Hunting Washington Forum

Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: bigtex on August 07, 2014, 10:38:06 PM

Title: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: bigtex on August 07, 2014, 10:38:06 PM: Earlier this year I posted how WDFW is proposing some type of hoof-rot related regulations for hunters. The regulation has been drafted and tomorrow the Fish and Wildlife Commission will vote on the regulation. The regulation states:

WAC 232-12-286 Reducing the spread of hoof disease—Unlawful transport of elk hooves.
(1) It is unlawful to transport the hooves of harvested elk beyond the site where the animal was killed in Game Man-agement Units 501 through 564, and 642 through 699.
(2) Violation of this section is an infraction under RCW 77.15.160, Infractions.

The WA Supreme Court decides what the actually monetary fine is. Under this WAC the offense would be charged under RCW 77.15.160(5)(b) which the Supreme Court said carries a $150 fine.
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: bobcat on August 07, 2014, 10:47:39 PM: Seems like a good idea and definitely not a difficult rule for hunters to follow.
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: bearpaw on August 07, 2014, 10:56:24 PM: :yeah: agreed, might be a good idea to bury them also...
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: bigtex on August 07, 2014, 11:18:31 PM: Kind of interesting the wide span of units this covers. Basically all of Grays Harbor county, a portion of Mason, all of Pierce, and even a portion of King (the White River GMU), and of course everything in the SW with the exception of Southern Skamania County.

This land description may mean something in terms of where WDFW thinks hoof rot may end up :dunno:
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: gonehuntin68 on August 10, 2014, 09:12:17 AM: Good Idea. :tup:
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: Old Man Yager on August 10, 2014, 09:19:04 AM: Why pack them out anyway? just extra weight!
Title: Re: Proposed Hoof Rot Regulation GMUs 501-564 & 642-699
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 11, 2014, 07:20:13 AM: This should give people a good idea of how widespread the problem is. :bash: