BILL INTRODUCED TO BAN PURSUIT OF BEAR AND BOBCAT IN CA

halfbreed · Post by **halfbreed** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 10:57 pm

well when i hit that link it takes me to MY facebook page w t h ??? but i did like the calvarygroup site on it today . but yes that bill was passed in 1994 in oregon

Fitz · Post by **Fitz** » Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:06 am

Shoot I'll try again.

Fitz · Post by **Fitz** » Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:51 am

Here's the link to their web page.
http://oregonoutdoorcouncil.org/

Peter Meyer · Post by **Peter Meyer** » Sun Oct 14, 2012 6:33 am

check my post in GPS in Cali. -Pete

Liz ODell · Post by **Liz ODell** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:35 pm

DON'T DROP THE BALL PEOPLE...PLEASE CONTACT THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION AND ASK THEM TO NOT ADOPT THE 'HOUND TAG' AMENDMENT IN SB1221...

Just need to fax and email them at the addresses on the page as often as possible telling them the reasons why they should not adopt the amendment...this might take them a while to even get to discussing it or they might do it right away so this may be an exercise in endurance for what you love. One thing for certain is we can't give up!

http://www.fgc.ca.gov/contact/

http://www.fgc.ca.gov/public/information/bios.aspx

Fitz · Post by **Fitz** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:20 am

Good call Liz! I forgot all about how the Dfg has the option.

ringo8585 · Post by **ringo8585** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:17 am

Yes thank you do the reminder you should post it in a new topic or I will thank you

R.M. · Post by **R.M.** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:18 pm

Liz ODell wrote:DON'T DROP THE BALL PEOPLE...PLEASE CONTACT THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION AND ASK THEM TO NOT ADOPT THE 'HOUND TAG' AMENDMENT IN SB1221...

I thought I was up to speed on SB1221, but apparently I am not. What is this "Hound Tag Amendment" you speak of?

Rimrock · Post by **Rimrock** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:35 pm

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.
Section 3032 is added to the Fish and Game Code, to read:

3032.
(a) As used in this section:
(1) “Bear” and “pursue” have the same meanings as defined in Section 3960.
(2) “Hound” means a dog used to pursue mammals.
(b) The commission may establish a hound tag program.
(c) If a hound tag program is established, the commission may require all of the following:
(1) That each hound be issued a license tag bearing a unique identifying number that is to be worn at all times by the hound while pursuing mammals.
(2) That all relevant local and state laws pertaining to dogs are being followed while the hound is being used to pursue mammals.
(3) That each hound be microchipped with an implanted transponder that has a unique identification code.
(4) That the owner maintain documentation showing that the hound is current on all required vaccinations and treatments for the prevention of rabies and any other disease specified by the department.
(5) That the owner report, within 24 hours of its last sighting, any hound that is lost during hunting, pursuing, or tracking activities.
(6) That the hound’s tag identification number be recorded on the hunting tag of any animal taken using the services of the hound.
(d) If a hound tag program is established, the commission may adjust the amount of the fees for the hound tag as necessary, to fully recover, but not exceed, all reasonable administrative and implementation costs of the department and the commission relating to the program.

Grzyadms4x4 · Post by **Grzyadms4x4** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:05 pm

Besides the useless regulations listed above, what is so bad about this program? Is there a very limited number of tags. It seems, from an uneducated stance, that this might be some work around for bear hunting in Cali. Am I incorrect?

lepcur · Post by **lepcur** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:23 pm

No, you're not correct. You still can't run bear or bobcat, what is stated above is for the rest of the critters we chase. I want to know what the heck we are doing or gonna do to get this $hit changed and over turn this stupid law??? Mike

pchop · Post by **pchop** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:14 pm

That seams to be the question nobody has an answer for!

treedanother1 · Post by **treedanother1** » Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:28 pm

good question mike. problem is what needs to be done and what will probably happen are two different things.

Peter Meyer · Post by **Peter Meyer** » Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:45 am

Hopefully, sometime in early January I will interview Nancy Foley head of the California Department of Fish and " Wildlife" for FullCry on their intended enforcement policy. Again, hopefully, I get more than a "no comment". -Pete

Grzyadms4x4 · Post by **Grzyadms4x4** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 12:05 am

That sucks. The only fortunate thing is that this was done legislatively and not by a voter referendum. It should make it easier to get repealed. But then again this is California we're talking about.