Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: Boss .300 winmag on December 01, 2017, 09:08:19 AMQuote from: Skyvalhunter on December 01, 2017, 08:36:48 AMHere in lies the problem:WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.We’ll have to see the harvest numbers, but I bet the Methow is probably already there.Any way to verify their numbers? ...Add a couple here ..a few there.. still no harvest decrease...Call me crazy but my tin foil hat says it might be possible. I'm working on a tin foil suit to go with my hat.
Quote from: Skyvalhunter on December 01, 2017, 08:36:48 AMHere in lies the problem:WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.We’ll have to see the harvest numbers, but I bet the Methow is probably already there.
Here in lies the problem:WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.
Why I think they are idiots.....https://www.kxly.com/news/local-news/wolves-do-not-appear-to-hurt-deer-elk-other-ungulates/669768596
Quote from: boneaddict on December 08, 2017, 08:12:56 PMWhy I think they are idiots.....https://www.kxly.com/news/local-news/wolves-do-not-appear-to-hurt-deer-elk-other-ungulates/669768596x2
Seriously, someone actually believed that enough to put it to print. I guess we can start to see where the former inhabitants of the Western State Mental Hospitol got employment. Freaking IDIOTS. We photographed fresh wolf tracks between Ardenvoir and Leavenworth during late archery, Roaring Ridge to be exact. But I'm sure they don't count either.
