to build fences worthy enough to keep them out?

 

[UrbanTrapper]

The article is another perfect example of press bias. Note how in the second sentence the 'journalist' refers to HSUS as a 'conservation group.' First, HSUS is not a conservation group, it is an animal rights group, and an extreme and corrupt one at that. We can't let journalists and the left get away with calling them a 'conservation group'.  Second, HSUS should not even be able to have 'Humane Society' in its name but it uses this to get millions from little old ladies who think they are giving to their local animal shelter.  Third, no mention is made in the article that, in the largest forfeiture of its kind in U.S. history, HSUS paid Ringling Bros. $15 Million to settle a corrupt organizations and racketeering (RICO) lawsuit that included charges of bribery, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. How do journalists get away with such blatant misrepresentations of the facts? How does an organization like HSUS get favorable press coverage and have such big influence on the Governor?

[huntnphool]

' First, HSUS is not a conservation group, it is an animal rights group, and an extreme and corrupt one at that. We can't let journalists and the left get away with calling them a 'conservation group'.  Second, HSUS should not even be able to have 'Humane Society' in its name but it uses this to get millions from little old ladies who think they are giving to their local animal shelter.  Third, no mention is made in the article that, in the largest forfeiture of its kind in U.S. history, HSUS paid Ringling Bros. $15 Million to settle a corrupt organizations and racketeering (RICO) lawsuit that included charges of bribery, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. How do journalists get away with such blatant misrepresentations of the facts? How does an organization like HSUS get favorable press coverage and have such big influence on the Governor?

 It's a infectious disease called "liberal bias"