Did anyone else see the report on baiting bear done by King 5 last night? It was one of their investigative reporting pieces.... it was about the volume of bait areas being found state wide in spite of the ban...

What a bunch of propandga garbage.... It gave all hunters a black eye in my opinion..

It was pathetic. If it offended you, I'd suggest emailing them and switching to a different channel for news.

I don't usually watch the news, but happened to see the broadcast you are talking about. What a pathetic and biased attempt at informative reporting....which of course leads back to the reason I don't watch the news in the first place.

Here's the story.

http://www.king5.com/localnews/investigators/NW_110303INVbearbaiting.16e6d7ac.html

If people aren't going to follow the law, no matter if the law is stupid or not, they'll just digging everyone a hole in which to bury hunting. It isn't like King 5 had to invent this problem, the poachers gave them plenty of ammunition. There are plenty of anti-hunters out there that love to hear this stuff.

With this kind of public relations, who needs PETA?

I know Those People They are not Poachers.They Got Busted For Scent On There Feet. They They Were Standing In The Road and Got Busted For Hunting Over Bait. the Game Wardens Did alotof lieing . I dont Have alot of respect For Things They Did. Two Friends Were Bear Calling Whith Cover scent on there Feet. They Lost There all lost there guns. that tv showwas lies very anti . Rick

bear, i think you may have been lied to bro.

game wardens have my fullest respect, they arent the fish and game... they are the lowest on the chain and they (for the most part) do their job.

curtis

I (as a hunter) had no problem with that story and I'm glad they aired it. I think that shop owner was either guilty as hell or an idiot, or both, (why else would he admit his guilt). They (King5) started out by saying most hunters follow the rules and ended by saying these losers were turned in by other (law abiding)hunters, where's the bias in that.

I think ethical hunters should applaud K5 for the story.

sorry Guys should just hang them all .Rick

Well… I had given up one King 5 about a year ago… but the wife had it on and I happened to catch that story… all I have to say was that she got made at me for yelling at the TV and calling the reporter a DumbAss….

So… that started a discussion about maybe I just should watch the TV… and I said that I was going to block King 5 from our TV's… That didn't go over big either…

Depending on if some of the data was true …If the guy flew in from Europe and falsified information… he is breaking the law, goodbye… And IF the fact is they were using bait then they were breaking the law, goodbye…

Now, the thing that started the yelling was when the story was over and Linda Byron started talking to the other Reporters and they asked something about if the number of bear had increased since the passing of the law and Linda said NO, that according to the WDFW they number of complaint calls had gone down. And also if you read the linked article they make a similar “…That's because after the initiative passed, the state increased the number of bears that could be taken by hunters from one to two in some areas, decreased the cost of the license and extended the bear hunting season from 70 to just under 100 days….”

Well she and this article neither answered the question about increase in bear, nor the truth about complaints!!

The number of bear HAS increase in Washington since the law was passed, that is why WDFW made the changes to the take limit, season length, and fee. The number of complaint calls has increased also, but if you live in a rural area you will get told that there is nothing they (WDFW) can do because you choose to live in there (the bears) home area. So, generally after hearing that locals just don't call again and resolve the problem themselves. Those are FACT's that the new will not report even though it is the TRUTH!

They need to tell the entire story not just the pieces that make a one sided hype piece!

Goodbye KING 5!

PS…. I took my bear on a stalk hunt… over a berry patch… is a berry patch a nature bait location?

Shoot Straight!!!

Not always true.... I got a bogus ticket from a game warden on the OP who has a reputation for writing crap tickets. I took it to court, and even the prosecutor was shaking his head. The judge threw it out of court. They are people. Some are good and some aren't.

This Ethical hunter says that they grouped all hunters in with the poachers. Even thought they threw in a disclaimer..... they still kept calling them hunters. How easy hard would it have been to call them what they are...poachers? Too tough for king 5's reporters apparently. Anytime they group us with them, we get a black eye. Also, that lady wouldn't have know a black bear from a racoon. As stated above, her facts weren't straight either....

POOR JOURNALISM AT BEST.

You know the sad thing is most people know hunters that do this very thing and they do nothing about it. Most consider spot and stalk bear hunting impossible so they justify baiting anyhow. Just like the owner of the sporting good store in the interview. It was the yuppies in Bellevue at fault forbanning baiting in his mind. So since they disagree it's ok to bait in their small minds. I hunt Wa, Or, Id for Bear, deer, elk. By far the most slob hunters are in Wa with Ore a close second. I thought the piece hit home and should be a wake up call for hunters to police their own. Anyone have anybody they know that they should have a little heart to heart with or make a call to the game dept. Including relatives?

Wow,


I baited for years, and still think it , along with hound hunting IS the mosty ethical way to take a bear, regardless of what the law is. I am not saying breaking the law is a good idea, but if we are talking ethics tward the ANIMAL then I will stand by my statement.
We on the fishing board spend a lot of time talking about ethics, and whats Best for the resource, I think this law is Not in the best interest of the resource.......let me explain.


Bear do not ordain any head gear, and your average hunter can't see a penis on a bear from 25 yards, let alone 200 through a scope. Now, lets see, a bear in a berry field high on a mountain you have watch it for 20 minutes, you shoot.......out walks two cubs.....but wait, you according to law are being ethical.....right???? If you recall your reg it clearly states, although not illegal, "PLEASE REFRAIN FROM SHOOTING SOWS WITH CUBS" Why did they state this??? Maybe because not is not ethical???? Hmmm. I wonder these days how many sows are shot on sight by deer hunters "ETHICALLY" hunting, with no regard to the now "2-3" bears they just killed. They may not have put a bullet in the cubs, but......in my mind they might as well have. Ethically are they now poachers???? Well, in my mind they are, and are just as guilty as the guy over bait that knew he was shooting a "single" boar!!!!!


Any guy that would "RAT" a relitive in my opinion, would make great bait....what a a-hole. YES, I find that very ETHICAL!!!


chumster

Chumster,

You mention ethics but then disclaim them if a realative is involved. Interesting concept.

In all but the rare situations it is easy to distiguish a sow from boars. The rare situation is usaually a dry sow anyhow.
If you have to watch the bear for 3 hours to make sure it's not a sow with cubs it's the right thing to do. One of the prime edicts of hunting know your target before you shoot. The number one hunting ethic. You highlight a huge problem in people in general greed. They want the animal more than they want to do the right thing.

Theking,


I really doubt you, or any hunter in the "heat" of the hunt stops, waits a hour, picks the bears leg up to make sure there is no sack. Maybe you can tell the difference of sexes between bears a 200 yds, but I would like to see it. We must talk about the general public of hunters.....do you think even 10% have your ability....really???? They shoot the first black object that looks like a bear period!!! They don't wait 10 seconds let alone a damn hour!!! They now hand out 2 tags to guys like this. Do I have a problem with a guy getting a bear......hell no, but I would like to know from MY view of ethics, there is not 2 cubs starving to death, for a rug mount, and bragging rights.

As far as my ethics tward family, I guess it's how your raised. I feel ratting a family member, or friend for that matter is the lowest of lows. I could never consider anyone of your caliber a friend, no matter how nice. I would feel as though I was always being under the gun. You sound like the type of guy who likes the atta boy pat on the back. If your not a cop, you should be. People would at least be able to ID you then <img border="0" alt="[wall]" title="" src="graemlins/wall.gif" />


Chumster

Chumster, I agree that baiting is probably more ethical for choosing between the sexes. However, it still doesn't justify breaking even a stupid law.

As for ratting on a friend/family member being the lowest of the lows.... Well, I guess I wouldn't consider someone who broke rules my friend. They're obviously working against law abiding hunter's interest and furthering the effort of the anti's to restrict our actions even further.

I'm all for hunters (and fishers) policing their own. I have witnessed some "hunters" do awful things in the field and I feel its my duty to ALL hunters who want to continue hunting for the next 50 years to call them on it. This weekend I had a "hunter" actually brag that he shoots hawks if they fly in range because they eat a lot of upland birds. If I could have witnessed it, I would have called it in eventhough this same person told me of a couple sweet spots minutes earlier. (This person wasn't a friend but just someone I'd met while hunting that day). If that's "low" in anyones mind, so be it. I'd rather have a clear conscience.

Chumster,

Circular logic at best. Regardless of what one thinks about it baiting and hounds are illegal. My friends and family would not violate any law knowingly so I have no worries. I would not assosciate with anyone that would. Having principles in the fishing and hunting community anymore gets you called a tree hugger, an anti and now a cop. Interesting if it were not so funny.

CWUgirl,


If you both look back at what I wrote.....I said it wasn't WISE to break the law. From what I GATHER you both think I supported the action of the gents in question. Well, the law is the law, and I never said what they done was right!!! I do look at different situations with a open mind, the world in general is not as black/white as most want to be purists claim. YOU EVER SPEED?? have you turned yourself in for it.....well???? People love to point fingers at the other guy.......never looking at themselves. We ALL have broken a law maybe some blatently, other by chance. OH YA.......YOUR PURISTS????


Now, lets look at what they did, broke a law.......A questionable law as far as i'm concerned, but yet still a law.

The concept that extremist will "excuse" hunting if it is done legally is a "RED FLAG" of stupidity. They could care less, killing is killing. Remember when hound hunting, and baiting were legal??? I don't remember many, if any, complaints from the general non-hunting public. I wasn't until extremists made a big stink that things changed, and not for the better. Now people like you think ratting people both hunting, and fishing, bringing it to a news organization will make things better.......your FOOLS!!! This in no way will ever make us as hunters look better. The public has been FOOLED into thinking baiting, and hound hunting are cruel, and you think that bringing it up will change thier mind??? AGAIN, FOOLS!! Hunters are going to put the last nail in thier coffin trying to do the "just" thing Sure you can sit there and say "they were breaking the law" but you forget when they put a measure up to the general public ,YOU like it, or not, are bunched up with these unethical, law breaking hunters. So regardless if you like it, or not, I think it is wise to let the game department deal with hunters within our own ranks, because news worthy stories of baiting, which people will probally continue, will only kill our sport hunting all together.......Law abidding, or not!!


CHUMSTER

Chumster, it was my impression that you condoned their actions because you believe baiting to be the ethical method of hunting and did not approve of poaching being reported.

Do I speed? Sure I do, but you really can't compare speeding to laws concerning hunting. Why? Because there aren't throngs of people united to stop us all from driving! There are anti-hunting lobbies, however, and they love to see hunters screwing up.

No, the extremists will not exuse hunting because its done legally. But hunters are shooting themselves in the foot if they allow others to blatently break the law and don't report it. Extremists are looking for hunters to slip up and show the masses who don't have a stake in the issue either way that we're all law breaking poachers. These stories will run time to time no matter if hunters report eachother or not. People who are prosecuted for bear baiting and other crimes provide lots of public record evidence all on their own.

I am not at all forgetting that I am lumped in with those unethical hunter/poachers. All the more reason to report them!! I don't want people who give ALL hunters a black eye to get away with their crimes. Hunters HELP every other hunter out there when they report poaching/law breaking because it takes those a-holes out of the hunter population or reforming their ways for risk of prosecution.

Have fun uniting with poachers and law breakers because that's what you're doing when you promote silence. I want NOTHING to do with poachers and won't hide their crimes under the rug.

Hunters aren't nailing their own coffin by trying to do the "just" thing in reporting. Poachers, rule breakers, and those who wish to keep their crimes secret are! You're just allowing the practices to continue, allowing more crimes to be committed by condoning it, and giving the media more fodder (because many will be caught by wardens) to report on.

Chumster,

Everything always comes down to black and white. IMHO one is as free to break the law as one is to follow the rule of law. Just when you break it no whining allowed :-)

I am a traditional and primative Archer. I have chosen to make hunting harder for the fun of it. I also do not subscribe to the big tent theory . There are a growing majority of people in the hunting commuity that are damaging the sport going forward. Our cultural trend shows us that hunter numbers are shrinking and will continue to do so. Conversely the non hunter has more input into our activities and it will get worse. The vast majority have nothing against hunting until. they do have a picture in their mind of their great Grandpa etc. hunting and he looked more like Aldo Leopold than Ted Nugent. The more we stray towards Ted the more likely they say no. Now Ted May be right in much of what he says but we all no it's not what you say it's how you say it. Black and white ultimately. Take care.

CWUgirl,


I'm sorry you feel that way, the only thing I ask of people of your caliber is......IF your going to report PLEASE keep it to our own ranks HUNTERS/GAMEWARDENS AS TO BRING A NEWS CREW IN WILL DAMAGE US ALL!!!!!!

king,

It's to bad we see things so different.......as I to am a primitive hunter, build bows, flint knap, and find many of the same likes you do. As you must know to pick up the stick, and string makes one a better hunter.......at least makes it more interesting.


Chumster

Game Wardens don't bring in news crews. For the most part, they despise them. Don't give a game warden a reason to write you up, and he won't. They'll even help you out plenty of times, sometimes point you in the direction of game.

CWU, to answer the question about an illegal fish (you asked a long time ago)... He said it was a matter of ethics. If the fish was being released properly and had a good chance of survival, he'd probably let the guy go. If the fish was tossed back into the water, he would write him up for everything he could. Sorta like the attitude test with the traffic cop.

Curtis

Regardless of how we view things it is imperitive that we all stick together. I've said this before and apparently it keeps going OVER your heads. These antis know they can't wipe us out with one big storm, so they take us out a little bit at a time. Why do you think they got rid of trapping, hounds and bait. The least amount of sportsman did those activities. What if they decide that they're gonna go after archers next. Are all you rifle, muzzleloader, and shotgunners gonna stand by and watch? "I don't bowhunt let em take it away doesn't affect me" Is that what you'll say. I bet the majority will. We need to fight for every right that we have.

THINK ABOUT IT.

GLOW

Glowball&#8230; I am with you&#8230;!

I have gone repeatedly to WDFW meetings to provide input and I am always shocked at how many hunters are willing &#8220;Cut off their nose despite their face&#8230;&#8221; (or are willing to sacrifice or give up another hunting styles season or weapon limitation)

I always try and make a statement to the audience that &#8220;We as hunter need to stand united, no matter what hunting method we have chosen other wise we will all lose in the long run!&#8221;

It is and has always been that if we as hunters are divided in our stand on an issue we will lose! There are some perfect examples in the near past&#8230; I don't trap so I will not support the trappers in their fight to defend trapping&#8230; outcome No trapping&#8230;

The thing about the King5 news article and other News stories that should PISS us all off is&#8230; that the news people don't use the correct language when presenting the story&#8230; when hunters or fishermen brake the law they are no longer hunters or fishermen they are POACHERS. This is similar to the Disney movie Bambi&#8230; when the &#8220;hunters are in the woods&#8221; and then the &#8220;hunters&#8221; start shooting anything that moved regardless of what it was, they are not hunters they are poachers&#8230; I have corrected, I can't count how many people about this fact&#8230;

Yes&#8230; I have broken the law. So, I guess everyone of YOU that drives is a criminal because I broke the law while driving&#8230; that logic doesn't make since&#8230;

My $0.02&#8230; and a bit of a rant&#8230;