Post by: Dman on January 18, 2008, 03:23:50 PM
Without surprise, one of the main issues to be discussed so far is the Tribal Right to both hunt wolves once they are de-listed and asserting that right. Above attached was presentation made as part of overall October agenda. People really need to get involved in commenting on this process, all the full meeting agenda's are available online. One of the key issues being mulled over is funding for re-establishing wolves in Wa. to the point of de-listing. So far, the general consensus is that this will come from potential hunting license surcharges. These fund's should come from the general State population as an ESA recovery type of taxation, DFW just needs to approach the legisltature, but more people need to voice that. No wolves at all in not an option, as they are both protected and already established. The primary plans call for re-establishing a sizeable population in the Cascades as well, not just the NE and SE corners. If license buyer's snooze on this one, they could be footing the bill for tribal hunts, compensation to ranchers for loss and relocation cost's without any input. I am a little disappointed in the process so far. I was first told I would be asked for my input after applying for the work group, but since the sessions started, they have been very closed mouth about releasing any details of the "plan" and if you read through the minutes, they are still discussing if it's a good idea to inform people about what the intent is. I say not only yes, but they are obligated to.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 18, 2008, 03:29:56 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/diversty/soc/gray_wolf/tribal_hunt.pdf
they are still discussing if it's a good idea to inform people about what the intent is.
Typical of our nanny state. They don't know whats best for them so we should make the decisions instead >:(
Post by: wackmaster on January 19, 2008, 05:00:40 PM
Post by: Slider on January 20, 2008, 11:25:12 AM
Post by: Houndhunter on January 20, 2008, 03:34:01 PM
Post by: vanhornhunter on January 20, 2008, 09:46:26 PM
Post by: mossback91 on January 20, 2008, 09:48:42 PM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on January 21, 2008, 09:22:41 AM
Post by: Houndhunter on January 22, 2008, 12:50:55 PM
Post by: mossback91 on January 22, 2008, 06:34:12 PM
well think bout this, did they hunt wolves for a living with spears and bows?? hell no, they never hunted them back then so they shouldnt be the only ones hunting them nowthey might have killed a few. The great brave men they were. Or mabye they counted coupe to show how brave they were. get 3 feather per a wolf, 1 for every man you count coupe on and 6 feathers for o*censored*ing coupe on grizz.
Post by: Cougeyes on January 23, 2008, 09:34:14 PM
Post by: Ridgerunner on January 24, 2008, 11:32:38 AM
Post by: Dman on January 30, 2008, 05:15:43 PM
For once the liberal indian seasons may benefit us,
That might be true, but they still don't get the concept of "co-manager's". It doesn't mean that you get to exploit every potential hunting opportunity before it even exist's -Ex. Blue Mountains moose already being hunted by tribes with no State permits allowed and now ESA listed wolves. BS, they just keep insisting on the biggest piece of the pie and it sucks. It's supposed to be 50/50, how is it 50/50 when we don't have any of those opportunities, or in the case of the wolves, our "right" to potentially hunt them should flow consistently with the tribes "asserted" right, not be an afterthought. From the latest meeting note's I've seen, there seems to be a reluctance to have the non-hunting public foot any of the bill to re-establish the wolves if they will be hunted by licence holders. That's when DFW reps need to emphasize the fact that MOST of the fund's would still come from license holder's to re-establish wolves, so there should be a right to hunt them but I don't know if it will get done. I have doubts. I would never hunt wolves myself, I just think that non-tribal hunters definitely should get a shot equally and I do not think they could be increased in number without hunting them at all.
Post by: Slider on January 30, 2008, 05:50:12 PM
Post by: actionshooter on January 31, 2008, 05:08:15 PM
Post by: Dman on February 02, 2008, 10:25:34 AM
Aren't the wolves under federal protection right now? I don't think fish and wildlife could impose a season IF they wanted to. As much as it hurts to say, the indians might be able to help keep the wolves in check when we can't do anything?
That's somewhat true, one of the long term purposes of this WDFW appointed group will be to determine if/when the State is ready to petition for de-listing, your right the Feds have to OK that, but the information to do so would come from WDFW's bio's, etc.. There are goals for getting that done. The indians are bound by the same Federal protections, they do apply to the tribe's as an inter-government agreement, but again, the indians are already jockying for their piece of the pie, where given the talks I'm thinking will undoubtably be the largest, if and when hunting for wolves is allowed in Wa.. I only care in principle. if they want to hunt them as a top priority, they should allow wolves to become established on at least a portion of their Reservation, right now the populations I'm aware of are totally off reservation, but it there is a lot of habitat on the res that is not used for cattle ranching, etc.. The tribe has offered a spot for antelope to reside on the res., so why not wolves? That comes accross to me like; 'We want to hunt wolves, but realize what damage they can do, so we don't want them mucking up our hunting for other game species on the Reservation, we'd rather they be a problem for others.'
Post by: actionshooter on February 02, 2008, 04:50:15 PM
Post by: Dman on February 03, 2008, 09:18:43 PM