Washington wolf population continues to grow

[pianoman9701]

Here s where you and I differ. Hunters aren't going anywhere we are established. If the liberal government said tomorrow hunting is outlawed I say FU at least I don't need to buy tag now.  This is as long as there is a need for us hunters aka lots of animals.  With the introduction of Wolves to take out our place as apex predators and managers of the herds we as hunters will become the true endangered species. It's the wolf plan. Slowly but surely.

I'm unwilling to lose my gun rights over a poaching charge or multiple charges. You may be, but I would suggest that would be a lose/lose situation. It would be far better to maintain public support for hunting to begin with. And, we can do that with the right communication.

I moved from the east coast back in '89. States like NJ, CT, RI, MA have so many liberals who know so little about game management that the hunters have lost their privileges in many places. Deer hunting, bear hunting, any trapping are out, sometimes statewide. The other problem there (and here), is that hunters don't know how to communicate to save their privileges. When you're 3.5% of the population and you treat the other 96.5% with contempt, you lose. When you're able to enlighten the ignorant with facts and do it in an approachable manner, you can maintain your rights. Knowing the facts about the North American Conservation Model and why the F&W departments use hunters to help keep wildlife healthy and abundant, and being able to present those facts and statistics in a non-threatening way will make it so you don't have to make the decision to poach down the road, possibly leading to the loss of your gun rights. We can have our cake and eat it too. We just need to learn how to put the frosting on it. Hunters are guilty of alienating the general public and there's no need for it when 80% of the general public understand the value of hunting when it's explained to them.

[pianoman9701]

The white collar approach is a slow death by a 1000 cuts. Blue collar approach gets it done. And the white collar approach gets stronger and stronger the less animals there are to hunt and thus less hunters/supporters.

Also your % are way off its not actual hunters versus antis it's more people who support/ aren't against hunting versus antis.

In the east coast hunting is comeing back in full swing deer numbers have exploded and people are getting killed from them in car accidents.  The deer are a pain in the ass to more people than antis. So hunting will prevail.

In which state can't you hunt in east coast.

My statistics are dead on and are a matter of record. In WA, less than 4% of the population hunts. Over 96% of our population doesn't hunt in WA. In a blue state like this, if you think the "blue collar approach" works, you haven't been paying attention to gun legislation and the wolf program that received large support. It doesn't work. You're not going to muscle liberals into your way of thinking. The Bill Gates and Hanauers of this state will have their way with you and your hunting privileges. I wish it were not so, but it is. Antis are now 8% of our population, more than twice the number of hunters. The others can be swayed by either group. Who do you think they'll listen to when you draw the hard line and the antis hold their hands and cry with them? I'm not saying we need to compromise - quite the opposite. I'm saying we need to learn how to talk to non-hunters in a non-aggressive approach with factual information.

In NJ and CT, they've banned black bear bunting, even though the bear populations are burgeoning. Several townships in NJ, CT, RI, and MA have banned whitetail deer hunting and now have population problems and tick problems. Their answer in some of those towns is birth control, idea presented by the HSUS and PETA, and accepted by the liberal populations of ignorant people.

[JLS]

The white collar approach is a slow death by a 1000 cuts. Blue collar approach gets it done. And the white collar approach gets stronger and stronger the less animals there are to hunt and thus less hunters/supporters.

Also your % are way off its not actual hunters versus antis it's more people who support/ aren't against hunting versus antis.

In the east coast hunting is comeing back in full swing deer numbers have exploded and people are getting killed from them in car accidents.  The deer are a pain in the ass to more people than antis. So hunting will prevail.

In which state can't you hunt in east coast.

If you think you are going to strongarm your hunting philosophy on the non-hunters of this state then I would suggest you really haven't been paying attention to the ballot box management dynamics over the last 20 years. 

Do you really think that you are going to compete with Paul Allen in regards to initiative advertising and propaganda and win?  If you do, you might have watched Red Dawn one too many times.

The FU approach is not only illegal in many instances, but will also serve to hasten the demise of hunters.

[pianoman9701]

I'm done. Good luck! 

[JLS]

The white collar approach is a slow death by a 1000 cuts. Blue collar approach gets it done. And the white collar approach gets stronger and stronger the less animals there are to hunt and thus less hunters/supporters.

Also your % are way off its not actual hunters versus antis it's more people who support/ aren't against hunting versus antis.

In the east coast hunting is comeing back in full swing deer numbers have exploded and people are getting killed from them in car accidents.  The deer are a pain in the ass to more people than antis. So hunting will prevail.

In which state can't you hunt in east coast.

If you think you are going to strongarm your hunting philosophy on the non-hunters of this state then I would suggest you really haven't been paying attention to the ballot box management dynamics over the last 20 years. 

Do you really think that you are going to compete with Paul Allen in regards to initiative advertising and propaganda and win?  If you do, you might have watched Red Dawn one too many times.

The FU approach is not only illegal in many instances, but will also serve to hasten the demise of hunters.

Hell no, no way we can compete with those guys. That's the reason why SSS is nesissary.  Maybe illegal but morally is it wrong we are under attack by liberals who want to destroy the hunting that we currently have in Washington. There plan is in place and  it is working sit back and watch it happen, try and fight it in the courts. The white collar approach isn't working.

Your SSS approach only lends credibility to their campaigns, and really does nothing appreciable or positive for the overall future of hunting.  Every time a hunter is caught utilizing the SSS method it turns more and more non-hunters against us.  It's pretty hard to argue my stance as a conservationist when I utilize and promote illegal methods such as "magic meatballs", and espouse the merits of shooting animals that are protected under state and/or federal law.  If I can't promote myself as a conservationist, how can I ever expect a non-hunter to support me as part of conservation efforts?  I really don't expect you to get this, but I keep hoping at some point you will.

[Magnum_Willys]

I want to see more wolves in this state! 7 more breeding pairs in fact. 
 

[jasnt]

The sss approach will not work. We already know 70% of the wolf population must be killed every year to stop or reverse growth.  Ask anyone who has hunted wolf. It's not easy. You could devote your whole life to killing wolves and never make a dent. There are way more wolves than has been confirmed and the population will continue to grow despite any efforts on our part. Even if every hunter in this state spent a day a week hunting wolves we could not slow growth. 

[bearpaw]

Unless I remember incorrectly, the owner of this site had either requested that illegal actions or the intent thereof not be posted, or had outright banned them. As I recall there were two reasons for this. 1. It leaves him in a bad position between the law and his members, and 2. Hunters are not the only ones viewing this site. Anti-hunters love to point out the illegal activities and the attitudes which justify them.

Can one of the mods please comment on the postings advocating poaching and SSS? Thanks.

The forum's official position regarding illegal activities: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,78064.0.html

Numerous courts have ruled that individuals are responsible for their own comments. I'm not really concerned about individuals making statements about their own thoughts and beliefs as long as it's not done in the context that H-W endorses illegal activity.

[bearpaw]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

[pianoman9701]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

It's more along the line of a 10th Amendment assertion - the state over the feds. It'd be nice to have some politicians who understand and acknowledge the depth of this problem for the people who live with it. But it's a moot point. As bearpaw mentioned, our governor has no such intestinal fortitude and even if he did, he sides with the HSUS and DOW. Wolves before man. He's a moron.

[WAcoyotehunter]

The other problem there (and here), is that hunters don't know how to communicate to save their privileges. When you're 3.5% of the population and you treat the other 96.5% with contempt, you lose. When you're able to enlighten the ignorant with facts and do it in an approachable manner, you can maintain your rights. Knowing the facts about the North American Conservation Model and why the F&W departments use hunters to help keep wildlife healthy and abundant, and being able to present those facts and statistics in a non-threatening way will make it so you don't have to make the decision to poach down the road, possibly leading to the loss of your gun rights.

You think the Steven's County Cattleman's Association is doing a good job of that??  They're a joke up here....more cowboy hats than cows and the State Cattlemen have even distanced themselves from that group.

[pianoman9701]

Meanwhile I just got a letter from The Idaho Dept of Fish and Game looking for a license renewal.

In the letter it stated that "61,200 deer were harvested in 2014, the most in Idaho since 1992and the hunter success rate overall was 40%." And "20,700 elk were taken in 2014, the most since 2005 and hunter success rate overall was 24%.

"We have every reason to believe that 2015 harvest numbers will be just as strong. As our crews conduct winter population surveys and forecasts, we are excited about what we are seeing in the hills streams for this upcoming season."

So much for a predator pit.

This would seem to support the action taken by the governor to ignore the feds, as stated by Bearpaw. And let's not forget, Sitka, ungulate management is only one problem. How are the ranchers doing and what were their losses? How many pets were taken? Hunting dogs? How's the ungulate population in Lolo where a majority of the pack exist? Oh, that's right. They're down more than 60%.

[bearpaw]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

[bearpaw]

Meanwhile I just got a letter from The Idaho Dept of Fish and Game looking for a license renewal.

In the letter it stated that "61,200 deer were harvested in 2014, the most in Idaho since 1992and the hunter success rate overall was 40%." And "20,700 elk were taken in 2014, the most since 2005 and hunter success rate overall was 24%.

"We have every reason to believe that 2015 harvest numbers will be just as strong. As our crews conduct winter population surveys and forecasts, we are excited about what we are seeing in the hills streams for this upcoming season."

So much for a predator pit.

This would seem to support the action taken by the governor to ignore the feds, as stated by Bearpaw. And let's not forget, Sitka, ungulate management is only one problem. How are the ranchers doing and what were their losses? How many pets were taken? Hunting dogs? How's the ungulate population in Lolo where a majority of the pack exist? Oh, that's right. They're down more than 60%.

No matter how you look at it, Idaho has more wolves than Washington by magnitudes. What Washington doesn't have is the habitat Idaho does. This proves that wolves aren't the end of hunting. It also proves that where habitat and weather are good, game populations ca still thrive with predators in the picture.  As for the Lolo, habitat seems to be the issue there, compounded possibly by predators. But a good fire or major logging could cure that.

I'm still waiting for that outbreak of Hytidad that was predicted to devastate Idaho.

CORRECTION: That depends on where you are talking.
Currently NE WA has more wolves than most areas in Idaho. We spend months in the woods in both states we know how these areas compare, verses someone relying on inept inaccurate data from an agency that calls wolves coyotes and denies wolf reports! I've had WDFW do that with wolves I reported!

[bearpaw]

Since Idaho started actively managing wolves, 5 per hunter and I think 3 per trapper, double cougar tags and double bear tags in many areas, wildlife is bouncing back fast in areras where wolves are being removed! All we expect is honest management in WA!