Commission Meeting - August 2023

[ducks4days]

For me with bears at least it's really simple.  Cougars likely the same.

Bear populations were sustainable (by the definition of still being around) for decades upon decades upon decades despite unlimited bag limits in western Washington, baiting allowed, trapping allowed, hounds allowed, even bounties for timber damage.  If those levels of harvest were not sustainable, bears wouldn't be here today. 

After 30 years of no highly effective means of take, even with the tiny fraction of depredation removals, how can anyone say with a straight face that bear populations are anything but as high as they've been in the last 75 years+...

It doesn't take a new study to put two and two together, and like others have said, a study isn't and shouldn't be necessary to continue with the status quo, only if it needs diverging from.

One of the WDFW members said it more eloquently during the meeting but the Commission basically spit in the face of the last 10 years of WDFW's biologists and their work.

Lehmkul spoke about this on the podcast.   They are asking for data and not getting it. 


This is what Lehmkul sent me when i asked him directly...

"I do trust the DFW staff and believe they are dedicated and top-notch. However, some commissioners, including me, felt that the science, data, and analysis were incomplete.  We asked for a fuller analysis of the all the issues in a comprehensive, standard form typical of such documents.  For example, I thought they did a very good job of detailing the Blue Mt elk situation; and, as a result I voted with the majority to approve their recommended 2-cougar bag limit for the area.  The whole commission voted in February 2021 for a full analysis of the spring bear issue; but, it was never done despite me and Commissioner McIsaac bringing it up several times during 2021.  I don’t know why the commission and staff did not follow through."

I don't want to trash on any Bio's either, but I'm in no way surprised when I hear of a Gov't employee not following thru on somthing.

They want to study everything to death. The commission often asks for information that is not available OR feasible to obtain either financially or time wise. I belive this is a tool used by them to force change that hurts sportsmen.

They dont want to study anything. They want a target outcome and are fishing for any justification to get it, and discarding anything that would stand in the way.

[hunter399]

For me with bears at least it's really simple.  Cougars likely the same.

Bear populations were sustainable (by the definition of still being around) for decades upon decades upon decades despite unlimited bag limits in western Washington, baiting allowed, trapping allowed, hounds allowed, even bounties for timber damage.  If those levels of harvest were not sustainable, bears wouldn't be here today. 

After 30 years of no highly effective means of take, even with the tiny fraction of depredation removals, how can anyone say with a straight face that bear populations are anything but as high as they've been in the last 75 years+...

It doesn't take a new study to put two and two together, and like others have said, a study isn't and shouldn't be necessary to continue with the status quo, only if it needs diverging from.

One of the WDFW members said it more eloquently during the meeting but the Commission basically spit in the face of the last 10 years of WDFW's biologists and their work.

Lehmkul spoke about this on the podcast.   They are asking for data and not getting it. 


This is what Lehmkul sent me when i asked him directly...

"I do trust the DFW staff and believe they are dedicated and top-notch. However, some commissioners, including me, felt that the science, data, and analysis were incomplete.  We asked for a fuller analysis of the all the issues in a comprehensive, standard form typical of such documents.  For example, I thought they did a very good job of detailing the Blue Mt elk situation; and, as a result I voted with the majority to approve their recommended 2-cougar bag limit for the area.  The whole commission voted in February 2021 for a full analysis of the spring bear issue; but, it was never done despite me and Commissioner McIsaac bringing it up several times during 2021.  I don’t know why the commission and staff did not follow through."

I don't want to trash on any Bio's either, but I'm in no way surprised when I hear of a Gov't employee not following thru on somthing.

They want to study everything to death. The commission often asks for information that is not available OR feasible to obtain either financially or time wise. I belive this is a tool used by them to force change that hurts sportsmen.

They dont want to study anything. They want a target outcome and are fishing for any justification to get it, and discarding anything that would stand in the way.

I agree with all the above.
Just wanted to add .....
Whatever happened to harvest rates,I thought that was the standard for the most part of, population density,overall health of herd or said animals. Does every aspect need a 5 year study.
It's not rocket science.
Harvest rates down--- population down
Harvest rates up---- population up.
Then looking at long term trends over the past years.
Shouldn't that be enough to set a season.

[Special T]

For me with bears at least it's really simple.  Cougars likely the same.

Bear populations were sustainable (by the definition of still being around) for decades upon decades upon decades despite unlimited bag limits in western Washington, baiting allowed, trapping allowed, hounds allowed, even bounties for timber damage.  If those levels of harvest were not sustainable, bears wouldn't be here today. 

After 30 years of no highly effective means of take, even with the tiny fraction of depredation removals, how can anyone say with a straight face that bear populations are anything but as high as they've been in the last 75 years+...

It doesn't take a new study to put two and two together, and like others have said, a study isn't and shouldn't be necessary to continue with the status quo, only if it needs diverging from.

One of the WDFW members said it more eloquently during the meeting but the Commission basically spit in the face of the last 10 years of WDFW's biologists and their work.

Lehmkul spoke about this on the podcast.   They are asking for data and not getting it. 


This is what Lehmkul sent me when i asked him directly...

"I do trust the DFW staff and believe they are dedicated and top-notch. However, some commissioners, including me, felt that the science, data, and analysis were incomplete.  We asked for a fuller analysis of the all the issues in a comprehensive, standard form typical of such documents.  For example, I thought they did a very good job of detailing the Blue Mt elk situation; and, as a result I voted with the majority to approve their recommended 2-cougar bag limit for the area.  The whole commission voted in February 2021 for a full analysis of the spring bear issue; but, it was never done despite me and Commissioner McIsaac bringing it up several times during 2021.  I don’t know why the commission and staff did not follow through."

I don't want to trash on any Bio's either, but I'm in no way surprised when I hear of a Gov't employee not following thru on somthing.

They want to study everything to death. The commission often asks for information that is not available OR feasible to obtain either financially or time wise. I belive this is a tool used by them to force change that hurts sportsmen.

They dont want to study anything. They want a target outcome and are fishing for any justification to get it, and discarding anything that would stand in the way.

I agree with you. I might not have stated it clearly but they ask for science they know they cannot or won't get and use that as the excuse to move on thier adgenda.

[hunter399]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

[baker5150]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

If they wanted Cougar hunting gone, why did they increase to a 2 tag limit in the Blues last year?

[Tbar]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

If they wanted Cougar hunting gone, why did they increase to a 2 tag limit in the Blues last year?

Posturing, they are a step ahead. Cougar hunting is at risk.

[Mtnwalker]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

If they wanted Cougar hunting gone, why did they increase to a 2 tag limit in the Blues last year?

Probably to shut people up because they knew it would have zero effect on harvest and they can claim they’re being proactive

[hunter399]

I don't really know,and shouldn't think out loud,most likely ever.

For all I know,they want bear gone completely too.
It's hard to read there true agenda,but the end goal is clear.
Consumption of wild animals is not looking good.

[Special T]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

If they wanted Cougar hunting gone, why did they increase to a 2 tag limit in the Blues last year?

Posturing, they are a step ahead. Cougar hunting is at risk.

That was in the Blues. The Director implemented that because he could do that on his own and didn't have to consult the Commissioners. If he wanted to increase the quoatas or increase the season length it was a commission issue.

In the grand scheme of things it accomplished nothing, but if the Director had opened up those other 2 issues the comission could have reduced quoatas, opportunity ECT. To me this proves the Problem is the Comissioners. One of our new comissioners Woody Meyers  is supporting 1 bear a year. Unfortunately some sportsmen didn't do thier due diligence and supported his appointment. Unfortunately he appears to be a Weilgus acholight.

[hunter399]

I'm just thinking out loud here.
So don't slam me too hard.

Thinking they want to take our second bear tag away.
Which will do know good,cause very few people harvest two.
So unless the amount of hunters actively hunting bears changes ALOT. Bear harvest stays the same across the board.

Cougar and Coyote they just want it gone .
We all know that's pressure from there little wildlife groups that poke at them like a 5year old,and whisper in there ear all the time.

If they wanted Cougar hunting gone, why did they increase to a 2 tag limit in the Blues last year?

Posturing, they are a step ahead. Cougar hunting is at risk.

That was in the Blues. The Director implemented that because he could do that on his own and didn't have to consult the Commissioners. If he wanted to increase the quoatas or increase the season length it was a commission issue.

In the grand scheme of things it accomplished nothing, but if the Director had opened up those other 2 issues the comission could have reduced quoatas, opportunity ECT. To me this proves the Problem is the Comissioners. One of our new comissioners Woody Meyers  is supporting 1 bear a year. Unfortunately some sportsmen didn't do thier due diligence and supported his appointment. Unfortunately he appears to be a Weilgus acholight.

Well I know Barbara Baker in that podcast was kinda holding the two fall bear tags over our heads. Basically saying that spring bear was not needed ,we have plenty of fall bear hunting.
Also holding that 30,000 comments up pretty high.

I'm not gonna hold it as bad, a 1 bear limit on that woody.
It won't effect bear harvest numbers at all.
Like I said in a post already,the only thing that can effect harvest rates is more hunters.

I bought a second tag last year and didn't fill it.
I'm not against it, and some hunters are pretty good at filling both.
So I'm not sure if his angle is to trade the second bear tag for spring bear return. Or if he just feels that two bear harvest is greedy or unethical. We would have to ask him.

But just like this conservation draft,things are gonna change.
And most likely we are not gonna like it.

[Alan K]

Populations aren't being held in check even with 2 bear tags allowed. In the absence of spring bear they ought to allow even more tags. It takes time and effort just to fill 2, only the most serious of bear hunters would fill more yet.  It's those serious hunters that we need to keep the populations flat, or hopefully start reducing it.  Most hunters view bear as an opportunity species, not something they dedicate time to. 

[hunter399]

Populations aren't being held in check even with 2 bear tags allowed. In the absence of spring bear they ought to allow even more tags. It takes time and effort just to fill 2, only the most serious of bear hunters would fill more yet.  It's those serious hunters that we need to keep the populations flat, or hopefully start reducing it.  Most hunters view bear as an opportunity species, not something they dedicate time to.

I agree totally.
Just like the 2 tag quota in the blues for cougar.
Just cause you hand out tags , doesn't necessarily have the desired effect.
But ya I'm sure bear population could sustain more tags.
I'm trying to figure out if the commission has an angle in reduced fall season . Or if they are just slapping us in the face.

[Special T]

Populations aren't being held in check even with 2 bear tags allowed. In the absence of spring bear they ought to allow even more tags. It takes time and effort just to fill 2, only the most serious of bear hunters would fill more yet.  It's those serious hunters that we need to keep the populations flat, or hopefully start reducing it.  Most hunters view bear as an opportunity species, not something they dedicate time to.

I agree totally.
Just like the 2 tag quota in the blues for cougar.
Just cause you hand out tags , doesn't necessarily have the desired effect.
But ya I'm sure bear population could sustain more tags.
I'm trying to figure out if the commission has an angle in reduced fall season . Or if they are just slapping us in the face.

It's fried tofu for the Anti Hunting crowd.

[Firstgenhunter]

Hey everyone, sorry for not replying sooner. Life got busy and I haven't had a time to sit down and write a good response. Here were my biggest takeaways from the meeting
1. Antis and the anti commissioners openly declared war on Washington hunters when Rowland said "Hunters should be nervous" And that a new group is managing wildlife and that we've ruled it for too long. Commissioners are not happy with her rants and Baker and Smith spent the meeting playing damage control.
2. They discussed turning elk into a draw-only hunt across the board and floated around banning predator hunting by April. Staff and even a commissioner pushed back against this behavior multiple times but they were shut down. Some of the commissioners treat staff horribly.
3. More and more hunters are going to get involved. We beat antis during public comment on both days. The final number was 28 pro-hunting and 21 anti. To be fair, a lot of hunters didn't get to speak because they were cut off due to time. The number would have been even bigger if time wasn't an issue. Almost every speaker said they were a member of HOWL which pissed off antis big time.
4. The Conservation Coalition was formed!! We're Washington State hunters that protect our hunting rights, traditions, and hunting lifestyle while encouraging conservation. We are grassroots and everyday hunters who are doing this. HOWL works with us almost full-time at this point. This has been in the works for a while but has finally gotten off the ground. We recruited a ton of speakers for the august meeting. What we're doing is helping hunters speak at meetings, getting hunters in the know and educating people on whats happening and helping them get involved. A lot of good stuff is coming soon. Here are some upcoming projects we have.

We are working on doing a social media campaign with hunter facts and statistics, working with HOWL on action items, introductions for our founding members over on our insta and a weekly/monthly newsletter. We are also planning on doing a podcast recap of the meeting with Andy Elliot, one of our founding members. If you guys want to learn more feel free to message me. Its time we unite to save Washington hunting!!

[Tbar]

Hey everyone, sorry for not replying sooner. Life got busy and I haven't had a time to sit down and write a good response. Here were my biggest takeaways from the meeting
1. Antis and the anti commissioners openly declared war on Washington hunters when Rowland said "Hunters should be nervous" And that a new group is managing wildlife and that we've ruled it for too long. Commissioners are not happy with her rants and Baker and Smith spent the meeting playing damage control.
2. They discussed turning elk into a draw-only hunt across the board and floated around banning predator hunting by April. Staff and even a commissioner pushed back against this behavior multiple times but they were shut down. Some of the commissioners treat staff horribly.
3. More and more hunters are going to get involved. We beat antis during public comment on both days. The final number was 28 pro-hunting and 21 anti. To be fair, a lot of hunters didn't get to speak because they were cut off due to time. The number would have been even bigger if time wasn't an issue. Almost every speaker said they were a member of HOWL which pissed off antis big time.
4. The Conservation Coalition was formed!! We're Washington State hunters that protect our hunting rights, traditions, and hunting lifestyle while encouraging conservation. We are grassroots and everyday hunters who are doing this. HOWL works with us almost full-time at this point. This has been in the works for a while but has finally gotten off the ground. We recruited a ton of speakers for the august meeting. What we're doing is helping hunters speak at meetings, getting hunters in the know and educating people on whats happening and helping them get involved. A lot of good stuff is coming soon. Here are some upcoming projects we have.

We are working on doing a social media campaign with hunter facts and statistics, working with HOWL on action items, introductions for our founding members over on our insta and a weekly/monthly newsletter. We are also planning on doing a podcast recap of the meeting with Andy Elliot, one of our founding members. If you guys want to learn more feel free to message me. Its time we unite to save Washington hunting!!

Best of luck.