Hunting Washington Forum
Other Hunting => Waterfowl => Topic started by: billythekidrock on February 21, 2009, 08:35:05 PM
-
Just a heads up that last night I saw the second of two county meetings on local TV in the past couple weeks that had public outcry on bird hunting in Eld Inlet.
The first one a couple weeks ago was a guy complaining about the constant duck hunting and possible daily over harvest.
The one last night had a guy complaining about some "professional hunters" from Marysville who are sitting on oyster beds shooting "everything that flys" including crows and seagulls. He stated that he called the sheriffs and F&W who both told him that they did not have jurisdiction and he wanted the county to look into it.
I am not sure what is going on or the legalities, but maybe someone can shed some light on the subject.
-
Oyster beds in Marysville??? Don't know of any out here
-
Oyster beds in Eld Inlet, hunters from Marysville...
-
Gotcha
I hate "hunters" that give us a bad name >:(
-
Yes, the hunters were from Marysville hunting near Olympia. That was one of the beefs as well. Said he didn't mind hunters shooting ducks for food, but didn't like people coming from out of town to wipe out all flying critters.
-
the plot thickens and the reputation continues to grow....
-
Couple idiots hunting + liberal Media = disaster
-
Remember, this was a council meeting about an area that is already firearm restricted with a ton of houses nearby. It won't take long for this area to be off limits to hunting.
-
Not at this time? Then when?
-
Thats not good.
-
Without factual information, "WHO" is just hearsay so I cleaned up the thread a bit. The "facts" as they stand are people are going to council meetings to complain about duck hunters.
From there I am sure it gets distorted on "what" and "how many" are being killed.
Just thought maybe someone would have info on who this is and why the locals think they are killing everything.
-
But from what I've seen non-hunting locals that don't like the sound of gunfire can exaggerate and speculate. And even other jealous hunters can make up stories and accusations.
-
But from what I've seen non-hunting locals that don't like the sound of gunfire can exaggerate and speculate. And even other jealous hunters can make up stories and accusations.
Yes they can, but the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
In the second meeting the guy actually said he was not against hunting ducks "for the table" as he put it.
-
Most likely slob-hunters then,which make us all look bad.
Seems there was a ton of them out there in the field the last couple years.
-
Where did you guys see that these hunters were doing anything wrong ???
We dont know if the statement about shooting "crows and seagulls" is true or not. Besides, crows are legal to shoot during duck season. So if these hunters are simply hunting ducks in a public area, then they are within the law and should have our support. Whoever they are.
-
I would guess it could be a case where these homeowners bought beach front property, put a big house on it, and now every saturday morning its a reenactment of WWII outside their front window.
The water is open to free use, as long as the hunters arent shooting at the houses or doing anything illegal, the use of that water should not be restricted.
I view these homeowners the same as the people who buy houses next to an airport and then complain about airplane noise and try to get the airport to close down because it interupts their lifestyle.
I dont think it should even be an issue, but we know that the fish and wildlife dept in our state love to accomodate the non-hunters and make them feel more at home.
-
I don't think it has to do with non-hunters. I think it has to do with hunters following the rules and also educating the public on what those rules are.
When I watched this meeting I did not get the vibe that this guy was against hunting but he was against needless killing.
-
Quote
[The water is open to free use, as long as the hunters arent shooting at the houses or doing anything illegal, the use of that water should not be restricted.]
Not if the property owner owns tideland's. Hunters cannot even drop boat anchor within private tideland's.
They can drift in the water,but I think in most bays it is illegal to drift and shoot birds.
-
Where did you guys see that these hunters were doing anything wrong ???
We don't know if the statement about shooting "crows and seagulls" is true or not. Besides, crows are legal to shoot during duck season. So if these hunters are simply hunting ducks in a public area, then they are within the law and should have our support. Whoever they are.
First: The statement would have already brought in the Federal guys and the game warden. I would bet the entire statement is fabricated. Seagulls is what I am commenting on.
Secondly, NON-LOCAL hunters from Marysville. Last time I checked Marysville is part of Washington and part of the United States of America, so they have a right not a privilege to hunt where the hell they want to as long as all is legal.
Thirdly, some of you were very quick to jump on the "slob hunter" band wagon without any information that was factual. Hey, back up the hunter before you back up the non-substantiated statements from people that are obviously against hunting. And I don't give a rats ass about the "for the table" comment. That does not tell me the guy is pro hunting.
This entire media generated "forum" is just like the crap that ranchers and dog trainers put up with in Bozeman, Montana once the "beautiful" people moved in. Blatant lies to get the undesirables out of town, a town I might add that the original people build with sweat and blood.
So before you go siding with the "media and landowner" lets get more facts and if possible law enforcement reports otherwise all this is is hear say and gossip mongering to get rid of hunting.
-
:yeah:
Good post.
-
:yeah:
Good post.
+1
-
Having seen these to televised meetings I got two different vibes off of the two speakers. One didn't like the shooting or hunting and the other was concerned about waste and killing of protected birds.
It also sounded like it could have been a depredation type situation to protect the shellfish beds. :dunno:
All I know is that it is likely to continue and I thought the duck hunters should keep their ears open and to monitor their own.
-
Quote
[The water is open to free use, as long as the hunters arent shooting at the houses or doing anything illegal, the use of that water should not be restricted.]
Not if the property owner owns tideland's. Hunters cannot even drop boat anchor within private tideland's.
They can drift in the water,but I think in most bays it is illegal to drift and shoot birds.
Sorry, I wasnt aware of that fact. Thanks for the info, you learn something new everyday
-
Quote
[The water is open to free use, as long as the hunters arent shooting at the houses or doing anything illegal, the use of that water should not be restricted.]
Not if the property owner owns tideland's. Hunters cannot even drop boat anchor within private tideland's.
They can drift in the water,but I think in most bays it is illegal to drift and shoot birds.
Sorry, I wasnt aware of that fact. Thanks for the info, you learn something new everyday
I don't know about drifting and shooting being illegal as long as the drift is wind or current driven a hunter should be golden. It's when the drift is a continuation of a power driven vessel that the drift becomes illegal. I don't know how a "bay or inlet" can be written up different from the general rules of the road for water fowl hunting.
BTW what is the defination of private tide lands? How far down and how far up is a "private tide land"?
-
"I don't know about drifting and shooting being illegal as long as the drift is wind or current driven a hunter should be golden. It's when the drift is a continuation of a power driven vessel that the drift becomes illegal. I don't know how a "bay or inlet" can be written up different from the general rules of the road for water fowl hunting.
BTW what is the defination of private tide lands? How far down and how far up is a "private tide land"?"
WAC 232-16-760 Northern Puget Sound
Hunting Method Restriction. It is unlawful
to hunt waterfowl, coot, or snipe from
a moving boat or any free-floating device
that is not in a fixed position which is either
anchored or secured to shore in Port Susan
Bay, Skagit Bay, Padilla Bay, and Samish Bay.
-
BTW what is the defination of private tide lands? How far down and how far up is a "private tide land"?
Private tide land can be owned from the high tide mark to as low as the low tide mark.
-
So that tells me that legally if you have a cripple out in lets say, Skagit Bay for example, that you cannot take a boat out and finish the bird off from the boat? Im not sure if you would get written up just for that considering you were attempting to get a downed bird, but by reading that definition I would say it is actually illegal?
-
Sounds like they should have stuck with geoduck...
-
Sounds like they should have stuck with geoduck...
Now that's funny...
-
"I don't know about drifting and shooting being illegal as long as the drift is wind or current driven a hunter should be golden. It's when the drift is a continuation of a power driven vessel that the drift becomes illegal. I don't know how a "bay or inlet" can be written up different from the general rules of the road for water fowl hunting.
BTW what is the definition of private tide lands? How far down and how far up is a "private tide land"?"
WAC 232-16-760 Northern Puget Sound
Hunting Method Restriction. It is unlawful
to hunt waterfowl, coot, or snipe from
a moving boat or any free-floating device
that is not in a fixed position which is either
anchored or secured to shore in Port Susan
Bay, Skagit Bay, Padilla Bay, and Samish Bay.
Thanks for the post.
So now lets look at this nice little tidbit. Can't anchor on private tide lands and can't drift so can't hunt but no one has out right stated that you can't hunt there.
Isn't this a crock of CRAP! If we can stop them from hunting lets make a series of laws that makes it impossible to hunt. You gotta love the antis don't you.
If laws like this can be made for other types of hunting and fishing then the antis have won without firing a shot.
Lets see: can't drift fish or troll in said bays etc, but can't anchor because they are private tide lands.
Next: can't utilize Federally build highways to access hunting areas if ammo and firearms are carried in same vehicle.
Call me crazy but what a great approach to making things more and more difficult.
-
I can't speak much to the tide land laws- (though that is a property issue- not hunting related. If you owned the tide lands you could hunt it) but as far as the drifting things goes- there is a reason. That is where the snow geese hang out. If they allowed the drifting to happen you wouldn't believe the mess that would result. It is bad enough with all the *censored*es that shoot em on the road on fir island and all the skybusters that flail away at them off of every dike- could you imagine every Tom, Dick, and Harry floating around the bay blasting the crap out of them as they try to roost? It is already gross the amount of lunacy a few snow geese create in people- opening up more avenues to cripple them would be worse. Those laws are valid- not anti-hunting.
-
I can't speak much to the tide land laws- (though that is a property issue- not hunting related. If you owned the tide lands you could hunt it) but as far as the drifting things goes- there is a reason. That is where the snow geese hang out. If they allowed the drifting to happen you wouldn't believe the mess that would result. It is bad enough with all the *censored*es that shoot em on the road on fir island and all the skybusters that flail away at them off of every dike- could you imagine every Tom, Dick, and Harry floating around the bay blasting the crap out of them as they try to roost? It is already gross the amount of lunacy a few snow geese create in people- opening up more avenues to cripple them would be worse. Those laws are valid- not anti-hunting.
Good post fullchoke. I am not used to vast quantities of "hunters" in areas I go so again I am ignorant to the situation. I was raised in an area with lots of space to disappear in and then I spent my formative years in Alaska which again vast space to disappear in to hunt or fish. I guess I would not know what to think of a situation like you have described if I were to hunt in such a crowded environment.
-
A lot of the tidelands are shellfish beds leased or owned by seafood companies, and quite a bit of the tidelands in Padilla and Samish bays are owned/leased by gun clubs-the law works great for keeping us yahoos off their hunting grounds.
Roadkill- I know someone who got a ticket for shooting a crippled brant from their unanchored boat, motor wasn't even running and they were sitting still. Federal game warden wouldn't budge even with a state game warden arguing for the hunters.
-
Roadkill- I know someone who got a ticket for shooting a crippled brant from their unanchored boat, motor wasn't even running and they were sitting still. Federal game warden wouldn't budge even with a state game warden arguing for the hunters.
Good to know! I never even thought anything of it, the safest way for dog or person to go get a cripple in that situation would to be with a boat and if it was diving you would have to shoot at it? Seems that making a good effort to retrieve a downed bird would be hindered by not being able to shoot the cripple.
The point above about the snow geese was very informative and it does make sense. People could just get close to the rafts of snow geese, float around and shoot them as they were getting off the water to head inland. The rules make more sense when you think about that situation
-
What fullchoke posted about the geese would be true for ducks on Padilla and Samish also. Lots of huge rafts of ducks floating around out there.
Also to add to the post about the crippled brant- they had been anchored, shot the bird, pulled the anchor and decide it was close enough to finish off without chasing. Game wardens were watching through binoculars. They are pretty serious about that law. I guess this doesn't have much to do with the original post, does it?
-
wow you guys sure get all worked up without knowing facts. :bash:
full choke and ck- right on! :o :tup:
sisu- maybe you should look up why those laws exist and are written the way they are for the bays up there. The laws are very old as well, and probably put in place by hunters.
You won't have to worry about me hunting in a situation like that. If there are people I stay away. I hate nearly everyone including myself. I left the west-side just because of people. Moved there from Alaska and realized too late that it was not the side for me.
I like to go out not see anyone if possible. Maybe hear a gun go off in the distance, way distance and continue my hunting. Nope, you guys can keep it and enjoy it all you want. Just not my bag of tea.
Ever sit in the dark alone in the woods and listen to the night...all kinds of sounds, smells that you don't hear or smell in the day. Now add extra people...the entire situation changes. It's no longer the same.
Sorry for deviating from the thread but Mr. Chaoski brought up reading the law for the west side...nope ain't gonna do that cause I ain't gonna be there.
-
+1 sisu,,,I think you just inspired me to get out of this zoo,it wasn't too bad 30 years ago,but now it's getting down right ridiculous to hunt and fish with all these people!!!!
-
doesnt really have as much to do with reading the law as it does with people blowing up about antis trying to close down hunting when they dont even know the issue. but why interupt a good tangent with the facts. There are issues regarding hunting in the south sound and the proximity of houses and people, but to say that it is all about people trying to shut down the right to hunt on areas like Samish, and Padilla bay is just plain false.
Know the issue before you run your mouth. :hello:
A-OK Mr. Pibbs. :bow: You are the expert and we will bow to Dr. Chaoski Pibbs! :kneel:
-
doesnt really have as much to do with reading the law as it does with people blowing up about antis trying to close down hunting when they dont even know the issue. but why interupt a good tangent with the facts. There are issues regarding hunting in the south sound and the proximity of houses and people, but to say that it is all about people trying to shut down the right to hunt on areas like Samish, and Padilla bay is just plain false.
Know the issue before you run your mouth. :hello:
A-OK Mr. Pibbs. :bow:
Some people feel compelled to attack no matter what. Trust me - it's not you sisu.