Don Baccus wrote...
> The situation on public lands, where deer and the like are typically
> pursued, is a separate issue in my mind - I don't mind talking about
> it, but please be careful to keep public lands hunting separate in
> your mind from the issue of hunters rights to hunt refuges they've
> paid for!

Say what? If one of us is confused about this, it isn't me. I said
nothing about rights of hunters on WRs. I brought up the public non-WR
lands precisely because hunters did *not* pay for those lands: we are
not beholden to hunters for them, and it's not "ungrateful" to question
hunting on them. Most of the acreage open to hunting in WA falls into
this category.

And yes, of course, there are historical and political reasons that F&W
depts are focused on hunting. I criticized the way a part of Wash F&W
handles one of its jobs, not to castigate the agency, but as another
example of why we need the TWW or something like it (increase clout of
nongame stuff)... can we just agree to agree on TWW?

David Wright
Seattle, WA
dwright at u.washington.edu