Should Washington Move to a Draw Only Management for Yakima, Colockum, and Blues

[Special T]

So much of this is assuming that herds are down and need help. I can't and won't speak to the blues but theres nothing wrong in Colockum and yakima short of poor counting and slight dip in numbers following an all time high of just a few years ago.

KF's article is very telling. Colockum and yakima populations haven't really changed in the last 30 years because that's what the land will support.  Despite the "explosion" of predators elk are still thriving. Weird.

I'm sorry to get back into discussion about this but from what I understand from talking to two biologists in the area who have been working in this field for 30+ years the elk are likely below objective. 2019 had a substantial late snow and counts were accurate enough to get an idea about overall population. Calf to Cow ratios are easy to get with feed sights because calves distribute more evenly within these populations. It's not just about overall populations. 800 animals below the "9000" objective line isn't much but it's enough to realize that at that number for whatever reason the elk aren't recruiting like when the total is at 10000+. If recruitment is low then harvest will be low.

Just like a bank account if you are taking more out than what goes in then you loose money. Very simple metaphor. Until the calf recruitment increases to 30+ we won't be able to harvest at a more liberal number.

I'd like to believe circumstantial evidence in you spending time in there but since your not the scientist doing surveys and data analysis which can sometimes be more insightful than actual surveys I'm incline to believe the people whose job its been for most of their lives.

counting a feed lot on a mild winter is what we like to call phoning it in. Just because a guy has been on the payroll for 30 years doesnt mean he is good at his job.  I spend a whole lot of time in the hills and they are missing a lot of animals. They just are.

We could spend our whole life in those hills and not be able to see everything... data analysis means that they are looking at more than just their survey data. I used to be skeptical like you but after two long discussions face to face with biologist's I'm incline to believe they know what they are doing.

For me 30 years is better resume than I spend a lot of time in the hills... sorry

When you talked to the 2 bios did you ask about the survey work? Which of the bios did the count, and what areas did they fly and why?

I listened to the podcast. It was interesting, but regardless of what my thoughts are on your proposals the $ impacts Trump everything. If you are going to dive deeper into this subject, you will need access to the bean counters. I will bet that interview/ conversation will be much harder to come by.

I Admire your passion and wish is was involved with one of the many great sportsmens groups in the state.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Special T]

Shoet term    you guys are talking the end of elk hunting. Itll take 20 years to get sustainable herds back. By then a large portion of WA elk hunters will be dead or too old to hunt. There will be almost no new recruitment in that time period. I'm all for shaking the tree but it has to make sense.

I wasn't advocating schorched earth otc any elk, that would be terrible.

It was just the only way I could think to get the tribe to thr negotiations table.

That and going roadless

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I think going roadless would be the best way, but if you remeber correctly the last  public lands director was handing out keys to tribal memebers, so I'm not sure if that would provide any leverage.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[grundy53]

Here is my main beef with all of this Jacob. You keep trying to sell this as some beneficial thing for the herds and for all hunters. The simple fact is the herds aren't dying off. They just aren't. WDFW need to get better at counting elk and get permit numbers back up to where they should be.

As for the quality experience,  you cannot take what you feel is quality and push it on others. Hunting every 5-10 years isn't acceptable. Add in the inevitable influx of NR hunters and it could be longer.  I love big mature animals but I also enjoy my elk meat every year.  Plenty of other ways to get better draw odds without destroying our hunting heritage.

They aren't dying off they just are suppressed. The truth is you can't just count your way back to 2014 numbers. It's not the same as it was and changing the number for the sake of it isn't gonna fix bad recruitment. They aren't that bad at counting I promise you...

I promise you I'm not pushing my idea of quality on others, read my post before this. If most hunters want the system as is I will support that, but I need to see accurate data to see what the majority really want. I don't think this poll does that but I think it is attainable. You could cap non-resident hunters like every other state does and benefits from. I think most people would be happy with a 3.5 year old 5 point that is why I think it is ridiculous that bulls are escaping to 10,11, and 12 years old under the current system. We don't need every bull to be 330"+. It would be nice to manage for a couple here and there for people who like that stuff but there is a middle ground. There's still strong hunting heritage in draw only state. That doesn't go away unless we let it...

So we have to agree with you or we don't know what we are talking about? You are grudgingly willing to side with us if we all want something else. But only if we provide empirical evidence (even though you don't) I think you may have a bit of tunnel vision. You know what you want and are twisting everything to fit that outcome.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[NOCK NOCK]

Here is my main beef with all of this Jacob. You keep trying to sell this as some beneficial thing for the herds and for all hunters. The simple fact is the herds aren't dying off. They just aren't. WDFW need to get better at counting elk and get permit numbers back up to where they should be.

As for the quality experience,  you cannot take what you feel is quality and push it on others. Hunting every 5-10 years isn't acceptable. Add in the inevitable influx of NR hunters and it could be longer.  I love big mature animals but I also enjoy my elk meat every year.  Plenty of other ways to get better draw odds without destroying our hunting heritage.

They aren't dying off they just are suppressed. The truth is you can't just count your way back to 2014 numbers. It's not the same as it was and changing the number for the sake of it isn't gonna fix bad recruitment. They aren't that bad at counting I promise you...

I promise you I'm not pushing my idea of quality on others, read my post before this. If most hunters want the system as is I will support that, but I need to see accurate data to see what the majority really want. I don't think this poll does that but I think it is attainable. You could cap non-resident hunters like every other state does and benefits from. I think most people would be happy with a 3.5 year old 5 point that is why I think it is ridiculous that bulls are escaping to 10,11, and 12 years old under the current system. We don't need every bull to be 330"+. It would be nice to manage for a couple here and there for people who like that stuff but there is a middle ground. There's still strong hunting heritage in draw only state. That doesn't go away unless we let it...

So we have to agree with you or we don't know what we are talking about? You are grudgingly willing to side with us if we all want something else. But only if we provide empirical evidence (even though you don't) I think you may have a bit of tunnel vision. You know what you want and are twisting everything to fit that outcome.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

BAM    

[dilleytech]

I too have heard biologists in podscasts say the reason for spike only hunts is to increase the total number of bulls available to be taken without affecting the over all population as much as bull only hunts due to spikes being Less likely to survive then a mature animal.

I never participated in a the rifle spike only hunts just archery and muzzy my whole life, but the people I know who actual hunt have a success rate closer to 50% so I don’t really buy the below 6% percent success rate argument. We all know most guys don’t get off their couch in hunting season and maybe a majority of guys don’t report their harvest. Draw only to hunt every 4-5 years probably sounds great to guys who all ready hunt out of state every year any way.  But for those of us who like killing a elk most years in are back yards it’s pretty hard to support.

My backyard is now a west side unit though so I guess I’ll just stand by on the sidelines and see what happens. I know my Yakima friends are really frustrated loosing there late season cow hunts, specially when you see how the state is being mismanaged. But hey at least there’s bears everywhere to hunt I guess..

You really should understand math before you start spreading misinformation to other people within your community. Just because you know people who are more successful year to year doesn't mean the stats aren't off, for example...

Last year in the Little Naches Unit 1288 hunters reported hunting modern general season and killed 45 bulls. That equals 3% success rate. If you increase the success rate to 6% due to non-reporting (which was your starting point of which you said it was higher than) then that means 77 bulls were actually harvested. If this were true, harvest data and end of year metrics would be wildly off and the elk would be in much worse shape. The number of calf recruitment doesn't support that number of spikes being on the landscape. We already harvest 65% of spikes in any given year so if you doubled harvest due to non-reporting that would mean there would be no more mature bulls escaping. It's not likely success rates are off by even a whole percent let alone .2 percent with the number of hunters you are dealing with. Just not the way statistics work man, sorry to tell ya.

Also if you are out there not reporting your harvest you are just making it harder for the biologists to do there job. The more accurate data they can get the better decision making can happen and be supported down the road. Be responsible and do your part as a hunter

My point was real hunters have fairly good success. It’s not until you factor in the bubba hunters who haven’t killed something in 20 years that you start to see these very low percentages. The elk hunting around Yakima is decent despite your attempt to say that a person should expect to kill a elk every 20 years based on the states percentages.

[ridgefire]

I have hunted the Naneum area for 25-30 years and I think the herd is doing great up where I hunt. I personally think they could give out alot more bull tags than they do. That being said, I am sick of paying more money for less opportunity as the years go on. I know the easy answer is to quit supporting the state but I'm too vested at this point with my points I have. We can keep throwing money at it and reducing tag numbers but imo that is just a band aid to the bigger issues.

[Pinetar]

I haven't gone completely through this thread but what herds/units is he talking about? Does he want to manage all herds/units on East side the same as if they are one and thinks ALL have the same issues and problems?

I keep hearing by most on here that the Blues are in trouble and will believe that since I know nothing of the Blues. Also hear the Yakima herds are having issues by some on here and will not comment on those as I do not hunt them either but sounds like Karl thinks they are doing fine and that is a good enough opinion for me. I will go with someone spending tons of times in the hills before I will go with the biologists that sit at their desks and push numbers around, especially since I have never seen one of our local biologist in the field.

But as far as Manastash (Observatory), Taneum (Peaches Ridge), Teanaway and Colockum units, they are just fine. Cutting the permits in the Manastash and Taneum is a joke. The herds in these four units are doing fine, cows, calves and all age class of bulls.

I spend a ton of time in the hills nine months out of the year as my job affords it as I just work in the summer months. From January through April for the last 30 years I have been in these units almost every single day watching Elk and their movements and I have not once seen a biologist on the ground and I know who they are. I have seen them flying around in helos occasionally and they are never out there until noonish or later when the bulls are already bedded down in the timber for the day. Sure they can fly around down low in the winter and count their herds of cows, calves and younger bulls but if they want to count their mature bulls (even on big winter years) they need to get up a hell of a lot earlier and strap on some snowshoes, they would be quite surprised how many mature bulls there are and what never comes down to the winter welfare elk in feed lots. We also do not see them flying in the higher elevations where all these big lonely bulls are wintering and that may be due to the weather or danger of up drafts? One year they showed up at 1PM landed in the snow and talked to me. They asked me what I was doing and if I had seen any bulls? I asked them what they were doing? They said "counting mature bulls so they could figure out their branch bull numbers for the upcoming season" This happened on April 1st LOL

Lots of complaining about hunting sucks for spike bulls but why are there always a bunch of spikes running around after hunting season and in our feedlots and around the outskirts all winter.

Hunting elk every year is a tradition in our huge family and we always fill most of our kids spike tags and when we do get lucky and draw a special branched antlered tag we have a great hunt and always fill the tag with a smoker bull. If we do not draw a special branched tag we can always go hunt branched bulls in the any elk units. We live on a ranch and have cattle but we would rather eat elk and fill our freezers with cow tags, OTC spikes and the occasional mature bull. Getting out hunting elk every year with family and friends is what I live for.

Leave it alone and go back to more bull tags in the Manastash (Observatory) and Taneum (Peaches Ridge) cause the four units mentioned above have plenty of mature bulls and cutting the tags is ridiculous.

Maybe there are issues in some units but certainly not in all of them, managing them all the same by taking OTC hunting away from everyone and only being able to hunt elk every three to five years is BS. I like hunting elk and eating spikes with the slim chance of hunting mature bulls.

WDFW and their biologist do not and can not manage themselves let alone our elk herds. For years they weren't giving out enough permits for mature bulls in the Colockum and they were dying of old age, they didn't believe any of us locals on what they had up there. They finally started giving out more tags then started cutting them in the other units.

We have some great elk hunting in this state and IMO when you draw a tag you have a better chance of killing a smoker bull then any other state and I have killed and hunted in a lot of the other Western states for elk.

You can't and shouldn't manage all the Eastside elk units the same with drawing every 3 to 5 years to hunt elk. I'm all for figuring out a system that will give us all a better chance to draw more often but shutting down OTC hunting of elk is not the answer.

Start killing more predators is a great start for all of our ungulates. And more scouting then hunting will notch your tags.

[Karl Blanchard]

And for anyone wondering, Pinetar literally spends every day keeping tabs on elk. There is nobody on the planet that knows kittitas county elk better than Pinetar. Not a single person.

[KFhunter]

Yeah, that was excellent and well written

Convenced me!

(but I'm still hunting Idaho any bull otc)

[fishngamereaper]

Would have to agree with Pine and Karl..I've hunted those units for nearly 30 years. Every time I set foot in any of those units I can find elk. There is no issues with the 300gmu elk numbers. People complain about lack of elk, but what I've seen over the years is the elk getting a little smarter. All the orv's running around these days is crazy. People think you can get a grasp on elk numbers from the road or the air, it just doesn't happen. In the last 3 years hunting between the Taneum and Little Naches I have yet to see a single person in the areas I hunt. Probably 30 days of hunting and another 30-40 days of scouting and running cams.  And not a single person on my cams. But plenty of elk. 

[predatorpro]

I think blacktail on the west side should go to permit only if not completely stop hunting them for a few years.  Ive only seen one in my entire life....

[GASoline71]

Took me a while but I just finished the whole thread.   

I have been hunting elk in 346 (modern firearm) and 342 (Muzzleloader) since 1991.  Have seen the effects of when we went to spike only around 1994ish (memory is dang near shot, forgive me if im off).  Prior to spike only and shortly there after, we had the "penalty box" when you applied for a cow tag or bull special draw.  There was no points system as I recall and you had to buy an "early" tag that started 4 or 5 days ahead of general season.  If drawn, you hunted a week prior to general season on your special permit tag, and then if you weren't successful, you had to wait 2 or 3 days before hunting in the general season.  If you were unfortunate to not be drawn, you had to wait 2 or 3 days after the general season started before you could hunt.  It was a weird setup and we all hated it.  We also had to choose out of 6 different elk areas to hunt from, and only hunt the herd in that area.  You had Western, Northern, Northeast, Colockum, Yakima, Southeast and the Blue Mountains.  Really made it a pain in the butt.

The seasons were also a little later in the year for modern firearm.  I don't remember being over there prior to Halloween except for a few years.  Now we're over there the 3rd week of October in T-shirt weather half the time.  I might as well be bowhunting!  (Not that bowhunting is a bad thing. Lol)  We had 6 to 8 people in our camp, and some years only 4 or 5.  We averaged about 2 elk a year.  Usually a spike or a raghorn 4 or 5 point, and/or maybe a cow.  After spikes only we saw lots of elk, but none we could shoot.  Mostly branched antlered bulls.  Which was a real shock as only a year or 2 prior we could have attempted a harvest on the animal.  Then the cow tags given out exploded with 200 to 300 tags being given out.  One year around 1996 you were stepping around gut piles from dead cow elk all over the place.  Some slob hunters even shot cows and left gut piles in the middle of roads.  Then the steady decline of "seen" elk happened and it was frustrating as hell.

Our beloved area was now turning into a zone of no elk and too many hunters.  So we bebopped around into different areas of the unit for a few years.  Our success rate diminished significantly.  Then in 2012 we saw our first wolf tracks.  Opening morning in 346 with 2" of fresh snow on the ground, and not even a half mile from camp.  4 sets of wolf tracks.  We never saw an elk track all day.    I'm not saying the wolves have decimated the herds, but they had to contribute some.

I love hunting elk in the 300 series GMU's.  I'm happy to read above that Manashtash and Taneum are doing well.  We've been thinking about kmoving our operation to 340 for quite some time.  It'll be hard to move from any area I've hunted for so long and lots of find memories of with family and friends.  But we're going to make new adventures and memories in a new area.  We hunt hard, and our family loves the thrill of the chase.  We will be absent from the elk woods this year as there are some family commitments and things outside of our control that are going to make us skip this season.  I bought my tag and put in for my point for the special draw. 

I do hope that there will always be an OTC season for elk in this state.  There are a lot of opportunities out there to harvest animals.  Just gotta do your homework and be willing to do the scouting.  Which we will be doing this year and through to next fall when we will be up in 340. 

Great debate on this topic so far.  I love to read this stuff from the "deck plate" as it were.  (sorry, old Navy term.) 

Gary

[villajac29]

So much of this is assuming that herds are down and need help. I can't and won't speak to the blues but theres nothing wrong in Colockum and yakima short of poor counting and slight dip in numbers following an all time high of just a few years ago.

KF's article is very telling. Colockum and yakima populations haven't really changed in the last 30 years because that's what the land will support.  Despite the "explosion" of predators elk are still thriving. Weird.

I'm sorry to get back into discussion about this but from what I understand from talking to two biologists in the area who have been working in this field for 30+ years the elk are likely below objective. 2019 had a substantial late snow and counts were accurate enough to get an idea about overall population. Calf to Cow ratios are easy to get with feed sights because calves distribute more evenly within these populations. It's not just about overall populations. 800 animals below the "9000" objective line isn't much but it's enough to realize that at that number for whatever reason the elk aren't recruiting like when the total is at 10000+. If recruitment is low then harvest will be low.

Just like a bank account if you are taking more out than what goes in then you loose money. Very simple metaphor. Until the calf recruitment increases to 30+ we won't be able to harvest at a more liberal number.

I'd like to believe circumstantial evidence in you spending time in there but since your not the scientist doing surveys and data analysis which can sometimes be more insightful than actual surveys I'm incline to believe the people whose job its been for most of their lives.

counting a feed lot on a mild winter is what we like to call phoning it in. Just because a guy has been on the payroll for 30 years doesnt mean he is good at his job.  I spend a whole lot of time in the hills and they are missing a lot of animals. They just are.

We could spend our whole life in those hills and not be able to see everything... data analysis means that they are looking at more than just their survey data. I used to be skeptical like you but after two long discussions face to face with biologist's I'm incline to believe they know what they are doing.

For me 30 years is better resume than I spend a lot of time in the hills... sorry

all your talk about how the Bio Is Doing Such A great job figuring everything out on the count and your avatar is three big mature "Rocky Mountain bull elk" sheds in deep snow.  LMAO!  They aren't spending the money or time doing sound research.  If you can't see that, you might want to clean your glasses.  I listened to the podcast you were on.  You admitted the elk were doing great prior to 2016.  Then they were hit with the perfect storm of problems that did knock the herd down, but not to what the game department is claiming.

Listen to my most recent podcast with P N W I L D. I came to understand how tag allocation actually happens and kind of made my understanding of the importance of bull to cow ratios mean much less than I thought. The thing is the important metrics like calf to cow ratios are much easier to get than bull to cow ratios.

I’m gonna allow my position to change as I become more educated on the situation. I was as skeptical of this situation when I started researching it but as I have spoken to biologists it seems like they know what they are doing and have answers for armchair quarterbacks like us. I recorded a 1 hour 45 minute discussion with Scott McCourquodale that I will be posting soon. Might update you on what I’ve found out.

[villajac29]

I would also be all for opening up the units the Indians hunt for any elk in all seasons until they are gone. Hopefully it would open their eyes and get the Indians on board with some sort of a management plan and them rebuild the herds back up. It would suck short term but would be worth it long term.

It saddens me how many hunters are saying this... this is not management and conservation, it is throwing a temper tantrum. I spoke with a biologist today who has worked for the Yakamas and understands their harvest and the data surrounding it. According to him it is unlikely that out of 10,000 registered Yakamas (including babies, children and the elderly) that the hunting population which is even smaller harvests enough elk for it to become problematic.

We have to start looking big picture. If tribal members were over-harvesting to the point many of you saying they are the numbers wouldn't be stagnant they would be decreasing significantly each year. It just doesn't add up. Maybe just maybe if non-tribal hunters were less antagonistic towards something we can't change and started a conversation with tribal members and tried to connect with them to start to build a relationship maybe they would see the importance of reporting their harvest. It will be impossible to change anything if you are always so fervently opposed to tribes harvesting elk. It happened before the decline whether you were seeing it or not... it is sustainable. I just hope some people on here stop acting like children and being mindful enough to be patient and think through what really can be done to help things. And if its us that's sacrificing something that goes to show we really care about the wildlife not just "what I want".

Sorry for the soapbox but its hard listening to another person say we should just kill all the elk and start back where we were 100 years ago, makes me sick...

The Tribe has a long history of not trusting the department and  non Tribal members. If the tribal Bio has good data that could be shared it would help a lot. I also wouldn't be surprised that old grudges die hard.

More communication is necessary to overcome this issue and neither side seems overly interested.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Glad someone else thinks so

[villajac29]

So much of this is assuming that herds are down and need help. I can't and won't speak to the blues but theres nothing wrong in Colockum and yakima short of poor counting and slight dip in numbers following an all time high of just a few years ago.

KF's article is very telling. Colockum and yakima populations haven't really changed in the last 30 years because that's what the land will support.  Despite the "explosion" of predators elk are still thriving. Weird.

I'm sorry to get back into discussion about this but from what I understand from talking to two biologists in the area who have been working in this field for 30+ years the elk are likely below objective. 2019 had a substantial late snow and counts were accurate enough to get an idea about overall population. Calf to Cow ratios are easy to get with feed sights because calves distribute more evenly within these populations. It's not just about overall populations. 800 animals below the "9000" objective line isn't much but it's enough to realize that at that number for whatever reason the elk aren't recruiting like when the total is at 10000+. If recruitment is low then harvest will be low.

Just like a bank account if you are taking more out than what goes in then you loose money. Very simple metaphor. Until the calf recruitment increases to 30+ we won't be able to harvest at a more liberal number.

I'd like to believe circumstantial evidence in you spending time in there but since your not the scientist doing surveys and data analysis which can sometimes be more insightful than actual surveys I'm incline to believe the people whose job its been for most of their lives.

counting a feed lot on a mild winter is what we like to call phoning it in. Just because a guy has been on the payroll for 30 years doesnt mean he is good at his job.  I spend a whole lot of time in the hills and they are missing a lot of animals. They just are.

We could spend our whole life in those hills and not be able to see everything... data analysis means that they are looking at more than just their survey data. I used to be skeptical like you but after two long discussions face to face with biologist's I'm incline to believe they know what they are doing.

For me 30 years is better resume than I spend a lot of time in the hills... sorry

When you talked to the 2 bios did you ask about the survey work? Which of the bios did the count, and what areas did they fly and why?

I listened to the podcast. It was interesting, but regardless of what my thoughts are on your proposals the $ impacts Trump everything. If you are going to dive deeper into this subject, you will need access to the bean counters. I will bet that interview/ conversation will be much harder to come by.

I Admire your passion and wish is was involved with one of the many great sportsmens groups in the state.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

The interesting part of that is Biologists rarely get involved with the dollars involved. That tends to happen in Olympia and with the commission. The Biologists I’ve talked to mainly focus on what the situation is and what can be done to effect it. A lot of what actually gets decided is how commissioners and others interpret what needs to be done. I’m gonna try to figure out at what level that happens? And try to have that conversation and record it for everyone. It definitely has to play a role but most biologists are focused on the animals not how revenue effects management.