Response to the East Side Permit Only Idea.

[sako223]

Your personal selection would stay the same the only thing that would change is the year. It would look more like this.

2010 deer/even   Elk/odd

2011 deer/even   Elk/odd

Brandon

How could that possibly work out? Not my idea.

I clearly stated how the odd/even would work.

The Odd/Even idea is not quite spelled out correctly.

Example: Determined by last number of WILD ID for general season

2010 Deer/Odd   Elk/Even

2011 Deer/Even   Elk/Odd

Current draw system left intact with points allowing adjustments.
This guarantees big game hunting every year for each hunter plus draw, and freedom to hunt all but closed units.

[fisheral87]

It is a good point about out of state hunters. They would dilute that draw percentage as well.

[colockumelk]

What do you mean Sako.  That's your idea the odd/even thing.  I think he was asking how it would work.  If the amount of permits would remain the same or if they'd go up.  I personally think the permits would increase each year as the number of bulls increased.

Now for my Colockum Permit idea you say it would displace hunter.  That is true there is no way around that.  But, what would you suggest we do?  What part of the Colockum herd will be finished by 2014 if we don't do anything?  How does that sit well with any of you?  Are you in denial or do you not care?  Do some of you think that it's your God given right to hunt in the Colockum and kill of every elk in that herd?  If so let me tell all of you it is NOT your right to hunt in the Colockum.  It is a PRIVILEGE that WE are ABUSING!!!!

In any case with the amount of permits that would be given out if it went permit only here's your odds to draw. 

Method.  Take amount of permits x points squared and divide it by number of applicants squared.  Gives you a percentage of a chance to draw.  Example  (301x3) squared. / 2412 (squared) = Chance to get drawn

RIFLE   Archery          Muzzle Loader
1 Point:  1.5% Chance                    1 Point   13% Chance                1 Point   5% Chance
2 Points:  6.2% Chance                   2 Points  53% Chance                2 Points  20% Chance
3 Points:  14% Chance                    3 Points  119% Chance              3 Points   44% Chance
4 Points: 25% Chance                                                                  4 Points    78% Chance
5 Points:  39% Chance                                                                  5 Points   176% Chance
6 Points:  56% Chance                       
7 Points: 76% Chance                       
8 Points: 100% Chance                     

[3dvapor]

Where do you get the 10% figure?

Alot of states set aside a percentage of total permits to non resident only usually somewhere between 5-20percent. I threw 10 in as a fair example of how things would possibly change.

[sako223]

Method.  Take amount of permits x points squared and divide it by number of applicants squared.  Gives you a percentage of a chance to draw.  Example  (301x3) squared. / 2412 (squared) = Chance to get drawn

RIFLE   Archery          Muzzle Loader
1 Point:  1.5% Chance                    1 Point   13% Chance                1 Point   5% Chance
2 Points:  6.2% Chance                   2 Points  53% Chance                2 Points  20% Chance
3 Points:  14% Chance                    3 Points  119% Chance              3 Points   44% Chance
4 Points: 25% Chance                                                                  4 Points    78% Chance
5 Points:  39% Chance                                                                  5 Points   176% Chance
6 Points:  56% Chance                      
7 Points: 76% Chance                      
8 Points: 100% Chance                      

My earlier reply was misrepresented as I was trying to address two things in one post quickly.

With current season thousands of hunter hunt the clockum general season. With permit only these hunter would be displaced to alter numbers and pressure in other units.
5 rifle special permits get 2412 applicants. That would take 482 years to guarantee a draw if no one got drawn twice.
By increasing the number of tags to 300 at the current number of applicants 2412 it would take 8 years to guarantee a draw if no one drew twice or more. But with a permit only system you could count on the number of applicants increasing therefore displacing the odds again.

As stated projecting mathematically using current application numbers implies a guaranteed draw within 8 years. Several realistic problems throw those numbers though.
Application numbers will go up maybe double or triple. Double application will turn 8 years into 16.
Applicants can and do get drawn multiple times which also stretches out the fill.
So 100% is not 100% in this case. Odds are odds and drawn is 100%

With the odd/even and current draw idea, the current allotment for cow permits in the yakima area may be reduced more than half this year in an effort to increase herd size again. The current draw system has always been adjustable.
This appeals to me by allowing hunters to participate in big game hunting every year. General season would then see half the hunters at a current success rate of 10% or less. I think permit success rate can reach 40% or better. This does not account for variables like weather.

With hunters being about 5% of the population we don't need a huge drop in participants for several years in a row. Which is what I see with permit only. Odd/even keeps everyone in the field every year and still participating in trophy or meat draws.

[colockumelk]

Sako don't get me wrong I'm completey on board with your idea.  However just because the Colockum would be permit only it doesn't mean people couldn't hunt the Yakima GMU's or the NE or the Blues or the West Side.  The other herds could  handle it.  In any case most of the hunters that hunt the Colockum would either go back to the West Side or would hunt in the low GMU's where unless weather pushes the Elk down there's not much there anyways.  So closing the Colockum down wouldn't hurt the other herds.

It is gonna happen sooner than most people think.  Like I said I am NOT joking when I say if the trend continues there WILL NOT be a breeding Colockum elk herd in 6 years. 

[sako223]

Well I agree harvest has to be cut there and across the board.
That is why I have looked for a balanced idea.
The other biggest reason is how to keep hunters in the field, and by shifting hunter numbers elsewhere will increase hunter frustration levels which are already high.

[colockumelk]

Our state if it continues managing game the way it has been will continue to lose hunters.  That has been a continuous trend since 1990.  The reason is because with the poor quality of hunting we have here in this state people are getting fed up and quiting.  THAT is why we are losing hunters. 

From 2002-2009 the branch bull population has dropped by 78% in the Colockum.
 In 2002  there were 391 branch bulls.  In 2009 there is only 85.  Thats an average drop of 11% a year.  If this trend continues like I said before by 2014 there will not be enough branch bulls to breed enough elk to sustain the herd.  IE no more Colockum elk herd.  The WDFW even said that the "True Spike thing will only  help by 10-15%.  The ONLY way is Permit only.  I'm not saying forever but at least long enough to get the bull to cow ratio back to 15:100.  It is currently 2.83:100      Like I said before the area is too open with too many roads.  Here's a break down of the spike survival rate from 2003-2008.  Keep in mind on top of this 10% of these spikes that lived through the Colockum slaughter will die of natural causes. 

Here's my sources
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/status/09trend.pdf  PG 78

http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/status/09trend.pdf  Pg 77
2003  23%
2004  24%
2005  12%
2006  19%
2007  26%
2008  17%

[sako223]

I recognize the problems and also know there are other contributing factors. Compared to the yakima herd there are more agriculture clashes with unfenced areas, people feeding elk, winter rec. Elk on the golf course.

WdfW shows about 8% success rate with a harvest of 303 bulls 121 cows for 08. This pencils out to about 5300 hunters.
With even/odd this would be reduced to 2650 hunters at 8% success rate would be around 151 bulls 60 cows.

[bobcat]

What if  hunters are reduced to 2,650 and the success rate goes up to 16%?

[sako223]

Well although not likely, but obviously if the success rate went to 16% the harvest would be the same at 303 bulls 121 cows. Total 424 elk with 2650 hunters still in the field.
In 1992 there were about 12,854 hunters with a success rate of 11% harvesting 801 bulls 613 cows. With the hunter reduction to less than half that in 08 did not raise the success rate to 16%. It is reduced to 8%.
Equally if the proposed 652 permits achieved the going success of permit hunts it could easily exceed 40-70% or 260-456 elk. with 652 hunters in the field.

[colockumelk]

Sako your slightly off.  The 652 permits is across the board rifle/ML/archery.  Most archery bull hunts only have a 12-24% success rate.  ML success is 35-45% and Rifle is 45-50%.  So really the average would be about 1/3 of the 652 permits would kill a bull.  So only around 220-260 would get a branch bull. 

Sako thank you for researching data and using real numberst to back up your arguments.  I really do appreciate that.  Too often people call me an idiot but have no data to back up their argument.  One guy told me that the answer is to make it 5pt min in the Colockum for everyone    So again thanks. 

[sako223]

Well I said about as I see no reason to get it down to the nit on this thread.
The reason is, I see why the WDFW has questioned your numbers as radical.
Just like this poll thread you have not posted it properly to begin with and have obviously slanted most every argument to your favor instead of presenting the whole picture.
The colockum herd has been at a lower size before.
You have presented this thread as whole eastside then defend it by the colockum numbers you present.
By going permit only on the eastside would displace up to 37,000 hunters for yakima and colockum by WDFW numbers.
How many years would it take to Guarantee a draw with that many hunters displaced? Lifetime plus?
Another facet of penalizing hunters is letting the elk go to other means of harvest. In recent years hunting permits sacrificed by general/permit hunters have been more than doubled to manage damage problems.
Then comes the millions lost in spending by hunters, calculated to be about $1000 per hunter. Huge loss for local economies.
So after scanning the same sources you cherry picked a slanted case, I can punch a lot lot of holes in your theory.
The worst part is it takes a ton of hunters out of the field and cuts off personal spending crippling the whole program.

With Even/Odd @ current hunter numbers the harvest would be lower than your permit system with four times or more hunters in the field.
They would be able to hunt big game every year and spend money to help the economy especially in the smaller towns.
Then we need to address the secondary issues which will never go away and in fact will get worse each year that we wait.

[bobcat]

Sako,  Have you presented your plan to anybody at the WDFW?  If not you need to write a letter to Dave Ware and/or Jerry Nelson. Want their email addresses?

[sako223]

I have not presented anything except here and to hunting friends.
This plan only came to mind as a compromise after reading threads here in the past couple months.
I would be fine with the WDFW scrutinizing it.