Yakama Nation Sheep Tags

[baker5150]

Is the concern that 2 additional sheep tags in the swakane will put the herd at great risk?  Or is the concern that trophy quality might slip, or someone who paid big money for a tag might have a little more competition?  The only reason wdfw should get involved is if it's a legitimate risk to the herd.

On the bright side, maybe these tribal tags will drive auction tag prices down so low wdfw will stop selling wildlife to the high bidder.

WDFW should be involved regardless.  It’s their job to manage the wildlife of this state, not just when there is risk to the herd.

[jmscon]

So, what does “In Common With” mean to the ordinary citizen group? Does it mean that the Yakima tribe can take over 800 deer or over 1900 elk in the 300 GMUs like the ordinary citizens? Or does it mean that each individuals get the same number of tags as the individual tribal members?

It seems that the Yakima tribe is getting the same number of tags as the ordinary citizens. Each user group is being treated the same.

Does anyone know for sure that WDFW was not consulted about this?

[jackelope]

I can verify that WDFW knew nothing of the additional sheep tags until a few days ago.

[idahohuntr]

Is the concern that 2 additional sheep tags in the swakane will put the herd at great risk?  Or is the concern that trophy quality might slip, or someone who paid big money for a tag might have a little more competition?  The only reason wdfw should get involved is if it's a legitimate risk to the herd.

On the bright side, maybe these tribal tags will drive auction tag prices down so low wdfw will stop selling wildlife to the high bidder.

WDFW should be involved regardless.  It’s their job to manage the wildlife of this state, not just when there is risk to the herd.

How should they be involved?

[jackelope]

Is the concern that 2 additional sheep tags in the swakane will put the herd at great risk?  Or is the concern that trophy quality might slip, or someone who paid big money for a tag might have a little more competition?  The only reason wdfw should get involved is if it's a legitimate risk to the herd.

On the bright side, maybe these tribal tags will drive auction tag prices down so low wdfw will stop selling wildlife to the high bidder.

WDFW should be involved regardless.  It’s their job to manage the wildlife of this state, not just when there is risk to the herd.

How should they be involved?

Biology. Conservation. Management.
Maybe rather that should the WDFW be involved, a better question may be ... should there be some cooperation between the 2 agencies?

If I’m off base, please explain why. Or do you feel there is not a conservation aspect to it. Is there no risk for overharvest? If you don’t believe so, I’d like to understand your logic.  Maybe your credentials that allow you to make that decision. You seem very sure and confident in that.

Otherwise you just look like you’re saying it’s ok to shoot 5 rams in there just because.

[PlateauNDN]

I thought the State issued 2 tags? If so, it would be a total of 4 correct?

[jackelope]

I thought the State issued 2 tags? If so, it would be a total of 4 correct?

Auction tag makes 5.

[jackelope]

I thought the State issued 2 tags? If so, it would be a total of 4 correct?

Auction tag makes 5.

And to add to that, if we dropped to 1 tag, I think that eliminates the swakane from the auction tag hunts. So we drop to 1, you drop to 1 and everything is right in the world.

[jackelope]

Only downside is we lose all that auction money that goes back to wild sheep. Which I guess is ok, because wdfw is overflowing with money to be spent on management.
(Insert passive aggressive sarcasm here)

[PlateauNDN]

My biggest issue goes beyond just the animals. I understand the conservation discussion and its importance, but compared to the politics involved between the State and Tribe this is menial.

I'd advocate for cooperation if the State would keep its nose out of the other major issues its sticking its nose in.

[jackelope]

My biggest issue goes beyond just the animals. I understand the conservation discussion and its importance, but compared to the politics involved between the State and Tribe this is menial.

I'd advocate for cooperation if the State would keep its nose out of the other major issues its sticking its nose in.

What are those other major issues?

[MtnMuley]

 The state can dictate exactly what units the auction tags can hunt regardless of how many draw tags are available. Those days of needing more than one draw permit are over. This was a positive in my eyes.

[idahohuntr]

Is the concern that 2 additional sheep tags in the swakane will put the herd at great risk?  Or is the concern that trophy quality might slip, or someone who paid big money for a tag might have a little more competition?  The only reason wdfw should get involved is if it's a legitimate risk to the herd.

On the bright side, maybe these tribal tags will drive auction tag prices down so low wdfw will stop selling wildlife to the high bidder.

WDFW should be involved regardless.  It’s their job to manage the wildlife of this state, not just when there is risk to the herd.

How should they be involved?

Biology. Conservation. Management.
Maybe rather that should the WDFW be involved, a better question may be ... should there be some cooperation between the 2 agencies?

If I’m off base, please explain why. Or do you feel there is not a conservation aspect to it. Is there no risk for overharvest? If you don’t believe so, I’d like to understand your logic.  Maybe your credentials that allow you to make that decision. You seem very sure and confident in that.

Otherwise you just look like you’re saying it’s ok to shoot 5 rams in there just because.

I agree, cooperation between the state and tribe would be a positive.  However, unless it is a conservation concern the state has no ability to intervene or engage the Yakamas on their sheep hunts.  Sure, they can offer up what they know about sheep management, but I would also ask if the state has given the yakamas a seat at the table when planning the state sheep hunts and permit levels?

Your concern about losing auction money is not justified imo.  WDFW doesn't have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem.  But your overall concern seems to be in regards to trophy quality and auction revenue...both of which are irrelevant (and insignificant) when stacked up to a tribe exercising a treaty right.

[jackelope]

Is the concern that 2 additional sheep tags in the swakane will put the herd at great risk?  Or is the concern that trophy quality might slip, or someone who paid big money for a tag might have a little more competition?  The only reason wdfw should get involved is if it's a legitimate risk to the herd.

On the bright side, maybe these tribal tags will drive auction tag prices down so low wdfw will stop selling wildlife to the high bidder.

WDFW should be involved regardless.  It’s their job to manage the wildlife of this state, not just when there is risk to the herd.

How should they be involved?

Biology. Conservation. Management.
Maybe rather that should the WDFW be involved, a better question may be ... should there be some cooperation between the 2 agencies?

If I’m off base, please explain why. Or do you feel there is not a conservation aspect to it. Is there no risk for overharvest? If you don’t believe so, I’d like to understand your logic.  Maybe your credentials that allow you to make that decision. You seem very sure and confident in that.

Otherwise you just look like you’re saying it’s ok to shoot 5 rams in there just because.

I agree, cooperation between the state and tribe would be a positive.  However, unless it is a conservation concern the state has no ability to intervene or engage the Yakamas on their sheep hunts.  Sure, they can offer up what they know about sheep management, but I would also ask if the state has given the yakamas a seat at the table when planning the state sheep hunts and permit levels?

Your concern about losing auction money is not justified imo.  WDFW doesn't have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem.  But your overall concern seems to be in regards to trophy quality and auction revenue...both of which are irrelevant (and insignificant) when stacked up to a tribe exercising a treaty right.

I’m not sure how you can say “unless it’s a conservation concern.” What else would it be?
It’s time that both sides try to work together with seats at the table.

My overall concern has literally zero, zilch, nada to do with auction revenue. It has literally everything to do with preserving an amazing resource that is hard to come by anywhere else.

[Oh Mah]

These seats at the table.I guarantee that WDFW would relish the idea of being able to have these discussions,So what does that say?