Free: Contests & Raffles.
I have no idea, that is the biologists' job to figure the numbers out. Where did you get your numbers? I can tell you that there was not 7,800 people that applied for archery bull elk permits. I added the numbers up and came up with about that, but that is not the number of people applying, it is the number of times a hunt got applied for, if that makes sense (probably doesn't)So if every person who applied for an archery bull elk permit in the 300 units put in for 4 choices, you can divide that 7,800 by 4 and that will give you the number of people that applied. I'm guessing not everybody would apply for 4 choices. The average might be 2, so divide it in half and 3,900 people applied.I'm not sure where you got the 5200 people archery hunting in the 300 units. I haven't found any report that gives that info. Unless you were looking at the 2007 harvest reports. In 2008 they left out all that information. All they give you is the number of animals killed per GMU, not the number of hunters.
Quote from: Sawbuck on March 04, 2010, 08:00:57 PMAnd no, I don't think that an 80% spike mortality rate is something that needs to be stopped. I would bet that that number is a little high; I'll give you that one. A few weeks ago at the Watt feed lot, I counted sixteen spikes and numerous branch antlered bulls,population and cows.Well I will tell you that around 70% of yearling bulls ARE killed in the Colockum every year. Then another 10% die from natural causes. Yearling bulls have a 10% mortality rate every year. (ie wounding deaths, cougars, disease, injury)2nd of all the elk in the Joe Watt feeding station is part of the YAKIMA elk herd, not the Colockum elk herd. So you really don't think an 80% mortality rate is something that needs to be stopped. Wow what a bold statement. You really don't care do you?? That statement truly says something about your priorities. Just kill them all right???The Colockum elk herd is also very different from the Yakima elk herd in regards to migration. 2/3 of the Colockum elk herd live east of Highway 97. In short they don't migrate much. Where the Yakima elk herd is the opposite. 2/3 or more stay high until the snow comes. So aerial surveys on the Colockum herd are VERY, VERY accurate. Where the Yakima surveys can be as much as 30% off. But who cares right kill em all off.
And no, I don't think that an 80% spike mortality rate is something that needs to be stopped. I would bet that that number is a little high; I'll give you that one. A few weeks ago at the Watt feed lot, I counted sixteen spikes and numerous branch antlered bulls,population and cows.
In order to implement a good elk plan, you need a plan that is suitable to the most people where you can accomplished the goal of bull escapement to meet management objectives and meet public acceptance. Jeez, can't beleive I have to explain this. Not all hunters in this state are trophy hunters.Not all hunters are meat hunters.Not all hunters are willing to wait, many like to hunt each year.Not all hunters will drive 200 miles for a hunt.Not all hunters believe you should have to drive 200 miles to go hunting.Not all hunters............and on and on.....Do you get the idea? By putting some Draw-Only and some OTC in each region you devise a plan that a greater number of people can live with. A very wise man once told me, "The best plan is a plan where everyone wins."
Not all hunters in this state are trophy hunters.Not all hunters are meat hunters.Not all hunters are willing to wait, many like to hunt each year.Not all hunters will drive 200 miles for a hunt.Not all hunters believe you should have to drive 200 miles to go hunting.Not all hunters............and on and on.....
Quote from: bearpaw on March 05, 2010, 07:40:41 PMNot all hunters in this state are trophy hunters.Not all hunters are meat hunters.Not all hunters are willing to wait, many like to hunt each year.Not all hunters will drive 200 miles for a hunt.Not all hunters believe you should have to drive 200 miles to go hunting.Not all hunters............and on and on.....All the things you listed can be had with permit only elk hunting, with the exception of hunting every year. And for that I say too bad. Too many hunters, not enough elk. Some people will have to grow up and realize that life just isn't fair. And besides, I think EVERYBODY would like to hunt every year. But you say they're not willing to wait? Then go hunt another state that has more elk, or go help other people on their hunt in the years when you don't draw a tag. Or hunt bears, or birds, or coyotes.Jeez, can't believe I have to explain this.
Who said the goal of draw only is "trophy hunting." That would all be dependent on how many tags were issued in each GMU.
A. Maximum group sizes are determined for each category. Ifa group application is drawn, all hunters in the group will receivea special hunting season permit and each hunter in the group can takean animal. If the number of permits available in a hunt categoryis less than the maximum group size, then the maximum group size isequal to the number of permits.i. Maximum group size for deer categories is 8.ii. Maximum group size for elk categories is 8.iii. Maximum group size for bear categories is 2.iv. Maximum group size for cougar categories is 2.v. Maximum group size for mountain goat categories is 2.vi. Maximum group size for bighorn sheep categories is 2.vii. Maximum group size for fall turkey categories is 4.
bobcat I think you are missing the whole point. If you attend WDFW meetings, by far, most hunters want the most time in the field possible. If more limited-entry-only elk hunting units are desired in this state, a plan that can satisfy the most hunters needs to be devised for better acceptance. The WDFW would not be doing their job to ignore the wishes of the majority of hunters to satisfy a few of the hunters.
Quote from: bearpaw on March 06, 2010, 03:00:32 AMbobcat I think you are missing the whole point. If you attend WDFW meetings, by far, most hunters want the most time in the field possible. If more limited-entry-only elk hunting units are desired in this state, a plan that can satisfy the most hunters needs to be devised for better acceptance. The WDFW would not be doing their job to ignore the wishes of the majority of hunters to satisfy a few of the hunters.No I'm not missing the point. It's just that I think it's more important for the WDFW to manage the state's elk properly than to cater to us hunters. What the point of having an unlimited number of elk tags if there are no elk or very few elk to hunt A loss of revenue from a decrease in tag sales is an easy problem to fix. Just increase the price of a tag to make up the difference. So if tags were cut by 50% you simply double the price.