collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd  (Read 1997 times)

Offline hughjorgan

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 1730
  • Location: Wilbur
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2021, 02:22:59 PM »
https://m.facebook.com/groups/875337566494224/?ref=group_browse

Please join this group and take it seriously. There's no reason we can't boycott this state while still voicing our opinion. Washington obviously cares about special interest greenie groups more than hunter's, conservation and actual science, but above that they care about revenue. In my opinion, the only way we see change is if we hit them in the wallet.

Not buying tags is just what Lorna smith and Fred koontz want. That for sure guarantees your not going kill a bear or two in the fall or a cougar. You also will no longer going to have skin in the game. How likely are you to stay engaged in whatís happening if you arenít keeping some skin in the game.

Theyíve made it easy to attend these meetings via zoom, sportsman need to get more active and engaged.

Lots of guys are upset about losing opportunity but how many guys are going to kill some bears in the fall. You can still make a sizable difference in the predator population but most guys arenít going to do anything about it.

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 28944
  • Location: NE Corner
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2021, 02:28:08 PM »
We all have skin in the game,  WDFW is no longer a fish and game agency but a wildlife agency, all Washington residents hinters or not have equal voice.

Sadly.   I'd love to see it go back to fish and game, pandering to hunters and fishing.

Offline hughjorgan

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 1730
  • Location: Wilbur
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #17 on: November 25, 2021, 02:34:17 PM »
True but in this instant the squeaky wheel got greased for the antis because they squawked the loudest.

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 28944
  • Location: NE Corner
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #18 on: November 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM »
I'm not so sure they did, 1000's of hunters filled out the public comments and did their part during the public comment period.

One zoom meeting was deliberately set during peak hunting season to purposefully disenfranchise hunters, and they set their vote based upon that, they loaded up that meeting with anti's while hiding it from prohunting, they totally ignored all the earlier comments submitted to public record.

These were illegal shenanigans being pulled here


Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2021, 02:55:40 PM »
I'm not so sure they did, 1000's of hunters filled out the public comments and did their part during the public comment period.

One zoom meeting was deliberately set during peak hunting season to purposefully disenfranchise hunters, and they set their vote based upon that, they loaded up that meeting with anti's while hiding it from prohunting, they totally ignored all the earlier comments submitted to public record.

These were illegal shenanigans being pulled here
What were the total comments? How many hunters? All info should have been in the staff report but I didn't catch it.

Offline hunter399

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 3968
  • Location: In your hunting spot
  • Groups: NRA RMEF
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2021, 03:25:23 PM »
I'm not so sure they did, 1000's of hunters filled out the public comments and did their part during the public comment period.

One zoom meeting was deliberately set during peak hunting season to purposefully disenfranchise hunters, and they set their vote based upon that, they loaded up that meeting with anti's while hiding it from prohunting, they totally ignored all the earlier comments submitted to public record.

These were illegal shenanigans being pulled here
What were the total comments? How many hunters? All info should have been in the staff report but I didn't catch it.

They also extended the comment time line so the anti-hunter could bash it with there BS. The department never sent an email to us hunters letting us know they extended it.
And if you erased your browser history ,you could comment a million times if you want. Which is probably what the antihunters did.
That's why there comment BS need attention also.
Your name
Address
Wild id:
Something proving your a Washington resident.
We don't need help from other states having a voice in Washington game management.

I know many of you don't want to blame the department and they did or do support hunters on the spring bear hunt.
But at the end of the day,they don't have there @$!# together.
Like a simple trail cam setup to catch bears activities.
Like every 10,0000 square miles ,how long does it take a bear to hit bait,how many bears hit bait in 30 days, x amount of bears per x amount of square mile times a huge area to give a rough population .
They did there bear counts like they do there deer counts ,like crap and us hunters will pay the price.
Two birds in the Bush is always better than one in the hand-that way you can always go to the Bush and hunt another day .conservation=Better hunting.
Wrote by hunter399

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 28944
  • Location: NE Corner
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2021, 03:44:35 PM »
 :yeah:


It reads like a battle of the .orgs and HW'rs

BHA made a strong showing, kudos to those folks  :tup: :tup:

 maybe HW'rs need a code so we can virtually fist bump one another for comments  :tup:


This vid has a lot of scrolling, it would take way too long to go through each comment


« Last Edit: November 25, 2021, 03:52:20 PM by KFhunter »

Offline hunter399

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 3968
  • Location: In your hunting spot
  • Groups: NRA RMEF
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2021, 03:58:40 PM »
:yeah:


It reads like a battle of the .orgs and HW'rs

BHA made a strong showing, kudos to those folks  :tup: :tup:

 maybe HW'rs need a code so we can virtually fist bump one another for comments  :tup:


This vid has a lot of scrolling, it would take way too long to go through each comment


I watched about half your vid.
Looks like about 50% of those comments don't want any hunting let alone a spring bear hunt.
The anti's really stepped there game up.
Two birds in the Bush is always better than one in the hand-that way you can always go to the Bush and hunt another day .conservation=Better hunting.
Wrote by hunter399

Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #23 on: November 25, 2021, 04:19:44 PM »
:yeah:


It reads like a battle of the .orgs and HW'rs

BHA made a strong showing, kudos to those folks  :tup: :tup:

 maybe HW'rs need a code so we can virtually fist bump one another for comments  :tup:


This vid has a lot of scrolling, it would take way too long to go through each comment


In the staff report they usually give a summary of comments for and against and an individual summary of aligned comments.

Offline KFhunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 28944
  • Location: NE Corner
  • My posts do not reflect an official opinion of HW
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2021, 04:21:16 PM »
I could not find that, it seems totally ignored.

Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #25 on: November 25, 2021, 04:42:39 PM »
I could not find that, it seems totally ignored.
I just watched it again.  You are correct, totally disregarded the staff report. They made a mockery of entire process as well as parliamentary procedures. I guess only verbal comments matter. I'll dig for the staff report mostly out of curiosity.  I'm not sure I've ever seen such public disregard for staff advisors, much less the advisory committee (gmac).

Offline jackelope

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+24)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 45560
  • Location: Duvall, WA
  • Groups: jackelope
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #26 on: November 25, 2021, 07:43:36 PM »
I could not find that, it seems totally ignored.
I just watched it again.  You are correct, totally disregarded the staff report. They made a mockery of entire process as well as parliamentary procedures. I guess only verbal comments matter. I'll dig for the staff report mostly out of curiosity.  I'm not sure I've ever seen such public disregard for staff advisors, much less the advisory committee (gmac).

Is there a way to use any of this against them? Send it up the flagpole somehow? Parliamentary procedure is a thing and itís a thing for a reason. If they ignored it, it seems thereíd be validity in questioning the whole process.

I have crappy cell service and canít get the video to play where Iím at.
:fire.:

" In today's instant gratification society, more and more pressure revolves around success and the measurement of one's prowess as a hunter by inches on a score chart or field photos produced on social media. Don't fall into the trap. Hunting is-and always will be- about the hunt, the adventure, the views, and time spent with close friends and family. " Ryan Hatfield

My posts, opinions and statements do not represent those of this forum

Offline Seabass

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 410
  • Location: Coeur dí Alene
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #27 on: November 25, 2021, 07:57:11 PM »
I think they dodge a huge bullet by doing everything in a ďzoomĒ environment now. Reading a comment posted by a faceless person is pretty easyÖfacing that person IN PERSON is a different animal. They are cowards.

Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+22)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2407
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #28 on: November 25, 2021, 07:58:16 PM »
I could not find that, it seems totally ignored.
I just watched it again.  You are correct, totally disregarded the staff report. They made a mockery of entire process as well as parliamentary procedures. I guess only verbal comments matter. I'll dig for the staff report mostly out of curiosity.  I'm not sure I've ever seen such public disregard for staff advisors, much less the advisory committee (gmac).

Is there a way to use any of this against them? Send it up the flagpole somehow? Parliamentary procedure is a thing and itís a thing for a reason. If they ignored it, it seems thereíd be validity in questioning the whole process.

I have crappy cell service and canít get the video to play where Iím at.
I don't believe so.  It will probably result with more training individually but I don't think it can reverse a decision.

Offline dreamingbig

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2007
  • Posts: 2503
  • Location: Mukilteo, WA
Re: Wdfw commission meeting dec 2nd 3rd
« Reply #29 on: November 25, 2021, 07:58:17 PM »
https://m.facebook.com/groups/875337566494224/?ref=group_browse

Please join this group and take it seriously. There's no reason we can't boycott this state while still voicing our opinion. Washington obviously cares about special interest greenie groups more than hunter's, conservation and actual science, but above that they care about revenue. In my opinion, the only way we see change is if we hit them in the wallet.

Not buying tags is just what Lorna smith and Fred koontz want. That for sure guarantees your not going kill a bear or two in the fall or a cougar. You also will no longer going to have skin in the game. How likely are you to stay engaged in whatís happening if you arenít keeping some skin in the game.

Theyíve made it easy to attend these meetings via zoom, sportsman need to get more active and engaged.

Lots of guys are upset about losing opportunity but how many guys are going to kill some bears in the fall. You can still make a sizable difference in the predator population but most guys arenít going to do anything about it.
I am done throwing good money after bad.  They are listening to those that donít buy tags right now.  Why should we have too to still have a voice?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
@mukbowhunt
Avid Bowhunter
Maxxis 35 / Trykon XL

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal