Year round Bull Elk season

[trophyhunt]

I have the “data” for all Idaho units and it’s all pretty similar. The dates change as the wolves migrated to nee areas then you see the impact regionally. I have also looked up overall harvest from the idfg for those time frames and it obviously shows the same decline. 13 years of aggressive wolf management has helped a lot but it took a few years of hunting and trapping before we saw any benefits. There is a ton of information that all support the fact that wolves eat elk, the more wolves you have the less elk you will have. We don’t really need graphs and data to understand that do we ? Back to the topic I have no resentment against natives hunting because I don’t and never have hunted Washington. As a lover of elk I think it’s absurd that one user group has a year round unlimited season on a herd facing massive challenges(wolves,bears,lions) and I’m sure at least some loss of habitat. To ignore this fact and just focus on everything else is wrong. Can you change it? You won’t know if you don’t try. I already said it’s in the best interest of the tribe to have some reasonable regulations. It has nothing to do with taking away their rights but at least have some common sense. I think a lot of people don’t want to speak up because they fear not being politically correct. That b.s. the elk need a voice

thank you for taking the time to post, you nailed it again, especially in your last paragraph ! The zero limits on deer and elk issue seems to always get deflected to an ignorance or taking away of tribal rights deal.  The question remains, as it always has! How the F can you manage herds when certain people have ZERO management and NO limits.  And if numbers and stats are so important, WHERE are the yakamas numbers??  And would they contain ANY factual info?  I’ve said this a hundred times but I’ll say it again. Not all tribes are abusers and have no management, some do it well.

[ribka]

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?

Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

[trophyhunt]

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?

Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Excellent comment!!  I may be going out on a limb here, but no way you will get that info!!!

[idaho guy]

I have the “data” for all Idaho units and it’s all pretty similar. The dates change as the wolves migrated to nee areas then you see the impact regionally. I have also looked up overall harvest from the idfg for those time frames and it obviously shows the same decline. 13 years of aggressive wolf management has helped a lot but it took a few years of hunting and trapping before we saw any benefits. There is a ton of information that all support the fact that wolves eat elk, the more wolves you have the less elk you will have. We don’t really need graphs and data to understand that do we ? Back to the topic I have no resentment against natives hunting because I don’t and never have hunted Washington. As a lover of elk I think it’s absurd that one user group has a year round unlimited season on a herd facing massive challenges(wolves,bears,lions) and I’m sure at least some loss of habitat. To ignore this fact and just focus on everything else is wrong. Can you change it? You won’t know if you don’t try. I already said it’s in the best interest of the tribe to have some reasonable regulations. It has nothing to do with taking away their rights but at least have some common sense. I think a lot of people don’t want to speak up because they fear not being politically correct. That b.s. the elk need a voice

First off thank you for the data.  I only looked up what was quickly available and more specifically the panhandle. I'm not sure what is considered north Idaho. I also have talked in detail with idfg representatives.  They said Selway and Lolo are hit the hardest but (according to them) most units in the state have adapted and elk hunting is stable.  I agree that they are marketing and I can get the name of person I communicated with but he was very anti wolf.
As for regulations, tribes do have them.  More specifically, I am not really quick to judge a tribe for having a year round season on bull elk and a 3 month season on cows when the state runs an arbitrary ad hoc season on cows from July 1st to March 31st with significant harvest and their main widget of success is dead cow elk.  Now if I'm looking at herd drivers I'll advocate for the herd drivers (cows) and allow more liberal bull harvest. Switch gears and discuss priorities, agricultural business vs treaty rights, I would again advocate for a formal agreement in the treaty which is firmly backed by sticky VI paragraph 2. Like always there is considerably more than meets the eye and many minds will not change regardless of commitments to resource management by tribes. I also acknowledge the need for agribusiness in this state as well as it being a key component of treaty negotiation. Wildlife in general has not received a fair representation and we are definitely weighted to the detriment of wildlife in overarching comprehensive management schemes.

 

  I agree with you on the ag depredation tags we definitely have that same scenario playing out in Idaho. 4 and 5 month cow tags don’t make sense but ironically the wolves made that situation way worse pushing big herds practically to town. Idfg will publish the most favorable data and make that most readily available after all they are in the business of selling tags to pay there salaries. I have no issues with that and respect greatly the job idfg is doing but they have to sell non- res tags.it is frustrating when people say “Idaho’s had wolves for 25 years and they are killing even more elk!!?” The anti hunters and pro wolves crowd twists that all the time and then tell us to “follow the data” but only there cherry picked data is good. The panhandle units have mostly stabilized but not everywhere and that’s after 13 years of aggressive management taking on average 400-500 wolves out each year. What would it look like if we had not taken out 5000-6000 wolves? It’s a good discussion and I appreciate where you are coming from especially with the ag depredation cow tags. I just get frustrated with the other side using cherry picked stats to promote the idea of high wolf populations existing with high elk populations. Like I said wolves eat elk, lots of elk, we don’t need graphs to understand that lots of wolves mean significant reductions in elk herds. Beware they will use that same data from idfg to prove Washington doesn’t need to aggressively manage wolves. They(center for biological diversity, defenders of wildlife etc etc) used those same charts to get wolves re introduced to Colorado. Idaho is doing good to great depending on the area, but I hate to see the same lies repeatedly used to screw other states just like they screwed Idaho. I think it’s important to look at Idaho using factual time frames and units so other states can have a counter argument. Repeating information put out in the best light possible is dangerous a lot can be learned from Idaho’s experience but you have to look at the facts not propaganda or “sales literature “. you make a lot of good points that I agree with. I’m a little over passionate about uncontrolled predators both the 4 legged and two legged varieties. I just love elk and passed on multiple legal cows last year (one in my back pasture) and a small bull. I have shot lots of cows but this particular herd seems to have been hit hard by depredation tags down low and wolves up high. I love big horns but am probably a meat hunter at heart. I would think the tribe would have the same feelings about the elk herds so I think people need to speak up about unlimited hunting and then conservation. I guess I think they would come to the table especially if it was done in conjunction with ag depredation tags as I think you suggested.mix that discussion with predator control, habitat and stiffer prosecutions of non native poaching and you could come up with a plan addressing ALL the issues. I think the tribe would be KEY in controlling predators as liberals won’t speak against them because of their overwhelming fear of appearing politically incorrect.  Thanks for the discussion and sorry for the long winded response trying to put off a fencing job this morning 😂 You can fight for what we’re  once iconic elk herds or say screw it and come hunt Idaho 😂

[dvolmer]

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?

Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Excellent comment!!  I may be going out on a limb here, but no way you will get that info!!!

They dont have that information to give.  They dont require it of their members.

[idaho guy]

I have the “data” for all Idaho units and it’s all pretty similar. The dates change as the wolves migrated to nee areas then you see the impact regionally. I have also looked up overall harvest from the idfg for those time frames and it obviously shows the same decline. 13 years of aggressive wolf management has helped a lot but it took a few years of hunting and trapping before we saw any benefits. There is a ton of information that all support the fact that wolves eat elk, the more wolves you have the less elk you will have. We don’t really need graphs and data to understand that do we ? Back to the topic I have no resentment against natives hunting because I don’t and never have hunted Washington. As a lover of elk I think it’s absurd that one user group has a year round unlimited season on a herd facing massive challenges(wolves,bears,lions) and I’m sure at least some loss of habitat. To ignore this fact and just focus on everything else is wrong. Can you change it? You won’t know if you don’t try. I already said it’s in the best interest of the tribe to have some reasonable regulations. It has nothing to do with taking away their rights but at least have some common sense. I think a lot of people don’t want to speak up because they fear not being politically correct. That b.s. the elk need a voice

thank you for taking the time to post, you nailed it again, especially in your last paragraph ! The zero limits on deer and elk issue seems to always get deflected to an ignorance or taking away of tribal rights deal.  The question remains, as it always has! How the F can you manage herds when certain people have ZERO management and NO limits.  And if numbers and stats are so important, WHERE are the yakamas numbers??  And would they contain ANY factual info?  I’ve said this a hundred times but I’ll say it again. Not all tribes are abusers and have no management, some do it well.

   

Seems like common sense  but what do we know 

[bobdog86]

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?


Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

You cant just focus on Washington tribes….the Nez Perce, located in Idaho, harvest at will in the Southeast portion of the Blue Mountains, without fear of anything. You will never get any data or cooperation from them, as long as things remain status quo. I mentioned before, it’s not just Washington tribes.  The Nez Perce put a serious smack down on the elk in the Blues.

[idaho guy]

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?


Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

You cant just focus on Washington tribes….the Nez Perce, located in Idaho, harvest at will in the Southeast portion of the Blue Mountains, without fear of anything. You will never get any data or cooperation from them, as long as things remain status quo. I mentioned before, it’s not just Washington tribes.  The Nez Perce put a serious smack down on the elk in the Blues.

 

100 percent they might be the worst. The only good thing is there a small number that I know of. I know of a couple and it’s ridiculous what they can do down there.

[Caseyd]

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Why aren’t damage prevention permits any bull then?

[hunter399]

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Why aren’t damage prevention permits any bull then?

Shooting Bulls and Bucks is the standard for most management plans.
I'm not real impressed with the "Standard" from WDFW these days.
Do you want sustainable populations?
Do you want to see how low the numbers can go?
Do you want future generations to be able to hunt?

Or do you want to grow a herd,
Do you want to raise population.

Maybe I'm just greedy.
But sustainable and the standard are not cutting the mustard for me.
In order to grow a herd,or raise population,the standard mangement plans need to go in the round file.
Alot of what I'm saying apply to deer as well.

[idahohuntr]

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Why aren’t damage prevention permits any bull then?

Because the intent often times with crop/damage permits is to reduce herd size...which is most effective through female harvest...not males.

[hunter399]

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Why aren’t damage prevention permits any bull then?

Because the intent often times with crop/damage permits is to reduce herd size...which is most effective through female harvest...not males.

Damage permits are a double edge sword.
Most property owners want the damage stoped.
So reduced herd is really the only option.

[Platensek-po]

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Why aren’t damage prevention permits any bull then?

Because the intent often times with crop/damage permits is to reduce herd size...which is most effective through female harvest...not males.

Damage permits are a double edge sword.
Most property owners want the damage stoped.
So reduced herd is really the only option.

If this is true then it would seem that AG is a problem in having larger herds. Historically elk were plains animals that roamed in huge herds. We are seeing them revert to this behavior and it’s the reintroduction of wolves. They get out of the trees and into the open. That open land is usually full of ranches and ag now. It’s tough to balance all sides of the equation. I understand ranchers need to live as well but they are also the main reason we can’t have wild herds of bison on the landscape. We need vegetables but elk, sheep and deer need winter forage. So many pieces to this. Ranchers, Ag, natives, hunters, predators, state management or lack thereof, logging and pesticide spraying, and lots more I’m sure.

[ribka]

I always chuckle when someone, who has no clue, throws in some platitude about tribes and wildlife management. Of course they don't and never will collect data as they could care less about healthy deer and elk herds. Please prove wrong with some actual data.  This includes all of the tribes in the state. Just like not caring about salmon stocks when they place nets accross  spawning rivers.

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?

Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Excellent comment!!  I may be going out on a limb here, but no way you will get that info!!!

They dont have that information to give.  They dont require it of their members.

[Rainier10]

I always chuckle when someone, who has no clue, throws in some platitude about tribes and wildlife management. Of course they don't and never will collect data as they could care less about healthy deer and elk herds. Please prove wrong with some actual data.  This includes all of the tribes in the state. Just like not caring about salmon stocks when they place nets accross  spawning rivers.

Can you post the tribal harvest numbers for all tribes in Washington  for deer and elk in WA?  Can you post the units they were harvested in  too and the ratio of 5x5 or larger bulls to spikes harvested and the percentage of 4x4 or larger bucks and the units harvested in?  Just the last 25 years so as not to make it too time consuming.   

Im sure since the tribes have such a vested interest in a healthy ungulate populations( as you stated in your post)  they keep better records than WDFW.  Do they examine teeth too for age determination?

Can you post a 25 year graph of the Yakama and Puyallup tribal harvest spefically from the Yakama elk herd the past 25 years as you stated they had no affect on herd numbers. Can you post a graph of tribal permits issued too. Im curious where on the Yakama  Rez do they register their harvests? Is it done online? How many hunting violations have the tribal game wardens issued the past 10 years to tribal members?

I would be interested in the tribal harvest data from the Blues elk and deer herds too.

thanks

Lots of internet knowledge that perpetuates the divide.  Many in this thread wouldn't know an ally simply because they are closed minded and at times ignorant. The tribes have a vested interest in strong ungulate herds and work diligently to achieve this. Also if its about strong herd numbers, male preference in harvest is always preferable, period.  Any bull,  whether its a 100 inch bull or 400 inch bull, is a better choice for herd growth than a cow.  Also the spike harvest strategy employed by the wdfw is a choice which roots much of the jealousy spewed in these threads. There are many different harvest strategies that can accomplish biological minimums to achieve pregnancy rates that promote stable herds.  The true issue is predators as well as agricultural influence which not only competes for prime habitat but also has a dedicated section with significant harvest throughout the state. It was less than a decade ago when the Yakima herd was growing at an unsustainable rate according to wdfw, only two things have changed,  damage section was created and predators remained unchecked.  Tribal harvest has been static to decreasing to the best of my knowledge.  I do not claim to know what all tribes harvest but I do have a limited knowledge of harvest numbers.

Excellent comment!!  I may be going out on a limb here, but no way you will get that info!!!

They dont have that information to give.  They dont require it of their members.

I have seen the report for a bunch of tribes collectively in this state and it is broken down by tribe.  It is not mine to share but I assure you it exists and there are over 20 tribes in this state that do track this information.