Idea to fix WA elk hunting.

[bobcat]

How about this- you can only buy an elk tag every other year. Less hunters in the woods, less elk killed each year, and special permits could likely be increased over time, making a person's odds of drawing better. In the off years, spend your time hunting predators more, coyotes, bears, and cougars.

[JimmyHoffa]

I kind of like the current system--OTC general with an occasional extra side of special permit; but for idea argument's sake could see it split into two systems.  Like I mentioned in the other thread, instead of East/West and Bow/Muzz/Mod, could maybe pick General or Special.  If you pick General, you can't apply for permits; and likewise if you pick Special, you can't hunt the general seasons.  Seems like that would up draw odds and reduce crowding in general seasons.  Not really favoring any changes, but would rather be able to be in the elk woods each year than have to sit out every other year or year picked by alphabet.

[bobcat]

JimmyHoffa- I like that idea but I'm not sure the state would, since it would reduce revenue. But, of course, the idea of only hunting elk every other year would do the same. I suppose they'd have to increase prices to balance it out so the revenue coming in doesn't change.

[Miles]

Has anyone defined a problem, or is this just a "solutions looking for a problem" thread?

[bobcat]

Has anyone defined a problem, or is this just a "solutions looking for a problem" thread?

Yes, I think the problem is that every person who would like to kill an elk every year is not doing so. We all want to hunt elk every year and be successful. That's just not happening!

[TheHunt]

I like the idea of 3 point minimum.  But to be honest, I think there should be units where a 5 point minimum should be employed where the bull to cow ratio is like 20 or 30 bull to cow exist.  Right now most are single digit or low teens.

[Miles]

Has anyone defined a problem, or is this just a "solutions looking for a problem" thread?

Yes, I think the problem is that every person who would like to kill an elk every year is not doing so. We all want to hunt elk every year and be successful. That's just not happening!

Killing and hunting are two different things, as I'm sure you are aware of.

Do you realistically think 100% kill ratio is attainable for as you state " every person who would like to kill an elk"?   To me, that is not realistic thinking.  In fact it's not realistic in most if not all states that offer elk hunting.

[Jpmiller]

Has anyone defined a problem, or is this just a "solutions looking for a problem" thread?

Yes, I think the problem is that every person who would like to kill an elk every year is not doing so. We all want to hunt elk every year and be successful. That's just not happening!

Killing and hunting are two different things, as I'm sure you are aware of.

Do you realistically think 100% kill ratio is attainable for as you state " every person who would like to kill an elk"?   To me, that is not realistic thinking.  In fact it's not realistic in most if not all states that offer elk hunting.

I agree with this and don't think I really support the idea that elk hunting in Washington needs fixing but I would like to see some way of getting the east side out of the spike only restriction. I think sportsmen can affect that change through habitat improvement and predator reduction with no changes to the Wdfw system.

[CarbonHunter]

The simple answer to any "perceived problem" can be answered by an increase in the ungulate herd. With more animals there will be more opportunities and more opportunities lead to more success. If you want more animals we will need to improve the habitat and increase the amount of land that is wildlife friendly. There is a lot of farm/range land that could be returned to winter grounds that would help to improve habitat and increase the ungulate population.

The only thing that is standing in the way of making this possible is lack of money. If sportsman were able to buy back the winter grounds and improve the summer ground habitat, all the issues could be solved. The true problem isn't the current permit setup or seasons that we have but the fact that our public lands only support a small amount of animals with the current habitat management plan.

[Wacenturion]

I personally like the system we have. There are way more bigger bulls now then there used to be.  Would I like to see less pressure, of course, but that's not going to happen with out going to a 100% draw system.  Would I like to be able to hunt the east side more often for branched antler bulls sure but then the quality would go down and the average size of bulls would go down.  Does it suck having to hunt the unit you want to only for spikes sure.  Your suggestions are almost exactly what it used to be here and it wasn't any better then.

Sorry, but had to comment.  They may be way more bigger bulls now, but the majority of us will never ever have an opportunity to hunt one.  So what is better?

[Wacenturion]

Not saying this is a solution, but thought I would throw it out for discussion...

What impact would it have on draw odds if we changed the way your hunt choices worked? Everyone still gets assigned their random number, but what if they only ran thru everyone's first choices, then, in the same order, ran thru everyone's second choice, and so on... what it really comes down to, is Should person A be able to draw a hunt as his 4th choice that person B has down as a first choice? Again, I'm not even sure how I feel about the idea, but thought I'd toss it out.

Simple solution....get rid of the moronic FOUR choices.....have only one for any application.  Everyone's odds for the most part get way better across the board for everything.  In my opinion the stupidist thing WDFW ever did.  Strictly for more revenue and less opportunity, but they made it sound sooooo good for us and the resource.

[Mudman]

  1 app per year, pick your poison!

[blackveltbowhunter]

I kind of like the current system--OTC general with an occasional extra side of special permit; but for idea argument's sake could see it split into two systems.  Like I mentioned in the other thread, instead of East/West and Bow/Muzz/Mod, could maybe pick General or Special.  If you pick General, you can't apply for permits; and likewise if you pick Special, you can't hunt the general seasons.  Seems like that would up draw odds and reduce crowding in general seasons.  Not really favoring any changes, but would rather be able to be in the elk woods each year than have to sit out every other year or year picked by alphabet.

This is one of the best ideas I have heard Jimmy.  It could work in the best interest of the herds as well, the 100 series on the east and the 500 series in the west could be OTC general and the rest of the units designated draw only.  The state could make up dollars by increasing the app fee for special hunts.

[Mudman]

Wont work.  Herds would quickly be decimated and hunting would be stopped/restricted.

[dhorn]

The simple answer to any "perceived problem" can be answered by an increase in the ungulate herd. With more animals there will be more opportunities and more opportunities lead to more success. If you want more animals we will need to improve the habitat and increase the amount of land that is wildlife friendly. There is a lot of farm/range land that could be returned to winter grounds that would help to improve habitat and increase the ungulate population.

The only thing that is standing in the way of making this possible is lack of money. If sportsman were able to buy back the winter grounds and improve the summer ground habitat, all the issues could be solved. The true problem isn't the current permit setup or seasons that we have but the fact that our public lands only support a small amount of animals with the current habitat management plan.