Accused bear poacher breaks silence, points finger at WDFW

[pianoman9701]

I say good,wdfw needs to give more spring permits to legal hunters,or open a baiting or hound season for everybody .With hound and baiting being illegal it should be for everybody ,there hound permits take away opportunity for us legal boot hunters and needs to stop .
Now that dill guy is a d-bag and cause wdfw does it ,does not mean you can poach.

No one's stopping us from legal bear hunting and the state's structured use of hounds to target problem animals isn't affecting our opportunity. There are plenty of bears everywhere in the state. This guy is trying to justify his horrendous poaching activities by comparing them with how the state responds to landowners having wildlife depredation and damage problems (which is a major part of their job). And, unless I'm mistaken, they use private houndsmen to do the work. Maybe if this jackhole had contacted the state to be a contractor instead of choosing to be a poacher, this lawsuit would never have been initiated. Am I missing something here?

Every bear killed with hounds is lost opportunity for more spring bear permits.
Every cougar killed with hounds is lost opportunity for cougar quota.

I do see it as lost opportunity in the amount of permits given to legal Hunters and season length.

How is it lost opportunity? There remain plenty of both to hunt. 

I will give example
A GMU has 20 spring bear permits
Same GMU has 20 hound bear permits
I would rather see wdfw give 50-60 spring permits for that GMU and cut the hound permits.
Hound hunting is illegal and should be for everybody.If it is that important to use hounds than wdfw should look at changing the law so we can all use them.

Every time you take away my chance to go hunting,less permits,shorter season, is lost opportunity.Regardless of the population of said Bears.

A bunch of questions for you because I don't know the answers. Do you know for a fact that the hound permits are allotted that way? It would seem to me that damage and depredation permits would be issued on an as needed basis, as opposed to a pre-set number. Also, do all of those spring bear permits get filled and are there a large number of hunters who are not selected? If the permits aren't being filled, then could the WDFW increase the number of draws for that GMU? Just wondering and making sure that the damage and depredation permits actually affect the number of spring bear permits allotted per GMU. I certainly would like to see way more GMUs that offer Spring bear permits here in SW WA and am not sure why there aren't. Is it because of all the hound permits that Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies get?

[Southpole]

I say good,wdfw needs to give more spring permits to legal hunters,or open a baiting or hound season for everybody .With hound and baiting being illegal it should be for everybody ,there hound permits take away opportunity for us legal boot hunters and needs to stop .
Now that dill guy is a d-bag and cause wdfw does it ,does not mean you can poach.

No one's stopping us from legal bear hunting and the state's structured use of hounds to target problem animals isn't affecting our opportunity. There are plenty of bears everywhere in the state. This guy is trying to justify his horrendous poaching activities by comparing them with how the state responds to landowners having wildlife depredation and damage problems (which is a major part of their job). And, unless I'm mistaken, they use private houndsmen to do the work. Maybe if this jackhole had contacted the state to be a contractor instead of choosing to be a poacher, this lawsuit would never have been initiated. Am I missing something here?

  The guy is trying to turn the tables to deflect his self inflicted problems, has less to do about the policies of bear hunting.

[hunter399]

I say good,wdfw needs to give more spring permits to legal hunters,or open a baiting or hound season for everybody .With hound and baiting being illegal it should be for everybody ,there hound permits take away opportunity for us legal boot hunters and needs to stop .
Now that dill guy is a d-bag and cause wdfw does it ,does not mean you can poach.

No one's stopping us from legal bear hunting and the state's structured use of hounds to target problem animals isn't affecting our opportunity. There are plenty of bears everywhere in the state. This guy is trying to justify his horrendous poaching activities by comparing them with how the state responds to landowners having wildlife depredation and damage problems (which is a major part of their job). And, unless I'm mistaken, they use private houndsmen to do the work. Maybe if this jackhole had contacted the state to be a contractor instead of choosing to be a poacher, this lawsuit would never have been initiated. Am I missing something here?

Every bear killed with hounds is lost opportunity for more spring bear permits.
Every cougar killed with hounds is lost opportunity for cougar quota.

I do see it as lost opportunity in the amount of permits given to legal Hunters and season length.

How is it lost opportunity? There remain plenty of both to hunt. 

I will give example
A GMU has 20 spring bear permits
Same GMU has 20 hound bear permits
I would rather see wdfw give 50-60 spring permits for that GMU and cut the hound permits.
Hound hunting is illegal and should be for everybody.If it is that important to use hounds than wdfw should look at changing the law so we can all use them.

Every time you take away my chance to go hunting,less permits,shorter season, is lost opportunity.Regardless of the population of said Bears.

A bunch of questions for you because I don't know the answers. Do you know for a fact that the hound permits are allotted that way? It would seem to me that damage and depredation permits would be issued on an as needed basis, as opposed to a pre-set number. Also, do all of those spring bear permits get filled and are there a large number of hunters who are not selected? If the permits aren't being filled, then could the WDFW increase the number of draws for that GMU? Just wondering and making sure that the damage and depredation permits actually affect the number of spring bear permits allotted per GMU. I certainly would like to see way more GMUs that offer Spring bear permits here in SW WA and am not sure why there aren't. Is it because of all the hound permits that Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies get?

I admit I don't have all the answers.
I think most of all spring permits started as target for bear damage to trees and has turned to a sporting season.
I do think if they wanted to raise harvest rates on spring bear they could allow all spring permits to use hounds and bait .

And yes this guy is scum poacher.

[ctwiggs1]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year. 

[Blacktail Sniper]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year.

 

I honestly doubt that sportsman's use of hounds and bait will ever be gotten back, too hot of a political potato!

What I could see as a possibilty (remote maybe, but not necessarily out of reach), is a push for a statewide, OTC spring bear season.   

With the spotlight being shined on the depredation process, the possibility of some expensive lawsuits to fight, now may the best opportunity to get spring hunts statewide and over the counter. 

[pianoman9701]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year.

 

I honestly doubt that sportsman's use of hounds and bait will ever be gotten back, too hot of a political potato!

What I could see as a possibilty (remote maybe, but not necessarily out of reach), is a push for a statewide, OTC spring bear season.   

With the spotlight being shined on the depredation process, the possibility of some expensive lawsuits to fight, now may the best opportunity to get spring hunts statewide and over the counter.

They can't just wave off a referendum or initiative by restoring hounds and/or bait. Unless a referendum or initiative is passed rescinding the 1996 initiative, their hands are tied, even if they wanted to bring it back. I doubt they do, however.

[ctwiggs1]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year.

 

I honestly doubt that sportsman's use of hounds and bait will ever be gotten back, too hot of a political potato!

What I could see as a possibilty (remote maybe, but not necessarily out of reach), is a push for a statewide, OTC spring bear season.   

With the spotlight being shined on the depredation process, the possibility of some expensive lawsuits to fight, now may the best opportunity to get spring hunts statewide and over the counter.

They can't just wave off a referendum or initiative by restoring hounds and/or bait. Unless a referendum or initiative is passed rescinding the 1996 initiative, their hands are tied, even if they wanted to bring it back. I doubt they do, however.

But it could go back to the ballot.  I suspect that when more and more bears start showing up around schools, playgrounds, and backyard BBQs, people's opinions may change a bit.

 Also, my *guess* would be that spring bear on the west side is going to continue to see more tags put out since the timber hound hunters will be on the decline.

[Humptulips]

I say good,wdfw needs to give more spring permits to legal hunters,or open a baiting or hound season for everybody .With hound and baiting being illegal it should be for everybody ,there hound permits take away opportunity for us legal boot hunters and needs to stop .
Now that dill guy is a d-bag and cause wdfw does it ,does not mean you can poach.

No one's stopping us from legal bear hunting and the state's structured use of hounds to target problem animals isn't affecting our opportunity. There are plenty of bears everywhere in the state. This guy is trying to justify his horrendous poaching activities by comparing them with how the state responds to landowners having wildlife depredation and damage problems (which is a major part of their job). And, unless I'm mistaken, they use private houndsmen to do the work. Maybe if this jackhole had contacted the state to be a contractor instead of choosing to be a poacher, this lawsuit would never have been initiated. Am I missing something here?

Every bear killed with hounds is lost opportunity for more spring bear permits.
Every cougar killed with hounds is lost opportunity for cougar quota.

I do see it as lost opportunity in the amount of permits given to legal Hunters and season length.

How is it lost opportunity? There remain plenty of both to hunt. 

I will give example
A GMU has 20 spring bear permits
Same GMU has 20 hound bear permits
I would rather see wdfw give 50-60 spring permits for that GMU and cut the hound permits.
Hound hunting is illegal and should be for everybody.If it is that important to use hounds than wdfw should look at changing the law so we can all use them.

Every time you take away my chance to go hunting,less permits,shorter season, is lost opportunity.Regardless of the population of said Bears.

A bunch of questions for you because I don't know the answers. Do you know for a fact that the hound permits are allotted that way? It would seem to me that damage and depredation permits would be issued on an as needed basis, as opposed to a pre-set number. Also, do all of those spring bear permits get filled and are there a large number of hunters who are not selected? If the permits aren't being filled, then could the WDFW increase the number of draws for that GMU? Just wondering and making sure that the damage and depredation permits actually affect the number of spring bear permits allotted per GMU. I certainly would like to see way more GMUs that offer Spring bear permits here in SW WA and am not sure why there aren't. Is it because of all the hound permits that Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies get?

I can't speak to bear but I do know every cougar killed on a depredation permit counts towards the quota in that cougar management area. This causes early closure of areas and reduced hunter opportunity.

[Humptulips]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year.

 

I honestly doubt that sportsman's use of hounds and bait will ever be gotten back, too hot of a political potato!

What I could see as a possibilty (remote maybe, but not necessarily out of reach), is a push for a statewide, OTC spring bear season.   

With the spotlight being shined on the depredation process, the possibility of some expensive lawsuits to fight, now may the best opportunity to get spring hunts statewide and over the counter.

They can't just wave off a referendum or initiative by restoring hounds and/or bait. Unless a referendum or initiative is passed rescinding the 1996 initiative, their hands are tied, even if they wanted to bring it back. I doubt they do, however.

But it could go back to the ballot.  I suspect that when more and more bears start showing up around schools, playgrounds, and backyard BBQs, people's opinions may change a bit.

 Also, my *guess* would be that spring bear on the west side is going to continue to see more tags put out since the timber hound hunters will be on the decline.

It's been 22 years now. Don't you think if an increase in problem bears to the extent it would cause public outcry was going to happen it would have happened by now?

[NumaJohn]

Dear all,

While many good reasons exist for debating bear and cougar seasons and regulations, I wish this poacher and his actions could be divorced from that debate. It gives him attention and a place in the discussion that he has not earned. As others have noted, he attempts a deflection, and it is a poorly executed attempt at that.

Just my two cents,

John

[ctwiggs1]

The answers are in the article.  They historically were giving depredation permits based on last years damage.  They stopped doing that this year, and are only issuing permits on an as-needed basis.  My guess would be that permits decline significantly this year.

 

I honestly doubt that sportsman's use of hounds and bait will ever be gotten back, too hot of a political potato!

What I could see as a possibilty (remote maybe, but not necessarily out of reach), is a push for a statewide, OTC spring bear season.   

With the spotlight being shined on the depredation process, the possibility of some expensive lawsuits to fight, now may the best opportunity to get spring hunts statewide and over the counter.

They can't just wave off a referendum or initiative by restoring hounds and/or bait. Unless a referendum or initiative is passed rescinding the 1996 initiative, their hands are tied, even if they wanted to bring it back. I doubt they do, however.

But it could go back to the ballot.  I suspect that when more and more bears start showing up around schools, playgrounds, and backyard BBQs, people's opinions may change a bit.

 Also, my *guess* would be that spring bear on the west side is going to continue to see more tags put out since the timber hound hunters will be on the decline.

It's been 22 years now. Don't you think if an increase in problem bears to the extent it would cause public outcry was going to happen it would have happened by now?

I don't know. 

We have had a massive population explosion in those 22 years, and apparently some pretty questionable hunting activities in timberland that is now under scrutiny has kept the numbers low.  Compound that with the already increasing bear sighting in urban areas over the last few years and I wouldn't be surprised if they start making the news cycle more often.

Not trying to get an internet argument going because frankly, I don't have a crystal ball.  I just think this could be a possible outcome.  Anytime you decrease predator hunting in our state, you see an increase in predators. 

[ctwiggs1]

Dear all,

While many good reasons exist for debating bear and cougar seasons and regulations, I wish this poacher and his actions could be divorced from that debate. It gives him attention and a place in the discussion that he has not earned. As others have noted, he attempts a deflection, and it is a poorly executed attempt at that.

Just my two cents,

John

Nobody believes him or cares about him. 

Don't worry, justice will prevail here:  He will get his minor fee and a possible small criminal record that'll likely be expunged in the future.

[Buckmania]

The depredation hunts for bears with hounds is not a "loophole" and is a legal and effective means of addressing the problem the state is forced to address.  The State/WDFW HATE this program and would kick it to the curb tomorrow if they legally could.  It is not a revenue generator, it's highly scrutinized (obviously), extremely arduous to administer given the continue piling on of regulations/rules/restrictions/paperwork to appease the opposition (both internal and external), and is ridiculously over-hyped.  The houndsmen bear (no pun intended) a tremendous burden as well with the rules governing this program, and they continue to get more and more stringent each year. The ONLY thing the houndsmen get out of it, is the joy of listening to the music their hounds make.  The timber companies use the houndsmen, the state hates the houndsmen, hunters who don't have or understand hounds hate the houndsmen, houndsmen who aren't a part of this program hate the houndsmen who are, etc. etc. etc. 

[Southpole]

Dear all,

While many good reasons exist for debating bear and cougar seasons and regulations, I wish this poacher and his actions could be divorced from that debate. It gives him attention and a place in the discussion that he has not earned. As others have noted, he attempts a deflection, and it is a poorly executed attempt at that.

Just my two cents,

John

Very well put, my thoughts as well.

[pianoman9701]

I don't think hunters hate the houndsmen. And the only houndsmen who hate the contracted houndsmen are the sour grapes, like the idiot in the article.