Spike Only units?

[logger]

you see hundreds of bulls? where?

[270Shooter]

you see hundreds of bulls? where?

Oak creek feeding station.

[jdb]

where is the south fork of the bethal?

[logger]

definatly not trying to get in a long peter contest,I myself [personal opinion] think that hundreds of bulls in oakcreek is pushin it, I maybe wrong  . I hunted it back when it was any bull and we didn't have all that much problem getting a couple a year. does anybody no what the real bull to cow ratio is?  southfork of oakcreek i stated that wrong is what I call and I'm sure it's not right is up the 1400 and stay left and you end up out in the sage basically above trout lodge.thats probaly not the technical term,just what i call it. I just think that continually killin off the calf crop is not a good idea, once again i am no bio. just personal opinion.

[colockumelk]

Spike only has yes given us more branch bulls.  But it doesn't work because everywhere else in this nation it's either any bull or 3pt min. and they have plenty of branch bulls to go around.  So why can't we?  I have three reasons for this.
1.)Tribal hunting.  We are the ONLY STATE that tribes have unrestricted hunting off their reservation.
2.) Road access.  There are far to many roads that lead to no where.  They need to keep the main roads open and close down the roads to nowhere.  This will help with three things.
    a.  During hunting season it will give the animals a place to escape to.  Right now ATV's can follow them anywhere.  How do  we expect to grow branch bulls if the spikes don't have anywhere to escape to?
    b. Most poachers (both tribal and non-tribal) don't go far from the roads.  Restrict their road access and you restrict their poaching access and possibilities. 
    c.  If people have to actually get out and walk many well quite hunting which will help out with the next issue.  Also with fewer roads the elk and deer wont be nearly so stressed out all year and will thus be in better health (ie able to fight off hair loss and other diseases) and will birth more fawns and calves.
3.) GO TO PERMIT ONLY.  WE have the highest hunter to elk ration in the world.  We have too many hunters and not enough ellk.  Easy enough cut down the numbers of hunters.  If the spikes live then our branch numbers will begin to sky rocket after a few years.  Determine how many branch bull elk you want harvested every year and put that amount of permits out.  Example lets say in the Observatory you determine that 100 bulls can be harvested.  With a 10% success rate this  means that you could put out 1000 branch bull tags between the three seasons.  Or even if youwanted to play it safe give out 750 tags a year.  Then have a separate draw system for cow permits with a separate point system and give out the amount of tags just like you did for the bulls.  I would love this.  I'd rather get to hunt elk every other year or every three years if I knew it was going to be a quality hunt than hunt every year that has poor quality. 

If the WDFW would do what I just mentioned we would get to see hunting like you see in Montana etc.  But they all have to be implemented in order for this to happen.  And who knows maybe if #'s 1 and 2 happened then maybe the third option would be needed.  Just my   What do you all think?

[bobcat]

Well I'm all for the permit only any bull seasons rather than the spike only general seasons we have now, but just so you know, at least two other states use spike only management with their elk...Utah and Oregon.

[fc2038]

Hey logger,

 Was out there this weekend at at the station I counted 176 bulls just down by the hay. If you head out towards the sheep station on the left side there is another viewing opportunity right before the junction with 410 I counted 43 more bulls there. (Branched) The magic total for the weekend was 219 branched antlered bulls. Those were the ones I could see. Can't get behind the station to count all them. Did not want to stay and wait until they fed to see all the others coming out of the hills. One thing this year I have noticed was the lack of spikes at the station. Only counted 4 spikes. So the spike only idea is working to increase the number of larger mature breading bulls in the herd. you should make a trip out to the feeding station to see for yourself. Like I said I remember going to the station after hunting season in the late 80's and early 90's and those animals were shot up. Ten bulls at the station was a good day.

Clock-- I agree with the permit only idea. just like eastern Oregon, and a lot of other states for that matter

[jdb]

Spike only has yes given us more branch bulls.  But it doesn't work because everywhere else in this nation it's either any bull or 3pt min. and they have plenty of branch bulls to go around.  So why can't we?  I have three reasons for this.
1.)Tribal hunting.  We are the ONLY STATE that tribes have unrestricted hunting off their reservation.
2.) Road access.  There are far to many roads that lead to no where.  They need to keep the main roads open and close down the roads to nowhere.  This will help with three things.
    a.  During hunting season it will give the animals a place to escape to.  Right now ATV's can follow them anywhere.  How do  we expect to grow branch bulls if the spikes don't have anywhere to escape to?
    b. Most poachers (both tribal and non-tribal) don't go far from the roads.  Restrict their road access and you restrict their poaching access and possibilities. 
    c.  If people have to actually get out and walk many well quite hunting which will help out with the next issue.  Also with fewer roads the elk and deer wont be nearly so stressed out all year and will thus be in better health (ie able to fight off hair loss and other diseases) and will birth more fawns and calves.
3.) GO TO PERMIT ONLY.  WE have the highest hunter to elk ration in the world.  We have too many hunters and not enough ellk.  Easy enough cut down the numbers of hunters.  If the spikes live then our branch numbers will begin to sky rocket after a few years.  Determine how many branch bull elk you want harvested every year and put that amount of permits out.  Example lets say in the Observatory you determine that 100 bulls can be harvested.  With a 10% success rate this  means that you could put out 1000 branch bull tags between the three seasons.  Or even if youwanted to play it safe give out 750 tags a year.  Then have a separate draw system for cow permits with a separate point system and give out the amount of tags just like you did for the bulls.  I would love this.  I'd rather get to hunt elk every other year or every three years if I knew it was going to be a quality hunt than hunt every year that has poor quality. 

If the WDFW would do what I just mentioned we would get to see hunting like you see in Montana etc.  But they all have to be implemented in order for this to happen.  And who knows maybe if #'s 1 and 2 happened then maybe the third option would be needed.  Just my   What do you all think?

You make some very good points and I agree on most, but I cant agree that spike only hasnt worked. It has greatly increased the trohpy potential of the yakima herd imo.

[colockumelk]

Thanks bobcat.  I didn't know that.  Now I do.  I need to look into Oregon and Utah and see how well their spike only programs work.  And if so what is different than ours if it works well.

JDB I'm not saying it hasn't worked to increase the amount of branch bulls.  There is no doubt about it.  I'm just saying if they went to permit only then they'd be able to give out alot more tags and you'd stand a chance at getting drawn every other year or three.  Just like in Montana.  I'd rather have a good quality hunt every three years than a crappy hunt every year.  As it is how many people have ten points and still havn't been drawn.  In many areas they give out a rediculously low amount of tags.  I also thought about this.  What if.

For the the permit system.  You had an A tag and a B tag.  With the A tag you put in all your branch bull choices.  For your B tag you put in all your antlerless choices.  With the A tag there would be preference points just like now.  If you didn't get drawn for your A tag you would automatically be eligible for the B tag drawings.  For the B tag there is no preference points and thus if you got drawn it wouldn't take away from your preference points.  Sort of like how the second doe tag used to be. 

And instead of giving out only 10 bull permits here and there in each unit.  Instead they figure out how many bulls and cows can be harvested each year and then they give out 5 times as many tags since the average success rate is only 10% but this gives you some fluff in case there's a freak year like an early winter and you have like 40% success rates.  Since the spikes would be living through the year every year you would instantly see a dramatic rise in the amount of brow tine bulls out there.  Thus every year for the first five years or so you would see more and more branch tags being issued especially once all the bugs were worked out.  Eventually the numbers would platue but not until they'd be giving out like 5 times more tags than they do now.  Think about it every year in the Colockum 300 or so spikes are killed.  If those spikes were allowed to become branch bulls then that's three hundred branch bulls being produced a year.  Now subtract 10% natural mortality (30) and subract current Indian Harvest numbers (40 a year.  Ha wishfull thinking) then that's 230 spikes that live to become branch bulls.  That means you could give out 600 bull tags a YEAR between the three seasons.  Wouldn't that be nice.  This would also mean that all the other areas would also be able to see an increase in those same amount of numbers.  Currently they only give out like 30 branch bull tags a year in the Colockum.  That's a increase of 20 times more tags. 

But the revenue of the WDFW would go down and since all they care about is more money and a bunch of cry babies would piss and moan about it this will never happen and thus all we have to look forward to is spike or antlerless and maybe if we're lucky every 8 years or so we get the opportunity to hunt for a branch bull.  Yay.  If some one disagrees or see where there might be a problem let me know.  Because I might be bringing this to the attention of the WDFW.  And any flaws in it that you all see would help me out greatly.   

[Curly]

WDFW usually does what the majority of people want them to do.  I doubt they will ever go to permit only for elk.  With the spike only general OTC tag, people can at least get out there and hunt every year........and that is what most people tell WDFW that they want.  And it works pretty well for elk.

I wouldn't mind permit only for elk in E WA, but at least the current way is still okay for the health of the herds.  It does seem like they could have a higher amount of permits than they currently give out though.

BTW - pretty much no matter what they do w/ permits or OTC tags (w/in reason) the elk hunting in this state will never be as good as other states in the West like Montana, Oregon, ID, Utah, CO........those states have a lot more habitat and much, much more land available for the elk.  We have too many people w/ less area for elk every year.

[colockumelk]

You are right as we will never have as many elk as Montana because of the land issue. I also think that many people still want OTC tags because they think that if it went to the permit system their way of thinking is that there would still only be 8 or 9 tags per area so they'd only get to hunt elk every 8 years.  Under my plan this would not be tgrue and they'd have alot more tags and thus get drawn alot more often than people do now.   I think that if they did do the permit thing for one there would be less hunters because many would just quite because of no OTC.  And I think that between the branch and cow permits people would most likely get drawn every year if not every other year.  I think that if someone could make this case of quality every two years over quantity every year kind of thing people would be willing to do this. 

This opinion by the way is strictly for the east side.  Obviously the west side has excellant elk numbers and since it's not broke why fix it?  Just my  .  Keep the ideas coming I'll need all I can get. 

[elksnout]

Alot of info here to have read and alot of good ideas to be sure. It is clear that Washington hunters think alot of their elk herds which is good. I've hunted this state for 38 of my 50 years and I remember longer seasons, no antler restictions and all roads being open too. All of my Washington hunting has been here in region five. Do any of you recall when elk season was two weeks long and the last four or five days late buck was open too ? A legal bull over here needs to have 3 points on one side to be legal. You sure just do not see horns and start shooting.... I start counting on  at  the nearest brow tine and when I count "three" pick a spot and shoot. Just the opposite for you east side guys I guess. Here's my take: I would rather hunt elk every other year or every third year and have a high quality hunt for a chance at a really nice bull and to have less hunters about than go every year and feel like I need to first out think them before I can concentrate on the elk. I hunt a road closure area by choice. Gate all spurs period. It makes a difference. Keeps the poachers out as well. Each year brings more and more pressure to our elk herds. Everyone knows cougars are getting to them, hell black bears too. More land being bought up and developed etc. I do not know much about the Indian thing other than what I hear. Since signing onto this site though I've learned plenty. Enough to know it's a big problem. One that we hunters most likely will not solve any time soon. In the end it's the critters and those that care for them the most who will suffer. 

[colockumelk]

Elksnout couldn't you have argued with me a little?  What's the fun in agreeing?    Just kidding.  You made a very good point that I have failed to make because I havn't been around that long. The fact that back in the day the seasons were longer and there were far more restrictions and our herds were strong and we had good hunting.  (When I say we I mean others who were alive back then)  So what is the difference between then and now.

I think there are many differences.
1.) We have more hunters now than we did back then.
2.) With the advent of ATV's all those super nasty roads are now accessible to most people.
        - I don't know if there are more roads now then there was back then but because of the ATV's  it means guys can go a lot more places than back in the day so this makes closing the roads more important.
3.)  I think that there is more poaching now then there was.  With the upsurge in ATV's snowmobiles night vision etc it has made it alot easier to poach then ever before. 

So like I said before the only way to control this is to control the numbers of hunters and control the amount of access available.  IE close the roads so the poachers, and Indians are kept out as well as the animals get some actual escapement during hunting season. 

So it's agreed then it'll be permit only for now on.  I'll just let the game department know how it's gonna be on March 6th.  I'm sure that will go over pretty smooth and I don't foresee any hangups with our plan.  Of course I hope you all know that last paragraph was

[elksnout]

Nah. Do not want to argue with my fellow elkies. At least not today. Too tired. It appears that there are just alot of guys on this site who truely care about our states wildlife. I've found that everybody hunts for different reasons. Hell we have a guy or two in our annual elk camp who just want to get away from their wives. And maybe that's how it should be. Killing an elk isn't the only reason to go. At least not for me.One of the best parts of elk camp is the evenings around the wood stove. There was one night when I went out to empty the bladder and I just stood there in the dark looking back at the wall tents and listening to the laughter thinking how great it was to be there. Yeah ,I want a bull to be sure and our group hunts darn hard to put them on the meat pole but that week each November recharges my batteries to get me through to the next fall. It' just a great time to share with friends and family. And we all need to keep these traditions going no matter what the weapon of choice. Fight the good fight and help keep our own backyards clean. Show a high level of sportsmanship, hunt safely and understand why you are out there. At that point , I feel we have a chance to lobby for positive changes to the way our wildlife is managed. Crap.... now I'am wishing it was fall again.

[Yak-NDN]

Think about it every year in the Colockum 300 or so spikes are killed.  If those spikes were allowed to become branch bulls then that's three hundred branch bulls being produced a year.  Now subtract 10% natural mortality (30) and subract current Indian Harvest numbers (40 a year.  Ha wishfull thinking) then that's 230 spikes that live to become branch bulls.  That means you could give out 600 bull tags a YEAR between the three seasons.  Wouldn't that be nice.  This would also mean that all the other areas would also be able to see an increase in those same amount of numbers.  Currently they only give out like 30 branch bull tags a year in the Colockum.  That's a increase of 20 times more tags. 

300 or so spikes a year what is the real problem? I am back in town and it looks like I missed out big time and I see we now have some new members. I don't want this to turn into the same squabble as last week so I will just ask you about the Boldt decision and how you think that will play out with game, I don't see that Yakama tribal members are taking 300 a year off the reservation and the state is doing it in one unit just with spikes. What about the other tags?  What about the other units?
Use your imagination and insert elk or deer in the Boldt decision and it also defines in common with.


Of this, Judge Boldt wrote: "By dictionary definition and as intended and used in the Indian treaties and in this decision, 'in common with' means sharing equally the opportunity to take fish…therefore, non-treaty fishermen shall have the opportunity to take up to 50% of the harvestable number of fish…and treaty right fishermen shall have the opportunity to take up to the same percentage."