STOP KILLING THE BABY MAKERS

[NRA4LIFE]

If you just do some simple number crunching, I'm guessing cougars alone kill 25 times more does than are legally killed by hunters.

[KFhunter]

Some thoughts...

Females in deer and elk populations are largely what controls the population abundance/productivity.  One male (buck or bull) can breed a lot of females in a year, so they are rarely the limiting factor.  Female harvest is one of the biggest tools wildlife managers have for addressing herd abundance.

Folks blame the WDFW and hunters for harvesting/allowing harvest of females - but the elephant in the room in ALL western states is social tolerance.  There are a lot of commerical ag groups and wildlife conflict issues that drive wildlife management decisions.  Elk and deer eating crops, getting into hay, orchards, vineyards all reduce social tolerance and often result in wildlife managers increasing female harvest...with the express purpose of reducing the number of elk and deer on the landscape. 

In addition to social tolerance, available winter range is much lower than historical availability in a lot of states and wildlife managers often do not want populations to get to a point that they damage (overgraze) available winter range.  So, they use female harvest to help ensure populations do not exceed what the winter range can sustainably support.

To minimize the hair on fire of those that like to screech incessantly/only about predators - I want to also be clear that hunter harvest of females is often additive to predator harvest of females (and calves/fawns), so Washington's reduction of bear harvest, no meaningful cougar harvest, and the expansion of wolves also contributes to reduced productivity and in some areas of the state this is very problematic.  That said - a large swath of GMU's in WA - and many units in other western states with much more liberal predator harvest - still have far lower big game herds as a result of social tolerance (e.g., farm bureaus advocating reduced herds) and winter range loss.

Low social tolerance and winter range reduction = more female harvest by wildlife managers/hunters.

I would agree if wdfw used the same social tolerance on predators

Bears tear up more orchards than any deer or elk, peel trees, eat fawns calves and yet....

The commission is using social tolerance not of people affected, but that of people least affected by bears and other predators

So it seems social tolerance only works whens its beneficial to the agenda

[boneaddict]

JReb, I do believe predator harvest is important, kill lots of them, need to kill more.
I do like big bucks and bulls, but enjoy most wildlife.  For god sakes I take butterfly pics.  I have noted that the bigger ones are more appreciated than the little ones. Today’s small buck pic will be buried by day two.  So there’s is that.  I’m here trying to save does for gosh sakes.  Lol

Ida, good post.   There is some anecdotal funniness to that in the valley.  They created more Muley doe opportunity on the valley floor because of an influx.   There was an influx because the wolves drove them there. Lol.   The deer found it safer dodging cars eating flowers and playing with Fido versus being ate by big Fido in the foothills. 

Probably a lot more than that NRA, wolves too
Bobcat, do you know if those numbers were from decreased tags, or lack of harvest because of fewer animals.   Thanks for the numbers.

[boneaddict]

And I’ll try to head it off at the pass, I didn’t go to the last commission meeting, I didn’t scream stop doe tags there.  I’m obviously not as righteous as I claimed earlier.   

You win!  Shooting the producer is good business.   Just ask Biden. Lol

[KFhunter]

I have noted that the bigger ones are more appreciated than the little ones. Today’s small buck pic will be buried by day two.

Kinda like the youtuber syndrome, gotta have boobs and butts to get any views

[Gringo31]

I don't think it's fair to assume most hunters understand conservation when our own WDFW clearly doesn't.  I will support any one making a comment, stating a belief if they are willing to have the discussion as to why.


All that being said, I understand the need for more harvest on say westside island deer.  I can NOT get my head around the attempt to dramatically reduce the mule deer herd in Washtucna.  I believe the mule doe permits are around 700 this year. 

Deer numbers are down and I believe it's on purpose. 

Personally, I think doe harvest should be limited to first time hunters, over 65 etc in areas that need it.

[buckfvr]

I think very strongly they backed off the doe harvest in the ne to placate wolf predation, stall the cattle conflict if possible (not).  Just like when they ended any elk hunts in the ne.  Cows (elk) are for wolves.

Preferring mature animals does not make you the sinister "trophy hunter" .   To each his own.

[duckmen1]

There is a lot of talk on here about how amazing blacktail numbers are. In some areas yes. But a lot of areas I hunt have shown drastic reduction in deer numbers. Areas we used to see 20 to 40 deer a day now if we see one to five its a good day. Or in other areas 5 to 10 deer a day were pretty good. If you go out now if you see a deer in 3 or 4 days out you feel lucky. Then there are areas that used to be good for deer. But elk numbers have risen. And deer numbers have drastically gone down. And one thing I can say for certain is it is nuts how high bear populations have gotten. My group does its part and hunts bears relatively hard. And seem to always tag some bears every year. 3 this year to be exact and could have been more had circumstances not have came about. So on that end we are trying to help. And did our part during the off season we took 13 coyotes in areas that the coyotes pound the deer. We are always trying to help on managing predators. And I put in for doe tags but focus on breaking down factors in doing so in areas with high deer numbers.

With blue toungue and all the other hard winters and disease in the last 8 years on whitetails I am suprised at the long seasons including the late hunt for whitetail in november with such low numbers. I honestly I quit hunting whitetails under my own ethics completely as areas used to thrive with whitetails but are almost non exhistant now. So I don't feel right in harvesting a whitetail from those areas buck or doe.
Now some units are doing better than others and that is where science based off of individual units a little more thorough would be better off in setting seasons and tags. They do to a point but could maybe do a little better I am sure.

But I did harvest a second doe tag mulie in an area that has fairly stable number of deer.  Filled my freezer to feed my family. But took in factors and ethics to the unit and area in doing so. Passed on every doe that had yearling. Waiting for a doe that I felt ok ethically in taking.

We all need to work together. Use ethics to the best we can. And stick together. But push for management within the wdfw to be based off science, not emotion.

I won't appologize for hunting legally with my tag. But I do understand the posts meaning and agenda and fully respect that too. We all would love to see high deer numbers. And all should do something to try to see improvement in one way or another.

[timberfaller]

We all need to work together. Use ethics to the best we can. And stick together. But push for management within the wdfw to be based off science, not emotion.

 

  duckmen1

[C-Money]

You win!  Shooting the producer is good business.   Just ask Biden. Lol
[/quote]

Ain't that the truth.

We didn't draw any permits, so its bucks for us this year. Thankfully we butchered a steer late summer, so we are good. A lot of years, I/we/family walk a line between store beef or doe/buck venison. The additional cost of applying for a doe tag, some years, puts meat in the freezer. I totally understand what Bone is saying in the OP, and I'm not offended or upset about the statement. He is right. In the same breath, we will continue to take advantage of doe tags in our area when we can, because we like to eat. Whitetail does that have filtered into muley country take priority over a muley doe, but it doesn't always work out that way. We have ate doe tags in good years because we have enough venison with our general buck tags.

[trophyhunt]

We actually felt kinda bad about killing our two cow moose last year in Huckleberry, we did see a few cows, but for the most part feel there should be no cow moose hunts in any unit.  But that is an uneducated opinion, I don't know enough about the resources, just a feeling.  So if we felt bad, why did we do it??  Because the tags were offered and I trust (barely) that they have a reason for a number of cows to be removed, and because it's an exotic hunt that you just don't get to do ever.   I believe some deer units can give up some doe tags, I also agree those tags should go to youth and 65 over.  But, lets not forget, most hunters hunt for meat.  Not everyone is a trophy hunter, so if the population can sustain it, I'm not against the killing of the baby makers.

[KFhunter]

Cow moose (and elk) should absolutely be discontinued, so should most all doe hunts this side of the Cascades

[bobcat]

Cow moose (and elk) should absolutely be discontinued, so should most all doe hunts this side of the Cascades

I agree

[jrebel]

Cow moose (and elk) should absolutely be discontinued, so should most all doe hunts this side of the Cascades

Moose specifically.....would you agree with your statement prior to the wolf population blowing up?  Asking because I never really payed attention to moose numbers till after the wolves were established. 

[furbearer365]

There is simply no need for an able bodied adult to get a doe and/or a second deer (doe), all the while our youth are stuck trying to draw a doe tag. All draw doe or cow draw tags should be abolish and our youth and disabled should be given "any deer" and "any elk."  Pretty sick that a 40 year old can draw a 2nd deer tag to harvest a doe, but my 12 year old son is forced to find a buck.