ATT: WA hunters need your help.

Washington hunters could really use some help and support right now. The F&W Dept is proposing to close down all public lands to hunting in August. The proposed closure includes all state and federal lands.
This is a knee jerk reaction to an unfortunate shooting incident last fall.

Proposal from the “Green Sheet”
(1) For BBMUs that open Aug 1, the Aug 1-31 period is limited to
hunting on private lands only. The justification for this change is to reduce conflict with other recreational users on public lands during the summer while still allowing bears to be harvested for damage reasons (e.g., orchard damage).

This is a straight across ban of hunting bears in August on public lands. Not just rifle hunters, but all weapons groups.

There have been no alternatives given such as:
Hunting by permit only
Master Hunters only
Archery or Muzzle Loader only

If you could find a couple minutes of time to write an email to the WA Dept of F&W at the email addresses below and let them know that closing any public lands to hunting is unacceptable, we Washington hunters would be grateful.

Thanks.


The one who is pushing this is donny.martorello@dfw.wa.gov

commission@dfw.wa.gov
director@dfw.wa.gov
wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
peter.goldmark@dfw.wa.gov
cpl@dnr.wa.gov

Asshattery!

You are INCORRECT. This proposal would only close BEAR hunting on public lands in august. All other hunting would still go on in august, just not bear.

Big damn deal. Any across the board closure is a reaction straight out of seattle. They know nothing about hunting and using a bad situation to do something they have long wanted to is just standard for that crowd. These are the types of things that are easily taken adn hard to get back. Write the letter everyone or the next time someone gets killed during deer /elk season we will see the same reaction.

Actually this proposal was not by the people from seattle. This proposal was by WDFW biologists. Here is the official proposal:

In addition to trends in total bear harvest, the Department uses trends in median ages of harvested bears and the percentage of females in the total harvest as indicators of the status of bear populations (see 2009-2015 Game Management Plan). Those data suggest bear populations are stable to slightly declining (in a few BBMUs). The Department is recommending status quo bear seasons, with two exceptions: (1) For BBMUs that open Aug 1, the Aug 1-31 period is limited to hunting on private lands only. The justification for this change is to reduce conflict with other recreational users on public lands during the summer while still allowing bears to be harvested for damage reasons (e.g., orchard damage). (2) For BBMUs that open in early September, change the opener from the day after Labor day to September 1. The justification for this change is consistency with opening day of deer archery seasons.

So as you can see this proposal would actually lengthen the bear season in most of E. washington, (where most public land is at)

This proposal is due to pressure on the WDFW. There is pressure to limit the season to avoid "another incident" and limit the # of hunters on public land until after summer vacation for schools. After this time, they estimate less people will be in the woods thus less chance of interaction. Where do you think that pressure is originating from? Which politians jumped on this when it happened last year. It is politians pressuring the WDFW to change seasons and using a bad situation for their own agendas.

And if you think that opening on the first of sept instead of teh day after labor day is a good deal for giving up all of aug.......Yikes. please dont help in negotiating for our fishing rights.

Yes, I did miss the word "bear" in the first part of the post, but I quoted directly from the Green Sheet below.

This is an access issue and if allowed, the trend will continue until we are kept off all public land for any reason.

Bigman, obviously you don't get it.

Maybe we should close all public land in August to NON-Hunters to prevent this from happening again. they have it all wrong.


could someone make one of those form letters with a link like CCA is doing so people could just click on it and send it? I could send it around to allot of people who would send it.


Kris

The proposal is complete bullsh!t.

We moved the open of bow season for elk a few years back so the bunny hugers could have that weekend . now bear season when will it end??????

why not stop hiking during hunting season.

I think this affected cougar season the same way. The biggest joke is the part that sez, To reduce user conflicts? huh? users are out year round. Motorcycles buzzing around in the middle of elk season? I wouldn't do it. Hikers have all summer why not tell them to stay home. or wear orange. or it's public land, anyone can use it at any time.

WHAT A BUNCH OF SH!T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some real intelligent responses here (sarcasm intended). That's just the sort of retort that will persuade Legislators that they are doing the right thing.

Sg

we arent talking to legislators, we are bitching about a stupid proposal to like minded hunters.....

Deadline to respond is Friday the 20th.

So here is an intelligent response...sort of.

Can a WDFW biologist explain to me the "BIOLOGICAL" effect of changing this season? What SCIENTIFIC benfits of changing this season can be gained? It sounds to me as if someone is overstepping their bounds in suggesting this change.

I called and requested to get a copy of the report from WDFW enforcement on the woman who was shot by the teenaager while bear hunting last August. My request was denied due to the fact that it was an ongoing investigation.

What happened was horrible, not only for the woman and her family, but also for the young man and his family. To say this was a life changing event for all would be an understatement.

Many questions go unanswered, and few details have been released, only snippets, especially when compared to other firearms related deaths. Some reports say she was wearing a blue jacket, others say she was putting it away. Some say it was foggy or misty, others say it was clear. Some reports say the range was 100+ yards, while the officer I talked to said it was less. In every murder case out there, we get all of the gruesome details. In this case, few details.

To make a kneejerk reaction to something that hasn't been through the court procees yet is bullsh!t and asshattery. Where on earth is the absolute outrage against elderly drivers who kill and maim people EVERY DAY in our state? Why isn't there a law that requires who reach the age of 70 to take a driver's test EVERY year? The damage caused by this segment of the population is much more harmful to society that the act of one 14 year old boy, yet the bumblers in Olympia decide they need to act on this. Ridiculous.

Across the State, how many incidental shootings are there every year during hunting season? 1, maybe as many as 3. Horrible in any instance, but compared to other pursuits, hunting is a VERY safe pursuit, provided you are not the intended game. Weigh that against the damage that is done every day by elderly drivers, across the State, and across the nation for that matter. The death toll is in the thousands EVERY YEAR! Where is the outrage and the legislation? I had a guy of 70+ decide today that he needed to be where I was, and he moved into my lane on Hwy 101 outside of Olympia. Old fart even left his blinker on for a mile after I informed him that I was already in the lane with my horn.

I say that we propose legislation where everybody from a city of 15,000 people or more be required to purchase a permit to get off the pavement and head into the woods. How many "Seattle" hikers die every year in the mountains? Where is the legislation to protect these "REI Rangers" from themselves? There ought to be a law!

Fawking asshattery, and complete and utter bullsh!t, I say. (Sorry, I had to be me.)

First Fly fishing on public lands must come to an end before someones eye gits ripped out then will get those dam bear hunters.

Great post Dogfish.

Onething they are trying to say in justification of this proposal is that there may be a slight decrease in the bear population. Here is a portion of my leter regarding the population.

Yes, upon rebuttal, you may state that the bear population is not growing at the rate it once was, but we are also losing bear habitat faster then ever. Where will the excess go?
By not hunting bears in August we are bound to have more bear/human conflicts especially in times of food shortages. Who will be responsible for removal of these excess bears? F&W? At what expense? I do not want to see F&W or their contractors killing or relocating bear (and coincidentally spending more money) when they could have been legally harvested. It does not make sense to have the department do it when hunters will pay to hunt them.

Year Total
2007 1585
2006 1642
2005 1333
2004 1654
2003 1566
2002 1725
2001 1439
2000 1165
1999 1113
1998 1802
1997 844

We are currently harvesting about 1500 bears a year. That is up about 500 from the pre-ban days of baiting and hound hunting. We have sustained those pre-ban levels or exceeded them for more then 10 years and we are still seeing more bears than ever. This is obviously not about the bear population.

But if there is any concern about the bear population then start by removing the second bear tag. I have not found any data available to the public about how many hunters are successful in filling both tags though my own informal surveys online show it could be about 10 percent of the successful hunters. I have successfully filled both bear tags in four seasons and though this will cut into my hunting time, it would be a decision I would support if it were based on sound management. Removing bear hunters from public lands over a user group issue is not sound management and I will not support it.

Don't give them any more ideas. I guarantee the ones that try to pass the laws look here too. Just as we can look into most of their business if we know where to look, they look at our places too.

Well according to "an insider" (posted on another site) there is really nothing we can do about this proposal and we are lucky that we didn't lose all hunting on public lands in the summer.

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,20754.msg241938.html#msg241938

That article is nothing short of a bunch of B.S. Compromise? Come on. So how many times are we going to compromise before we compromise our asses out of public land use. The law states (U.S. Constitution Ammendment 14) that "the government can only take away land for public use." Does that mean that they can take away land use from one part of the public and give it to another part of public for their own use? Apparently so. Sounds like B.S. to me. Knee jerk reactions usually end up coming back to bite us in the end. Wouldn't it be ironic if a hiker gets killed by a bear in the next couple of years? What then? Kick the bears out so the hikers can still hike around. Double standards, double standards. Guarantee the bear gets taken out and they get to stay. So its OK if hippies take out the bear because it mauls a hiker. But not OK for a hunter to harvest a bear. Oh my god, my head hurts from this assanying stupidity.

I think we need a civil war to stop the week minded. and stop the political correctness that is killing this country!!!!!

Hey guys.... here is an update and possibly a one year reprive.
Revised Proposal
Looks like they have revised the proposal and have stricken the August/Public land portion for one year.

We may have to organize and fight this again real soon.

If it were suggested a time to do so, I would say now. I guarantee the folks trying to get it shut down won't be waiting unitl later.

I agree.

And theres the answer!

Good article in The Sun by their outdoor writer:

http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2009/feb/23/seabury-blair-jr-mr-outdoors-some-seeing-red/

You know what the best part of that article is? It is written by an individual who hikes. That means that there is a voice of reason amongst the opposing force. And that means that there could possibly be hope. the scariest part of all this, is that there may not be any reason for hope. The downsizing of WDFW in conjunction with the land closures for public lands and hunting seems to be all to well tied together with the same rope. I sure hope that I am wrong though.