HB 2971 House Vote Monday

[CombinationLicense]

Please help out with this issue if you can spare 3 minutes to send an email in support of HB 2971 - The Email Alert from OHA's Lobbyist Al Elkins explains what's necessary from you.

"CL"



To: Interested Parties
From: Al Elkins, OHA Lobbyist
Re: Alert on HB 2971A
Date: May 4th, 2007

Hello!

The Oregon Hunters Association needs you help. The OHA sponsored bill HB 2971A is coming up for a vote on the floor of the House next Monday May 7th.

What HB 2971A Does
As you know currently in order for ODFW to use someone to conduct bear and cougar work they cannot appoint them as an agent but must hire them as a full time employee. It is the belief of ODFW that they do not have the authority to appoint agents. This bill gives them the authority to do so.

What HB 2971A Does Not Do
It does not change the provision of Measure 18. The bill does not change the Cougar Management Plan. The bill does not allow for the sport hunting of Cougars.

What OHA Needs You To Do
We need you to send emails to all, or as many as you can, of the representatives listed below. Stop sending emails by 10am on Monday.

In your email we need you to urge them to vote yes on HB 2971A. In the subject line of the email say: VOTE YES ON HB 2971A.

Here are a few talking points. Do not copy and paste these, but incorporate them into your email. This way all the emails will be different.

1. HB 2971A does not overturn Ballot Measure 18, but allows for the use of agents as stated in Ballot Measure 18.
2. The bill will help reduce costs by allowing for volunteer agents to help with wildlife management activities.
3. The bill spells out how an agent will be hired through a written agreement.


Rep. Jeff Barker, Aloha, email address: rep.jeffbarker@state.or.us

Rep. Phil Barnhart, Eugene, email address: rep.philbarnhart@state.or.us

Rep. Vicki Berger, Salem, email address: rep.vickiberger@state.or.us

Rep. Terry Beyer, Springfield, email address: rep.terrybeyer@state.or.us

Rep. Suzzanne Bonamici, Beaverton, email address: rep.suzannebonamici@state.or.us

Rep. Debra Boone, Cannon Beach, email address: rep.deborahboone@state.or.us

Rep. Brian Boquist, Dallas, email address: rep.brianboquist@state.or.us

Rep. Scott Brunn, West Linn, email address: rep.scottbruun@state.or.us

Rep. Peter Buckley, Ashland, email address: rep.peterbuckley@state.or.us

Rep. Chuck Burley, Bend, email address: rep.chuckburley@state.or.us

Rep. Tom Butler, Ontario, email address: rep.tombutler@state.or.us

Rep. Kevin Cameron, Salem, email address: rep.kevincameron@state.or.us

Rep. Brian Clem, Salem, email address: rep.brianclem@state.or.us

Rep. Jean Cowan, Newport, email address: rep.jeancowan@state.or.us

Rep. John Dallum, The Dalles, email address: rep.johndallum@state.or.us

Rep. Jackie Dingfelder, Portland, email address: rep.jackiedingfelder@state.or.us

Rep. Chris Edwards, West Eugene, email address: rep.chrisedwards@state.or.us

Rep. Sal Esquivel, Medford, email address: .rep.salesquivel@state.or.us

Rep. Linda Flores, Clackamas, email address: rep.lindaflores@state.or.us

Rep. Larry Galizio, Tigard, email address: rep.larrygalizio@state.or.us

Rep. Bill Garrard, Klamath Falls, email address: rep.billgarrard@state.or.us

Rep. Sara Gelser, Corvallis, email address: rep.saragelser@state.or.us

Rep. Vic Gilliam, Molla, email address: rep.vicgilliam@state.or.us

Rep. George Gilman, Medford, email address: rep.georgegilman@state.or.us

Rep. Fred Girod, Stayton, email address: rep.fredgirod@state.or.us

Rep. Mitch Greenlick, Portland, email address: rep.mitchgreenlick@state.or.us

Rep. Bruce Hanna, Roseburg, email address: rep.brucehanna@state.or.us

Rep. Paul Holvey, Eugene, email address: rep.paulholvey@state.or.us

Rep. Dave Hunt, Clackamas County, email address: rep.davehunt@state.or.us

Rep. Bob Jenson, Pendleton, email address: rep.bobjenson@state.or.us

Rep. Betty Komp, Woodburn, email address: rep.bettykomp@state.or.us

Rep. Tina Kotek, North/NE Portland, email address: rep.tinakotek@state.or.us

Rep. Wayne Krieger, Gold Beach, email address: rep.waynekrieger@state.or.us

Rep. Jerry Krummel, Wilsonville, email address: rep.jerrykrummel@state.or.us

Rep. John Lim, Gresham, email address: rep.johnlim@state.or.us

Rep. Greg Macpherson, Lake Oswego, email address: rep.gregmacpherson@state.or.us

Rep. Ron Maurer, Grants Pass, email address: rep.ronmaurer@state.or.us

Rep. Jeff Merkley, Portland, email address: rep.jeffmerkley@state.or.us

Rep. Karen Minnin, Wood Village, email address: rep.karenminnis@state.or.us

Rep. Susan Morgan, Myrtle Creek, email address: rep.susanmorgan@state.or.us

Rep. Nancy Nathanson, Eugene, email address: rep.nancynathanson@state.or.us

Rep. Donna Nelson, McMinnville, email address: rep.donnanelson@state.or.us

Rep. Mary Nolan, Portland, email address: rep.marynolan@state.or.us

Rep. Andy Olson, Albany, email address: rep.andyolson@state.or.us

Rep. Tobias Read, Beaverton, email address: rep.tobiasread@state.or.us

Rep. Dennis Richardson, Central Point, email address: rep.dennisrichardson@state.or.us

Rep. Chuck Riley, Hillsboro, email address: rep.chuckriley@state.or.us

Rep. Arnie Roblan, Coos Bay, email address: rep.arnieroblan@state.or.us

Rep. Diane Rosenbaum, Portland, email address: rep.dianerosenbaum@state.or.us

Rep. Mike Schaufler, Happy Valley, email address: rep.mikeschaufler@state.or.us

Rep. Wayne Scott, Canby, email address: rep.waynescott@state.or.us

Rep, Chip Shields, Portland, email address: rep.chipshields@state.or.us

Rep. Greg Smith, Heppner, email address: rep.gregsmith@state.or.us

Rep. Patti Smith, Corbett, email address: rep.pattismith@state.or.us

Rep. Kim Thatcher, Keizer, email address: rep.kimthatcher@state.or.us

Rep. Carolyn Tomei, Milwaukie, email address: rep.carolyntomei@state.or.us

Rep. Gene Whisnant, Sunriver, email address: rep.genewhisnant@state.or.us

Rep. Brad Witt, Clatskanie, email address: rep.bradwitt@state.or.us

[baltz526]

74th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2007 Regular Session

NOTE: Matter within { + braces and plus signs + } in an
amended section is new. Matter within { - braces and minus
signs - } is existing law to be omitted. New sections are within
{ + braces and plus signs + } .

LC 1902

A-Engrossed

House Bill 2971
Ordered by the House May 2
Including House Amendments dated May 2

Sponsored by COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES


SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure.

Allows State Department of Fish and Wildlife to appoint person
to act as agent for purpose of using one or more dogs to hunt or
pursue black bear or cougar. Directs department to fix
compensation and prescribe duties of agent. Limits authority of
agent to act.

A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to methods of taking wildlife; amending ORS 498.164.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. ORS 498.164 is amended to read:
498.164. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) { - and
(3) - } { + to (4) + } of this section, a person may not use
bait to attract or take black bears or use one or more dogs to
hunt or pursue black bears or cougars.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section prohibits the use
of bait or one or more dogs by employees or agents of county,
state, or federal agencies while acting in their official
capacities.
{ + (3)(a) As allowed by subsection (2) of this section, the
State Department of Fish and Wildlife is authorized to appoint
persons to act as agents for the department for the purpose of
using one or more dogs to hunt or pursue black bear or
cougar. Such hunt or pursuit must be in compliance with the black
bear management plan and the cougar management plan adopted by
rule by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission. An agent acts on
the department's behalf and, subject to the department's
direction and control, implements specific management programs of
the department. An agent may not engage in any other hunting or
pursuit while acting on the department's behalf.
(b) The department shall:
(A) Make the appointment in written form; and
(B) Ensure that the written appointment is available to the
public for review at the main office of the department in Salem.
(c) Upon appointment of an agent by the department, the
department shall fix the compensation of the agent and prescribe
the duties of the agent. The authority of the agent to act shall
be limited to the terms set forth in the written appointment
under paragraph (b) of this subsection.
(d) The commission shall adopt by rule a process and criteria
for selecting persons to act as agents pursuant to subsection
(3)(a) of this section. + }
{ - (3) - } { + (4) + } Nothing in subsection (1) of this
section prohibits the use of bait or dogs by persons for the
taking of black bears or cougars in accordance with the
provisions of ORS 498.012 relating to taking wildlife that is
causing damage.
{ - (4) - } { + (5) + } Any person who violates subsection
(1) of this section commits a Class A misdemeanor and, upon
conviction, shall in addition to appropriate criminal penalties
have his or her privilege to apply for any hunting license
suspended for a period of five years for a first offense and
permanently suspended for any subsequent offense.
{ - (5) - } { + (6) + } For the purposes of this section,
'bait' means any material placed for the purpose of attracting or
attempting to attract bears.
----------

[Matthewc]

Fairwell to Fairchase

[baltz526]

it gives the odfw the ability to use agents, my question is how will odfw use the agents. damage control/ complaints or big game management

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by baltz526

it gives the odfw the ability to use agents, my question is how will odfw use the agents. damage control/ complaints or big game management

The Oregon Cougar Plan calls for a reduction in the number of cougars in three target areas. These target areas have been identified as locations where predation has severely impacted big game populations. Reducing the numbar of predators in these areas will impact the big game herds in a positive way. The cougar reduction has already started in two of the three areas (Heppner area and Jackson county) and has cost over $100K using ODFW employees to "take" less than 30 cats. The cost will go up when Wildlife Services & ODFW employees are doing the "management" activities. HB 2971 simply gives ODFW the ability to use voluntary houndsmen for this purpose and will save the Department money by reducing the number of billable hours by ODFW and Wildlife Services personnel. That money then can be used for other ODFW needs like Salaries, programs, etc...

Benefit - Reduced cost to implement the Oregon Cougar Plan = Fewer hunter dollars needed to reduce predation on big game herds = more money for "On the ground" ODFW work.

"CL"

[baltz526]

what percentage of agent action will be used for damage control/complaint and big game management

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by Matthewc

Fairwell to Fairchase

With due respect fair chase only applies to "Sport Hunting".

ODFW "management" activities are use to control animal populations in accordance with the Oregon Wildlife Policy. Those activities include sport hunting, trapping, and "taking" situations where problem animals are killed for a variety of reasons. Agricultural or property damage complaints, human health & safety issues and scientific data collection are a few of them. Predation management is another and is COMPLETELY outside of the realm of sport hunting when being done for "management" purposes. Tags are not issued, but instead "kill permits" are used.

Fair chase has nothing to do with this discussion.

"CL"

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by baltz526

what percentage of agent action will be used for damage control/complaint and big game management

I can't answer that exactly Baltz because I'm not sure.

I do know that ODFW has been paying for Wildlife Services to control cougars associated with Damage complaints and human health & safety issues for quite some time - with hunter dollars. The "Intergovernmental Agreement" between ODFW and Wildlife Services that covers black bears, cougars and furbearers was in the amount of $90,000 and was for the time period of 2005-2007 biennium.

The Oregon Cougar Plan contains the new element of actual cougar population reduction in the target areas, which is the subject of all the controversy. I was told just a few weeks ago by ODFW that the cost of implementing the plan in the two target areas was at $109,000 so far and 24 cats had been taken at that time. That is money directly associated with population reduction and benefiting game herds.

That much I know for fact

"CL"

[Salmo trutta]

I sent my email in.

[CombinationLicense]

Thanks - and for the record:

Nothing would please me more than to repeal Measure 18 and get things back into the hands of the ODFW rather than the valley voters. We all need to remember this issue at the next election and hold our elected representatives accountable for their positions. For now we have to settle for this



"CL"

[Matthewc]

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

With due respect fair chase only applies to "Sport Hunting".

ODFW "management" activities are use to control animal populations in accordance with the Oregon Wildlife Policy. Those activities include sport hunting, trapping, and "taking" situations where problem animals are killed for a variety of reasons. Agricultural or property damage complaints, human health & safety issues and scientific data collection are a few of them. Predation management is another and is COMPLETELY outside of the realm of sport hunting when being done for "management" purposes. Tags are not issued, but instead "kill permits" are used.

Fair chase has nothing to do with this discussion.

"CL"

All due respect returned

It does indeed have a circular connection. When hunters are no longer used as the primary management tool [which we were voted to hunt fair chase, no dogs no bait] and are rendered less effective, removing of problem animals becomes an increased task to such agencys, but none of that matters now does it..

You guys are not for this bill to protect "little johnny and his fathers livestock" your for this bill to protect deer and elk, understandable. I may be for it to after further research...I would want to have a location to check where and when they cleaned an area out before I when on my hunt. So I could hunt an area left intact for "fair chase" demanded by voters" hunting. Get it now?

[ehunter]

Done e-mail sent.

Matt

This bill is a win win for us (hunters) and the people who are losing their pets and farm animals. Remmber they were not the ones who voted for this it was a vote controlled by Portland.
The people in Portland are never going to feel this. After all they panic if they see a coyote in the city limits

There is no way that we can controll the population with out dogs. The last few years have proven that as the pop rose from 3000 to over 5000 cats. This allows the state to have some controll and use volunteer hunters without having to pay some one else from our funds.

[Limbhanger]

Originally Posted by Matthewc

You guys are not for this bill to protect "little johnny and his fathers livestock" your for this bill to protect deer and elk, understandable. I may be for it to after further research...I would want to have a location to check where and when they cleaned an area out before I when on my hunt. So I could hunt an area left intact for "fair chase" demanded by voters" hunting. Get it now?

I am for this bill because it saves the ODFW money that could be spent on other critical programs. That is the only thing this bill represents.

[Matthewc]

lol BlacktailBowhunter I just know your not emplying I am an animal rights activist. I just know thats not what your saying Blacktail..Just like you I spent alot of time in the woods with a Bowtech for bear cougar and deer. On the ground with no bait and no dogs. Because its not allowed.

Hunting for bear and cougar was a dogs and bait deal and it worked, numbers stayed in check. So we will not get that back. We accept that. I would go either way bait or no bait...My questions are concerning allowing what we are not to be done by agencys[to save money or not], not of fair chase or not, nor of concern over the predators well being..get it yet? again? I have the right to question this and I have the right to be concerned about the overall future outcome. Once they have the bar, there is no going back.......Just like measure 18, there is no going back..As a hunter IM going to make sure that I dont vote myself out of hunting oppertunity and feel realy stupid in 5 years.....IM going to do the research and I think ANYONE else voting should do so that does not already know the facts. I am learning as we go here, thanks..

I will further research as I stated. I had already read the original cougar plan but IM reading the updated final one now. I also have the orange code book because for many years I tried to find all ways to get around the no bait laws for bear and after having consulted agents themselfs it was found that the only way to bait was to stick the bait in your damn pocket. You could not even put scent spray on a stump. Fair chase is another loosly used term that in one place means anything but a noose and in other locations reffers to no bait no dogs.

You guys almost have me convinced its a good thing but I tend to tread carefully on hunting issues because of the fact at how 18 DID affect us all FOREVER as you said yourself.

Guess what Ive killed and eatin from it too, surprised>?

If you know where there is any "problem" bears in the north cascade zone please let me know so I can kill and eat from it again....??? There is nothing finer then being part of the food chain. Tonights dinner is fresh spring salmon...

[garyk]

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

HB 2971 simply gives ODFW the ability to use voluntary houndsmen for this purpose and will save the Department money by reducing the number of billable hours by ODFW and Wildlife Services personnel.

When we were told about using volunteers it sounded good, so it seems strange that the bill does not contain the word "volunteer" or "volunteer activities" at all. It does mention fixing compensation, but leaves that issue wide open

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by Matthewc

Get it now?

Uhh no, I don’t really see a cogent point there.

ODFW uses an array of methods and the best available data to determine how to best manage wildlife species under their scope of responsibility in compliance with the Oregon Wildlife Policy. They are tasked with that obligation and are authorized to perform necessary management activities by Oregon State Statute (ORS 496). Prior to the implementation of Measure 18 the cougar population was kept in check by sport hunting with the use of dogs. I understand that you think that hunting cougars with dogs is not “fair chase” sport hunting. Many other Oregonians see it that way too but we’re not talking about the sport hunting. What we are talking about is the lawful and wise management of a species of animal that is under the ODFW’s scope of responsibility in accordance with the Oregon Wildlife Policy. ODFW and their agents are exempt from the restrictions that Measure 18 placed on the sport hunting of cougars, so the use of dogs for “management” purposes can’t be construed to violate fair chase standards.

Your point about hunting in an area after it’s been “cleaned out” is evidently incomplete. Maybe you meant that once cougar numbers are reduced in an area, it allows the herds to multiply back to pre-1994 levels when the predators were effectively controlled? Then with increased herd numbers it would be too easy to hunt deer and elk so it violates the spirit of fair chase?

You might want to clarify that point but I would appreciate if you would do it in the “Paid Predator Hunters” thread. I already posted a link to the Oregon Cougar Plan there so you could verify all the facts relevant to the issue. I posted this thread as an information source for IFISHERS that would like to contact their House Representatives. Let’s leave this thread for information in accordance with the IFISH AUP and discuss the issue over on the other one.

GaryK – The bill clarifies the use of AGENTS, which by definition can be paid or unpaid. Volunteers are not paid and using that terminology only would affect the department’s ability to hire subcontractors like Wildlife Services.

"CL"

[Matthewc]

lol Open a can of worms with me then try to call it a highjack? lol

Unlike yourself I actually hunt predator, not just deer and elk.

Want my phone number? Love to talk with you in person.

Hunting for bear and cougar was a dogs and bait deal and it worked, numbers stayed in check. So we will not get that back. We accept that. I would go either way bait or no bait...My questions are concerning allowing what we are not to be done by agencys[to save money or not], not of fair chase or not, nor of concern over the predators well being..get it yet? again?

[loper]

Originally Posted by Limbhanger

I am for this bill because it saves the ODFW money that could be spent on other critical programs.

During testimony given April 10 on House Bill 2971 in front of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Peter Buckley (Ashland), testifying in opposition to this bill stated "whether or not you agree with the Cougar Management Plan...it has a budget."

As far as he was concerned, because ODFW at this time cannot use volunteers as "agents", and because ODFW is directed by the plan to actively manage cougars, the fact that money budgeted for management could be more wisely used was irrelevant; money was budgeted for this work, so it should be spent for that work.

Does that sound like a wise use of your hunter dollars? My jaw almost hit the floor when I heard him say that.

[CombinationLicense]

See you over in the "Paid Predator Hunters" thread...

[Matthewc]

I sent you my phone number, see you on the phone.

[baltz526]

since i'm a member of OHA. i support this through our lobiest al elkins. with my questions mostly answered i hope others are clear on what changing the wording accomplishes. if hb 2971 passes i would like to see the uses of this program published in detail, location of areas with animal numbers taken and cost savings realized. this bill dosn't excite me, but i'll bet it will make the cattlemens association happy, city and county goverments also. i hope it makes oregon hunters happy. time will tell

[Matthewc]

well put

[BlacktailBowhunter]

Originally Posted by garyk

When we were told about using volunteers it sounded good, so it seems strange that the bill does not contain the word "volunteer" or "volunteer activities" at all. It does mention fixing compensation, but leaves that issue wide open

It doesn't need the word volunteer. Here is why:

(c) Upon appointment of an agent by the department, the
department shall fix the compensation of the agent and prescribe
the duties of the agent.

"The department shall fix the compensation of the agent". Which means that if the department only hires volunteers for agents then the "fixed compensation" is ZERO.

Remember this is law that we are talking about and has it's own language and intent. Right now the department cannot use volunteer agents, so by saying "fix the compensation of the agent" that fixation can be zero compensation, which means that they are volunteering their time for free, which makes them a volunteer.

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by ehunter

The people in Portland are never going to feel this. After all they panic if they see a coyote in the city limits

Did you see that story on the news about Happy Valley residence.

Happy Valley nothin' like city folk

BTW email to Rep. Mike Schaufler is done!

[CombinationLicense]

ttt

Tomorrow is the day....

"CL"

[Old Soldier]

I sent all of them a message to vote yes. Some answered only two dumb ones said the bill over rode Measure 18. Told them to read the bill again it was to save money. I can not beleave these types get elected if the can not read and understand what a bill says.

Good job CL on trying to explain what this is all about.

[BlacktailBowhunter]

I sent emails to 23 Reps. I would have liked to of gotten all of them. Hey Soldier, who said it over rode 18? I'll PM you.

[loper]

HB 2971 was carried over to the House calendar for a vote on Tuesday, May 8; looks like another day to get emails in if you haven't already

[CombinationLicense]

Thanks for the update Loper - let's hope for the best tomorrow



"CL"

[loper]

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

Thanks for the update Loper - let's hope for the best tomorrow



"CL"

HB 2971 just passed on the House floor

[CombinationLicense]

40-19! Now we have to take on the Senate where things are considerably "greener". Thanks to everyone that took the time to participate

"CL"

[rimrock]

CL, do you know the anticipated date for the Senate vote?

[Limbhanger]

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

40-19! Now we have to take on the Senate where things are considerably "greener". Thanks to everyone that took the time to participate

"CL"

That is Awsome !!!! Thanks for the report.

[loper]

HB 2971 (the "agent" bill) is now scheduled for a Public Hearing and Possible Work Session in the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee on Thursday, May 24th at 3:00pm in Hearing Room B.

Anybody else going to be able to make it to the hearing?

[CombinationLicense]

ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

HB 2971 keeps on rolling and is now headed to the Senate floor for a vote. Please take the time to contact your Senator (or all the Senators) and let your voice be heard on this important bill. Thanks

"CL"



To: Interested Parties
From: Al Elkins, OHA Lobbyist
Re: Alert on HB 2971A
Date: June 1st, 2007

Hello!

The Oregon Hunters Association needs you help. The OHA sponsored bill HB 2971A is coming up for a vote on the floor of the Senate soon.


What HB 2971A Does:

As you know currently in order for ODFW to use someone to conduct bear and cougar work they cannot appoint them as an agent but must hire them as a full time employee. It is the belief of ODFW that they do not have the authority to appoint agents. This bill gives them the authority to do so.


What HB 2971A Does Not Do:

It does not change the provision of Measure 18. The bill does not change the Cougar Management Plan. The bill does not allow for the sport hunting of Cougars.


What OHA Needs You To Do:

We need you to send emails to all, or as many as you can, of the Senators listed below.


In your email we need you to urge them to vote yes on HB 2971A. In the subject line of the email say: VOTE YES ON HB 2971A.


Here are a few talking points. Do not copy and paste these, but incorporate them into your email. This way all the emails will be different.

• HB 2971A does not overturn Ballot Measure 18, but allows for the use of agents as stated in Ballot Measure 18.
• The bill will help reduce costs by allowing for volunteer agents to help with wildlife management activities.
• The bill spells out how an agent will be hired through a written agreement.

Senator Jason Atkinson, Central Point, sen.jasonatkinson@state.or.us
Senator Brad Avakian, NE Washington and NW Multnomah Counties, sen.bradavakian@state.or.us
Senator Alan Bates, Ashland, sen.alanbates@state.or.us
Senator Roger Beyer, Molalla, sen.rogerbeyer@state.or.us
Senator Kate Brown, Portland, sen.katebrown@state.or.us
Senator Ginny Burdick, Portland, sen.ginnyburdick@state.or.us
Senator Margaret Carter, Portland, sen.margaretcarter@state.or.us
Senator Peter Courtney, Salem, sen.petercourtney@state.or.us
Senator Ryan Deckert, Beaverton, sen.ryandeckert@state.or.us
Senator Richard Devlin, Tualatin, sen.richarddevlin@state.or.us
Senator Ted Ferrioli, John Day, sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us
Senator Gary George, McMinniville, sen.garygeorge@state.or.us
Senator Larry George, Sherwood, sen.larrygeorge@state.or.us
Senator Avel Gordly, Portland, sen.avelgordly@state.or.us
Senator Betsy Johnson, Scappoose, sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.us
Senator Jeff Kruse, Roseburg, sen.jeffkruse@state.or.us
Senator Rick Metsger, Mt.Hood, sen.rickmetsger@state.or.us
Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson, Gresham, sen.lauriemonnesanderson@state.or.us
Senator Rod Monroe, Portland, sen.rodmonroe@state.or.us
Senator Bill Morrisette, Springfield, sen.billmorrisette@state.or.us
Senator Frank Morse, Albany, sen.frankmorse@state.or.us
Senator David Nelson, Pendleton, sen.davidnelson@state.or.us
Senator Floyd Prozanski, South Lane and North Douglas Counties, sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us
Senator Kurt Schader, Canby, sen.kurtschrader@state.or.us
Senator Bruce Starr, Hillsboro, sen.brucestarr@state.or.us
Senator Joanne Verger, Coos Bay, sen.joanneverger@state.or.us
Senator Vicki Walker, Eugene, sen.vickiwalker@state.or.us
Senator Ben Westland, Tumalo, sen.benwestlund@state.or.us
Senator Doug Whitsett, Klamath Falls, sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us
Senator Jackie Winters, Salem, sen.jackiewinters@state.or.us

[Blacktail Slayer]

Sent:smile:

Now lets hope that it passes

[Abalone]

Sir,
I am a lifetime resident in Oregon and a Hunter. I live and vote in district 40. The Elk herds and Deer populations in Oregon are down Please Vote Yes on HB 2971.

Thank you

Sent

[Limbhanger]

Emails sent !!

[Don Becker]

Sent. Don

[ehunter]

Sent as well

Originally Posted by Don Becker

Sent. Don

[Old Soldier]

Got my e-mails in I hope every other hunter did the same. It important that this bill passes. It save money for ODFW that hunters have paid.
See CL post it tells you all you need to know. The bill is up for a vote tomarrow June 8 from the information I got today from the OHA Lobyist.

[Don Becker]

Originally Posted by Don Becker

Sent. Don

And, my brother Jon, e-mailed them all . . . . Don

[loper]

sent mine in this morning; received two responses

the bill is being presented right now (as I'm typing); we'll know one way or the other in a few minutes if it passes the Senate

[loper]

IT PASSED THE SENATE!!!!!!!!

[CombinationLicense]

Yeah baby! I just got word from Al that the vote was 19-8

"CL"

[Limbhanger]

Awesome !!! Good work everybody!!!

[ehunter]

Who were the 8 who didn't vote on this? It might be interesting to know?

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

Yeah baby! I just got word from Al that the vote was 19-8

"CL"

[loper]

The House concurred with the Senate amendments on HB 2971 and repassed the bill on a 37-17 vote yesterday.

[Abalone]

Got this back from my rep today.

Thank you for contacting me to support HB 2971. Your feedback is important to me and helps inform the actions I take in the Legislature.
I have been a proponent of this bill for several sessions and I am glad to report that the bill has passed both chambers. I think it's good public policy and I was proud to vote for it.
Thanks again for your note. It's an honor to represent you and I hope you will continue to contact me about issues that are important to you.

Sincerely,
Representative Dave Hunt
House Majority Leader
Oregon State Capitol