GMAC meeting 6-7-14

[jackelope]

Make that 4.

[bobcat]

Wingshooter88 and Idahohuntr are the only two members I knew of on this site.   

[bigtex]

Let me say it plainly, the GMAC is an advisory group only, they don't make any decisions or policy for the WDFW. Like idahohuntr, I am a member of the GMAC.

WDFW has an advisory group for just about every division/section in WDFW, there's even an WDFW LE advisory group. But the big keyword is advisory they don't vote to approve or disapprove anything. WDFW basically comes to them and says "what do you think about this" and moves on. The ultimate vote still comes from the commission. Advisory groups can say something is a bad idea, but if WDFW wants it, and the commission approves it, then it's a done deal.

[bobcat]

Yes, of course I'm aware that the GMAC doesn't make the final decisions and approvel of policy for the WDFW. But, Dave Ware sure justified the changes to the permit system by what he said was strong support by the GMAC, who nodody had ever heard of.   

Of course he also told us the extra revenue brought in from all the new applications we were being forced to buy, would be put towards more access to private lands. How much more access to private timberlands do we have as of this year?   

[billythekidrock]

Yes, of course I'm aware that the GMAC doesn't make the final decisions and approvel of policy for the WDFW. But, Dave Ware sure justified the changes to the permit system by what he said was strong support by the GMAC, who nodody had ever heard of.   

Of course he also told us the extra revenue brought in from all the new applications we were being forced to buy, would be put towards more access to private lands. How much more access to private timberlands do we have as of this year?   

He also said it was the GMAC that recommended removing the buck and bull permits for Master Hunters. Then I heard from a GMAC/site member that that was not the case.

[idahohuntr]

Let me say it plainly, the GMAC is an advisory group only, they don't make any decisions or policy for the WDFW. Like idahohuntr, I am a member of the GMAC.

WDFW has an advisory group for just about every division/section in WDFW, there's even an WDFW LE advisory group. But the big keyword is advisory they don't vote to approve or disapprove anything. WDFW basically comes to them and says "what do you think about this" and moves on. The ultimate vote still comes from the commission. Advisory groups can say something is a bad idea, but if WDFW wants it, and the commission approves it, then it's a done deal.

All very true...that is why I believe it is critical GMAC members share what we hear from WDFW at those meetings.  We maybe get a little more insight into what proposals or ideas are coming down the line and this site is a great place to distribute that information.   

[bigtex]

Of course he also told us the extra revenue brought in from all the new applications we were being forced to buy, would be put towards more access to private lands. How much more access to private timberlands do we have as of this year?   

Actually WDFW has been making strides in improving access on private lands in SE WA, and a lot of that has to do with the extra revenue. It's been unfortunate to see the decline in access on private lands in the SE portion of the state (mainly due to an aging land ownership in that area) over the past decade but finally WDFW is getting a hold of it and starting to turn the decline around. What did you expect, WDFW to essentially pay Weyco the couple of millions of dollars they could receive if all of their permits sell out just so they wouldn't require an access permit?

Quite honestly, the big timber companies (Hancock, Weyco, etc) are out of WDFW's game when it comes to their private lands program. Those companies stand to make too much money through an access permit then WDFW could provide to keep their lands open. It's a lot easier for WDFW to knock on somebodys door in Whitman County and tell them they'll give them some cash if they allow access to their thousands of acres, then it is to say "hey weyco I know you could make a couple million dollars if all your permits sell out, but how's a couple thousand bucks?"

If we want unrestricted public access to timberlands then it needs to come from the legislature 

[Lucky1]

Thanks for the update. .223 for deer and expandable broadheads? that should get some good debates/threads going.

sent from my typewriter

  I like both proposals. I'll jump in the debate when and if it happens.

[bobcat]

Of course he also told us the extra revenue brought in from all the new applications we were being forced to buy, would be put towards more access to private lands. How much more access to private timberlands do we have as of this year?   

Actually WDFW has been making strides in improving access on private lands in SE WA, and a lot of that has to do with the extra revenue. It's been unfortunate to see the decline in access on private lands in the SE portion of the state (mainly due to an aging land ownership in that area) over the past decade but finally WDFW is getting a hold of it and starting to turn the decline around. What did you expect, WDFW to essentially pay Weyco the couple of millions of dollars they could receive if all of their permits sell out just so they wouldn't require an access permit?

Quite honestly, the big timber companies (Hancock, Weyco, etc) are out of WDFW's game when it comes to their private lands program. Those companies stand to make too much money through an access permit then WDFW could provide to keep their lands open. It's a lot easier for WDFW to knock on somebodys door in Whitman County and tell them they'll give them some cash if they allow access to their thousands of acres, then it is to say "hey weyco I know you could make a couple million dollars if all your permits sell out, but how's a couple thousand bucks?"

If we want unrestricted public access to timberlands then it needs to come from the legislature 

No, actually I don't expect the WDFW to do anything about providing access to private timberlands. I'm not even one who is against the new access fees. I posted in another thread how I thought we are now better off with the drive in access, seven days/week, for just a small fee. It's worth it for some people, and not for others. But for those who can take advantage of the program, I feel we are now being provided much better opportunities for hunting Weyerhaeuser land than we were in the past.

Sorry, don't want to get this too far off topic. Really my only issue was with the WDFW and how they changed the permit system without any input from the public, and then lied and said they had public support.

If the public had been given a fair chance to weigh in on the topic, and people liked the proposals, then I wouldn't have had so much of a problem with it, although myself, I never would have agreed with the changes that they made and the way they distributed points into all the new categories. But I was sitting there at the meeting in Olympia when Dave Ware said he had "broad public support" for the changes. That was an outright lie and I will never forget it.

[Ridgerunner]

Doesn't sound like any big proposals are coming for the next three year cycle.

[dreamingbig]

Sounds like a big did.  Were the archery elk seasons addressed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[huntnphool]

Doesn't sound like any big proposals are coming for the next three year cycle.

The increased late permits in the Methow are ridiculous and once again prove that WDFW's only concern is revenue!

[popeshawnpaul]

Sounds like a big did.  Were the archery elk seasons addressed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Archery seasons and allocation issues get addressed in the Allocation Sub-committee, not at the GMAC meeting although I reported on what was discussed at the last Allocation Sub-committee meeting.  For years, I've been the WSB/bowhunting rep on the GMAC and Allocation Sub Committee.  There are notes taken at these meetings that are distributed and approved so you can go back and look at what happened and have some accountability.  I make myself very available to talk with bowhunters and members of WSB so I can accurately represent them.

[dreamingbig]

Shawn,  thanks for the additional info!  We have chatted on here before and I certainly appreciate the efforts.  I realize the previous report didn't address all of the issues discussed.

Let us know how we can help the cause.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wacenturion]

Game Management Advisory Council.

They're the ones who, in 2010, approved of the ridiculous changes to the draw system, which Dave Ware told them had "broad public support." And, nobody on this board had ever heard anything about those changes until it was basically a done deal.

Basically the GMAC is nothing more than a PR validation of public support for whatever WDFW's Wildlife Management wants to impose.  Always has been.  Your comment is a prime example............