Letter to WDFW regarding 2009-2011 Bear Hunting Rule Change Proposals

[alecvg]

Nice job Shane, your letter sounds perfect, and makes logical sence.

[Bofire]

A ML or Archery gear cannot 'ethically' kill at the range a rifle will, no doubt, but an bow or ML can launch a projectile a hell of a lot further than 50 yards or 120 yards. It makes no difference if the kill is clean or just a 1 inch deep wound hunters still get blamed. I think my old compund would launch an arrow a good 250 yards, a ML prolly close to a mile.

I cannot seem to find these proposals, can someone put up a link please.
Carl

[shanevg]

A ML or Archery gear cannot 'ethically' kill at the range a rifle will, no doubt, but an bow or ML can launch a projectile a hell of a lot further than 50 yards or 120 yards. It makes no difference if the kill is clean or just a 1 inch deep wound hunters still get blamed. I think my old compund would launch an arrow a good 250 yards, a ML prolly close to a mile.

I cannot seem to find these proposals, can someone put up a link please.
Carl

That really has nothing to do with this case.  I'm sure at the proper angles you could launch a bullet from a modern firearm for multiple miles.  Luckily, WDFW isn't dealing with very many people idiotic enough to try and do things like that (whether it be with a bow, ML, or MF.  I'm not referring to anything about how far any of these weapons can potentially shoot in the letter.  I am talking about the ranges that hunters generally stick to while hunting.

[Abolt338]

A ML or Archery gear cannot 'ethically' kill at the range a rifle will, no doubt, but an bow or ML can launch a projectile a hell of a lot further than 50 yards or 120 yards. It makes no difference if the kill is clean or just a 1 inch deep wound hunters still get blamed. I think my old compund would launch an arrow a good 250 yards, a ML prolly close to a mile.

I cannot seem to find these proposals, can someone put up a link please.
Carl

http://wdfw.wa.gov/do/newreal/release.php?id=jan2309a

[woodywsu]

I believe the Sauk mountain incident happened with a 120 yard shot. Are you saying that ML hunters will not take that shot. I'm pretty sure there would more guys pass on the shot when compared to taking it, but some will definately still take the shot.

[shanevg]

I believe the Sauk mountain incident happened with a 120 yard shot. Are you saying that ML hunters will not take that shot. I'm pretty sure there would more guys pass on the shot when compared to taking it, but some will definately still take the shot.

All I am saying in the letter is that 120 yards is about the maximum effective distance as opposed to 500+ yards for a rifle so as far as safety goes (as far as WDFW is concerned) a ML is a lot less dangerous than a MF.  I know the shot in the Sauk Mt. incident was only 120 yards which just makes it all the more frustrating, but I am trying to argue any point I can w/ WDFW to convince them to keep the hills open in August.

[Bofire]

It has everything to do with this new LAW, the case means nothing.
The wound/kill does not have to be a intended shot with out identifying the target. A shot that occurred because your gun fell over, or a shot that glanced off a rock will get the same result.

[Slamadoo]

Why would you even bring up modern firearms as opposed to muzzle loaders and archers? This proposal is ludicrous, and should be stated as such. I don't understand why we hunters should give up any of our bear season for any hunting method.

Maybe you dont hunt bear with a modern firearm, but I do. A muzzle loader or bow will kill you just as well as a modern firearm. An Idiot with a bow or muzzle loader is just as dangerous as an idiot with a modern firearm.

It seems to me that you are trying to give concessions when there is no need to. All we hunters should say is that, " What happened at sauk mountain was a terrible accident and tragedy. But that it was only that, an accident. An accident so rare, that it hasn't happened in the last several decades. We feel that requiring young hunters to hunt with supervision, along with increased awareness by both hunters and non-hunters alike will keep horrible accidents like this from happening in the future."

I understand what you are trying to do, but I dont see why any bear hunters should lose their August bear season. It doesn't matter what you hunt with.

[bowhuntin]

 

[Abolt338]

Why would you even bring up modern firearms as opposed to muzzle loaders and archers? This proposal is ludicrous, and should be stated as such. I don't understand why we hunters should give up any of our bear season for any hunting method.

Maybe you dont hunt bear with a modern firearm, but I do. A muzzle loader or bow will kill you just as well as a modern firearm. An Idiot with a bow or muzzle loader is just as dangerous as an idiot with a modern firearm.

It seems to me that you are trying to give concessions when there is no need to. All we hunters should say is that, " What happened at sauk mountain was a terrible accident and tragedy. But that it was only that, an accident. An accident so rare, that it hasn't happened in the last several decades. We feel that requiring young hunters to hunt with supervision, along with increased awareness by both hunters and non-hunters alike will keep horrible accidents like this from happening in the future."

I understand what you are trying to do, but I dont see why any bear hunters should lose their August bear season. It doesn't matter what you hunt with.

Exactly!  Well said...

RW

[boneaddict]

120 yard shot

Haven't read your letter yet shane...trying new tactic reading back to front LOL   HELL, there are guys on here that would take 120 yard shots with their bows.        now on my way up the thread

[WAcoyotehunter]

The main reason for this regulation is to make a small cut on the harvest of bears.  The harvest is starting to show more immature bears and the WDFW wants to make a small amendment to save a few animals.  What they didn't realize is that most of the 'diehard' bear hunters are chasing them in August...they are thinking about that now and might consider making some amendments if the harvest data lines up with some of the areas most hunted in August.  

The user groups statement was used to 'kill two birds with one stone' they figured they were further ahead cutting time off the front of the season then they were off the rear- but either way, they wanted to cut harvest slightly and a shorter season was their way of doing it.

[Slamadoo]

The main reason for this regulation is to make a small cut on the harvest of bears.  The harvest is starting to show more immature bears and the WDFW wants to make a small amendment to save a few animals.  What they didn't realize is that most of the 'diehard' bear hunters are chasing them in August...they are thinking about that now and might consider making some amendments if the harvest data lines up with some of the areas most hunted in August.  

The user groups statement was used to 'kill two birds with one stone' they figured they were further ahead cutting time off the front of the season then they were off the rear- but either way, they wanted to cut harvest slightly and a shorter season was their way of doing it.

If this is the truth, and it very well may be, then I wish they would have given this reason for doing it to begin with. If I remember correctly, they used "reducing hunter/non-hunter conflict" for their main reason for removing the August hunt. Maybe I misread the proposal, but this was the general idea that I got.

[WAcoyotehunter]

In addition to trends in total bear harvest, the Department uses trends in median ages of harvested
bears and the percentage of females in the total harvest as indicators of the status of bear
populations (see 2009-2015 Game Management Plan). Those data suggest bear populations are
stable to slightly declining (in a few BBMUs). The Department is recommending status quo bear
seasons, with two exceptions: (1) For BBMUs that open Aug 1, the Aug 1-31 period is limited to
hunting on private lands only. The justification for this change is to reduce conflict with other
recreational users on public lands during the summer while still allowing bears to be harvested for
damage reasons (e.g., orchard damage). (2) For BBMUs that open in early September, change the
opener from the day after Labor day to September 1. The justification for this change is
consistency with opening day of deer archery seasons.General Cougar

Here is the excerpt from the web page- The info i posted earlier is straight from the author of the "green sheet"

[WDFW-SUX]

If we were alloud to bait shooting immature/Sow Bears would not be an issue.