Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota

[bobcat]

Everyone knows the WDFW manages for maximum revenue and NOT for the appropriate number of deer and elk in each GMU.

[quadrafire]

I would not be in favor of that much of fee increase. I would be behind an OTC spring bear though.
On a side note why does GMU 113 have no spring season? Griz recovery area??

[boneaddict]

That would be my guess quad

[Mtnwalker]

Sounds like a good idea to me, except I don't agree with the fee increases. I think those will come no matter what so no sense in offering them up to begin with. I keep seeing guys say "that's just a drop in the bucket" or "its not enough to bring the deer back" but that's how politics work. The anti gun people aren't coming out and trying to take all of our guns right now, but they're chipping away at it piece by piece. I don't think it's realistic to expect a comprehensive reform where all of the sudden we can dog run cougars and bait bears and kill wolfs, but chipping away in small positive steps like more spring bear tags I believe is doable.

[GoldenRing270]

Maybe the non-resident price goes to far. What if it were more proportional to a multi-season deer permit. I believe its $43 for a regular deer tag and something like $140 for a multi-season. So since a regular bear tag is $24 would it be reasonable for OTC spring bear tags to cost $80 or $90?

[Mtnwalker]

Another step we could push for would be to eliminate the "Only 1 of which may be taken in Eastern Washington" clause from certain gmu's in regards to the fall bear tags.

[hunter399]

I agree with more spring bear tags,don't agree with fee increases wdfw wastes enough of our money.And we need more cougar hunting,I think there numbers of how many cats we have is way off ,quota system is good,but cats that are killed by wdfw as problem cougar should not count towards quota,which would cause harvest numbers to go up a little , but not enough to hurt cat population.

[JLS]

I think all these ideas that really only target single issues potentially causing declines are not that helpful.  A comprehensive plan for managing predators, hunter harvest, and habitat by region is what we need.  Prior to developing this plan we need herd objectives by region or GMU...target population size, buck:doe ratio, proportion of mature bucks in herd etc.

You would think this info (herd objectives) would be included in the mule deer management plan...but its not...its 150 pages of junk, and the only specific numbers or goals provided are when they talk budgets and revenue 

Agreed.  If one wants anything meaningful to happen, there should be a push for an adaptive management plan and a willingness to accept periodic sacrifices that come with them. 

There is absolutely no reason why additional bear opportunity should be more expensive. 

Those of you who want hounds allowed for cougar hunting (myself included), should be talking to your legislators and not living in the past about what was or wasn't said 20+ years ago.  Citizen's initiatives can be repealed by the legislature, not a departmental entity.  Focus your efforts there.

If you want cougar quotas increased, talk to your commissioners.  The last increase was reversed because procedure was not followed.

All of the talk about requiring people to hunt predators in order to get a deer tag is silly.  It is not legally defensible, and would only serve to put a very negative light on hunters as a whole.  Not to mention, recruitment of new hunters would suffer IMO.  There is nothing stopping anyone from shooting as many coyotes as they want, and bear hunter participation is very low relative to opportunity.  Mandating people take part in this is a recipe for disaster and lawsuits.

[Lowedog]

For quite a few years I have mostly been a lurker on this site.  Actually have lurked more this year than I have the last 5 or so years. 

I keep seeing this topic pop up with ideas on how to increase mule deer numbers.  The common thing I see is that for the most part, hunters aren't willing to do the one thing that would be the most beneficial for mule deer.  That is to go away from an OTC general season for mule deer. 

All one has to do is take a look at 20 years of harvest reports  to see that us hunters have killed pretty close to the same amount of deer from year to year.  Actually over the last several years, even with approximately 20,000 less hunters we have been killing around the same numbers of deer state wide as we did for the last 20 years.  Fewer hunters are killing the same amount of deer means of higher success rates.  It of course cycles up and down and you can see a drop in harvest in a year that had a high success rate the previous year or two.  The last 3 years show high success rates. 

This discussion has been going on for as long as discussion boards regarding hunting in this state have been around.  I still feel the best way to effectively help mule deer numbers rebound is to reduce hunter harvest.  Most likely, WDFW won't stop selling deer tags and most likely, hunters won't stop buying them so we will still be having this discussion for decades to come. 

[Skyvalhunter]

One word for that "points" of which people aren't willing to give up.

[boneaddict]

They are the devil

[boneaddict]

Sound thoughts JLS and Lowedog

[Mtnwalker]

For quite a few years I have mostly been a lurker on this site.  Actually have lurked more this year than I have the last 5 or so years. 

I keep seeing this topic pop up with ideas on how to increase mule deer numbers.  The common thing I see is that for the most part, hunters aren't willing to do the one thing that would be the most beneficial for mule deer.  That is to go away from an OTC general season for mule deer. 

All one has to do is take a look at 20 years of harvest reports  to see that us hunters have killed pretty close to the same amount of deer from year to year.  Actually over the last several years, even with approximately 20,000 less hunters we have been killing around the same numbers of deer state wide as we did for the last 20 years.  Fewer hunters are killing the same amount of deer means of higher success rates.  It of course cycles up and down and you can see a drop in harvest in a year that had a high success rate the previous year or two.  The last 3 years show high success rates. 

This discussion has been going on for as long as discussion boards regarding hunting in this state have been around.  I still feel the best way to effectively help mule deer numbers rebound is to reduce hunter harvest.  Most likely, WDFW won't stop selling deer tags and most likely, hunters won't stop buying them so we will still be having this discussion for decades to come.

Unfortunately harvest success rates don't directly correlate with deer population numbers, but they will use it against us as it is a very easy statistic for most people to look at and say "see, hunting is still just as good as it was." But in reality when I used to see 15 bucks before I shot my 1, and now I see maybe 3 bucks before I shoot my 1, that 80% reduction of bucks in the field isn't shown in my hunter success report. Technology is getting better, optics are amazing and guys are shooting 800 yards now on a regular basis. Backpack/backcountry  hunting is almost mainstream, Guys are working harder than ever  to harvest their deer and all of that I believe is supporting Sort of a false narrative when it comes to harvest numbers vs actual population

[GoldenRing270]

I agree Lowedog. We hunters need to harvest less mule deer and the best way to control harvest would be to go away from the OTC tags but as you pointed out and as is clear in the thread I started about ending doe harvest most hunters are not willing to make that sacrifice. Most hunters blame predators which is why I posted this idea up.

Mother nature has been harsh these last few years. Hopefully we have some easy fire seasons and fairly mild winters to come.

[bobcat]

I agree that what I said about requiring a certain number of predators be killed would never happen. I just like the idea. I'd like the incentive, myself. I always plan to hunt predators but then I just don't find the time. I also agree with the comments about doing away with the general season. Mule deer needs to be permit only, so the number of deer killed can be controlled by GMU. I'm afraid that would end up putting excessive hunting pressure on blacktails and whitetails though, so we'd actually need permit only for ALL deer hunting, or at least some sort of quota system.