Author Topic: Copy of my letter to the game dept. reference goats. (Read 7991 times)

norsepeak · « **on:** February 27, 2009, 10:47:30 PM »

Mr. Rice,
Thank you for sending me a copy of the project. I've read through most of it and found it interesting. However, I believe that we (WDFW, sportsmen and women) are missing out on a very good opportunity.

Just a little background, I have a degree in Wildlife Mgmt. from WSU, with a minor in Range Mgmt. I have been hunting, hiking, camping and recreating in the mountains of Central Washington for 30+ years. I have lived on Chinook Pass for the last 16 years doing those activities. In my career, I'm luck enough that I get to spend 200+ days a year in the mountains on and around Chinook Pass, and in those last 16 years, I've taken it upon myself to monitor the populations and progress of the goats in the Chinook Pass drainage.

Over the last 16 years I have seen a marked increase in the numbers of goats, especially mature Billies in all of the sub-populations on the Pass. I feel like we have a great opportunity to manage this valuable resource while at the same time offering a very special hunting opportunity that could rank up there with the likes of British Columbia and Alaska in terms of trophy potential and quality.

I obtained a copy of the "population Dynamics and Harvest Potential of Mountain Goat Herds in Alberta" study from Will Moore in the Yakima office. I read through it with great interest after a meeting with Mr. Moore. He told me that the study that was done here in Washington was modeled after the Alberta study. I can see where you came up with the acceptable population number for harvest, as it is stated several times in the Alberta study. However, it also states in the study under Management Implications that "management decisions should be herd-specific since goat population dynamics vary among populations despite geographical proximity." I believe that during our phone conversation that you said that in Washington we are not managing for total herds but rather isolated populations that are in close enough proximity to intermingle. Why?

The Alberta study also says "we should only issue tags for populatins that are increasing" which from my personal observations have shown that that is most definetly the case with all sub-populations in the drainage, so why not a couple more tags?

The Alberta study goes on to say "we should prevent harvest of adult females, particularly those older than 5 years." This has been a mainstay of large ungulate management for near 100 years and has proven to be successful, so why don't you issue goat tags to guides and/or outfitters trained in goat identification? Or offer a training program for tag holders? I understand the video that used to be sent out to tag holders was fairly successful, why did we stop doing it?

By offering a few more tags, and by hunting some sub-populations that have mature Billies dying of old age, we could generate more income for the WDFW, support local business like outfitters and lure out-of-state hunters here for trophy quality goat hunts without damaging the resource. One specific example is the herd on Devil's Slide in the Milk Lake drainage. Last summer the herd numbered 35-40 animals with at least 5 mature Billies in the 8-10 year old range. Why not harvest one Billy from this herd? Is it really going to damage the viability of the herd?

Your numbers from your study state that total population for the state is between 2401 and 3184 animals with a best estimate of 2815 animals. Why does the state only offer 18 tags statewide with a harvest of somewhat less than that? Do you not think the population could handle a harvest of at least twice that? 30 some animals out of 3000 give or take?

You mentioned in our phone conversation that a population needs to have at least 100 animals to even consider offering a tag. Here is a little information if found you might be interested in.

Colorado
Unit G2-stable population of 175, 8-12 tags in 2009
Unit G3-Stable population of 125, 8-12 tags in 2009
Unit G4-Declining population of 110, 6 tags in 2009
Unit G5-Stable population of 135, 12 tags in 2009
Unit G6-Stable population of 140, 12 tags in 2009
Unit G7-Stable population of 120, 5 tags in 2009
Unit G9-Stable population of 60, 5 tags in 2009
Unit G12-Stable population of 100, 8 tags in 2009
Unit G13-Stable population of 290, 20 tags in 2009
Unit G15-Stable population of 55, 4 tags in 2009
Unit G16-Stable population of 120, 9 tags in 2009
Unit G17-Stable population of 75, 7 tags in 2009

Here in Washington we are harvesting 1% of most populations numbering 100 or more based on our phone conversation. We are letting a lot of mature goats die of old age. There are a lot more goats than your aerial study suggests, especially in the Chinook Pass drainage, and I think if done properly we could sustain an addition 3-5 tags on the whole drainage. In my meeting with Mr. Moore I was able to tell him about sub-populations that he said were not included in the survey. I believe that in Washington we could have a hunting opportunity to rival any place on earth, and I'd like to help make that possible. Thank you for your time and effort.

norsepeak · « **Reply #1 on:** February 27, 2009, 10:50:38 PM »

What do you guys think? Too much or just enough?

addicted · « **Reply #2 on:** February 27, 2009, 10:54:39 PM »

As long as they take the time to actually read it and implement said ideas I think it's awesome.

norsepeak · « **Reply #3 on:** February 27, 2009, 10:57:09 PM »

who knows, I spent most of a day talking to bios, head bios, regional mangers and so on one day, and I felt like I should have been hitting myself in the head with a hammer all day....I would have got the same accomplished...

billythekidrock · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2009, 06:34:03 AM »

Great letter.

Slider · « **Reply #5 on:** February 28, 2009, 08:39:32 AM »

Looks Good!!! Nail it!!!

shanevg · « **Reply #6 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:16:06 AM »

I think it's a great letter and exactly what WDFW wants. You have a lot of great points that we've all been trying to tell WDFW for years, but you actually have viable research points to back up your arguments. I only wish there was a way that all of us could send in the same letter so that it would come from more than one person. Unluckily, it is all based on your own observations and research, so it is only fitting to come from you. But let me say: Good job!

BTW, do you have a digital copy of some of the research you talk about (e.g. the Alberta Study) I would love to read through it.

Buckrub · « **Reply #7 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:40:51 AM »

WDFW is about managing hunters and non game species.

One needs to look at the spike only in E. Washington. They have never met the goals of bull to cow ratio.

You think it might have something to do with no spike escapement numbers? look at the bull harvest for the GMU's and then look at the bull permits.
You reference Colorado....look into the elk management vs: ours.

A good letter but I have NO faith in the dept. to do anything that makes any sense at all.

KNOPHISH · « **Reply #8 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:12:05 PM »

Excellent letter but I think the WDFW will not take it under consideration even with your qualifications. That's just my thoughts as they usually don't seem to follow the science. I totally agree with you. I remember when there were used to be more goat tags than sheep tags, now it's more sheep but it sounds like the goat populations may larger. Part of the WDFW new proposals was for 2 raffles tags & I disagreed with that saying if your going to give another tag make it in the normal draw.

videoman · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2009, 09:18:36 AM »

I flew with the WDFG about 2yrs ago on a goat survey up in the Chelan unit. We spotted 180 goats in North Chelan and decided to fly South Chelan and found almost 200 goats and it is not even a unit we can hunt. Plus in the North Chelan survey we had to find some via the radio collar. That tells you we are not even seeing all the goats. The game department is being ran by a bunch of non-hunters that do not understand game management. Its time for a reality check.

WDFW-SUX · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2009, 09:20:15 AM »

BINGO>

Its really sad how incompetant they are proving themselves to be.

norsepeak · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2009, 01:29:22 PM »

Shane, I only have a paper copy of the Alberta study. It is interesting, but it's very technical and not well written. It seems like they did a good study, but they looked at the wrong things, and they try to quantify EVERYTHING, which doesn't always work when you are dealing withwild animals that are only motivated by two things, food, and safety. They don' always fit into a "model"

boneaddict · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2009, 01:37:34 PM »

Good sound letter.

SuperDave · « **Reply #13 on:** March 01, 2009, 08:19:10 PM »

Great letter! Sounds to me like you know more about the herds than they do and they don't want to be out done! Great job on the research.

gasman · « **Reply #14 on:** March 01, 2009, 08:33:21 PM »

Thanks Norespeak, You are a valuable asset to the hunting community.

That letter is great and on the spot, now we just have to educate the WDFW

to understand where we are coming from as sportsman's, and you hit the nail on the head.

actionshooter · « **Reply #15 on:** March 01, 2009, 08:36:30 PM »

Thanks for trying to educate the WDFW, What your doing can't hurt, hopefully they actually look at it.

Falcon · « **Reply #16 on:** March 02, 2009, 07:21:57 PM »

NP:

Great letter with some sound thought involved. If the game dept doesn't start thinking about some population issues, I fear that the almighty mtn goat will soon be a non game animal in this state.

I have been blessed to have harvested 2 nice billies. The first in 84 in the Pratt
River which has been closed for over 15 years, and the second and my final back in 99 in the Coral Pass unit. My billy was shot out of a herd of about 30 goats !

Its a shame that the guys that really want a shot at this beautiful animal may never get a chance if the dept doesn't stop shutting down every unit because they haven't taken the time to survey them. If thats the case, let some trained volunteers get it done !

Ridgerunner · « **Reply #17 on:** March 02, 2009, 08:10:41 PM »

Great letter, better to do something than just sit back and complain.

norsepeak · « **Reply #18 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:31:06 PM »

nice goat falcon. It just makes me want to spend my money out of state, where they actually care about the animals and the hunter!!!

shanevg · « **Reply #19 on:** March 02, 2009, 11:21:23 PM »

That's a real nice goat Falcon, what does he score? Hopefully I can get drawn someday and get one like that on my wall. If I can't get drawn I'm just going to have to save up for BC or Alaska (or get lucky in Montana or Colorado I guess - but they just don't grow the same caliber trophies.)

Falcon · « **Reply #20 on:** March 03, 2009, 08:48:42 PM »

Thanks guys,

That goat was shot 84 in the Pratt River. He was shot early season, so his hair isn't real long. I haven't had him scored. My taxidermist said he looked to be around 6 years old. Horns measure 8.5 x 5. Not real long, but heavy enough to look good on the wall.

A mtn goat hunt is truley a once in a lifetime experience. I wish more guys had the opportunity to hunt these great animals !

TeacherMan · « **Reply #21 on:** March 03, 2009, 09:14:27 PM »

That sounds great. Maybe someday I will be able to use your services because of this letter. Very sound and I like that you have actual reference material, not just emotion and opinion.

norsepeak · « **Reply #22 on:** March 03, 2009, 10:08:00 PM »

we'll see what happens, been 4 days and no response yet. He probably just deleted it anyway....who knows.

popeshawnpaul · « **Reply #23 on:** March 04, 2009, 08:36:25 PM »

Your letter is spot on regarding the science Norse. Many are reading that study like it is the managment bible. It is not. It is a good study to consider but actual numbers like you gave regarding Colorado are much better because it's a tride and true study in progress. The population is sustained and they are taking a larger percentage of the goats than we do.

I would be willing to bet their population is wrong. Dead wrong. I would get there is over 5000 goats in this state, maybe more. I base this on all my time in the mountains and goats I see everwhere from the alpine lakes to chelan. I truly don't think we see many of the goats. This type of managment is costing the wdfw lots of money. It's also costing hunters our valuable resources. If we are not going to give out any tags, why do we need the wdfw managers? Think about that one when you make your management recommendations.

I guess I'm putting my wildlife managment degree to good use after all...

popeshawnpaul · « **Reply #24 on:** March 04, 2009, 11:05:10 PM »

I wanted to also add that I don't buy the issue that they are concerned about female goats surviving. I think that is short sighted. It would be very easy to require people watch a video or training seminar on male identification before they go hunting. If we ensured that people only took males, we could offer quite a few more permits under the department's way of thinking. That would be easy and not cost much.

andrew_12gauge · « **Reply #25 on:** March 04, 2009, 11:09:26 PM »

when have you ever known the wdfw to take the easy way of game management, c'mon pope you know better

shanevg · « **Reply #26 on:** March 05, 2009, 09:39:50 AM »

Emailed WDFW concerning the lack of funds for proper goat research. In a nut shell I suggested what we have all been suggesting here: a. Get some volunteers (perhaps through the Master Hunter program) to help with wildlife research. b. Require up front tag costs for OIL tags so they can gain interest in addition to the $5 application fee so they have more funds for research. and c. Look at how other states (e.g. Colorado) are successfully managing their goat populations.

Not that I really think they will listen to me, but the more often they hear it the better. I honestly am shocked that the WDFW doesn't require up front tag costs just to get the interest as they seem to try to think of anything they can think of to suck money out of us.

norsepeak · « **Reply #27 on:** March 05, 2009, 04:44:55 PM »

I'd also like to see them do like other states and only offer "up to a certain % of tags" to non-residents. They way it is now it is POSSIBLE that all of the goat tags in the state go non-residents....not a good system.

News:

Advertisement

Author Topic: Copy of my letter to the game dept. reference goats. (Read 7991 times)

Advertisement

Quick Links

Recent Topics