Any other bowhunters want to throw up?

[et1702]

Little late to the discussion table fellas but I did voice my opposition to the changes proposed to the 300 units.

In my research I used WDFW's 2016 Trend report https://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01875/wdfw01875.pdf pages 131-135, harvest stats and on the ground observations.

The trend report linked above mentions the herd is above management objective and failed to conduct surveys in the years prior (2014, 2015) due to mild winters, along with that harvest trends seem to stay around the 11% mark.

However, from time in the hills I will say that this past season left little to desire of the state. The Chinook fire displaced a lot of humans. The influx of which was seen in the Rimrock 364 unit, a few hunters, lots of displaced ORV parties and a massive 200+ person wedding which took place in Sleepy Park Meadows (1202) opening weekend early archery. 2 full days of tunes for the whole hillside. Along with that, the free-range cattle were still there during both weeks. This obviously had an impact on herd activity, and I suspect harvest was minimal.

Shooting back over to the 356-unit, reduced access into areas above the rattlesnake bridge (buck lake, nelson butte, McDaniel lake) has been an ongoing issue for a few years now. The unit holds many elk, however, the decline in access and the amount of prescribed fires during season in and around Timberwolf mountain coupled with natural fires in the vicinity, should support the '16 trend report data stating an increase of elk densities.  Not to forget, there are often sheep that free-range out on the timberwolf side, again another species elk don't want to compete with.

To me, my experiences and observations don't seem to correlate with the proposed changes.......

They don't correlate what so ever, with my research or observations either.  The trend reports have suggested that the Yakima herd has been relatively stable to increasing, even thru the bad winter of 2015/2016.  As indicated by the 2016 report, the herd is estimated at 10,000+ animals.  The cow/calf and bull/cow ratios both pre and post hunting seasons are at/or within WDFW's objectives.  Someone earlier in this discussion said that they had spoken with WDFW Bio's that they trusted and Yak herd had dropped from 12K to approx. 8.5K animals.  I'm not sure where the 12K number came from, as per WDFW's own trend reports for the past several years, its been at 10 to 11K animals.  If true, it didn't help that WDFW gave out 350 damage permits for the private landowners and their buddies to slaughter our elk during the 2016/2017 winter in the Cowiche area.  In my mind, this suggests that herds are still over objective, or they could have used non-lethal means to get the elk back onto winter range.

Therefore, where is the data that shows we lost 1500 to 2500 animals in the 2016/2017 winter?  I hunted the 2017 season, and saw no drop in the number of elk in the primary unit we hunt (364), and we have multiple cameras in the woods beginning in May each year for the past 10+ years. 

Additionally, allowing archery to keep the option to harvest cows during the late season and leaving the same number of tags available to ML and MF seasons is not an equitable option.  First, most of the elk have move out of the areas they hold in during Sept and Oct.  They migrate out of the higher elevation units into the lower units (which are mostly closed).  Plus they have been chased, disrupted and shot at since early Sept., making them hole up and not move much during daylight hrs.

Bottom line, if the data does exist (to show that we lost a *censored*-load of elk in 2016/2017 winter), then ML and MF cow tags should also be removed in these Yak units.  If not, at a minimum, archery user group should also receive option of drawing cow tags in these same units for early season.  Also, tags available should be based on avg. success of each user group, not the number of users in each group, like it appears they are proposing for the Colockum unit (328/329) this year (250 rifle tag and 100 archery cow tags, WTF?).

Show me the data!  Also, yes, I have provided comments and I will be at the commission mtgs.  Personally, I believe we will never see this opportunity restored.  The real issue is number of people in this state, and constant encroachment and destruction of elk habitat, especially their winter range.  This is the reason they are offering so many cow permits in the Colockum (328/329), they want less elk, not more.  Look it up!

ET

[dreamingbig]

 Great comments ET.  I very much agree with your observations.  I don’t think they have the data.  The changes aren’t logically.  If they have the data they should present it with the proposed changes.

Thinking aloud the past few days makes me wonder if they are anticipating wolf relocation thus are preparing for the herd decline that will follow.  This is purely speculation on my behalf.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snapshot]

...a sign of the times.

[Calvin Rayborn]

Dang!