Please comment: Black Bear Timber Damage CR-102

[mcrawfordaf]

Public comment is open for rule changes on Black Bear Timber damage: (1) Purpose. The purpose of the black bear timber damage permit is to reduce damage to commercial timber caused by black bears peeling and consuming tree parts resulting in permanent damage or death to the tree. A black bear timber damage permit allows a person to remove one or more black bears as conditioned on the permit. This section does not apply to federal employees and agents while acting in their official capacities for the purpose of protecting private property.

https://publicinput.com/black-bear-timber-damage

[GOcougsHunter]

Comments made.

[starkeybomb]

done! it was an interesting read.  I think there is room for improvement.  Some ambiguous language that could use and update.  A little too easy to pull the hunts without much reasoning.

[ducks4days]

Done. Supported most of it, included requests that some parts be clarified or removed.

"Conservation concern" should be clearly defined
"Safety risk" should be clearly defined
'The Department' should be clearly defined

I dont like the idea of Lorna Smith thumbing through granted permits or pending applications and revoking or denying them by claiming bear hunting is fundamentally a safety risk or conservation concern across the board .

[HikerHunter]

Commented. I'm guessing since this is being called a "timber damage permit" that my spring bear points won't count towards it?

[fireweed]

Can the timber companies "charge" for hunting these damaging bears?  It's like a homeowner complaining to the WDFW about a mice infestation, the state offering the homeowner a free cat, then charging the cat for the privilege of killing mice.

[high_hunter]

Commented. I'm guessing since this is being called a "timber damage permit" that my spring bear points won't count towards it?

No, it's separate.

[high_hunter]

Can the timber companies "charge" for hunting these damaging bears?  It's like a homeowner complaining to the WDFW about a mice infestation, the state offering the homeowner a free cat, then charging the cat for the privilege of killing mice.

No.  If you read more of it, it states they cannot charge for access or sell the permit. 

[duckmen1]

I just can't help but question if recreation hunters will be left out and these permits will go toward the contract hunters.

[X-Force]

Done. We will see how far this goes.

[Special T]

Can the timber companies "charge" for hunting these damaging bears?  It's like a homeowner complaining to the WDFW about a mice infestation, the state offering the homeowner a free cat, then charging the cat for the privilege of killing mice.

No.  If you read more of it, it states they cannot charge for access or sell the permit.

I've read it page 4 6 C it states that they can deny a permitt if they don't allow public access. It does not however define what public access means. If it does please tell me where me where.

[hunter399]

Still a may need to look at what a current black bear timber application looks like first.
That's the application it said they will use.
Why would I support this if I will never be granted a damage permit.

And just to be honest here. All this is for is to cover the department and the commission for the spring bear decision.
Let's say on average a 100 bears would be harvested ,when spring bear hunt was active. Which was and always be a damage hunt.
Not recreational.

So how much projected timber loss each year does a 100 bears do in the spring? (Maybe a few foresters can chime in here).
5 logging truck loads ,a 100 loads.
Anyway see my point.
It's a liability that our great commission doesn't want over there head.

If I could ask one question?.....

How many permits will they issue?

They need to issue about 1000 permits for any average joe like you and I to even have a tiny,tiny,tiny chance of ever seeing a permit.
Otherwise it's just a friend and family thing,to cover liability on the commission behalf. We will never see a permit.

I don't know,I'm gonna have to do a little research,and look up a few things. Before I support it.
The commission made a decision on spring bear.
They should lay in the bed they made.
The fact that anybody thinks they will see one of these permits is crazy to me.

My comment will most likely say , reinstate spring bear hunt as a damage hunt. So that it is fair to everybody,and spring bear points can be applied towards this hunt. Permits are issued fairly in a drawing format.

[Special T]

Page 4 section 5 C states that the permitt holder/Hunter must have a bear tag.

 I can only assume that this is further proof of instituting a damage tag to hunters. Combine that with the public access portion and it sounds pretty good.

It also implies that since it requires a tag one person cannot kill more bears than they have tags for, so it incitivizes opening the hunting to more people. It does however give them control since the person has to be named by the landowner. This May change the way spring bear looked where the more local or active hunter has a better chance to increase harvest of trouble bears.

[high_hunter]

Can the timber companies "charge" for hunting these damaging bears?  It's like a homeowner complaining to the WDFW about a mice infestation, the state offering the homeowner a free cat, then charging the cat for the privilege of killing mice.

No.  If you read more of it, it states they cannot charge for access or sell the permit.

I've read it page 4 6 C it states that they can deny a permitt if they don't allow public access. It does not however define what public access means. If it does please tell me where me where.

I didn't see it defined.  Just read what you saw, that the permit could be denied.  Think this is grey and that any of the pay to play private timber companies would argue they did allow public access, just not open to ALL public.

One good thing is that if you are the "designated hunter" they cannot charge for access, keys, etc.

[Special T]

 

Yes but that does not address what access is doing the general season, only for the permitted hunt.