Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 05:41:09 PM
Post by: Curly on May 06, 2012, 05:56:50 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 07:03:57 PM
Post by: The Weazle on May 06, 2012, 07:13:34 PM
the only thing to complain about is the prices, and the season timing...I think they should move all seasons 10-15 days to the right, and of course lower the prices, or include a Discover pass if you spend over $200 on hunting/fishing licenses, etc...
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 07:35:20 PM
They have worked at simplifying regulations the past several years. I don't agree with the extra categories they came up with for special permit hunts, but some people actually liked the change. I don't like that they try to whittle away at bear and cougar seasons every chance they get. But, they did just give us back our 7-month any weapon cougar season, statewide. So gotta give 'em credit for that.
I have to agree with Weazle- we've got it pretty good right now.
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 07:51:36 PM
I am the one vote for Yay!...We have great opportunity in this state. Everywhere else I have lived, has all been a lottery system, even for residents. We have moose, goats, deer, elk, sheep, ducks, geese, rabbits, upland birds, coyotes we can shoot at night, cougars, bobcats, etc...lots of species, lots of opportunities, and lots of land...
the only thing to complain about is the prices, and the season timing...I think they should move all seasons 10-15 days to the right, and of course lower the prices, or include a Discover pass if you spend over $200 on hunting/fishing licenses, etc...
Yes Washington is a great chunk of real estate for all those critters, its diverse and could hold a whole lot more of those critters with better management.
We should have a world class Elk oppertunity here, as good or better then our Turkey and Cougars.
I think it could be a lot better.
Post by: Huntbear on May 06, 2012, 07:57:22 PM
They could not give a rat's ass about the hunters in this state.... All they care about is money,,,, and where the next place is that they can rip us off for another buck... less quality opportunities... higher and higher license and tag prices... They should have to go on a fixed income like the rest of us... MAYBE, quit spending money on freaking wolves..... :bash: :bash: :bash:
They are counting on the working hard to make a living guys like me to keep them in business because we can not afford to hunt anywhere else....
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 08:00:02 PM
Post by: runamuk on May 06, 2012, 08:51:34 PM
We the people hired the idiots that made this mess now we the people need to unhire them or prepare to see things continue to just get worse and worse :dunno: :dunno:
Post by: The Weazle on May 06, 2012, 08:52:55 PM
I wouldn't say they're out of touch. No they don't necessarily set the seasons and the rules just the way we all would like. But then how many of us on here agree on any one topic? If anything, in my opinion, they try too hard to cater to the public's every little whim.
They have worked at simplifying regulations the past several years. I don't agree with the extra categories they came up with for special permit hunts, but some people actually liked the change. I don't like that they try to whittle away at bear and cougar seasons every chance they get. But, they did just give us back our 7-month any weapon cougar season, statewide. So gotta give 'em credit for that.
I have to agree with Weazle- we've got it pretty good right now.
:yeah: Bobcat said what I was trying to say a whole lot better...
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 08:56:02 PM
In case you havent noticed; all BC does is carry the water for WDFW.
If WDFW was any better to me, i might have an orgasm. We got it pretty good right now? WTF man. You are loony. Next you will tell us we should lick the boot that kicks us.
Post by: Deep Forks on May 06, 2012, 08:57:09 PM
WDFW has been infiltrated and has sold out to the tree hugging, unshaved, birckenstock wearing rainbow coalition types.... Yea... Olympia, I am talking about your sorry, pork stuffed asses.....Right on Huntbare. WDFW and its commissioners worry to much about the critter observing, bird watching, wolf loving liberal extremist's. The hunter's in this state pay to play, therefore pay the bill's so we should be listened to and taken more serious. :twocents: JMHO
They could not give a rat's ass about the hunters in this state.... All they care about is money,,,, and where the next place is that they can rip us off for another buck... less quality opportunities... higher and higher license and tag prices... They should have to go on a fixed income like the rest of us... MAYBE, quit spending money on freaking wolves..... :bash: :bash: :bash:
They are counting on the working hard to make a living guys like me to keep them in business because we can not afford to hunt anywhere else....
Post by: runamuk on May 06, 2012, 09:06:35 PM
We are NOT concerned with the help. We are concerned with those who make the decisions. WOW you had to bring the guvment teachers here? LETS JUST STAY ON TOPIC SHALL WE! You have earned your handle bub.
In case you havent noticed; all BC does is carry the water for WDFW.
were you speaking to me?
you sound like your knickers are in a knot :dunno:
Post by: Curly on May 06, 2012, 09:41:11 PM
I wouldn't say they're out of touch. No they don't necessarily set the seasons and the rules just the way we all would like. But then how many of us on here agree on any one topic? If anything, in my opinion, they try too hard to cater to the public's every little whim.
They have worked at simplifying regulations the past several years. I don't agree with the extra categories they came up with for special permit hunts, but some people actually liked the change. I don't like that they try to whittle away at bear and cougar seasons every chance they get. But, they did just give us back our 7-month any weapon cougar season, statewide. So gotta give 'em credit for that.
I have to agree with Weazle- we've got it pretty good right now.
What about the wolf plan they came up with. That isn't going to help the deer/elk and us hunters any. And sure they gave us back the cougar season, but they shouldn't have taken it away to begin with, so they don't deserve credit for that.
What about them trying to take away night hunting for coyotes? That is a great method for taking out the fawn eaters and yet they tried to do away with. They will likely try again.
What about their rule change a couple years ago that prevents a dog to be with you when coyote hunting. Their excuse for the rule/law was "it wasn't socially acceptable". WTF.......they should not be catering to some do gooders like that.
What about there lack of support for us hunters when it comes to the tribal abuses in this State? They should doing a better job with that.
They must be wasting money at the dept. I bet if there was an audit, we could find all sorts of waste going on there. I would bet that they could cut a bunch of jobs there (probably a lot of managers at the top) and not have to increase the price of the application fees.
And even if you feel "we have it pretty good right now", the writing is on the wall. Things are just going to get worse and it seems like the WDFW is working against us. It seems like we have to watch them like a hawk and fight for everything that they "give" us. :twocents: :twocents: :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 09:57:21 PM
To me the wolf plan is irrelevant anyway. So the plan requires 15 breeding pairs, and if/when that number is met, and they are taken off the endangered species list, there still won't be any way to keep the numbers down in any significant way. The only methods of lethal control that would have a real impact still won't be allowed- like poison, trapping, and aerial gunning. So is the wolf plan really an issue? I don't think so.
Tribal hunting- well, I don't think the WDFW has the money to do much about it. They'd have to take it to court and that's just not in the budget. Especially now that the indians have casinos and other tax free revenue producers. The state just can't compete with that.
Night hunting? They didn't try to take it away. They came up with a proposal to limit calibers and shot sizes in an attempt to make it easier for game wardens in trying to catch people poaching deer and elk at night with spotlights.
Does that cover everything?
Post by: Curly on May 06, 2012, 10:02:51 PM
They treat us like a never ending ATM or credit card. If they need more money for their programs and it isn't in the budget, just jack up the fees. Why not cut some of their staff and/or programs instead of jacking up the prices?
Maybe they have some valid reasons for the fee increases, but I'd sure like to hear from them as to why they have to increase the prices and what the money is going toward. They are just making it harder for new people to get into the sport and for old folks on fixed incomes to continue in the sport. :twocents:
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 10:05:37 PM
I haven't studied up on the wolf plan too much, but I know they did their best to come up with something that would be accepted by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, as that is the federal agency that has control over the regulation of endangered species. Without a plan that is accepted the the USFWS, then lethal methods of wolf management would never be an option. My preference would be to have zero wolves in the state, but that's just not going to happen.
To me the wolf plan is irrelevant anyway. So the plan requires 15 breeding pairs, and if/when that number is met, and they are taken off the endangered species list, there still won't be any way to keep the numbers down in any significant way. The only methods of lethal control that would have a real impact still won't be allowed- like poison, trapping, and aerial gunning. So is the wolf plan really an issue? I don't think so.
Tribal hunting- well, I don't think the WDFW has the money to do much about it. They'd have to take it to court and that's just not in the budget. Especially now that the indians have casinos and other tax free revenue producers. The state just can't compete with that.
Night hunting? They didn't try to take it away. They came up with a proposal to limit calibers and shot sizes in an attempt to make it easier for game wardens in trying to catch people poaching deer and elk at night with spotlights.
Does that cover everything?
the red text pretty much killed your whole standing
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 10:09:48 PM
the red text pretty much killed your whole standing
Not sure what you mean by that. Standing in what?
So if the wolves ever become relatively abundant in this state, do you feel we could limit the population in any significant way, simply by hunting them, like Idaho is now doing?
Post by: Curly on May 06, 2012, 10:11:09 PM
I haven't studied up on the wolf plan too much, but I know they did their best to come up with something that would be accepted by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, as that is the federal agency that has control over the regulation of endangered species. Without a plan that is accepted the the USFWS, then lethal methods of wolf management would never be an option. My preference would be to have zero wolves in the state, but that's just not going to happen.
To me the wolf plan is irrelevant anyway. So the plan requires 15 breeding pairs, and if/when that number is met, and they are taken off the endangered species list, there still won't be any way to keep the numbers down in any significant way. The only methods of lethal control that would have a real impact still won't be allowed- like poison, trapping, and aerial gunning. So is the wolf plan really an issue? I don't think so.
Tribal hunting- well, I don't think the WDFW has the money to do much about it. They'd have to take it to court and that's just not in the budget. Especially now that the indians have casinos and other tax free revenue producers. The state just can't compete with that.
Night hunting? They didn't try to take it away. They came up with a proposal to limit calibers and shot sizes in an attempt to make it easier for game wardens in trying to catch people poaching deer and elk at night with spotlights.
Does that cover everything?
They gave too much in the wolf plan. They should have been more aggressive and make the feds the bad guys. I'm sure they could have had a plan for delisting the wolves in the E part of the State immediately, but they didn't even try.
I agree with you that we won't be able to control the wolf population. That is exactly why they should have tried for a lesser amount of wolves and none of the 3 consecutive year b.s. They should have had a plan that would allow for shooting of wolves immediately. That would slow the spread of them.
They may not have the money for dealing with the Tribal issues, but maybe they could have come-up with some if they weren't concentrating on things like wolves and whatever else they are wasting time and money on.
And, maybe they do a lot of things right and I some of the stuff I'm critical about, maybe I shouldn't be...........but it is because I've lost confidence in them and it is hard to see anything good in what they do after they've done some things that are so wrong.
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 10:16:50 PM
What the hell. this is speak your mind and im gettin censored? Well ok.
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 10:18:53 PM
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 10:20:19 PM
the red text pretty much killed your whole standing
Not sure what you mean by that. Standing in what?
So if the wolves ever become relatively abundant in this state, do you feel we could limit the population in any significant way, simply by hunting them, like Idaho is now doing?
would have to open up trapping, poisen and baiting and put a bounty on their heads.
who come up with 15 breeding pairs anyways, you got any idea how many dogs would be out there for that to happen?
and why not delist them in the east side of WA where they aren't federally protected
too many wolf huggers in the WDFW (https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com%2Fdailyrecordnews.com%2Fcontent%2Ftncms%2Fassets%2Fv3%2Feditorial%2F1%2Fc2%2F1c28ce10-8010-11e1-af9a-0019bb2963f4%2F4f7f2b67c8426.image.jpg&hash=4e62a657967982537b2d612d7934e9d90f81418f)
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 10:23:27 PM
washelkhunter- So how would you propose that the state keep wolves from crossing the Canadian border? Funny how everyone likes to blame the WDFW for something they have no control over.
so now they migrated naturally from Canada?
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 10:25:18 PM
washelkhunter- So how would you propose that the state keep wolves from crossing the Canadian border? Funny how everyone likes to blame the WDFW for something they have no control over.
so now they migrated naturally from Canada?
Canada and Idaho. I didn't realize that fact was in dispute.
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 10:25:31 PM
What a bunch of crap. Who the hell came up with 15 breeding pairs eh? Where TF did that number come from huh? Who decided that? God? Does anyone remember what the original no: was when they reintroduced into MT? Seems to me it was like 15 or 20. Then what happened? Well they ended up with 150 breeding pairs and a big problem because the antis have no limit to the no: of wolves. They can never have enough. Well reckon ive had enough. Wa isnt MT or ID or AK. If we dont put em down then we might as well oil em up and put em away because there wont be nothing left to hunt. Why does this failed experiment have to be played out here? We know how the story ends. My fellow Washington hunters, you know what to do. Or just sit around the ole wood stove and tell your grandkids what it was like in the ole days.
Post by: Jerbear on May 06, 2012, 10:39:11 PM
Too many biologists. Plus too many biologists that don't hunt and don't want you to. Step in Big Tex if I'm wrong.
The other is the deer season. I am surprised that the smaller towns have not raised hell with this one. they end the season onFriday. How cute. That could be another week end the family is out hunting together. And more revenue for cities like Goldendale. This is a ,Let's really piss em off with this one" situation.
They do not have our best interest at heart. It's the revenue they are after, period.
Now see what they did. I lost my temper, so now I have to pray to the Big Warden to forgive me.
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 11:15:53 PM
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 11:20:30 PM
Why do you care so much about me? :dunno:
Who are you?
Post by: KFhunter on May 06, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
Im going to ask you again Bobcat. Who are you? Do you work for WDFW? Are you Washington State Highway Patrol. Are you a WDFW commissioner? Are you EPA, NSA, FBI, CIA, HS? Okanogan Cty Sheriff? Who are you? I've asked and if your a person of authority then you have to answer. So?
He doesn't have to anwer that, and probably if he is one of those listed above then he'd get in trouble if he did in an official capacity and isn't a public information officer.
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 11:27:50 PM
Butt out KF. Or do you carry Bobcats water?
Post by: bobcat on May 06, 2012, 11:29:17 PM
My name's Bobcat.
Nice to meet you, washelkhunter. :chuckle:
Post by: washelkhunter on May 06, 2012, 11:34:10 PM
Post by: Jerbear on May 07, 2012, 01:14:38 AM
Bob could you bring me some water please? :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL:
Post by: huntnnw on May 07, 2012, 01:31:34 AM
WDFW has been infiltrated and has sold out to the tree hugging, unshaved, birckenstock wearing rainbow coalition types.... Yea... Olympia, I am talking about your sorry, pork stuffed asses.....
They could not give a rat's ass about the hunters in this state.... All they care about is money,,,, and where the next place is that they can rip us off for another buck... less quality opportunities... higher and higher license and tag prices... They should have to go on a fixed income like the rest of us... MAYBE, quit spending money on freaking wolves..... :bash: :bash: :bash:
They are counting on the working hard to make a living guys like me to keep them in business because we can not afford to hunt anywhere else....
:yeah:
Post by: Deep Forks on May 07, 2012, 04:27:22 AM
Hey WEH, what seems to be your problem? Bobcat has tons of friends on this site. He is a hunting fool. He not only hunts, but works behnd the scenes to keep us informed as to what is going on. Your last line of questions verges between child like, and punk. Bob is well respected on this site. at this point, you are not.Bob won't have to worry about hunting, cause the wolves are going to kill our part of the critters while our wonderful WDFW put their trust in Employee's like Scott Fitkin. Only TWO wolves left in the Methow (horse pucky) but the WDFW won't stand up and say horse chit. The wolves in the Teanaway weren't mentioned until they couldn't keep it quiet any longer. They purely in my mind don't give a rip about us the HUNTER. And I'm not talking about the Patrol Officers or the employee's who actually work. Talking about the people who actually make decisions, the wrong decisions. :bash: :twocents:
Bob could you bring me some water please? :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL:
Post by: Curly on May 07, 2012, 07:01:35 AM
Hey WEH, what seems to be your problem? Bobcat has tons of friends on this site. He is a hunting fool. He not only hunts, but works behind the scenes to keep us informed as to what is going on. Your last line of questions verges between child like, and punk. Bob is well respected on this site. at this point, you are not.
Bob could you bring me some water please? :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL:
:yeah:
I know Bobcat and he is not a WDFW employee, commissioner, or anything else like that. He just has a different view of WDFW than I do. I wish I could be as optimistic toward WDFW and hunting in this state as he is. I used to be like him, and I didn't find much fault in what WDFW does. But WDFW is starting to lose hunters that are even as supportive of them as Bobcat........(as is evident by this poll).
Post by: boneaddict on May 07, 2012, 07:12:17 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 07, 2012, 08:03:47 AM
WDFW has been infiltrated and has sold out to the tree hugging, unshaved, birckenstock wearing rainbow coalition types.... Yea... Olympia, I am talking about your sorry, pork stuffed asses.....
They could not give a rat's ass about the hunters in this state.... All they care about is money,,,, and where the next place is that they can rip us off for another buck... less quality opportunities... higher and higher license and tag prices... They should have to go on a fixed income like the rest of us... MAYBE, quit spending money on freaking wolves..... :bash: :bash: :bash:
They are counting on the working hard to make a living guys like me to keep them in business because we can not afford to hunt anywhere else....
:yeah:
Definately agree with that, and that bobcat does seem a DFW water boy But both washelkhunter and huntnnw avatars suck.
The tree hugging, unshaved, birckenstock wearing rainbow coalition type would like them though! :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: bearpaw on May 07, 2012, 09:09:49 AM
Our 2 esteemed senators, *censored*dowell and mudday, never said one word in protest to the wolves coming into wa. mudday could have scotched it and *censored*dowell would have secounded the motion and then maybe we could have kept them out with fed help; but oh no; not one peep out either of em.
What the hell. this is speak your mind and im gettin censored? Well ok.
There is a handful of nasty words that are automatically censored anywhere on the forum by the forum software, not by any mod. :twocents:
Post by: Huntbear on May 07, 2012, 09:16:00 AM
Hey WEH, what seems to be your problem? Bobcat has tons of friends on this site. He is a hunting fool. He not only hunts, but works behnd the scenes to keep us informed as to what is going on. Your last line of questions verges between child like, and punk. Bob is well respected on this site. at this point, you are not.
Bob could you bring me some water please? :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL: :IBCOOL:
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
And yes, even though I do not agree with bobcat on everything.... he is still a very good person to have on your side. And he is always very well informed.... :tup:
Post by: bearpaw on May 07, 2012, 09:24:35 AM
Im just an avg working man, middle class, (struggling) make my living helping people out in surgery when most the time they dont want to see me. You still havent answered my question. Who are you?
Butt out KF. Or do you carry Bobcats water?
Jeesh, you need to take a couple heart pills before you keel over.
The WDFW has too many employees who do not hunt or fish and are actually be trying to reduce opportunity for hunting and fishing. Biologists, I think there are good and bad. The biggest problem is that universities have anti-hunting professors brainwashing the students (future biologists) they teach to think that predators do not need to be managed and that animals will self maintain there numbers. The reality is that the WDFW should be maximizing all hunting opportunites rather than trying to figure how to make wildlife self regulate. There are simply too many greenies running the system.
Wolf Plan
Wyoming did it right, they held out for 10 bp's and they got it. There was no logical reason for 15 bp's in WA other than the WDFW wanting that many. In a nutshell, our WDFW is too pro-wolf and anti-hunting, many managers need to be replaced by employees who want to support hunting and fishing.
Why didn't you put this topic in the WDFW section so WDFW could read everyone's thoughts?
Post by: Special T on May 07, 2012, 09:30:47 AM
I think that the most evil thing about the WDFW and commission is the fact they don't SUPPORT hunting. I think most of the things they do to hurt hunting is due to lack of action... They don't DO much that really hurts, but they sure as hell don't try to be proactive and help alleviate problems. :twocents: They are not our Allies, Partners, or Benefactors... They are part of the political machine that is tilted against hunting. Because they are part of the political machine there is only one real way to change things... Vote out many of the current politicans... Rob Mckenna must be Gov. :twocents:
Post by: bearpaw on May 07, 2012, 09:33:38 AM
I need my vote changes to no support, i screwed it up...
I think that the most evil thing about the WDFW and commission is the fact they don't SUPPORT hunting. I think most of the things they do to hurt hunting is due to lack of action... They don't DO much that really hurts, but they sure as hell don't try to be proactive and help alleviate problems. :twocents: They are not our Allies, Partners, or Benefactors... They are part of the political machine that is tilted against hunting. Because they are part of the political machine there is only one real way to change things... Vote out many of the current politicans... Rob Mckenna must be Gov. :twocents:
I agree, we need McKenna and we need to boot out a few other liberal democrats.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 07, 2012, 09:35:08 AM
I need my vote changes to no support, i screwed it up...
I think that the most evil thing about the WDFW and commission is the fact they don't SUPPORT hunting. I think most of the things they do to hurt hunting is due to lack of action... They don't DO much that really hurts, but they sure as hell don't try to be proactive and help alleviate problems. :twocents: They are not our Allies, Partners, or Benefactors... They are part of the political machine that is tilted against hunting. Because they are part of the political machine there is only one real way to change things... Vote out many of the current politicans... Rob Mckenna must be Gov. :twocents:
I need my vote changes to no support, i screwed it up...
I think that the most evil thing about the WDFW and commission is the fact they don't SUPPORT hunting. I think most of the things they do to hurt hunting is due to lack of action... They don't DO much that really hurts, but they sure as hell don't try to be proactive and help alleviate problems. :twocents: They are not our Allies, Partners, or Benefactors... They are part of the political machine that is tilted against hunting. Because they are part of the political machine there is only one real way to change things... Vote out many of the current politicans... Rob Mckenna must be Gov. :twocents:
I agree, we need McKenna and we need to boot out a few other liberal democrats.
YESSSSSSSSS! :yeah: :yeah:
Post by: Deep Forks on May 07, 2012, 03:48:54 PM
:yeah: Exactly what I was trying to say back several posts ago, just to mad to get my point across. Leave it to Dale to stay rational enough to convey the oppropriate message. :tup:Im just an avg working man, middle class, (struggling) make my living helping people out in surgery when most the time they dont want to see me. You still havent answered my question. Who are you?
Butt out KF. Or do you carry Bobcats water?
Jeesh, you need to take a couple heart pills before you keel over.
The WDFW has too many employees who do not hunt or fish and are actually be trying to reduce opportunity for hunting and fishing. Biologists, I think there are good and bad. The biggest problem is that universities have anti-hunting professors brainwashing the students (future biologists) they teach to think that predators do not need to be managed and that animals will self maintain there numbers. The reality is that the WDFW should be maximizing all hunting opportunites rather than trying to figure how to make wildlife self regulate. There are simply too many greenies running the system.
Wolf Plan
Wyoming did it right, they held out for 10 bp's and they got it. There was no logical reason for 15 bp's in WA other than the WDFW wanting that many. In a nutshell, our WDFW is too pro-wolf and anti-hunting, many managers need to be replaced by employees who want to support hunting and fishing.
Why didn't you put this topic in the WDFW section so WDFW could read everyone's thoughts?
Post by: bearpaw on May 07, 2012, 05:05:40 PM
Here is the current WDFW Mission Statement:
Mission and Goals
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/mission_goals.html
Our Mission
To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities.
Vision
Conservation of Washington’s fish and wildlife resources and ecosystems.
WDFW defines “Conservation” as:
Protection, preservation, management, or restoration of natural environments and the ecological communities that inhabit them; including management of human use for public benefit and sustainable social and economic needs.
(Adapted from The American Heritage® Science Dictionary Copyright © 2005)
Department Goals
To achieve its mission, WDFW will continue to focus its activities on the following four goals:
I.Conserve and protect native fish and wildlife
II.Provide sustainable fishing, hunting and other wildlife-related recreational experiences.
III.Use sound business practices, deliver high-quality customer service.
IV.Maintain a highly skilled and motivated workforce.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 07, 2012, 05:43:01 PM
I will be doing an Examiner column on this poll and the responses Tuesday morning.
If you would care to add anything to the discussion, do so now.
After it is published...I strongly encourage you to weigh in with your observations about my observations.
Post by: aer212 on May 07, 2012, 08:06:26 PM
Night hunting? They didn't try to take it away. They came up with a proposal to limit calibers and shot sizes in an attempt to make it easier for game wardens in trying to catch people poaching deer and elk at night with spotlights.
You say they didn't try to take it away. What you wrote is the beginning of taking it away. First they start with a little and then pretty soon they have it all. Here is an example I'm sure you are familiar with. In England in 1987 they were proposing to ban all semi auto rifles above .22 rimfire. Most said well I don't shoot a semi auto so who cares? It won't affect me. In 1988 it passed. In 1997 they banned all handguns. Here is a quote from the article,"The complacency of many UK gun owners, who felt their guns weren't targets of the legislation, was to blame. They hid in the darkness, happy to throw the semi auto rifle owners to the wolves, content that they were under no threat. Only 10 years later, pistols went on the chopping block". Do you know what you have to do to hunt there now? 1. Apply with police chief for permission. 2. Satisfy police you have good reason to own a gun. 3. Satisfy police that you have suitable land to shoot on. 4. Guns kept in locked cabinet while not in use, ammo locked in another cabinet separate from firearms. 5. State what caliber you want in advance. 6. State how many rounds you want for that caliber in advance. All that and they could still not let you hunt if they wanted. So don't tell me that they are not trying to take night hunting away, like I said, they start with small things that people may not care about. I don't night hunt so it wouldn't affect me anyway but every time they take something away, its part of a bigger plan, at least thats what it seems. I agree with most everyone else on here, wdfw takes away hunting opportunities, raises prices, on top of that they bring wolves in. Any idiot knows what happened in Idaho and Montana, not to mention Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. So why does WA need wolves? Do they think that they can do something different than those other states mentioned?
Post by: aer212 on May 07, 2012, 08:10:02 PM
Post by: bobcat on May 07, 2012, 08:40:28 PM
Quote
You say they didn't try to take it away. What you wrote is the beginning of taking it away. First they start with a little and then pretty soon they have it all.
Well, the fact is they DIDN'T take it away, they didn't take away anything. They got enough complaints and they must have reconsidered it and realized the proposed new rules were wrong. And in my opinion those proposed rules had to have been written by someone who WAS "out of touch."
They're wanting to reduce poaching of deer and elk at night, and that's a good goal. But it was obvious to most anybody who knows anything about hunting that making more limitations on night hunting of predators isn't the right way to go about it. It would only affect the law abiding hunting, not the poachers out killing deer and elk at night.
If you remember, I was one of the first, if not THE first person on this site complaining and writing letters to the WDFW about the proposed changes to the night hunting rules. So don't think I was in favor of this. But I do have to give them credit when credit is due. They listened to us and took it off the table even before they went in front of the commission with the 2012-2014 proposals.
Post by: washelkhunter on May 07, 2012, 08:53:11 PM
Ladies and Gents:
I will be doing an Examiner column on this poll and the responses Tuesday morning.
If you would care to add anything to the discussion, do so now.
After it is published...I strongly encourage you to weigh in with your observations about my observations.
I look forward to reading your article.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 06:52:29 AM
washelkhunter- So how would you propose that the state keep wolves from crossing the Canadian border? Funny how everyone likes to blame the WDFW for something they have no control over.
That's not the point.
Wolves have been roaming back and forth into the state for years, probably decades. It's far different when a program is promoted and adopted that requires X-number of wolves rather than merely recognizes they are here. This shifts from a level of recognizing we have a wolf population and tolerating it to encouraging and working to expand it, with the intended or unintended consequence of impacting the elk and deer populations, and providing one more excuse for continued tight hunting seasons that are timed to minimize harvest by hunters, who are now viewed as competition for the wolves.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 08:28:53 AM
Im just an avg working man, middle class, (struggling) make my living helping people out in surgery when most the time they dont want to see me. You still havent answered my question. Who are you?
Butt out KF. Or do you carry Bobcats water?
WHOA! Time out.
Let's ratchet this back a few notches. Bobcat may seem like a WDFW apologist, and he may seem to some that he is still wet behind the ears, and it may strike some folks that at times he is completely :liar:, but he's still got just as much right to be here as do you, and likewise KFhunter. People can still defend one another here, y'know. Even if they appear to be wrong, and even if they occasionally appear to be bat :crap: crazy, and that's a description that might apply to several people on occasion.
We're just having a chat here about the WDFW, and this informal poll.
Who cares what anybody here does for a living?
Post by: Huntbear on May 08, 2012, 08:43:41 AM
washelkhunter- So how would you propose that the state keep wolves from crossing the Canadian border? Funny how everyone likes to blame the WDFW for something they have no control over.
That's not the point.
Wolves have been roaming back and forth into the state for years, probably decades. It's far different when a program is promoted and adopted that requires X-number of wolves rather than merely recognizes they are here. This shifts from a level of recognizing we have a wolf population and tolerating it to encouraging and working to expand it, with the intended or unintended consequence of impacting the elk and deer populations, and providing one more excuse for continued tight hunting seasons that are timed to minimize harvest by hunters, who are now viewed as competition for the wolves.
:tup:
Dave... you put it much more elequent than I ever could... mine would be filled with #@#$^%$%##$ and &(%$&^@%^*^& :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 09:26:36 AM
Hunters lack confidence in WA wildlife agency
If the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife went looking for support from hunters today, they’d have a hard time finding much brotherhood on the Hunting Washington forum, where an informal poll shows more than 87 percent of the respondents have no confidence in the agency leadership or the Fish & Wildlife Commission.
http://www.examiner.com/article/hunters-lack-confidence-wa-wildlife-agency
Post by: Huntbear on May 08, 2012, 09:51:46 AM
Well done sir!
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 10:01:28 AM
:tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:
Well done sir!
Thx and feel free to forward the link to everybody you know.
Also: Don't be shy about weighing in with a response in the reader feedback area below. It's "Facebook" oriented, alas.
Post by: Wacenturion on May 08, 2012, 10:01:41 AM
:tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:
Well done sir!
:yeah:
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 08, 2012, 10:09:03 AM
:tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:
Well done sir!
:yeah:
again :yeah:
Post by: Special T on May 08, 2012, 10:16:16 AM
QuoteYou say they didn't try to take it away. What you wrote is the beginning of taking it away. First they start with a little and then pretty soon they have it all.
Well, the fact is they DIDN'T take it away, they didn't take away anything. They got enough complaints and they must have reconsidered it and realized the proposed new rules were wrong. And in my opinion those proposed rules had to have been written by someone who WAS "out of touch."
They're wanting to reduce poaching of deer and elk at night, and that's a good goal. But it was obvious to most anybody who knows anything about hunting that making more limitations on night hunting of predators isn't the right way to go about it. It would only affect the law abiding hunting, not the poachers out killing deer and elk at night.
If you remember, I was one of the first, if not THE first person on this site complaining and writing letters to the WDFW about the proposed changes to the night hunting rules. So don't think I was in favor of this. But I do have to give them credit when credit is due. They listened to us and took it off the table even before they went in front of the commission with the 2012-2014 proposals.
Bobcat, I think its the WDFW's ignorance on subjects that they should know about that make me the angryest. Its either Ignorance or Willfull destruction, and neither are acceptable. If they can't find people to put forth educated rules then why do we bother with them? :bash:
Post by: bobcat on May 08, 2012, 10:18:25 AM
Post by: Special T on May 08, 2012, 10:22:33 AM
Post by: Wacenturion on May 08, 2012, 10:42:03 AM
There should be a requirement for employment with the WDFW, to have a valid Washington State hunting license. :tup:
It wouldn't mean those who bought it would hunt, merely use the purchase to qualify for a job. Of course the Agency would make more money. Careful what you wish for, WDFW may be watching. :chuckle:
Post by: aer212 on May 08, 2012, 11:02:20 AM
There should be a requirement for employment with the WDFW, to have a valid Washington State hunting license. :tup:
I would agree with that but also have a record of hunting or fishing, not just buying a tag to get the job. I cannot understand how there could be people working for wdfw who do not hunt or fish.
Post by: Special T on May 08, 2012, 11:22:30 AM
Kinda the same thing as lots of people working for the WDFW. :bash:
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 11:26:58 AM
There should be a requirement for employment with the WDFW, to have a valid Washington State hunting license. :tup:
You know, there was a time when this would not even have to be brought up, because everybody who worked for the GAME Department DID have a license.
But now...one wonders just how many people working for the agency DON'T have a license.
Post by: Special T on May 08, 2012, 11:32:20 AM
Post by: Kain on May 08, 2012, 02:20:54 PM
That being said I completely blame the hunters of this state for it all and not WDFW. We argue constantly with each other and VERY few do more than bitch and complain.
PS why is this poll in the Off Topics section? This is absolutely on topic for the general discussion section. :dunno:
Post by: Curly on May 08, 2012, 02:23:13 PM
PS why is this poll in the Off Topics section? This is absolutely on topic for the general discussion section. :dunno:
:yeah:
It would be nice if it were moved to a section where everyone could see it. Hint, hint......... :twocents:
Post by: washelkhunter on May 08, 2012, 02:29:09 PM
Post by: whitney on May 08, 2012, 05:08:04 PM
I have little confidence that the WDFW has the best interest of hunters in mind. I see a far greater effort in pleasing anti hunters and maximizing dollars with less opportunity. The cougar issue alone has convinced me of that.
That being said I completely blame the hunters of this state for it all and not WDFW. We argue constantly with each other and VERY few do more than bitch and complain.
PS why is this poll in the Off Topics section? This is absolutely on topic for the general discussion section. :dunno:
I will second that notion.
I would also submit a well organized letter writing campaign would go far with legislators. To blow my own horn a bit, I have developed a working relationship with my legislator and communicate often on the issues that matter to me. I have also received comment thanking me for my participation and insight with regard to the same. If people are concerned enough to write, and continue to press the issue, things can change. A collective voice can be powerful, while nothing more than bitching and complaining will never be heard.
Is anyone willing to collaborate on a well written letter that covers the issues, for the next legislative session?
~Whitney
Post by: Dave Workman on May 08, 2012, 07:38:26 PM
Is anyone willing to collaborate on a well written letter that covers the issues, for the next legislative session?
~Whitney
Why wait?
Now's the time to get cranked up, as the campaign season is bout to unfold.
Post by: Deep Forks on May 08, 2012, 08:27:58 PM
Dave, awesome article. :tup:
Post by: TheHunt on May 08, 2012, 08:30:28 PM
Do you fish
Do you hunt
Do you trap
Do you own a gun
Post by: runamuk on May 08, 2012, 09:23:22 PM
The number of members on this forum are a lot of votes toward the election process. :twocents:
Dave, awesome article. :tup:
that would seem to be the case yet we only got 118 people out of ?? to even vote on an anonymous poll (use pointer and click) :dunno: I think that speaks volumes about what is wrong in Washington 8)
Post by: boneaddict on May 08, 2012, 09:28:14 PM
Quote
I wonder if the WDFW ever poll their employee's about this topic.
Do you fish
Do you hunt
Do you trap
Do you own a gun
I have so wondered that
Post by: Dhoey07 on May 08, 2012, 09:54:52 PM
The number of members on this forum are a lot of votes toward the election process. :twocents:
Dave, awesome article. :tup:
that would seem to be the case yet we only got 118 people out of ?? to even vote on an anonymous poll (use pointer and click) :dunno: I think that speaks volumes about what is wrong in Washington 8)
118 people in 2 days that thought this is an important enough to actually vote. Not everyone saw this poll right off the bat
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 08, 2012, 10:04:53 PM
Post by: runamuk on May 08, 2012, 10:22:30 PM
:yeah: It was hidden in the 'off topic' area. I didn't see it until this afternoon when it made it to general discussion.thats because it was originally the sort of topic that was deemed to not be favored by the "majority" just saying watch how this goes I bet we get maybe another 118 votes so a couple hundred out of a forum with 10 thousand people...thats what....20% of the population as representation?? think for a minute that means 20% of a population is representing the majority this is kinda a sad situation 80% could disagree but they dont feel like sounding off so they go unrepresented ;).
Post by: washelkhunter on May 09, 2012, 12:54:36 AM
Post by: washelkhunter on May 09, 2012, 01:11:21 AM
:yeah: It was hidden in the 'off topic' area. I didn't see it until this afternoon when it made it to general discussion.thats because it was originally the sort of topic that was deemed to not be favored by the "majority" just saying watch how this goes I bet we get maybe another 118 votes so a couple hundred out of a forum with 10 thousand people...thats what....20% of the population as representation?? think for a minute that means 20% of a population is representing the majority this is kinda a sad situation 80% could disagree but they dont feel like sounding off so they go unrepresented ;).
This was not a hidden 'topic" nor was it deemed to "not be favored by the majority". What it is, is a big deal and I wanted it to be considered by the adults who pay the bills for WDFW. My intent was not to be exclusionary but serious. This poll is a shot across the bow of WDFW, its a wakeup call for them. They can no longer ignore or take the hunters in this state for fools. We are not just going to knuckle under and watch our brethren be trampled upon and priced out of the very thing that is perhaps the essence of humanity. The chance to HUNT.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 09, 2012, 04:53:59 AM
Thanks Mr. Workman. A very good article about the concerns and issues of Wa. St. hunters. I hope that it leads to a series of extremely frank discussions with our public servants. It cant go on like this. Again, thank you.
You're the one who cooked this up, not me.
I merely wrote about it.
AND: I added the same poll questions to the thread that my column started over on 'huntfish' forum. We'll see how it does over there. :dunno:
Thank You :tup:
Oh, BTW.... It's 'Dave' ;)
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 09, 2012, 08:03:10 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 09, 2012, 08:47:42 AM
Saw that ...I was vote#4..... Now 6-0
It's straight NEGATIVE over there. 100% no confidence
I may have to do a follow-up column.
;)
Post by: Special T on May 09, 2012, 09:30:20 AM
Post by: Glockster on May 09, 2012, 09:56:37 AM
Their response is always that special touchy feely brand of passive aggressive Politically Correct BS ala "thank you for taking the time to write us about your concern over ____. We realize this is a contentious issue for some stakeholders and we are in the process of conducting study X, study Y, and scoping study Z to employ best science practices in our decision making process. However we are bound by law and policy to implement policy NO for now until we know the outcomes of studies X, Y &Z. We look forward to continued public input on the matter"
Going to hearings is marginally better; at least you can give them some of the heat in person and confront the lies face to face. Like when Lora Leschner told us that she would work to mitigate the Skagit losses with new hunting access and land purchases. Her parting quip was that hunters could still access these areas in their aqua pods. That was a good one.
The only real hope for change is a real house cleaning. We need a GAME DEPT. The only hope for a real housecleaning is electing Rob McKenna and demanding that he do it if we give him our votes.....that's where our letters should be focused right now.
Post by: Huntbear on May 09, 2012, 10:03:49 AM
:yeah: It was hidden in the 'off topic' area. I didn't see it until this afternoon when it made it to general discussion.thats because it was originally the sort of topic that was deemed to not be favored by the "majority" just saying watch how this goes I bet we get maybe another 118 votes so a couple hundred out of a forum with 10 thousand people...thats what....20% of the population as representation?? think for a minute that means 20% of a population is representing the majority this is kinda a sad situation 80% could disagree but they dont feel like sounding off so they go unrepresented ;).
This was not a hidden 'topic" nor was it deemed to "not be favored by the majority". What it is, is a big deal and I wanted it to be considered by the adults who pay the bills for WDFW. My intent was not to be exclusionary but serious. This poll is a shot across the bow of WDFW, its a wakeup call for them. They can no longer ignore or take the hunters in this state for fools. We are not just going to knuckle under and watch our brethren be trampled upon and priced out of the very thing that is perhaps the essence of humanity. The chance to HUNT.
This is all well and good, and it is a good start.
HOWEVER, until ALL hunters band together as one voice... the WDFW wins everytime.
ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS THIS...
Give the bow hunters something that the muzzy guys do not get, or take away something from the rifle hunters and give it to the muzzy hunters.. US HUNTERS WILL START INFIGHTING, AND THE WDFW SITS BACK AND LAUGHS.. AND GETS WHATEVER THE F%CK THEY WAY....
AND YES I AM YELLING.... :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: runamuk on May 09, 2012, 10:10:59 AM
Never said it was hidden you posted it in a board ignored by much of the membership, so it wasn't where the majority could see it and now it is and I still stand by my position that it wont attain a majority of votes. I never said it wasn't serious it is but unfortunately the vast majority of your hunting brethren wont even take time to click on a poll, thus further illuminating the problem affecting all of us. I think they call it apathy, then when you choose to eat your own as in rant at people like myself and others who are actually on your side and in agreement it further degrades the prospects of gathering support.:yeah: It was hidden in the 'off topic' area. I didn't see it until this afternoon when it made it to general discussion.thats because it was originally the sort of topic that was deemed to not be favored by the "majority" just saying watch how this goes I bet we get maybe another 118 votes so a couple hundred out of a forum with 10 thousand people...thats what....20% of the population as representation?? think for a minute that means 20% of a population is representing the majority this is kinda a sad situation 80% could disagree but they dont feel like sounding off so they go unrepresented ;).
This was not a hidden 'topic" nor was it deemed to "not be favored by the majority". What it is, is a big deal and I wanted it to be considered by the adults who pay the bills for WDFW. My intent was not to be exclusionary but serious. This poll is a shot across the bow of WDFW, its a wakeup call for them. They can no longer ignore or take the hunters in this state for fools. We are not just going to knuckle under and watch our brethren be trampled upon and priced out of the very thing that is perhaps the essence of humanity. The chance to HUNT.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 09, 2012, 10:31:40 AM
This is all well and good, and it is a good start.
HOWEVER, until ALL hunters band together as one voice... the WDFW wins everytime.
ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS THIS...
Give the bow hunters something that the muzzy guys do not get, or take away something from the rifle hunters and give it to the muzzy hunters.. US HUNTERS WILL START INFIGHTING, AND THE WDFW SITS BACK AND LAUGHS.. AND GETS WHATEVER THE F%CK THEY WAY....
AND YES I AM YELLING.... :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Amigo, you have just defined what is really wrong with Resource Allocation, and why I went on the warpath about it back in the 1980s while working as Washington Editor of the now-defunct Fishing & Hunting News.
Several people here have generously given a :tup: for my column, and there will be a follow-up in TheGunMag.com, where I am senior editor, and at the Examiner probably tomorrow or Friday after more people have the chance to weigh in.
Some folks here, Bearpaw and Wacenturion, remember when F&H News essentially declared war on what the late Bill Farden felt was crummy fish and game management when the "new" philosophy of the Fish & WILDLIFE Department became SOP.
Fighting that fight has cost people on this forum, including me. But it was the right fight to pick, and it remains so today.
This poll is hardly scientific, but as I wrote in my Examiner column, http://www.examiner.com/article/hunters-lack-confidence-wa-wildlife-agency sometimes this kind of poll allows for a better, more personal look at what people think because you guys are weighing in.
Glockster is spot-on about what it will take to change this, and that's a change in the governor's office. It will also require a change in leadership in the Legislature, from Democrat to Republican (and conservative) control, and that's got to last at least four years to start undoing the damage that has been done for the past quarter-century.
OF COURSE we're not all on the same page. Intelligent adults do not always agree on every point.
But the time has come to push out - of - the -way those who would:
a) Go along to get along
b) Devote their time to being apologists for WDFW
c) Come to this and similar forums as essential trolls
We either fight together or not
Post by: blackdog on May 09, 2012, 10:41:44 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 09, 2012, 12:13:34 PM
It is the Commission members that I have no confidence in but that isn't one of the choices.
Well, this commission takes its cues from staff.
Post by: Special T on May 09, 2012, 02:37:19 PM
Post by: Huntbear on May 09, 2012, 02:46:22 PM
Dave, I would love to hear your take as to why hunters get screwed over in comparision to fishing... I think The fishing side has problems but are better represeted by the WFDW... Am i not seing the whole picture?
Part of the reason the fishermen are so well represented is because of Salmon and Steelhead recovery. It started years ago, and many passionate people that loved to fish for those two species banded together like no others. Did not matter if you fished with spinning rods, casting rods, fly rods, spey rods, float rods.
So you had a very intense and UNITED group of sportsman, the commercial guys and the Indians.
Other than that, Sturgeon fishing has declined but in my opinion, that had to be done to protect the species from disappearing completely.
And no one is really gonna go after the trout and bass fisherman anyway.... unless there is a non native wolf like fish we can introduce to our state and let it roam free as a bird till we get at least 4 breeding pairs in every lake over 2 acres..... :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: Dave Workman on May 10, 2012, 04:50:29 AM
Say it ain't so!
You people aren't finished voting on this, are you????
:dunno:
Post by: blackdog on May 10, 2012, 06:22:13 AM
Post by: Special T on May 10, 2012, 07:29:42 AM
Post by: Glockster on May 10, 2012, 08:03:09 AM
I'm sure that the director does a better job with the fishing side than the Hunting side since he came from the sport fishing side... I wish we knew more about his hunting...
While he is a bit better on the fishing side than the previous version, he is a far cry from what is needed to stand up for our side when it comes to negotiating salmon seasons with the tribes. Exhibit A: Elliot Bay , Exhibit B Tulalip bubble fishery. The recreational fishing contribution to the state's economy and the sportfishing industry are much bigger $'s than hunting, so it gets a bit more attention but not much more but I wouldn't consider it far better in terms of representation. All the salmon revovery money got eaten up with stupid plant a tree upside down projects (see them along the Duwamish) and revive a ditch feel good school kid stuff.
Post by: bearpaw on May 10, 2012, 08:16:04 AM
Specifically, any paid lobbyinst/employee (Kehne) should not be allowed to sit on the commission. That should be against state law.
Post by: Huntbear on May 10, 2012, 08:41:39 AM
I think our current director is the best we have had in a few decades, however, I still have limited faith in the WDFW and the commission. At this point I would agree that we need a house cleaning in both, the commission should be composed of equal numbers of avid hunters and fishermen, you don't hunt or fish, you don't belong on the commission. Many of the commissioners and WDFW managers and bio's should be replaced if they do not fully support hunting and fishing.
Specifically, any paid lobbyinst/employee (Kehne) should not be allowed to sit on the commission. That should be against state law.
It is a direct Conflict of Interest to say the least...... and as such Kehne should be excused from any conversations about wolves...
Post by: Dave Workman on May 10, 2012, 12:02:35 PM
I think our current director is the best we have had in a few decades, however, I still have limited faith in the WDFW and the commission. At this point I would agree that we need a house cleaning in both, the commission should be composed of equal numbers of avid hunters and fishermen, you don't hunt or fish, you don't belong on the commission. Many of the commissioners and WDFW managers and bio's should be replaced if they do not fully support hunting and fishing.
Specifically, any paid lobbyinst/employee (Kehne) should not be allowed to sit on the commission. That should be against state law.
I dunno. There was one guy back in the 1990s.... Bern Shanks.
Post by: bearpaw on May 10, 2012, 12:19:42 PM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 10, 2012, 02:42:39 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on May 10, 2012, 03:51:07 PM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 11, 2012, 09:31:46 AM
And that percentage just got worse!!
Yes, it did.
Post by: Curly on May 11, 2012, 10:09:28 AM
Post by: Curly on May 11, 2012, 10:10:18 AM
Post by: 6x6in6 on May 11, 2012, 01:47:21 PM
Faith in the existence of the WDFW?
That's a tough choice. :chuckle:
Post by: Huntbear on May 11, 2012, 01:54:16 PM
BTW - I have more faith that Bigfoot exists than I have faith in WDFW. :twocents::yeah: :yeah:
Post by: washelkhunter on May 11, 2012, 07:54:22 PM
Post by: Moose22 on May 12, 2012, 07:59:02 PM
Post by: runamuk on May 12, 2012, 08:10:20 PM
10825 members and only 203 votes. Where is everone?
its about right 2% of the board weighed in, this is pretty much what I guessed it would be. This is also the reason we are where we are in this state if you figure across the board maybe 2% of the people in Washington are making decisions for the state, leaves 98% unrepresented.
Post by: Moose22 on May 12, 2012, 08:21:45 PM
10825 members and only 203 votes. Where is everone?
its about right 2% of the board weighed in, this is pretty much what I guessed it would be. This is also the reason we are where we are in this state if you figure across the board maybe 2% of the people in Washington are making decisions for the state, leaves 98% unrepresented.
Sadly, your are right and my math match's your, right around 2%. If you don't vote, wether here or general elections, how can you bitch?
Post by: 3nails on May 12, 2012, 08:47:18 PM
Post by: runamuk on May 13, 2012, 09:27:58 AM
Thing is though I've noticed the vast majority of members are basically in-active. There are VERY FEW "regulars".
now take that observation and apply it to all politics across the board, this is the country we live in very few believe they need to be involved thats what politicians and lawyers, and lobbyists are for. And because they have been left in charge they have slowly made everything so complicated the average person has problems unraveling any of it. I was reading something the other day that suggested the average person commits up to three felonies a year and doesn't even know they are. That was an America wide discussion and it would not surprise me to be honest. I see misdemeanors daily here in campus housing when I mention the no guns ok most get that but when I mention also no knives of a certain size(think buck knife) no air soft, bb guns, pellet guns, no bows and arrows, no incense and no candles all of these are in the same section of rules, part of which is covered by a WAC. Watched two guys shoot a can last night in the yard with a pellet gun, I know people who practice with their bows, most when told say how can they make you give your guns to the cops isnt that a violation of the 2nd amendment? :dunno: People literally have no clue what is going on and are now too busy just getting by. I read a paragraph in my history book this morning that could be written today if we are going where that one went we are in for a world of hurt.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 15, 2012, 07:35:53 AM
10825 members and only 203 votes. Where is everone?
its about right 2% of the board weighed in, this is pretty much what I guessed it would be. This is also the reason we are where we are in this state if you figure across the board maybe 2% of the people in Washington are making decisions for the state, leaves 98% unrepresented.
Well, it sure looks like this thread has run its course.
You estimate 2% of the people weighed in with votes? And you expect someone to stick up for you when you don't stick up for yourselves?
Post by: Dave Workman on May 15, 2012, 07:38:18 AM
It is the Commission members that I have no confidence in but that isn't one of the choices.
Did you vote?
Post by: JohnVH on May 15, 2012, 08:12:43 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 16, 2012, 02:49:05 PM
tricky poll, if you agree with the question youd naturally click on the yea, but better read the whole thing!
I think you may be reading more than is there.
Nothing tricky about it, IMHO
Post by: JohnVH on May 16, 2012, 02:52:06 PM
tricky poll, if you agree with the question youd naturally click on the yea, but better read the whole thing!
I think you may be reading more than is there.
Nothing tricky about it, IMHO
Just saying, I wonder how many people agree with the poll and clicked yes, then noticed they wanted the explenation behind nay.
:twocents: :twocents:
Post by: Special T on May 16, 2012, 03:32:52 PM
Post by: Moose22 on May 16, 2012, 10:43:32 PM
tricky poll, if you agree with the question youd naturally click on the yea, but better read the whole thing!
I think you may be reading more than is there.
Nothing tricky about it, IMHO
Thanks Dave, really, how tricky is the question. This poll is definitely unscientific but, with all the bitching and complaining that goes on in these threads, very few respond. Hopefully come November we do not have the same attitude and response that we see here.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 17, 2012, 04:27:00 AM
:hello: I did! I voted too quick and chose poorly.
Someone as quick on the trigger as you shouldn't own a gun.
:chuckle:
Post by: Special T on May 17, 2012, 09:15:43 PM
Post by: JJD on May 20, 2012, 01:49:19 PM
The conservative mind set; Times are not so hot, economy is poor and people have less to spend. Therefore, we (gov) must tighten our belts just like our constituents have to. When times are better, we'll ASK for more.
Liberals on the other hand say, times are tough, $$ are not coming in, we gotta charge more to maintain our wasteful ways and continue our agenda. Who cares if some who are making due with less must stop hunting because they can no longer afford increased fees. Or, that they may never return to the sport. That's part of our agenda anyway.
Problem in a nut shell. When goverment talks about tightening belts, it our, certainly not theirs! For them, that concept is abstract.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 22, 2012, 10:19:56 AM
Unscientific polling results on two popular Washington hunting forums – Hunting-Washington and HuntFishNW – show that the Department of Fish & Wildlife and the commission that sets its policies are in big trouble.
http://www.examiner.com/article/wa-hunter-forums-no-confidence-wdfw-is-apathy-a-problem
Post by: fair-chase on May 22, 2012, 10:30:57 AM
Post by: Special T on May 22, 2012, 10:39:31 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 22, 2012, 01:43:03 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on May 23, 2012, 01:19:44 AM
Post by: Kain on May 23, 2012, 06:50:11 AM
Graph I created to show how predator management is being handled in Washington. This is the same agency that will be managing wolves.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi406.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp150%2FNaithankain%2FCougarHarvests4.jpg&hash=af4d1fc6d8d753ebb2942fde9257bc350cf45c3c)
Post by: Special T on May 23, 2012, 06:52:40 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 23, 2012, 06:58:39 AM
WOW! Great article Mr. Workman and what a way to throw down the gauntlet. This is it Amigos, the tide is turning. Now is the time to circle the wagons and get ready to charge. Yes we have gripes, but guess what they are legitimate. We the hunters and fishers pay these peoples salaries. They WORK for us and they need to be reminded of that. Lets make these bureaucrats accountable to US FIRST! Lets rally and start it up! :tup:
Thx.
I got a nice note this morning from a guy big in the hunting community about this column. "Hit the nail on the head."
Yet, I see only one guy left a comment at the bottom of the column. :dunno:
Oddly, the goobers at Examiner.com gave me one of the lowest content scores for this column. Go figure.
Post by: Bob33 on May 23, 2012, 07:02:51 AM
Post by: Dhoey07 on May 23, 2012, 07:47:31 AM
WOW! Great article Mr. Workman and what a way to throw down the gauntlet. This is it Amigos, the tide is turning. Now is the time to circle the wagons and get ready to charge. Yes we have gripes, but guess what they are legitimate. We the hunters and fishers pay these peoples salaries. They WORK for us and they need to be reminded of that. Lets make these bureaucrats accountable to US FIRST! Lets rally and start it up! :tup:
Thx.
I got a nice note this morning from a guy big in the hunting community about this column. "Hit the nail on the head."
Yet, I see only one guy left a comment at the bottom of the column. :dunno:
Oddly, the goobers at Examiner.com gave me one of the lowest content scores for this column. Go figure.
I would leave a comment Dave, but you have to sign into facebook and i don't do that. So here ya go.
You say that if we want change we will have to do more than sit around campfires. I totally agree with that.
If you are suggesting to go out and vote, that's great. But I don't trust ANY politician farther than you could throw them.
If you are suggesting that we run for a political office, what kind of person in their right mind would "sacrifice" their life to the political BS machine?
If you are suggesting writing letters/e-mails to WDFW and our current representatives, I have done it and actually recieved a response or two, albeit a kind "thank you for your concern, have a nice day" slap in the face.
People can join DU, WWA, RMEF or CCA and donate their money in hopes of a "voice" to combat anti-hunters and bunny huggers but when you are writing a 300$ check to WDFW for a hunting license, fishing license and permit apps, it's difficult to find more money to give away.
I wish that there was an easy answer, but we all know that there isn't. I am glad that you took the intiative to write this article and I hope it helps open eyes of both hunters/outdoorsmen and politicians to the position we're in.
Post by: Special T on May 23, 2012, 07:51:43 AM
This statement is the reason why we are underrepresented. Good people are too busy with life to protect what is ours... There are many thankless jobs out there that need doing by good people instead of the self serving ones that are currently running the show. :twocents:
Post by: Oneshot1Kill on May 23, 2012, 08:44:22 AM
Post by: Huntbear on May 23, 2012, 09:00:32 AM
Most of us, have way to many skeletons in our closet to run for any office... hell I know I do... Would never put my family through that kind of unholy scrutiny.... If it was just me, and me alone, not an issue. But since I sit on the conservative side of things, and am very pro hunter, how deep do you think the liberal media bashing would go?????
however, I will send my thoughts and feelings to the WDFW every time I feel the need. It may not be all professional every time, but I get my point across. I would also support any experienced hunter we could find to get into said positions. We need hunters back in office if we want this to come back to our favor. It should also be a pre requisite for any office in the WDFW.
Post by: Glockster on May 23, 2012, 10:50:37 AM
I go out of state because the opportunity is much better to bring home meat and see more deer than hunters. I spend way more $$$ because the out of state experience is so much better than WA's. I get more than my money's worth out of state so just like any consumer, that's where my $'s go. Sorry if they have to raise the instate fees to compensate for my $'s going out of state. Sorry the people who run things at WDFW see that as a solution to their budget woes.
Maybe I'm not a "true hunter" in your definition, but I have the freeedom to spend my $ where I want to and that ain't WA anymore for the most part.
Post by: buckfvr on May 23, 2012, 11:10:38 AM
Whenever I think about our laws and such that annoy me here I always have a thought to other states such as California and other countries like Australia. We got it pretty darn nice. And having to spend more for tags and such is a good thing, more money going towards conservation. And has anyone else ever thought that it's the new hunters fault for the lack of game taken during a season. I'm sure a bunch on here are the true hunters that go and actually hunt but look at how many people have given into things like road hunting, out of state hunting for trophies, and poaching. And everyone that goes out of state or poaches just add on to the cost of tags than complain about it. Heck, I buy a tag every year even if I know I'm only gonna be able to go out once with my bow. By the way, I'm talking about people who go out of state than don't hunt here. I know some of you guys are the big time, hunt everywhere guys and that's cool too.
EIther you're on the young side, or not from this state......You havent apparently witnessed the losses of the last 10, 20, and even 30 years......The rediculous, continous increases in fees. The decline in our deer herds, and elk herds......the blatant management for special interest groups....the lieing and deceiving by management. IMHO, you do not understand whats going on here in Wa., and where its going.......THEY WORK FOR US AND THEY DONT OWN THE ANIMALS. Despite what they tell us.
Post by: Oneshot1Kill on May 23, 2012, 04:59:10 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 23, 2012, 05:22:40 PM
Post by: Glockster on May 24, 2012, 07:02:11 AM
Sorry for offending you glockster, but I was just relating it to poaching as a poacher doesn't buy tags in our state and neither does a hunter that goes out of state. Therefore that money doesn't go back into the state. And yeah I'm young but I've witnessed and heard about the cost of tags going up like none other. The first year I went turkey hunting the store owner gave me 50 cents to cover the cost of my tag. I think I paid in total for all tags 58 bucks. Now it'll be well in the $100 range. But that's because of inflation and more people not going hunting. Did you know that if you multiple the percentage of inflation on todays dollar to the dollar in the 40's it's still almost the same. Gas woulda been $3.50 a gallon then yet everyone says they wished they lived in the time to pay a quarter for a gallon of gas. Prices go up and until U.S. citizens remember that they are the true owners of the government we gotta keep paying what they tell us and look at the positive side.
I kinda thought you were on the young side, so that explains some things and I'm not ever offended by good debate....that's America. I suspect you have parent or parents who subsidize your life's expenses so inflation is just a concept to you for the most part at this point in your life. Wait til you have a 60hr a week job, a bitchy wife, a mortgage, and two kids who you would like to take hunting with you. Then you'll know.
Ask anyone who lived through the 70's about what life would be like today if that brand of inflation was allowed to continue. Europe and California are a couple of scary glimpses into our future if the present path of "prices gotta go up" is allowed to continue.
Post by: JJD on May 24, 2012, 05:59:50 PM
Well of course whole sale inflation is the future. How else do you expect the liberals to catch up to 15 trillion (and growing) dollar debt?
Post by: Kain on May 24, 2012, 06:47:24 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on May 24, 2012, 06:52:56 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on May 24, 2012, 06:57:28 PM
Quote
Mission and Goals
Our Mission
To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities. I think this part is backwards. IF they were looking to provide SUSTAINABLE fishing and hunting, that would have to include protecting etc.
Vision
Conservation of Washington’s fish and wildlife resources and ecosystems.
WDFW defines “Conservation” as:
Protection, preservation, management, or restoration of natural environments and the ecological communities that inhabit them; including management of human use for public benefit and sustainable social and economic needs.
(Adapted from The American Heritage® Science Dictionary Copyright © 2005)
Department Goals
To achieve its mission, WDFW will continue to focus its activities on the following four goals:
I.Conserve and protect native fish and wildlife
II.Provide sustainable fishing, hunting and other wildlife-related recreational experiences.
III.Use sound business practices, deliver high-quality customer service.LOL, just look at the poll...high quality customer service lol
IV.Maintain a highly skilled and motivated workforce.
Post by: elkslayer069 on May 24, 2012, 07:05:24 PM
Post by: buckfvr on May 24, 2012, 07:38:29 PM
Post by: Huntbear on May 24, 2012, 07:45:24 PM
I think we send this poll to Oly land !!! :yeah:
I have already sent an email to the Director and the Commissioners with links to this poll, voicing my extreme displeasure about several issues.... Did that last week some time.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on May 24, 2012, 07:57:56 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on May 24, 2012, 11:22:28 PM
Glancing at the poll data, I didnt realize we had 26 employees of WDFW on here..... :dunno:
There has to be a few here that hunt and fish and feel the same way many here do. Remember its not the rank and file we have issues with; its upper mgmt.
Post by: buckfvr on May 26, 2012, 07:30:47 AM
Glancing at the poll data, I didnt realize we had 26 employees of WDFW on here..... :dunno:
There has to be a few here that hunt and fish and feel the same way many here do. Remember its not the rank and file we have issues with; its upper mgmt.
It was more tongue in cheeck, feather rufflin, etc., etc. ............