WDFW NOT Closing ~15,000 acres of public land to hunting!

[JoeVon]

Is anyone getting this out on the social media circuit?

[fireweed]

This site is my only social media forum so I would hope someone else can advertise this.  The issue is found under ELK and under Region 5 boundary adjustments.

3. Adding Elk Area 5066 (Norway Pass) to GMU 522 (Loo-Wit). Anticipated effects include reductions in hunter confusion and resulting enforcement issues. Other anticipated effects include the elimination of opportunities to hunt other game species in Elk Area 5066. However, these effects are anticipated to be minor because very few hunters report hunting activity for other game species in Elk Area 5066

This is a high intensity backcountry hunt for elk--and also anyone can hunt deer, bear or small game here.  Just because there isn't a high amount of hunter report doesn't mean nobody hunts here.  Getting popular with bear and always provided a rugged high buck type hunt.
 

[BULLBLASTER]

Is “elk area 5066” even an option when reporting hunting or success for any other species than elk? Mayne thats why nobody reports anything but elk there?

[millerwheeler]

There are a ton of rule changes that should be very concerning. To a lot of us , every inch we give them we lose 10 more

[hard hunter]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention...commented in the survey as well

[KFhunter]

One of the reasons was enforcement?


imo difficult enforcement is not a valid reason for closures.

[BULLBLASTER]

One of the reasons was enforcement?


imo difficult enforcement is not a valid reason for closures.

[pianoman9701]

"Leave elk area 5066 alone. Some hunters are always confused, especially with our regs. And sorry if our hunting privileges create enforcement issues. But hunter access should not be negatively affected to make enforcement easier. You could shut down all hunting and that would help enforcement issues. Just say no!"

[Bullkllr]

One of the reasons was enforcement?


imo difficult enforcement is not a valid reason for closures.

With only a few possible access points, I'm not sure it's even true. Less so than most hike-in areas, imho.

Is “elk area 5066” even an option when reporting hunting or success for any other species than elk? Mayne thats why nobody reports anything but elk there?

It's still part of GMU 524

[lastmk8]

It's BS they lump several items together. They throw a couple carrots in there with a real turd . Every individual item should have agree/disagree/neutral.

Excellent comment, unfortunately, this is exactly how "Politics" works in this country, at all levels.  Anyone can sell a turd, just wrap enough fluff around it.  Sad, yet very True.

[fireweed]

Remember, this whole issue of "confusion" started with the Weyerhaeuser access permit.  The Margaret Unit was always elk hunting by permit, but when Weyco went pay-to-play, the wdfw decided to make it easy for the company, and lifted the special draw requirement for elk, making the Margaret unit a general hunt.  Elk numbers had really dropped there--except for the USFS part of the Margaret.  To keep that area from being overrun by regular non-Weyco permit hunters, the WDFW created a special elk permit just for that USFS Monument area (5066).  Now they want to hurt the regular hunter more, but closing that area to all other hunting by shifting it to the Loowit unit.  This whole scheme makes a Weyco permit even more valuable!  Regular hunters get shafted all around.

[fireweed]

As of today, only 16% of survey respondents were "against" this set of proposals and 24% neutral. 
Go change your vote if you clicked agree!

[pianoman9701]

I wonder how many of the 60% agreed actually hunt. I'm betting not many.

[Mtnwalker]

I was curious why it was showing current support numbers for some but not others? This proposal in particular seemed to be formatted in such a way to cultivate the response they were hoping to get. I commented and then also went and commented to the commission after I was done with the survey, about the way it lumped contradictory proposals together as 1 agree or disagree item.

[hunterednate]

Thanks for bringing this up. I disagreed and left a comment as well. Part of my beef with this is that there were THREE options in the initial survey, one of which included adding 5066 to Loowit with the provision that bear hunting, grouse hunting, etc. would still be permitted in this portion of Loowit. That option seems to have disappeared, but may have inflated the initial number of respondents in favor or the change in survey 1. Seems misleading to not eliminated that option after the first survey.