Four folks out enjoying the woods on 1 Sept. They meet at a trail crossing. One guy is just hiking, he has a loaded handgun in his backpack, one guy is riding his mule and has a loaded handgun in a saddle bag, one guy was fishing a mountain lake and has a loaded handgun concealed by his jacket and one guy is bowhunting and had his handgun in a holster in plain view. None of them have a CWP. Only one will be in violation? The bowhunter. Makes NO sense what so ever.
Dont believe anything you hear or read, and only half of what you see. R
About half of the people I heard from said they wanted to be able to lawfully protect themselves from any criminal element that might be out to prey on unarmed outdoorsmen. Some had been robbed in the past or had their camps burglarized. Others have come upon drug operations in the woods.
Fred,
A few people I know said they had always gone into the archery woods prepared regardless of the former restriction; they packed heat. They didn't like breaking the law but felt their personal safety was more important. Now they can pack without feeling like a law-breaker.
D
Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding the recently amended archery regulation now authorizing bowhunters with a valid concealed pistol license to carry a sidearm while archery hunting. Your e-mail has been forwarded to me for a response.
Please be advised that the chief of our enforcement program has no authority to mandate any hunting rules or regulations. The chief—along with all of our Fish and Wildlife Officers—is responsible for enforcing hunting laws and rules, not making them.
RCW 9.41.060(8), Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms, authorizes an exception to the restriction on carrying firearms for “…any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping….” The operative word to pay attention to is “lawful.” Bowhunters in Washington State are regulated by rules promulgated by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. Those rules are specific to bowhunters who choose to purchase a Washington State license to hunt big game with archery tackle. The commission has delegated authority from the legislature to adopt rules governing the time, place and manner of lawful hunting activity. Those rules can be as restrictive or as relaxed as they deem appropriate to the species hunted.
The commission has always been concerned about the potential for individual bowhunters to use a sidearm to unlawfully kill big game. Knowing that individuals with concealed pistol licenses (CPL) are thoroughly vetted through a criminal background history check, the commission has a high level of confidence that CPL holders will not wish to jeopardize their license. There is no such assurance with the general hunter who does not possess a CPL.
You should also know that representatives of the bowhunting community—not WDFW staff—are the ones that proposed this regulation to the Fish and Wildlife Commission and they are the ones that sought to distinguish between CPL holders and non-CPL holding archers.
Mik Mikitik
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Enforcement Program
Hunter Education Division
That's sad in itself. The double standard illustrated by Fred's example isn't hard to figure out.
Commission members overthinking their role in law making. They should not be able to put any type of a twist on existing laws. I think they are either taking, or being allowed too many liberties with their volunteer job status. No other user group has strings tied to hand guns and neither should we.
The commissions high level of confidence with CPL holders comes with absolutely no assurances either. I know I'm sick and tired of people who hold titles for what ever reason, thinking its appropriate to impose their ways on the general public. I still say, muck them out from top to bottom, and start over. Russ
This simply wasn't the bowhunters' fight; bowhunting organizations didn't ask for it; they didn't promote it; the organizations told the department and the commission that however they chose to do deal with the issue was up to them.
One last thought: Fred, when you get it from Mikitik himself that he misrepresented the bowhunting community in his email, I hope you will set the record straight and retract your inflammatory remarks.
D
Mik Mikitik is ignorant of the facts on the matter. He claiming that bowhunting representatives pushed for the change is provocative and irresponsible whether he intended it that way or not. It is a matter of public record that the Commissioners asked for Enforcement’s input and opinion, and that Enforcement supported a permit requirement. It is also a matter of public record that bowhunting ‘leadership’ (I hate the word) told the Commission that because the Archery Coalition wasn’t who asked for the sidearm restriction to be removed in the first place that we didn’t care how it was done.
So where did the notion come from that ‘leadership’ thinks that “bowhunters cannot be trusted to follow the law”?
Snapshot, I take by the fact you are offended by what I wrote up above that you are one of the "Leaders" of the bowhunting community in this state? I sent an e-mail to the Enforcement Chief asking what was the thought process in adding the CPL requirement, because I was informed he was the one who asked for it. I got a response from a WDFW offical who fairly imfatically told me it was not them but the Leadership of the bowhunting community. How am I to know who asked for it and who didn't? It's pretty clear you were suprised your fellow bowhunters wanted this and it's fairly clear the Leadership didn't raise an objection to bowhunters being treated differently then all other user groups in the woods. To me that is as much as signing off on it. You didn't want it and therefore whatever the stipulations were, fine with you. If I am wrong about that, then I apologize to you, if not then I stand by my....disappointment with the representation the bowhunters received on this issue.
Honestly I'm done discussing this, I have decided I've had it with this state. I will no longer buy a trapping, hunting or fishing license here in WA. It's not just this issue, it's several, but this issue and other issues like outlawing coyotes with hounds because the WDFW deemed it socially unacceptable and the sportsmen of this state said nothing. I am through.
RCW 9.41.060 Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms.
The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:
(1) Marshals, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens or their deputies, or other law enforcement officers of this state or another state;
(2) Members of the armed forces of the United States or of the national guard or organized reserves, when on duty;
(3) Officers or employees of the United States duly authorized to carry a concealed pistol;
(4) Any person engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing, or dealing in firearms, or the agent or representative of the person, if possessing, using, or carrying a pistol in the usual or ordinary course of the business;
(5) Regularly enrolled members of any organization duly authorized to purchase or receive pistols from the United States or from this state;
(6) Regularly enrolled members of clubs organized for the purpose of target shooting, when those members are at or are going to or from their places of target practice;
(7) Regularly enrolled members of clubs organized for the purpose of modern and antique firearm collecting, when those members are at or are going to or from their collector's gun shows and exhibits;
(8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area;
(9) Any person while carrying a pistol unloaded and in a closed opaque case or secure wrapper; or
(10) Law enforcement officers retired for service or physical disabilities, except for those law enforcement officers retired because of mental or stress-related disabilities. This subsection applies only to a retired officer who has: (a) Obtained documentation from a law enforcement agency within Washington state from which he or she retired that is signed by the agency's chief law enforcement officer and that states that the retired officer was retired for service or physical disability; and (b) not been convicted or found not guilty by reason of insanity of a crime making him or her ineligible for a concealed pistol license.
Fred, I was asked to serve as president of a state archery organization (TBW) about eight years ago. So yes, I wear that target on my back. And the only reason I am involved in this political baloney is that the organization's charter directs that it be a supporting organization of WSB. Otherwise I'd be under my rock where I belong.
Stuff runs off my back like water from a duck; when it comes to what I’ve done while representing TBW I sleep very well at night because my heart beats for archery hunting and untruths uttered by anyone affect me personally very darn little. But for the sake of others occasionally the record needs to be set straight. The uninformed that happen to surf past this site deserve better than to be spoon-fed misinformation, so for their sake I spoke up. You've been around the internet sites long enough to have garnered a good deal of respect, so people who are ignorant of the goings on within the department are going to give credence to the things you say. True, you had no way of knowing whether Mikitik had his facts straight or not. For what it’s worth, the only time I’d seen him at any of the last few commission meeting was to present an award to a long-time hunter education instructor. So Mik may not have been the best person for your letter to be filtered through. And in fairness to Mik it is apparent in his reply that he was confronting an assertion that the chief sets policy. That may not have been what your letter said but it would appear that he took it that way.
Bowhunters had always been treated differently than others when it came to sidearms; bowhunters were who asked that it be so in the first place during the early years of WSB. Times have changed and some people don't feel so safe in the woods. So any relaxing of the outright restriction to carry is a step in a direction that the majority of TBW's membership will appreciate. For me to stand in the way of a change that they will benefit from would have been unconscionable regardless of my personal opinion of carrying around a weighty chunk of metal.
Fred, no apology is needed, thanks. I hope you make it to Moses Lake this weekend so we have the chance to meet and maybe together go out and break a couple of arrows on the rocks.
