Washington Senate Bill 5613 - Stops County agencies from doing cougar removal

[Tbar]

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.

[dreamingbig]

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

[bearpaw]

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.

[bearpaw]

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.

[Tbar]

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.

[Tbar]

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?

[Special T]

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.

[hunter399]

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
That's not a short little deal.

[hunter399]

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.

[Tbar]

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. 

[dreamingbig]

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

[bearpaw]

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!

[hunter399]

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.

[bigtex]

The bill passed the Senate and now heads to the House.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[chukarchaser]

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.