Shoot em' cause you can!

[Rainier10]

I mentioned this on another thread and nobody bit so I thought I would start it's on topic.

Everyone is complaining about the lack of elk this year on the east side.  People are pretty passionate that the tribes are taking too many animals.  People say even though they were given the right to do it in the treaties they should exercise some self control and be concerned about herd health.

Around 2015-2016 time frame the WDFW said that the eastern elk herds were over capacity and decided to drop the numbers drastically by giving out cow permits like candy on Halloween.  There were those that said it was ludicrous and would hurt the herd.  Obviously it would hurt the herd, that was the plan, lower numbers.

Why didn't people eat those tags?  Just don't fill them.  Why?  Because the WDFW was giving them out and if you got one and had the right to fill it and by golly you were going to use that right and fill the freezer even if it meant lowering herd numbers.  Heck if you didn't do it the next guy in line was going to.

Same goes for deer in the methow.  Tons of doe tags given out the a year or two ago and people filled those because they had the right.

Heck this year everyone was complaining about the reduced number of moose permits and how few moose there were out there.  I didn't see one thread started of "I just drew a moose tag and I am going to not even hunt and save a moose for the health of the population".

So many on here say if I was a tribal member and had the rights that they do I wouldn't take so much that I hurt the health of the herd, I would be more responsible and conserve the resource but when the tables are turned and we do draw tags we go ahead and shoot em cause we can.

If we are such better conservationists than why is it that we fill tags when we can on animals and areas that are hurting, why do we shoot any legal buck versus just old mature bucks, why do we shoot any doe versus a dry doe or a any cow versus a dry cow?  Most take it to the limit of what is allowed and legal.

Just something to think about.

[jstone]

I saw this coming
I archery elk hunt the Naneum every year. I have had countless opportunities at cows with my bow. Needless to say I have eaten my elk tag for 3 years now cause I won’t shoot cows that have calf’s in the Hurd. Just my decisions. I hope that they take those cow hunts away for a while. They always over compensate when the Hurd looks good.
Probably ran by people who have no business being in the WFG 

[Sandberm]

EVERYTHING in life is that way and ALWAYS has been. People do not do whats right...they do what they have the right to do.

Look at our national debt. All Republicans(or at least they used to before Trump became president) scream about how high it is, yet when it comes time to do the right thing and cut spending... oh no, not in my district...is what is said.

People want equal sacrifice. Its why well thought out rules are so important.

 

[sjhgraysage]

I had one of those 2016 cow permits for cowiche, and didn't shoot anything. I thought the number of permits was overboard.

[Odell]

You have a point. But ultimately you are still talking about 1 person filling 1 tag, within a management plan.

Individuals being able to take an unlimited amount of animals, often trophy animals without cooperating within a state management plan is quite different, especially when its to sell antlers and jerky

[pianoman9701]

Is the OP suggesting that we decide on our own, without the resources available to the wildlife managers, how many animals we need to take out or not of the mix? What if you think there are too many animals in a given area and not enough tags to properly control their numbers? Do you then encourage and practice poaching for the benefit of the herd? Tags and seasons are developed by the game managers according to population counts, harvest counts, winter kill counts and other data. Using hunters to regulate wildlife populations to maintainable levels is the core off the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. If you feel that the number of cow or doe tags issued is unreasonable, wouldn't your next step be to approach the decision-makers for those species and question them about the reasoning for the tag numbers? The attitude that "I think we're taking out too many of..." isn't based on scientific assessment, but on emotion. Use your tag or don't use your tag. But until you have scientific facts on which to make your decision, you're simply guessing that there's a problem. 

[Rainier10]

I am talking about 300 cow tags in one unit.  A few people ate those tags in the name of conservation but most filled them because they could and then want to complain that the reason we don't have any animals is because on guy is shooting 30 when he is allowed to.  So it is okay for them to shoot what they can because they can no matter what the impact is but when a native does it and he is allowed to shoot more than one non native then it is an issue.

If the herd can't take the loss of 30 by one tribal member how can it handle the loss of hundreds by non tribal members?

When given the chance to make a difference and not fill that tag most fill the tag rather than pass.  Then the next year when they don't have a tag they complain that too many animals are being taken.

I get it.  It's human nature.  I don't want to give up my opportunity but take away that guys opportunity.  Archery shouldn't have general cow tags they should be permit only like the rifle guys and give the rifle guys more tags.

It goes on and on. It just cracks me up to see people complain that someone is exercising their rights within the law and when they get a special opportunity to take an easier harvest than the general tags allow most take it.

And on the management plan it is not about wildlife management, it is about people management and making sure everyone gets an opportunity while trying to maintain a healthy level of wildlife but when push comes to shove most of the time the people get their way and wildlife suffers.

[Rainier10]

Is the OP suggesting that we decide on our own, without the resources available to the wildlife managers, how many animals we need to take out or not of the mix? What if you think there are too many animals in a given area and not enough tags to properly control their numbers? Do you then encourage and practice poaching for the benefit of the herd? Tags and seasons are developed by the game managers according to population counts, harvest counts, winter kill counts and other data. Using hunters to regulate wildlife populations to maintainable levels is the core off the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. If you feel that the number of cow or doe tags issued is unreasonable, wouldn't your next step be to approach the decision-makers for those species and question them about the reasoning for the tag numbers? The attitude that "I think we're taking out too many of..." isn't based on scientific assessment, but on emotion. Use your tag or don't use your tag. But until you have scientific facts on which to make your decision, you're simply guessing that there's a problem. 

I am certainly not saying to poach that would be outside of the law.  The law doesn't say that if you have a tag you have to fill it.  Sounds like some here do take that option.

Most on here complain that tribal members take too many animals.  Those tribal members have the right to do it.  Many of those people that complain that tribal members take to many animals draw special tags in areas that they say have declining numbers of animals and aren't like the good ole days of seeing hundreds of elk but now that they have a tag in their pocket they are going to go to those now miserable hunting grounds and take out one of the remaining cows because they can.

Just funny how it isn't right for someone to shoot em cause they can until you are that person with the right to shoot em and you do, it's right when the tag is in your pocket but if someone else has the right and you don't then it is overharvest and abuse.

Do I think the tribes should reel in some members? Yes.  Do I think the game department should put more restrictions on us for the sake of the game? Yes.  Do I think we should fill tags and complain that the tribes are too?  No.

[Platensek-po]

I am talking about 300 cow tags in one unit.  A few people ate those tags in the name of conservation but most filled them because they could and then want to complain that the reason we don't have any animals is because on guy is shooting 30 when he is allowed to.  So it is okay for them to shoot what they can because they can no matter what the impact is but when a native does it and he is allowed to shoot more than one non native then it is an issue.

If the herd can't take the loss of 30 by one tribal member how can it handle the loss of hundreds by non tribal members?

When given the chance to make a difference and not fill that tag most fill the tag rather than pass.  Then the next year when they don't have a tag they complain that too many animals are being taken.

I get it.  It's human nature.  I don't want to give up my opportunity but take away that guys opportunity.  Archery shouldn't have general cow tags they should be permit only like the rifle guys and give the rifle guys more tags.

It goes on and on. It just cracks me up to see people complain that someone is exercising their rights within the law and when they get a special opportunity to take an easier harvest than the general tags allow most take it.

And on the management plan it is not about wildlife management, it is about people management and making sure everyone gets an opportunity while trying to maintain a healthy level of wildlife but when push comes to shove most of the time the people get their way and wildlife suffers.

What was the success rate on those hunts? Just because they gave out 300 tags doesn’t mean 300 animals were shot. If it’s a 20% success rate that means 60 animals not hundreds. Wildlife management isn’t about wildlife management?? That’s interesting.

[pianoman9701]

Is the OP suggesting that we decide on our own, without the resources available to the wildlife managers, how many animals we need to take out or not of the mix? What if you think there are too many animals in a given area and not enough tags to properly control their numbers? Do you then encourage and practice poaching for the benefit of the herd? Tags and seasons are developed by the game managers according to population counts, harvest counts, winter kill counts and other data. Using hunters to regulate wildlife populations to maintainable levels is the core off the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. If you feel that the number of cow or doe tags issued is unreasonable, wouldn't your next step be to approach the decision-makers for those species and question them about the reasoning for the tag numbers? The attitude that "I think we're taking out too many of..." isn't based on scientific assessment, but on emotion. Use your tag or don't use your tag. But until you have scientific facts on which to make your decision, you're simply guessing that there's a problem. 

I am certainly not saying to poach that would be outside of the law.  The law doesn't say that if you have a tag you have to fill it.  Sounds like some here do take that option.

Most on here complain that tribal members take too many animals.  Those tribal members have the right to do it.  Many of those people that complain that tribal members take to many animals draw special tags in areas that they say have declining numbers of animals and aren't like the good ole days of seeing hundreds of elk but now that they have a tag in their pocket they are going to go to those now miserable hunting grounds and take out one of the remaining cows because they can.

Just funny how it isn't right for someone to shoot em cause they can until you are that person with the right to shoot em and you do, it's right when the tag is in your pocket but if someone else has the right and you don't then it is overharvest and abuse.

Do I think the tribes should reel in some members? Yes.  Do I think the game department should put more restrictions on us for the sake of the game? Yes.  Do I think we should fill tags and complain that the tribes are too?  No.

Show me the data which backs up your assertions. "Most on here...", "...department should put more restrictions on us..." is all opinion without the data.

Look, I get and really respect that you're truly concerned about the health of our ungulate herds and that shows us your elevated level of sportsmanship, as well as your desire for proper conservation. But there has to be a separation of feelings and/or emotions of what you believe is happening from science-based data used to set harvest projections. Again, if you feel those projections are too high, you have recourse - approach the game managers and find out where they came up with the numbers to support their decisions. Go to groups like RMEF and the MDF to lobby the DFW and further assist them with proper population counting.

[Rainier10]

Is the OP suggesting that we decide on our own, without the resources available to the wildlife managers, how many animals we need to take out or not of the mix? What if you think there are too many animals in a given area and not enough tags to properly control their numbers? Do you then encourage and practice poaching for the benefit of the herd? Tags and seasons are developed by the game managers according to population counts, harvest counts, winter kill counts and other data. Using hunters to regulate wildlife populations to maintainable levels is the core off the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. If you feel that the number of cow or doe tags issued is unreasonable, wouldn't your next step be to approach the decision-makers for those species and question them about the reasoning for the tag numbers? The attitude that "I think we're taking out too many of..." isn't based on scientific assessment, but on emotion. Use your tag or don't use your tag. But until you have scientific facts on which to make your decision, you're simply guessing that there's a problem. 

I am certainly not saying to poach that would be outside of the law.  The law doesn't say that if you have a tag you have to fill it.  Sounds like some here do take that option.

Most on here complain that tribal members take too many animals.  Those tribal members have the right to do it.  Many of those people that complain that tribal members take to many animals draw special tags in areas that they say have declining numbers of animals and aren't like the good ole days of seeing hundreds of elk but now that they have a tag in their pocket they are going to go to those now miserable hunting grounds and take out one of the remaining cows because they can.

Just funny how it isn't right for someone to shoot em cause they can until you are that person with the right to shoot em and you do, it's right when the tag is in your pocket but if someone else has the right and you don't then it is overharvest and abuse.

Do I think the tribes should reel in some members? Yes.  Do I think the game department should put more restrictions on us for the sake of the game? Yes.  Do I think we should fill tags and complain that the tribes are too?  No.

Show me the data which backs up your assertions. "Most on here...", "...department should put more restrictions on us..." is all opinion without the data.

Look, I get and really respect that you're truly concerned about the health of our ungulate herds and that shows us your elevated level of sportsmanship, as well as your desire for proper conservation. But there has to be a separation of feelings and/or emotions of what you believe is happening from science-based data used to set harvest projections. Again, if you feel those projections are too high, you have recourse - approach the game managers and find out where they came up with the numbers to support their decisions. Go to groups like RMEF and the MDF to lobby the DFW and further assist them with proper population counting.

Have you read any threads on this forum?  Sarcasm, I know you have.

What's up with these regulations?  Are the bios actually in the field or just sitting behind a desk?  Why do they want us to report what we are seeing?  Get off your butt and get in the field and see what is really happening out there.

Have you read any of the tribal bashing threads?  Again sarcasm I am sure you have.

You want numbers?  I have so many numbers I can make your head spin on success rates of each hunting method in the area and even what the success rate is on the damage tags given out that some say are the real problem, too many damage tags.

The point of this thread isn't to figure out what success rates are it is to bring the attention to the fact that people come on here and complain that certain user groups get more opportunity than others and shouldn't take it.

Tribal is a big one.  They have no limit and "if I had no limit I would show more self control."  But that's not the case.  When most on here have their limit increased for one season they come on here and say, "I just drew blank and I am looking for help to make sure I fill this tag and do it justice".

It's just funny to me where people draw the line.  It's okay to do if I am the one getting the special privelage but if it is someone else and heaven forbid it be a tribal member it is the end of hunting as we know it.

Next big one, wolves.  They are the end of hunting as we know it.   Ungulates can't take it.  I agree, it may be the straw that breaks the camels back.  There are all kinds of people on here complaining about wolves and "why can't we hunt them yet?"  That's great and I think we should keep pushing for that but there are things that we can do outside of that to help.  Increase your time in the field hunting the predators that you are allowed to hunt that do damage to the fawn and calf recruitment.

Like I say I just think it is funny how people complain about what they can't do anything about but do little to nothing with what they do have control over.

[pianoman9701]

OK, I've made my point. Thanks for the discussion.

[Rainier10]

OK, I've made my point. Thanks for the discussion.

  I don't want to get bogged down in the numbers of it all.  Those can be juggled any way you want to prove the glass is half full or half empty, it's still 50%.

I am people watcher and amuses me to sit back and watch people complain about what they have very little control over and do nothing about what they can control.

Like I posted in the other thread I was taught very early in my life, "don't let what you can't do get in the way of what you can do".

And just to clarify I am not saying that people should take management into their own hands and poach wildlife.  If they want to take it into their own hands and not fill tags that they are given that is within the rules, poaching is not and never will be. 

Poaching is another one that I am very passionate about and don't want anyone to think I am condoning or calling for it as you suggested I might be.

I think if we could get poaching under control legal hunters would have much much more opportunity.

[pianoman9701]

OK, I've made my point. Thanks for the discussion.

  I don't want to get bogged down in the numbers of it all.  Those can be juggled any way you want to prove the glass is half full or half empty, it's still 50%.

I am people watcher and amuses me to sit back and watch people complain about what they have very little control over and do nothing about what they can control.

Like I posted in the other thread I was taught very early in my life, "don't let what you can't do get in the way of what you can do".

And just to clarify I am not saying that people should take management into their own hands and poach wildlife.  If they want to take it into their own hands and not fill tags that they are given that is within the rules, poaching is not and never will be. 

Poaching is another one that I am very passionate about and don't want anyone to think I am condoning or calling for it as you suggested I might be.

I think if we could get poaching under control legal hunters would have much much more opportunity.

I have a great deal of respect for your opinions and experience. I did not and would not suggest that you support poaching and I don't think you do. I was using that as the other side of the coin when asserting that we should ignore what the WDFW says about the health of our wildlife populations. You've said that people shouldn't use their tags because you didn't think the populations are healthy enough. I was merely suggesting that if conversely, you thought the populations were too strong, what's the solution then? Neither of us would support poaching. 

[2MANY]

WDFW is a joke.

Fawn and calf recruitment is at a low and they are killing pregnant mothers.

Perhaps the anti's should step in.

Pathetic.