Free: Contests & Raffles.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife remains neutral on SB 5100, according to Becky Bennett, a spokeswoman for the agency’s enforcement program.
QuoteThe Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife remains neutral on SB 5100, according to Becky Bennett, a spokeswoman for the agency’s enforcement program.Why are they neutral here? Do they not have science and data and game management objectives they could use to form an opinion?Yet another way the department refuses to go to bat for hunters, even when the science supports it.
article in the socialist-review tody about proposal to involve hounds again for cougarshttp://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/jan/23/three-washington-bills-deal-with-cougars-hounds/
In another plus for the Humane Society, the bill would give the Fish and Wildlife Commission more leeway in not using dogs to pursue one or more cougars in areas with public-safety problems. The law currently says the commission "shall" authorize using dogs when there is no practical alternative. The bill would change "shall" to "may."
So I know nothing about nothing, and am well aware. But requiring training and additional vetting of houndsmen sounds like raising the barrier to entry more than trying to enable houndsmen to train. It would be great to have a bill supported by, say, actual houndsmen that proposed something that would really help them. Maybe I'm being too consipratorial?