I've been reading up on a few laws.
Of course most say they can authorize a hunt or kill permits to mitigate damages,which there not doing.
Under this law ,it looks like to me .
All the timber company has to do is lease me a chunk of land for 1 penny an acre.
Or make me an employee for 30 days at a penny a day.
We could harvest any bear causing damages ,without a license,tag,or anything.
Here is a link to what I'm reading.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.36.030
I'm still digging ,give me time here.
Need to find a case where the commission deny kill permits or hunts that mitigate damages.
See what happened historically.
I know this law authorizes the commission to mitigate damages.
Since there the only ones that are "authority" to issue.
Technically leaves them liable in a situation such as spring bear.
My opinion,I'm not a lawyer.
https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=220-440-060
Last I talked to someone in the know about the depredation options, it's a joke now. A 1-mile radius circle hunt area from documented current year damage coordinates. No bait, no traps, no dogs, just a boot hunt on a tiny tiny fraction of the GMU. 15 day or 30 day permit. Good luck, especially when damage is generally on 15 year old or so stands that the only visible areas are roads. The other thing is animals can't be retained, everything has to be donated.
The only people allowed to use dogs or bait now are government folks. APHIS does a little trapping but are so under staffed they only take care of a small fraction that used to be removed when houndsmen could be utilized. Most timber companies opt to just supplemental feed through the spring because getting boot permit hunts in place preclude them from doing any feeding in the area for fear of someone hunting over it. Feeding is more of a band-aid and doesnt help with population control which is needed to benefit other wildlife, but certainly mitigates timber damage more than a handful of boot hunt depredation permits.
