Hunters face $1,500 fine & jail for breaking new big game shot limit under state law starting January 1
Reply
Washington wildlife managers to share potential hunting rule changes
The agency will take public comments on the candidate proposals in a separate online process
Eric BarkerOutdoor and Environmental Editor
A hunter displays a pheasant.Tribune/Eric Barker
Mule deer does graze in wheat stuble of eastern Washington in this photo from 2021. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is in floating possible hunting rule changes and plans to share the ideas with the public. Pete Caster/Tribune
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will share potential changes to hunting rules that the agency may develop into full proposals to be vetted during its three-year, season-setting process.
Wildlife managers will explain dozens of potential rule changes and answer questions during a series of online public meetings starting Tuesday.
“We wanted to take this opportunity to thoroughly discuss details about the hunting rule changes we are considering with members of the public,” said Anis Aoude, the department’s game division manager in a news release. “After reviewing over 1,000 comments in an earlier public comment opportunity, WDFW has narrowed it down to about 60 proposals we are considering for this three-year season setting. We have not yet determined which of those potential proposals will move forward for the formal rule making process, and public input now can shape which proposals we consider.”
The agency will take public comments on the candidate proposals in a separate online process.
The recommendations were made by agency staff, partners, advisory groups and members of the public. They will be unveiled on the agency’s rule-making website Monday at bit.ly/4fJ8xo7 which will also include links to the public meetings and public comment surveys. Aoude said they include things like changing boundaries of hunts, adding or subtracting an early or late hunt or changing rules governing hunting methods. He said making some mule deer and elk hunts on the east side of the state permit only instead of over-the-counter is not included.
Daily headlines, straight to your inboxRead it online first and stay up-to-date, delivered daily at 7 AMDo not fill this fieldSign Up
“We still have some work to do on that,” he said.
Candidate changes that make the cut and are developed into formal proposals will be unveiled late this year or in January. Another public comment period will be held then. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission will decide which proposals are adopted into the 2027-29 hunting rules, but it could delegate some or all of it to Fish and Wildlife Director Kelly Susewind.
All of the informational meetings will be held from 6 to 8 p.m. via Zoom. The first on Tuesday will cover deer, elk and moose. A meeting on Wednesday will cover waterfowl. A meeting on turkey, upland game birds, small game, carnivores and furbearers will be held Aug. 17.
Venue changed for third and final Deer Hunting with Dogs forum
Managing Urban Deer in Connecticut
- Introduction
- Consequences of Deer Overabundance
- Non-lethal Management Options
- Herd Reduction Options
- Questions About Hunting
- Examples of Special Deer Reduction Programs in Connecticut
- Examples of Local Deer Reduction Efforts by Municipalities
- Facts About White-tailed Deer and Deer Management
- Developing an Urban Deer Management Plan
- References and Suggested Readings
Examples of Local Deer Reduction Efforts by Municipalities
Darien
In 1997, Darien’s First Selectman formed a Deer Management Committee. In March 2005, the committee presented a deer management plan to the Board of Selectmen to allow hunting on Sellecks Woods (28 acres), owned by the town, and on Dunlap Woods (22 acres), owned by the Darien Land Trust. Liability issues surrounding the hunt prevented hunting at Dunlap Woods and delayed hunting at Sellecks Woods until mid-December. To address local liability issues, the town acquired additional insurance at minimal cost and required hunters to sign an indemnity agreement (Appendix 1). A late start, unfavorable weather conditions, and unauthorized human disturbance resulted in a decision to end that year’s hunt early. Over a period of several years, several hundred pounds of venison were processed and donated to food shelters throughout the area. The program was originally run by a town committee for a number of years, but now deer management in the town is led by an independent effort partnering hunters with homeowners.
Greenwich
In 2004-2005, the Town of Greenwich developed and implemented a deer herd reduction and monitoring program approved by the DEEP on select town-owned land. The herd reduction consisted of a 4-night sharpshooting program on 3 town-owned properties, which resulted in the removal of 80 deer. From this removal, 2,400 pounds of venison were donated to local food pantries. Town cost was estimated at $646 per deer removed (total cost = $51,680). In addition, the Conservation Commission identified large landowners and encouraged them to allow hunting and continued to promote hunting as the main tool for reducing and maintaining the deer population.
New Canaan
The town-appointed a deer committee in 1998. The committee collected information on deer and deer management, evaluated all possible deer management options, and recommended to town residents that bowhunting be used as a means to reduce the deer herd. The town allocated funds to conduct surveys of the deer population and residents’ opinions about deer. The town also hired a deer manager to contact all homeowners who owned at least 6 acres to encourage them to allow bowhunting. A sportsmen’s group assisted the community by making hunters available to landowners interested in reducing the deer population in their area.
During the first 2 years of the program, the number of deer removed by hunting tripled.(30) Archery harvest increased from 19 deer in 1997 to a 20-year average harvest of 74 deer/year while deer vehicle accidents decreased from 62 deer in 1997 to a 20-year average of 12 deer-vehicle accidents/year from before to after promoting hunting in the town.
Redding
Bowhunting on private property has been the primary means of reducing deer numbers, while owners of larger properties have been specifically encouraged to allow hunting on their land. However, in 2005, a subcommittee of the Redding Conservation Commission prepared a report that examined the effects of deer on forest ecology as a result. In October 2005, the Conservation Commission voted unanimously to allow controlled hunting on town-owned land (about 1,000 acres) to protect and preserve the land from the effects of deer overabundance. It was noted that 40 deer-vehicle accidents were recorded in 2005 in Redding. Due to late approval, limited bowhunting was allowed on some town-owned properties, resulting in the removal of 32 deer. In 2005, Redding appointed a deer warden and assistant deer warden to further deer management efforts by overseeing deer reduction efforts. The number of town properties hunted per year has averaged around 9. Controlled hunts continue throughout the town today, with much reduced harvest numbers averaging about 17 deer per year with much fewer deer-vehicle accidents (12 deer-vehicle accidents) occurring per year.
Ridgefield
In 2004, the Board of Selectmen established the Ridgefield Deer Committee to determine the extent of deer overpopulation in Ridgefield and assess how the town should address the problem. In June 2005, the committee voted 17 to 1 to approve a report containing many recommendations, including controlled hunting on town-owned property. In July 2005, the report was presented to the Board of Selectmen. In November 2005, the Board appointed a 5-member deer management committee to implement the recommendations. In May 2006, the residents of Ridgefield voted in support (73%) of modifying the local ordinance to allow hunting on town-owned land, and, during that year, 73 deer-vehicle accidents were recorded. The number of town properties hunted per year has ranged between 10 to 15 and the number of deer taken has ranged between 92 in 1998 to 336 in 2009. Controlled hunts still continue throughout the town today, with much reduced harvest numbers (35 deer) and deer-vehicle accidents (2 deer-vehicle accidents), an indication that population control efforts have been working. More information is in the Ridgefield Controlled Hunt Fact Sheets .
Wilton
In 2001, a deer committee was assembled to research perceived problems associated with deer. The committee sponsored public meetings, conducted a town-wide survey of residents, and created a newsletter dedicated to deer issues. In 2002, the first controlled deer hunt administered by Wilton was conducted on water company lands within the town and the committee sent a letter to large landowners encouraging them to allow hunting. In 2003, the deer committee produced a final report and began implementing recommendations from the report. In 2004, a second controlled hunt was held. In 2005, the town changed an ordinance that previously prohibited hunting on town-owned properties to allow hunting for the purpose of reducing nuisance wildlife that threatens public health and safety or threatens the town’s natural resources. During that year, 47 deer-vehicle accidents were recorded. The town initiated its first hunt on town-owned open space in 2005 and added a second town-owned property in 2006.
The Wilton Land Conservation Trust also authorized hunting on one of its parcels. The number of properties hunted per year has increased to 16 in total. Controlled hunts still continue throughout the town today, with 72 deer harvested in 2022. A total of 15 deer-vehicle accidents were reported in 2022, an indication that population control efforts have been working.
Chapter 8: Facts About White-tailed Deer and Deer Management
Content last updated in August 2026.
When bird flu hit the UK, suffering seabirds died in their thousands. Australia’s wild flocks will soon do the same
Australia’s bird population will experience ‘large mortalities’ and risk species loss, modelling based on global outbreaks shows
Graham Readfearn Environment and climate correspondentSat 8 Aug 2026 16.00 EDTShare24
Sandwich terns are a graceful seabird known for their committed, forceful and spectacular plunging dives into the ocean to catch fish.
Thousands of the species started to fall sick across Europe in 2022 with tens of thousands dying as a lineage of the H5N1 bird flu – 2.3.4.4b – spread through the continent’s wild flocks.
The effects of the virus on the brain cause the terns to flounder on the ground, craning and straining their necks in a suffering behaviour known as star-gazing. It is difficult to watch.
“I remember a colony at Scolt Head Island in Norfolk,” says Prof James Pearce-Higgins, the director of science at the British Trust for Ornithology.
“You had adult terns trying to mate with dead terns and chicks begging for food from their dying parents.
“It was a real sense of a colony collapse as you watched this transfer of the virus between birds.”
Sandwich terns are close relatives of greater crested terns, which are seen all around Australia and were the first native bird to suffer a mass mortality event from the disease in Australia on South Australia’s Limestone Coast.
Since the virus re-emerged in Europe in 2021 it has swept over every other continent, killing millions of birds and mammals, and infecting more than 400 bird species as well as mammals – in particular, seals and sea lions.
The virus was finally detected in Australia two months ago in migratory seabirds that likely brought the disease from breeding grounds in the subantarctic.
This week, the federal government revealed analysis of the potential threat to Australia’s wildlife which showed almost 400 species of birds and mammals were at “high risk” or worse if they caught the disease.
One expert who worked on the analysis, Prof John Woinarski of Charles Darwin University, tells the Guardian he expects the disease will have spread across the continent within a year.
Pearce-Higgins says: “I would expect Australia is going to experience large mortalities, like those we have been through, and it’s going to put some species at risk.”
Almost half of Australia’s bird species are unique to the continent, meaning that a lot of uncertainty comes with predicting what H5N1 could do to the animal population.
It also means the risk of the virus causing planet-wide extinctions is higher now that every continent is affected.
Death toll will be ‘confronting’
“We’ve been looking overseas since 2021 and seeing the advance of this virus,” says Dr Sara Ryding, an evolutionary ecologist at Deakin University.
“It has been horrible overseas – tens of thousands of birds dying in single colonies.
“The concern was, we knew it was going to arrive eventually – how could it not? But we didn’t know what it would look like when it got here.”
Ryding has led research to project the level of risk from H5N1 for all Australia’s bird families by developing a model based on official reports of the disease from around the globe to the World Organisation for Animal Health.
The research suggested the most at-risk families of birds were gannets and boobies (Sulidae), followed in descending order of risk by cranes (Gruidae), darters (Anhingidae), ducks, geese and swans (Anatidae), and gulls, terns and noddies (Laridae). But a host of other bird families – including pelicans, crows, ravens, falcons and kestrels – were all predicted to be susceptible.
While many species of those birds are not considered threatened, the sight of large numbers of dead and sick birds, particularly larger species like swans and pelicans, “is going to be confronting,” Ryding says.
“I don’t want to cause panic, but we have seen the devastation it has caused overseas and there’s no reason to think it will be any less devastating here,” she says. “I think it will be really bad.”
Studies have identified several behaviours that can make animals susceptible to catching the disease, such as scavenging dead and dying animals for food (as do gulls and Tasmanian devils), spending time in dense colonies (like seals and waterbirds) and spending time around bodies of water where the virus can live for weeks or months, or where other infected animals might also be around.
‘Devastating’ for seals and sea lions
The virus has been particularly damaging for seals and sea lions. Tens of thousands of seals and sea lions have died in outbreaks in Peru, Chile, Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina and, most recently, on Australia’s subantarctic territory of Heard Island and McDonald Islands.
The virus can cause debilitating conditions for the seals and sea lions – known collectively as pinnipeds – with severe neurological and respiratory symptoms.
Australia has three resident pinniped species – the New Zealand fur seal, the Australian fur seal and the already endangered Australian sea lion – and government analysis has suggested the risk for all three from the virus is “very high”, meaning “very severe reduction in population size or viability is predicted” if the virus reaches them.
Dr Saia Bartes is an Argentinian marine biologist who has just completed her PhD on Australian fur seals at Deakin University and has helped study declines in South American sea lions after the virus struck there.
“It was devastating for them. In north Patagonia, we lost a third of the sea lions,” she says.
Because pinnipeds often share space with infected birds, and tend to be in tightly packed groups, Bartes says they are particularly susceptible.
Pinniped numbers are still recovering from commercial hunting, she says, and “they could start declining again really quickly, which is happening in South America” if the virus found them.
Back in the UK, Pearce-Higgins says there is some hope. Their experience of collaboration with conservation groups, volunteers and local authorities through weekly and later monthly meetings had been critical in the response.
And there were some signs the impacts of the virus may be slowing.
“The hope is that because a lot of these birds are long-lived, the population could be more resilient. But we still don’t really know the probabilities of future outbreaks,” he says.
“It might look really bad for a few years, but the hope is that [Australia] can focus on the conservation of what is left.”
Exposing the Big Game 