Is there a lapse of logic? Is this hypocrisy?

[dreamunelk]

Was this a WDFW decision?  Please explain!
Just like bear baiting and hound hunting there are still way to many people who choose to be uniformed.  This was just another form of ballot box biology.  I have seen nothing that indicates that the WDFW supported.  I am pretty  sure they argued against it.

So long as people choose to be ignorant this type of thing will continue to happen.  Others made the choice.  Not WDW staff but, everyone immediately blames them.  What risk it there for an elected official who supports a pis poor decision when they are not held accountable?  Instead they blame the agency or people who have no choice but to follow the ruling!  Pretty neat gig if you are the politician.

Sorry for ranting here but, it just seems that even though there is a lot of information on this site and from other sources people just jump to a conclusion and run with it.  We keep making the mistake as a user group.

"    The Washington Association of Fish and Wildlife Professionals has submitted a clear rebuttal to the proposal. The two-page letter cites points that have been documented in detail by state biologists and supported by the majority of sportsmen commenting on the proposal in meetings and surveys:

    • Biological considerations do not support an antler-point restriction.

    • Surveyed hunters prefer no antler restrictions.

    • The restrictions would reduce hunter opportunity.

    • Economic impacts are possible as general hunters head elsewhere."

Pretty much sums it up, does it not?

[1bugman]

Great work Dave. That's pretty much how I feel about the APR's. I still wonder what the Biologist say about it. 

Well, I guess we all know the answer now, eh?
 

Yes we do, and I'm not surprised.

[bearpaw]

As usual you had a good write Dave but I am on the other side of this issue and want to point out that there is science both ways on this issue. I think the Commission should be commended for listening to local concerns. The idea is to limit harvest for a few years till the herd recovers.

With all due respect, many of the people commenting on this issue have no basis for making an educated statement as to the number of deer in the area. People who worked hard to get this passed know how many deer the area will support and can see that the herd is severely depressed. No matter what method is used to reduce harvest, someone will complain, the APR still provides for everyone an equal chance to recreate. 

As i have stated before, isn't one of the big bitches the fact that the WDFW never listens to sportsmen?   

Well this time the commission listened to local hunters who have lived a lifetime in the area and know what the deer numbers should be. I know there are issues regarding the elk herds too, just think how nice it would be if we tried a couple different strategies in an attempt to fix some of the problems. The same holds true for salmon, birds, etc.

I also think you misunderstand, people in the NE area want out of the area hunters, but we want to help the herd recover. All hunters can still hunt, you just have to be more selective which will result in fewer bucks being killed for a few years. This hopefully will pay dividends in the future for everyone.

In the future some of you will have concerns for the wildlife in your area, I hope the commission will listen to what the local people in your area have to say.

[notsosneaky]

Was this a WDFW decision?  Please explain!
Just like bear baiting and hound hunting there are still way to many people who choose to be uniformed.  This was just another form of ballot box biology.  I have seen nothing that indicates that the WDFW supported.  I am pretty  sure they argued against it.

So long as people choose to be ignorant this type of thing will continue to happen.  Others made the choice.  Not WDW staff but, everyone immediately blames them.  What risk it there for an elected official who supports a pis poor decision when they are not held accountable?  Instead they blame the agency or people who have no choice but to follow the ruling!  Pretty neat gig if you are the politician.

Sorry for ranting here but, it just seems that even though there is a lot of information on this site and from other sources people just jump to a conclusion and run with it.  We keep making the mistake as a user group.
.
"    The Washington Association of Fish and Wildlife Professionals has submitted a clear rebuttal to the proposal. The two-page letter cites points that have been documented in detail by state biologists and supported by the majority of sportsmen commenting on the proposal in meetings and surveys:

    • Biological considerations do not support an antler-point restriction.

    • Surveyed hunters prefer no antler restrictions.

    • The restrictions would reduce hunter opportunity.

    • Economic impacts are possible as general hunters head elsewhere."

Pretty much sums it up, does it not?

Yes the ruling is passed by wdfw. Duvia is the vice chair of the
commision. These seven men alone have the power to change the regs.
Washington association of wildlife professiionals offered rebuttle. They are not wdfw
The blame lies soley on wdfw as it usually does. They deserve it

[Curly]

I don't know about blaming WDFW for the rule.  Seems like their biologists were against it, but the commissioners think they know better so they approved the proposal.  I think any blame should lie entirely on the commission.

I lost respect for the commission when they approved Dave Ware's plan for categories with the special permits.  The plan had several flaws and yet they sill approved it when they should have denied it until they could figure out a way to do the points instead of distributing them to all categories.  Several other flaws in the system were brought up but the attitude was "We'll just pass it now and tweek it later as necessary".  That was a stupid decision (IMHO) and so is the APR thing.  For the biologists to not support it, but yet the commission goes ahead and approves it just doesn't sit right with me.