Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on December 03, 2011, 08:35:51 AM
http://tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwliveplayer&eventID=2011121002
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 08:43:37 AM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 08:46:26 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 03, 2011, 08:46:49 AM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 08:50:30 AM
WTH...I clicked on and found it but nothen showing ...has it started yet ?
Yes it's live right now. I believe it started at 8:00.
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:06:39 AM
http://tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwliveplayer&eventID=2011121002
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:07:56 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:23:02 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:30:17 AM
In my opinion several commissioners are showing their desire to maintain huntable populations of wildlife and license revenue.... :tup:
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 09:32:52 AM
Quote
A lot of people must be logging onto the video, there are interuptions.
I haven't had any issues.
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 09:34:52 AM
Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on December 03, 2011, 09:36:16 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on December 03, 2011, 09:40:51 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 09:44:37 AM
sounds like commissioner Perry is really pushing for language to protect our herds in eastern washington... :tup:
Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on December 03, 2011, 09:48:36 AM
Post by: mulehunter on December 03, 2011, 09:53:53 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 09:54:05 AM
Post by: mulehunter on December 03, 2011, 09:55:26 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:07:24 AM
Post by: bullcanyon on December 03, 2011, 10:10:39 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:11:29 AM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 10:12:40 AM
Floors me that they believe we don't already have breeding pairs in the s cascades. Are they being serious?
I haven't seen pictures or heard of any proof of that, have you?
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 10:14:17 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:23:31 AM
The commission just unanimously approved an ammendment that the goal is 15 bp's for 3 years, but if 18 bp's are reached delisting process can begin without waiting 3 years.
Yes it can begin but the delisted status gavel will not fall until the end of the three year waiting period. It only speeds up the delisting process. In other words, we will have to wait 3 years no matter what. If delisting takes a couple of years with court battles and all considered, hopefully all of that will be over at the end of the 3 years.
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 10:25:29 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on December 03, 2011, 10:25:48 AM
Floors me that they believe we don't already have breeding pairs in the s cascades. Are they being serious?
I haven't seen pictures or heard of any proof of that, have you?
:yeah:
Wolves where here long before the first pack was documented. Have to have solid proof. Dose not matter how creditable the observer is.
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:26:08 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:28:09 AM
Who was the guy just speaking who says "woof'" and "wooves". :chuckle:
Not sure I was listening while typing so I didn't get a visual on the voice. I think it was Perry. Schmitten just finished.
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 10:29:13 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:33:12 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:36:19 AM
Post by: denali on December 03, 2011, 10:37:49 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 10:41:13 AM
We are going to get stuck with this plan as amended. It's too many wolves to start with and there is great risk of herd losses, but at least there are some good added amendments.
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:44:09 AM
Mahnken just added some excellent statements.
We are going to get stuck with this plan as amended. It's too many wolves to start with and there is great risk of herd losses, but at least there are some good added amendments.
He did in fact, up until he folded and accepted it.
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:45:15 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 10:45:59 AM
Mahnken just added some excellent statements.
We are going to get stuck with this plan as amended. It's too many wolves to start with and there is great risk of herd losses, but at least there are some good added amendments.
He did in fact, up until he folded and accepted it.
He had already accepted it, he was just adding comments.
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:46:35 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 10:49:21 AM
Well I am very disappointed that we are stuck with 15 bp's. The biggest problem is the WDFW ability to monitor. By the time they say we have 15 bp's it will be closer to 100 bp's just like the other states.
Right now we have over 100 wolves and the WDFW thinks we have +-30.... :bash:
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:49:53 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 10:50:54 AM
I think that we need to put together a well thought out letter to the commission. It should be concise and precise in communicating our dissapointment in how they represented the Hunters and Outdoorsmen of the State of Washington.
Every hunter needs to send a letter, and we need to draft a letter from "Washington For Wildlife".
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:51:29 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 10:52:15 AM
I think that we need to put together a well thought out letter to the commission. It should be concise and precise in communicating our dissapointment in how they represented the Hunters and Outdoorsmen of the State of Washington.
Every hunter needs to send a letter, and we need to draft a letter from "Washington For Wildlife".
I just posted the same thing a couple back Dale...
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 10:55:46 AM
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 10:57:35 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 11:03:34 AM
I just don't see the plan having any affect on what happens with the wolves in this state. With or without a plan, they are going to increase in number and spread across the state into suitable habitat. They talk about "control" but what is that? A wolf hunting season? If that ever happens how many wolves will actually be killed? I'd guess not enough to make any difference at all. The only problem I may have with the plan is if they end up moving wolves around the state into areas that don't already have wolves. If they don't get there on their own, then they don't need to be there, ever, in my opinion.
I understand your position, but we already have wolves in my backyard. They already tried to attack my neighbors dogs, they already threatened one of our H-W members when she was deer hunting, they have already eaten beef in Stevens County, and H-W members are posting sightings and pictures on a regular basis. So like it or not we need a plan, it just sucks that we are stuck with 15 bp's that must be verified by WDFW. They can't even deal with cougar complaints much less wolf problems which have proven to be much worse for every other state.
On a positive note:
I do commend the commission for adding the amendments which were added, without those amendments this plan would be much worse.
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 11:08:44 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 03, 2011, 11:10:44 AM
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 11:16:04 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 11:16:39 AM
I wish these bios could tell me how many breeding pairs we have up here in the NW Corner of the state ... There are animals living here that never seen a person and if these Bios never get out of the truck and go for a hike then how are they so sure on what we have ? I know for a fact we have wolves living on Washington Pass... Between New Halem and Winthrop ..people I know have seen them on horse back ...Has anyone Ever heard of the DEPT .. mentioning these wolves which most likely came out of Canada ....how far is the border ? :dunno: the country is so rough around here not many like going out in it :rolleyes: :chuckle:
Therein lies the real problem.
It really doesn't matter how many BP's the plan specifies, unless the WDFW does a much better job of monitoring than they have been doing, there will be at least 4 wolves for every wolf they confirm.
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 11:24:21 AM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 11:25:54 AM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2011, 11:27:56 AM
I just don't see the plan having any affect on what happens with the wolves in this state. With or without a plan, they are going to increase in number and spread across the state into suitable habitat. They talk about "control" but what is that? A wolf hunting season? If that ever happens how many wolves will actually be killed? I'd guess not enough to make any difference at all. The only problem I may have with the plan is if they end up moving wolves around the state into areas that don't already have wolves. If they don't get there on their own, then they don't need to be there, ever, in my opinion.
I understand your position, but we already have wolves in my backyard. They already tried to attack my neighbors dogs, they already threatened one of our H-W members when she was deer hunting, they have already eaten beef in Stevens County, and H-W members are posting sightings and pictures on a regular basis. So like it or not we need a plan, it just sucks that we are stuck with 15 bp's that must be verified by WDFW. They can't even deal with cougar complaints much less wolf problems which have proven to be much worse for every other state.
On a positive note:
I do commend the commission for adding the amendments which were added, without those amendments this plan would be much worse.
Having the plan is fine, but really what does it do to change all the negative consequences of having wolves in this state? So if the wolf population gets to the minimum numbers required in the plan, and lethal wolf control is allowed- what does that lethal control mean? Simply that the state will sell wolf tags and people can attempt to hunt them? Or will they go up in helicopters and shoot them from the air, or poison them? You know, effective methods of control that will actually have an impact...
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 11:36:27 AM
I noticed in some of the commissioner's comments that they themselves may be doubtful of wolf management.
Perhaps wolves will end up being the straw that brings back trapping to this state.
Post by: trophyhunt on December 03, 2011, 11:44:00 AM
Post by: mulehunter on December 03, 2011, 11:55:35 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on December 03, 2011, 12:22:11 PM
I see your point now, all I can say is at least it sets a goal post where some sort of management can begin. After watching the poor success of wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana many of us are pretty much in agreement that sport hunting will not control wolf numbers.
I will be optimistic here. I think in time hunting may be a good tool. I think we have to except that there is a learning curve. There will be individuals who take the time to actually learn about wolves and apply that knowledge. Looking at current results may be misleading. How many hunters just thought they would go over there and shoot a wolf? Not as easy as it sounds. Remember most of us hunters are not even close to as good as we think we are. But, a few do come close by luck of skill.
Post by: dreamunelk on December 03, 2011, 12:23:21 PM
Anyone record those meeting. Pls post if possible.
Should be available in a day or two on line. Check the link provided earlier or co to the commission web page.
Post by: mulehunter on December 03, 2011, 01:06:09 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 03, 2011, 01:46:33 PM
Post by: Machias on December 03, 2011, 02:42:36 PM
Post by: huntrights on December 03, 2011, 02:48:05 PM
The WDFW Commissioners voted to accept the Washington Wolf Conservation and Management Plan with amendments that were proposed at the meeting. I will not try to paraphrase the amendments; it would be best for those interested to read the actual amendments when they are available to view. Multiple Commissioners indicated that the plan, with the amendments, will give the WDFW flexibility to respond to issues such as threats to ungulate populations and livestock. They also indicated that the plan will be a ”Living” document that should support adaptive management of the wolf population; that is, the plan can be changed as the situation changes in reality. The Commissioners appeared very cognizant of the issues experienced in other states as wolf populations were allowed to grow beyond target levels.
Much of the controversy seems to center around a sustainable wolf population being in place in the State of Washington. That said; the sooner target wolf levels are achieved, the sooner the process can be started to downgrade the threatened or endangered status (delist); this will allow the WDFW more flexibility in appropriate management of the species. As was mentioned at the meeting, financial and human resources are an issue when allocating these resources to actually obtain accurate wolf counts and numbers of breeding pairs in the various zones. My personal opinion is that the WDFW resource issue will not be resolved anytime soon; there does not appear to be enough money or qualified people on staff to adequately monitor the wolves.
There is a wolf sightings post in this forum. I do not know how much of an official link there is to the WDFW, but I would propose that some official link or agreement be made with WDFW; I believe they could use the help. If hunters, ranchers, and others in areas where the wolves are expanding can photograph the wolves, and/or identify where their dens are, then the WDFW wolf specialist(s) can be taken to the exact locations where there is undisputable evidence of the wolves and/or breeding pairs. I am concerned that if the WDFW monitors the wolf population and breeding pair status alone, using their limited resources, their assessment may be a significant underestimate of how many wolves and breeding pairs there actually are. My point is: I believe we should find some way to work with the WDFW to ensure the state wolf population and number of breeding pairs is assessed as accurately as possible.
As always, efforts should be unified. I believe there are many national and state organizations that might be able to help coordinate such an effort to help the WDFW. I don’t believe it would be in the best interest of our ungulate populations, livestock ranches, or rural communities to have official wolf counts show numbers that might tend to be less than the actual number of wolves. Those of you that have connections with organizations such as the RMEF, Hunter’s Heritage Council, Washingtonians for Wildlife Conservation, Safari Club International, Washington for Wildlife, and Big Game Forever, to name a few, might consider proposing such partnerships with state game management departments. I believe if we work together, positive results are more likely.
Here's the link to the WDFW news release:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/release.php?id=dec0311a
Post by: bearpaw on December 03, 2011, 02:53:00 PM
Post by: buckfvr on December 03, 2011, 03:05:54 PM
I do not believe they are being truthfull. I believe this was a done deal weeks ago, and I believe all the commissioners knew it.
Why no ammendmant for personal; protection ??? :dunno: It will be a few short years and this will be escalating totally out of control, and they will continue to make mistakes as they attempt to appease their political supporters. We are odd man out. There is no up side to this, there is nothing good that can come from this.
We , the license holders, need to have a voice that is taken seriously. They just talk circles and always come back to their own agenda. I still say, get rid of every last one of the lame *censored*s.....top to bottom, including commissioners.
Post by: mulehunter on December 03, 2011, 03:14:16 PM
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 03:18:13 PM
Post by: bullcanyon on December 03, 2011, 03:26:36 PM
Post by: The Weazle on December 03, 2011, 03:33:22 PM
Post by: jager on December 03, 2011, 03:39:59 PM
It's too bad really. I seriously wish there was someone that could explain how to fix the WDFW...legally :chuckle:
Post by: KillBilly on December 03, 2011, 04:10:32 PM
Have a nice trip to Montana. Two or three guys not buying a license won't do squat.
And just what is it that you have done? Share that with us please.
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 04:25:33 PM
Post by: FALFire on December 03, 2011, 04:42:07 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 03, 2011, 04:49:19 PM
Post by: wraithen on December 03, 2011, 04:51:39 PM
Post by: leed on December 03, 2011, 05:27:14 PM
Post by: Dave Workman on December 03, 2011, 07:30:38 PM
Quote
The plan allows WDFW to use lethal and non-lethal measures to manage wolf predation on at-risk deer, elk and caribou populations if wolf numbers reach or exceed the recovery objective within a region where predation occurs. The commission modified the definition of "at-risk" populations to give WDFW more flexibility in responding to the effect of wolf predation on those animals.
Anyone who thinks this is just peachy is :liar:
The most likely scenario: When a deer or elk population reaches an "at-risk" level, hunting seasons go first for us guys, and later for the tribes, and finally for the wolves.
Let's review:
When a deer or elk population reaches an "at-risk" level, hunting seasons go first for us guys, and later for the tribes, and finally for the wolves.
Any questions?
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 03, 2011, 08:55:48 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 03, 2011, 09:03:56 PM
Scott, I will gladlyrefrain from purchasing any license or tags next year. I'm with ya on that one....I have said this many times too !! Guarantee you can count me in :tup: :tup:
Post by: bullcanyon on December 03, 2011, 11:26:26 PM
Have a nice trip to Montana. Two or three guys not buying a license won't do squat.
Might even hit Idaho on my way by:) Just saying I'd be in if we had enough people to can out. 1000 people or so at an average of what? $150+ counting all permits and tags. $150,000 won't affect them? And they won't sell that many multi permits. Bamalama hasn't put enough people to work yet to make that happen.....
Post by: buckfvr on December 04, 2011, 09:30:11 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 04, 2011, 09:40:41 AM
Post by: CedarPants on December 04, 2011, 09:44:08 AM
Seriously men It is definately time for sportsmen to take a more serious stand than any other time before... we need to take extreme measures to get some attention and now we have more power do you sites like this we need to start using it to get the word out ..... We are fed up !!!! Besides Washington is losing sportsmen by the minute So I do not see it taking to long before sheet hits the fan .....I never dreamed I would ever use words that would say I would give up my rights to hunt BUT If it is going to benefit our goals as sportsmen and conservationist then so be it :o :yeah:
I agree.
It's put up or shut-up time ... and unfortunately, this is where we as a group usually shut-up.
Post by: Dave Workman on December 04, 2011, 03:31:33 PM
Commissioners are Governor appointees.......director is hand picked by Governor......we give lip service in the form of complaints and rants to the above persons.......the anti movement gives money to the political aspect of this problem, which is where it all starts. I for one will be sending e-mails that will leave no doubt as to how I feel regarding gov, her directors, and the commissioners, and how it is time for them to leave.
She is leaving. I don't think any of the current commissioners have been confirmed.
The only way....and I mean O-N-L-Y way...to change this situation is to change the PARTY of the governor. Democrats have held the governor's office for more than 25 years. Look what it's gotten us.
You have a choice to make next November.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 04, 2011, 03:55:15 PM
Post by: denali on December 04, 2011, 03:59:51 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 04, 2011, 04:15:45 PM
Yep just keep recounting votes until you get the "right" out come. >:(:yeah: :yeah: :tup:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 04, 2011, 06:09:01 PM
and you are right and I am sure the majority of us on here agree but its the ones who are not on here that are the problem ! :tup:Commissioners are Governor appointees.......director is hand picked by Governor......we give lip service in the form of complaints and rants to the above persons.......the anti movement gives money to the political aspect of this problem, which is where it all starts. I for one will be sending e-mails that will leave no doubt as to how I feel regarding gov, her directors, and the commissioners, and how it is time for them to leave.
She is leaving. I don't think any of the current commissioners have been confirmed.
The only way....and I mean O-N-L-Y way...to change this situation is to change the PARTY of the governor. Democrats have held the governor's office for more than 25 years. Look what it's gotten us.
You have a choice to make next November.
Post by: Dave Workman on December 04, 2011, 07:02:41 PM
and you are right and I am sure the majority of us on here agree but its the ones who are not on here that are the problem ! :tup:
Alas, there are people even here, and on some of the gun rights forums, who blindly vote Democrat.
Then they turn around and wonder how we can stop the anti-gun rush. Just how stupid is that?
Post by: Gringo31 on December 04, 2011, 07:30:09 PM
Post by: wence5 on December 04, 2011, 11:41:17 PM
and you are right and I am sure the majority of us on here agree but its the ones who are not on here that are the problem ! :tup:
Alas, there are people even here, and on some of the gun rights forums, who blindly vote Democrat.
Then they turn around and wonder how we can stop the anti-gun rush. Just how stupid is that?
Definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.
There's your problem. :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: The Weazle on December 06, 2011, 08:07:48 PM
Have a nice trip to Montana. Two or three guys not buying a license won't do squat.And just what is it that you have done? Share that with us please.
I have done more than you would ever know. I want to know how a few people not buying licenses is going to make a statement. More first timers will buy a license than old timers that wont buy a license. Plus even if you hunt out of state for big game, most people will still buy a license to hunt in state for small game and or fish. Same department,same bank account. Want to make a statement, go to meetings, write letters/emails, and vote. I know I am preaching to the choir, but you asked what I have done. I have done all of the above!!! I also hunt more than this state when my deployment schedule and check book allow, but I always buy a tag and a license for Washington just so I have "voted". Less hunters = less "votes", and = less money, less representation, and more tree hugger money and "votes" to set policy. Happy hunting!!!