collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!  (Read 11836 times)

Offline C-Money

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 10942
  • Location: Grant County
  • Self proclaimed 3pt master
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2013, 03:52:07 PM »
I would like to follow this one.
I felt like a one legged cat trying to bury a terd on a frozen pond!

Offline Elkrunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 2261
  • Location: Wenatchee
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2013, 09:42:34 AM »
Tag....

Offline colockumelk

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 4910
  • Location: Watertown, NY
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2013, 09:56:32 PM »
Okay back from Colorado and I finally had a chance to read it.  The report wasn't surprising to me as far as herd movement and migration patterns and routes.  Also the correlation and negative effects roads and traffic disturbances have on elk wasn't surprising either.  Pretty much backed up and supported every other road managment study I have read.  Which is basically higher density of roads leads to more stress on the animals, a higher natural mortality rate, lower birth rates, higher numbers of poaching and an increase in hunting success rates. 

The numbers of pregnant cows is definately encouraging however when the late winter/early spring surveys are conducted only 35% of those pregnant cows still have a calf alive with them.  Not sure why the calf survival rate continues to be low? Maybe bears and coyotes are scooping them up when they are new borns.   :dunno:

I didn't see anything in that report about the chronically low bull to cow ratio.  Looking at the trend reports ( from 2012). From those numbers here's what I took away from it.  In 2009 (the last year that it was spike before going true-spike) the overall bull:cow ratio was 4.43:100. The branch bull:cow ratio was 2.28:100.  The latest survey (2012) showed an increase in the overall bull:cow ratio.  Due to the fact that slowely but surely true spike is allowing more and more yearlong bulls to escape and live to be big boys.  In fact in 2009 the split between yearling and big boys was 50:50.  Now the split between yearling and big  boy is 60/40.  This had led to an overall bull:cow ratio of 6.64:100.  But the branch bull to cow ratio has increased to 2.72:100. 

On average since 2009 we are seeing the yearling bull survival rate almost double. Up from 80 in 2009 to 153 in 2012.  Yet the branch bull population has only increased by 22.  Here is the million dollar question.  Since 2009 270 yearling bulls have survived to become branch bulls.  45 have died from natural causes. About 5 a year are killed by licensed hunters and we know 107 are alive today.  So where did the other 103 branch bulls go to.   :dunno:  That is the question that needs to be answered.   

To wrap my opinions up.  I say since true spike is having a positive effect (even as slow as it is) then continue with it.  Double the amount of cow permits given out.  Since the herd is above the objective give out cow permits to bring the population down to the goal number of elk.  This will do two things #1 bring the herd size down to the stated goal #2 ease the harvest pressure off of the yearling bulls which will result in more spikes living and a higher bull to cow ratio. 

And road closures.  Continue to put up physical barriers on the roads which are already closed.  Dramatically increase fines for violations.  Start looking at strategic, smart and responsible road closures that can provide areas of escapement.  If two roads go to the same place close one of them.  There should be alot more areas on that map that gets farther than 652 yds (1km) from a road.   
"We Sleep Safe In Our Beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those that would do us harm."
Author: George Orwell

Offline jstone

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 6568
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2013, 07:31:22 AM »
Thanks i was waiting for your out look. I wanna go back bow hunting in the Naneum next year. Switched to the Taneum when the true spike thing happened. I miss my area. Thanks Clockumelk

Offline danderson

  • Hunter Education Instructor
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2010
  • Posts: 1702
  • Location: Central Wash
    • elkhornarchers
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #19 on: January 23, 2013, 07:49:45 AM »
Do we know how many spikes were killed during the 2012 season that were not true spikes, from hunters  that either misidentified the number of points on the animal, or cases of out right poaching, I heard the number was quite high. I still think that the overall benefits for continuing the true spike rule is zip,  :twocents:

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 39202
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #20 on: January 23, 2013, 07:55:41 AM »
This "true spike" only rule is a complete joke. How many other states manage elk this way? I don't have a problem with spike only regulations, but this true spike rule is ridiculous. If the elk herd is in that bad of shape, they should be managing harvest by permit only hunting. And yes, that should include Yakama tribal members.

Offline woodywsu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Moses Lake
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #21 on: January 23, 2013, 08:25:55 AM »
103 missing bulls? Hmmmmm. Be nice to hear a harvest report from the tribe.

As for the calf:cow ratio, I personally blame it on predation and road closures occuring too late in the winter. Febuary 1st isn't early enough  :twocents: If Kittitas Valley Field and Stream Club could get on board, I think WDFW would try it.

Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 25046
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2013, 02:40:21 PM »
103 missing bulls... not to let the tribe off the hook completely but what about the wolves... don't many of the elk from the colocum go through the area where there is a wolf pack for the migration?
In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

Offline Whitefoot

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 264
  • Location: YAKAMA NATION
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #23 on: January 23, 2013, 03:04:24 PM »
Where are the wolves at up there?
Cayusm

Offline mulehunter

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 3367
  • Location: Hobart, Wa
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #24 on: January 23, 2013, 03:28:54 PM »
Where are the wolves at up there?

I believe between Chelan/Kittiitas BIO and GD already knew about it ( I may be wrong) and they been following the new pack recent, its by Pitcher Canyon below Mission ridge the Rancher with his Webcam caught a PG wolf recent before winter start 2012.  There is a Pack hanging out there for sure.  I have seen pic from the rancher. Its 100% real PG Wolf! Today Pups are out there!  >:(

Offline luvtohnt

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2008
  • Posts: 1438
  • Location: Ellensburg
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #25 on: January 23, 2013, 03:38:24 PM »
There may be a few individual elk from this group that are in close proximity to the Teanaway pack, but for the most part the majority of the elk are outside the wolves home range. After mulehunters post I have to add it would make sense to have another pack in that area with dispersal and all, I think I may have to go spend some time up there this winter to see if I can run across some tracks. If this is in fact true then the group of elk that migrate every year, spend the summer in the new packs territory.

Good luck convincing the Kittitas County Field and Stream of anything that actually aids in conservation!

Disturbance, and starvation are probably the two largest factors contributing to cow:calf numbers. In my opinion that range is severly degraded from years of overgrazing. Cheatgrass just in not palatable to elk. The closure does not prevent disturbance in the most crucial month for elk. I would guess that January sees the highest mortality (other than hunting season) on the elk herd. However looking at numbers from other states our cow:calf ratio for the Colockum herd is on the high side for late winter counts.I still feel the biologists bull counts may be a little low but I have never talked directly with a boi to get info on the counts. Colock seems to be the most up to date on this so for now I will just take his word on it.

Brandon

Offline Whitefoot

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 264
  • Location: YAKAMA NATION
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #26 on: January 23, 2013, 03:41:56 PM »
Wow!  Really.  That sucks.  I haven't seen them yet.  Lol. 
Cayusm

Offline woodywsu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Moses Lake
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2013, 08:32:01 AM »
I wasn't blaming 103 bulls on tribal harvest. I was stating that I would like to see a harvest report so we could see how many issues we have (predation, poaching, habitat). luvtohunt and I are on the same page. Earlier road closure, less predators (cougars, wolves, bears), and better wintering habitat is the cause to poor calf:cow numbers. I did hear that RMEF was helping DFW get some food plots established throughout winter range such as existing wheatfields, west bar, etc.

mulehunter, I saw the wolf pic too. He left there about 2 weeks ago I was told by rancher, but so did the deer and elk

Offline colockumelk

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 4910
  • Location: Watertown, NY
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2013, 08:46:57 AM »
I think that planting food plots in such as winter wheat and alfalfa would help out alot in winter survival rates and would definately help alot in keeping elk off of the farmers alfalfa fields. 

As far as having troubles growing the population of mature branch bulls.  It absolutely falls on the Yakama tribal hunters.  In 2006 the WDFW estimated they were harvesting up to 40 branch bulls a year.  Members on this website (Whitefoot included) have told me that more and more tribal hunters are hunting that herd.  Which is to be expected.  Because just like any other good hunting spot, once word of mouth gets around and the "secret" is out about it, people start hoarding in on your honey hole.  So the number of branch bulls harvested by tribal members is probably higher.  And on our side of the fence I do believe that poaching is on the rise in that GMU.  It's a poaching hotspot.  It has big huge bulls and has ALOT of roads which means easier access for poachers. 

I'm not pointing fingers at any individual group.  It is what it is.  They are using their treaty rights.  I may not like it or agree with it but it is what it is.  I do wish the Yakama Tribal council would start to take an active role in establishing proper and ethical game managment rules and regs for that area.  Because the only thing that will help the branch bulls out is if they start doing their part.  Again my beef isn't with individual tribal hunters.  Its with the rules and regs (in this case lack therof) that allow this to happen.  Road closures will also help out with this.   :twocents:
"We Sleep Safe In Our Beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those that would do us harm."
Author: George Orwell

Offline woodywsu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Moses Lake
Re: Recent Colockum Elk Study!!!
« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2013, 09:15:49 AM »
Higher calf:cow numbers results in more bulls. Blame is only on Yakama harvest. It's a combination of things.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Selling Pistols and rifles by pianoman9701
[Today at 08:34:12 AM]


AUCTION: Custom knife by Alden Cole by A. Cole
[Today at 07:44:36 AM]


Mt. St. Helens Goat by CNELK
[Today at 07:07:39 AM]


Lots of coho by 3boys
[Today at 07:03:24 AM]


Stealth Cam QV20 by kodiak06
[Today at 06:54:42 AM]


Apps per Tag for Muzzy Elk by trophyhunt
[Today at 04:26:16 AM]


Calling in August in Western Washington by Jrtishchuk
[Yesterday at 11:44:39 PM]


Muzzleloader Scope by Dan-o
[Yesterday at 08:24:45 PM]


Ross Lake boat launch? by Oldguy
[Yesterday at 08:14:32 PM]


Gots me a new/old rockchuck rifle coming by JDHasty
[Yesterday at 07:54:20 PM]


Muzzleloader scope options by trophyhunt
[Yesterday at 06:13:21 PM]


newbie bear field dressing and hide by KNOPHISH
[Yesterday at 05:21:23 PM]


GMU 247 Entiat bear hunting by jstone
[Yesterday at 04:58:38 PM]


More Kings! by Crunchy
[Yesterday at 04:38:57 PM]


Spot lock in the salt? by GWP
[Yesterday at 08:04:10 AM]


Anybody breeding meat rabbit? by HighlandLofts
[Yesterday at 02:36:05 AM]


Wall Tents Tips and Tricks by ghosthunter
[July 26, 2025, 10:33:57 PM]


2025 Washington Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Raffle by trophyhunt
[July 26, 2025, 08:15:41 PM]


Nice bull? by Kingofthemountain83
[July 26, 2025, 06:01:05 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal