Inches away from no cougar season

[Billy]

What a frigging mess...so best I can tell removing problem cougars will count towards a quota that could shut down hunting season? This is all set up with out the WDFW's blessing....

WDFW Commission Narrowly OKs Cougar Rulemaking Concepts For Developing 2024 Season -

A deeply, starkly, bitterly divided Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission has directed WDFW staffers to develop a slate of cougar rulemaking proposals to get in place ahead of the start of hunting season this September.

nwsportsmanmag.com

 

[Coach Potter]

There are people on that commission who are fundamentally opposed to hunting…and they are winning.

 

[Jim F.]

Makes me wonder how much the Washington State Petting Zoo hang tag will cost us . . .

 

[Rob Allen]

Bad people are in control. It's that simple. I don't mean people with differences of opinion. I mean bad people.
We have to start calling a spade a spade.

 

[Zak]

Bad people are in control. It's that simple. I don't mean people with differences of opinion. I mean bad people.
We have to start calling a spade a spade.

I'm going to guess that opinions differ on which people are the "bad people."

Edit: Oh wait, were your talking about WA wildlife folks? Just reading your comment in isolation, I thought that you were talking about the world in general.

 

[Rob Allen]

I'm going to guess that opinions differ on which people are the "bad people."

Edit: Oh wait, were your talking about WA wildlife folks? Just reading your comment in isolation, I thought that you were talking about the world in general.

Anyone who uses the government as a tool to accomplish a political agenda is bad.
Our government's exist to protect individuals against the will of the people. Yes, you heard that right.

In this situation it is wrong for animal rights idiots to use undue power to effect hunting regulations. They do not care about how that affects people or wildlife. Yes, that makes them bad people.

 

[albula]

Anyone who uses the government as a tool to accomplish a political agenda is bad.
Our government's exist to protect individuals against the will of the people. Yes, you heard that right.

In this situation it is wrong for animal rights idiots to use undue power to effect hunting regulations. They do not care about how that affects people or wildlife. Yes, that makes them bad people.

Settle down Rob. Take a deep breath. At times a broad brush is not the best brush to use.

 

[Zak]

Anyone who uses the government as a tool to accomplish a political agenda is bad.
Our government's exist to protect individuals against the will of the people. Yes, you heard that right.

In this situation it is wrong for animal rights idiots to use undue power to effect hunting regulations. They do not care about how that affects people or wildlife. Yes, that makes them bad people.

Government has other roles besides protecting against the tyranny of the majority.

 

[clarkman]

not much of a hunter, nor will I ever be (mostly because it would cut too much into my fishing time), but that's pretty ridiculous.

 

[Rob Allen]

Government has other roles besides protecting against the tyranny of the majority.

Maybe so, but that is their fundamental and overriding responsibility.

 

[Rob Allen]

Settle down Rob. Take a deep breath. At times a broad brush is not the best brush to use.

It's the right brush now!

 

[_WW_]

I'm all for letting a minority extremist impose their will on the rest...as long as it's my extremist will. If not then screw it.

 

[Wayne Kohan]

I am not a hunter, but found this an interesting read. I have no idea if this is a good rule or bad, but the way it was pushed through was wrong. It reminds me of the way some of the local school boards have operated, where they don’t get public comment and have added agenda items that are not posted, in violation of the open meeting rules. Seemingly to push their own agendas. That’s not right, and not good.

 

[Salmo_g]

Anyone who uses the government as a tool to accomplish a political agenda is bad.
Our government's exist to protect individuals against the will of the people. Yes, you heard that right.

In this situation it is wrong for animal rights idiots to use undue power to effect hunting regulations. They do not care about how that affects people or wildlife. Yes, that makes them bad people.

Rob,

You could really benefit by taking a class like Government 101. The entire purpose of government is to accomplish a political agenda. That agenda is generally set forth in governing documents like a constitution, administrative codes, and agency policies. Governments exist to do whatever their respective enabling legislation declares, which may include a whole lot more than protecting individuals from the will of the people, and in fact, generally do.

In the present situation, it is no more wrong for animal rights interest groups to attempt to sway the WDFW Commission than it is for the Washington State Sportsmen's Council to sway it. That's how pluralistic societies work. In the past, sporting (and commercial fishing) interests have been the primary and nearly only interest groups trying to influence the Commission. Clearly that is changing. And equally clearly is that you don't like it. In which case this means that sporting interests need to up their collective game and try harder to influence the Commission. The good or bad or evil that you see is just a case of differing opinions. Believe it or not, there is no ONE WAY THAT IT SHOULD BE. The way it should be is whatever way the people of Washington State decide for it to be.

In the present situation I personally don't know. I stopped attending WDFW Commission meetings when Covid began and they began holding virtual meetings that were difficult to participate in, and ineffective as well. I'm thinking about resuming my attendance, but I haven't as yet formulated my "political agenda."

 

[Roper]

Rob,

You could really benefit by taking a class like Government 101. The entire purpose of government is to accomplish a political agenda. That agenda is generally set forth in governing documents like a constitution, administrative codes, and agency policies. Governments exist to do whatever their respective enabling legislation declares, which may include a whole lot more than protecting individuals from the will of the people, and in fact, generally do.

In the present situation, it is no more wrong for animal rights interest groups to attempt to sway the WDFW Commission than it is for the Washington State Sportsmen's Council to sway it. That's how pluralistic societies work. In the past, sporting (and commercial fishing) interests have been the primary and nearly only interest groups trying to influence the Commission. Clearly that is changing. And equally clearly is that you don't like it. In which case this means that sporting interests need to up their collective game and try harder to influence the Commission. The good or bad or evil that you see is just a case of differing opinions. Believe it or not, there is no ONE WAY THAT IT SHOULD BE. The way it should be is whatever way the people of Washington State decide for it to be.

In the present situation I personally don't know. I stopped attending WDFW Commission meetings when Covid began and they began holding virtual meetings that were difficult to participate in, and ineffective as well. I'm thinking about resuming my attendance, but I haven't as yet formulated my "political agenda."

Were the people of Washington even asked? I get the feeling it’s decided by unelected bureaucrats…

 

[Dustin Chromers]

Were the people of Washington even asked? I get the feeling it’s decided by unelected bureaucrats…

Don't worry. It's for the greater good.

 

[Coach Potter]

Rob,

You could really benefit by taking a class like Government 101. The entire purpose of government is to accomplish a political agenda. That agenda is generally set forth in governing documents like a constitution, administrative codes, and agency policies. Governments exist to do whatever their respective enabling legislation declares, which may include a whole lot more than protecting individuals from the will of the people, and in fact, generally do.

In the present situation, it is no more wrong for animal rights interest groups to attempt to sway the WDFW Commission than it is for the Washington State Sportsmen's Council to sway it. That's how pluralistic societies work. In the past, sporting (and commercial fishing) interests have been the primary and nearly only interest groups trying to influence the Commission. Clearly that is changing. And equally clearly is that you don't like it. In which case this means that sporting interests need to up their collective game and try harder to influence the Commission. The good or bad or evil that you see is just a case of differing opinions. Believe it or not, there is no ONE WAY THAT IT SHOULD BE. The way it should be is whatever way the people of Washington State decide for it to be.

In the present situation I personally don't know. I stopped attending WDFW Commission meetings when Covid began and they began holding virtual meetings that were difficult to participate in, and ineffective as well. I'm thinking about resuming my attendance, but I haven't as yet formulated my "political agenda."

I hear what you're saying but these commissioners aren't elected, they are appointed...they only represent the agenda of the person who appointed them. They are sort of government but not really. The more frustrating part is that they are allowed to make decisions based on opinion even when there is evidence that is contrary to their opinion.

If the evidence stacked up that cougars shouldn't be hunted because that wouldn't be sustainable then this debate would be moot.

There are commissioners who don't "believe" hunting should be allowed under any circumstance. That's fine...but that's a decision that should be decided by voters. How to manage hunting should be decided by people who, at a minimum, accept hunting as an allowable activity. This process feels like a group is using a system to eliminate something that they were called to manage and that wasn't the purpose of the system.

If the activity should be eliminated, then it should be eliminated overtly rather than covertly.

 

[Coach Potter]

There were also some Covid shenanigans pulled to get a couple of these commissioners appointed and that feels underhanded.

 

[Roper]

Who appointed the commissioners?

 

[Rob Allen]

Rob,

You could really benefit by taking a class like Government 101. The entire purpose of government is to accomplish a political agenda. That agenda is generally set forth in governing documents like a constitution, administrative codes, and agency policies. Governments exist to do whatever their respective enabling legislation declares, which may include a whole lot more than protecting individuals from the will of the people, and in fact, generally do.

In the present situation, it is no more wrong for animal rights interest groups to attempt to sway the WDFW Commission than it is for the Washington State Sportsmen's Council to sway it. That's how pluralistic societies work. In the past, sporting (and commercial fishing) interests have been the primary and nearly only interest groups trying to influence the Commission. Clearly that is changing. And equally clearly is that you don't like it. In which case this means that sporting interests need to up their collective game and try harder to influence the Commission. The good or bad or evil that you see is just a case of differing opinions. Believe it or not, there is no ONE WAY THAT IT SHOULD BE. The way it should be is whatever way the people of Washington State decide for it to be.

In the present situation I personally don't know. I stopped attending WDFW Commission meetings when Covid began and they began holding virtual meetings that were difficult to participate in, and ineffective as well. I'm thinking about resuming my attendance, but I haven't as yet formulated my "political agenda."

I disagree fundamentally and I believe the constitution does too. American's have hunted and fished since we first got here for both spirt and subsistence it is an absolute right. The constitution does not list our rights it lists limitations on government.

Had the founding fathers known what idiocy we'd get up to there'd be a lot more rights listed..

Living in a dualistic society.. those stupid, yes I do mean stupid animal rights folks ought to remember that.

when biologists say "hey, we gotta stop hunting cougars or the population will crash" then, I'll be opposed to cougar Hunting.
I think trapping is horrible however I have absolutely no right whatsoever to tell people not to trap or to try to use government to end trapping. NONE.

Activists are right down there with lawyers and despots.
We have another generation that thinks they need to change the world for the better.. two things about that.

1. They almost always make the world worse.
2. The very concept is tyrannical in nature..
Leave the world alone...