soft expectations....

[muleyguy]

That's not a thesis.  That's a set of opinions wrapped in irrelevant facts supported by no numbers.  Here's some data and you tell me what they mean in terms of trend.  Antlerless and Anlered are for Districts 4-8 the heart of cascade mule deer country along with the total of hunters afield state wide:


            Hunters    Antlerless    Antlered
2014    120,488      2006          6225
2013    123,928      1071          5608
2012    120,082       633           5391
2011    125,537       532           4821
2010    131,133       548           4761
2009    135,859       461           5605
2008    144,514      544            4135
2007    139,241
2006    135,195
2005    135,653

The kill counts take more time to compile before 08 so I skipped it but I certainly can go do it.

Your contention is that hunting is disimproving and getting more crowded.  The trends are clear as day. There are fewer and fewer hunters on a downtrending line.  Those hunters are killing MORE mule deer than in the past. I see that before the fires of 14 the doe alocation was increasing.  That's not a sign of too few deer and the antlered kill supports that for those years too.  I expect that 2015 and 20116 will now see reductions because the big doe kill last year was driven by the fire decision.

Overall, you are simply wrong. Hunter's are diminishing no matter what you say about population. Success is improving. Antlerless availablility is UP indicating they feel the herd is at carrying capacity.  To me this points out that there's no biological imperative to changing the system.  The demands to change the system are about aesthetics and perception of quality. It's not about deer management. I bet if we had the age data of hunters we'd see that the pool is getting older all the time and recuriting fewer new young hunters. Our trend without doing anything at all is toward more space with fewer hunters getting more deer per hunter.

this is called soft expectations.........the reason the deer hunters are going down??  hmmmmm.......not hard to discern that....you conveniently left out "hunter days"  my guess, is that once you calculate that, it isn't as drastic as you make it seem........for people on here that know me, I'm good at digging out WDFW data;  in this case, I'm not going to waste my time......

the reason for decreased hunters?   that is not hard......its called "poor experience".....we are losing hunter from poor experience in the field.  Ttust me, if we had excellent experience, there would be more demand then supply........

what do you think is the cause of declining hunter numbers when tags are unlimited?   trust me......its not because the experience is so excellent...........

go look at the whitetail units in northern spokane after the APR........the best success of the APR (and why the special interest groups (landowners.outfitters) were for it)  was to discourage hunters.  and it did an excellent job of this.

how exciting is it to go hunt mule deer in mid october with an
apr???  Not very exciting.....which results in every increasing lower hunter numbers....

so, what we are doing management wise in this state is , instead of doing draw only, is putting in stupid regulations in the name of "science" that are really designed to reduce hunter pressure without reducing opportunity......

so, go ahead and keep your soft expectations........it will just delay what really needs to happen......and, by the way.....I saw a unicorn crapping skittles up in the okanagon the other day.........maybe we should put a season out for them???

let me clue you in.........the reason we are seeing lower deer hunter numbers is because the experience is so poor, many are giving up on it.......

soft expectations instead of real change......

[jrebel]

Could the decline in hunters also be due to price of tags, less youth hunters, etc.....  Your assessment seems a little one sided and centered around quality of hunt.  Though I don't disagree that quality of hunt may be a part of it....I don't agree it is all of it. 

Price of tags, less public land (private timber pay to play), less youth hunting, gated roads, ect. ect. ect.....all play a role in smaller total number of hunters.   

[syoungs]

I have to think price of tags, point creep, and quality of out of state hunts all have lead me to looking to other states for my big game hunting. I only have so much time to hunt in a year, might as well pay a little extra to go somewhere with better quality.

[hunterofelk]

Very difficult to get young people started in hunting, especially on the west side. Only a couple of weekends and they can't miss school.  By the time they are out of school they are busy with starting their life's and hunting doesn't hold any excitement. My two stepsons took the hunter Ed course, but we could never find a free weekend or area to hunt close enough to home. Now they are just not interested.

[haus]

Very difficult to get young people started in hunting, especially on the west side. Only a couple of weekends and they can't miss school.  By the time they are out of school they are busy with starting their life's and hunting doesn't hold any excitement. My two stepsons took the hunter Ed course, but we could never find a free weekend or area to hunt close enough to home. Now they are just not interested.

Tough to take in how quickly things have changed. '98-'99 when weyco closed the gates, it was a pinnacle shift in what to expect with land management from the majors. This also coincided with the impact of the changes implemented on National Forest lands, which were initially applied in the early 1990's, but it took until the late 90's early 2000's to see the effects. These two changes were also impacted by the third, predator populations, due to the loss of the ability to bait and/or use hounds to hunt predators, as well as major restrictions for trapping. The four would be disease. The fifth would be a statewide effect, pay to play. I remember my parents jokingly saying in my early teens that at some point in my life time I'd see a time where you'd have to pay for access just to hunt. 20 years later its the standard, not the exception.

While the first four impacts have taken their established toll for the most part, its the fifth that continues to accelerate rapidly.

Getting young people into hunting now, versus how it was up through the 90's has changed significantly. Our options then seemed unlimited, now it is if you have the money.

[boneaddict]

There are a lot more points than just your one sided argument.   

I have the opportunity to kill a 190 class buck every season on public land with an over the counter tag.   I have the expectations to enjoy my season every year with the hope to fill my freezer with a mature buck with one of the simplest legal primitive weapons I can use.   

[JimmyHoffa]

Getting the young people approved to begin with is tougher and tougher.  They used to hold hunter's ed at the schools and could get a large number of people qualified early on.  Now, there seems to be lots of people waiting for the next year of HE classes. 

[Miles]

There are a lot more points than just your one sided argument.   

I have the opportunity to kill a 190 class buck every season on public land with an over the counter tag.   I have the expectations to enjoy my season every year with the hope to fill my freezer with a mature buck with one of the simplest legal primitive weapons I can use.   

Welcome back... I was starting to think you found a new spot to hang out.

[boneaddict]

Yep, that's discouraged my family, not to mention the conflict with premier sports, something that really didn't exist when I was a kid.  Throw in the cost of a license and tags.  Its not a casual purchase anymore.   Also cant just hop on the tenspeed and hope to have an evenings hunt.   80% of the land where I spent 80% of the time hunting growing up is behind a posted sign now.   

[boneaddict]

Just busy Miles.   Thankyou.   Managed to submit my permit apps today.   

[WAcoueshunter]

Yeah, as others have noted, I think it's a pretty big leap to assume the decline from 144K hunters to 120K hunters in six years is due to declining experience in the field.  In fact, the numbers would argue otherwise - fewer hunters and significantly more harvest in recent years, wouldn't that indicate a better experience? 

[boneaddict]

Nah that's just technology.  Its going to be the end all to hunting

[boneaddict]

There was a big surge around 2007 because of the creation of this site, and as people became addicted to the keyboards and realized that it was more fun to be on here than actually out hunting, the decline began.   It was cheaper, saved gas money, and all sorts of different factors to just sit here and spin stories.

[Bigshooter]

Less hunters, more deer being killed, and you call that a declining experience.   I call it a better experience.

[LeviD1]

Getting the young people approved to begin with is tougher and tougher.  They used to hold hunter's ed at the schools and could get a large number of people qualified early on.  Now, there seems to be lots of people waiting for the next year of HE classes.

 

I think this and tag costs are two of the biggest issues. I know some people trying to get through hunters ed and to get into a field course after the online class since that's almost the only thing you can take it as anymore is so hard. You have to register for the field course at midnight the first night registration opens up because there very very limited classes for the demand. Otherwise you have to wait another year and hope you get registered on time. Its to bad there isnt more classes instead of so much online. I dont have kids but if there were knowledgeable instructors and hands on with empty weapons like when I took it. I would pay $75-100 per child instead of doing online so its worth instructors time to want to teach it. I always grew up around guns and hunting so that part wasnt all knew to me, but there were quite a few kids in the class that were never around it. Sorry I just dont think online classes is a good way to teach gun handling. Tag costs is a big deal to. If you and your spouse say hunt for all big game deer, bear, elk, cougar, and small game and fishing license like I do. Then you got say 2 kids that get deer, bear, or deer, elk or just deer and a small game, and fishing license if their over 14 or whatever the age is. Then if you buy turkey tags at all. Your looking at at least $350 up to probably around $500 just dropping on tags. Then any applications you want to put in for on top of that. Then gear for the family, cost of gas, food and whatever else for the weekend. Thats thousands. Just to have a chance at getting an animal. Thats probably why most people think why do all that when I can go to the store. Or maybe they think instead of spending time and money on hunting lets go on a 1-2 weeks vacation somewhere. Of tag costs dropped to what they were 10-15 years ago I'm sure there would be a lot more people hunting in washington. Cause then you have people who go out of state for maybe some better hunting for a few hundred more but maybe increase their success rate by 40%. Thats my  anyways