collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota  (Read 10779 times)

Offline GoldenRing270

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 98
  • Location: Methow
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2017, 03:20:50 PM »
Antler point restrictions don't work and besides how is 4 pt min. not an elimination of opportunity? Hunters can no longer shoot mature 3 points. Sounds like an elimination of opportunity to me just not as beneficial as some other ideas like draw only.

More aggressive predator control would be helpful but today's mule deer hunters have it made, affordable optics, laser rangefinders, lightweight backpack gear, significantly improved archery equipment, multi-season tags and the list goes on. If we hunters continue harvesting at the rate we have been mule deer are doomed and that is how we lose the sport.

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 9104
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #46 on: November 28, 2017, 03:58:22 PM »
I wish someone would explain to me how you build the herd with APR. Last I heard bucks don't give birth unless you are telling me does are going unbred. Are they?
Bruce Vandervort

Offline jnordwell

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 114
  • Location: Camas Washington
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #47 on: November 28, 2017, 04:14:58 PM »
The verdict is in and it's clear that mule deer hunters would love to see more opportunity to hunt predators and WDFW loves revenue, another idea came to mind that could to be a great compromise. How would everyone feel about increasing the spring bear quota? Lets say the WDFW adds 500 special permits for spring bear tags and spreads them across different east cascade foothills gmu's but in order to get the WDFW on board with this here's the kicker: If drawn residents could purchase the tags for $222.00 (the cost of a non-resident bear tag). Also, if you punch your tag this would count as your eastern Washington bear and you could no longer hunt bear in the fall unless you headed west. The current spring bear tags we have in place would stay the same and still cost the normal $24 for residents. In MeatEater podcast episode 68 Steve talks with Pat Durkin about how a higher percentage of fawns are killed in the spring by bears than coyotes. They are in Wisconsin and I'm unsure if it is the same here in Washington but I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Do what Oregon does have a section of the state with a high population and over the counter spring season.. same price as a fall bear tag. I won’t pay more to hunt something. If they feel it’s a problem then it shouldn’t cost us more for there lack of game management. Chase bears with dogs...again and cats...

Offline Ridgeratt

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 5887
  • IBEW 73 (Retired) Burden on the working class.
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #48 on: November 28, 2017, 04:50:35 PM »
They're giving bounties on wolves in Idaho, albeit indirectly.  I don't need a direct bounty from WDFW, but if mule deer groups want to help they could do something like the co-op in Idaho.

Maybe I shouldn't use the word "bounty" and substitute incentive instead. 


found it, this is what I'm talking about when I say bounty

https://www.foundationforwildlifemanagement.org/

I talked to one of your neighbors. He was hunting Idaho and got checked by the IDFW Leo. He asked if any of them had a wolf tag? One in the party did he was told to use it on the last wolf he shot!!   :chuckle: :chuckle:

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3604
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #49 on: November 28, 2017, 05:54:21 PM »
"If you want to have meaningful impact on recruitment of older age class deer, you HAVE to provide more escapement.  This comes through restricted access, shorter seasons, reduced hunter numbers, or a combination thereof.  There is no free lunch."

How about through aggressive predator, especially lion, reduction?  How about 4x minimum?  Why won't you accept these as viable options?  If the only tactics we bring to the table is the elimination of hunter opportunity, then we and our sport is doomed.   :bash:
I completely disagree...and history is on my side.  Until the early 1900's there was virtually no regulation on hunting and game populations were severely depleted across the US.  This prompted hunters to support regulations (including severe limits on opportunity), excise taxes, the formation of fish and game agencies to manage wildlife (and hunter harvest!)...ultimately resulting in a great expansion of hunting opportunity that exists today.  Also note - these severely depleted game populations occurred at a time when there were numerous predator control/extermination programs and bounties...so even though hunters back in the 1920's basically exterminated wolves...game was still extremely sparse before hunter harvest was more regulated. 

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline KFhunter

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34512
  • Location: NE Corner
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #50 on: November 28, 2017, 05:55:46 PM »
The early 1900's have like zero relevance to today

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3604
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #51 on: November 28, 2017, 06:00:14 PM »
I wish someone would explain to me how you build the herd with APR. Last I heard bucks don't give birth unless you are telling me does are going unbred. Are they?
As previously mentioned...APR is allowing for some bucks to survive.  My own observations of post hunt herd composition lead me to believe there are many units where virtually no bucks would survive if there was not an APR.  If no bucks survived or very, very few...you would have issues with unbred does and ultimately rapidly declining populations.

I do not believe APRs are effective at increasing trophy potential...because nearly all the harvest gets shifted to the age 2 or 3+ bucks as opposed to being spread across all the age classes.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3604
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #52 on: November 28, 2017, 06:05:00 PM »
The early 1900's have like zero relevance to today
In the context of needing to regulate hunter harvest to maintain, recover, or increase game populations it is absolutely relevant and a clear cut example demonstrating the success of such actions. 
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline GoldenRing270

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 98
  • Location: Methow
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #53 on: November 28, 2017, 06:13:23 PM »
Our past mistakes are never relevant to today. We can't learn anything from the past and history doesn't repeat itself. Also we should never think about the future. We should only focus on what we can get away with today.

Offline KFhunter

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34512
  • Location: NE Corner
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #54 on: November 28, 2017, 06:28:05 PM »
I wish someone would explain to me how you build the herd with APR. Last I heard bucks don't give birth unless you are telling me does are going unbred. Are they?
As previously mentioned...APR is allowing for some bucks to survive.  My own observations of post hunt herd composition lead me to believe there are many units where virtually no bucks would survive if there was not an APR.  If no bucks survived or very, very few...you would have issues with unbred does and ultimately rapidly declining populations.

I do not believe APRs are effective at increasing trophy potential...because nearly all the harvest gets shifted to the age 2 or 3+ bucks as opposed to being spread across all the age classes.

The only thing 3pt minimum's do is leave a bunch of 2 pts laying around to rot.


It's about as smart as regulation forcing you to release all salmon with intact adipose fins, and you have sea lions and dogfish following the boat.

Offline GoldenRing270

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 98
  • Location: Methow
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #55 on: November 28, 2017, 06:50:10 PM »
Oh and if we hunters harvest fewer mule deer then it will only leave more for the predators so we should continue to kill them at the exact same rate so that the population continues to decline until there aren't any deer left for the predators to get their grubby paws on. (feeling sarcastic tonight :sry:)

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 9104
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #56 on: November 28, 2017, 10:48:25 PM »
I wish someone would explain to me how you build the herd with APR. Last I heard bucks don't give birth unless you are telling me does are going unbred. Are they?
As previously mentioned...APR is allowing for some bucks to survive.  My own observations of post hunt herd composition lead me to believe there are many units where virtually no bucks would survive if there was not an APR.  If no bucks survived or very, very few...you would have issues with unbred does and ultimately rapidly declining populations.

That is pure imagination on your part. Take right now. In WA mule deer are all 3 pint minimum. That leaves spikes, two points and surviving larger bucks to breed. How could you possibly ever observe what you say you see you believe in.
I cannot believe there is anyplace where hunters are so successful they could take out every buck or even most.
It takes very few bucks to service a lot of does.

Oh and if we hunters harvest fewer mule deer then it will only leave more for the predators so we should continue to kill them at the exact same rate so that the population continues to decline until there aren't any deer left for the predators to get their grubby paws on. (feeling sarcastic tonight :sry:)

The plain fact is to get more bucks you need more does so stop doing that but don't do the work of the animal rights people by killing hunting.
Bruce Vandervort

Offline KFhunter

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34512
  • Location: NE Corner
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #57 on: November 28, 2017, 10:50:29 PM »
to get more does you need less predators

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 9104
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #58 on: November 28, 2017, 10:57:38 PM »
 :yeah:
Bruce Vandervort

Offline Skyvalhunter

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Posts: 16009
  • Location: Sky valley/Methow
Re: Another idea for Washington Muley's: Increased spring bear quota
« Reply #59 on: November 29, 2017, 05:18:49 AM »
to get more does you need less predators
To get less predators you need longer predator seasons and higher quotas. 
The only man who never makes a mistake, is the man who never does anything!!
The further one goes into the wilderness, the greater the attraction of its lonely freedom.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal