collapse

Author Topic: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says  (Read 1963 times)

Offline Blacktail Sniper

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 4527
  • Location: Rochester, Washington
  • Kill'em all...let the gravy sort'em out!!!
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #50 on: December 07, 2017, 10:32:49 PM »
For conversations sake:

Say HSUS pushes the issue and gets the law changed to remove property damage as reason to lethally remove bears, be it with hounds or bait, but leaves the language regarding public safety.

The public safety clause would still allow hounds for instances where people are at risk, but not merely to protect property, what then would the timber companies alternatives be to address tree damage?

Use the USDA for lethal removal?

Thoughts on them pushing against the big timber lobby hard enough to bring them (and their money) into the mix as the opposition.

Just tossing these out for discussion from some different perspectives.






It is better to be consistently incorrect than inconsistently correct...

Sarcasm: The ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it. 

My level of sarcasm depends on your level of stupidity...

Sarcasm makes smart people laugh and stupid people mad.

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 4071
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2017, 10:36:37 PM »
They could snare them?  Over bait?

Yes, you didn't know it was happening? What is more you can't do it. There is a secretive process for permitting bear snarers. There are a small number of people that do this for timber companies plus APHIS does the work also.
Bruce Vandervort

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 13394
  • Location: The Wedge
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2017, 10:42:55 PM »
No, interesting. 

I learn stuff all the time on this forum
I should be out hunting lions, thanks WDFW

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 4071
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #53 on: December 07, 2017, 10:47:59 PM »
For conversations sake:

Say HSUS pushes the issue and gets the law changed to remove property damage as reason to lethally remove bears, be it with hounds or bait, but leaves the language regarding public safety.

The public safety clause would still allow hounds for instances where people are at risk, but not merely to protect property, what then would the timber companies alternatives be to address tree damage?

Use the USDA for lethal removal?

Thoughts on them pushing against the big timber lobby hard enough to bring them (and their money) into the mix as the opposition.

Just tossing these out for discussion from some different perspectives.

Maybe a time to rehash the gist of HSUS's lawsuit.
I do not believe there is a problem with using hounds except the houndmen have to be agents of the State, County or Feds. That leaves out most if not all hound guys.
There is no such restriction for trappers. Trappers can work as contractors and be in full compliance. This from 655

(a) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the
10 killing of black bear with the aid of bait by employees or agents of
11 county, state, or federal agencies while acting in their official
12 capacities for the purpose of protecting livestock, domestic animals,
13 private property, or the public safety.

Bruce Vandervort

Offline lokidog

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 13178
  • Location: Decatur Island/Sultan
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #54 on: December 07, 2017, 11:29:14 PM »
I hope this is found to be in violation of state law.
Maybe then there will be a chance of getting the law repealed, or at least opportunities increased for bear hunting without hounds and/or bait.

I disagree, hunters should never support ending one type of management for personal gain. That is part of how we lost bear baiting and hounding in the first place, some hunters supported the ban!  :twocents:



Well, sorry but I'm no longer sympathetic to the big timber companies who charge hunters for access and then poison our wildlife and destroy the habitat with their herbicides.


So if a cougar kills your dog, goat, horse or injures your child out playing in the yard, you dont want the state to be able to use hounds to catch that lion with the use of hounds? am i understanding you?

No, apparently you're not understanding me. I said nothing about the scenario you described.

oh, i thought you were saying you hoped using dogs to do depredation kills on bear would be deemed illegal. i was just making an example of depredation more relateble (since you don't own a tree farm) that would also be deemed illegal.

Actually, your comparison is not valid.  The law states, according to the article, that WDFW may remove problem bears (and cougar I would assume) using hounds.  The law does not state that  agents of Weyerhauser, etc. may do so.

BTW, I am not in support of HSUS, I am in support of opening up bear hunting opportunities to the public. Timber companies want bear removed, crawl to us hunters....   :tung:

Offline Alan K

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 2447
  • Location: Lewis County, WA
  • University of Idaho Alumni
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #55 on: December 08, 2017, 06:32:14 AM »
Believe it or not, timber companies don't have any problem with black bears. In fact, its a benefit for them in the eyes SFI to maintain broad biodiversity and have robust wildlife populations.

What they do have a problem with is specifically the damage causing bears. If anyone can provide a more realistic and effective way of targeting specific damaging bears, I'm certain they'd listen. When a forester discovers a stand being peeled, they can often secure a permit within a day or two with a photo of damage and GPS coordinates for proof. WDFW folks verify damage at their soonest availability, and if a photo or coordinates were fabricated the applicant is in BIG trouble. There are a number of hound guys (and I believe all of the ones the state is comfortable with issuing permits to are WCO's as well) ready to take care of the problem and be right there. The speed in which you jump on these things is paramount to getting the culprit bear. From what I know of things, the hunters show up, strike the bear typically right there in the damaged stand, and have it removed within hours of arriving.

Of course we'd all like additional hunting opportunity. In my opinion the -general- season should start July 1, about the time that peeling stops as the berries come on.  There is no doubt the population could sustain it, and it would help ungulate populations out.  The issue with spring bear boot hunting is that it is ineffective targeting specific bears, and cannot overlap with the effective and culprit bear targeting houndsmen. Same reasons there isn't supplemental feeding in areas with spring boot hunts. There would be questions in the mind of LEO's that a bear was harvested over a supplemental feeding site or with hounds under a spring bear tag.


Offline HighCountryHunter88

  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 1009
  • Location: GRAHAM
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #56 on: December 08, 2017, 07:06:56 AM »
I hope this is found to be in violation of state law.
Maybe then there will be a chance of getting the law repealed, or at least opportunities increased for bear hunting without hounds and/or bait.
I disagree, hunters should never support ending one type of management for personal gain. That is part of how we lost bear baiting and hounding in the first place, some hunters supported the ban!  :twocents:





Well, sorry but I'm no longer sympathetic to the big timber companies who charge hunters for access and then poison our wildlife and destroy the habitat with their herbicides.


So if a cougar kills your dog, goat, horse or injures your child out playing in the yard, you dont want the state to be able to use hounds to catch that lion with the use of hounds? am i understanding you?

No, apparently you're not understanding me. I said nothing about the scenario you described.

oh, i thought you were saying you hoped using dogs to do depredation kills on bear would be deemed illegal. i was just making an example of depredation more relateble (since you don't own a tree farm) that would also be deemed illegal.

Actually, your comparison is not valid.  The law states, according to the article, that WDFW may remove problem bears (and cougar I would assume) using hounds.  The law does not state that  agents of Weyerhauser, etc. may do so.

BTW, I am not in support of HSUS, I am in support of opening up bear hunting opportunities to the public. Timber companies want bear removed, crawl to us hunters....   :tung:

the bear hunters are not agents of the timber companies, they are in the state program, ran by state employees. they get tags from the state and have to find damage, in most cases take photo evidence with timestamp and gps concordance of damage for biologist to inspect before they are given tags.

also, if they are no longer allowed to use dogs or snares, they will just go to feeding programs, if theyre no longer able to do that then they will hold the state and tax payers liable for the state owned bears damage to their crop.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2017, 08:42:59 AM by HighCountryHunter88 »
-Matt

Offline HighCountryHunter88

  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 1009
  • Location: GRAHAM
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #57 on: December 08, 2017, 07:09:09 AM »
Believe it or not, timber companies don't have any problem with black bears. In fact, its a benefit for them in the eyes SFI to maintain broad biodiversity and have robust wildlife populations.

What they do have a problem with is specifically the damage causing bears. If anyone can provide a more realistic and effective way of targeting specific damaging bears, I'm certain they'd listen. When a forester discovers a stand being peeled, they can often secure a permit within a day or two with a photo of damage and GPS coordinates for proof. WDFW folks verify damage at their soonest availability, and if a photo or coordinates were fabricated the applicant is in BIG trouble. There are a number of hound guys (and I believe all of the ones the state is comfortable with issuing permits to are WCO's as well) ready to take care of the problem and be right there. The speed in which you jump on these things is paramount to getting the culprit bear. From what I know of things, the hunters show up, strike the bear typically right there in the damaged stand, and have it removed within hours of arriving.

Of course we'd all like additional hunting opportunity. In my opinion the -general- season should start July 1, about the time that peeling stops as the berries come on.  There is no doubt the population could sustain it, and it would help ungulate populations out.  The issue with spring bear boot hunting is that it is ineffective targeting specific bears, and cannot overlap with the effective and culprit bear targeting houndsmen. Same reasons there isn't supplemental feeding in areas with spring boot hunts. There would be questions in the mind of LEO's that a bear was harvested over a supplemental feeding site or with hounds under a spring bear tag.

 :yeah:
-Matt

Offline Pegasus

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jun 2017
  • Posts: 223
  • Location: King County
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #58 on: December 08, 2017, 08:27:22 AM »
All you need to know about the Humane Society: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=X9nJSWpV49w

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 4071
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #59 on: December 08, 2017, 12:05:47 PM »
I hope this is found to be in violation of state law.
Maybe then there will be a chance of getting the law repealed, or at least opportunities increased for bear hunting without hounds and/or bait.
I disagree, hunters should never support ending one type of management for personal gain. That is part of how we lost bear baiting and hounding in the first place, some hunters supported the ban!  :twocents:





Well, sorry but I'm no longer sympathetic to the big timber companies who charge hunters for access and then poison our wildlife and destroy the habitat with their herbicides.


So if a cougar kills your dog, goat, horse or injures your child out playing in the yard, you dont want the state to be able to use hounds to catch that lion with the use of hounds? am i understanding you?

No, apparently you're not understanding me. I said nothing about the scenario you described.

oh, i thought you were saying you hoped using dogs to do depredation kills on bear would be deemed illegal. i was just making an example of depredation more relateble (since you don't own a tree farm) that would also be deemed illegal.

Actually, your comparison is not valid.  The law states, according to the article, that WDFW may remove problem bears (and cougar I would assume) using hounds.  The law does not state that  agents of Weyerhauser, etc. may do so.

BTW, I am not in support of HSUS, I am in support of opening up bear hunting opportunities to the public. Timber companies want bear removed, crawl to us hunters....   :tung:

the bear hunters are not agents of the timber companies, they are in the state program, ran by state employees. they get tags from the state and have to find damage, in most cases take photo evidence with timestamp and gps concordance of damage for biologist to inspect before they are given tags.

also, if they are no longer allowed to use dogs or snares, they will just go to feeding programs, if theyre no longer able to do that then they will hold the state and tax payers liable for the state owned bears damage to their crop.

The bear hunters are considered contractors. I doubt the State wants to take them on as agents because of liability concerns.
The feeding programs do not work. Everyone I have spoken with say they increase damage in areas by concentrating bears near the feeder. A big boar will sit on the feeder and other bears will eat bark because they can't get in to the feeder.
You can say what you want about the majority of bears not being a problem but I do not think that is true if there are to many bears in an area. Population control is key to keeping damage down.
Bruce Vandervort

Offline Alan K

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 2447
  • Location: Lewis County, WA
  • University of Idaho Alumni
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #60 on: December 08, 2017, 12:46:46 PM »
Supplemental feeding is very effective. I think I've mentioned this before on the last thread, but just take a look at the north side of the Kapowsin Tree Farm where there is feeding, and the south side where there is only the spring bear hunt.  HUGE difference in damage.

Yes, boars will hog a feeder sometimes, but any forester paying attention will add a second feeder to the general area and the problem is solved. There usually wont be multiple dominant boars in an area since it's also breeding season.

The problem with feeding is that it costs money, tens of thousands of dollars each year when its all said and done depening on the size of the tree farm and amount of feeders.  Most of the big timber companies try to mitigate damage with feeding, and if damage persists, thats when they apply for a depredation permit. 

Some have started to just say heck with it and not spend the money on feeding and go straight to depredation permits, and its due in part I'm sure to the cost, but also the hassle dealing with removing feeders prior to a depredation hunt.

Feeders must be removed prior to any hunting, be it trapping, baiting, or hounds. The pain there is that if there is literally one pellet of rotton feed left behind folks are accused of trying to 'bait' to the depredation permit which is just ridiculous. Thousands and thousands of dollars are spent trying to get the problem taken care of non-lethally.  If folks are going to be hassled to that degree after shoveling up buckets and buckets of the rotten feed a bear has scooped out, they throw their hands up and just say heck with it then.

The reality on the ground, and the motives of those who utilize depredation permits is far from what King 5, and now HSUS is painting.  As at least some people have noted, thats nothing to be suprised by. Its just disappointing.

Offline fish vacuum

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 2048
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #61 on: December 08, 2017, 02:51:16 PM »
I actually hope HSUS sticks it to the wdfw. Then the Wdfw has to play the card that the law itself unjust. Wa state constitution says a law cannot have two subject matters.

I agree that the law should have never been upheld. But who I see this hurting the most are the hound hunters who still had a way to hunt their dogs. That is why HSUS wants to stop this.
Bearpaw is spot on.  It will be a sad day in Washington when there are no houndsmen to call after someone is mauled by a cougar.  Karelian bear dogs can't do everything.

They donít do crap now anyways.  :twocents:
They're specially bred to bark at, and chase, wild animals. Gotta pay a premium for a special dog that does that.

Online Boss .300 winmag

  • Best Biggie Blogger
  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Old Salt
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 9322
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • DAN-O CAN'T TAKE BIGGIE PICS
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #62 on: December 08, 2017, 04:36:13 PM »
I actually hope HSUS sticks it to the wdfw. Then the Wdfw has to play the card that the law itself unjust. Wa state constitution says a law cannot have two subject matters.

I agree that the law should have never been upheld. But who I see this hurting the most are the hound hunters who still had a way to hunt their dogs. That is why HSUS wants to stop this.
Bearpaw is spot on.  It will be a sad day in Washington when there are no houndsmen to call after someone is mauled by a cougar.  Karelian bear dogs can't do everything.

They donít do crap now anyways.  :twocents:
They're specially bred to bark at, and chase, wild animals. Gotta pay a premium for a special dog that does that.

Seen them in action by the WDFW, Iím not real impressed.  :twocents:
"Just because I like granola, and I have stretched my arms around a few trees, doesn't mean I'm a tree hugger!
Hi I'm 8156, our leader is Bearpaw.


Keep Calm And Duc On!

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 13394
  • Location: The Wedge
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2017, 04:51:37 PM »
They should use Brittany's,  my little Brit barks her head off and has ran a bear up a tree by herself.   One was trying to get my pears and I had no idea it was in the back yard, I let her out the front door for a potty and she always makes a circle of the house and found that bear in the back yard... :yike:

holy ruckus batman, that little dog was pulling fur out of that bears arse and the bear was giving it all it had for the nearest big pine tree.


I was kinda proud of her    :IBCOOL:


(but I was more careful to check for bears as I didn't want her getting hurt next time)
I should be out hunting lions, thanks WDFW

Offline fish vacuum

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 2048
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2017, 05:01:11 PM »
I actually hope HSUS sticks it to the wdfw. Then the Wdfw has to play the card that the law itself unjust. Wa state constitution says a law cannot have two subject matters.

I agree that the law should have never been upheld. But who I see this hurting the most are the hound hunters who still had a way to hunt their dogs. That is why HSUS wants to stop this.
Bearpaw is spot on.  It will be a sad day in Washington when there are no houndsmen to call after someone is mauled by a cougar.  Karelian bear dogs can't do everything.

They donít do crap now anyways.  :twocents:
They're specially bred to bark at, and chase, wild animals. Gotta pay a premium for a special dog that does that.

Seen them in action by the WDFW, Iím not real impressed.  :twocents:
Leave it to the state to pay extra for a special dog breed that barks at animals. The bear dog breeders must be great salesmen.

Offline HighCountryHunter88

  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 1009
  • Location: GRAHAM
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2017, 06:09:19 PM »
I hope this is found to be in violation of state law.
Maybe then there will be a chance of getting the law repealed, or at least opportunities increased for bear hunting without hounds and/or bait.
I disagree, hunters should never support ending one type of management for personal gain. That is part of how we lost bear baiting and hounding in the first place, some hunters supported the ban!  :twocents:





Well, sorry but I'm no longer sympathetic to the big timber companies who charge hunters for access and then poison our wildlife and destroy the habitat with their herbicides.


So if a cougar kills your dog, goat, horse or injures your child out playing in the yard, you dont want the state to be able to use hounds to catch that lion with the use of hounds? am i understanding you?

No, apparently you're not understanding me. I said nothing about the scenario you described.

oh, i thought you were saying you hoped using dogs to do depredation kills on bear would be deemed illegal. i was just making an example of depredation more relateble (since you don't own a tree farm) that would also be deemed illegal.

Actually, your comparison is not valid.  The law states, according to the article, that WDFW may remove problem bears (and cougar I would assume) using hounds.  The law does not state that  agents of Weyerhauser, etc. may do so.

BTW, I am not in support of HSUS, I am in support of opening up bear hunting opportunities to the public. Timber companies want bear removed, crawl to us hunters....   :tung:

the bear hunters are not agents of the timber companies, they are in the state program, ran by state employees. they get tags from the state and have to find damage, in most cases take photo evidence with timestamp and gps concordance of damage for biologist to inspect before they are given tags.

also, if they are no longer allowed to use dogs or snares, they will just go to feeding programs, if theyre no longer able to do that then they will hold the state and tax payers liable for the state owned bears damage to their crop.

The bear hunters are considered contractors. I doubt the State wants to take them on as agents because of liability concerns.
The feeding programs do not work. Everyone I have spoken with say they increase damage in areas by concentrating bears near the feeder. A big boar will sit on the feeder and other bears will eat bark because they can't get in to the feeder.
You can say what you want about the majority of bears not being a problem but I do not think that is true if there are to many bears in an area. Population control is key to keeping damage down.

I understand they are not agents, but they are regulated through the state program not the timber company

If feed doesnít work why do timber companies utilize it? Some instead of killing bears
-Matt

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 4071
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Timber farm bear hunts 'illegal,' Humane Society says
« Reply #66 on: December 08, 2017, 07:22:24 PM »
I think we are in agreement. It is just word play and HSUS is using that word play to throw a monkey wrench into the works.
Why are they still doing the feeding? IMO public relations.
Ralph Flowers was the guy that envisioned the feeding program. He passed it on to Kelly Lund. Kelly use to get all my beaver carcasses. They used them in conjunction with the mixture they use mostly. Kelly's son Denny was doing it also. Denny told me it was counterproductive. Heard the same from Bob Gilman in OR and a couple other guys I would not argue with.
Never did it myself but the guys I mentioned knew more about bears than all the experts in the NW so I have to give their opinions some credence.
Bruce Vandervort

 

* Recent Topics

New Sponsor, Elk Hunt Consulting by elkinrutdrivemenuts
[Today at 05:12:47 PM]


Wyoming antelope questions by Eric M
[Today at 05:09:18 PM]


high dollar cast iron by DoubleJ
[Today at 05:09:18 PM]


Whitetail European (The Shed Taxidermy Studio) by Ballance1
[Today at 05:09:04 PM]


Delete by 7mmlong
[Today at 05:08:12 PM]


Cougar Chills by bigmacc
[Today at 05:05:54 PM]


WTS. T/C ENCORE Stainless Frame only by 7mmlong
[Today at 05:05:01 PM]


Magpul Pro Rem700 Chassis. by huntandjeep
[Today at 04:56:20 PM]


Some T-Shirts I thought this group might find funny... by Widgeondeke
[Today at 04:53:24 PM]


First coyote with my 204 Ruger by MHWASH
[Today at 04:47:23 PM]


Recurve tips by n_mathews13
[Today at 04:44:37 PM]


For Sale: Franchi Affinity Compact 12 gauge Max 5 26 inch barrel by bod
[Today at 04:35:20 PM]


Bacon cure? by Woodchuck
[Today at 04:27:30 PM]


feeding stations by huntnfmly
[Today at 04:16:06 PM]


WDFW Steelhead meeting Tonight 1/16 by Special T
[Today at 04:15:35 PM]


Heads up, Incoming BAD legislation, rattle the cages POLITELY in Olympia by Special T
[Today at 04:04:19 PM]


Big blacktail?? by jackmaster
[Today at 03:54:27 PM]


FS Savage/Stevens 200 30-06 200$ by kukusya
[Today at 03:43:12 PM]


WTS: Kifaru Mountain Rambler by davk
[Today at 03:33:55 PM]


F/S Deer horn lamp by Jermshooter
[Today at 03:32:57 PM]