HB 1046 Would Ban WDFW and Other Agencies from Using Dogs to Take Bear & Cougar

[KFhunter]

All those *censored*s that voted agaist hound hunting did it because they think its cruel and inhumane for the bear/cat, but yet this whole time fish and game had been hiring sell out houndsman to do it for them. Thats total BS. If its cruel and inhumane and made illegal for the everyday citizen it should be illegal for everyone especially the government and their biologists.

Agreed.

Consider the scenario where an urban area has too many cougars. So the state comes in with hounds and provides a public service by removing them. Well doesn't that mean that previous hunters were providing the same service?

I don't like the implication that the state only does it because it has to and that makes it acceptable. Well they wouldn't have to if they allowed hound hunting in the first place.

So I don't see a loss if this bill passes. Why shouldn't the state have to play by the same rules as the rest of us? And if it passes the anti-hunting Seattle media will have to explain how this anti-hunting Democrat didn't understand what she was doing.

But I doubt it will get the votes so I wouldn't get worked up either way. Most rural Democrats will probably vote against it.

I cant quoat the article but i read that California takes as many cats with hounds as they used to... So cats being killed are ok just not sportsmen doingit.

These are strong arguments and I gotta be honest, its making me nod my head in agreement. 

[Special T]

All those *censored*s that voted agaist hound hunting did it because they think its cruel and inhumane for the bear/cat, but yet this whole time fish and game had been hiring sell out houndsman to do it for them. Thats total BS. If its cruel and inhumane and made illegal for the everyday citizen it should be illegal for everyone especially the government and their biologists.

Agreed.

Consider the scenario where an urban area has too many cougars. So the state comes in with hounds and provides a public service by removing them. Well doesn't that mean that previous hunters were providing the same service?

I don't like the implication that the state only does it because it has to and that makes it acceptable. Well they wouldn't have to if they allowed hound hunting in the first place.

So I don't see a loss if this bill passes. Why shouldn't the state have to play by the same rules as the rest of us? And if it passes the anti-hunting Seattle media will have to explain how this anti-hunting Democrat didn't understand what she was doing.

But I doubt it will get the votes so I wouldn't get worked up either way. Most rural Democrats will probably vote against it.

I cant quoat the article but i read that California takes as many cats with hounds as they used to... So cats being killed are ok just not sportsmen doingit.

These are strong arguments and I gotta be honest, its making me nod my head in agreement.

If ranchers cannot get the kind of support they need then those in Urban areas should be on the same footing. Isnt that why Kretz has proposed transplanting wolves to Orcas Island and such? Most folks dont care because it doesnt effect them...

Im not convinced this is a great strategy since all manner of cat hunting is illegal in this state. I wonder if this predator lawsuit will address any of this nonsense?

[bearpaw]

All those *censored*s that voted agaist hound hunting did it because they think its cruel and inhumane for the bear/cat, but yet this whole time fish and game had been hiring sell out houndsman to do it for them. Thats total BS. If its cruel and inhumane and made illegal for the everyday citizen it should be illegal for everyone especially the government and their biologists.

Like most things there is more than one side to this issue.
- If anyone still has hounds that is one of the few ways to keep them hunting
- Local rural residents and ranchers need help eliminating a problem animal that is costing them

I've helped WDFW in the past but after conflicting issues I quit. However, a rancher friend had a cougar killing animals last spring and none of the houndmen they normally use were available, so I helped.

[bearpaw]

All those *censored*s that voted agaist hound hunting did it because they think its cruel and inhumane for the bear/cat, but yet this whole time fish and game had been hiring sell out houndsman to do it for them. Thats total BS. If its cruel and inhumane and made illegal for the everyday citizen it should be illegal for everyone especially the government and their biologists.

Agreed.

Consider the scenario where an urban area has too many cougars. So the state comes in with hounds and provides a public service by removing them. Well doesn't that mean that previous hunters were providing the same service?

I don't like the implication that the state only does it because it has to and that makes it acceptable. Well they wouldn't have to if they allowed hound hunting in the first place.

So I don't see a loss if this bill passes. Why shouldn't the state have to play by the same rules as the rest of us? And if it passes the anti-hunting Seattle media will have to explain how this anti-hunting Democrat didn't understand what she was doing.

But I doubt it will get the votes so I wouldn't get worked up either way. Most rural Democrats will probably vote against it.

I cant quoat the article but i read that California takes as many cats with hounds as they used to... So cats being killed are ok just not sportsmen doingit.

These are strong arguments and I gotta be honest, its making me nod my head in agreement.

If ranchers cannot get the kind of support they need then those in Urban areas should be on the same footing. Isnt that why Kretz has proposed transplanting wolves to Orcas Island and such? Most folks dont care because it doesnt effect them...

Im not convinced this is a great strategy since all manner of cat hunting is illegal in this state. I wonder if this predator lawsuit will address any of this nonsense?

The whole issue is complex. The few remaining hound hunters rely on helping WDFW or helping timber companies to keep their dogs trained, or they have moved their hunting out of state. The hound hunting and baiting was banned by voter initiative, there are only two ways to overturn a voter innitiative, the voters have to vote again or the legislature has to overturn it. While I agree with some of the thoughts on taking the ability to use hounds away from WDFW, I understand that the few remaining hound hunters rely on WDFW and/or timber companies to keep their dogs trained. There is no easy answer!