Community > Advocacy, Agencies, Access
WA court: Farmer had right to shoot cherry-picking elk
Coasthunterjay:
--- Quote from: mossback91 on February 16, 2008, 11:28:59 PM ---
--- Quote from: Coasthunterjay on February 16, 2008, 06:04:02 PM ---
put the blame on whoever makes you feel good but it wasnt the farmer......you can calm down and be rest assured that i WASN'T accusing any individual officer......not one man can do everything......
--- End quote ---
Farmer's fault he should have built stronger fences. He probably knew that animals came down and wintered aroudn his property every year.....so why not prevent it by buildign some nice fences huh?? He probably could have waited a little longer for the game department to work on getting some sort of damage control plan worked out where the animals wouldnt have beeen wasting. You cant expect it to happen over night. The farmer had many things he could have been doing other than going on killing sprees.
--- End quote ---
FREEKING TYPOS...... WOOPS SORRY ABOUT THAT, JUST CAUGHT IT............that would explain wy me a doublung were bikering back and forth.....sorry dude :DOH:
and mossback this was something that had been adressed several times and i believe that the story states that WDFW had built a damage control fence in aiding the farmers problem...but it was so inexpensively or poorly built by contractors that ehe farmer also had to fund more money into fixing and repairing the fences but this also did not stop the Elk......i think that was in the story if you read it at the beginning ;). your right there probably was more he could have done but the state like what doublelung stated could have done more as well..............this was just one of many poorly represented situations that just happened to happen here.......
DOUBLELUNG:
I agree with 99% of what CoasthunterJay wrote, and took exception to what is really a side-note to the issue. And, though we've never met, I like what I see of what he writes. I think we'd get along, he'd be welcome at my campfire anytime (especially being young and strong, with his packframe, and my big dead elk down in the canyon ...). We're on the same team.
I think this is an unfortunate situation, but as I wrote before, I am glad the orchardist was exonerated. He might have made a poor business decision (ie, depending on the state to keep big game, near the core of big game habitat, out of his orchards, while experiencing hundreds of thousands in damage...); but not criminal. At least, that's my take based on what one reporter wrote.
These kinds of cruddy situations will continue to occur, as long as the people in charge think it's fine that limited resources are squandered to make the leadership as comfortable as possible at the expense of the fish and wildlife resources.
In 2007, WDFW had 1,601 employees; roughly 850 in Olympia, and roughly 750 in the rest of the state. Of the 750 in the field, the majority are hatchery workers raising and rearing fish. Maybe 350 peopel in the field, monitoring, managing and protecting the resources. I think that's piss-poor management of limited resources, and piss-poor allocation of OUR money to manage OUR resources.
If Olympia staff were reduced to 500 or so, and those assets allocated to the FIELD, I think it would be a lot better. Or, reduce the excess STAFF, give the field staff the aerial survey time, study resources, and other tools to do their jobs better with existing personnel, and devote more resources to managing existing wildlife lands and acquiring more, and it would be a heck of a lot better.
Just my 2 cents, trying to point the finger in the right direction.
bobcat:
In my opinion it should be up to the farmer/orchardist/landowner to put up his own fences to protect his property. It should not be the responsibility of the state.
boneaddict:
A_MEN
billythekidrock:
--- Quote ---If Olympia staff were reduced to 500 or so, and those assets allocated to the FIELD, I think it would be a lot better. Or, reduce the excess STAFF, give the field staff the aerial survey time, study resources, and other tools to do their jobs better with existing personnel, and devote more resources to managing existing wildlife lands and acquiring more, and it would be a heck of a lot better.
--- End quote ---
You think reducing staff would allow them to do a better job? What excess staff?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version