Hunting Washington Forum

Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: bearpaw on January 24, 2022, 12:59:10 PM

Title: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 24, 2022, 12:59:10 PM
SB 5613 - 2021-22
Concerning the use of dogs to hunt black bear, cougar, or bobcat.

Sponsors: Van De Wege, Rolfes, Conway, Hasegawa, Liias, Lovelett, Pedersen, Stanford

Substitute Bill Text: https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2021-22/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5613-S.pdf?q=20220124125438
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 24, 2022, 12:59:46 PM
Sheriff responds to proposed bill on cougar hunting

https://www.goldendalesentinel.com/news/sheriff-responds-to-proposed-bill-on-cougar-hunting/article_8d6a28a6-73e1-11ec-92fe-eff831e39f1b.html
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 24, 2022, 01:00:43 PM
Sportsmens Alliance: SB 5613: Washington State Serves as a Cautionary Tale

https://www.sportsmensalliance.org/news/sb-5613-washington-state-serves-as-a-cautionary-tale/?bblinkid=257673591&bbemailid=37734769&bbejrid=-2052331081
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: KFhunter on January 24, 2022, 01:01:04 PM
That foia email chain that was posted here not long ago shows some in the dept are very against it too
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: pickardjw on January 25, 2022, 11:08:24 AM
My letter to my representatives if you need a template. Link to comment is below:

https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill/5613

I am opposed to SSB 5613 and request that my elected representatives vote NO on this bill for the following reasons:

1. County officials are more likely to respond appropriately to problem predators like cougars. Stripping them of the ability to manage these predators for the residents in their jurisdictions could potentially cause harm to livestock, pets and people.

2. Wildlife management should not be dictated by the legistlature in the first place. Stripping the WDFW of the ability to allow hunters to manage predator populations by the fair chase methods of baiting and hound hunting has been a serious detriment to deer and elk populations. RCW 77.15.245 should be removed in it's entirety.

Please vote NO on SSB 5613 and please consider legislation to remove RCW 77.15.245 for the sake of our deer and elk populations. Thank you for your time.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bigtex on January 25, 2022, 12:21:20 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 25, 2022, 12:26:54 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.

That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bigtex on January 25, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 25, 2022, 12:49:23 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.

That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bigtex on January 25, 2022, 12:53:49 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Alan K on January 25, 2022, 02:39:26 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

It's like saying the county can use guns to take care of problem cats, but they can't use any ammo... It reduces a county's odds of successfully removing problem cats to near zero.

The purpose of the original carveout language in I-655 was because everyone recognized the need to remove problem animals when they threatened safety or damaged property. I can't think of a valid reason why on earth would anyone want to use anything but the quickest and most effective method of solving the problem. It's not about fair chase or sport hunting, its about stopping problem animals. Period.  Thats why the the only possible reason for the bill is to inhibit killing of cougars. 
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: walt on January 25, 2022, 04:11:38 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.

And how long until policy changes and WDFW no longer says "go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar" and instead says "we need to send our wildlife conflict manager out to assess the situation...blah...blah...blah..."?  Public safety is the Sherriff's responsibility.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: highcountry_hunter on January 25, 2022, 06:09:46 PM
It’ll pass. I almost guaran *censored*ing tee it. The way they’ve got it worded says the words “Hunt cougars with hounds” in the summary of the bill. The anti’s will push hard for it in King and Pierce county because they know that’s who decides what’s best for our entire state (even though this bill will more than likely not effect either of those counties), and the antis know that’s where the voters are most uninformed on the true issues with wildlife. As usual, they’ll vote with their hearts instead of their heads and the rest of us will actually have to live with these decisions. What a wonderful *censored* hole of a state we live in!

And before you start in on me, yes I will do my part by sending plenty of emails to all of my local representatives
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: chukarchaser on January 25, 2022, 06:33:30 PM
as it pertains to public safety no dually authoirzed LE agency should have to call WDFW first.  We elect county sheriffs (except the idiots in King county) to protect us as they deam necessary.  WDFW cant even make a case that the kill rate in Klickitat is higher than when they did it.  Proof there is no abuse. 
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on January 25, 2022, 07:05:54 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.

And how long until policy changes and WDFW no longer says "go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar" and instead says "we need to send our wildlife conflict manager out to assess the situation...blah...blah...blah..."?  Public safety is the Sherriff's responsibility.
What is the definition of public safety? Do you feel that the Sherriff in this case has acted solely in the interest of public safety? What are you basing your disagreement on?
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on January 25, 2022, 07:11:51 PM
as it pertains to public safety no dually authoirzed LE agency should have to call WDFW first.  We elect county sheriffs (except the idiots in King county) to protect us as they deam necessary.  WDFW cant even make a case that the kill rate in Klickitat is higher than when they did it.  Proof there is no abuse.
Do you think counties should conduct large scale deer and elk removals to address public safety without a wildlife professional assessment? FYI this type of legislation HAS been written.  What is your definition of public safety, is there a statewide standard? Can you explain the justification used in Klickitat? If there is consistency between the agency actions and county actions, what's the harm in this bill?
All of that said it's bad legislation that was facilitated by the actions of one.
Title: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: dreamingbig on January 25, 2022, 10:38:28 PM
My opinion is that the counties can kill as many problem cougars as they want.  I am not losing sleep over it… it makes such a small dent in our predator population.  We are still out of balance and getting worse year by year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 26, 2022, 06:14:54 AM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 26, 2022, 06:19:11 AM
as it pertains to public safety no dually authoirzed LE agency should have to call WDFW first.  We elect county sheriffs (except the idiots in King county) to protect us as they deam necessary.  WDFW cant even make a case that the kill rate in Klickitat is higher than when they did it.  Proof there is no abuse.
Do you think counties should conduct large scale deer and elk removals to address public safety without a wildlife professional assessment? FYI this type of legislation HAS been written.  What is your definition of public safety, is there a statewide standard? Can you explain the justification used in Klickitat? If there is consistency between the agency actions and county actions, what's the harm in this bill?
All of that said it's bad legislation that was facilitated by the actions of one.

You are going to have to show where any county is wanting to do large scale deer and elk removals for public safety?

Exactly the opposite is more likely, many counties are wanting to save the remaining deer and elk.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on January 26, 2022, 06:44:36 AM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
The two counties are polar opposite in both issues and cooperation.  If Klickitat conducted their actions with more merit, like flood, we would not have this bill.  Did you see the numbers posted? the removal numbers are significant in NE, just approached differently.  The difference is you have dissenting opinions vs legislation.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on January 26, 2022, 06:55:32 AM
as it pertains to public safety no dually authoirzed LE agency should have to call WDFW first.  We elect county sheriffs (except the idiots in King county) to protect us as they deam necessary.  WDFW cant even make a case that the kill rate in Klickitat is higher than when they did it.  Proof there is no abuse.
Do you think counties should conduct large scale deer and elk removals to address public safety without a wildlife professional assessment? FYI this type of legislation HAS been written.  What is your definition of public safety, is there a statewide standard? Can you explain the justification used in Klickitat? If there is consistency between the agency actions and county actions, what's the harm in this bill?
All of that said it's bad legislation that was facilitated by the actions of one.

You are going to have to show where any county is wanting to do large scale deer and elk removals for public safety?

Exactly the opposite is more likely, many counties are wanting to save the remaining deer and elk.

Maybe you should set this as a standard.  As well as hold yourself to that standard.  I'll dig up the proposal to validate what? Oh yeah, because I have to! and you take the next step to make an opposition statement to discredit?
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Special T on January 26, 2022, 08:27:58 AM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
The two counties are polar opposite in both issues and cooperation.  If Klickitat conducted their actions with more merit, like flood, we would not have this bill.  Did you see the numbers posted? the removal numbers are significant in NE, just approached differently.  The difference is you have dissenting opinions vs legislation.

Please highlight the differences in how the 2 counties operate and whynit is significant.  What I think most sportsmen see are 2 counties pushing back the WDFW slow walking responce and people being tired or it. I can tell you that I try and read a lot but I don't see the differences as easily as you do.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: hunter399 on January 26, 2022, 08:29:07 AM
I think maybe some are missing the bigger picture here.
And need to attend this.
Just cause it gets thrown out in here.
Doesn't mean that WDFW Commission can't set there own rules.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/commission/meetings/2022/28january2022-fwc-agenda

Don't you guys wanna hear the "science" Most likely how we should let them live.And the super science stuff.

I'm no expert but......
Don't most hunting and fishing regulations become some type of Washington law or wac.
So the Commission could very well go one direction or the other,plus we can get a feel for new Commission members to see how pro predator they may be.
Just sayin..

One other strange item is its a briefing,yet it's 4 hours long :yike:
That's not a short little deal.

Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: hunter399 on January 26, 2022, 09:46:34 AM
Also didn't the biological diversity place bring this very topic up in the spring bear meetings.
I thiink this is agenda driven I'm sure.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on January 26, 2022, 10:37:44 AM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
The two counties are polar opposite in both issues and cooperation.  If Klickitat conducted their actions with more merit, like flood, we would not have this bill.  Did you see the numbers posted? the removal numbers are significant in NE, just approached differently.  The difference is you have dissenting opinions vs legislation.

Please highlight the differences in how the 2 counties operate and whynit is significant.  What I think most sportsmen see are 2 counties pushing back the WDFW slow walking responce and people being tired or it. I can tell you that I try and read a lot but I don't see the differences as easily as you do.
Jeff Flood has taken a valid approach to reach accountability where there were questionable inaction by agencies. He has continually worked to improve data collection as well as communication.  He has worked with both the department and tribes to improve the situation and trust.  Klickitat is the opposite, action driven vs accountability.  So one is building a foundation to build capacity and accountability and one is flexing and pushing jurisdictional limits. I can guarantee that Jeff Flood has a more definitive path to actions that can be validated by data. 
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: dreamingbig on January 26, 2022, 12:37:14 PM
Probably fair to point out that some members of the commission won’t vote based on data.  They let the personal beliefs of “right” guide their vote.  If they don’t like predators being killed then they are looking to reduce opportunity.  The data isn’t going to change their mind.  They don’t care!  Prove us wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on January 26, 2022, 02:22:54 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
The two counties are polar opposite in both issues and cooperation.  If Klickitat conducted their actions with more merit, like flood, we would not have this bill.  Did you see the numbers posted? the removal numbers are significant in NE, just approached differently.  The difference is you have dissenting opinions vs legislation.

Please highlight the differences in how the 2 counties operate and whynit is significant.  What I think most sportsmen see are 2 counties pushing back the WDFW slow walking responce and people being tired or it. I can tell you that I try and read a lot but I don't see the differences as easily as you do.
Jeff Flood has taken a valid approach to reach accountability where there were questionable inaction by agencies. He has continually worked to improve data collection as well as communication.  He has worked with both the department and tribes to improve the situation and trust.  Klickitat is the opposite, action driven vs accountability.  So one is building a foundation to build capacity and accountability and one is flexing and pushing jurisdictional limits. I can guarantee that Jeff Flood has a more definitive path to actions that can be validated by data.

Admittedly I don't know much about what exactly Klickitat is doing or not doing, and it doesn't affect me. But if it's only Klickitat they want to shut down then why are they addressing this on a statewide basis. It appears that accountability doesn't really matter, the democrats simply want to end all counties ability to manage predators!
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: hunter399 on January 26, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

The part your not getting, the state will waffle on killing any predator, when a predator attacks livestock or presents a public safety concern the counties will get rid of it. And it's not just Klickitat, we have our own county agent here in the NE corner. All the ranchers know he is the only option they have to resolve issues because Olympia cow tows to the predator lovers.
The two counties are polar opposite in both issues and cooperation.  If Klickitat conducted their actions with more merit, like flood, we would not have this bill.  Did you see the numbers posted? the removal numbers are significant in NE, just approached differently.  The difference is you have dissenting opinions vs legislation.

Please highlight the differences in how the 2 counties operate and whynit is significant.  What I think most sportsmen see are 2 counties pushing back the WDFW slow walking responce and people being tired or it. I can tell you that I try and read a lot but I don't see the differences as easily as you do.
Jeff Flood has taken a valid approach to reach accountability where there were questionable inaction by agencies. He has continually worked to improve data collection as well as communication.  He has worked with both the department and tribes to improve the situation and trust.  Klickitat is the opposite, action driven vs accountability.  So one is building a foundation to build capacity and accountability and one is flexing and pushing jurisdictional limits. I can guarantee that Jeff Flood has a more definitive path to actions that can be validated by data.

Admittedly I don't know much about what exactly Klickitat is doing or not doing, and it doesn't affect me. But if it's only Klickitat they want to shut down then why are they addressing this on a statewide basis. It appears that accountability doesn't really matter, the democrats simply want to end all counties ability to manage predators!
Ding,ding,ding.
We have a winner.
Democrats and more.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bigtex on February 09, 2022, 09:39:07 AM
The bill passed the Senate and now heads to the House.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: chukarchaser on February 12, 2022, 06:53:34 PM
Someone show me where there are any substaniated claims that Klickitatt county acted outside the guidlelines of public saftey.  Even WDFW testied that the numbers where substantially the same between county operations and WDFW operations.  The county just acted faster.  If the state did there job without caving to liberal pressure this would not be an issue.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: logger on February 14, 2022, 02:47:10 PM
If I know songer as well as i think I do , olympia is just pissing in the wind to think he's going to cow down to them.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Jake Dogfish on February 14, 2022, 03:14:38 PM
The whole state will suffer from how klickitat is managing cougars.  Antis have a lot of power in the legislature.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: logger on February 14, 2022, 06:15:33 PM
The whole state will suffer from how klickitat is managing cougars.  Antis have a lot of power in the legislature.
how would you handle the cougar problem in klickitat? 
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Jake Dogfish on February 14, 2022, 06:26:46 PM
Throw em a bone.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Tbar on February 14, 2022, 07:14:34 PM
Someone show me where there are any substaniated claims that Klickitatt county acted outside the guidlelines of public saftey.  Even WDFW testied that the numbers where substantially the same between county operations and WDFW operations.  The county just acted faster.  If the state did there job without caving to liberal pressure this would not be an issue.
What are those guidelines and where can I find them? Citation?
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Landowner on February 26, 2022, 09:42:31 PM
The bill did not move out of committee in House by the end of deadline this past week.  That should be end of it.  Hopefully.  Until next year.
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Rainier10 on February 27, 2022, 06:31:13 AM
The bill did not move out of committee in House by the end of deadline this past week.  That should be end of it.  Hopefully.  Until next year.
thank goidness
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: bearpaw on March 08, 2022, 06:32:00 PM
Amazing, but glad to hear that  :tup:
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: buglebrush on March 08, 2022, 07:36:46 PM
The original bill is significantly different than the substitute bill.

The article with Songer's quotes were regarding the original bill. The original bill would've outright banned county involvement. The substitute bill allows for county involvement after WDFW authorizes such assistance. How it would go is Klickitat County (or any county) responds to a cougar call, they call WDFW (which they typically do anyways) and WDFW says go ahead and use dogs to find the cougar.
That wouldn't be so bad, but typically, WDFW is probably more likely to avoid killing any predator! The bill sucks!
The bill has nothing to do with killing a predator, it's simply can counties utilize their own dog teams. Even if the original bill were to pass (which doesn't matter now since that bill is essentially gone) if a deputy responded to a cougar attack and they observed the cougar they could shoot it on sight, they just couldn't call out a county dog team.

It is highly likely the substitute bill was pass and become law. But in reality I doubt it will change anything since those calls to WDFW were in almost all cases already being made.
That's simply not true, it's all about stopping predators from being killed, that's why they are doing this legislation, so counties can't manage problem cats!
Obviously hound teams are vital to finding problem cats and if you take away a hound team your chances of finding the cat decrease almost entirely. However, the bill simply deals with can counties utilize their own dog teams, it does not prohibit counties from killing cougars.

Using dogs is the only way to actually have a good opportunity of removing cats.  Seriously, don't you ever get tired of defending Washington's retarded predator management? 
Title: Re: Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 09, 2022, 05:58:03 AM
Anyone know who the money pocket padded sponsor of this SB 5613 bill was? Missed it above: : Van De Wege, Rolfes, Conway, Hasegawa, Liias, Lovelett, Pedersen, Stanford
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2022, SimplePortal