Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 10:03:24 PM
Post by: Lucky1 on January 17, 2014, 10:29:57 PM
Post by: KFhunter on January 17, 2014, 10:41:57 PM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,78064.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,78064.0.html)
this poll is against HW policy, I won't respond or vote in it.
Post by: KFhunter on January 17, 2014, 10:48:40 PM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,105968.msg1381854.html#msg1381854 (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,105968.msg1381854.html#msg1381854)
Post by: wolfbait on January 17, 2014, 10:51:44 PM
:dunno: one of the s's would preclude me saying anything about it. I am not sure what I would do. I do hate the thought of the wolves killing game that us hunters pay to manage. We can manage the deer and elk populations without the help of the wolves, thank you very much. I wonder if the pro wolf people actually go out and look at wolves or listen to them howl. I just don't get their motivation.
Conservation NW and Defenders of wildlies just count their money at the end of the week, WDFW just keep spewing the same crap.
I feel sorry for the people who work for WDFW who feel the same as many of us do, and they are lumped into the same piles as those at WDFW who promote wolves. I know several who can't wait till they can retire.
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 10:54:48 PM
read thisim not saying go out and break the law, just trying to see what most think about the subject? My opinion, I could give two cents about wdfw monitoring my post or me! I'm legal and have nothing to hide, just looking for opinions. I really don't think I'm breaking any forum rules?
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,78064.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,78064.0.html)
this poll is against HW policy, I won't respond or vote in it.
Post by: KFhunter on January 17, 2014, 11:00:31 PM
While the polls are similar, mine was different because none of the options were an illegal choice. You do not have to turn in a poacher nor will you ever be arrested or cited for failing to turn one in.
I hope you understand?
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 11:16:47 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 11:21:49 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 11:43:19 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2014, 11:54:18 PM
Post by: Chukar on January 18, 2014, 12:09:21 AM
Is it illegal. Yep.
I just would not turn anyone in if it was done for livestock protection, property or being pushed by however many might be pressuring.
Shooting spree no. Sometimes things happen. I think a farmer, rancher or threatened hunter needs to do what needs doin
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on January 18, 2014, 05:17:03 AM
Post by: washelkhunter on January 18, 2014, 05:49:31 AM
Post by: AspenBud on January 18, 2014, 07:47:22 AM
Smossy's girl, what happened to your post? It was spot on! You put in words what I couldn't, thanks. But I don't know where it went?
I didn't know if I wanted to get in a debate about it but here's what I had:
KFhunter, the rules/policy you listed actually doesn't say you can't ask about this subject. It says the forum doesn't condone illegal activities against wolves and that "When comments are found that suggest illegal activity they are usually left on the forum so that law enforcement can monitor such activity." So technically this poll/thread I wouldn't think is against the forum rules, but it is to each participants discretion on voicing their opinion with the disclaimer that authorities might be monitoring it.
Just my observation. I think if it were a discussion on illegal activities actually committed then it would be against forum rules.
Whether it's against forum rules or not, one should consider the legal repercussions. If you submit an opinion in favor of the topic and eventually get caught poaching it could well be used against you in court depending on what the law does. The "I swear I thought it was a coyote" defense won't save you. It's sort of like being found liable for a dog bite. If your dog bites someone who chooses not to press charges and you talk about it on a forum like this you are digging yourself a hole in the event someone else gets bit since you publically admitted you knew the dog was dangerous and has a history of biting and did nothing about it.
How likely the law is to look through this stuff, I don't know. But these days anything is possible. Hunt WA may not save personal information but IP addresses and browsing history is saved by ISP's. It would not take much for a LEO building a case to get here.Hello NSA.
Post by: Special T on January 18, 2014, 08:10:03 AM
Post by: Eli346 on January 18, 2014, 08:21:49 AM
Post by: rasbo on January 18, 2014, 08:35:22 AM
Our opinions are valued in many circles but I don't see why we should leave this out here in a public forum for all to see. There are groups, and they are watching, that may want to use the poll against us in any way possible. I'm not saying they can do anything legally but they can sure use it to put us in an unfavorable light. Right now we need all the help we can get and I don't believe this will further our cause.:tup:
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2014, 08:40:56 AM
Post by: idahohuntr on January 18, 2014, 09:07:32 AM
Right now we need all the help we can get and I don't believe this will further our cause.:yeah:
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 09:28:24 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 18, 2014, 09:31:15 AM
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2014, 09:33:30 AM
That would rule out the deer and elk I hunt. ;)
Post by: PolarBear on January 18, 2014, 09:36:46 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 09:39:57 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 18, 2014, 09:42:11 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 09:42:39 AM
"Our agenda should be, no evasive species in our state!"at least they are very welcomed in our state, and provide a purpose for many.
That would rule out the deer and elk I hunt. ;)
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2014, 09:45:54 AM
"Evasive". ;)"Our agenda should be, no evasive species in our state!"at least they are very welcomed in our state, and provide a purpose for many.
That would rule out the deer and elk I hunt. ;)
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 09:48:05 AM
This isn't ID. It's WA and the greenies are in charge. We need to be beyond reproach. In ID, they have a season on greenies. Here, they have one on us.i agree, I just don't think we should just bow down to people who want to take our right to hunt away. Because of the greenies here we are at a bigger threat of losing our hunting rights or at least making a very limited hunting state because of the damage the wolves do. The anti's love wolves, the wolf can do our job in keeping the herd numbers down, they don't need us hunters to do it once the wolf population gets big enough. But I know you are very aware of that, so what do we do?
Post by: whackmaster on January 18, 2014, 09:49:32 AM
So illegal that the governor of Idaho told his game wardens to not spend a dime on pursuing wolf kills by people a couple years ago when it was out of control over there? Most of us are legal hunters here, this thread just shows how frustrating it is having wolves in our state protected. Most agree they don't care if wolves die, so what. There might be a law in our state in the near future that makes it illegal for you to smoke in your car when anyone under 18 is riding w you. So if I put a poll up asking if you smoke in your car w kids in it, will you be just as negative about it? Illegal doesn't always make sense, common sense makes sense. Just sayin.Bravo :tup:
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 09:49:57 AM
duh, lol! I'm only half way done with my coffee this morning!"Evasive". ;)"Our agenda should be, no evasive species in our state!"at least they are very welcomed in our state, and provide a purpose for many.
That would rule out the deer and elk I hunt. ;)
Post by: chukar58 on January 18, 2014, 09:55:14 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 18, 2014, 10:02:36 AM
This isn't ID. It's WA and the greenies are in charge. We need to be beyond reproach. In ID, they have a season on greenies. Here, they have one on us.i agree, I just don't think we should just bow down to people who want to take our right to hunt away. Because of the greenies here we are at a bigger threat of losing our hunting rights or at least making a very limited hunting state because of the damage the wolves do. The anti's love wolves, the wolf can do our job in keeping the herd numbers down, they don't need us hunters to do it once the wolf population gets big enough. But I know you are very aware of that, so what do we do?
I didn't say we need to bow down. I said we need to be beyond reproach. Huge difference.
What do we do? We continue (or start if you haven't already) to hammer our state senators and reps about the damage the DFW is doing to our heritage and our wildlife. We need to make sure they understand about granulosis, that these are not the same wolves we had here before by about 30-40% size difference, and point out that our ridiculous wolf plan is 50% more aggressive than that of MT, a state with 1/16 of our population density. We need them to understand that our wildlife commission needs to be chosen, vetted, and approved by our legislature, not by the waive of the liberal Governor's hand; that gubernatorial wildlife appointments are causing the department to become run by environmental activists, not those who have as priorities hunting, fishing, and conservation which enhances our wildlife and uses hunters as a tool to manage it, not large and voracious Canadian apex predators. My senator and reps know my face and my name. If that were true of 1/4 of HuntWA's members, we'd be making huge progress on these issues. But, showcasing hunters who admit to being lawless, unethical, poachers of wolves does nothing but hurt our future.
Post by: washelkhunter on January 18, 2014, 10:03:43 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 18, 2014, 10:04:42 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 10:08:50 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Post by: washelkhunter on January 18, 2014, 10:10:58 AM
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2014, 10:16:14 AM
Post by: PolarBear on January 18, 2014, 10:18:54 AM
It is like the first rule of fight club!
Post by: denali on January 18, 2014, 10:19:36 AM
Post by: gvan on January 18, 2014, 10:22:52 AM
Remind me again - what does the third S stand for?:yeah:
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 10:38:01 AM
This H-W thread has been linked and discussed on a wolf advocates web site :bdid:well then they can read this, you wolf advocates have your heads up your behinds! Go to Canada or Alaska if you want to hang out with wolves!
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 18, 2014, 10:45:51 AM
This H-W thread has been linked and discussed on a wolf advocates web site :bdid:
Who'd have thought that would happen? Oh yeah, most of us. :bash:
Post by: washelkhunter on January 18, 2014, 10:51:37 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 10:54:35 AM
Post by: buckfvr on January 18, 2014, 11:01:23 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 11:13:45 AM
Its a lot easier said than done............................ :twocents:i agree, not sure how many would actually pull the trigger? That's why I think threads like this don't give any anti's ammo, it's just talk and opinions.
Post by: Hunterman on January 18, 2014, 11:40:31 AM
This H-W thread has been linked and discussed on a wolf advocates web site :bdid:
Who cares.. Not wanting to start any fight here, but who really cares. I have read, and watched the way some of the post go on this, and at some point someone will come up with the " This will or is going to make good ammo for the anti's" and then the whole thread turns. If a person doesn't have the backbone to stand-up for what they say, and are not afraid of what other think of them for their stands, then maybe just maybe they should not say anything.
trophyhunt,, I for one think this is a very good thread, to find how people think, and feel. I will say that I voted "No". and don't give 2 hoots on who see'e it or their care.
Hunterrman(Tony)
Post by: idahohuntr on January 18, 2014, 11:45:28 AM
Who cares..People who support state based management of wolves that includes hunting them.
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 11:46:21 AM
very well said, you nailed it. Thank you for the post! :tup:This H-W thread has been linked and discussed on a wolf advocates web site :bdid:
Who cares.. Not wanting to start any fight here, but who really cares. I have read, and watched the way some of the post go on this, and at some point someone will come up with the " This will or is going to make good ammo for the anti's" and then the whole thread turns. If a person doesn't have the backbone to stand-up for what they say, and are not afraid of what other think of them for their stands, then maybe just maybe they should not say anything.
trophyhunt,, I for one think this is a very good thread, to find how people think, and feel. I will say that I voted "No". and don't give 2 hoots on who see'e it or their care.
Hunterrman(Tony)
Post by: Hunterman on January 18, 2014, 11:58:21 AM
Hunterman(Tony)
Post by: buckfvr on January 18, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Who cares..People who support state based management of wolves that includes hunting them.
Be fine with me if the tribes kill every last one of them........I do not support state based management of anything under the current administration, regionally and beyond. :twocents:
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on January 18, 2014, 12:47:04 PM
As a recurve hunter, if one is close enough to me that I have the choice.. I am in fear for my life.
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2014, 12:50:05 PM
Only comment I will make...If you're in fear of your life, the second and third Ss are irrelevant.
As a recurve hunter, if one is close enough to me that I have the choice.. I am in fear for my life.
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Post by: PolarBear on January 18, 2014, 12:50:38 PM
http://youtu.be/Nt6kKhlX8vU (http://youtu.be/Nt6kKhlX8vU)
Post by: KFhunter on January 18, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
Threads like these are useful in seeing the anger and frustration out there RE wolves. WDFW is failing the hunters and I for one do not trust the state in any game management if past history is any indication. I didn't loose that trust on the wolf issues alone however, with just about any species out there (excepting turkey) one can find gross
They are using their hunting base as nothing more than a voluntary tax paying base.
For the record I will not conduct illegal activities and thankfully the wolves are illusive enough I'm not tested in my resolve :chuckle:
I will however defend myself vigorously if challenged or threatened.
Post by: washelkhunter on January 18, 2014, 01:07:45 PM
Post by: KFhunter on January 18, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
I'm pissed off about their Elk management pratices. You've got Elk clashing with farmers in the western WA area, so they bring in professional USFWS killers to
THEN in the NE/WA they feed the small herds to the wolves, AFTER having neglected them for 20+ years!!! The NE is capable of some fantastic herds of Elk and amazing hunting if only the state would get off their asses and DO SOMETHING to help the Elk herds here. They were struggling prior to wolves and now they're being decimated in a perfect trifecta of cats, bears and now wolves. >:( :bash: :bash:
Same for the OIL moose tags, they're doing NOTHING to preserve our Moose, F-em feed em to the wolves :bash: :bash: guys got 24 years worth of points trying to get a moose tag only to have the freakin wolves eat them.
WDFW is capable of liberal application of hound hunting permits even with the voter initiative, instead they adopt this asinine cougar plan that limits each GMU to a pittance of what should be taken by hunters. 2 cats for GMU 105 ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!?? WTFap! :bash: :bash:
WDFW is also capable of expanding bear baiting permits, they do it for private timber companies WHY NOT try to get that canceled in favor of hunters doing it???? Bears peel trees on DNR land too you know :bash: Designate huge swaths of land as bear damage areas and bring in the dogs and bait piles! >:(
Remove the spring draw and make it a simple OTC tag like turkey, so you can fill your spring tag then purchase another tag for the fall hunt.
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2014, 04:44:44 PM
After reading UC WARDEN I'm under the impression WDFW is also grossly negligent in law enforcement. It pisses me off to no end they nickle and dime hunters for a game rules that are in my opinion designed to create the maximum amount of violators possible. How many have heard the phrase " I need a lawyer in my back pocket in the field ". So they go after stupid crap like someone dragging their deer down through the brush a little ways to a blocked off road then gutting it then tagging it...BIG FREAKIN DEAL it's not like he had it in the truck driving away. Nail the hell out of someone if they're dragging it out to the truck w/o a tag not down through 20 foot of brush where it'll be easier to gut. If I were a game warden I'd saunter up and congradulate the hunter, tell him he'd better get his tag on it then help drag it out. :bash: >:( :bash:I wish I could vote you on the wildlife commission, you would be able to speak for many hunters in our state. The anger is real and I think it's how most of us feel for the most part. And part of that anger is knowing all the work that some good bio's have done is gonna go to waste, or should I say go to the wolves. That passion you have is why I posted this poll, I just wanted to see how most felt.
I'm pissed off about their Elk management pratices. You've got Elk clashing with farmers in the western WA area, so they bring in professional USFWS killers topoachcull them at night instead of helping hunters gain access and encouraging farmers to allow hunters to take the animals. What incentive is there for a farmer to let hunters on their property when they're getting compensated by the state and USFWSpoachers"hunters" will take them at night??? :bash: :bash:
THEN in the NE/WA they feed the small herds to the wolves, AFTER having neglected them for 20+ years!!! The NE is capable of some fantastic herds of Elk and amazing hunting if only the state would get off their asses and DO SOMETHING to help the Elk herds here. They were struggling prior to wolves and now they're being decimated in a perfect trifecta of cats, bears and now wolves. >:( :bash: :bash:
Same for the OIL moose tags, they're doing NOTHING to preserve our Moose, F-em feed em to the wolves :bash: :bash: guys got 24 years worth of points trying to get a moose tag only to have the freakin wolves eat them.
WDFW is capable of liberal application of hound hunting permits even with the voter initiative, instead they adopt this asinine cougar plan that limits each GMU to a pittance of what should be taken by hunters. 2 cats for GMU 105 ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!?? WTFap! :bash: :bash:
WDFW is also capable of expanding bear baiting permits, they do it for private timber companies WHY NOT try to get that canceled in favor of hunters doing it???? Bears peel trees on DNR land too you know :bash: Designate huge swaths of land as bear damage areas and bring in the dogs and bait piles! >:(
Remove the spring draw and make it a simple OTC tag like turkey, so you can fill your spring tag then purchase another tag for the fall hunt.
Post by: wolfbait on January 18, 2014, 06:21:21 PM
After reading UC WARDEN I'm under the impression WDFW is also grossly negligent in law enforcement. It pisses me off to no end they nickle and dime hunters for a game rules that are in my opinion designed to create the maximum amount of violators possible. How many have heard the phrase " I need a lawyer in my back pocket in the field ". So they go after stupid crap like someone dragging their deer down through the brush a little ways to a blocked off road then gutting it then tagging it...BIG FREAKIN DEAL it's not like he had it in the truck driving away. Nail the hell out of someone if they're dragging it out to the truck w/o a tag not down through 20 foot of brush where it'll be easier to gut. If I were a game warden I'd saunter up and congradulate the hunter, tell him he'd better get his tag on it then help drag it out. :bash: >:( :bash:I wish I could vote you on the wildlife commission, you would be able to speak for many hunters in our state. The anger is real and I think it's how most of us feel for the most part. And part of that anger is knowing all the work that some good bio's have done is gonna go to waste, or should I say go to the wolves. That passion you have is why I posted this poll, I just wanted to see how most felt.
I'm pissed off about their Elk management pratices. You've got Elk clashing with farmers in the western WA area, so they bring in professional USFWS killers topoachcull them at night instead of helping hunters gain access and encouraging farmers to allow hunters to take the animals. What incentive is there for a farmer to let hunters on their property when they're getting compensated by the state and USFWSpoachers"hunters" will take them at night??? :bash: :bash:
THEN in the NE/WA they feed the small herds to the wolves, AFTER having neglected them for 20+ years!!! The NE is capable of some fantastic herds of Elk and amazing hunting if only the state would get off their asses and DO SOMETHING to help the Elk herds here. They were struggling prior to wolves and now they're being decimated in a perfect trifecta of cats, bears and now wolves. >:( :bash: :bash:
Same for the OIL moose tags, they're doing NOTHING to preserve our Moose, F-em feed em to the wolves :bash: :bash: guys got 24 years worth of points trying to get a moose tag only to have the freakin wolves eat them.
WDFW is capable of liberal application of hound hunting permits even with the voter initiative, instead they adopt this asinine cougar plan that limits each GMU to a pittance of what should be taken by hunters. 2 cats for GMU 105 ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!?? WTFap! :bash: :bash:
WDFW is also capable of expanding bear baiting permits, they do it for private timber companies WHY NOT try to get that canceled in favor of hunters doing it???? Bears peel trees on DNR land too you know :bash: Designate huge swaths of land as bear damage areas and bring in the dogs and bait piles! >:(
Remove the spring draw and make it a simple OTC tag like turkey, so you can fill your spring tag then purchase another tag for the fall hunt.
:tup:
Most people who live where wolves have been released, and then have to deal with the wolves, while WDFW lie about how many wolves are in their area, believe in the SS rule. And these sentiments are being felt by people who use to think wolves were a great addition to WA.
Post by: JLS on January 18, 2014, 08:52:48 PM
So illegal that the governor of Idaho told his game wardens to not spend a dime on pursuing wolf kills by people a couple years ago when it was out of control over there? Most of us are legal hunters here, this thread just shows how frustrating it is having wolves in our state protected. Most agree they don't care if wolves die, so what. There might be a law in our state in the near future that makes it illegal for you to smoke in your car when anyone under 18 is riding w you. So if I put a poll up asking if you smoke in your car w kids in it, will you be just as negative about it? Illegal doesn't always make sense, common sense makes sense. Just sayin.
Actually, he ordered that in response to Judge Malloy's ruling that halted the state sanctioned wolf hunts that began in the late 2000's. I don't disagree with him either, if the state is going to pay for the management of wolves, and they had met the predicated delisting thresholds then I would certainly want the hunts to move forward. Since they didn't, Idaho should not have been footing the bill for wolf management.
Otter’s News Release
(BOISE) – Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter notified Interior Secretary Ken Salazar today that Idaho no longer will act as the federal government’s “designated agent,” managing wolves imposed on the state under the Endangered Species Act.
Instead, the Governor directed the Idaho Fish and Game Commission to immediately refocus its efforts on protecting Idaho’s deer, elk and moose, and said the Idaho Department of Fish and Game will be submitting applications to the Interior Department for additional flexibility in addressing wolf depredation issues “so we can exercise our sovereign right to protect our wildlife.”
“This directive preserves an individual’s right to kill a wolf in self defense or in the defense of another person. It does not jeopardize the existing flexibility landowners and permittees have to protect their livestock and pets from wolves,” Governor Otter wrote in a letter to Salazar. “Additionally, this approach does not ask Idahoans who continue suffering wolves – especially sportsmen – to subsidize any part of this federal program or bear the risk or burden of inadequate federal funding in the future.”
In his letter, the Governor reiterated that the State of Idaho has consistently proven itself to be a responsible steward of all wildlife – “including your wolves.”
“We also showed that we could successfully manage a hunting season for wolves as we do for other species,” he said. “The State managed wolves as part of the ecosystem, in concert with other species and needs, which was ironically decried by environmentalists who seemingly want wolves to benefit at the expense of other wild and domestic species.”
“I am still committed to finding a path forward for delisting. My goal remains restoring State management under our approved plan as quickly as possible, if for no other reason than to fulfill the promise of our State law that all wildlife within our borders will be managed by the State. To that end, I am encouraged by the efforts of representatives from the three legislatures (Idaho, Montana and Wyoming) to see if there is a path forward for delisting and state management,” Governor Otter wrote to Salazar. “Although we could not agree during the course of our negotiations, I share your commitment to delist the species and restore state management as quickly as possible. It is truly frustrating that we cannot accomplish that shared goal today.”
Post by: KFhunter on January 18, 2014, 08:58:49 PM
He's welcome to run for governor of WA
Post by: mulehunter on January 18, 2014, 09:02:46 PM
Just so you know.... Dont mail it thur Fed Ex. :tup:
Post by: buckfvr on January 18, 2014, 09:06:06 PM
Post by: PolarBear on January 18, 2014, 09:09:01 PM
Post by: Bigshooter on January 18, 2014, 09:12:21 PM
Post by: PolarBear on January 18, 2014, 09:18:46 PM
Post by: Smossy on January 18, 2014, 09:28:06 PM
There is an anti wolf facebook page that I am on that gets death threats from absolute lunatic anti hunter/pro wolf morons every single day. Some of these cretins actually wish death on hunter's entire family just because they support killing wolves. :dunno: The extreme antis in any movement don't need much to grab and run with. They will allways make a hyperbolic mess out of anything, true or not.Kill a family, save a wolf. :dunno:
That makes no sense. Stooopid.
Post by: Special T on January 19, 2014, 08:04:56 AM
EVEN if some one a mild as Rob Mckenna had been elected GOV he wouldn't likely be overly concerned about hunting and what is going on... We would have a chance, but he would likely be preoccupied with state revenue, budgets, shoots etc. About the best outcome would be to get some REAL sportsman running the WDFW again.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on January 19, 2014, 08:19:54 AM
Post by: WaSouthpaw on February 04, 2014, 05:22:08 AM
I wonder if WDFW has a robo-wolf yet that they could set up to bust people willing to shoot wolves?
The WDFW won't do a set-up that is more than 25 yds off a paved road. They're to lazy.
Any idiot who shoots one 25 yds off the road deserves what they get...
Post by: WaSouthpaw on February 04, 2014, 07:01:08 AM
hOW CAN I SUM THIS UP ??? O.K So some of you are saying its o.k for these groups to keep criticizing hunters and their heritage but we should remain quiet on our opinions on what we think of them ? It is a free country and sitting around and being quiet is not going to work ...We are not the only people disagreeing with the wolf thing !!!!:yeah:
Post by: bhawley76 on February 04, 2014, 07:07:38 AM
Post by: coachcw on February 04, 2014, 07:08:01 AM
Post by: Bordercop on February 04, 2014, 01:16:08 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 04, 2014, 01:33:31 PM
I would agree with P-mans oppion of "staying beyond approach", however since we do not have ANY support from the WDFW or the politicians i don't think it matters. With out departmental support or Political support hunters either die a slow death or a quick one. Unless there is some kind of ideological change in this state the best we can do is hold the line, we certainly wont make any real gains....
EVEN if some one a mild as Rob Mckenna had been elected GOV he wouldn't likely be overly concerned about hunting and what is going on... We would have a chance, but he would likely be preoccupied with state revenue, budgets, shoots etc. About the best outcome would be to get some REAL sportsman running the WDFW again.
Sorry, but you're way off the mark ST in my opinion. Hunters may only comprise just under 4% of the population, but our activities/sport are currently supported by over 80% of the population. Yes, hunting is supported by a large majority. But, when we make the statements that are being made here, we'll lose that public support. The public has been brain-washed into thinking wolves are good under almost any circumstance. But they also think, as do many hunters, that lawless poachers are bad. Combine the two and give the general public the impression that hunters in general support the illegal killing of those big cuddly critters and you lose much of your non-hunter support, support that's necessary for us to accomplish many other things like a hunting rights amendment.
We'd be much better off educating the public about the downside of the wolf plan than publicly saying "forget it, I'm doing what I want regardless of the law", and making all of us look like extremist poaching wackos.
Post by: Special T on February 04, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
There is a huge disconnect between vocal support and the willingness to do something about it. (active)
I think that this poll shows that there IS a problem... In general when citizens feel like they have some recourse on a problem they work within the system. MOST people don't want to be a criminal or be thought as one... Until they are ignored, maligned, and lied to. Mind you there are MANY other instances in history where people rattled their pitchforks against the laws to facilitate change. :twocents:
Post by: trophyhunt on February 04, 2014, 02:14:59 PM
I guess where we disagree is "public support". Public OPINION may be favorable of hunters but the public does not support us. The public hamstrings us due to ignorance or apathy because peta paints the public a Disney view of nature.:yeah: The poll does show what most think, I'm a little surprised of the number of guys who would turn in their fellow hunter on a wolf?
There is a huge disconnect between vocal support and the willingness to do something about it. (active)
I think that this poll shows that there IS a problem... In general when citizens feel like they have some recourse on a problem they work within the system. MOST people don't want to be a criminal or be thought as one... Until they are ignored, maligned, and lied to. Mind you there are MANY other instances in history where people rattled their pitchforks against the laws to facilitate change. :twocents:
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 04, 2014, 02:21:32 PM
I guess where we disagree is "public support". Public OPINION may be favorable of hunters but the public does not support us. The public hamstrings us due to ignorance or apathy because peta paints the public a Disney view of nature.
There is a huge disconnect between vocal support and the willingness to do something about it. (active)
I think that this poll shows that there IS a problem... In general when citizens feel like they have some recourse on a problem they work within the system. MOST people don't want to be a criminal or be thought as one... Until they are ignored, maligned, and lied to. Mind you there are MANY other instances in history where people rattled their pitchforks against the laws to facilitate change. :twocents:
According to statistics I've read, you're incorrect. And, PETA is the group that most see as extremist, not hunters. This poll is skewed and has nothing to do with the public support of hunters. It has only to do with hunters' perception of that support and about what they should do about it with regards to the wolf plan.
Post by: KFhunter on February 04, 2014, 02:39:10 PM
hunting is making a comeback in the greenie tree hugger crowd. Sustainable, non-gmo, no vaccines etc etc etc
Post by: Special T on February 04, 2014, 02:50:03 PM
According to statistics I've read, you're incorrect. And, PETA is the group that most see as extremist, not hunters. This poll is skewed and has nothing to do with the public support of hunters. It has only to do with hunters' perception of that support and about what they should do about it with regards to the wolf plan.
I agree with you that this poll reflects how HUNTERS feel. IMO it reflects how HUNTERS are not getting ACTIVE support from the 80% of the population that say they support us, and if its OK to take matters into their own hands.
Often times in Polls there is a large disconnect between what people say and what they are willing to actually do. If 80% of people supported hunters we would still have hound hunting, trapping, and a wildlife council full of sportmen that reflect those who foot the bill for conservation. Unfortunately none of things are a reality, so 80% of the public SAY they support hunters but obviously there isn't a lot of follow through. THAT was my point.
"The public hamstrings us due to ignorance or apathy because peta paints the public a Disney view of nature."
This is my WAG as to WHY the public takes no action, but i have no real proof. I would wage money on apethy because very few people are affect by the issue of wolves.
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 04, 2014, 02:56:26 PM
In my opinion, hunters, their apathy, and inability to come together for a common goal are a big part of the reason we lost hounding and baiting. Had all the hunting groups in our state joined in solidarity, we'd have beaten that initiative. They didn't and we lost. And, we're still blaming someone else for the loss. :dunno:
I get where you're coming from ST, I just don't think it's productive. A negative profile will only ever hurt our sport.
Post by: Curly on February 04, 2014, 02:59:36 PM
The poll does show what most think, I'm a little surprised of the number of guys who would turn in their fellow hunter on a wolf?
I'm surprised as well. I think the number was a little higher a few years ago when a similar poll was ran, but it is still surprising. And because of that amount of guys that would turn in a wolf shooter, I'm afraid I will not be able to SSS due to the fact that there are so many of us that would turn in a guy for SSS. It isn't worth the risk to me to get caught......but I'm glad some are willing to risk it. :tup:
Post by: Special T on February 04, 2014, 03:07:01 PM
I don't think we disagree as much as you may think. I was just reading the cards as they were laid out, as i see them. It could be that we (sportmen) need to hit rock bottom before we get our act together. I think we may be nearing that point. On the poll about the new gold panning regs i didn't think i would see that much support for gold panners considering how rabid some fishermen can be.
Post by: KFhunter on February 04, 2014, 03:15:02 PM
I think wolves are bringing hunters together in a common cause, so discussions like these are helping in that regard. Yes it's too bad there is some dirty laundry bring air'd publically on here, but this forum is a discussion between hunters and I for one won't apologize for saying what I think about it. I can't sit at the table with each one of you and have a discussion over a bottle of beer so I come on here and do it. CNW and other wolf advocate sites can see what we're thinking, but heck we know what they're thinking too. I just don't see any meeting in the middle on this one. They want to end hunting, public grazing and pretty much anything outdoors that isn't human powered and zero impact.
There just isn't any middle ground to be had. The best course of action is to expose what they're really after and get grass roots sites up and running like Washington for Wildlife. HW is the voice for hunters Washington wide, so for guys like me there is no better way to air my opinions on the matter. WDFW reads this stuff but so does 1000's of other hunters.
It's early in the game and the pain hasn't really been felt by Washington hunters as of yet. Some regional guys see it, but the big majority won't see it until THEIR hunting area gets devastated.
Post by: Curly on February 04, 2014, 03:35:51 PM
Post by: singleshot12 on February 04, 2014, 03:47:56 PM
Wolves should be considered an invasive species. We are the top preditor so it is natural for us to eliminate a lesser and competitive mammal especially if we feel a sense of danger :twocents:.
Post by: trophyhunt on February 04, 2014, 03:59:28 PM
Well, there is no law saying you are required to turn in a poacher. So, I will probably never turn in a guy that shoots a wolf..........and I have a hard time calling that guy a poacher; technically he is, but I won't call him one. Also will not turn him in (even if they gave cash rewards or moose permits, I still wouldn't turn in the guy).amen brother!!
Post by: wence5 on March 05, 2014, 12:34:41 PM
The "would you turn in a wolf poacher" poll showed over 80% of hunters would not turn in a wolf poacher, and that was several years ago I can only assume it's higher now. WDFW has failed miserably at hunter outreach and transparency on this issue. Trust has eroded.
I think wolves are bringing hunters together in a common cause, so discussions like these are helping in that regard. Yes it's too bad there is some dirty laundry bring air'd publically on here, but this forum is a discussion between hunters and I for one won't apologize for saying what I think about it. I can't sit at the table with each one of you and have a discussion over a bottle of beer so I come on here and do it. CNW and other wolf advocate sites can see what we're thinking, but heck we know what they're thinking too. I just don't see any meeting in the middle on this one. They want to end hunting, public grazing and pretty much anything outdoors that isn't human powered and zero impact.
There just isn't any middle ground to be had. The best course of action is to expose what they're really after and get grass roots sites up and running like Washington for Wildlife. HW is the voice for hunters Washington wide, so for guys like me there is no better way to air my opinions on the matter. WDFW reads this stuff but so does 1000's of other hunters.
It's early in the game and the pain hasn't really been felt by Washington hunters as of yet. Some regional guys see it, but the big majority won't see it until THEIR hunting area gets devastated.
preach it brother! :tup:
Post by: hunter399 on March 05, 2014, 05:33:52 PM
Post by: bowhunterwa87 on March 05, 2014, 05:49:50 PM
Post by: wence5 on March 06, 2014, 08:39:08 AM
I woulnd not turn in anybody for wolf poaching.But i woulnd not shoot a wolf,care about my hunting rights way too much for that. :twocents:
I understand what you are saying, but what about our hunting rights being taken away because the wolves destroyed the elk and deer herds? Not pitching on you or saying you should break the law, just something to think about. :dunno:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 06, 2014, 08:43:14 AM
Post by: villageidiot on March 06, 2014, 09:30:27 AM
We all know whats happening with the wolf reintroduction and mass killings they are doing to our wildlife and livestock industry. It's a very difficult situation and decision each one has to make. Either way you go there are consequences.
Post by: Northway on March 06, 2014, 09:48:24 AM
I would agree with P-mans oppion of "staying beyond approach", however since we do not have ANY support from the WDFW or the politicians i don't think it matters. With out departmental support or Political support hunters either die a slow death or a quick one. Unless there is some kind of ideological change in this state the best we can do is hold the line, we certainly wont make any real gains....
EVEN if some one a mild as Rob Mckenna had been elected GOV he wouldn't likely be overly concerned about hunting and what is going on... We would have a chance, but he would likely be preoccupied with state revenue, budgets, shoots etc. About the best outcome would be to get some REAL sportsman running the WDFW again.
Sorry, but you're way off the mark ST in my opinion. Hunters may only comprise just under 4% of the population, but our activities/sport are currently supported by over 80% of the population. Yes, hunting is supported by a large majority. But, when we make the statements that are being made here, we'll lose that public support. The public has been brain-washed into thinking wolves are good under almost any circumstance. But they also think, as do many hunters, that lawless poachers are bad. Combine the two and give the general public the impression that hunters in general support the illegal killing of those big cuddly critters and you lose much of your non-hunter support, support that's necessary for us to accomplish many other things like a hunting rights amendment.
We'd be much better off educating the public about the downside of the wolf plan than publicly saying "forget it, I'm doing what I want regardless of the law", and making all of us look like extremist poaching wackos.
Some people support the idea of hunting not necessarily because they are hunters themselves, but because they have romantic notions of it as a sport and as an important part of our culture and history. Does that protect hunters from overreach in terms of rules & regulations? No, not necessarily, but I believe it does provide a strong layer of protection for the sport, in general.
It's the history and culture surrounding ranching that helps protect that industry, as another example. For a lot of people, it's not about what ranching actually is or isn't in our current day & age, it's about what their vision of it is. That's what gets people who have no connection to it to strongly advocate.
In terms of how the public will react to poaching, it depends on what else is going on. How is the economy? Has there been a terrorist attack or other major world events occurring? At certain times the backlash could be higher, or nothing, depending on the surrounding circumstances.
Post by: Jingles on April 03, 2014, 01:01:29 PM
Post by: wolfbait on April 03, 2014, 06:28:09 PM
The anger at such waste I don't think can truly be expressed. SS
Post by: Curly on April 03, 2014, 06:45:35 PM
The anger at such waste I don't think can truly be expressed. SS
I like the two s' so idea too.....I mean who carries a shovel? :)
Post by: wolfbait on April 03, 2014, 06:58:03 PM