Free: Contests & Raffles.
I’m pissed. We’re going into the best few weeks of shed hunting and they close it. Literally the safest place I could hang out with a virus goin around. And you can bet nothing major is gonna change by the 31st.
Quote from: MLhunter1 on March 16, 2020, 07:45:58 PMI’m pissed. We’re going into the best few weeks of shed hunting and they close it. Literally the safest place I could hang out with a virus goin around. And you can bet nothing major is gonna change by the 31st. Sheds will still be there, except for the ones on the roads that the employees pick up
Quote from: Old Man Yager on March 24, 2020, 08:55:57 AMQuote from: MLhunter1 on March 16, 2020, 07:45:58 PMI’m pissed. We’re going into the best few weeks of shed hunting and they close it. Literally the safest place I could hang out with a virus goin around. And you can bet nothing major is gonna change by the 31st. Sheds will still be there, except for the ones on the roads that the employees pick upno they won’t!!!! No reason to ever buy that pass or go look for sheds anymore. I heard they aren’t selling anymore passes, only those people that have already bought the pass for 2020 can go in. 😜
Quote from: Roosevelt on March 06, 2019, 02:11:18 PMI believe the objective of the change of policies is an effort to boost deer populations and the quality of bucks. I think they could have made different changes to accomplish this. The old rules allowed a family to go up (with one permit) and kill an animal for each tag holding family member. When you put 1200 permits up for sale that quickly diminishes the deer population in an area. I think last year they changed the rules to a two point minimum, which was a good first step. Now, they are going away from the general antlerless deer harvest on the properties they manage, and I think that was a great move as well. However, instead of making families buy two permits for husband and wife (and potentially more for children over 18), my opinion is that they should put a limit on harvest of animals per permit instead. Whether it is one animal of each species per permit or two? However, I think making families buy two permits isn't the way I would have done it. Pretty much across the board there has been an effort to get more participation from women and children into hunting and the outdoors in general. If you put a limit of one deer tag per permit, then it allows families to go up and do all of the other outdoor recreational activities that tree farms provide while still working toward the goal of improving the deer population and quality. Just a thought that crossed my mind. By the way, I am surprised that these permits are even managed via Hancock. They own very little in the Kapowsin tree farm anymore, and I didn't even know they owned any in the White River. I am not as familiar with that farm, but know the Muckleshoots bought around 90,000 acres from them in that tree farm a few years back (I believe Hancock still manages it for them). I know a large chunk (if not all) of the Eatonville tree farm was sold recently as well. Hancock is fazing out of the timberland management/investment business so when this permit came out as a Hancock permit this year I was surprised. The management and decisions within these farms is voted on by the stakeholders (land managers) within the farms. Even though you are buying a "Hancock Permit", the land you are hunting is mostly owned and/or managed by other companies. I am assuming they have stayed with the Hancock label out of convenience. I am pleased to see that the new landowners are all working together to keep the permit and area managed as one block though. With the checkerboarded ownerships in those areas I have been interested to see how they would manage recreational access. Well said. The deer population in there definitely needs an overhaul. In my two years and countless miles walking, I have never laid eyes on a buck in there. With the two point minimum and antlerless being banned, I think it would be a miracle for a family to fill even 1 deer tag. I 100% agree with you that the new rule on each adult needing there own pass is a big thorn in the continuation of the hunting community.
I believe the objective of the change of policies is an effort to boost deer populations and the quality of bucks. I think they could have made different changes to accomplish this. The old rules allowed a family to go up (with one permit) and kill an animal for each tag holding family member. When you put 1200 permits up for sale that quickly diminishes the deer population in an area. I think last year they changed the rules to a two point minimum, which was a good first step. Now, they are going away from the general antlerless deer harvest on the properties they manage, and I think that was a great move as well. However, instead of making families buy two permits for husband and wife (and potentially more for children over 18), my opinion is that they should put a limit on harvest of animals per permit instead. Whether it is one animal of each species per permit or two? However, I think making families buy two permits isn't the way I would have done it. Pretty much across the board there has been an effort to get more participation from women and children into hunting and the outdoors in general. If you put a limit of one deer tag per permit, then it allows families to go up and do all of the other outdoor recreational activities that tree farms provide while still working toward the goal of improving the deer population and quality. Just a thought that crossed my mind. By the way, I am surprised that these permits are even managed via Hancock. They own very little in the Kapowsin tree farm anymore, and I didn't even know they owned any in the White River. I am not as familiar with that farm, but know the Muckleshoots bought around 90,000 acres from them in that tree farm a few years back (I believe Hancock still manages it for them). I know a large chunk (if not all) of the Eatonville tree farm was sold recently as well. Hancock is fazing out of the timberland management/investment business so when this permit came out as a Hancock permit this year I was surprised. The management and decisions within these farms is voted on by the stakeholders (land managers) within the farms. Even though you are buying a "Hancock Permit", the land you are hunting is mostly owned and/or managed by other companies. I am assuming they have stayed with the Hancock label out of convenience. I am pleased to see that the new landowners are all working together to keep the permit and area managed as one block though. With the checkerboarded ownerships in those areas I have been interested to see how they would manage recreational access.
