Spring bear public comment is open

[WAcoyotehunter]

After hearing Lemkhul(?) speak I'm afraid this is going to be lost...I had hopes he would be the pivotal 5th vote, but I fear after what he said he is going to vote to cancel this hunt.

That was the feeling I got from his final comment as well. Missed some of the post-public input comments but it sounded like there was some information out there that Ragan was requesting that they were going to provide to answer some of his questions on population trends?

same here.  His closing comments were strange and definitely have me concerned.

[Stein]

I don't think you need too expensive of a crystal ball to predict what way Inslee's appointees are likely to lean.  I'm going way out on a limb here assuming he didn't spend a bunch of time worrying about how he can find just the right people to balance all the interests and create a commission that will thoughtfully arrive at mutually beneficial outcomes.

[idahohuntr]

After hearing Lemkhul(?) speak I'm afraid this is going to be lost...I had hopes he would be the pivotal 5th vote, but I fear after what he said he is going to vote to cancel this hunt.

That was the feeling I got from his final comment as well. Missed some of the post-public input comments but it sounded like there was some information out there that Ragan was requesting that they were going to provide to answer some of his questions on population trends?

same here.  His closing comments were strange and definitely have me concerned.

In response to his comments about why hunt bears in spring when we don't hunt deer/elk in the spring...well, areas with struggling elk recruitment (blue mountains) spring is a great time for bear season as the spring bear hunts remove large predators at the time elk calves are most vulnerable to bears (late spring and early summer).  In this sense, it is one of the very few management tools the Department has to address conservation of another species. 

Hopefully he can still be reasoned with.  I fear when Inslee appointed these 3 it was conditioned on not supporting spring bear hunts.  There is no hope for Rowland or Ragen, but I really hope Lehmkuhl can listen and vote with reasoned logic.

[Pac_NW]

After hearing Lemkhul(?) speak I'm afraid this is going to be lost...I had hopes he would be the pivotal 5th vote, but I fear after what he said he is going to vote to cancel this hunt.

That was the feeling I got from his final comment as well. Missed some of the post-public input comments but it sounded like there was some information out there that Ragan was requesting that they were going to provide to answer some of his questions on population trends?

same here.  His closing comments were strange and definitely have me concerned.

In response to his comments about why hunt bears in spring when we don't hunt deer/elk in the spring...well, areas with struggling elk recruitment (blue mountains) spring is a great time for bear season as the spring bear hunts remove large predators at the time elk calves are most vulnerable to bears (late spring and early summer).  In this sense, it is one of the very few management tools the Department has to address conservation of another species. 

Hopefully he can still be reasoned with.  I fear when Inslee appointed these 3 it was conditioned on not supporting spring bear hunts.  There is no hope for Rowland or Ragen, but I really hope Lehmkuhl can listen and vote with reasoned logic.

He also said we don't hunt any other animals in spring... but I am pretty sure turkey and small game including coyote and cougar are still open. With that said we probably SHOULD be hunting predators during the spring in which our ungulates are susceptible to attack.

[Chesapeake]

We hunt bears in the spring cause that’s when they rut, like turkeys, elk in September, ect…
Plus, for bears that eat fish and carrion as a diet staple in the fall, the meat is better in the spring.

[big buck hunter]

Commissioner Lehmkuhl's comments have me concerned. He states he is a "life long hunter." His bio states he has "authored or coauthored over 100 scientific research or management publications on subjects ranging from birds, to flying squirrels, to elk, and to landscape management." Your lifetime of hunting and wildlife research cannot lead you to the conclusions that have been stated by above commenters on this forum? These points should be obvious to a person with a background that he claims. These should be easy conclusions to come to if you have hunted your entire life and have a Phd in Wildlife biology. He knows the answer to his question, if he truly doesn't, he has no business being a Commissioner with such a lack of understanding of wildlife management. Same goes for Commissioners Smith and Baker. The wildlife in this state, both current and future, are in the hands of these commissioners yet they don't have a solid understanding of wildlife management to begin with. I fear the future of this state will have plenty of wildlife habitat but no wildlife to go along with it.

I recall some of the very points that prior posters on this thread have made for why we hunt bear in the spring made by the bio's during previous meetings. Hopefully the new members abstain from voting due to a lack of knowledge on the subject. Smith and Baker are No's. Linnville, Anderson and Thorburn are Yes's. I believe McIsaac was a Yes. If he's a Yes and the 3 new members don't vote we got a chance.

[Special T]

If you look at the list of Anti hunters they all have scientific or work history that makes them hard to attack from a technical standpoint. With the exception of Lorna Smith. The conformation hearings were also very troubling considering how that turned out.

I belive we are in for a fight. I hope folks are willing to dig deal and stay engaged. The recent comments were a good show of organization and force. We will need to keep up the pressure.

[Stein]

They may have a scientific background, but did anyone actually present data showing that bears are on the decline in the areas proposed for spring hunting?  I heard global warming, touchy feely stuff, fairness, ethics, whatever, but any actual data?  I only listened to part.

[dwtraut7]

I don't think you need too expensive of a crystal ball to predict what way Inslee's appointees are likely to lean.  I'm going way out on a limb here assuming he didn't spend a bunch of time worrying about how he can find just the right people to balance all the interests and create a commission that will thoughtfully arrive at mutually beneficial outcomes.

That’s how I felt about it prior to this meeting and certainly felt so after listening.

[Special T]

I don't think you need too expensive of a crystal ball to predict what way Inslee's appointees are likely to lean.  I'm going way out on a limb here assuming he didn't spend a bunch of time worrying about how he can find just the right people to balance all the interests and create a commission that will thoughtfully arrive at mutually beneficial outcomes.

That’s how I felt about it prior to this meeting and certainly felt so after listening.

I do not disagree, however they are on the commission andntheynget a vote even If We disagree. . Fact. Sportsmen are playing checkers they atenplaying chess. Sportsmen are just starting to figure out thenrukes to the game are not as advertized.

[HillHound]

They may have a scientific background, but did anyone actually present data showing that bears are on the decline in the areas proposed for spring hunting?  I heard global warming, touchy feely stuff, fairness, ethics, whatever, but any actual data?  I only listened to part.

Their data was When they park at the trailhead with 40 other cars and go crunching on their granola all they way down the trail reeking of bug spray and new REI gear they aren’t seeing any bears…. And that’s our fault apparently.

[Bullkllr]

Very good points about the direction of the Commission in general and Lehmkuhl in particular. There is no reasonable explanation for anyone with his supposed background to appear so clueless.

Listening to other follow up comments, the deck is definitely stacked. Smith was only concerned about the people who didn't get to comment? She might as well have said, "All the pro predator/anti-hunter people from my organization signed up and didn't get to speak". Ragen the "sealion guru" is a lost cause. Rowland is an ESA attorney.

I was also a little dismayed that they shot down the idea of spring bear being a "canary in the coalmine" or domino issue -when to me it clearly is- or that it is likely to ever be reinstated- but I guess that's to be expected. They can't honestly believe this doesn't have anything to do with other hunting now and future. They know exactly what it is, and most will get the result they wanted.

"Welcome to Washington State: where we'd really like to ban hunting- but doing that all at once would get some backlash- and we do like the money the licenses bring in- so we'll just breed so many protected predators that there's nothing left for you to actually hunt"

[Tbar]

Very good points about the direction of the Commission in general and Lehmkuhl in particular. There is no reasonable explanation for anyone with his supposed background to appear so clueless.

Listening to other follow up comments, the deck is definitely stacked. Smith was only concerned about the people who didn't get to comment? She might as well have said, "All the pro predator/anti-hunter people from my organization signed up and didn't get to speak". Ragen the "sealion guru" is a lost cause. Rowland is an ESA attorney.

I was also a little dismayed that they shot down the idea of spring bear being a "canary in the coalmine" or domino issue -when to me it clearly is- or that it is likely to ever be reinstated- but I guess that's to be expected. They can't honestly believe this doesn't have anything to do with other hunting now and future. They know exactly what it is, and most will get the result they wanted.

"Welcome to Washington State: where we'd really like to ban hunting- but that would get some backlash- and we do like the money the licenses bring in- so we'll just breed so many protected predators that there's nothing left to actually hunt"

I believe they say it's not a canary because it's an agenda . There's no alarm if you want the bird and miners to die. They want to protect large carnivores at all cost "not anti hunting" . The injection of marine mammal framework was extremely troubling as well.  They are flipping the script on scientific management and reaching, mmpa was blanket protection. The agenda will be promoted in the name of science and consumptive users will be largely discounted/disregarded. 

[hunter399]

Very good points about the direction of the Commission in general and Lehmkuhl in particular. There is no reasonable explanation for anyone with his supposed background to appear so clueless.

Listening to other follow up comments, the deck is definitely stacked. Smith was only concerned about the people who didn't get to comment? She might as well have said, "All the pro predator/anti-hunter people from my organization signed up and didn't get to speak". Ragen the "sealion guru" is a lost cause. Rowland is an ESA attorney.

I was also a little dismayed that they shot down the idea of spring bear being a "canary in the coalmine" or domino issue -when to me it clearly is- or that it is likely to ever be reinstated- but I guess that's to be expected. They can't honestly believe this doesn't have anything to do with other hunting now and future. They know exactly what it is, and most will get the result they wanted.

"Welcome to Washington State: where we'd really like to ban hunting- but that would get some backlash- and we do like the money the licenses bring in- so we'll just breed so many protected predators that there's nothing left to actually hunt"

That last part there is so funny ,cause it's so true.
It's a crying shame that Fishermen and hunter can't seem to combine our voice. Fishing is where the money pit is.
They sell more fishing licences and make more money ,than hunting licences ,permits,ect.
Them Communist anti-hunters that are commented,they want to end all hunting and has very little to do with spring bear.

[Bullkllr]

Very good points about the direction of the Commission in general and Lehmkuhl in particular. There is no reasonable explanation for anyone with his supposed background to appear so clueless.

Listening to other follow up comments, the deck is definitely stacked. Smith was only concerned about the people who didn't get to comment? She might as well have said, "All the pro predator/anti-hunter people from my organization signed up and didn't get to speak". Ragen the "sealion guru" is a lost cause. Rowland is an ESA attorney.

I was also a little dismayed that they shot down the idea of spring bear being a "canary in the coalmine" or domino issue -when to me it clearly is- or that it is likely to ever be reinstated- but I guess that's to be expected. They can't honestly believe this doesn't have anything to do with other hunting now and future. They know exactly what it is, and most will get the result they wanted.

"Welcome to Washington State: where we'd really like to ban hunting- but that would get some backlash- and we do like the money the licenses bring in- so we'll just breed so many protected predators that there's nothing left to actually hunt"

That last part there is so funny ,cause it's so true.
It's a crying shame that Fishermen and hunter can't seem to combine our voice. Fishing is where the money pit is.
They sell more fishing licences and make more money ,than hunting licences ,permits,ect.
Them Communist anti-hunters that are commented,they want to end all hunting and has very little to do with spring bear.

Exactly, and the commission maintains it's not. Despite the fact that they're caving in to them, if not flat out supporting them.

All I know is, something needs to change for sportsmen, especially hunters, to have a chance to save anything at all.