WFWD Report on Courgars and Bears

[GOcougsHunter]

Some of these (ignorant) commissioners continue to try and make a case that if we don't have perfect information on bear numbers it's possible the populations are actually decreasing...clearly trying to make a case that the sky could be falling and we might not know.  The WDFW staff point to their various metrics and nothing concerning jumps out re: declines. Yet, we have extremely clear data on whats going on with Blue Mountains elk...and the contribution of predators...the hypocrisy, while not at all surprising, is absurd.   

I don't think ignorance is at play.  They need a reason to doubt and ignore WDFW biologists in favor of either a conservative stance or to open the door to varying opinions from alternate sources.

They ask WDFW something, WDFW goes back and collects/fixes/adjusts, comes back and the goalpost moves.

Regarding elk, they simply don't care.  There are no "save the elk" progressive groups as they are not cute.  Sad but true.

Actually there is one... Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.  This is not a dig at the RMEF, but, they have a big dog in this fight and I am not sure why they are kinda silent.  They are a big organization and  with that comes a lot of responsibilty and risk.  But advocating for a rapidly declining elk population would be in their wheelhouse, no?!

[Special T]

Some of these (ignorant) commissioners continue to try and make a case that if we don't have perfect information on bear numbers it's possible the populations are actually decreasing...clearly trying to make a case that the sky could be falling and we might not know.  The WDFW staff point to their various metrics and nothing concerning jumps out re: declines. Yet, we have extremely clear data on whats going on with Blue Mountains elk...and the contribution of predators...the hypocrisy, while not at all surprising, is absurd.   

I don't think ignorance is at play.  They need a reason to doubt and ignore WDFW biologists in favor of either a conservative stance or to open the door to varying opinions from alternate sources.

They ask WDFW something, WDFW goes back and collects/fixes/adjusts, comes back and the goalpost moves.

Regarding elk, they simply don't care.  There are no "save the elk" progressive groups as they are not cute.  Sad but true.

Actually there is one... Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.  This is not a dig at the RMEF, but, they have a big dog in this fight and I am not sure why they are kinda silent.  They are a big organization and  with that comes a lot of responsibilty and risk.  But advocating for a rapidly declining elk population would be in their wheelhouse, no?!

Most critter/habitat orgs will have strong words at best. They make too much money from grants and land transfers with the state/feds.

That said RMEF did speak against the proposed conservation policy, so good on them but don't expect more than that.

[MeepDog]

I just tried calling the RMEF main office and no answer. I'm really curious what theyre willing to do to help our blue mountain elk herd. Even a voice in a meeting would meaningful.

[Rainier10]

So you changed the season and bag limit and more bears were harvested?

Uh we changed those in eastern Washington and the same number of bears were harvested in eastern Washington. We changed very little in western Washington and harvest increased.

Why would it increase if you didn’t increase opportunity?

Uh… there are more bears, population is increasing, more people are general season hunting because there is no spring season.

[Griiz]

So you changed the season and bag limit and more bears were harvested?

Uh we changed those in eastern Washington and the same number of bears were harvested in eastern Washington. We changed very little in western Washington and harvest increased.

Why would it increase if you didn’t increase opportunity?

Uh… there are more bears, population is increasing, more people are general season hunting because there is no spring season.

Might have irritated people so they put more effort in. Bear hunting definitely has been a hot topic and that extra advertising might have gotten more people to try bear hunting too.

[MeepDog]

Why would it increase if you didn’t increase opportunity?

If they saw an increase in participation (which should be measurable) then that could contribute to a higher harvest rate of black bears without an increase in population. More guns would mean more bears, but again they have the participation data to check for this.

In fact you could have more bears taken than last year, with a lower success rate per person if the increase of hunters was high enough.

[KFhunter]

So you changed the season and bag limit and more bears were harvested?

Uh we changed those in eastern Washington and the same number of bears were harvested in eastern Washington. We changed very little in western Washington and harvest increased.

Why would it increase if you didn’t increase opportunity?

Uh… there are more bears, population is increasing, more people are general season hunting because there is no spring season.

Speaking about the NE corner I’m seeing changes in historic bear areas - I’m talking history dating back to hound hunting era when I rode around with them running hounds - some of these areas are now utterly devoid of bears, hidden away homestead apple trees with 6 inches of apples rotting on the ground,  where it should be covered so deep in bear dung you need muck boots

Other pockets still a ton of bears, but fall bear hunters need to make sure their area they’ve hunted for years is still carrying bears

Only reasoning I’ve got is wolves, harassment near wolf dens, or dragging bears out of dens in winter I’m not sure the cause, but I lean towards persistent wolf harassment near dens or rendezvous areas

[KFhunter]

Why would it increase if you didn’t increase opportunity?

If they saw an increase in participation (which should be measurable) then that could contribute to a higher harvest rate of black bears without an increase in population. More guns would mean more bears, but again they have the participation data to check for this.

In fact you could have more bears taken than last year, with a lower success rate per person if the increase of hunters was high enough.

I could see increased participation, given the giant spotlight that has been put on the issue

[Stein]

Some of these (ignorant) commissioners continue to try and make a case that if we don't have perfect information on bear numbers it's possible the populations are actually decreasing...clearly trying to make a case that the sky could be falling and we might not know.  The WDFW staff point to their various metrics and nothing concerning jumps out re: declines. Yet, we have extremely clear data on whats going on with Blue Mountains elk...and the contribution of predators...the hypocrisy, while not at all surprising, is absurd.   

I don't think ignorance is at play.  They need a reason to doubt and ignore WDFW biologists in favor of either a conservative stance or to open the door to varying opinions from alternate sources.

They ask WDFW something, WDFW goes back and collects/fixes/adjusts, comes back and the goalpost moves.

Regarding elk, they simply don't care.  There are no "save the elk" progressive groups as they are not cute.  Sad but true.

Actually there is one... Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.  This is not a dig at the RMEF, but, they have a big dog in this fight and I am not sure why they are kinda silent.  They are a big organization and  with that comes a lot of responsibilty and risk.  But advocating for a rapidly declining elk population would be in their wheelhouse, no?!

They are not what I would consider progressive, at least politically.

They also have a set amount of resources and I would expect them to put those resources where they can be best utilized.  If I was allocating resources, I wouldn't waste too many with the WDFW commission.

We keep pretending like some testimony is going to make one bit of difference.  It won't.  You could put up 100 reams of data and not one sentence would make a difference.  They were put into place to achieve an objective and it isn't supporting hunting and fishing or deer and elk herds.

[pickardjw]

They won't drop the, "estimates aren't accurate enough" argument until the WDFW lines up every bear and cougar and counts them one by one.

It still bugs me that Lemkuhl said he didn't understand why the numbers aren't as accurate as they are for salmon...

[GOcougsHunter]

They won't drop the, "estimates aren't accurate enough" argument until the WDFW lines up every bear and cougar and counts them one by one.

It still bugs me that Lemkuhl said he didn't understand why the numbers aren't as accurate as they are for salmon...

And they were asking the bios to reconcile why some habitats have less bear population per square km over others.  Why don't the numbers line up?  ummm...  cities...  lakes...  interstates...

[Special T]

The goal is to be able to say the commission is so dysfunctional that it should be eliminated and put directly under the govenor.

[Jake Dogfish]

These are some takeways we have. We cant push the narrative that "predators are the bad guys" anymore. We are harvesting them at sustainable levels and doing so for food should be the narrative. Soon as other topics like hunting vs conflict enter the discussion the waters become muddied quite quickly to say we don't have the science to meet management objectives. 25% tooth submission rates for bears and 47% non reporting at all. This makes us look bad and we all need to do better.

It’s time to flip the script.  The antis want more predators, with less and less food for them to eat.  You would not starve your family pet to death and we should not be doing that to our wildlife.  It’s unethical.  It’s time for hunters and fishers to take the moral high ground.

[KFhunter]

These are some takeways we have. We cant push the narrative that "predators are the bad guys" anymore. We are harvesting them at sustainable levels and doing so for food should be the narrative. Soon as other topics like hunting vs conflict enter the discussion the waters become muddied quite quickly to say we don't have the science to meet management objectives. 25% tooth submission rates for bears and 47% non reporting at all. This makes us look bad and we all need to do better.

It’s time to flip the script.  The antis want more predators, with less and less food for them to eat.  You would not starve your family pet to death and we should not be doing that to our wildlife.  It’s unethical.  It’s time for hunters and fishers to take the moral high ground.

I’m totally on board with taking the moral and ethical high ground….

Wake me up when we get a governor we can work with

[actionshooter]

Some of these (ignorant) commissioners continue to try and make a case that if we don't have perfect information on bear numbers it's possible the populations are actually decreasing...clearly trying to make a case that the sky could be falling and we might not know.  The WDFW staff point to their various metrics and nothing concerning jumps out re: declines. Yet, we have extremely clear data on whats going on with Blue Mountains elk...and the contribution of predators...the hypocrisy, while not at all surprising, is absurd.     

 They aren't ignorant... they know EXACTLY what they are doing, have a plan and are putting it into play.... when predator numbers are to high and ungulate numbers are too low... hunting in Washington is over