Baiting on the chopping block

[pianoman9701]

It is a proven fact the second you start to give they will only want more.

Background checks are a great example. In CA, they then banned high capacity mags, require ammo registration, you need bullet releases on semi-autos. Since it still hasn't stop gun murders, I see gun bans as being the next logical step.

[bobcat]

This has been pointed out before, but again, this particular issue, was not something that the anti-hunting types are pushing for. This was an issue brought to the attention of the WDFW by HUNTERS.

Yes, there is no doubt that anti-hunting groups would support a ban on baiting deer and elk. Most non-hunters probably would as well, just because to someone who is not educated on the subject, it seems to be unethical.

The only issue seems to be in Okanogan county during the late archery season when mule deer are concentrated on winter range. It would be great if some regulations could be written to simply address this particular problem.

Baiting is an important hunting tactic for small parcels of land in developed areas. This is where deer numbers are often highest and where hunting can be a very important way of keeping populations in check. Baiting may be the only practical way to hunt a 5 acre parcel of land, and it may also be the safest.

[Bob33]

FYI I did receive a reply to my email.

Thank you for taking the time to email your comments to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission. Each commissioner will receive a copy.

Opinions and comments such as yours provide the Commission with valuable insight into fish and wildlife issues of concern to communities throughout our state. The Commission relies on public testimony, email, and correspondence to help determine what is working well and what requires more concentrated efforts.

Thank you for your interest in the conservation and management of the state’s precious fish and wildlife resources.

[grundy53]

FYI I did receive a reply to my email.

Thank you for taking the time to email your comments to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission. Each commissioner will receive a copy.

Opinions and comments such as yours provide the Commission with valuable insight into fish and wildlife issues of concern to communities throughout our state. The Commission relies on public testimony, email, and correspondence to help determine what is working well and what requires more concentrated efforts.

Thank you for your interest in the conservation and management of the state’s precious fish and wildlife resources.

I received the same email.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[pianoman9701]

This has been pointed out before, but again, this particular issue, was not something that the anti-hunting types are pushing for. This was an issue brought to the attention of the WDFW by HUNTERS.

Yes, there is no doubt that anti-hunting groups would support a ban on baiting deer and elk. Most non-hunters probably would as well, just because to someone who is not educated on the subject, it seems to be unethical.

The only issue seems to be in Okanogan county during the late archery season when mule deer are concentrated on winter range. It would be great if some regulations could be written to simply address this particular problem.

Baiting is an important hunting tactic for small parcels of land in developed areas. This is where deer numbers are often highest and where hunting can be a very important way of keeping populations in check. Baiting may be the only practical way to hunt a 5 acre parcel of land, and it may also be the safest.

It may have been started by hunters (I'd like to see the proof on that, though), but it's certainly heavily supported by anti-hunting groups. Any aspect of hunting they can chip away at they will.

[bobcat]

Not sure if this is enough proof, but here's a statement by the WDFW from the meeting in Olympia in April 2015 (which I attended):



If you'd like to see the entire document:

http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2015/04/apr09_2015_16_summary.pdf

[Blacktail Sniper]

I guess I don't understand the amount issue. What's that got to do with anything? So you should only be able to call ducks and geese so many times before shooting them or you can only rattle three times every hour. Doesn't make sense really does it. If you can afford to dump a truckload of food then so what and more power to you, I cant but im not against it either. Its like saying your a loud to call coyotes but I cant afford an electric call so I want to have them band for that reason, doesn't make sense again does it. Stay the course fellow hunters and stay united...

You can call once or a hundred times in an hour, rattle for 15 seconds or 45 minutes straight. When you are done, there isn't a huge pile of rotting, smelly, decaying fruit left behind.

Now, if you are dumping a truckload, but going back in and cleaning up and hauling it away, that may be different.

Just playing the devils advocate, and i'm not trying to be a jerk but if its your property should it matter? 

What if you live downwind of that truck load of rotting & decaying fruit and do not appreciate the smell?

The bottom line is, to some people, both hunters and anti-hunters, it does, regardless of where it occurs and that is the problem that needs addressed and a reasonable solution found.

One example that is often debated is road hunters vs boot hunters.

Both are legal, but yet some just can't stand the thought of a road hunter, don't consider it hunting by their personal definition, and see no reason for it.

How is that been addressed?

As a solution to try and find a mid-point for the different user groups, there are areas that are restricted to no vehicle traffic.  Now doesn't that seem like a more logical approach?

If not, it will likely be eliminated on all scales, and the end result is another method taken away, never to come back, and then on to the next issue to chip away at hunting in general.

YOU, sir, are the one chipping away at hunting! If we as hunters support ANY restrictions on ANY way of hunting, we are contributing to the anti's cause.

Are antis going to be satisfied with restrictions on baiting? NOPE!! There will always be some way of hunting they want to take away. Chipping away as you say. Unless we as hunters unify and say ALL ways of hunting should remain legal, we will continue to lose rights. This was the way of hound hunting, baiting bears, etc. Its the same as the gun control issue. Any restrictions are sliding further down that slippery slope. So YOU are part of the problem, not the solution, IMHO.

Not sure where you get that I am the enemy??

I take it that you are saying take a stand, all or none and hope that you pick correctly???

Tell me how well that worked with bait and hounds for bear??

Incase you are not aware, I spent many months contacting agencies, WDFW, Senators and Representatives trying to get legislation passed on the spring damage bears hunts and the use of bait.

So, no Sir, I am not what I consider part of the problem! If you cannot look past your own stubborness or ignorance and see that the more likely out come of a bullheaded, all or none approach such as yours to not likely be favorable for everyone, then good luck to you!

[singleshot12]

I'm having a hard time digesting if your not for baiting then you must be one of them attitude.

Sure nobody wants more laws,but maybe this is a good thing. Deer and elk may once again spread out and forage naturally,giving everyone fair opportunity.

I know my area would improve 100% if 90% of the deer were not locked up and concentrated on someone elses property"bait pile".

It should be the same as the waterfowl baiting laws, which everyone has accepted btw.

But I guess keep it legal for now, to not be accused of being an anti-hunter Until baiting is proven or not to be detrimental to the herds.

[singleshot12]

Scientific studies need to be made to find out whether or not baiting concentrates animals or spreads desease before any new law changes

[Blacktail Sniper]

I'm having a hard time digesting if your not for baiting then you must be one of them attitude.

Sure nobody wants more laws,but maybe this is a good thing. Deer and elk may once again spread out and forage naturally,giving everyone fair opportunity.

I know my area would improve 100% if 90% of the deer were not locked up and concentrated on someone elses property"bait pile".

It should be the same as the waterfowl baiting laws, which everyone has accepted btw.

But I guess keep it legal to not be accused of being an anti-hunter.Until baiting is proven to detrimental to the herds

Well stated!

And honestly, it sounds like there are truly only a small amount of what I would call industrial level baiting any way, so I really cannot see the harm that saying 500 pounds of apples isn't okay, but 50 pounds is.

Just means a person has to put a little bit more effort in. But maybe that is it, the lazy factor...that is it is hard work to run a bait site when you can't just dump 500 or a 1000 pounds in one shot and call it good.

[pianoman9701]

Not sure if this is enough proof, but here's a statement by the WDFW from the meeting in Olympia in April 2015 (which I attended):



If you'd like to see the entire document:

http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2015/04/apr09_2015_16_summary.pdf

Hunters and landowners - additional input. Like I said, It wasn't only hunters and there are a lot of others outside hunting having input.

[jasnt]

I'm having a hard time digesting if your not for baiting then you must be one of them attitude.

Sure nobody wants more laws,but maybe this is a good thing. Deer and elk may once again spread out and forage naturally,giving everyone fair opportunity.

I know my area would improve 100% if 90% of the deer were not locked up and concentrated on someone elses property"bait pile".

It should be the same as the waterfowl baiting laws, which everyone has accepted btw.

But I guess keep it legal for now, to not be accused of being an anti-hunter Until baiting is proven or not to be detrimental to the herds.

how do you know 90% of the deer are on some one else's property?

[singleshot12]

I'm having a hard time digesting if your not for baiting then you must be one of them attitude.

Sure nobody wants more laws,but maybe this is a good thing. Deer and elk may once again spread out and forage naturally,giving everyone fair opportunity.

I know my area would improve 100% if 90% of the deer were not locked up and concentrated on someone elses property"bait pile".

It should be the same as the waterfowl baiting laws, which everyone has accepted btw.

But I guess keep it legal for now, to not be accused of being an anti-hunter Until baiting is proven or not to be detrimental to the herds.

how do you know 90% of the deer are on some one else's property?

Observation

[Curly]

I am also of the opinion that the baiting issue started with hunters having issues with baiting. 

Most non-hunters already assume baiting is illegal.  Lots of hunters even think it's illegal.  Hunters bring up the issue with WDFW and the next thing you know anti-hunters have picked up on the issue and of course they're all over it.  Anything they can take away they will.

[westsidehntr]

I guess I don't understand the amount issue. What's that got to do with anything? So you should only be able to call ducks and geese so many times before shooting them or you can only rattle three times every hour. Doesn't make sense really does it. If you can afford to dump a truckload of food then so what and more power to you, I cant but im not against it either. Its like saying your a loud to call coyotes but I cant afford an electric call so I want to have them band for that reason, doesn't make sense again does it. Stay the course fellow hunters and stay united...

You can call once or a hundred times in an hour, rattle for 15 seconds or 45 minutes straight. When you are done, there isn't a huge pile of rotting, smelly, decaying fruit left behind.

Now, if you are dumping a truckload, but going back in and cleaning up and hauling it away, that may be different.

Just playing the devils advocate, and i'm not trying to be a jerk but if its your property should it matter? 

What if you live downwind of that truck load of rotting & decaying fruit and do not appreciate the smell?

The bottom line is, to some people, both hunters and anti-hunters, it does, regardless of where it occurs and that is the problem that needs addressed and a reasonable solution found.

One example that is often debated is road hunters vs boot hunters.

Both are legal, but yet some just can't stand the thought of a road hunter, don't consider it hunting by their personal definition, and see no reason for it.

How is that been addressed?

As a solution to try and find a mid-point for the different user groups, there are areas that are restricted to no vehicle traffic.  Now doesn't that seem like a more logical approach?

If not, it will likely be eliminated on all scales, and the end result is another method taken away, never to come back, and then on to the next issue to chip away at hunting in general.

YOU, sir, are the one chipping away at hunting! If we as hunters support ANY restrictions on ANY way of hunting, we are contributing to the anti's cause.

Are antis going to be satisfied with restrictions on baiting? NOPE!! There will always be some way of hunting they want to take away. Chipping away as you say. Unless we as hunters unify and say ALL ways of hunting should remain legal, we will continue to lose rights. This was the way of hound hunting, baiting bears, etc. Its the same as the gun control issue. Any restrictions are sliding further down that slippery slope. So YOU are part of the problem, not the solution, IMHO.

Not sure where you get that I am the enemy??

I take it that you are saying take a stand, all or none and hope that you pick correctly???

Tell me how well that worked with bait and hounds for bear??

Incase you are not aware, I spent many months contacting agencies, WDFW, Senators and Representatives trying to get legislation passed on the spring damage bears hunts and the use of bait.

So, no Sir, I am not what I consider part of the problem! If you cannot look past your own stubborness or ignorance and see that the more likely out come of a bullheaded, all or none approach such as yours to not likely be favorable for everyone, then good luck to you!

I think you are the enemy because you support helping the antis erode our rights. Interesting that you ask how well bear baiting and hound hunting, as the banning of these helps prove my point. Did the antis stop once these were banned? Nope. Will they stop when restrictions are placed on baiting? Nope! Next, will be a total ban on baiting. Your kind will say, we should ban baiting so the antis won't totally ban all hunting.

We could call them "common sense baiting restrictions." Sound familiar?