Post by: bearpaw on June 09, 2014, 01:29:22 PM
YOUTH & NEW HUNTER RECRUITMENT & HUNTER RETENTION
These proposals have been compiled by a group of concerned hunters and hunter-ed instructors with the involvement by many members of an online hunting forum www.Hunting-Washington.com (http://www.Hunting-Washington.com). It is understand that WDFW is already utilizing many programs but hunter recruitment and hunter retention continues to be problematic, to be the most effective at recruiting new hunters and retaining current hunters all possible options must be employed to reverse the trend of fewer and fewer licensed hunters.
How to get WDFW involved?
Encourage WDFW personnel to support the idea
Lobby key WDFW managers
Submit to the Parks & Recreation Task Force
Submit to the Wildlife Commission
Send letters/email to WDFW
Propose ideas through Regional Offices
Propose the ideas at GMAC meetings
?
?
Identify the limiting factors for youth and new hunter recruitment and issues for retaining current hunters
Identify the issues that discourage new participants to hunting
Identify why hunters quit hunting in Washington
Query all hunter education instructors on what can be done to improve hunter education and recruitment of new hunters
At the completion of hunter ed classes, query students on what information could have been covered that would have helped them better prepare for their first hunt
After 6 and 12 months email/postcards to graduates with a link to online surveys to query what information could have been covered that would have helped them prepare better for their first hunt. Ask if they have purchased a hunting license. If not, why not?
Youth with parents who do not hunt
Lack of mentors
Limited availability of hunter-ed classes, most classes are full well in advance
Businesses are not allowed to teach Hunter-Education such as allowed for driver licensing and boating
Complexity and confusion of hunting regulations
Conflicting interests, particularly among youth
Societal shift in attitudes about hunting and firearms
Increasing costs of equipment and access
Urbanization
Unethical behavior of other hunters
Youth and adults may not know Hunter-Ed is available
Youth and adults may not know how to get started hunting
Limited access and availability of hunting land
Low harvest success, compounded by unrealistic expectations
The negative outlook of the State of Hunting portrayed to the public
?
?
Steps to increase recruitment of youth and adult hunters, convert more hunter-ed grads to license buyers
Increase number of hunter ed instructors by at least 20% each year for 5 years
Increase availability of hunter ed classes by at least 20% each year for 5 years
Poll existing Hunter-Ed Instructors regarding their concerns, take steps to improve relationships with existing Instructors
There are many hunters and others who could serve as instructors, they need to be asked and treated properly
If not in existence, create and promote Hunter-Ed Teaching Group Kits, kit includes guidance videos, class videos, gun sets, paperwork, and other supplies to get new teaching groups started
Allow private business to teach hunting education and hunting skills classes, similar to driver licensing and boating
Encourage groups to have mentor programs to recruit new hunters
Foster relationships with hunting and conservation groups that encourage first time hunters to participate
WDFW should continue to grow the Hunt by Reservation Program
Expand on Take a Kid Hunting
Create a toll free New Hunter Info Line such as 800-NEW-HNTR
Provide class instruction on how to buy licenses, how to apply for permits and tips about areas with public land access
Create online videos on the WDFW website to teach new hunters basic hunting skills
Encourage and facilitate contests, especially youth contests, hunting and photo contests
Free small game license for youth up to age 17
Increase the age for reduced price youth licenses from 15 to 17
Free small game license to all hunter-ed graduates regardless of age
Free hunting licenses and a deer tag to graduates of Hunter Education training if they hunt the year they pass
Allow certified instructors to enter hunter ed information for graduates in the WILD system, so graduates may purchase licenses online immediately upon completion of a course
Increase the fee for Hunter-Ed (to encourage those wanting to hunt to participate, but will this be counter productive)
Offer benefits for taking youth hunting & fishing, not only to the youth, but to anyone taking them, this will encourage adults to take youth
Make hunting and fishing as easy and successful as you can for kids
Encourage private land owners to offer opportunities to youth and hunters who take a youth with them
Create more Upland Bird and Waterfowl hunting opportunities, especially for youth and new hunters
Work with groups to develop more upland bird raising and releasing to provide more hunting opportunity, especially for youth
A reduction in license fees for a parent/child combo that take Hunters Ed and then purchase their licenses together
Increased bag limit when kids are included
Create doe days and cow days for kids, no permit needed, in areas throughout the state
Increase youth waterfowl hunting opportunities
More youth seasons in all areas of the state
More youth seasons around holidays when youth are out of school
More quality tags and special hunt opportunities for youth
Allow schools to offer hunter-ed training or provide info about hunter-ed classes that are available
Allow youth hunters to use a parents tag (like in Oregon)
Create first time hunter opportunities and incentives
Create Brochures to outline all youth and new hunter programs and incentives, distribute to groups and license vendors
Expand and include links to youth & new hunter opportunities and info on the WDFW Go Hunt web page http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/gohunt/ (http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/gohunt/)
Encourage more Youth & New Hunter Info on hunting forums and other outdoor forums
Send WDFW News Releases especially hunter-ed, hunting, and fishing opportunities to media outlets and post on forums so the info is more publicly available
Image (improve the image and importance of hunters as conservationists)
Promote and encourage more participation in complementary outdoor activities. Wildlife viewing, orienteering, and other outdoor activities
Emphasize that success in hunting is measured by more than harvest
Create realistic expectations among new hunters. Harvest success on big game is statistically low
Expand the Hunting By Reservation concept and prioritizing first-time-hunters during landowner agreement negotiations
Provide training in land access tools such as GoHunt, county assessor websites, and other resources
Ask select hunting related publications (Outdoor Life, Field and Stream, etc.) to provide free one year subscriptions to Hunter Education graduates
Offer a bonus drawing point for Hunter Education graduates that purchase a hunting license the year they pass
Offer a bonus drawing point for anyone participating in the Hunter Education Deferral Program provided they take Hunter Education training and buy a hunting license the next year
Offer lifetime hunting licenses with cost based on actuarial tables
Offer multi-season deer permits over the counter, at a reduced cost to youth and possibly first time hunters
Pursue partnerships with state, non-profits, and businesses to create a funding base to provide stipends to first-time-hunters for the purchase of licenses and gear for hunting
Develop an outreach program to non-hunters, there is recent evidence that a growing number of health conscious locavores are turning to hunting as a source of local, natural protein
Encourage better spokesmen in the hunting community. The messages sent by long-time hunters and leaders in the hunting community influence others perceptions
Take a closer look at overall hunter satisfaction and take more serious steps to improve hunter satisfaction for higher hunter retention
?
?
Establish a Hunting-Skills Program to teach basic hunting skills to new hunters with no mentor to get them started hunting
Solicit input from hunter-ed instructors regarding establishment of a Hunting Skills Education Program
Solicit input from the public regarding establishment of a Hunting Skills Education Program
Expand the existing Hunter-Ed curriculum to include optional Hunting Skills curriculum/activities
Create a new program to teach new hunters basic hunting skills
Create partnerships with hunting groups and allow certified businesses to teach hunting skills
Seek Master Hunters as volunteers to teach
Include training of WA hunting regulations and hunting skills during hunter education
Offer additional levels of Hunting Skill Education for an additional fee
?
?
How to fund additional Hunter-Education
Encourage and facilitate businesses and sporting groups to certify and offer Hunter-Ed and Hunting Skills training
Charge a fee to participate in Hunter Ed
Increase the cost of hunter education training, but credit the cost toward hunting licenses if purchased within 60 days
Pittman/Robertson funds?
Provide a donation opportunity for hunter-ed when purchasing licenses
Increase all hunting licenses and tags by $1 with increases dedicated to Hunter-Ed
Apply for grant money to fund more hunter education
?
?
Steps to help retain current hunters
Improve access to hunting lands
Prevent cost increases to hunt, reduce costs where possible
Offer 3-year license purchase, that will help retain a hunter for 3 years
Offer lifetime licenses, that will help retain a hunter for life
Restructure elk management, many hunters hate hunting spike bull elk every year
Offer a "Sportsman's Package" where you get everything possible at a reduced rate
Simplifying hunting regulations to encourage a hunter to want to buy a license next year
Offer a better cost:benefit value ratio that is higher than other state options
Increase herd numbers which will allow improve hunt quality, allow longer seasons, and will retain hunters
Flexible seasons could let people choose when to have their family hunting camp (set your date range when you buy your tags)
A "Family Maximum Cost" package could help, set it at $600, they'd sell thousands, plus kids will be involved that may have not been taken hunting
Costs go up and opportunity goes down, reverse that trend
Communicate honestly about controversial issues with hunters to improve hunter attitudes and retain more hunters
The crux is that the F&G agencies need to do a better job, and in many areas
Reduce the opportunity for bad experiences, they cause hunters to quit, less opportunity, poor success, bad contacts with a warden or sheriff or land owner, buying the wrong tag due to confusion
More verbal or written warnings without a citation by wardens for minor offenses without intent to commit a crime
Police pull drivers over for a tail light bulb (or some other small infraction) and give a warning, the same cannot be said regarding encounters with some WDFW officers
WDFW can retain more hunters by supporting hunters more
Expand predator seasons, cougar should be year round, more Spring bear hunts
More advanced hunter classes - maybe survival, conditioning, tracking basics, give incentives to take the classes
The big three....access, opportunity, and cost. With the lack of access, high priced fuel & licenses, increase in predators,
hunters eventually give up
?
?
Post by: bearpaw on June 09, 2014, 01:43:17 PM
Steps to help retain current hunters
?
?
Post by: WSU on June 09, 2014, 01:51:59 PM
I'm sure cost is a factor. Hopefully others have more info than I do.
Post by: iusmc2002 on June 09, 2014, 01:52:52 PM
The Hunters Ed instructor incentive permits would probably need to have the 3 year minimum lowered to 1-2 years.
Making licenses more expensive for everyone isn't going to help encourage/retain hunters.
Maybe a reduction in license fees for a parent/child combo that take Hunters Ed and then purchase their licenses together
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2014, 01:58:05 PM
I've said it before, and I still feel that a small fee for hunters ed would go a long way to ensuring the people that sign up for the courses, complete them. Make it totally refundable upon completion of the class or a credit towards the license. I think that a lot of it comes down to money. If they want more instructors, there's going to need to be some better compensation. The people that are doing it now, do it because they love the sport, or because they want to pass it on. If there was financial compensation for the instructors, I think there would be more interest in becoming an instructor. With peoples work schedules, real lives and whatnot, there isn't enough hours in the day for them to have a life AND teach. The retired guys that I teach with don't have those issues, for the most part. A big push for ethical, experienced/retired hunters to become teachers would be a great thing.I respectfully disagree. I don't believe instructors should be compensated. That attracts instructors for the wrong reason. We have enough hunters and others in the state that could serve as instructors. They need to be asked and treated properly.
The Hunters Ed instructor incentive permits would probably need to have the 3 year minimum lowered to 1-2 years.
Making licenses more expensive for everyone isn't going to help encourage/retain hunters.
Maybe a reduction in license fees for a parent/child combo that take Hunters Ed and then purchase their licenses together
As for charging a refundable fee, we already do that. It helps but does not completely eliminate no shows.
I like the parent/child combo idea.
Post by: jackelope on June 09, 2014, 02:02:19 PM
This is where I need the most input:
Steps to help retain current hunters
?
?
A lot of aggravated hunters in this thread.....
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,153802.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,153802.0.html)
License costs, access, guys who hate hunting spike bull elk every year, the list goes on.
Post by: iusmc2002 on June 09, 2014, 02:10:07 PM
I've said it before, and I still feel that a small fee for hunters ed would go a long way to ensuring the people that sign up for the courses, complete them. Make it totally refundable upon completion of the class or a credit towards the license. I think that a lot of it comes down to money. If they want more instructors, there's going to need to be some better compensation. The people that are doing it now, do it because they love the sport, or because they want to pass it on. If there was financial compensation for the instructors, I think there would be more interest in becoming an instructor. With peoples work schedules, real lives and whatnot, there isn't enough hours in the day for them to have a life AND teach. The retired guys that I teach with don't have those issues, for the most part. A big push for ethical, experienced/retired hunters to become teachers would be a great thing.I respectfully disagree. I don't believe instructors should be compensated. That attracts instructors for the wrong reason. We have enough hunters and others in the state that could serve as instructors. They need to be asked and treated properly.
The Hunters Ed instructor incentive permits would probably need to have the 3 year minimum lowered to 1-2 years.
Making licenses more expensive for everyone isn't going to help encourage/retain hunters.
Maybe a reduction in license fees for a parent/child combo that take Hunters Ed and then purchase their licenses together
As for charging a refundable fee, we already do that. It helps but does not completely eliminate no shows.
I like the parent/child combo idea.
I agree that instructors shouldn't be compensated, but if they're trying to increase instructor numbers by 100% in the next 5 years, they're going to need SOME sort of draw for the new instructors.
I've been doing this for less than a year, so I haven't had any problems that some of my instructor group has experienced. They have said the previous guy that ran our area was HORRIBLE to work for, but it has improved significantly in the last 1-2 years.
Really like their idea about polling instructors for what they think could be done to improve things.
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2014, 02:19:29 PM
I've suggested that several times. What better way is there to learn what instructors need and want than to ask them?
It's very disappointing that it has not happened on a coordinated basis.
It's been my perception that good programs attract good instructors, and poor programs don't attract anyone.
WDFW needs to find out what works and what doesn't work, and then use that information to improve all the programs.
This is a bit off topic, however. Hunter retention has little to do with hunter education. Recruitment of new hunters does.
Post by: Todd_ID on June 09, 2014, 03:06:47 PM
This is where I need the most input:All states struggle with this. Idaho just implemented the 3-year license purchase. It won't help for the on-the-fence-guys you're wanting to retain, but it would keep a guy off the fence for 3 years. Also, they have the lifetime license that we don't: same concept but lifetime of no fence-sitting.
Steps to help retain current hunters
?
?
ID is good at the upsell by offering the "Sportsman's Package" where you get everything possible at a reduced rate; it actually increases revenue since some buy it who would not have otherwise spent the full amount just to know that they've got "everything". Making the license process easier by offering a one-package-at-a-discount option would help retention.
Simplifying hunting regulations would make it easier for a guy to want to buy a license next year. ID messed this up with their elk regulations around '96 and have paid the price since. Now they're loosening the regs to allow hunting in more than one elk zone, etc. That'll help them and will help us, too.
Only way to retain hunters is to offer a cost:benefit value that is higher than other options, though. Increase herd sizes and you'll lengthen seasons which will increase the benefit and retain hunters. Flexible seasons would let people choose when to have their family hunting camp (set your date range when you buy your tags).
A "Family Maximum Cost" package would help retention. Set it at $600, and they'd sell thousands! Plus, they'd be getting kids involved that may have not been taken to hunting camp.
But if you find a way to get venison to cost less than beef at Safeway, then you're a magician!
Post by: MuleDeerCrazy on June 09, 2014, 03:25:50 PM
In my opinion, hunter ed gives people the "credentials" to hunt, but not the knowledge to actually go out and do it. They can legally hunt, but still most don't know where to start... and giving somebody a set of regs still doesn't help... because they don't know where to start. They need somebody to help them make sense of the whole thing so they understand how to come up with a game plan, decide what species they want to start hunting, how to select an area, how to juggle between different weapon types and season preferences, how to scout an area, how to develop a strategy for making their kiddos successful, how to assess various constraints to what their goals are, how to make the special permit process work for them, and how to maximize their experience and make memories that will last a lifetime!
Bull Pacs, Inc. is on a mission to do just that... more to come :twocents:
Post by: Stein on June 09, 2014, 03:31:39 PM
If you want to get crazy, schedule a group hunt for the class.
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2014, 03:54:23 PM
How about the last class is instruction on how to buy licenses, how to apply for permits and some tips about public land access nearby where the class was held?I agree and believe the curriculum needs to be revised to include topics such as that. I created a document for our students to help them prepare for their first hunt, but it would be nice to cover more of it in class (see attached.)
If you want to get crazy, schedule a group hunt for the class.
As for a group hunt, I doubt the Risk Management department would think too highly of it.
Post by: Gringo31 on June 09, 2014, 04:03:21 PM
To retain hunters, they need to be on your side. With issues like predator control (in general), wolves and how well we feel we are honestly being communicated to seem to be an area that could improve. IF that could be accomplished, I think you'd retain more hunters.
Post by: Curly on June 09, 2014, 04:19:31 PM
This is where I need the most input:
Steps to help retain current hunters
?
?
WDFW can help retain current hunters by not issuing citations with bs charges. I have never had a bad run-in with enforcement but I've heard of a few encounters that if I were the guy that was issued a citation I would have a hard time hunting in this state ever again. And if you lose that person as a hunter, then how many of his buddies or kids do you end up losing because you've lost him?
Our resident LEO expert gave examples of officers in Adams and Grant counties issuing citations to hunters for wastage of game when leaving coyotes lay. Another one he told probably 6 months ago (but I can't forget it) was when a person told about how an officer almost wrote him up for spotlighting deer when he was simply walking out of the woods with a headlamp on. The LEO expert on this site said he has no problem with the officer writing for that and he says those cases have held up in court. :o
I don't want to seem like I'm bashing enforcement officers, but when I hear of instances like this I am just amazed. Instances like this makes it seem like they are out to find any technicality that they can pin on you.
Post by: Special T on June 09, 2014, 04:28:47 PM
As far as Keeping hunters/sportmen i think the issue is harder. I think the crux is that the WDFW needs to do a better job, and in many areas. While the department pushes the "experience" and not the kill, I can hike with a gun for free ( or a camera) and don't have to worry about additional laws(or forking out for a Lic). Hunters don't need success everytime however they definitely need some to stay hunting. Additionally bad experiences cause many people to quit. Rising costs, harder to succeed, less opportunity in the field are all challenges. All it takes is a bad experience with a warden or sheriff, land owner, buying the wrong tag because your confused to tip you over the edge and say :pee: on it... I used to fish but no longer do, because of a bad experience. I LOVE to waterfowl hunt, but rarely go on public land anymore for the same reason. I used to buy EVERYTHING and try and do it all. Now I just waterfowl, kill coyotes and sometimes buy my deer tag for archery. I no longer wish to fight it... If i had not landed a couple of good spots to deer hunt I likely would give that up too.
Post by: Special T on June 09, 2014, 04:36:25 PM
Perhaps the number of barbed hook and cotten ball stories are overstated, But i can tell you I've been pulled over for a tail light bulb out several times (or some other small infraction) and had a pleasant exchange and sent on my way. I cannot say the same thing with my encounters for the WDFW. That does not mean there is a rule that needs changing, but rather the culture in the department.
Post by: kentrek on June 09, 2014, 05:00:15 PM
Alot of good ideas on the "not buying an elk tag" thread
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2014, 05:22:15 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 09, 2014, 06:05:19 PM
Open up predator seasons. Cougar should be year round. More Spring bear units, especially on the south-wetside were there are few, if any. Remove penalties for waste of game for coyotes.
I like the idea of more advanced hunter classes - maybe survival, conditioning, tracking basics. Give incentives to take the classes. You could earn higher ratings by completing successive classes and earn extra draw points or other hunting opportunities; it's something that ties you to the department/state.
Post by: jackelope on June 09, 2014, 06:55:29 PM
It says quite a bit about the problem itself that an effort to ask our state's hunters how to improve retention and recruitment is headed by a private individual and not WDFW.
Dale is working for the government now. Don't forget. Him and Gov Inslee are besties.
:chuckle:
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2014, 06:58:56 PM
Oops. Forgot that. Sorry Dale. PS - can you help me out with the draw just a wee bit?It says quite a bit about the problem itself that an effort to ask our state's hunters how to improve retention and recruitment is headed by a private individual and not WDFW.
Dale is working for the government now. Don't forget. Him and Gov Inslee are besties.
:chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on June 09, 2014, 07:55:28 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on June 09, 2014, 08:14:52 PM
Post by: Curly on June 09, 2014, 08:38:17 PM
Post by: bearpaw on June 09, 2014, 08:42:35 PM
I think I have most of the ideas updated in the first post, I will look at the link provided by jackelope, please continue to comment on hunter retention! :tup:
Post by: Rider on June 09, 2014, 08:58:14 PM
I used to fish but no longer do, because of a bad experience.Yep. Reiters ended it for me. Guides just got too expensive. Used to be fun to fish on the Sky when I was growing up. The prison hole got to be like the Blue Zoo.
Hunter retention......
I just picked up bow hunting this year. With the internet it is easier to learn than when I was a boy. Still would be good to be able to learn in some type of mentor relationship. Part of the reason why I joined HuntWA.
I will say that the archery season duration is BS. The permit system is perplexing. If the fishing permit system was as complex as the hunting permits there would be a virtual riot from the anglers.
Post by: bobcat on June 09, 2014, 09:49:42 PM
Quote
I will say that the archery season duration is BS. The permit system is perplexing. If the fishing permit system was as complex as the hunting permits there would be a virtual riot from the anglers.
I'm the opposite. I can't make sense of the fishing regulations. Hunting regulations to me are simple. But then I've been studying this state's hunting pamphlet every year for 35 years. So I could see where it might seem complex to others. But I sure don't think fishing regulations are any less complex.
Post by: elksnout on June 09, 2014, 10:02:48 PM
Post by: huntrights on June 10, 2014, 05:29:11 PM
Steps to retain current hunters:
The perception that WDFW regulates hunting to maximize revenue needs to be proven wrong by real actions from the WDFW (See below in Reduce the cost of hunting in Washington.
Reduce the cost of hunting in Washington:
o When hunters apply for special or quality big game hunts, the WDFW charges the application fee plus the cost of the tag even though the hunter may not get drawn for their chosen hunts. If not drawn, WDFW keeps all of the money. They say the hunter may still go on the general hunt, but perhaps the hunter does not wish to participate in the general hunt for a variety of reasons. For example: Hunter success during the general hunt may be rather low and hunt options are very restrictive (i.e. spike and true spike elk hunts). The WDFW should give the hunter the option of a refund or to go on the general hunt; they should NOT just keep the money. They basically have turned the cost of the application fee into the total cost of the hunting license and tags. The bottom line is hunters are being charged for what they may not want.
o The WDFW has broken hunting into small pieces and charges for each piece (i.e. hunting license, small game license, migratory bird permit, migratory bird authorization, pheasant permit, etc.). This also holds true for fishing (Freshwater, saltwater, shellfish, razor clam, two-pole endorsement, Puget Sound Crab endorsement. And, of course with all of this, the DISCOVER PASS and the Watchable Wildlife Decal. This all tends to feed the perception of managing wildlife to maximize revenue.
The general elk season was moved a few weeks earlier in the year resulting in missing that start of the winter migration of elk out of the higher elevations. In addition to that, some of the general season hunts are restricted to spike and true spike which put a hunter at risk of harvesting an elk that had that extra tine in the shadows or he had his head turned at a slight angle that hides the extra tine. Suggestion: move the general season a few weeks later and ease up on the antler restrictions by widening the opportunity to a larger range of antlered elk.
Stop closing and destroying access roads (decommissioning). Decommissioning procedures I have come across include:
o Digging up the entire road bed and turning it into a series of densely located moguls (large humps).
o Dumping large boulders along a large portion of the path.
o Cutting down small saplings and crisscrossing the fallen tree trunks along the road path.
All of these methods of destruction make traversing the original road path extremely difficult and hazardous, or nearly impossible. Whether people agree or not, my observation is that game animals like elk and deer will not traverse the destroyed areas unless under stress (i.e. spooked or being chased); they tend to walk to the side of the old road bed where it may still be smooth or they will walk completely off of the old path. When given a choice, they also will take the easiest path that serves their purpose just like humans. Stop the destruction! The only purpose behind such destructive activity is to deny access and keep people out.
If roads must be closed for valid reasons, then pursue non-destructive alternative actions like:
o Road maintenance rotation.
o Forest roads to trails and related forest access efforts similar to what has been promoted by Congresswoman Jamie Herrera Beutler and others to keep our forests healthy, safe, and accessible.
o Avoid road decommissioning and protect road beds for future use by converting roads slated for closure into trails.
o Close, stabilize and seed road beds; avoid decommissioning
o Ensure public safety by stabilizing and maintaining road beds that can be re-opened for rescues, firefighting, and emergency evacuation routes when necessary.
o Focus on creating and maintaining road loops to ensure ingress and egress for public safety.
o Reduce cost by enhancing partnerships with [Stewardship] groups that can assist with road and trail maintenance.
o Consider converting high maintenance level roads that are not major thoroughfares to lower maintenance levels.
o Ensure access under the Americans with Disabilities Act by designating roads and trails for off-road vehicle access.
o Pursue/explore possible funding opportunities for road maintenance:
o Timber sales, Stewardship dollars, Federal road tax
Stop closing camping areas where hunters have camped for decades and forcing them into congested camping cities.
The regulations are convoluted and overly complicated. Hunters can read the regulations, but still not be sure if they are complying with all of the laws. LEOs should not be so quick to find fault and write citations when regulations are unclear and there was no intent to break the law.
o For example: Transporting wildlife If quartered, the tag should remain with the carcass or largest portion of the carcass. If you happen to pick the wrong portion of the carcass on which to leave your tag, you just might end up with a serious citation even though you had no intention of breaking the law. Since Washington hunters are placed in a position where they typically cannot retrieve big game using motorized vehicles, they must quarter the animals and carry them out (this, by the way, eliminates less capable people that would like to hunt). Leaving a tag unattended on the carcass in the field while carrying back a quarter of the animal puts the hunter at risk of losing their tag plus getting a serious citation. So what do you do? Message to WDFW: Fix this! Change the regulation to state the tag must be with at least one portion of the quartered animal.
Allow retrieval of big game using motorized vehicles when feasible. It is important to get harvested animals processed quickly to avoid meat spoilage.
WDFW does not appear to promote hunting; however, they appear to accommodate anti-hunting and environmentalist sentiments due to political pressure. The WDFW should visibly promote hunting versus giving the perception of continually making it more difficult and expensive.
Last general elk season, I spoke to over 20 hunters that indicated significant disappointment with the current situation. Hunting has become too expensive, access is being taken away, roads are being closed and destroyed, camp areas are being closed, general seasons do not have reasonable hunter success due to timing, regulations have become more complicated, WDFW does not appear to be an advocate for hunters, and the WDFW appears to be revenue driven versus pursuing wildlife management based on sound and unbiased science and promoting hunting as a primary wildlife management tool.
Develop and offer mentor programs for adults and youth to open up hunting opportunities that many may not have considered. For example, many hunters may have only hunted with modern rifle, but never considered archery or muzzleloader because they dont know anyone that will introduce them to these alternatives.
Work closely with private land owners (i.e. timber companies, farmers, ranchers, etc.) to keep their lands open to hunting for free or a reasonable access fee.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on June 10, 2014, 08:46:24 PM
Post by: Windwalker on June 10, 2014, 09:36:47 PM
You all have a good handle on this and some of my issues have been covered already but here is my 2 cents.
Query other states simplified hunting/fishing literature- ours reads like the obamacare regulation book.
Loose the walmart receipt look to the licenses- should be a card that fits in your wallet..
Make a lifetime combo license available- with a box checked that means all inclusive for saltwater/Freshwater/clam/shellfish etc etc- a never again covers-it-all card. Tags.. groan.. would be extra but no more licenses ever.
Why is there a "small" game license? Really? Call it a hunting license and quit with the subdivisions and burying us in minutia.
A "Hunting License" and "Fishing License" or Hunt/Fish Combo License should cover every license at a reduced fee for 17 and under- all inclusive- saltwater/Freshwater/clam/shellfish small/big game and bird "tags"fees, taxes levied or what ever guise used to siphon $ out of our wallet.
And the card should be a Hard license the size of a drivers license- not something that looks like 5 walmart receipts a foot long.
Availability to purchase 'ONE' minor license valid until the season ends or 18th birthday..
Fishing license can be bought at an early age- hunting license (or Combo) purchased with proof of hunter safety course.
Tags- minors should only pay a token fee - seems there are tags for everything that walks or crawls- should be for big game only not birds.
$84.50 for a pheasant is insane.
I Know I know its to cover the costs of planting and administrative costs- whatever..kids should hunt CHEAP!
Post by: Special T on June 10, 2014, 10:08:26 PM
Post by: bobcat on June 10, 2014, 10:17:40 PM
Oh, and youth prices are dirt cheap already. So that's not the issue.
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2014, 10:36:32 PM
Many Thanks,
Dale
Post by: Windwalker on June 10, 2014, 10:59:45 PM
When ever people say the PRICE is too high, what they really mean is the prices is too high for what they are getting... Be-live it or not i would pay more and buy the whole combo again IF i thought the WDFW was actually a hunter FIRST organization. GREAT service costs $ Be willing to pay for it... On the FLip side MANY hunters like me are hostile vocally and have reduced our spending BECAUSE of the quality of the experience. :twocents:
:yeah:
And yea, I know how much it costs for pheasants..$84 is a bargain for me but $40.50 isn't a bargain for youth. Still a lot of $$
Post by: REHJWA on June 10, 2014, 11:18:28 PM
We need more small game opportunities to help get younger hunters started off.
Post by: huntrights on June 11, 2014, 02:52:09 PM
State wildlife management agencies must get their money one way or another. Total costs to Washington residents to hunt and fish may be close to what is charged in other states, but the perception is that Washington residents pay more because every time they wish to participate in a hunting or fishing activity there seems to be extra charges for another license, a tag, an endorsement, a stamp, etc. Admittedly, Washington has an incredibly diverse wildlife population which creates many hunting and fishing opportunities that may not be available in other states; this may also contribute to the convoluted/confusing hunting and fishing regulations.
A couple of items that may be somewhat unique to Washington are the Discover Pass and the Watchable Wildlife Decal.
Discover Pass
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=79A.80.020
According to this paper:
"Funding Public Recreation With the Discover Pass: Policy and Practicality"
http://www.agforestry.org/upload/userfiles/Funding_Public_Recreation_with_the_Discover_Pass-Policy_and_Practicality_Final_Report.pdf
"Revenue from the Discover Pass and day‐use permits is deposited into the Recreation Access Pass
Account. The first $71 million in revenue is distributed as follows: 8 % to State Wildlife Account (WDFW);
8 % to Park Land Trust Revolving Account (DNR); 84 % to State Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account.
All revenues exceeding $71 million each fiscal biennium are distributed equally amongst the agencies."
Watchable Wildlife Decal
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.32.560
According to RCW 77.32.560, "Proceeds from the sale of the decal must be deposited into the state wildlife account created in RCW 77.12.170"
:twocents:
A good question to ask might be how much is spent by each user group in Washington that use the state lands requiring a Discover Pass. That is, who is carrying the brunt of the Discover Pass expense and who is actually benefiting? Hunters? Anglers? Or, the average Seattle urban dweller? If hunters and anglers are carrying the brunt of the Discover Pass, then perhaps the percentage of the proceeds that goes to the State Wildlife Account (WDFW) should reflect the percentage paid by hunters and anglers versus the 8%. State Parks may need funding (84% of the first $71 million), but what user groups are carrying the lion's share of that expense via Discover Pass purchases? If someone has the answers and can cite their sources, please share them.
Post by: Curly on June 12, 2014, 08:57:07 AM
:twocents:
A good question to ask might be how much is spent by each user group in Washington that use the state lands requiring a Discover Pass. That is, who is carrying the brunt of the Discover Pass expense and who is actually benefiting? Hunters? Anglers? Or, the average Seattle urban dweller? If hunters and anglers are carrying the brunt of the Discover Pass, then perhaps the percentage of the proceeds that goes to the State Wildlife Account (WDFW) should reflect the percentage paid by hunters and anglers versus the 8%. State Parks may need funding (84% of the first $71 million), but what user groups are carrying the lion's share of that expense via Discover Pass purchases? If someone has the answers and can cite their sources, please share them.
:yeah:
My feeling is that the DP was implemented as a way to keep the State Parks Dept from going under. It is a poor excuse in my opinion to have users of DNR lands and WDFW lands funding State Parks. State Parks needs to figure out some other way of running the dept or convince the legislature to fund them with general fund money............just not on the backs of sportsmen. :twocents:
Post by: Special T on June 12, 2014, 09:46:00 AM
Post by: bernacrock on June 13, 2014, 06:40:16 AM
I was able to get into a Hunter's ed class for next month, hope to do deer and possibly migratory birds.
I've been fishing since December 2013 here, and I have to say that the regulations here are way crazier than they were back east. The hunting regs look slightly more open, but not much so. I suspect I have a lot of scouting to do this summer as I have no idea where to go which is probably going to be the biggest obstacle to sticking with the sport. Pretty much trying to learn on my own.
Post by: Special T on June 13, 2014, 07:26:57 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 13, 2014, 08:29:09 AM
As a new Washington resident and first time hopeful hunter, that elk thread was a bit discouraging. I came from the east coast and a state that had virtually no public hunting grounds and the few left were heavily hunted and basically a shooting gallery when the season started.
I was able to get into a Hunter's ed class for next month, hope to do deer and possibly migratory birds.
I've been fishing since December 2013 here, and I have to say that the regulations here are way crazier than they were back east. The hunting regs look slightly more open, but not much so. I suspect I have a lot of scouting to do this summer as I have no idea where to go which is probably going to be the biggest obstacle to sticking with the sport. Pretty much trying to learn on my own.
There is still hunting opportunity in this state. I would focus on NF lands and contacting private landowners in your area, wherever that is. From what part of the East coast did you come?