Post by: Antlershed on February 12, 2016, 10:24:44 AM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/hunting_regulations/
Post by: Wacenturion on February 12, 2016, 11:01:01 AM
Post by: Wacenturion on February 12, 2016, 11:03:47 AM
Post by: Wacenturion on February 12, 2016, 11:10:07 AM
Wonder how that applies to a 30 gallon hanging automatic feeder. Is it the amount on the ground, or in the feeder itself? :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on February 12, 2016, 11:15:10 AM
Post by: mp.hunter on February 12, 2016, 11:25:01 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: jstone on February 12, 2016, 12:15:15 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 12, 2016, 12:50:55 PM
Post by: X-Force on February 12, 2016, 12:54:02 PM
Post by: Bango skank on February 12, 2016, 12:55:57 PM
Post by: mp.hunter on February 12, 2016, 12:56:25 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Bango skank on February 12, 2016, 01:43:29 PM
Post by: wheels on February 12, 2016, 02:05:57 PM
Post by: X-Force on February 12, 2016, 02:31:48 PM
Post by: jstone on February 12, 2016, 03:10:24 PM
Post by: Bango skank on February 12, 2016, 03:35:52 PM
Hopefully limiting baiting falls flat on its face.
Dont kid yourself. Its gone. Better work on your rattling.
The fact that theyre including minerals is ridiculous. Like a salt lick has major drawing power in the fall. What a joke.
The other screwed up thing is that people with private property will continue baiting, cause how would they get caught without somebody trespassing? I guarantee my dbag neighbor will continue baiting, and what can i do about it? Nothing without breaking the law myself, which im not willing to do. Its a joke.
Post by: Ridgeratt on February 13, 2016, 08:35:53 PM
I would think that it would mean the amount of bait that's actually on the ground.
Wouldn't it be the total amount. Since a lot of feeders keep the bait in a feed tube. With very little ever getting on the lawn.
Post by: Lucky1 on February 13, 2016, 09:29:49 PM
Post by: Bullkllr on February 13, 2016, 09:54:41 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on February 14, 2016, 09:18:07 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on February 14, 2016, 05:06:12 PM
The anti baiting proposals are just political and emotion based. They will not help the WDFW with game management. Baiting is a effective game managent and hunting tool.
But unfortunately folks don't have to give a wild ID number to ruin our hunting.......and they do use emotion more than anything else, since logic and facts confuse them
Post by: jbeaumont21 on February 14, 2016, 05:53:19 PM
Post by: Hunting7mm on February 14, 2016, 05:58:24 PM
Post by: Hunting7mm on February 14, 2016, 06:22:35 PM
Reasons supporting proposal:
In the last three years the Department has been approached by hunters and landowners that do not approve of the practice of baiting for the purposes of hunting deer or elk. Additional input was received as part of the 3-year hunting season package, public process in 2015. The non-random input the Department received via the website during the 3-year package process indicated that 23% of hunters wanted a ban on baiting with an exception for food plots and agricultural operations. Fourteen percent (14%) of hunters wanted to disallow the use of bait by hunting guides and restrict the manner and volume of baiting by hunters not using guides. A 63% majority of the hunters commenting wanted no change to the rules pertaining to baiting deer and elk. In a random telephone survey of deer hunters conducted as part of the 2015-17 3-year package, 59% either opposed or strongly opposed baiting for deer. Deer hunters that supported or strongly supported baiting for deer made up 21% of the respondents. Eleven percent (11%) of those surveyed were neutral and 9% didn’t know. In the same random telephone survey, 68% of elk hunters either opposed or strongly opposed baiting for elk. Elk hunters that supported or strongly supported using bait to hunt elk were 14%. Eleven percent (11%) of those surveyed were neutral and 8% didn’t know. Although some potential exists, the Department has no data at this time to suggest that the practice of baiting for deer and elk hunting has a negative population or natural resource effect. The Fish and Wildlife Commission discussed this issue in March and April 2015 and decided to not make changes to the existing rule (baiting for deer and elk hunting is allowed). Since then, the Department has facilitated further discussion with a group of hunters interested in the issue. That group met several times over the past year. Through that process, and input received from the Game Management Advisory Council in 2015, it is clear that there is no consensus on this issue other than scents and natural agricultural practices should not be considered baiting. Members expressed several points of view ranging from banning all baiting for deer and elk hunting to retaining the ability to bait using any quantity. The committee discussed alternatives to the “all or none” scenario, which resulted in several options that will be presented to the Commission for discussion and possible decision. The Commission will consider options that range from banning all baiting to retaining all baiting, including two specific options that consider a volume limit on the amount of bait allowed.
Post by: jasnt on February 14, 2016, 07:00:30 PM
Post by: zike on February 14, 2016, 07:35:45 PM
The other screwed up thing is that people with private property will continue baiting, cause how would they get caught without somebody trespassing? I guarantee my dbag neighbor will continue baiting, and what can i do about it? Nothing without breaking the law myself, which im not willing to do. Its a joke.
Drone?
Post by: Bango skank on February 16, 2016, 04:18:30 AM
The other screwed up thing is that people with private property will continue baiting, cause how would they get caught without somebody trespassing? I guarantee my dbag neighbor will continue baiting, and what can i do about it? Nothing without breaking the law myself, which im not willing to do. Its a joke.
Drone?
I actually have considered that. He seems to think its okay to trespass and poach on my property, so i dont think id feel too guilty about flying over his with a drone
Post by: teanawayslayer on February 16, 2016, 06:30:41 AM
I wonder how many bull elk are taken out of Teanaway by tribal members each year? Could that be why they are reducing the number of permits?there are more Bulls than cows! What aggravates me is the fact they are giving all the bull tags to the rifle hunters and taking away from the archery and muzzy hunters. Really limits the bull category in ew. As a muzzy hunter I pay just as much as the rifle hunter for special permits. Why is our opportunity being taken away? Seems to me it would be fair to take those 12 tags and give 6 to rifle 3 muzzy, and 3 archery.
Post by: cboom on February 16, 2016, 09:22:52 AM
I wonder how many bull elk are taken out of Teanaway by tribal members each year? Could that be why they are reducing the number of permits?there are more Bulls than cows! What aggravates me is the fact they are giving all the bull tags to the rifle hunters and taking away from the archery and muzzy hunters. Really limits the bull category in ew. As a muzzy hunter I pay just as much as the rifle hunter for special permits. Why is our opportunity being taken away? Seems to me it would be fair to take those 12 tags and give 6 to rifle 3 muzzy, and 3 archery.
I think the most fair thing to do would be issue tags based on the percentage of aplicants. If 70% of applications are for rifle tags, 20% are for muzzy, and 10% are for archery i feel 70% of the tags should be riffle, 20 muzzy, and 10 archery. I have no idea what the actuall percentages are, I made up the 70,20,10 just for the example.
Post by: bobcat on February 16, 2016, 10:10:54 AM
I wonder how many bull elk are taken out of Teanaway by tribal members each year? Could that be why they are reducing the number of permits?there are more Bulls than cows! What aggravates me is the fact they are giving all the bull tags to the rifle hunters and taking away from the archery and muzzy hunters. Really limits the bull category in ew. As a muzzy hunter I pay just as much as the rifle hunter for special permits. Why is our opportunity being taken away? Seems to me it would be fair to take those 12 tags and give 6 to rifle 3 muzzy, and 3 archery.
Did you see the proposed additional muzzleloader permit in the quality category? As well as 1 archery permit. Looks they reduced the 3 modern firearm permits to 1 and gave 1 to archery and 1 to muzzleloader.
Post by: bobcat on February 16, 2016, 10:25:46 AM
I'm glad to see the change but also slightly disappointed as I liked having the option to take a doe if my freezer was empty. Lots of people will be surprised by this change and I'd be willing to bet that many does will still be taken by people unaware of the change.
Post by: Curly on February 16, 2016, 10:34:09 AM
A big change I just noticed for those who hunt the late muzzleloader season for blacktail deer. The Lincoln GMU (501) is proposed to change from being open for "any deer" to "any buck." That unit has been either sex for the late muzzleloader season for many years. I hunt it a lot.
I'm glad to see the change but also slightly disappointed as I liked having the option to take a doe if my freezer was empty. Lots of people will be surprised by this change and I'd be willing to bet that many does will still be taken by people unaware of the change.
That's good news. About time they made the change. That's been either sex for as long as there has been a ML season, right?
Post by: danderson on February 18, 2016, 09:10:19 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on February 19, 2016, 08:58:49 AM
The toughest task the WDFW is not managing the wildlife, it is dealing with the people, hunters and non hunters.
Post by: bobcat on February 19, 2016, 09:03:18 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on February 19, 2016, 09:18:36 AM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 19, 2016, 09:39:21 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on February 22, 2016, 10:05:45 AM
Got my hopes up when i saw proposed cougar changes. Was expecting a doubled quota. Nope.It looked to me like option 1 and 2 both lowered the quotas in the areas that I would be hunting. Option 3 seemed to be status quo of what we are used to right now. That is the option I am going with and suggesting that they do something by permit to use dogs more. This would allow the older more mature cats to be taken rather than the young dumb ones that get taken by chance.
Post by: Rainier10 on February 22, 2016, 11:36:45 AM
I understand the complaint side of the issue and that you are trying to address a social issue rather than a wildlife health issue.
I have to say I am against any restriction on baiting with such a broad brush. I would be for smaller changes, like a limit just at a certain time of year in certain GMU's that are having the most complaints. But restricting it across the board in every GMU when there are only issues in very limited area by a very limited number of individuals is overkill.
Baiting is an effective tool for many hunters in certain instances. I don't see where it is having drastic affect on deer herd statewide and see no reason to ban it completely.
I don't approve of any of the three options and know that for this cycle there is a fourth option, that is to do nothing, and come back next year with a proposal that limits baiting in certain GMU's at certain times when the abuse is occurring.
There are two proposals that limit the quantity without banning it completely, 245 and 246. 245 put a limit of 10 gallons and no sites within 200 yards of each other. 246 limits it to 10 gallons with no limit on the number of bait sites or distance between them. I guess if you had to choose one of the three 246 is the lesser of all three.
Again I believe there is a fourth option of status quo for this year and come up with a restriction in certain GMU's at certain times of the year, kind of like a firearm restriction area or a special deer area. Create a boundary in these areas that are having truckloads of apples dropped in the late season and say restricted baiting to this amount at this time of the year in this area.
Post by: bearpaw on February 25, 2016, 12:38:24 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/hunting_regulations/
Post by: bobcat on February 25, 2016, 12:55:53 PM
I thanked them for closing the Lincoln GMU (501) to doe harvest, and asked them to consider eliminating the harvest of does in most of western Washington.
I asked them to work on bringing back hound hunting for cougars.
I asked them to do away with the "true spike" only rule in some eastern Wa. units.
The baiting issue- I said I could live with the 10 gallon maximum restriction and that anything more than that is not needed and not necessary.
I asked if they could move the application deadline for special permits up by a month so that people would know the results of the draw before Weyerhaeuser access permits go up for sale, OR coordinate with Weyerhaeuser on their timing so we don't have that same problem again this year.
I know I had more comments but that's all I can remember right now.
Post by: trophyhunt on February 25, 2016, 02:24:38 PM
Post by: emac on February 25, 2016, 04:18:46 PM
It's a little late now but what do you guys think about splitting up the deadlines for certain species? Example, in January have the app period for spring bear, elk and goat or moose. Then in a couple months have quality deer, sheep, goat or moose. Then a month later do all the other permits as a group buck deer, 2nd deer, bull, cow elk ect! That way if you draw a very special tag, you can ghost point other special permits, to avoid the chance of drawing two or three special permits in one year? I like it.I am not a fan of a bunch of different deadlines but I think you are on the right track. What I think should happen is still apply for all at the same time but when they draw start with quality, then bull, then cow and so forth. If you draw quality your name is pulled out of all other category's (unless it's a second tag) if you don't draw quality then you are still in for bull and cow. If you ended drawing a bull tag than your name is removed from the cow category.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Post by: trophyhunt on February 25, 2016, 04:21:37 PM
i think we are both on the right track.It's a little late now but what do you guys think about splitting up the deadlines for certain species? Example, in January have the app period for spring bear, elk and goat or moose. Then in a couple months have quality deer, sheep, goat or moose. Then a month later do all the other permits as a group buck deer, 2nd deer, bull, cow elk ect! That way if you draw a very special tag, you can ghost point other special permits, to avoid the chance of drawing two or three special permits in one year? I like it.I am not a fan of a bunch of different deadlines but I think you are on the right track. What I think should happen is still apply for all at the same time but when they draw start with quality, then bull, then cow and so forth. If you draw quality your name is pulled out of all other category's (unless it's a second tag) if you don't draw quality then you are still in for bull and cow. If you ended drawing a bull tag than your name is removed from the cow category.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Post by: emac on February 25, 2016, 04:32:04 PM
Yeah I agree. More deadlines means more I have to remember. I don't know if my idea would increase odds cause I don't know how many people actually get drawn for multiple Permits, but it is always a fear that I am going draw a quality tag and a bull tag the same year. And that would blow in my opinion.i think we are both on the right track.It's a little late now but what do you guys think about splitting up the deadlines for certain species? Example, in January have the app period for spring bear, elk and goat or moose. Then in a couple months have quality deer, sheep, goat or moose. Then a month later do all the other permits as a group buck deer, 2nd deer, bull, cow elk ect! That way if you draw a very special tag, you can ghost point other special permits, to avoid the chance of drawing two or three special permits in one year? I like it.I am not a fan of a bunch of different deadlines but I think you are on the right track. What I think should happen is still apply for all at the same time but when they draw start with quality, then bull, then cow and so forth. If you draw quality your name is pulled out of all other category's (unless it's a second tag) if you don't draw quality then you are still in for bull and cow. If you ended drawing a bull tag than your name is removed from the cow category.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk