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

[bowhuntin]

I was thinking the same thing, plus it would be a lot safer for hikers. Kill two birds with one stone by bringing back baiting.

[Abolt338]

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.

When I spoke with the WDFW biologists (two of them) they both said that bear populations were actually a little on the high side over the last 3-4 years, which makes me think the comment regarding "stable or slightly declining" is actually a good thing and has little to do with the proposals. 

They specifically state their justifications under the two proposed changes.  Neither addresses population issues.

RW

[need2huntmor]

It doesn't matter if you are shooting  an animal at 40 yards with a bow, 80 yards with a ML, or 400 yards with a rifle.  The fact is, you have to be absolutely positive of your target.  That fact that the hunter did not positively identify his target is the reason that hiker died, not that fact that he happened to be using a rifle to hunt with.  I think more adult supervision of younger hunters, and possibly all outdoor users being required to wear blaze orange during hunting seasons, might be good ideas to consider.

[WAcoyotehunter]

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

or use dogs...

[bobcat]

and possibly all outdoor users being required to wear blaze orange during hunting seasons

No! That is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard.

[Slamadoo]

Why is that such a bad idea? It is just a safety precaution. Im don't neccessarily think it should be required, but I think it should be recomended. It is just a way to ensure that people are as safe as possible. Why do you think hunters have to wear it?

[Slamadoo]

If I am "Joe-Hiker" and am going to go hiking during hunting season. You bet your ass I am going to wear blaze orange.

[bobcat]

To me it's just not right for the government to mandate the color clothing a person must wear. Simple as that. Let people wear whatever color they want. Besides if they want to be seen there are colors other than orange that would work. Pink, red, yellow, flourescent green. It should be up to the individual, not the government deciding the color of our clothing. What about bow hunters who hunt in September for deer/elk while rifle bear season is on? Should they also be required to wear orange?

[bobcat]

If I am "Joe-Hiker" and am going to go hiking during hunting season. You bet your ass I am going to wear blaze orange.

If you choose to do so, fine. Would you want the government requiring it, and if you forgot your orange vest one day, how would you feel if you got a $120 citation? (don't know it would be $120, just assuming since that's what it costs for no seat belt)

[Slamadoo]

I agree that the government should not be mandating what color of clothing people should wear in the forest. Im just saying it would be a good idea for someone to inform people that there are hunters out there in the fall, and that it is a good idea to wear colors that would differentiate you from a deer. Reminding people that bright colors like yellow, orange, red, pink, and white might be a better option than black, brown, green, and other dark colors.

According to your logic though, why should anyone wear blaze orange? Lets just let any hunter wear whatever they want. It seems as though your ok with modern fire arms hunters being mandated to wear orange, but no one else. If it is that dangerous to hunt without orange on, then why don't muzzleloaders or bow hunters wear orange.

If other hunters in the field have to wear orange, then we should be encouraging other users like hikers, mushroom pickers, and others to wear orange. I just don't see the harm in the government reminding people of what is going on. They don't seem to have a problem reminding people to wear seatbelts.

  

Why is that such a bad idea? It is just a safety precaution. Im don't neccessarily think it should be required, but I think it should be recomended. It is just a way to ensure that people are as safe as possible. Why do you think hunters have to wear it?

Like I said in this previous post of mine. I DO NOT THINK IT SHOULD BE MANDATORY!!! I just think it would be a nice reminder. I feel that most people are not even aware that hunting goes on in these areas that they use.

[bobcat]

I am also against the law requiring modern firearm hunters to wear orange. But I believe we are stuck with that one. I wear my orange vest but I don't like the fact that if I put my backpack on I am now in violation of the law, as I no longer have 400 square inches of orange visible from all sides. Or, if in the middle of a downpour I decide to slip my raincoat over my orange vest so that I can stay dry. It should be my choice, not the governments. I have a nice bright red rain coat I would like to wear sometimes but unfortunately it is not the color the government has told me I must wear. I really doubt I would look anything like a deer with my bright red rain coat on. I should also have the option of wearing neon pink if I so choose. I think it would be safer than orange. Just my      

[Slamadoo]

I agree with you on that.

[need2huntmor]

Sorry to touch a nerve with the whole blaze orange thing.  Just throwing out ideas that would be better than closing hunting completely, for the whole month.  I don't agree with the government running our lives either, but if they are set on making a change to address the issue of the hiker being shot, at least it would be more of a compromise, instead of just shutting one user group (hunters) out completely.

[Abolt338]

I think someone made a post earlier suggesting that signs be posted in "high-traffic areas" letting users (hikers/hunters) know that hunting seasons are going on and that the are is used by hunters.

This would serve the purpose of informing the ignorant and allowing people to make their own choices regarding the clothes they wear and the time of year they venture out into the woods.

It would also let hunters know that certain areas are used heavily by other outdoor users.

RW

[boneaddict]

Yakima Herald actually ran an article before the season this year and recommended folks to where bright colored clothing because hunting season was on.  Maybe the Seattle times could have ran that and a life would have been saved.   doubt it, the kid was obviosuly an idiot.