BigGameHoundsmen.com

Hey guys here a few changes the DFG is thinking about making regarding Hunting Bear in 2009. One of the things they are thinking is to not close the season down early or to extend the numer of bears from 1700 to 1900. I like the idea of keeping the season opened and not closing early, better. BUT let your voice be heard call or write the DFG in support of not closing the season early and or raising the number of bears we can take.

Heres a link: http://www.fgc.ca.gov/regulations/new/2009/365isor.pdf


Larry Lowell

Hi Larry,

Though it was one of the options considered, they will not be increasing the quota to 1900. The season will end every year on the last Sunday of December regardless of the actual number of bear taken, as the Department has determined that doing so will not adversely impact the health of the state's bear population.

Take it to the bank.

Don't talk about it be about it. I'll be at the Lodi meeting on April 9 to express my opinion. So will quite a few of my hunting buddies. Remember, they work for us. We are in the woods and know what's going on. See you there Pete Meyer

It always makes me nervous when Fish & Game gives us something, without us asking for it.

This is their way of biologically maintaining the states Bear population. Just so happens that we get to take advantage of it.

We're the only hunting group here (Bear Hunters) with or without dogs who can have their season ended early due to a quota.
Not Duck, Deer, Turkey, or Hogs. Not anything. They all go to the end of their season date of closure.

I don't know why some folks have to be pessimistic about everything.

That like saying gas went down today. What are they going to do raise the price three-fold tomorrow to make up for it.

Instead, welcome a good thing and THANK those in charge of making the decision when a good one comes down the pike. You don't want to go into any of these meeting accusing anyone of having something up their sleeves in exchange for a good idea.


Just my 2cents.

You'd better GET JACKED UP about SB250!!
Maybe, just maybe we'll see more than 12 Houndsmen in Sacramento on such a pressing issue.
Ask those in Stanislaus county what they pay to keep an intact dog. DO WANT THAT WHERE YOU LIVE? I think not.

its probably just to ease our pain for the future raise of price of the tag

BLIND FAITH IN FISH AND GAME... IN OUR STATE, ARE YOU KIDDING
When have they ever given, it's either been take or non support on anything that the anti's wanted.

Peter Meyer wrote:Don't talk about it be about it. I'll be at the Lodi meeting on April 9 to express my opinion. So will quite a few of my hunting buddies. Remember, they work for us. We are in the woods and know what's going on. See you there Pete Meyer

I hope you and any other Houndsmen that are able to attend any of the meetings, will also, in a positive way, be able to bring up the Training Season issue. Sence the DFG is in a giving mood planting a seed today, and others watering it, my help for tomorrow. When they took away the training season years ago it was never ment to be permanent. It never hurts to keep asking. Shoot the DFG like all of the California Government Agences is in desperate need of Funds, I know I for one would be willing to pay and extra fee to be able to train by dogs in the woods. With the economy hurting throwing out a pay to train idea may work, never know.

Larry Lowell

I know a lot of us would be willing to pay the same price for a pursuit permit as we do for the Bear tag, they could even require a catch log to help with there bear studies.

Personally I'm a little leery of it. I would love to not have the bear season end early BUT I am wondering just how many bears will be killed and how this could quite possibly end up in litigation again and we might end up with NO bear season for a year. The original litigation (Animal rights groups got a judge to put an injuntion against the hunt that year because they claimed DFG did not have the EIS completed correctly - I believe their was some truth to that fact - there has to be an Environmental Impact Statement done every year on the previous years hunt and impact to population and habitat or the hunt will NOT happen.) caused us to be without a bear season for a year. In order to make them happy and get a bear season again DFG accepted the AR's proposal of a 1700 bear kill. They are NOT happy with DFG's proposal for an unlimited kill and they will probably litigate against the entire hunt the next year after the unlimited kill season is done. If DFG would/could guarantee that this will not end in an even more restrictive bear hunt I would feel a little better about it. Both DFG and the Forest Circus that I work for have very small balls when it comes to the environmentalists/animal rights crowd and litigation...otherwise we would have a lion season and SPI would not be closing their Quincy lumber mill.
Also if any of you think the bear guides in California are getting a bit out of control (I think they are) well just wait until we have an unlimited kill season...I'm afraid you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Thats my 2 cents worth on this, it sounds awesome on the surface but I'm afraid it may have bigger implications than we are thinking of. As far as unlimited kill, well I personally don't feel a need to kill an unlimited amount of bears (though we will still be under the one tag rule). What would be real awesome would be for DFG to end training on bear on the last Sunday in December regardless of when the kill is met, of course that does not help their complaint of time and money wasted on closure notices. But they may end up spending way more defending the bear hunt itself in 2010. If none of you read/saw the articles on it DFG was not even allowed to plant any of the thousands of fish they raised in the hatcheries this last summer because they did not get the EIS done for the impact on the red & yellow legged frog......

way to go liz its about time somebody told all these young guys what happended in the past , i was highly involved back then . just got tired of all the bs on booth sides we tried to get training season back ,but a choosen few wouldnt agree to leave the guns at home during training season what did they need them for/ why are we only allowed only one dog during deer season ,why was that let go , as far as the lion season f g told us one thing when we went into the meeting terry mainsfield shot us down ,hounds people in this state have been told enough times ,if you give us something well take care of you us being our fish and bunny cops , ive said for years we as hunters need to use the court system the same as the antis make them use there money so far it has fallen on deaf ears

Attendance at the final hearing will not be necessary for this change to be approved. Science and the economy both support this change.

For those of you who plan on attending the meeting anyway, I only hope you do not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

I respect your opinion, and trust us earned and shouldn't be given.

In my opinion we all need to come together, dropping attetudes and personal grudges from the past and turn the page and try to move forward. No ones asking people to blindly trust anyone. You know as well as I, that as much negitiveity the DFG has towards Houndsmen it not from us as a total group not deserving it. I'm always telling my kids that with trust comes freedom. It would be nice for the Houndsmen in California to come together and support a hand being held out to us as Bear Hunters. When the DFG sees us as a group that is willing to stand together and see's us as a good revenue sorce, instead of a bunch of wild outlaws, I think we'll get alot further with them.

If you go back about 5 years ago, and look at the training season in regards to birddogs you'll see that they used to charge a small training fee. There was a training season and it excluded training during the wild birds nesting season. About 4 or 5 years ago the DFG through the efforts of a few birddog people were able to work out dropping g the training fee and allow training on wild birds year round. So it can be done. It just take an open mind, and people that are willing to sit down and state our case, offer to give alittle (in our case money, for a training season) With trust comes freedom, I see now as the perfect time to reach out our hand back to the DFG in support of their proposel of ending the early seaon closer. In my opinion we also drop our personal grievances when we talk to them, (you don't have to forget) but maybe it's time to try and turn the page and work together with the DFG.

Larry Lowell

Get your facts straight before you go off half cocked spreading incorrect information.
CA Title 14 subsection 365 IV. (a) 2. Increase the in-season bear harvest quota from
1700 to 1900. Nowhere does it say unlimited kill. In seasons where the quota has gone over you are only talking up to maybe 20 or 30 bears. More get killed on the roadways of the Tahoe Basin each year. I'll get the statistics and post them asap. I talked to a warden who said he thought the limit should be increased by a couple of hundred. According to biologists the black bear population is steady if not increasing in CA. In some parts of the Sierras bears are a nuisance. Hunting makes more sense than filling a depredation permit and wasting meat. Going to a hearing and acting like they expect
(rude, dirty, foul, vulgar) serves no purpose. Putting forth a well worded intelligent argument is the only way to go. When you're right, you're right, just don't let it go to your head and come out your mouth the wrong way. Some one needs to speak up. If nobody shows for public comment then why should they even offer us the chance. I know they would love to not hear from us in person and in public but such is the nature
of our government. Use it or lose it. PJ Meyer

Houndsmen are not the only ones who hunt bear, and the percentage of bear taken by us continues to decline with each year; we are overwhelmingly non-consumptive and it was largely for this reason that DFG had to open bear season to coincide with deer season. This proposed amendment is just another means of the Department meeting its management goal for the state's black bear population, and is not intended to screw over the hound hunting community.

The quota was met 33% of the time during the last six seasons. 66% of the time, the season came to its conclusion on the last Sunday of December. As such, I fail to understand why we should be worried that the bear guides will bring harm to the bear population...it would seem that they are not doing so now to any extent. As for the rest of us, those who want to continue to run bear for the entirety of the season or who are not inclined to kill a bear will continue to leave our tag unfilled until the very last moment. What exactly will change when the quota goes away?


Larry,
I hope others come to the same conclusion as you. It is unnecessary and unproductive to try to ascribe some sort of devious conspiracy on the part of DFG as the underlying motivation for this proposed change.

Peter Meyer,
If you go back and look at the text of the amendment, you will note that the option of increasing the quota to 1900 was dismissed by DFG from being considered as the ideal choice. While there is certainly no guarantee, the opinion that the Department sets forth according to the determinations of its biologists rightly carries weight with the Commission. As such, it is highly unlikely that the quota will be raised to 1900.