Hunters need to make a Statement

[Skyvalhunter]

Agree with Dale in that each area has its owns causes some more than others. My area has a high predator problem with minimal habitat loss. In fact logging on the past has opened it up so food source is abundant.

[hunter399]

I think everyone relates to the problems in the areas they hunt. Karl relates to human encroachment because that is happening in his area. I relate to predators because that's a huge issue in my area, and Humptulips suggested part of the problem is caused by poor hunting in western WA so more hunters travel east. I think we are all correct, some factors are probably bigger factors or lesser factors depending on which part of the state you have experience, but these are all problems our deer face. 

Karl, when I said I didn't think housing developments were the biggest problem, that there aren't enough deer to use the available habitat I was really thinking of NE Washington and I should have said that. In this area there is a lot of winter range that used to be full of mule deer, that winter range is still there, there are no housing developments, it's federal land that can't be developed. But our herds have so many predators they keep getting smaller. A prime example is the east slope of the Kettle Crest coming off Sherman Pass. There is a ton of empty winter range, much of it has locked gates, no access, no homes, you can't even blame the tribe, there's no access for them to get off the highway into most of that winter range. You really can't even blame hunters for the continued decline either, there has been no mule doe hunting for years here and bucks have to be bigger than 3 point, none of them live that long here. Literally very few mule deer are even legal to shoot here, yet they continue to decline.

I do understand the situation is different in your area and probably what you are professing is likely very accurate. 

The north half ,mule deer does,and bucks smaller than 3pts do get taken. I know one tribal member that took a spike and a doe out the same mule deer herd. Like same day.
I do agree with most you said, and in stevens county,and all of NE Washington that is not the north half,mule deer are still declined .So I can't really blame the tribe in those areas.
But the north half they have a very long season of like 4 deer and no state law apply . And yes a lot of the winter range is locked up. Natives have snowmobile and SXS and fourwheler and all that good stuff.

If you look at NE Washington as a whole with mule deer to not include the north half ,mule deer face a host of problems from predators are the biggest ,to poaching 3pt min,out of season hunting,SXS,ATV,EBIKES, in closed road areas.
Then habitat ,drought,fire,clear cuts,spraying brush,.
Look at a lot of NE units some will have 50 or less harvest rate for mule deer .
NE Washington should be permit only for mule deer a long time ago ,just looking at harvest rates alone in any GMU.

[elkboy]

In 1960 the population of WA state was 2.8 million people. In 2022 the population of WA state is 7.76 million people. Let that sink in a bit. Those people don't all live on house boats. To say that habitat loss and degradation isn't an issue with a population increase of almost 5 MILLION humans is crazy to me. And let's remember habitat and USABLE habitat are two very different things. All the rolling cheat grass hills in the world aren't gonna support very many MD. You can kill every single predator from that landscape and you still won't regain any meaningful numbers.

Does the current state of forest management make me sick? Yes. Does losing spring bear, hounds, bait, and the moratorium on killing wolves make me sick? YES! But to be so short sighted and stubborn as to put sole blame on the backs of predators is disappointing as you all have shown you have the intellect to look deeper than that.

We aren't getting hounds and bait back. Spring bear is fun but its a small management tool. We can more than make up for 146 bears if we all just put more effort into actually hunting them. And let's be honest, the likelihood of ever hunting a wolf in WA or OR in any of our lifetimes is closer to zero than it is 100%. Habitat enhancement is something we can still control and almost everyone can get behind. Predator killing divides the room before there is even a conversation started.

Yes, all this.  100%

Forest stands, whether west side or east side, tend to be overstocked, reducing understory forage production.  This doesn't help deer and elk.   
Slamming as many vacation homes as possible into places like the Methow doesn't help deer and elk.
High-fencing deer and elk from their historic winter range, as has been done in the east Cascades foothills, doesn't help deer and elk.  (Any elk get onto ag lands anyway?  Hammer 'em with dep tags!)
Failure to address the degradation of habitats by invasive plants doesn't help deer and elk. 
Society's continued intolerance of seasonal amounts of smoke from prescribed fires to stimulate forage production doesn't help deer and elk. 
And I do agree, predators can be part of the problem.  But we have to look at how the entire system, human and natural, is constituted at present.  And it's not in the favor of deer and elk. 

[hunter399]

In 1960 the population of WA state was 2.8 million people. In 2022 the population of WA state is 7.76 million people. Let that sink in a bit. Those people don't all live on house boats. To say that habitat loss and degradation isn't an issue with a population increase of almost 5 MILLION humans is crazy to me. And let's remember habitat and USABLE habitat are two very different things. All the rolling cheat grass hills in the world aren't gonna support very many MD. You can kill every single predator from that landscape and you still won't regain any meaningful numbers.

Does the current state of forest management make me sick? Yes. Does losing spring bear, hounds, bait, and the moratorium on killing wolves make me sick? YES! But to be so short sighted and stubborn as to put sole blame on the backs of predators is disappointing as you all have shown you have the intellect to look deeper than that.

We aren't getting hounds and bait back. Spring bear is fun but its a small management tool. We can more than make up for 146 bears if we all just put more effort into actually hunting them. And let's be honest, the likelihood of ever hunting a wolf in WA or OR in any of our lifetimes is closer to zero than it is 100%. Habitat enhancement is something we can still control and almost everyone can get behind. Predator killing divides the room before there is even a conversation started.

Yes, all this.  100%

Forest stands, whether west side or east side, tend to be overstocked, reducing understory forage production.  This doesn't help deer and elk.   
Slamming as many vacation homes as possible into places like the Methow doesn't help deer and elk.
High-fencing deer and elk from their historic winter range, as has been done in the east Cascades foothills, doesn't help deer and elk.  (Any elk get onto ag lands anyway?  Hammer 'em with dep tags!)
Failure to address the degradation of habitats by invasive plants doesn't help deer and elk. 
Society's continued intolerance of seasonal amounts of smoke from prescribed fires to stimulate forage production doesn't help deer and elk. 
And I do agree, predators can be part of the problem.  But we have to look at how the entire system, human and natural, is constituted at present.  And it's not in the favor of deer and elk.

I agree guys ,many factors out there. And only so many we can control.
And that's where we should start. It's pretty obvious the APR for mule deer has worked over the years. But we are still on the down hill trend . May have to think about some permit areas in the future ,where mule deer are hurting the most.

[KFhunter]

I'm always for habitat improvements, from grazing underutilized forested areas to reduce brush, build trails and reduction of fire intensity

Working with landowners to improve habitat with no strings attached

I stopped by the pheasants forever booth and asked about habitat on my property and they said they don't do that, then I asked about chicks, don't do that either, but could put me in touch with a bio. (Which means out of pocket improvements) 
I left their booth wondering wth do they do then? if not habitat work?

As for large land being broken up into small land,  perhaps look at zoning laws,  used to be I could only break up to 20 ac chunks, now its like 5 ac chunks I think, in winter ranges maybe some pressure could be applied to keep larger lots rather than many small lots.  That's very local at county commission I believe.

I know a lot of hunters hate seeing cattle on their bait sites, but they really can improve habitat if done right.  Much of our habitat is way way underutilized so the understory grows way thick, then fires way too hot that sterilization happens. We need to encourage responsible grazing.  It's impossible to get good labor so hunting groups need to get active in these contracts as far as improvements go.  Water tanks help elk, deer and all species besides just cattle.

We need to open roads, hunting isn't just for the guys that pack in miles, its for all ages, classes and types of people.  We need to quit bottling them up on a fraction of the roads they used to have access on. This also helps fire suppression, but aslo prescriptive burns as well as it reduces risk factors and gets approved easier if there's access. 

And yes, we need a great deal of predator reduction in all areas of the state.  It's not a coincidence that in the 90's hunting was in its heyday and then started a methodical decline with banning much of our trapping. 

All sectors need looked at, all angles.  This starts at the ballot box.

[baldopepper]

I certainly agree that every area has different factors effecting big game populations. I can really only comment on areas that I've hunted for the last 30-40 years. While I don't completely underestimate predator problems, why am I seeing areas with heavy restricted human intrusion,, meaning big chunks of private, posted property doing quite well with their big game populations?  I see it in Utah where populations around the big cwmu's keep human pressure down and I see it around my home in the ne corner where more and more ground has been posted.. Signs don't keep  the predators out. I can honestly take a 30 minute drive from my place and show you you easily 3-400 deer where 25 years ago it would be closer to 40-50. But, where you'd see them is on restricted, private property much of which was not restricted 10-15 years ago.  In my area at least, hunter oriented human intrusion is a far bigger factor than predators or at least that's the only conclusion I can come up with.

[buckfvr]

I dont believe for one second that there is more deer here anywhere than there was 20 years+- ago.  I do think animals in certain areas have been redistributed making it look as though there are more animals when in actuality there is not.  Predators to include man, have greatly altered herd dynamics.

For me, most notably in 121 and 101, many of the spots that were my go-to spots hold very few animals (especially within reasonable proximity of known wolf pack) now to the point of no longer spending much if any time there.  Finding a landing to spend the day glassing, now means a constant parade of every type of vehicle in 10-minute increments disrupting the peace.  Dont say go back in farther to get away from the road runners because you cant in many places and these are places where you "USED" to be able to find deer reliably.

Its all changed/changing for the foreseeable.

[baldopepper]

I dont believe for one second that there is more deer here anywhere than there was 20 years+- ago.  I do think animals in certain areas have been redistributed making it look as though there are more animals when in actuality there is not.  Predators to include man, have greatly altered herd dynamics.

For me, most notably in 121 and 101, many of the spots that were my go-to spots hold very few animals (especially within reasonable proximity of known wolf pack) now to the point of no longer spending much if any time there.  Finding a landing to spend the day glassing, now means a constant parade of every type of vehicle in 10-minute increments disrupting the peace.  Dont say go back in farther to get away from the road runners because you cant in many places and these are places where you "USED" to be able to find deer reliably.

Its all changed/changing for the foreseeable.

kind of agree, but the point is that where they have redistributed to they are doing very well.  Agreed, it is all changing, animals are moving out of those high traffic, heavily hunted areas and moving into those areas with less aggressive traffic and fewer orange outfits wandering around.Fawn production around my area was excellent last year, most does with fawns and lots of twins. With hunting areas being compacted more every year the traffic in open areas has forced animals to make the move, and they aren't migrating out like they used to.

[buckfvr]

Agree.  From my perspective, hwy 25 corridor and lower end of Addy/Cedonia see more resident deer rather than like you say, migrators, that leave and move back to higher ground with the green up.  I still see areas of mules that recede higher up into the hills with the snow line, but its small local herds that seem to disappear in the timber with any human intrusion.

[hunter399]

Agree.  From my perspective, hwy 25 corridor and lower end of Addy/Cedonia see more resident deer rather than like you say, migrators, that leave and move back to higher ground with the green up.  I still see areas of mules that recede higher up into the hills with the snow line, but its small local herds that seem to disappear in the timber with any human intrusion.

I agree that's the truth.
Had a few areas you could glass up 50 in a day,no problem.
Same spot now ,your lucky 5 a day to glass up .

[KFhunter]

The redistribution thing is easily explained when you consider that just about every patch of dirt had hay or crops on it 15-20 years ago, deer didn't have far to go to find high quality feed.

Also in that time-frame footholds for yotes ended, as well as hounds for cats and bears, it took ahwile for their pops to explode and show an effect on deer. 

Now we see good pops of deer on mostly private property, where tbere is high quality feed, cover and suitable conditions they can carry good numbers as predators don't like otber predators around, they don't stack up..kinda

Higher elevation backwoods deer aren't thriving, aren't keeping fawns and so natural selection is favoring lower elevation deer that live generations on mostly private lands. 

This is disrupting to migratory trends where higher elevation deer come low to winter out, and affecting species at those elevations that use deer and deer carcasses.

What we're seeing now is higher elevations devoid of deer during prime seasons when they should be there, as none were born with those migration routes ingrained in them from generations prior.   A deer isn't going to strike out on it's own and think "hmm, I think I'll summer way up there in tbat saddle this year!"   No, it would have taken a doe to drag its fawn up there, and in turn drag its fawn up there so on so forth. Old lead does dragging family units up year after year.

Those chains of migratory knowledge are being broken.

[baldopepper]

Already some around me are putting in food plots. Another rather large chunk nearby was recently purchased by a group of hunters to use exclusively for hunting. Property costs are so high, I expect to see more group purchases rather than one guy buying a little piece and putting a hunting cabin on it. Don't think it's a good trend for hunting in general, but as we all know of, things are changing.  Buying into a hunting club or using an outfitter with leased land, I think is going to be more common in the future.

[Jingles]

The redistribution thing is easily explained when you consider that just about every patch of dirt had hay or crops on it 15-20 years ago, deer didn't have far to go to find high quality feed.

Also in that time-frame footholds for yotes ended, as well as hounds for cats and bears, it took ahwile for their pops to explode and show an effect on deer. 

Now we see good pops of deer on mostly private property, where tbere is high quality feed, cover and suitable conditions they can carry good numbers as predators don't like otber predators around, they don't stack up..kinda

Higher elevation backwoods deer aren't thriving, aren't keeping fawns and so natural selection is favoring lower elevation deer that live generations on mostly private lands. 

This is disrupting to migratory trends where higher elevation deer come low to winter out, and affecting species at those elevations that use deer and deer carcasses.

What we're seeing now is higher elevations devoid of deer during prime seasons when they should be there, as none were born with those migration routes ingrained in them from generations prior.   A deer isn't going to strike out on it's own and think "hmm, I think I'll summer way up there in tbat saddle this year!"   No, it would have taken a doe to drag its fawn up there, and in turn drag its fawn up there so on so forth. Old lead does dragging family units up year after year.

Those chains of migratory knowledge are being broken.

WDFW and even  a large number of hunters will not admit that the Winter kill of 95/96  had a severe impact on the deer not migrating back to the high country mainly because the shere number of lead does that died off. When you could find 20, to 40 deer within a 100 yards of each other it does not take a Masters in Rocket science to realize the impact that is going to have on migration patterns, and when the generation that survived didn't migrate but stuck around in the low Lands and in towns the following generations did the same, kinda like 3rd and 4th generation welfare recipients in the human race

[baldopepper]

Who is the average hunter now? 30 years ago a guy worked a 40 hour work week, got the weekends off, got 3-4 weeks off and his kids loved going hunting or getting outdoors because there wasn't anything on TV they wanted to watch. Gas was $1.50 gallon and they didn't didn't have huge phone and internet bills to deal with.  Now many are working 60+ hour works, get PTO time instead of vacation time and if they get sick they burn up all their PTO time. Wife has to work to make ends meet so any time off has to be juggled around her schedule as well. Kids will go with, but God forgive if you wander out of cell phone range. Fuel costs bogel your mind, and make them rethink driving out for much pre hunt scouting and then they get ridiculed if they shoot anything less than than a fully mature buck or bull. All the old favorite spots look like a footballs game parking lot and ORV and 4wd flying by make them think of I-5 at rush hour.  They can't get off work during the week to hunt or scout when the crowds are down. So the east coast or deep south method of joining a club or hiring a guide looks pretty appealing. Farmers and ranchers who are struggling are much more willing to take in the extra money from privatizing and leasing out their land. Big land owners have discovered that getting then selling landowner permits can be very lucrative.Anti's and animal rights groups laugh at our inability to quit squabbling amongst ourselves and make a concentrated effort to change things Game animals are learning how to read "No Trespassing" at a very young age.  We're still a little behind the curve in the west, but we're catching up quickly.  I'm lucky, have memories of the good old days but not optimistic for the future of the average type hunter.

[KFhunter]

You laid out very well why I didn't vote Inslee or any dems save one in a local race