Changing hunting in Washington

[JimmyHoffa]

Agree that the majority don't currently target predators, I think most get the tag 'just in case'.  I would like to see them allow unlimited tags for those that do hunt the predators (or at least more than one or two tags).  Very few are out looking for them.

[Branden]

This topic isn't about predators exactly. So I will make this short. I have killed 4 cougars in Washington without dogs. You have to put a lot of time in, and get lucky. But it can be done. Hunters are allowed to shoot 2 bears a year if they want. How many actually kill a bear? No limit on bobs or yotes. But not very many get killed. Its not the wdfw's fault we have an over abundance of yotes, bears, cougars, or bobcats.

Whoever said they don't think you should have to choose the high hunt as your regular general season cause the season is so short, (I think it was Chesapeake) the high hunt is longer then the regular general season. So why should that not be a season by itself?

Jimmyhoffa sp? I don't think you could have a free for all for 2 weeks each month, because the deer are way to vulnerable in November December.

Bearpaw, if you think it would work to totally limit say 2 deer units, (I think that is what you are saying?) what are you accomplishing? I guess I'm not understanding what doing something like this in a couple units would actually do? Or if you had something else in mind to try in a couple units would you please explain?

Utah used to have general state wide tags. Then they went to region wide tags. Now they are going to unit specific tags.
 Why is every state in the west going to a system like this? I think 99% of hunters would agree most of the other western states have better deer hunting then Washington. So why is it so hard to copy the best parts of the other states management practices?

My grandpa used to keep track of deer shot one 150,000 acres on the westside. There were more deer shot during the 4 day late buck in November then the general season in October. Its just to easy to hunt the eastside for a big buck during the general and pass on small bucks when you know you have a 4 day season that is a slamdunk for a meat buck, with a chance of shooting a dumb rutted up wallhanger.

[str8meat]

draw system the whole state, lets regulate the deer populations along with the hunters for better opps for all. but washington is greedy and the west side wants the cash. simply put if hunters wants seasons and better oppurtunities, they need to stand together and cut off the cash flow. cut their cash flow and things will change otherwise your pissin up a rope and then trying to push it. nuff ced

[pianoman9701]

You can't compare WA to other western states, Branden. First of all, only OR and CA have joined us in voting out baiting and hounds for bears and cougars. When the ballot initiative for the baiting/hounds prohibition took place, the DFW did very little to let people know what the repercussions would be. In addition, they've messed with the predator seasons, (only recently recanting and going back to broader dates and fewer restrictions), and restrictions. To say that the DFW has no blame in predator issues here in WA is absurd in the very least. Delusional is more appropriate. Then, add their aggressive wolf plan, even more so than the USFWS suggestion.

Yes, we can learn some lessons from other states if improved hunting is the goal of the DFW. But we're not clear that is the goal, in fact. To the contrary, many of us believe that generations of liberal, anti-hunting governors have top loaded the commission and the department with people who'd rather just see hunters go away. This is not the case in states like Utah, ID, and MT, where hunters comprise as much as 30% of the population, as opposed to 4% here.

Hunting can only be changed in WA when the hunter is accepted as a necessary tool for game management and conservation, not viewed as an extremist killing machine who cares only about his trophy. It's a culture change that requires the help of the DFW to forward. We won't get that help if we continue to elect liberal, anti-hunting governors and they keep appointing wolf lovers like Jay Kehne to the commission.

[Branden]

You can't compare WA to other western states, Branden. First of all, only OR and CA have joined us in voting out baiting and hounds for bears and cougars. When the ballot initiative for the baiting/hounds prohibition took place, the DFW did very little to let people know what the repercussions would be. In addition, they've messed with the predator seasons, (only recently recanting and going back to broader dates and fewer restrictions), and restrictions. To say that the DFW has no blame in predator issues here in WA is absurd in the very least. Delusional is more appropriate. Then, add their aggressive wolf plan, even more so than the USFWS suggestion.

Yes, we can learn some lessons from other states if improved hunting is the goal of the DFW. But we're not clear that is the goal, in fact. To the contrary, many of us believe that generations of liberal, anti-hunting governors have top loaded the commission and the department with people who'd rather just see hunters go away. This is not the case in states like Utah, ID, and MT, where hunters comprise as much as 30% of the population, as opposed to 4% here.

Hunting can only be changed in WA when the hunter is accepted as a necessary tool for game management and conservation, not viewed as an extremist killing machine who cares only about his trophy. It's a culture change that requires the help of the DFW to forward. We won't get that help if we continue to elect liberal, anti-hunting governors and they keep appointing wolf lovers like Jay Kehne to the commission.

So you think we should sit on our hands and do nothing? How many days did you spend hunting bear, cougar, bobcat, and yotes last year? There are 4 predators open to hunting otc with pretty long seasons. I would hope you spent twice as many days hunting predators last year as deer or elk since you have longer seasons and twice as many predator species to choose from.

For all the guys saying dfw is the problem with the predators, I hope you go out and spend more time actually hunting predators then deer or elk. Because like stated above seasons are longer, and there are twice as many species of predators for more variety.

Since this thread is turning into a predator is the problem thread, I came up with an idea. How about we implement a program like they have back east called "earn a buck" You would have to shoot a cougar before they would issue a deer tag. Or 2 bears before they will issue you a tag. How does that sound? Then we will manage predators, and since I am sure everybody is doing their part to kepp the predator population down inspite of dfw, everybody will still get to hunt every year? 

[buckfvr]

Certainly should be way more participation during predator seasons, and coyotes should be hunted year 'round by all hunters.  We have the seasons, its up to us.

[kentrek]

You can't compare WA to other western states, Branden. First of all, only OR and CA have joined us in voting out baiting and hounds for bears and cougars. When the ballot initiative for the baiting/hounds prohibition took place, the DFW did very little to let people know what the repercussions would be. In addition, they've messed with the predator seasons, (only recently recanting and going back to broader dates and fewer restrictions), and restrictions. To say that the DFW has no blame in predator issues here in WA is absurd in the very least. Delusional is more appropriate. Then, add their aggressive wolf plan, even more so than the USFWS suggestion.

Yes, we can learn some lessons from other states if improved hunting is the goal of the DFW. But we're not clear that is the goal, in fact. To the contrary, many of us believe that generations of liberal, anti-hunting governors have top loaded the commission and the department with people who'd rather just see hunters go away. This is not the case in states like Utah, ID, and MT, where hunters comprise as much as 30% of the population, as opposed to 4% here.

Hunting can only be changed in WA when the hunter is accepted as a necessary tool for game management and conservation, not viewed as an extremist killing machine who cares only about his trophy. It's a culture change that requires the help of the DFW to forward. We won't get that help if we continue to elect liberal, anti-hunting governors and they keep appointing wolf lovers like Jay Kehne to the commission.

So you think we should sit on our hands and do nothing? How many days did you spend hunting bear, cougar, bobcat, and yotes last year? There are 4 predators open to hunting otc with pretty long seasons. I would hope you spent twice as many days hunting predators last year as deer or elk since you have longer seasons and twice as many predator species to choose from.

For all the guys saying dfw is the problem with the predators, I hope you go out and spend more time actually hunting predators then deer or elk. Because like stated above seasons are longer, and there are twice as many species of predators for more variety.

Since this thread is turning into a predator is the problem thread, I came up with an idea. How about we implement a program like they have back east called "earn a buck" You would have to shoot a cougar before they would issue a deer tag. Or 2 bears before they will issue you a tag. How does that sound? Then we will manage predators, and since I am sure everybody is doing their part to kepp the predator population down inspite of dfw, everybody will still get to hunt every year? 

if we all had to kill two bear or one couger befor we could go after elk and deer..that would realy cut down on human trafic in the woods.. but realy even if you have to label me as a poacher im still going to hunt elk regardless if i filled a bear/cougar quata

too kill bears let baiting be legal,half the "bear" "hunters" do it anyhow
with cougars give out more hound hunts...problem solved

[bearpaw]

Branden, I think you would get further if you maintained a sensible discussion. Asking hunters to earn a buck by killing a bear or cougar isn't sensible since you and I both know how low the average success rate is on bear and cougar without dogs or bait.

The last full season before WDFW outlawed hound hunting I took 23 hunters, I am pretty sure they were all Washington residents (possibly some members on this forum) hunting for cougar. They killed 23 cougar all near Colville. Now we have a biologist that says we should only kill 2 cougars in one of the units where I often killed 2 to 4 per season with my hunters not to mention what other hounders killed. Funny thing is we had a perfectly healthy cougar population when they shut down hunting. 

We used to have from 20 to 40 cougar tags in each of these units in the NE, anyone who denies what kind of cougar production occurs here is either lieing or unknowledgeable.

To suggest that hunters are unwilling to do their part in predator management is likely not going to make many friends. I have guys weekly calling me asking if they can somehow hunt cougar with hounds in Washington and I have to tell them no. 

[pianoman9701]

You can't compare WA to other western states, Branden. First of all, only OR and CA have joined us in voting out baiting and hounds for bears and cougars. When the ballot initiative for the baiting/hounds prohibition took place, the DFW did very little to let people know what the repercussions would be. In addition, they've messed with the predator seasons, (only recently recanting and going back to broader dates and fewer restrictions), and restrictions. To say that the DFW has no blame in predator issues here in WA is absurd in the very least. Delusional is more appropriate. Then, add their aggressive wolf plan, even more so than the USFWS suggestion.

Yes, we can learn some lessons from other states if improved hunting is the goal of the DFW. But we're not clear that is the goal, in fact. To the contrary, many of us believe that generations of liberal, anti-hunting governors have top loaded the commission and the department with people who'd rather just see hunters go away. This is not the case in states like Utah, ID, and MT, where hunters comprise as much as 30% of the population, as opposed to 4% here.

Hunting can only be changed in WA when the hunter is accepted as a necessary tool for game management and conservation, not viewed as an extremist killing machine who cares only about his trophy. It's a culture change that requires the help of the DFW to forward. We won't get that help if we continue to elect liberal, anti-hunting governors and they keep appointing wolf lovers like Jay Kehne to the commission.

So you think we should sit on our hands and do nothing? How many days did you spend hunting bear, cougar, bobcat, and yotes last year? There are 4 predators open to hunting otc with pretty long seasons. I would hope you spent twice as many days hunting predators last year as deer or elk since you have longer seasons and twice as many predator species to choose from.

For all the guys saying dfw is the problem with the predators, I hope you go out and spend more time actually hunting predators then deer or elk. Because like stated above seasons are longer, and there are twice as many species of predators for more variety.

Since this thread is turning into a predator is the problem thread, I came up with an idea. How about we implement a program like they have back east called "earn a buck" You would have to shoot a cougar before they would issue a deer tag. Or 2 bears before they will issue you a tag. How does that sound? Then we will manage predators, and since I am sure everybody is doing their part to kepp the predator population down inspite of dfw, everybody will still get to hunt every year? 

Did I say we should sit on our hands and do nothing? No, I didn't. If you're looking to pick a fight, pick up the phone and call the DFW. Picking fights with other hunters probably isn't going to get anything positive accomplished.

I'm very active in hunting politics other than just typing in here. The whole DFW knows me by name, as do all of my state and federal reps, and the wildlife commission. When I don't like something, I not only bring it to the attention of other hunters, I speak up to the powers that be. Do I continue to hunt? Yes. I don't believe a boycott is useful and I do believe that the people who pay the bills for the DFW should have the strongest voice. I'm not sure what you do other than typing in forums, but if you do as much as I or more, I applaud your efforts to push for change. If not, you're just another complainer looking to pick fights with people on your side of the argument. Which is it?

[fair-chase]

Branden, as you've probably noticed there are many problems with a draw only system, the least of which is the draw system itself. Hunters perception is likely the biggest hurdle to overcome. The perception that a draw only system would limit opportunity is a bit scewed but understandable. Likely stemming from a distrust (and rightly so) of the DFW. The DFW does not have the best relationship with hunters in this state (by their own doing) and this adds to the scepticism about their abilities to properly implement such a system. The truth is that if done properly a draw system could increase time afield, success ratios, and provide an overall better experience for hunters. This of course would be entirely dependant on the WDFW's proper implementation of such a system; and leaving such a task in the hands of those deemed incompetent by their own user base would not be well received. As witnessed in countless other threads regarding this same topic.

[Dhoey07]

You can't compare WA to other western states, Branden. First of all, only OR and CA have joined us in voting out baiting and hounds for bears and cougars. When the ballot initiative for the baiting/hounds prohibition took place, the DFW did very little to let people know what the repercussions would be. In addition, they've messed with the predator seasons, (only recently recanting and going back to broader dates and fewer restrictions), and restrictions. To say that the DFW has no blame in predator issues here in WA is absurd in the very least. Delusional is more appropriate. Then, add their aggressive wolf plan, even more so than the USFWS suggestion.

Yes, we can learn some lessons from other states if improved hunting is the goal of the DFW. But we're not clear that is the goal, in fact. To the contrary, many of us believe that generations of liberal, anti-hunting governors have top loaded the commission and the department with people who'd rather just see hunters go away. This is not the case in states like Utah, ID, and MT, where hunters comprise as much as 30% of the population, as opposed to 4% here.

Hunting can only be changed in WA when the hunter is accepted as a necessary tool for game management and conservation, not viewed as an extremist killing machine who cares only about his trophy. It's a culture change that requires the help of the DFW to forward. We won't get that help if we continue to elect liberal, anti-hunting governors and they keep appointing wolf lovers like Jay Kehne to the commission.

So you think we should sit on our hands and do nothing? How many days did you spend hunting bear, cougar, bobcat, and yotes last year? There are 4 predators open to hunting otc with pretty long seasons. I would hope you spent twice as many days hunting predators last year as deer or elk since you have longer seasons and twice as many predator species to choose from.

For all the guys saying dfw is the problem with the predators, I hope you go out and spend more time actually hunting predators then deer or elk. Because like stated above seasons are longer, and there are twice as many species of predators for more variety.

Since this thread is turning into a predator is the problem thread, I came up with an idea. How about we implement a program like they have back east called "earn a buck" You would have to shoot a cougar before they would issue a deer tag. Or 2 bears before they will issue you a tag. How does that sound? Then we will manage predators, and since I am sure everybody is doing their part to kepp the predator population down inspite of dfw, everybody will still get to hunt every year? 

How often do you see cougars in the woods while hunting?  Bobcats?  Bears?  If you were running them with hounds, then how often?  Ya the season is open for months right now but cougars, bears and bobcats are not at all like hunting deer and/or elk. 

[JimmyHoffa]

I do agree with Branden that not enough hunters target the predators.  That is why I think cougars and bears shouldn't have a limit.  Let the guys that chase them pick up the slack.  Kind of hard to get into the pelt business when you can only get one cougar and two bears for the year.

[pianoman9701]

I do agree with Branden that not enough hunters target the predators.  That is why I think cougars and bears shouldn't have a limit.  Let the guys that chase them pick up the slack.  Kind of hard to get into the pelt business when you can only get one cougar and two bears for the year.

Agreed, and agreed that there should be fewer obstacles to hunting them.

[bearpaw]

 

[Branden]

"earn a buck" was a joke, hence the wink face.

Still, not one of the guys on here said they spend more time predator hunting then deer or elk hunting. If you think to many predators is the main problem, why aren't you doing something about it?