Post by: X-Force on August 25, 2017, 06:57:06 AM
The proposal below is interesting because there is also a survey question to make deer tags like elk tags (E or W).
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/seasonsetting/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/seasonsetting/)
Issue:
Some people party hunt for deer or elk and do so without possessing a valid deer or elk tag.
Background:
Law Enforcement encounters people that may be party hunting for deer and elk with modern firearms or muzzleloaders. Those people don’t have an unfilled deer or elk tag in their possession and claim to be hunting bear, cougar, or coyote. Requiring possession of an unfilled deer or elk tag during those seasons may reduce party hunting.
18. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Make it unlawful to hunt bear or cougar with a centerfire rifle or muzzleloading rifle, which are lawful for hunting big game, without possessing a valid, un-notched deer or elk tag that is valid for the time and area being hunted.
Make it unlawful to hunt bear or cougar with a centerfire rifle or muzzleloading rifle, which are lawful for hunting big game, without possessing a valid, un-notched deer or elk tag that is valid for the time and area being hunted, with the exception of small game and forest grouse.
Some combination of Options 2 and 3.
Other
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 25, 2017, 07:02:52 AM
Post by: vandeman17 on August 25, 2017, 07:03:36 AM
Post by: cbond3318 on August 25, 2017, 07:18:42 AM
I do not want to impact our meager predator management we currently have.
My vote was "no change"
Thanks for posting!
For those that may skim past for bears, there are some significant ideas on the table in that survey....
Attention Yakima and Colockum Bow Hunters! :tup:
Post by: Dhoey07 on August 25, 2017, 07:24:02 AM
Is there any evidence that illegal party hunting is effecting deer or elk populations?
Post by: lewy on August 25, 2017, 07:34:42 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 25, 2017, 08:01:01 AM
Post by: cbond3318 on August 25, 2017, 08:07:06 AM
Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.
That one was especially disturbing. Why couldn't they come up with tag serial numbers that can be voided when a duplicate is purchased. Then if a slime ball is using a voided tag, the warden could run it and bust-o-!
Post by: emac on August 25, 2017, 08:08:02 AM
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Post by: greenhead_killer on August 25, 2017, 08:15:33 AM
What a crock of poo. When they talk about how the moose are declining they dont mention the one major reason they are decliningi left a lot of comments concerning this. Let's not talk the real issue, wolves, let's just try and go around it. Idiots
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Post by: kselkhunter on August 25, 2017, 08:26:38 AM
Post by: bobcat on August 25, 2017, 08:35:17 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 25, 2017, 08:37:35 AM
Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.
That one was especially disturbing. Why couldn't they come up with tag serial numbers that can be voided when a duplicate is purchased. Then if a slime ball is using a voided tag, the warden could run it and bust-o-!
That's a great suggestion. I also suggested they increase poaching penalties
Post by: bracer40 on August 25, 2017, 08:58:44 AM
But like PMan said, it shouldn't be that difficult to have each tag identified w a unique identifier.
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 25, 2017, 09:16:46 AM
I'm glad to see them addressing the duplicate tag issue. It's a real problem. I voted for "Some combination of Options 1 through 5."
On what do you base this statement?
Post by: kselkhunter on August 25, 2017, 09:24:28 AM
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on August 25, 2017, 09:25:55 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 25, 2017, 09:38:23 AM
When I had to get a replacement tag in Oregon, I had to go to ODFW office and sign an affidavit regarding why I was getting a replacement tag. My tag was a 7 hour drive away, and my hunt was the next morning for a 5 day season. Not sure what the process is in WA, but replacement tags shouldn't be allowed to be purchased at a license vendor. Half the big box sporting goods stores staff (I'm looking at you Dick's Sporting Goods) barely know how to work the license/tags computer, and too easy for a poacher to get a second tag.
For all of you guys who want to make it harder to replace lost tags because duplicate tags make poaching easier: where is the data to support your assumptions that replacement tags are widely used for poaching? What about the earlier suggestions regarding using serial numbers on tags so that a voided/lost tag could be easily identified if attached to an animal? Poachers aren't going to do the lost tag thing year after year. Or if the WDFW is allowing that without it sending up some warning bells, their system is screwed up. Let's change the system to make poaching harder instead of further restricting lawful hunters who need replacement tags.
Post by: Bob33 on August 25, 2017, 09:50:45 AM
I am almost never in favor of restricting legal hunting to address poaching. On both duplicate tag and party hunting poaching issues I instead recommended increasing penalties to include multiyear loss of hunting privileges. The in-season hunting community is basically made up of three components: hunters who follow the law, hunters who intend to hunt legally but give in to temptation when an illegal opportunity arises, and those who head out to deliberately break the law. Time after time, studies have shown the greatest poaching deterrents, in descending order, are jail time, loss of privileges, loss of equipment, and fines. Poaching detection rates are low, running from less than 1% to around 20%; the most effective hunter management tools are those that provide sufficient deterrent to move hunters from the second and third groups, to the first.Unfortunately it is extremely rare for poachers to be given jail time, and also rare for them to lose hunting privileges or loss of equipment.
Given that, I can understand efforts to make it more difficult to obtain duplicate tags.
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on August 25, 2017, 01:07:02 PM
Regarding duplicate tags they should definitely have to be picked up at regional offices, allowing them to be sold free for all at Wally World is ridiculous
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on August 25, 2017, 01:41:02 PM
I've never understood what good it does to take away a poachers hunting privileges, they've already shown they have no regard for the law anyway.It lowers the bar greatly for the next bust. All you need is to catch them in the field with a hunting weapon, or even a photo taken by a third party with an affidavit to the officer.
Post by: bigtex on August 27, 2017, 05:39:13 PM
Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.Penalties for poaching in WA are stiff, but it's the county prosecutors or judges who don't want to hand down those penalties. Or would rather take the theft of a shopping cart case to court instead of a poaching case.
A $5,000 criminal fine, 364 days in jail, and a $2,000 civil fine for poaching a doe isn't a slap on the wrist to me :twocents:
Post by: bigtex on August 27, 2017, 05:40:51 PM
So are WDFW Officers now supposed to check the tag number every time they contact a hunter to ensure they aren't hunting on a duplicate tag? What about the areas with no internet service via cell phones?Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.That one was especially disturbing. Why couldn't they come up with tag serial numbers that can be voided when a duplicate is purchased. Then if a slime ball is using a voided tag, the warden could run it and bust-o-!
Post by: olyguy79 on August 27, 2017, 05:46:00 PM
:yeah:Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.Penalties for poaching in WA are stiff, but it's the county prosecutors or judges who don't want to hand down those penalties. Or would rather take the theft of a shopping cart case to court instead of a poaching case.
A $5,000 criminal fine, 364 days in jail, and a $2,000 civil fine for poaching a doe isn't a slap on the wrist to me :twocents:
I agree 100%
I could give you a list of counties that either basically doesn't prosecute poaching violations, or if they do, the penalty is minimal. That's not WDFW's fault, in most cases it's a overworked and understaffed prosecutors office.
I personally like what California is starting to do and divert the funds from trophy big game poaching cases and giving 50% of the fine from the poaching case to the prosecutors office, that way there is actually an incentive to prosecute the case. Right now 100% of the funds from all fish/wildlife fines in WA go to the county, but the county decides how they use the money.
Post by: walt on August 27, 2017, 06:00:48 PM
So are WDFW Officers now supposed to check the tag number every time they contact a hunter to ensure they aren't hunting on a duplicate tag? What about the areas with no internet service via cell phones?Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.That one was especially disturbing. Why couldn't they come up with tag serial numbers that can be voided when a duplicate is purchased. Then if a slime ball is using a voided tag, the warden could run it and bust-o-!
Couldn't they snap a quick pic of the hunter's ID and tag and look it up when back at the office? Or have a staffer do the looking up? :dunno:
Post by: Humptulips on August 27, 2017, 06:15:00 PM
On the duplicate tags it seems to me nobody would ask for a duplicate as long as they had the original. No doubt some are going to notch a tag and then think they can get away with round 2 but I don't see how you would catch them short of searching every hunters freezer.
Post by: grundy53 on August 28, 2017, 05:00:19 AM
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Post by: Special T on August 28, 2017, 06:42:59 AM
Predators take more game then poachers so we want to make it harder to control predator populations? I would like to see some figures on this that indicate it is a problem because I don't believe it is that widespread.
On the duplicate tags it seems to me nobody would ask for a duplicate as long as they had the original. No doubt some are going to notch a tag and then think they can get away with round 2 but I don't see how you would catch them short of searching every hunters freezer.
The WDFW does often make those kind of assertions with no data, and yet what most sportsmen consider basic logic is dismissed for lack of data.
Post by: birddogdad on August 28, 2017, 06:54:58 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on August 28, 2017, 07:15:16 AM
Post by: birddogdad on August 28, 2017, 07:53:11 AM
I don't think that guys with bear tags only out party hunting for elk would be stopped by a new rule. It is currently legal to wander around the woods with a rifle completely separate from hunting. So those guys that currently party hunt would still be legal to go with their buddies and carry a rifle. Only thing that would change is they couldn't legally shoot a bear, so I guess they borrow a tag from someone else. The only thing that changes is WDFW loses the sale of a few bear tags. How many are we really talking about? One or two a year?
hehe agree with this. Didn't consider that angle of just out in the woods. But like I said, some of us don't get to spend a month in the woods hunting bear before a weeks in the woods for deer/elk.. A chance encounter with a bear is a win for me and after time in an area for deer, I have found areas of significant bear activity. im going back in after I tag a deer to find that guy.
Post by: KFhunter on August 28, 2017, 08:52:33 AM
Poachers don't need duplicate tags, that just leaves a paper trail. I'd like to see some evidence that this is a big problem. Pretty sure the wife washed my license once and I opted to get a duplicate because the ink was unreadable. I had no idea this was a "problem", and I'm not sure it is.
As for bears I'd wager the bulk of bears taken are by opportunity while hunting another species of game, why would WDFW want to have less bears taken where there's already far too many???
Post by: huntnphool on August 28, 2017, 08:53:08 AM
Post by: KFhunter on August 28, 2017, 08:54:30 AM
Sounds more like bear protection than party hunting control.
:yeah:
More predator protections :bash:
Post by: Gringo31 on August 28, 2017, 09:34:38 AM
Example:
Quote
Species: Deer
Issue:
Improve the first time experience for youth hunters. Allow more liberal deer hunting requirements for youth hunters in those locations that can handle a moderate increase in hunting pressure.
Background:
Recruitment of new hunters is a priority for the Department. Some argue that many of the restrictions related to which animals are legal for harvest make it difficult for youth hunters to have a successful, first-time hunting experience. Some Districts in the state are of the opinion that they have the resources to offer more liberal legal animal requirements to youth hunters.
1. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Allow youth hunters to kill any white-tailed deer in areas where only white-tailed bucks or white-tailed bucks with antler restrictions are legal.
Allow youth hunters to kill any mule deer buck in areas where only 3 pt. minimum mule deer bucks are legal.
A combination of Option 2 and Option 3.
:yike: :bdid:
Post by: huntnphool on August 28, 2017, 09:40:00 AM
Can someone tell me what they do with this info? Are these suggestions or "up to a vote"?
Example:QuoteSpecies: Deer
Issue:
Improve the first time experience for youth hunters. Allow more liberal deer hunting requirements for youth hunters in those locations that can handle a moderate increase in hunting pressure.
Background:
Recruitment of new hunters is a priority for the Department. Some argue that many of the restrictions related to which animals are legal for harvest make it difficult for youth hunters to have a successful, first-time hunting experience. Some Districts in the state are of the opinion that they have the resources to offer more liberal legal animal requirements to youth hunters.
1. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Allow youth hunters to kill any white-tailed deer in areas where only white-tailed bucks or white-tailed bucks with antler restrictions are legal.
Allow youth hunters to kill any mule deer buck in areas where only 3 pt. minimum mule deer bucks are legal.
A combination of Option 2 and Option 3.
:yike: :bdid:
We used to allow youth hunters to do this.
Post by: Gringo31 on August 28, 2017, 09:50:32 AM
Post by: 7mmfan on August 28, 2017, 10:12:37 AM
Can someone tell me what they do with this info? Are these suggestions or "up to a vote"?
Example:QuoteSpecies: Deer
Issue:
Improve the first time experience for youth hunters. Allow more liberal deer hunting requirements for youth hunters in those locations that can handle a moderate increase in hunting pressure.
Background:
Recruitment of new hunters is a priority for the Department. Some argue that many of the restrictions related to which animals are legal for harvest make it difficult for youth hunters to have a successful, first-time hunting experience. Some Districts in the state are of the opinion that they have the resources to offer more liberal legal animal requirements to youth hunters.
1. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Allow youth hunters to kill any white-tailed deer in areas where only white-tailed bucks or white-tailed bucks with antler restrictions are legal.
Allow youth hunters to kill any mule deer buck in areas where only 3 pt. minimum mule deer bucks are legal.
A combination of Option 2 and Option 3.
:yike: :bdid:
I remember the last year they did this over in the Methow. A guy camped next to us came down one day with two 2-points on a cart. Had his 6 year old and 8 year old boys with him, and one rifle. Said the boys both shot their respective deer with his 300 win mag. Both were neck shot. Uh huh.
Post by: pianoman9701 on August 28, 2017, 10:26:02 AM
Take the surveys. There's also a proposal from the director to restrict duplicate tags because poachers might be using them. It's ridiculous. Ramp up the penalties for poaching instead of targeting law-abiding hunters.Penalties for poaching in WA are stiff, but it's the county prosecutors or judges who don't want to hand down those penalties. Or would rather take the theft of a shopping cart case to court instead of a poaching case.
A $5,000 criminal fine, 364 days in jail, and a $2,000 civil fine for poaching a doe isn't a slap on the wrist to me :twocents:
There's plenty of blame to go around on being soft on poaching and WDFW administration is right there, too. Operation Cody was ill-supported by LE administration, both in assets and coordination with prosecutors to get them the information they need for convictions. Many of those heinous offenders got off with a slap as a result.
Post by: RB on August 28, 2017, 10:29:14 AM
Can someone tell me what they do with this info? Are these suggestions or "up to a vote"?
Example:QuoteSpecies: Deer
Issue:
Improve the first time experience for youth hunters. Allow more liberal deer hunting requirements for youth hunters in those locations that can handle a moderate increase in hunting pressure.
Background:
Recruitment of new hunters is a priority for the Department. Some argue that many of the restrictions related to which animals are legal for harvest make it difficult for youth hunters to have a successful, first-time hunting experience. Some Districts in the state are of the opinion that they have the resources to offer more liberal legal animal requirements to youth hunters.
1. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Allow youth hunters to kill any white-tailed deer in areas where only white-tailed bucks or white-tailed bucks with antler restrictions are legal.
Allow youth hunters to kill any mule deer buck in areas where only 3 pt. minimum mule deer bucks are legal.
A combination of Option 2 and Option 3.
:yike: :bdid:
I remember the last year they did this over in the Methow. A guy camped next to us came down one day with two 2-points on a cart. Had his 6 year old and 8 year old boys with him, and one rifle. Said the boys both shot their respective deer with his 300 win mag. Both were neck shot. Uh huh.
EXACTLY! :yeah:
Having an open season would hurt the Mule Deer even more, if there is sufficient numbers in an area give out a structured amount of tags to youth to limit the impact of the entire herd. I also voted to keep the Bear season during Deer/Elk for similar reasons that have already been stated, if a person takes a week off to hunt Deer/Elk and tags out, but has found good Bear sign while out they should be able to go after Bear as an option in my opinion. :twocents:
Post by: bearpaw on August 28, 2017, 10:30:37 AM
Can someone tell me what they do with this info? Are these suggestions or "up to a vote"?
Example:QuoteSpecies: Deer
Issue:
Improve the first time experience for youth hunters. Allow more liberal deer hunting requirements for youth hunters in those locations that can handle a moderate increase in hunting pressure.
Background:
Recruitment of new hunters is a priority for the Department. Some argue that many of the restrictions related to which animals are legal for harvest make it difficult for youth hunters to have a successful, first-time hunting experience. Some Districts in the state are of the opinion that they have the resources to offer more liberal legal animal requirements to youth hunters.
1. Select and comment on an alternative:
No change
Allow youth hunters to kill any white-tailed deer in areas where only white-tailed bucks or white-tailed bucks with antler restrictions are legal.
Allow youth hunters to kill any mule deer buck in areas where only 3 pt. minimum mule deer bucks are legal.
A combination of Option 2 and Option 3.
:yike: :bdid:
I remember the last year they did this over in the Methow. A guy camped next to us came down one day with two 2-points on a cart. Had his 6 year old and 8 year old boys with him, and one rifle. Said the boys both shot their respective deer with his 300 win mag. Both were neck shot. Uh huh.
If they are worried about illegal take I think it would be a bigger mistake to allow any buck for youth than to allow bear hunting! I like the tohiuught of increasing opportunity for youth but we need to protect the resource at the same time. :twocents:
Post by: boneaddict on August 28, 2017, 10:46:55 AM
Post by: buglebrush on August 28, 2017, 12:41:59 PM
just shaking my head.
Exactly. It shouldn't surprise me anymore, but somehow it still does. WDFW's incompetence is staggering. :bash:
Post by: buglebrush on August 28, 2017, 12:47:08 PM
Post by: konradcountry on August 28, 2017, 02:13:52 PM
I don't think that guys with bear tags only out party hunting for elk would be stopped by a new rule. It is currently legal to wander around the woods with a rifle completely separate from hunting. So those guys that currently party hunt would still be legal to go with their buddies and carry a rifle. Only thing that would change is they couldn't legally shoot a bear, so I guess they borrow a tag from someone else. The only thing that changes is WDFW loses the sale of a few bear tags. How many are we really talking about? One or two a year?
Yea they really haven't thought this through. A group of guys in the woods with guns might be target shooting. Do they need to empty their pockets to show that they don't have any tags? What if it is a hiker with a rifle for protection?
But I've very skeptical of these party poachers in the first place and it just sounds like paranoia.
I doubt most poachers buy any tag at all. I would bet most are shooting deer and elk in areas where they know that no one is around. I highly doubt most are going around in parties with bear tags.
Those supposed party poachers are probably young males with limited budgets just roaming around the woods. Probably 21 year olds drinking beer and scaring off any wild game within miles.
I'm all for increasing penalties against poachers but this won't do anything.
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on August 28, 2017, 02:38:17 PM
Post by: Special T on August 28, 2017, 02:56:10 PM
I wonder where sportsmen get the idea that they are only a piggy bank?
Post by: steeleywhopper on August 28, 2017, 04:06:48 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on August 29, 2017, 05:50:15 PM
This is my feeling on any law that penalizes law abiding sportsmen so the corrupt, inept LE of WDFW has a little easier job. Having a gun during archery deer seasons that overlaps bear comes to mind. :bash: :bash:
Post by: bighorn1 on August 29, 2017, 06:39:20 PM
Post by: crowinghen on August 29, 2017, 07:12:32 PM
I am so sick of these pre-emptive rules that turn legal sportsmen into outlaws. If party hunting is a problem - emphasize patrols/investigations into the areas of concern and make some busts...don't pass a law making it easy to write a hundred tickets...probably 99 of them to well intentioned sportsmen who don't hear/know about this new stupid rule.
This is my feeling on any law that penalizes law abiding sportsmen so the corrupt, inept LE of WDFW has a little easier job. Having a gun during archery deer seasons that overlaps bear comes to mind. :bash: :bash:
Exactly!
Post by: SCRUBS on August 29, 2017, 07:59:17 PM
I am so sick of these pre-emptive rules that turn legal sportsmen into outlaws. If party hunting is a problem - emphasize patrols/investigations into the areas of concern and make some busts...don't pass a law making it easy to write a hundred tickets...probably 99 of them to well intentioned sportsmen who don't hear/know about this new stupid rule.
This is my feeling on any law that penalizes law abiding sportsmen so the corrupt, inept LE of WDFW has a little easier job. Having a gun during archery deer seasons that overlaps bear comes to mind. :bash: :bash:
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah:
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on September 16, 2017, 09:45:28 AM