WDFW Contradicts Itself in Recent Spring Bear Email

[cougforester]

This was in the background/project summary section of the Concise Exploratory Statement recently sent out by WDFW regarding 2021 Spring Bear Rules:

As described in the GMP, spring hunts are designed to address emerging management
needs, such as black bear damage to trees in commercial timberlands, minimizing bear-
human conflict, and/or to more evenly distribute harvest compared to fall seasons.
The spring black bear permit hunts allow WDFW to geographically distribute hunters as
compared to the general fall black bear season. This distribution provides additional
recreational opportunity, and helps to mitigate bear timber damage, reduce bear densities
in areas of high negative bear-human interactions and where ungulate neonate survival is
low due to possible bear predation. The spring black bear permit season is designed to
target specific areas where these opportunities and issues occur. Over the past ten years,
Washington’s average annual black bear mortality was 1,771. The average fall harvest
over the past five years was 1,556 and spring was 114. The previous five-year averages
were 1,499 and 74, respectively. The proportional harvest of the spring season is small.
The five-year average spring bear harvest is seven percent of the total bear harvest. Given
the small percentage, spring bear hunting is unlikely to substantially diminish the bear
resource.

But then later when addressing the comments received by WDFW:

Comment: Would like to see a general spring bear season.
Bears can be more susceptible to harvest in the spring and that is why WDFW limits the
scope of the spring bear season. Given that the bear resource is finite, opening a general
spring bear season could result in a higher than desired bear harvest that would
necessitate reducing harvest opportunity elsewhere. This could mean a reduced bag limit
or a shorter fall season

Also it noted the 5 year running average for spring bear harvest in the state is 114 for 778 permits. That's just under 15% success. The stated reasons for spring bear season in this document is :

The spring black bear permit hunts allow WDFW to geographically distribute hunters as
compared to the general fall black bear season. This distribution provides additional
recreational opportunity, and helps to mitigate bear timber damage, reduce bear densities
in areas of high negative bear-human interactions and where ungulate neonate survival is
low due to possible bear predation.

It seems to me their goals stated above do not correlate with their objections to OTC spring bear and their language saying spring harvest does not have a significant impact on bear population. Seems to me if the department wanted to truly provide rec opportunity, mitigate bear timber damage, reduce high negative bear encounters with humans and reduce bear predation on young ungulates, they would be very conducive to at least providing more permits.

Lastly, this is the scariest paragraph in the document:

WDFW received a form letter from five hundred and four (504) people opposing spring
bear hunting in general. Most of the three hundred and twenty-eight (328) people that
participated in the online survey were in favor of the proposed rule changes. Those that
were opposed had multiple reasons.

Hunters need to be aware of groups actively trying to cut hunting opportunities out from underneath us. If we lose spring bear hunting, even in its current state, that likely would only signal the beginning of the end of hunting as we know it.

[Special T]

While at the same time the comission gets 2 anti hunters appointed and replacing One that was pretty good for hunters in comparison.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[lightning9191]

It only takes a couple minutes to jot an email. Let the commission know your thoughts: commission@dfw.wa.gov


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Cougartail]

While at the same time the comission gets 2 anti hunters appointed and replacing One that was pretty good for hunters in comparison.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Just read Lorna Smith's website for her failed commissioner run. I'm thinking a photo hunt is all she would allow if it was up to her.

[cougforester]

It only takes a couple minutes to jot an email. Let the commission know your thoughts: commission@dfw.wa.gov


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

I've started sending an email every couple weeks. Might as well be the squeaky wheel for once.

[Skyvalhunter]

While at the same time the comission gets 2 anti hunters appointed and replacing One that was pretty good for hunters in comparison.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Just read Lorna Smith's website for her failed commissioner run. I'm thinking a photo hunt is all she would allow if it was up to her. :twocents:qq

You want to contact Lorna contact her thru here that's how I did.
http://westernwildlife.org/

[bracer40]

Not sure how many caught this episode of the Meateater podcast, https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cub21ueWNvbnRlbnQuY29tL2QvcGxheWxpc3QvYWFlYTRlNjktYWY1MS00OTVlLWFmYzktYTk3NjAxNDY5MjJiL2FjMDdmZjYyLWQwYjAtNDM0My1iNDhhLWFiMWEwMDEzNGRmMC85YzU3YTE5OS1hNTE3LTRjYmUtODk0MC1hYjFhMDAxMzRlMDMvcG9kY2FzdC5yc3M/episode/NWE0NTU2ZGEtMGY0Yy00MmIyLWE0NmUtYWM5NTAwMDMzZGJl?hl=en&ved=2ahUKEwixkKi4nYXuAhWGup4KHSHXCjgQjrkEegQIBRAN&ep=6
***egads! Episode 252 in case the ugly link doesn’t work.
or even listen to podcasts, but there was a guest on discussing how out of state interests (i.e. anti-hunters) were able to easily influence commission meetings that due to Covid, were conducted over Zoom calls. If I remember right there were hundreds(?) on a recent call discussing Spring bear hunts. And of course, they were all in opposition. Made my blood boil that they were even allowed to participate as non-residents of WA!
I get it that non-hunters in WA have equal say in hunting matters because game is managed by the state for its residents (I don’t like it, I feel anybody voting on game laws should hold a valid license). But to allow non-residents to have an equal voice in the state’s management discussions doesn’t seem right.

[Stein]

WDFW is taking a bunch of heat over spring bear hunting, they have held the line more or less but I wouldn't expect much appetite to expand anything.

[hunter399]

Spring Bear permits could of been increased many times in the past few years easily .
@Bango
Where's this guy been ,old bango is the foo fighter of bear regs. I forgot he had me blocked at one time.Somebody will have to @Bango him.

[Special T]

WDFW is taking a bunch of heat over spring bear hunting, they have held the line more or less but I wouldn't expect much appetite to expand anything.

Im not so sure they will hold any line whenit comes to predator hunting. Even our "Friends" abandoned us over coyote  hunting derbies.

[ctwiggs1]

@Bango Skank

There ya go.

MeatEeater just discussed WA spring bear awhile back on their podcast.  They noted that a lot of anti hunting groups have been using the virtual meetings to their advantage so they can Zoom in from anywhere in the US and complain about the ethics of hunting. 

Probably time for us to do the same.  The only way we're going to even keep what we've got is by showing up to meetings.

[cougforester]

The email from WDFW today regarding spring bear, multi season and special permit applications opening up had this ominous line in it:

Please be aware that the spring bear rule that governs this hunt is currently being challenged through litigation. The pending litigation could result in cancellation of this hunt. If this occurs, we will notify hunters accordingly and identify next steps. 

That sure doesn't sound encouraging.

[KNOPHISH]

YGBFKM I got the same email and gonna be sending a protest email. Isn’t their mission statement something about providing and increasing opportunities? Game management is about science not butt hurt leaf lickers.

[brew]

im sure i'm wrong but i thought the majority of the lawsuit brought against WDFW was to basically end the "depredation" hunts that private timber companies used through DNR to get hound hunters in the spring on their lands to eradicate the bears.  The spring hunts offered by WDFW through the special permit hunts was just the icing on that cake. Yes looking at the data the spring permit season offered by WDFW kills way less than 10 % of the total yearly bear harvest but i have yet to see statistics stating how many bears are killed in the spring by these "depredation" hound hunters

[KNOPHISH]

Ya they also put in the link that baiting and hound hunting is not allowed. Ya we all know that bs legislation. Game management by ballot box should be illegal.

[KFhunter]

Game management by ballot box should be illegal.

How much you wanna bet that if somehow the ballot box said to "kill all the wolves" it wouldn't be allowed to stand?

ballot box management is only successful when the vote matches the agenda.

[Alan K]

im sure i'm wrong but i thought the majority of the lawsuit brought against WDFW was to basically end the "depredation" hunts that private timber companies used through DNR to get hound hunters in the spring on their lands to eradicate the bears.  The spring hunts offered by WDFW through the special permit hunts was just the icing on that cake. Yes looking at the data the spring permit season offered by WDFW kills way less than 10 % of the total yearly bear harvest but i have yet to see statistics stating how many bears are killed in the spring by these "depredation" hound hunters

Depredation permits had nothing to do with the DNR - they were issued by WDFW.  The DNR's timberlands (and our kids' future school funding) gets ravaged each year by bears but they don't pursue depredation remedies.  Depredation removals didn't scratch the surface of bear populations. I think the depredation harvest was 125 to 150 a year if I remember right. Back in the day before they were game animals and it was truly open season on them, it was common for 4-5k to be taken each year. Populations made it through that level of sustained harvest just fine, and we've been harvesting a fraction of that for decades now. It's not difficult to put two and two together and understand that populations have to be as high as they've been in a long time. Depredation removals and spring bear hunts are of no threat to the species, even remotely. 

If anyone has the chance to drive through a tree farm with a houndsman with bear dogs, I highly suggest taking them up on it. It's shocking how many times the box blows up. The depredation permits were set up with tiny strike areas to target the damaging bears, and the hunters often drive by a half dozen bears getting to the strike area. They are elusive animals and live primarily in the reprod. Just because we don't see them out in clearcuts like deer and elk doesn't mean they aren't there!

At least a portion of the accusations in the depredation lawsuit was that WDFW acted outside their authority by basically setting rules using guidance documents rather than going through a true rule making process.  The way WDFW did things sounds like it was pretty rogue and they got slapped down for it. I haven't looked into the spring bear lawsuit, but I wouldn't be surprised if WDFW established things there too without going through the proper channels. At the end of the day it's all self imposed technicalities that WDFW created for themselves, while landowners and hunters take it in the shorts because of it.  When WDFW gets their processes and rule making figured out both depredation permits and spring bear hunts (if lost) should be back.

[NRA4LIFE]

"Given that the bear resource is finite".  What?  Who writes this garbage?