Post by: Humptulips on February 07, 2021, 05:25:57 PM
I will post a link here when it is opened for comments.
No, this will not happen but down the road a lot of comments asking for this may help us get a change in status at some point in the future.
https://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/season-setting?fbclid=IwAR0eo3aqOgMx0kN2MlIjnzAO81N_Go8ctWukQtSAw2wkx4c1_0WA-QwItSI#
Go to furbearers/small game
WAC 220-400-020 It's the first proposal
Post by: fowl smacker on February 07, 2021, 05:34:56 PM
On February 11th you will be able to comment on the second round of Hunting Season Proposals. Among them are a couple items related to trapping. One of them is changing rabbits and hares status from small game to dual small game/furbearer. It might seem unrelated but I would like you to urge the Commissioners to also change the status of Bear and Cougar to dual status big game/furbearer.Asking a serious question here, what would the change do? Why would we want it changed?
I will post a link here when it is opened for comments.
No, this will not happen but down the road a lot of comments asking for this may help us get a change in status at some point in the future.
Post by: Humptulips on February 07, 2021, 05:50:56 PM
Post by: Loup Loup on February 07, 2021, 05:57:04 PM
Is wolf classified as a big game animal?
Post by: big wood on February 07, 2021, 05:59:32 PM
Post by: Jpmiller on February 07, 2021, 05:59:49 PM
Post by: pd on February 07, 2021, 06:01:28 PM
Eventually a trapping season for both species.
Hi Bruce. Let's break this down into 2 different ideas.
I don't hunt rabbits/hares, so have little perspective. Tell us why making hares/rabbits both a small game species and also a furbearer species would be a good thing. I guess it makes sense to make them available to trappers--but is that it? If so, OK by me. (Honestly, I don't know why you need the "furbearer" stamp of approval. I can't see that anybody really cares that much about rabbits. Maybe I am wrong.)
Next, the issue of trapping for bears and cougars. Sure, I would support that. But, I know nothing about this as well. Talk to us about it, please.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on February 07, 2021, 06:16:04 PM
Trapping a cougar would not be too different than trapping bobcats I would think, bait, curiosity lures, etc., again...just need a bigger box!
Post by: Loup Loup on February 07, 2021, 06:41:57 PM
I must admit, I did not think they would dual rate rabbits. Both game animal and furbearer.
In a nutshell, trapping is not a legal method of take for a game animal. The Dept has been able to dismiss requests to trap cougar, bear out of hand simply by stating they are game animals end of discussion.
Now if they dual rate rabbits so they can be trapped, the presidence is established to dual rate other species.
I beleive persueing the trapping of cougar and bear is a pipe dream. My take is the real goal would be eventually the legallizeing of trapping of wolves by the license buying public as a management tool. Trapping wolves has already been well established by our good neighbor Idaho.
Eventually it will be either Government trappers trapping and gunning wolves at upwards of $100,000 per wolf, or having private enterprise do the bulk of the control.
I have long maintained that the growing wolf population will be an arrow in our quiver to get back some use of foothold traps and snares.
More to it than I want to type, but this dual rate is a foot in the door.
Post by: Humptulips on February 07, 2021, 08:39:36 PM
Rabbit trapping is coming about because some people asked for it. Not trappers, I believe it is coming from the survivalist types. I see no reason to oppose it.
So why ask for bear and cougar. You only get something by asking and the rabbit status is a good opening to bring the subject up. Are they going to adopt the idea. No but if we keep talking about it we get them used to the idea of it and that maybe helps down the road.
Maine has a bear trapping season. Who wouldn't like to catch a bear? Texas allows cougar trapping. NM did last year but I'm not sure about its status now.
It could also open up WCO work on these animals. Will we replace hound guys? Absolutely not but maybe there are places where hounds are not feasible.
There are some guys right now permitted to trap bears but it seems to be a secret club. I would like to see it opened up to anyone who wanted to do the work.
How about a 48 hrs trap check on land trapsI was just in a conference call Friday defending the language we have now. There is interest in making the trapcheck laws more restrictive so I think that is not doable. We are keeping the current language for three more years.
Post by: Loup Loup on February 07, 2021, 09:07:41 PM
But I will say there is more chance, and more need for progress down the road with wolf trapping tthan going off halfcocked early on a no chance wild goose and perhaps loseing some credibility.
Post by: hunter399 on February 07, 2021, 09:13:49 PM
Would spring bear hunting be erased so timber company's can hire trappers.
Just asking................
Post by: carpsniperg2 on February 07, 2021, 09:19:11 PM
Post by: hunter399 on February 07, 2021, 10:26:45 PM
Why can't we get padded foot traps,WDFW uses them to put collars on.
Post by: Oh Mah on February 07, 2021, 10:51:43 PM
SQUIRREL NEEDS TO BE PUT ON THAT LIST ALSO IMO.
Post by: bearpaw on February 07, 2021, 11:40:06 PM
There already is precedence for dual status. Bobcats and raccoons both are small game/furbearer.
Rabbit trapping is coming about because some people asked for it. Not trappers, I believe it is coming from the survivalist types. I see no reason to oppose it.
So why ask for bear and cougar. You only get something by asking and the rabbit status is a good opening to bring the subject up. Are they going to adopt the idea. No but if we keep talking about it we get them used to the idea of it and that maybe helps down the road.
Maine has a bear trapping season. Who wouldn't like to catch a bear? Texas allows cougar trapping. NM did last year but I'm not sure about its status now.
It could also open up WCO work on these animals. Will we replace hound guys? Absolutely not but maybe there are places where hounds are not feasible.
There are some guys right now permitted to trap bears but it seems to be a secret club. I would like to see it opened up to anyone who wanted to do the work.How about a 48 hrs trap check on land trapsI was just in a conference call Friday defending the language we have now. There is interest in making the trapcheck laws more restrictive so I think that is not doable. We are keeping the current language for three more years.
:yeah: I completely agree 100%, this is the type of forward thinking the outdoor community must learn to use!
Post by: Humptulips on February 08, 2021, 12:18:51 AM
How would "trapping" bears effect spring bear season.Timber companies already hire trappers. The only thing that would change there is maybe it would open up to anyone interested. Right now it is a secret club and nobody gets admittance unless you know someone. Heck, I am President of the Trappers Association and I don't know the secret hand shake. :dunno:
Would spring bear hunting be erased so timber company's can hire trappers.
Just asking................
I would hope that this Special Permit trapping would be secondary to recreational hunters and trappers.
All I'm trying to imply is be careful what you ask for.In a way making cougar and bear furbearers would open the door to padded jaw traps. On a legitimate complaint the department can issue a Special trapping permit for furbearers on private land. With that permit you can keep the animal but you cannot sell it.
Why can't we get padded foot traps,WDFW uses them to put collars on.
Post by: wags on February 08, 2021, 08:04:30 AM
I could imagine it coming from someone/group who wants to practice survival training exercises. Don't really have a problem with it.
Post by: wags on February 08, 2021, 08:14:43 AM
I'm with you on it Humptulips,It makes sense(thats why they wont do it)and its time we hunters and trappers started making noise like the antis in every way we can with as many as we can.Squirrels; that can be a fun topic. eastern gray squirrels are an invasive species and you can pretty much do with them whatever you like.
SQUIRREL NEEDS TO BE PUT ON THAT LIST ALSO IMO.
An interesting subject is Douglass squirrels. Ask the WDFW why they are on the state protected species list, they have been for at least 40 years that I can remember. They (the Department) have no clue why they are protected. I have asked them the question many times over the years and I always hear the same thing; "We will get back to you on that", which by the way is their standard answer to most difficult questions. Of course you never hear back.
Post by: hunter399 on February 08, 2021, 08:30:01 AM
Hasn't spring bear permits been reduced in recent years due to this secret club trapping.
Post by: Ghost Hunter on February 08, 2021, 08:36:11 AM
Would trapping cougars and bears even be feasible with Washington's trap limitations? I don't know anything about it, I'm all for any expansion of take of predators if it's helpful.
Man, I would dig a pit for that opportunity. Private property of course.
Post by: hunter399 on February 08, 2021, 09:02:53 AM
I looked it up on WDFW site and ..........
I do believe every timber company in the state would apply for special trapping permits and a serious reduction in spring bear tags would occur .
Just my opinion,not worth much.
I realize your upset that trapping is happening of bears and you can't be apart of it.
Every spring bear hunter should be upset.
It's the reason we can't have an OTC spring bear or Alot more permits.
Post by: Grizzlybuiltcontracting on February 08, 2021, 10:02:31 AM
On February 11th you will be able to comment on the second round of Hunting Season Proposals. Among them are a couple items related to trapping. One of them is changing rabbits and hares status from small game to dual small game/furbearer. It might seem unrelated but I would like you to urge the Commissioners to also change the status of Bear and Cougar to dual status big game/furbearer.
I will post a link here when it is opened for comments.
No, this will not happen but down the road a lot of comments asking for this may help us get a change in status at some point in the future.
Im All In!
Where and How do we comment on Feb 11?
Post by: Humptulips on February 08, 2021, 10:07:37 AM
I'll post a link to comment on the 11th.On February 11th you will be able to comment on the second round of Hunting Season Proposals. Among them are a couple items related to trapping. One of them is changing rabbits and hares status from small game to dual small game/furbearer. It might seem unrelated but I would like you to urge the Commissioners to also change the status of Bear and Cougar to dual status big game/furbearer.
I will post a link here when it is opened for comments.
No, this will not happen but down the road a lot of comments asking for this may help us get a change in status at some point in the future.
Im All In!
Where and How do we comment on Feb 11?
No need to answer my two questions above .Timber companies can do that right now and some do.
I looked it up on WDFW site and ..........
I do believe every timber company in the state would apply for special trapping permits and a serious reduction in spring bear tags would occur .
Just my opinion,not worth much.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on February 08, 2021, 10:09:01 AM
On February 11th you will be able to comment on the second round of Hunting Season Proposals. Among them are a couple items related to trapping. One of them is changing rabbits and hares status from small game to dual small game/furbearer. It might seem unrelated but I would like you to urge the Commissioners to also change the status of Bear and Cougar to dual status big game/furbearer.
I will post a link here when it is opened for comments.
No, this will not happen but down the road a lot of comments asking for this may help us get a change in status at some point in the future.
Make sure you remind us when the time comes so we can address your request.
Post by: Goshawk on February 20, 2021, 09:33:44 PM
How would "trapping" bears effect spring bear season.
Would spring bear hunting be erased so timber company's can hire trappers.
Just asking................
They can and do already hire snare trappers for bear; with proper permits of course...
Post by: hunter399 on February 20, 2021, 10:54:17 PM
And give that option to every trapper in the state,and tell me spring bear permits will continue to stay the same.How would "trapping" bears effect spring bear season.
Would spring bear hunting be erased so timber company's can hire trappers.
Just asking................
They can and do already hire snare trappers for bear; with proper permits of course...
Post by: hunter399 on February 20, 2021, 11:39:40 PM
I'll support your cause and comment and help you out.
Then when bear trapping is exposed through the many permits given out ,just maybe we can get more recreational permits.
Post by: Humptulips on February 21, 2021, 01:58:24 AM
I'll tell ya what.There very well is likely to be more bear snare permits issued as a result of the hammering hound guys have seen from the anti-hunting groups regardless of any actions that may benefit trappers in general.
I'll support your cause and comment and help you out.
Then when bear trapping is exposed through the many permits given out ,just maybe we can get more recreational permits.
If bears were listed as furbearers, which is a longshot at best, I do not think there would be more bear snare permits issued because of a change in status. We might see a change who gets them though.
Post by: hunter399 on February 21, 2021, 08:06:38 AM
Like said I will go change my comments for trapping rabbits for ya . all though I do think trapping bears would be a long shot in this state . look at what the anti"s are trying to do to the recreational hunt. Alot of my negativity stems from that I think.I'll tell ya what.There very well is likely to be more bear snare permits issued as a result of the hammering hound guys have seen from the anti-hunting groups regardless of any actions that may benefit trappers in general.
I'll support your cause and comment and help you out.
Then when bear trapping is exposed through the many permits given out ,just maybe we can get more recreational permits.
If bears were listed as furbearers, which is a longshot at best, I do not think there would be more bear snare permits issued because of a change in status. We might see a change who gets them though.
Post by: Bigshooter on February 21, 2021, 09:04:04 AM
Post by: Tbar on February 21, 2021, 09:27:48 AM
The secret hand shake club to get to trap and run hounds on timber company is stupid right now. These guys are killing so many bears and cougars that you wouldn't believe me if I told you the numbers. I believe this club needs to end and more tags need to be given to the average hunter. There is no reason why on the west side of the state if you got rid of this secret club that we couldn't have a general season spring hunt.The anger and blame towards big timber is misguided at best. We are far more likely to fall in line with California and make it illegal to hunt predators at all than have a general spring season. I think you would find more alliances and reap more net benefits by working with timber than against. The hounds were taken by the will of the people in this state not timber. The ill will is misplaced IMO.
Post by: KFhunter on February 21, 2021, 10:26:16 AM
It was a presentation about wildlife in general, but that stood out.
Post by: Humptulips on February 21, 2021, 11:07:52 AM
There are however small timber land owners that cannot get permits for hounds because of the size of their property. They can get bear snare permits but it is expensive and of course they cannot keep the bear.
There is a loophole in the law though in that if bear were a furbearer any bear caught could be retained for personal use even if caught with a Special Trapping Permit.
There are two guys in my area these changes would fit. One ended up hiring the USDA to trap the bears and he paid to have them butchered and donated to ?, not sure where exactly they went but he didn't get to keep them.
The other guy couldn't afford trapping so he lives with problem and I would estimate 1/3 of his trees are bear damaged.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on February 21, 2021, 11:33:54 AM
Post by: Humptulips on February 21, 2021, 11:59:45 AM
Post by: Tbar on February 21, 2021, 12:14:06 PM
Just to be clear, the last thing I want to do is take opportunity away from the hound guys or impact anyone's ability to address damage complaints. I do not think large timberland owners will do anything different then they have been doing.If this is the case it may be wise to try to get a champion within the RDAN to guide the department to a decision. Without (and sometimes with) guidance I don't see adoption. Also if you target the next policy session there may be some stability restored to the commission.
There are however small timber land owners that cannot get permits for hounds because of the size of their property. They can get bear snare permits but it is expensive and of course they cannot keep the bear.
There is a loophole in the law though in that if bear were a furbearer any bear caught could be retained for personal use even if caught with a Special Trapping Permit.
There are two guys in my area these changes would fit. One ended up hiring the USDA to trap the bears and he paid to have them butchered and donated to ?, not sure where exactly they went but he didn't get to keep them.
The other guy couldn't afford trapping so he lives with problem and I would estimate 1/3 of his trees are bear damaged.
Post by: Bigshooter on February 21, 2021, 12:28:06 PM
The secret hand shake club to get to trap and run hounds on timber company is stupid right now. These guys are killing so many bears and cougars that you wouldn't believe me if I told you the numbers. I believe this club needs to end and more tags need to be given to the average hunter. There is no reason why on the west side of the state if you got rid of this secret club that we couldn't have a general season spring hunt.The anger and blame towards big timber is misguided at best. We are far more likely to fall in line with California and make it illegal to hunt predators at all than have a general spring season. I think you would find more alliances and reap more net benefits by working with timber than against. The hounds were taken by the will of the people in this state not timber. The ill will is misplaced IMO.
Who's angry at big timber? I have no ill will towards anyone. All i'm saying is why should 1 guy get to kill 100's of bear and cougar every year. All the while the average hunter can't hunt during the spring. It's a joke.
Post by: Tbar on February 21, 2021, 12:40:44 PM
It's not a joke, and the blame goes to the urban population in this state. While currently your reference points are not mutually exclusive one could argue that they could be or maybe more importantly should be. I bolded where the ill will comment came from.The secret hand shake club to get to trap and run hounds on timber company is stupid right now. These guys are killing so many bears and cougars that you wouldn't believe me if I told you the numbers. I believe this club needs to end and more tags need to be given to the average hunter. There is no reason why on the west side of the state if you got rid of this secret club that we couldn't have a general season spring hunt.The anger and blame towards big timber is misguided at best. We are far more likely to fall in line with California and make it illegal to hunt predators at all than have a general spring season. I think you would find more alliances and reap more net benefits by working with timber than against. The hounds were taken by the will of the people in this state not timber. The ill will is misplaced IMO.
Who's angry at big timber? I have no ill will towards anyone. All i'm saying is why should 1 guy get to kill 100's of bear and cougar every year. All the while the average hunter can't hunt during the spring. It's a joke.
Post by: Bigshooter on February 21, 2021, 03:40:48 PM
It's not a joke, and the blame goes to the urban population in this state. While currently your reference points are not mutually exclusive one could argue that they could be or maybe more importantly should be. I bolded where the ill will comment came from.The secret hand shake club to get to trap and run hounds on timber company is stupid right now. These guys are killing so many bears and cougars that you wouldn't believe me if I told you the numbers. I believe this club needs to end and more tags need to be given to the average hunter. There is no reason why on the west side of the state if you got rid of this secret club that we couldn't have a general season spring hunt.The anger and blame towards big timber is misguided at best. We are far more likely to fall in line with California and make it illegal to hunt predators at all than have a general spring season. I think you would find more alliances and reap more net benefits by working with timber than against. The hounds were taken by the will of the people in this state not timber. The ill will is misplaced IMO.
Who's angry at big timber? I have no ill will towards anyone. All i'm saying is why should 1 guy get to kill 100's of bear and cougar every year. All the while the average hunter can't hunt during the spring. It's a joke.
I have zero ill will towards guys that know the hand shake. I'm not bitter about it at all. I find it stupid that wdfw is fine with it.
It is a joke. Nobody should be getting to do what these guys are doing. You can blame it on whoever you want. But there are better ways of getting the same result.
Post by: Tbar on February 21, 2021, 04:03:00 PM
Post by: Alan K on February 21, 2021, 04:14:14 PM
The way I understand it, the pool of folks able to meet those check boxes is pretty shallow and shrinking every day as they move to Idaho etc.. In many cases folks don't meet the first item. The hounding community doesn't have a good reputation because there were a lot of guys who became outlaws not willing to give it up despite the initiatives ban.
And timber has nothing to do with cougar removals, they don't damage property for timber companies. The cat removals are typically done for smaller property owners who are having livestock killed repeatedly, or for public safety removals.
Depredation removals should not be confused with recreational hunting. They're a fraction of the take, and in no way even scratch population numbers. The state could sustain a spring bear hunt just fine regardless of any depredation removals.
Post by: Goshawk on February 23, 2021, 08:45:43 PM
Land owners have the ability to open their grounds to hunting just as much as anyone else, even limiting the weapon type (archery, shotgun, etc.) for safety if necessary. Some of our Timber lands are buttoned up drum tight and open to nobody for any form of recreational take. Then when the animals become a problem, they run crying to the State for special take permits. Somehow that just seems wrong that my tax dollars are spent to fund this practice when the solution is already there to be used.
Post by: hunter399 on February 23, 2021, 10:31:35 PM
Regarding Depredation hunts and bear snaring, I'm very much against them both.:yeah:
Land owners have the ability to open their grounds to hunting just as much as anyone else, even limiting the weapon type (archery, shotgun, etc.) for safety if necessary. Some of our Timber lands are buttoned up drum tight and open to nobody for any form of recreational take. Then when the animals become a problem, they run crying to the State for special take permits. Somehow that just seems wrong that my tax dollars are spent to fund this practice when the solution is already there to be used.
Totally agree
Post by: GWP on February 24, 2021, 12:17:25 AM
Post by: hunter399 on February 24, 2021, 01:36:27 AM
It only takes a few to ruin it. I understand the big land owners using a system that they can rely upon and they know works. Not to mention it always seems someone seems to get their nose bent one way or another and either complains or starts trouble. Why go through all that? It works for them as is. They are not in the ‘feel good’ business, and there really is no reason for them to want or need to open up to an unknown element of hunters. While it would be nice of them to spread it out, I would not blame them if they did not.Ya but it = out something like this.
I'm gonna complain about being
On welfare ,I don't want a job.
My gun rights,I voted biden
No ammo on shelves,never stops at gun store
Hate my job,never apply for a new one
Why work ,someone else will fix my problems
Bear damage,not gonna let access for hunters.
Kinda see how that works out.
It's also a two way road.
Trees are a assets ,investment,ect to timber company
Bear are also an asset to the state and people of Washington.
But at the end of the day timber copanys have done very little to solve there own problem.
Seems they just want the problem gone.
No help from hunters
It's there right to not allow access.
Don't ask tax payers to pay for your permits.
Through the department of agriculture /Federal permits.
Why do you think it's a special club cause it's not issued through the state.
Here's the kicker as Washington becomes more of a grizzly recovering zone ,snare permits will be pulled back.
Post by: GWP on February 24, 2021, 09:23:52 AM
Same with Buffalo way back. How do you pare them down to nothing? Pro's. You find the best at what they do and put them to work. The fewer people to deal with, the easier it will be. And they will be more efficient for the most part.
Get a license, get the reputation, and you can also be a 'professional hunter' with all the headaches and problems that go along with that 'job'. And yes, it is a job. Everything becomes a 'job' when you do enough of it and you are expected to perform.
Sure, opening it up would be great for the public, but there is a downside for them to do that.
Post by: hunter399 on February 24, 2021, 11:38:02 AM
That's all I'm say in.
Post by: Humptulips on February 24, 2021, 01:32:28 PM
Regarding Depredation hunts and bear snaring, I'm very much against them both.One size does not fit all. I'll just take from the two examples near me I am familiar with.
Land owners have the ability to open their grounds to hunting just as much as anyone else, even limiting the weapon type (archery, shotgun, etc.) for safety if necessary. Some of our Timber lands are buttoned up drum tight and open to nobody for any form of recreational take. Then when the animals become a problem, they run crying to the State for special take permits. Somehow that just seems wrong that my tax dollars are spent to fund this practice when the solution is already there to be used.
The one guy owns a pretty good chunk of land by most standards but it is in three different chunks surrounded by FS and some residential properties. He tried the depredation hunts in the Spring which didn't help. Pursuit has to be called off when the bear gets a ways off the property. In 4 years they never killed one bear although they chased a lot. The bears practically beat the hunters back to the property. He finally hired USDA and they snared them and the guy paid to have the bears professionally butchered and donated.
This land and all adjacent land is the same age second growth or larger trees on the FS. No where can you see well enough to make boot hunting effective. It is open to public hunting.
The other guy owns about 15 acres up against the ONP. Same thing with the trees, the age of trees bears peel precludes effective boot hunting and hound would just be on the Park in short order.
The only way to take these bears is with bait, either baited tree stands, which the law does not allow even a permit for or snares which can be permitted.
I view this as a matter of opportunity. Traditional boot hunters will never harvest any of these bears. The land owners are suffering because there is no way to realistically control the population. The only option at present is to hire USDA to snare the bears. The way the laws are the options are limited. If we could go back to the way things were prior to 1996, that would be great but we cannot.
These animals are an opportunity for a user group, trappers, that no other group can take advantage of. Why not let trappers take advantage of the opportunity.
Listing bears and cougar as furbearers would be a first step. That doesn't get a change in the rules but it opens the door on some things the Commission could approve down the road.
My understanding of the law is that if they were furbearers the Department could issue a site specific permit to snare bears but the trapper could keep the bear as long as they did not sell it. They could also initiate (live traps) a bear trapping season but both would have to go before the Commission to be approved so anyone could have their comment pro or con before that happened.
Post by: headshot5 on February 24, 2021, 04:19:55 PM
Regarding Depredation hunts and bear snaring, I'm very much against them both.One size does not fit all. I'll just take from the two examples near me I am familiar with.
Land owners have the ability to open their grounds to hunting just as much as anyone else, even limiting the weapon type (archery, shotgun, etc.) for safety if necessary. Some of our Timber lands are buttoned up drum tight and open to nobody for any form of recreational take. Then when the animals become a problem, they run crying to the State for special take permits. Somehow that just seems wrong that my tax dollars are spent to fund this practice when the solution is already there to be used.
The one guy owns a pretty good chunk of land by most standards but it is in three different chunks surrounded by FS and some residential properties. He tried the depredation hunts in the Spring which didn't help. Pursuit has to be called off when the bear gets a ways off the property. In 4 years they never killed one bear although they chased a lot. The bears practically beat the hunters back to the property. He finally hired USDA and they snared them and the guy paid to have the bears professionally butchered and donated.
This land and all adjacent land is the same age second growth or larger trees on the FS. No where can you see well enough to make boot hunting effective. It is open to public hunting.
The other guy owns about 15 acres up against the ONP. Same thing with the trees, the age of trees bears peel precludes effective boot hunting and hound would just be on the Park in short order.
The only way to take these bears is with bait, either baited tree stands, which the law does not allow even a permit for or snares which can be permitted.
I view this as a matter of opportunity. Traditional boot hunters will never harvest any of these bears. The land owners are suffering because there is no way to realistically control the population. The only option at present is to hire USDA to snare the bears. The way the laws are the options are limited. If we could go back to the way things were prior to 1996, that would be great but we cannot.
These animals are an opportunity for a user group, trappers, that no other group can take advantage of. Why not let trappers take advantage of the opportunity.
Listing bears and cougar as furbearers would be a first step. That doesn't get a change in the rules but it opens the door on some things the Commission could approve down the road.
My understanding of the law is that if they were furbearers the Department could issue a site specific permit to snare bears but the trapper could keep the bear as long as they did not sell it. They could also initiate (live traps) a bear trapping season but both would have to go before the Commission to be approved so anyone could have their comment pro or con before that happened.
I'm on board 100% It is crazy to me all the people who think we are in a predator pit in Washington, but they are against adding another tool to the toolbox to help manage predators.