Post by: Kain on April 06, 2012, 10:10:29 PM
You can add your name to the bottom and email it to:
commission@dfw.wa.gov
Quote
Dear Commission,
I ask you to look at these numbers and see that cougar hunting season and limits should be much longer than the WDFW is proposing.
Year Total Harvest Boot Hunter Harvest Source
2011 124 108 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2011/reports/cougar.php
2010 165 145 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/cougar.php
2009 142 123 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2009/reports/cougar.php
2008 188 139 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2008/reports/cougar.php
2007 201 106 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2007/cougar.php
2006 200 146 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2006/cougar.php
2005 202 129 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2005/cougar.php
2004 208 136 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2004/cougar.pdf
I added all of the harvest guideline numbers together from http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/2012/wsr_12-04-098.pdf and got 205-277 harvestable cats. Supposedly this is 12%-16% of all the huntable cats in WA. This percentage of cougars is supposed to be the most cats that can be harvested without effecting cougar populations or social structures. But if I calculate 12-16% of the estimated cougar population of 1900-2100 cats I get:
1900 - 2100
12% 16% 12% 16%
(228-304) - (252-336).
These numbers are much higher than the guideline numbers and according to Dr Martorello the estimated cougar populations do not even include subadults, which are huntable cats. So these number should be 24% higher.
If the boot hunter harvests never even come close to the lowest number of cats that can be harvested why are hunters being so limited on season length and number of tags? A year round season (like Oregon has started) could be opened with unlimited tags and boot hunter would still not be able to reach these numbers in most cougar units. Any unit that did get close or over is usually only by one or two cats and they are quickly replaced by the migrating cats from neighboring units. With mandatory reporting and cougar guideline protection in place I see no reason why hunters are being unfairly limited.
We have the data from past years when the season started August 1st and lasted until the end of March. There is no guessing or estimating involved in lengthening the season. We have the data. Not once did boot hunters come close to harvesting all that the newest scientific data allows for a stable cougar population. Even when you take all forms of hunting and depredation harvests it rarely meets the minimum goals. The vast majority of boot hunter harvests occurred during general deer and elk as incidental harvests. Outside of that time cougar harvest is extremely low. This means that even with a year round season the additional number of cats taken would be minimal. Cougars can breed anytime of the year so limiting cougar season to the fall does not have the same effect on cub mortality that we see with fawns and calves.
Hunters need to be allowed to hunt and harvest all the cougars that sound science will permit. Seasons should not be based on emotions or other non scientific reasons. All of our predator numbers are doing excellent in this state while other wildlife numbers continue to decline. Hunting as a conservation and behavior modification tool has always been the most effective. Please, please consider implementing the longest season that our best science and past harvest data supports.
Sincerely,
Post by: Special T on April 06, 2012, 10:16:13 PM
Post by: denali on April 06, 2012, 10:23:40 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on April 06, 2012, 10:27:41 PM
Post by: fair-chase on April 06, 2012, 10:35:11 PM
Post by: Kain on April 06, 2012, 11:15:28 PM
Please consider joining WFW and adding your voice to our mission to preserve hunting in this state. The committees are open to all members to help shape what direction the WFW takes on each issue.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on April 07, 2012, 08:39:59 AM
Post by: aer212 on April 07, 2012, 12:10:40 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on April 07, 2012, 01:31:57 PM
Post by: Kain on April 07, 2012, 02:46:41 PM
Sorry, I thought this would be about mom's in tank tops at little league games
That season is always open. I'm just a wildlife watcher for that species though. :tup: :chuckle:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 07, 2012, 04:30:35 PM
Post by: ouchfoss on April 07, 2012, 09:25:58 PM
I like the idea of a year round Cougar season. I would think that having an open season during fawn and calving season would make it far easier to find them if you trail elk herds that time of year. :twocents:
Post by: Kain on April 07, 2012, 11:41:40 PM
Post by: Kain on April 07, 2012, 11:45:58 PM
Post by: Kain on April 09, 2012, 09:46:40 AM
Post by: Kain on April 11, 2012, 11:04:11 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 18, 2012, 04:18:32 PM
Post by: cem3434 on April 18, 2012, 04:54:20 PM
They should have made it a year around season in my opinion. I think if there was a year around season, the cougar population would be just fine. :twocents:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 18, 2012, 04:58:29 PM
Post by: Kain on April 18, 2012, 05:19:30 PM
http://www.hunt.info/Cougar_Letter_06-29-11.pdf
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=79347.msg980547#msg980547
This most current letter only points out major flaws in their justification for not fully restoring our season to pre 2008 levels or making it a year long season. Using their own numbers and harvest reports we have proven that they have been under-harvesting cougar for almost a decade. Now with this new season they will continue that trend.
Our work is no where near done though. Please if you have not joined WFW, look into it and consider joining the cougar committee also. If/when we get a longer season we will still be under these harvest guidelines and that will be a huge point to use to get hound hunting returned.
Post by: DIYARCHERYJUNKIE on April 19, 2012, 11:55:56 AM
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 12:45:38 PM
Is there any chance of hounds coming back to wa. It seems like it wouldn't matter a quota is a quota no matter how it's filled right. If there was any chance at that I would support it.
There is a chance but it is going to be a tough fight to get the laws changed. We just need hunters to come together and start being more active to get it done. It wont happen on its own thats for sure.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 19, 2012, 01:04:47 PM
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 01:38:56 PM
Not to be ignorant but this post alone shows how much most people care :yeah: :sry:
Sad but true. I see a lot of cryin and wishing going on at hunt-wa and then there is not more than a handful that could be bothered to even send an email.
Post by: rasbo on April 19, 2012, 01:48:16 PM
Is there any chance of hounds coming back to wa. It seems like it wouldn't matter a quota is a quota no matter how it's filled right. If there was any chance at that I would support it.I dont think hounds will ever be brought back,The greater percentage of hunters will not support it,same with the trapping laws...Sucks
Post by: DIYARCHERYJUNKIE on April 19, 2012, 02:02:54 PM
Bob
Post by: Special T on April 19, 2012, 08:37:24 PM
Post by: rebal69972 on April 19, 2012, 09:11:56 PM
Post by: Jason on April 19, 2012, 09:23:36 PM
Sad but true. I guess i'm one of the few who did send them an e-mail..here's the reply i got.Not to be ignorant but this post alone shows how much most people care :yeah: :sry:
Sad but true. I see a lot of cryin and wishing going on at hunt-wa and then there is not more than a handful that could be bothered to even send an email.
Dear Mr. Jason
Thank you for taking the time to email your comments to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission. Each commissioner will receive a copy.
Opinions and comments such as yours provide the Commission with valuable insight into fish and wildlife issues of concern to communities throughout our state. The Commission relies on public testimony, email, and correspondence to help determine what is working well and what requires more concentrated efforts.
Thank you for your interest in the conservation and management of the state’s precious fish and wildlife resources.
Sincerely,
Tami Lininger, Executive Assistant
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 09:24:53 PM
We need to come together If we want that change like Kain says. I have a lot of resources to put together a reasonable plan to establish a hound season I owe it to my family to pursue it. They took part in the early days of hounds in wa. They were proactive towards keeping hounds in wa. I need to be proactive towards getting them back. If you could pm me kain with your opinion on a starting point maybe we could work together along with others. Thanks.
Bob
YES I would love to hear your plan. WFW has a hound hunting committee that needs more members like you willing to put in the effort. I cant remember off the top of my head you the chairman is of that committee. Message Killbilly and he will be able to tell you. I cant wait to see some movement on this.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 19, 2012, 09:31:01 PM
We all need to be like Uncle Ted ...tell them we will cut off some heads if things do not change :yike: :dunno: :tup:
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 09:34:15 PM
Sad but true. I guess i'm one of the few who did send them an e-mail..here's the reply i got.Not to be ignorant but this post alone shows how much most people care :yeah: :sry:
Sad but true. I see a lot of cryin and wishing going on at hunt-wa and then there is not more than a handful that could be bothered to even send an email.
Dear Mr. Jason
Thank you for taking the time to email your comments to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission. Each commissioner will receive a copy.
Opinions and comments such as yours provide the Commission with valuable insight into fish and wildlife issues of concern to communities throughout our state. The Commission relies on public testimony, email, and correspondence to help determine what is working well and what requires more concentrated efforts.
Thank you for your interest in the conservation and management of the state’s precious fish and wildlife resources.
Sincerely,
Tami Lininger, Executive Assistant
Thanks for helping Jason. I guess I was just in a mood when I wrote that. I just get frustrated with fellow hunters sometimes. We can have an argument that last for weeks about lighted nocks or wolves but cant seem to gain much support to stop the mismanagement of an apex predator that takes nearly 100,000 deer and elk every year in this state.
The sad part is that if we could stop the manipulation of cougar management now we may be able to prevent the same thing happening with wolves.
They will fight to stop an invasion of ants while all along their house is being eaten by termites.
Post by: fair-chase on April 19, 2012, 10:34:34 PM
We need to come together If we want that change like Kain says. I have a lot of resources to put together a reasonable plan to establish a hound season I owe it to my family to pursue it. They took part in the early days of hounds in wa. They were proactive towards keeping hounds in wa. I need to be proactive towards getting them back. If you could pm me kain with your opinion on a starting point maybe we could work together along with others. Thanks.
Bob
Would love to hear your plan. :tup:
Please forgive my ignorance on this issue. It is my understanding that we need to get a petition signed by no less than 120,577 signatures to move on a referendum and get RCW 77.15.245 (hound hunting and baiting ban) on the chopping block. Is this correct or is there another way to go about this? Sorry, learning as I go on this stuff.
Post by: Special T on April 19, 2012, 10:39:00 PM
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 10:49:04 PM
We need to come together If we want that change like Kain says. I have a lot of resources to put together a reasonable plan to establish a hound season I owe it to my family to pursue it. They took part in the early days of hounds in wa. They were proactive towards keeping hounds in wa. I need to be proactive towards getting them back. If you could pm me kain with your opinion on a starting point maybe we could work together along with others. Thanks.
Bob
Would love to hear your plan. :tup:
Please forgive my ignorance on this issue. It is my understanding that we need to get a petition signed by no less than 120,577 signatures to move on a referendum and get RCW 77.15.245 (hound hunting and baiting ban) on the chopping block. Is this correct or is there another way to go about this? Sorry, learning as I go on this stuff.
I believe there are ways that the legislature could overturn this law after a certain amount of time or with a super majority vote. They have tried to do it with lots of other laws like raising taxes.
Post by: Kain on April 19, 2012, 10:54:56 PM
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_the_initiative_process_in_Washington#cite_note-5
Quote
Legislative tampering
See also: Legislative tampering
In Washington, no initiated statute may be amended or repealed for two years without a 2/3 supermajority vote of both chambers. Any initiated law, so amended, is not subject to veto referendum. After two years, the law may be repealed or amended by a simple majority vote.[6]
See law: Washington Constitution, Article II, Section 1
Post by: DIYARCHERYJUNKIE on April 19, 2012, 10:56:02 PM
Post by: DIYARCHERYJUNKIE on April 19, 2012, 10:57:19 PM
Sounds like the law can be overturn by a simple majority after two years.QuoteLegislative tampering
See also: Legislative tampering
In Washington, no initiated statute may be amended or repealed for two years without a 2/3 supermajority vote of both chambers. Any initiated law, so amended, is not subject to veto referendum. After two years, the law may be repealed or amended by a simple majority vote.[6]
See law: Washington Constitution, Article II, Section 1
:tup:
Post by: JCKILLSHOT on April 19, 2012, 11:06:00 PM
Post by: Feanix on April 20, 2012, 11:03:21 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 20, 2012, 11:35:40 AM
Post by: Kain on April 20, 2012, 12:15:33 PM
Need to keep this visible. Im in as well. let me know what i need to do to help with support. I have a few contacts to spread the word.
I'm in just tell me what you want me to do...
Awesome guys. Unfortunately the commission made its decision already and we may be stuck with it for three years.
We need to continue to try to get it changed though. I would really like to get as many people as we can to write letters to the commission asking why they chose the short Sept-March season despite overwhelming evidence that our previous season of Aug-March never reached guideline numbers. Very strong estimates that a year round season would still not reach those numbers.
I wonder if an attorney could help ....ya know ...check into the laws and help us out .....?
I dont know if a lawyer can help or not but some supportive legislators may be able to demand why the WDFW and commission are choosing to disregard their legislative mandate.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.012
Quote
RCW 77.04.012
Mandate of department and commission.
Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters.
The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource. In a manner consistent with this goal, the department shall seek to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the fishing industry in the state. The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state.
The commission may authorize the taking of wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish only at times or places, or in manners or quantities, as in the judgment of the commission does not impair the supply of these resources.
The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
Recognizing that the management of our state wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources depends heavily on the assistance of volunteers, the department shall work cooperatively with volunteer groups and individuals to achieve the goals of this title to the greatest extent possible.
Nothing in this title shall be construed to infringe on the right of a private property owner to control the owner's private property.
[2000 c 107 § 2; 1983 1st ex.s. c 46 § 5; 1975 1st ex.s. c 183 § 1; 1949 c 112 § 3, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 § 5780-201, part. Formerly RCW 75.08.012, 43.25.020.]
Notes:
State policy regarding improvement of recreational salmon fishing: See note following RCW 77.65.150.
Post by: Feanix on April 20, 2012, 12:40:43 PM
Looks like that comment was from the comission statement and aimed at the mojo/lumenock issue. It does say in the meeting documents, however, that they will be proactively looking at harvest guideline numbers and that the hound/baiting issue is legislative and they have no control over.
1) We should "help" them with their evaluation of harvest guidelines.
2) We should look more towards legislators to help us with the hounds/baiting issue and do more research on what we need ro do to get a bill/repeal in the legislature.
Post by: Feanix on April 20, 2012, 01:48:01 PM
Post by: Kain on April 30, 2012, 05:59:03 PM
Quote
Year Total Harvest Boot Hunter Harvest Source
2011 124 108 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2011/reports/cougar.php
2010 165 145 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/cougar.php
2009 142 123 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2009/reports/cougar.php
2008 188 139 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2008/reports/cougar.php
2007 201 106 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2007/cougar.php
2006 200 146 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2006/cougar.php
2005 202 129 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2005/cougar.php
2004 208 136 http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2004/cougar.pdf
Post by: Feanix on May 07, 2012, 07:07:13 PM
Im working on compiling some more data that will strengthen our position when talking with legislators or to present to the comission. hope to have that up by next week or so.
long winded bump ;)
Post by: Kain on May 23, 2012, 07:42:29 AM
Post by: Machias on May 23, 2012, 09:01:01 AM
Post by: denali on May 23, 2012, 09:05:55 AM
I would also question the population numbers, I'm sure they are higher than that :twocents:
Post by: huntnphool on May 23, 2012, 09:28:41 AM
Post by: Kain on May 23, 2012, 12:06:51 PM
Well written Kain. Unfortunately I'm betting that it also ends up being one more point for Dave Workman to write about in his column. http://www.examiner.com/article/wa-hunter-forums-no-confidence-wdfw-is-apathy-a-problem
I wish he would. I am really hoping it sets a fire under hunters though. It is pretty obvious that the WDFW could not care less about what we think and we are soo divided we dont have a strong voice on anything. Hopefully seeing it visualized in a graph will show people just how bad this agency manages our predators. We can bet that wolf management will be even worse.