wdfw To slaughter mt saint helens elk herd

[CP]

What is the proposal that will devastate the St Helen’s herd?  I'm not seeing it.   

[Wacenturion]

The key statement...."There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size."

Absolutely true......but what is a shame is that WDFW would rather meet and discuss problems like this than actually do something on the ground to improve it.  It's like your yard isn't going to mow itself.....you have to get off your butt and do it it.  Oh...and don't tell me all those thousands of dollars worth of seed aerial dropped on the old river bed of rocks and some sand years ago was doing what I would call habitat improvement.  What a joke.  The problem exists because WDFW doesn't know how to manipulate habitat...oh perhaps ...some may know, but just to lazy to want to get dirty doing it.  Easier to keep discussing it in meetings and writing new plans from decade to decade.

How is F&W supposed to improve the habitat when they don't own it? Most of that land down there is owned by private timber companies that are in for the money.

I know on the coast DNR/F&W are doing something about elk habitat on state land, but how are they supposed to do anything on private land?

It's called PARTNERSHIPS.......................it requires EFFORT!  WDFW has had active partnership programs in the past such as Upland Wildlife Restoration which at one time in the 90's I believe had over 3 million acres of private land statewide under agreement, and a good portion of private timber lands on the westside.... but have cut them or reduced them to insignificant levels in lieu of other programs...such as research to study the problems over and over again as an example.You know you guys can continue to give WDFW a pass on actual habitat improvement if you want, but you kidding yourself to think that's not the problem.   

[BrushChimp]

Burn the unit? Clearcut the whole unit? Those trees aren't even 30 years old... Why don't we get elk numbers back to what they were pre-1980 and quit bitchin'? There ain't nothing in that herd anyways. Special permits that no one can draw where a guy hunts a bunch of raghorn bulls.

BTKR, hit the nail on the head.

It would be a major production to modify/improve enough habitat to save them all.
Many people have been able to enjoy the booming population thanks to the eruption and many public and private entities. Now it seems as if we are faced with the population bust due to declining habitat.

It is what it is. There are too many elk for the habitat and the private/timber industry is not going to provide much help for a herd that is over capacity.

As it's been said many times before, the eruption provided a lot of area for vegetation to come back just like a clearcut would do. Elk populations skyrocket. The planted trees grew larger, entered the stem exclusion age, and now there is less browse. Elk will have to culled and/or die back to pre-1980 levels.

As far as private industry goes, of course they aren't going to help the elk herds. They grow trees and log them. That's what they do. They don't get paid to create or "manipulate" elk habitat. They actually lose money from ungulates eating their trees. From their point of view it would be a waste of money. From our point of view it allows more elk to live, creating more hunting opportunities. Hopefully elk are culled back quickly so they WDFW doesn't have to keep wasting their money feeding them each winter.

[yelp]

The WDFW used to have access and habitat agreements with Private Timber companies all over SW washington.  They let the funding for the program go in the toilet. The program wasn't the same after that.  The agreements assisted timber companies with access and habitat problems.  Like logger said and BKR said The sole purpose of private timber companies is to grow timber not wildlife, so what can they do and how do we make them do something for elk.

 Well if it was me I would get the Timber companies, RMEF, Tribes and other non goverment organizations that want to assist and see what could be developed.  Then go to the WDFW with a plan and ask if they want to be a partner...why do we wait for the WDFW to something about the problem.  There are lots of ways to skin a cat!  Habitat that exists post eruption needs some attention period.  The habitat needs to be tweeked.  The reprod is so thick it needs to be thinned, edges need to be created, prescribed burning, aerial seeding.  There are federal programs available for these types of projects..the conservation districts and NRCS offices could be contacted about projects.  The elk need forage...grass..they need more of it.  The volcanic ash layer, just like a lot of areas in eastern washington accumulated and created a crust which made it hard for native grasses and forbs to germinate.  It is no different here.  The St. Helens area can support a lot more elk if managed differently...and they wouldn't starve.  It however will takes time and money lots and that is the issue nobodys got either.  

[gasman]

Hey BBARNES,
No one on here still knows what the referance to this thread is.

How about enlighting all of us on the topic at hand instead of letting the thoughts run wild.


Are you trying to "stir the pot" because you have contributed nothing to this thread?
 

[jackelope]

if this goes by standard operating procedure, bbarnes won't be back anytime soon.

[tmike]

Can I at least see the numbers that constitute this "Slaughter" before I jump to any conclusions and rip into WDFW. I've heard people complain that decisions aren't based on Biology, I've done it myself. This one sounds like it makes sense on the surface. Can we get a link or see the numbers 

[bucklucky]

Burn the unit? Clearcut the whole unit? Those trees aren't even 30 years old... Why don't we get elk numbers back to what they were pre-1980 and quit bitchin'? There ain't nothing in that herd anyways. Special permits that no one can draw where a guy hunts a bunch of raghorn bulls.

  I'm being sarcastic when I say to clearcut or burn the unit, Its called a tree farm for a reason  Like I have been saying from the start, we need to get the elk population back to what it waas pre-eruption. I'm done with this St Helens BS........maybee 

[billythekidrock]

 The St. Helens area can support a lot more elk if managed differently...and they wouldn't starve.  It however will takes time and money lots and that is the issue nobodys got either.  

I agree with that. The areacould support more elk if it were managed differently. But I doubt you would get the timber companies to change the way they do business (ie: potentially lose money) especially with the economy the way it is.

[bullchaser]

Can I at least see the numbers that constitute this "Slaughter" before I jump to any conclusions and rip into WDFW. I've heard people complain that decisions aren't based on Biology, I've done it myself. This one sounds like it makes sense on the surface. Can we get a link or see the numbers 

1+ WDFW probably needs to be ripped but I agree I would like to see it first. One thing I do know is we are not going to get more habitat so we need less elk.

[huntnphool]

There are federal programs available for these types of projects..

No *censored*, whats a couple more earmarks on top of the 8700+ already proposed I mean do they really need 7 Million to study pig flatulence.

[WDFW-SUX]

 

[bucklucky]

 

[ELKHOG]

I am wondering if BBarnes even went to the meeting now.  Started the thread and can't even provide data to back the thread subject. Maybe he is trying to figure something to say 

[Bearhunter]

He went, check out his web site, and you will see that he care deeply for the Saint Helens Elk herds!