WA 2022 Spring Bear Hunting Suspended. Is it Lost for Good?

[Irrelevant]

Also, this is likely to get significantly worse in the near future. Several of the pro hunting positions are up for renewal. I sent an email to the gov office. The response didn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

I also started taking another approach. I'm not emailing the commission anymore without 'cc-ing my state legislators. They may have more power than I do to actually change something.

 

[idahohuntr]

I sent an email to the gov office. The response didn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

Ugh...that's not good to hear...even if unsurprising.

Going back to a tangent earlier in this thread...I think Tribes are the greatest political influence in WA with respect to reasonable predator management. Some of them have even called out these commissioners for their racist policies. I hope hunters and tribes can work together to beat back some of the insanity of this gov and his commissioners.

 

[DouglasR]

Are these real stats @neffa3 ?
Why are 69% of hunters opposed to the hunt?

 

[Irrelevant]

Are these real stats @neffa3 ?
Why are 69% of hunters opposed to the hunt?

View attachment 251849

Because of the way they formed the questions. Wdfw conducted a similar poll last year with different results

 

[Irrelevant]

Going back to a tangent earlier in this thread...I think Tribes are the greatest political influence in WA with respect to reasonable predator management. Some of them have even called out these commissioners for their racist policies. I hope hunters and tribes can work together to beat back some of the insanity of this gov and his commissioners.

Several tribal members commented against the suspension originally. However, I think the lack of an official position from any of the major WA tribes is politically deliberate. They don't need WDFW to allow them to do anything hunting wise, it's already a granted right. But they likely don't want to offend that side of the political spectrum as they do rely on that support for other topics. It's a situation where there's no win in commenting against any form of hunting for them. Besides, have you followed the tribes stance on predators? They are actively reintroducing them, I have yet to hear of them offering anything that resembles a position of being "pro" predator hunting.

 

[Irrelevant]

I went back and read through our thread on this article (brawl in Spokane). It has a direct impact on this topic.

In Washington State, Hunters May No Longer Be "Necessary to Manage Wildlife"

An emerging wildlife war has its first skirmish this week in Spokane where a reformist group is looking to deprioritize hunting and hunters.

www.outdoorlife.com

In it, Ed Arnet references the Resiliency Roadmap, a document made to guide wildlife agencies in the future.

https://www.fishwildlife.org/download_file/view/2254/2258

I've read through it, and in light of the recent decisions from the WDFW commission, I can't say I support that road map, and I think hindsight will prove me correct. This was the wrong path to take. We shouldn't support state agency boards to be taken over by emotional agenda driven politics, which is exactly what you will get if you follow the road map. It calls for a coming together of the typical environmental community with the traditional hunting and fishing community; a push to get more people actively involved in wildlife management, while in the same breath knowing that these people are increasingly disconnected from wildlife.

That this, as HW and others have said, this incorporating of non-consumptive (I dislike that term, but will use it for now) viewpoints is the ONLY way for our wildlife agency professionals to maintain the public's trust is a fallacy. They already don't care what you say, they are not driven by reason, or rational thought, or even by science (lest they fund it for specific the results). WA is certainly at the forefront of executing the recommended approach. And look where it got the agency. You have these non-consumptive activist user groups, submitting applications for commission positions with people who vow to execute deliberate agendas; those same groups hosting invitation only retreats for sympathetic commissioners to strategize how to best accomplish their agenda, and worst of all you have them completely ignoring the recommendations of the actual professional staff to vote the agenda! How is that a preferred path to continued relevancy?

 

[Irrelevant]

A couple of updates.
1. This topic is up for discussion again this Friday. The commission voted to end all recreational spring bear hunting last year. However, they left a small opening. Some of the members were "supportive" of a management hunt using recreational hunters (semantics!). This discussion will focus on that nuance.
2. Washingtonian for Wildlife Conservation is suing Inslee over the makeup of the commission. The Realtors Association had a similar gripe, sued, and settled, with the outcome that two of the existing commission members would resign. A similar outcome is hoped for in this commission.

 

[Irrelevant]

 

[BobJohnson]

that sucks