Post by: Shannon on June 13, 2008, 07:31:19 PM
I heard a little bit about it a few years ago but nothing new. Just curious. I would think that if the baiting initiative was done incorrectly I would think the same would hold true for hound hunting on the same initiative. Anyone have any new news?
Post by: Coasthunterjay on June 13, 2008, 07:44:00 PM
still stated in the regs though.......No baiting of bears, so untill it says otherwise im a straight arrow!
sure would like to bait if i could though!
Post by: Abolt338 on June 14, 2008, 09:16:04 PM
This type of issue was replayed when the state passed another public initiated concerning certain traps as well as certain types of poison. I believe the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of the initiative in that particular case (though I believe they were wrong).
We'll just have to wait and see.
RW
Post by: HEADSHOT on June 21, 2008, 11:01:23 PM
Post by: PolarBear on June 21, 2008, 11:09:02 PM
Post by: ThePascoKid on June 22, 2008, 08:21:32 PM
Post by: Tall Chief Hunting Club on June 22, 2008, 08:39:12 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on June 23, 2008, 05:46:15 AM
if i remember correctly....you may use any scents you like for bears but it can not be anything they can eat or taste
Scent is against the law.
Post by: DeKuma on June 23, 2008, 09:05:37 AM
Post by: bucklucky on June 23, 2008, 09:09:46 AM
Post by: ICEMAN on June 23, 2008, 09:26:27 PM
Post by: Tall Chief Hunting Club on June 24, 2008, 04:08:39 PM
Post by: robodad on June 24, 2008, 04:26:18 PM
And if you put the stuff on a rag on the ground 20 yds away it would be considered bait then wouldn't it ?? :dunno:
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 24, 2008, 04:34:03 PM
RCW 77.15.245
Unlawful practices -- Black bear baiting -- Exceptions -- Illegal hunting -- Use of dogs -- Exceptions -- Penalties.
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of RCW 77.12.240, 77.36.020, 77.36.030, or any other provisions of law, it is unlawful to take, hunt, or attract black bear with the aid of bait.
(a) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the killing of black bear with the aid of bait by employees or agents of county, state, or federal agencies while acting in their official capacities for the purpose of protecting livestock, domestic animals, private property, or the public safety.
(b) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prevent the establishment and operation of feeding stations for black bear in order to prevent damage to commercial timberland.
(c) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the director from issuing a permit or memorandum of understanding to a public agency, university, or scientific or educational institution for the use of bait to attract black bear for scientific purposes.
(d) As used in this subsection, "bait" means a substance placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, scattered, or otherwise used for the purpose of attracting black bears to an area where one or more persons hunt or intend to hunt them.
(2) Notwithstanding RCW 77.12.240, 77.36.020, 77.36.030, or any other provisions of law, it is unlawful to hunt or pursue black bear, cougar, bobcat, or lynx with the aid of a dog or dogs.
(a) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the killing of black bear, cougar, bobcat, or lynx with the aid of a dog or dogs by employees or agents of county, state, or federal agencies while acting in their official capacities for the purpose of protecting livestock, domestic animals, private property, or the public safety. A dog or dogs may be used by the owner or tenant of real property consistent with a permit issued and conditioned by the director.
(b) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the director from issuing a permit or memorandum of understanding to a public agency, university, or scientific or educational institution for the use of a dog or dogs for the pursuit, capture and relocation, of black bear, cougar, bobcat, or lynx for scientific purposes.
(c) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the director from issuing a permit or memorandum of understanding to a public agency, university, or scientific or educational institution for the use of a dog or dogs for the killing of black bear, cougar, or bobcat, for the protection of a state and/or federally listed threatened or endangered species.
(3)(a) Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, the commission shall authorize the use of dogs only in selected areas within a game management unit to address a public safety need presented by one or more cougar. This authority may only be exercised after the commission has determined that no other practical alternative to the use of dogs exists, and after the commission has adopted rules describing the conditions in which dogs may be used. Conditions that may warrant the use of dogs within a game management unit include, but are not limited to, confirmed cougar/human safety incidents, confirmed cougar/livestock and cougar/pet depredations, and the number of cougar capture attempts and relocations.
(b) The department shall post on their internet web site the known details of all reported cougar/human, cougar/pet, or cougar/livestock interactions within ten days of receiving the report. The posted material must include, but is not limited to, the location and time of all reported sightings, and the known details of any cougar/livestock incidents.
(4) A person who violates subsection (1) or (2) of this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. In addition to appropriate criminal penalties, the department shall revoke the hunting license of a person who violates subsection (1) or (2) of this section and order the suspension of wildlife hunting privileges for a period of five years following the revocation. Following a subsequent violation of subsection (1) or (2) of this section by the same person, a hunting license shall not be issued to the person at any time.
[2005 c 107 § 1; 2001 c 253 § 31. Prior: 2000 c 248 § 1; 2000 c 107 § 260; 1997 c 1 § 1 (Initiative Measure No. 655, approved November 5, 1996). Formerly RCW 77.16.360.]
NOTES:
Effective date -- 2000 c 248: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [March 31, 2000]." [2000 c 248 § 2.]
Severability -- 1997 c 1 (Initiative Measure No. 655): "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [1997 c 1 § 2 (Initiative Measure No. 655, approved November 5, 1996).]
Post by: Gutpile on June 24, 2008, 04:49:37 PM
Post by: Tall Chief Hunting Club on June 24, 2008, 05:27:02 PM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 24, 2008, 05:28:18 PM
Post by: Tall Chief Hunting Club on June 24, 2008, 05:33:55 PM
Post by: HEADSHOT on June 25, 2008, 10:00:52 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on June 26, 2008, 03:15:33 AM
Quote
take the dogs n bait out of the woods and the critters numbers increase!
I have to disagree with this one statement. We are killing more bears now then we did before and the population is still increasing. It has nothing to do with the lack of bait or hounds. It is (was) sound management by F&G and sportsmen that allowed the population to grow into a large breeding base that now expands exponentially.
Post by: HEADSHOT on June 26, 2008, 07:59:56 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on June 27, 2008, 05:59:30 AM
Post by: Bofire on June 27, 2008, 07:37:42 AM
She argued that a guy cooking in camp carried scent on him, a woman in her time has a scent, even a guy camping for several days without bathing facilities carries a scent. Does that mean they are baiting?
Anyway she won the case and her argument was used to win other cases.
Carl
Post by: robodad on June 27, 2008, 08:01:01 AM
I think the law is for spreading the stuff for the purpose of attracting them or intentionally placing a substance out for the purpose of hunting over and not necessarily for what kind of perfume you prefer !!!
Post by: DeKuma on June 27, 2008, 08:02:59 AM
Post by: Coasthunterjay on June 27, 2008, 08:59:34 AM
Post by: robodad on June 27, 2008, 09:16:25 AM
i would still like an absolute answer because now that this comes up it makes it very vague, and ide love nothing more than to bait some bears........hell yah!
OMG !! OK, NO BAIT.
How's that :chuckle:
If you want to put a doughnut or two in your pocket, that is up to you, the law does not say you cannot pack a lunch, if you take the doughnuts out of your pocket and set them on a stump it is illegal.
Same with scents, if you want to attract a cougar to you by placing scent on your body then you are an idiot IMO but legal, squirting it on a trail or bush or stump or whatever would be illegal.
Post by: Bofire on June 27, 2008, 11:27:58 AM
I like to spray some around me and the caller.
Carl
Post by: bearmanric on June 27, 2008, 12:16:38 PM
Post by: ThePascoKid on June 27, 2008, 01:57:59 PM
Post by: rasbo on August 28, 2008, 11:44:06 AM
Post by: Timberlineduke on August 28, 2008, 06:11:30 PM
Here is the abomination........ :(
RCW 77.15.245
(d) As used in this subsection, "bait" means a substance placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, scattered, or otherwise used for the purpose of attracting black bears to an area where one or more persons hunt or intend to hunt them.
As a matter of fact.......it could be read into this...that if you happen upon an unoccupied bait area, or an area that has a natural food source, but was moved or piled up.....and you hunt over one of these areas....you could be quilty of baiting.
Case and point: A young kid has permission to hunt geese in a farmers potatoe field.....but a day or two before....the farmer gets a truck full of potatoes stuck in the muddy field while on the way out with a load.....the only way to get the truck out is to dump the load of potatoes in the field and pull just the truck out with a tractor......two days later...the kid shows up to hunt geese.....sees the load of potatoes in the field and that it's attracking geese.....so he uses the potatoe pile as a blind and slays them......lo and behold....here comes one of our agents and tickets the kid for hunting over bait. Takes his geese, his gun and leaves him with a ticket. The kid finds a lawyer who is also a hunter to defend him in court.......the kid mows.....weedeats....split wood for the lawyer in order to pay him back somehow........they go to court.........lost......$500.00 fine.....a hunting violation on his record and no gun.
Now tell me that a hunter can know that by reading that RCW.......not a very warm and fuzzy feeling about what is given to us in our Game Reg's. :bash: