collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Numbers Down?!?!?!  (Read 6536 times)

Offline Machias

  • Trapper
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 18929
  • Location: Worley, ID
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2009, 07:31:08 PM »
I'd be interested to see what the age and sex of harvested bears has done, I bet it's quite a few more sows and young bears are taken now then in the past.  I wonder how many cubs are left on their own now.
Fred Moyer

When it's Grim, be the GRIM REAPER!

Offline Abolt338

  • Volunteer Wild Animal Population Control Specialist
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Posts: 151
  • Location: Cashmere, WA / Los Angeles, CA
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2009, 07:39:08 PM »
Quote
Statewide harvest rates eventually returned to their pre-ban levels,

In over ten years it has not returned to preban levels. We are killing nearly 1/3 more now then when we could use dogs and bait.

I should have said "returned and then surpassed" pre-ban levels.  You're right, we actually harvest more bears now than before the ban; but a greater percent of those harvests occur in more open country as incidental kills as a direct result of liberal (meaning loose) policies set due to the ban and the likely decline in harvests that resulted from it.

RW
There's no place like the middle of nowhere!!!

Offline billythekidrock

  • Varmint
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 13440
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2009, 07:44:03 PM »
Quote
Statewide harvest rates eventually returned to their pre-ban levels,

In over ten years it has not returned to preban levels. We are killing nearly 1/3 more now then when we could use dogs and bait.

I should have said "returned and then surpassed" pre-ban levels.  You're right, we actually harvest more bears now than before the ban; but a greater percent of those harvests occur in more open country as incidental kills as a direct result of liberal (meaning loose) policies set due to the ban and the likely decline in harvests that resulted from it.

RW

I thought you meant that, but wasn't sure.

I agree that there are too many incidentals as a result of the cheap tags and longer season.




Offline Abolt338

  • Volunteer Wild Animal Population Control Specialist
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Posts: 151
  • Location: Cashmere, WA / Los Angeles, CA
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #18 on: March 10, 2009, 07:48:24 PM »
Quote
Statewide harvest rates eventually returned to their pre-ban levels,

In over ten years it has not returned to preban levels. We are killing nearly 1/3 more now then when we could use dogs and bait.

I should have said "returned and then surpassed" pre-ban levels.  You're right, we actually harvest more bears now than before the ban; but a greater percent of those harvests occur in more open country as incidental kills as a direct result of liberal (meaning loose) policies set due to the ban and the likely decline in harvests that resulted from it.

RW

I thought you meant that, but wasn't sure.

I agree that there are too many incidentals as a result of the cheap tags and longer season.

And don't forget the few of us (you included) who choose to chase more than one ;)...

RW
There's no place like the middle of nowhere!!!

Offline rasbo

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Aug 2008
  • Posts: 20144
  • Location: Grant county
  • In God I trust...Try taking that away from me!
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2009, 07:50:13 PM »
Quote
Statewide harvest rates eventually returned to their pre-ban levels,

In over ten years it has not returned to preban levels. We are killing nearly 1/3 more now then when we could use dogs and bait.

I should have said "returned and then surpassed" pre-ban levels.  You're right, we actually harvest more bears now than before the ban; but a greater percent of those harvests occur in more open country as incidental kills as a direct result of liberal (meaning loose) policies set due to the ban and the likely decline in harvests that resulted from it.

RW

I thought you meant that, but wasn't sure.

I agree that there are too many incidentals as a result of the cheap tags and longer season.

And don't forget the few of us (you included) who choose to chase more than one ;)...

RW
yeah you dirty rotten killers :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :hello:

Offline billythekidrock

  • Varmint
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 13440
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #20 on: March 10, 2009, 07:56:42 PM »
C'mon now... :chuckle:
I have only filled both tags 4 times and all of them on the Westside. Only one was an incidental. Actually I have only killed one ever as an incidental. All the others were targeted. :chuckle:




Offline hogsniper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2007
  • Posts: 1410
  • Location: Oregon
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #21 on: March 10, 2009, 08:04:01 PM »
I dont believe it for a minute...I saw bears absolutly everywhere last year from 10 one day 6 another, in all elevations and times of year...I saw a total of 34 last year...33 of em in washington...But like said before I doubt the game department knows whats going on either...Too many of the damn things in my opinion, keep on killin em!!!

Offline rasbo

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Aug 2008
  • Posts: 20144
  • Location: Grant county
  • In God I trust...Try taking that away from me!
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #22 on: March 10, 2009, 08:16:39 PM »
I get one per year when I hunt the early hunt,now only the spring hunt and havent been drawn.season used to open july 15 in old hancock then a few days later they would close it down.There is no shortage of bears in there,its just that they dont all sit on the road and wait.the girdling in hancock is quite much.

Offline billythekidrock

  • Varmint
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 13440
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2009, 06:25:22 AM »
I'd be interested to see what the age and sex of harvested bears has done, I bet it's quite a few more sows and young bears are taken now then in the past.  I wonder how many cubs are left on their own now.

I also agree and wonder about that.




Offline lokidog

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 15186
  • Location: Sultan/Wisconsin
Re: Numbers Down?!?!?!
« Reply #24 on: March 13, 2009, 09:30:26 AM »
I dont believe it for a minute...I saw bears absolutly everywhere last year from 10 one day 6 another, in all elevations and times of year...I saw a total of 34 last year...33 of em in washington...But like said before I doubt the game department knows whats going on either...Too many of the damn things in my opinion, keep on killin em!!!

Anytime you want help reducing their numbers, feel free to call!   :drool: :drool:

 


* Advertisement

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal