WDFW Response For GMU346

[colockumelk]

As an archer I am ashamed that the local archery clubs helped the WDFW make this decision.  But here's why they are opening up a general season during the rut in GMU346.  So thoughtfull and unselfish of the local clubs to do that.   

In any case here is what the WDFW emailed me back.

Yakima Elk Recommendations

Question:  Why did WDFW recommend changing the Game Management Units that are open to archers during the early season in 2010?

Answer:  Recruit has been lower than average in recent years and the Yakima elk herd has fallen below population objective.  These trends are most evident in Population Management Unit 35, so we’ve recommended steps to reduce antlerless harvest there and shift pressure to Population Management Unit 33, where more elk are available for harvest.
Population Status:  The Yakima Elk Herd Plan and Game Management Plan call for 9500 elk in the Yakima elk herd.  Recently, the total herd has slipped below 9000 elk.  Within the core Yakima elk herd, there are 3 sub-herds or Population Management Units (PMU’s).  PMU 33 is composed of Game Management Units (GMU) 336, 340, 342, and 346; PMU 35 includes GMUs 352, 356, and 360; and PMU 36 includes GMU’s 364 and 368.  PMU 35’s population is the farthest below objective.  The goal in the Yakima Herd Plan for PMU 35 is 2920 elk, but the current population is only 2220 elk (Figure 1).
Recruitment:  To track population trends, we also use a recruitment index, which is the number of yearling bulls (spikes) harvested each fall plus the number of spikes on the winter range.  For example, the fall 2008 general harvest in PMU 35 was 117 spikes.  An additional 60 spikes were on the winter range, so the recruitment index was 177 for 2008.  Figure 2 shows a long term decline in recruitment that matches the population trend. 
Since PMU 35 produced 177 yearling bulls in 2008, at least 177 (probably 180-200) yearling cows were also recruited into the population that year.  During the Yakima Elk Study, data from radio collared elk indicated that about 7.5% of adult cows die from factors other than reported harvest each year.  For PMU 35, this non-reported loss would be about 120 cow elk per year.  If the female recruitment index is 200, and we lose 120 cows, we’d expect the antlerless population to grow by about 80 elk a year if no harvest occurred.  Any harvest level above 80 antlerless elk, would cause a stable or declining population.  There has been a negative balance been recruitment and harvest for a number of years.  Antlerless permit levels for modern firearm and muzzleloader hunters have been reduced.  Unfortunately, recruitment continues to decline in PMU 35 and more steps need to be taken to reduce antlerless harvest. 
Public Process:  In fall 2009, the problem with the elk population was taken before the local archery clubs in the Yakima area. After much discussion, the local archers agreed that something had to be done.  They preferred closing antlerless harvest in the early season rather than the late season in PMU 35.  However, there was also a need to provide opportunity in some other area, not only to spread hunters out, but also to maintain harvest equity between weapons groups.  PMU 33 has the most elk, best recruitment, and greatest ability to withstand additional harvest. The only GMU’s not already open during early archery season in PMU 33, are 342 and 346.  GMU 342 does not have many elk in the early season and is mostly shrub-steppe or open forest habitats, so the local archers requested GMU 346 in exchange for GMU’s 352 and 356.
The status of the Yakima elk herd and proposal to change archery GMU’s was also presented to the Game Management Advisory Council in December 2009.  No objections were voiced and the proposal carrier forward.  While it is recognized that some hunting quality will be lost for branched bull permit hunters in GMU 346, that same quality should be gained in GMU’s 352 and 356 if this recommendation is approved.               

[gasman]

I do like the the opening of LN unit for early archery, but not this way.


Why ask only the Yakima Archery club.
I will bet that the archers from out side the Yakima area out number the archers from Yakima.
Why did we not get asked also 

[colockumelk]

Exactly.  Or how about ask the rifle and ML clubs since this will directly affect their Rut tags in the area as well.  For the rifle guys that is the ONLY GMU in the area where you can draw more than 1 rut tag.  This will screw over the rifle and the ML guys.  If I was a rifle or ML guy I would be pissed.  Like I said I'm a bow hunter and this pisses me off.  It's not fair to the other user groups.  Once again the WDFW is issueing a short term fix to a longterm problem. 

[gasman]

Maybe it is there way of makeing up for taking a day away from the archers and giving it to the riffle guys.
 

[WDFW-SUX]

WDFW is retarded.

[webster1]

the indians are still going to kill the big bulls 

[gasman]

the indians are still going to kill the big bulls 

Lets not start this again 

[Sawbuck]

The muzzleloader and rifle boys from 352 and 356 are probably smiling. Whatever happens there are always going to be a group of complainers.

[luvtohnt]

So would you be more pissed off that 352, and 356 were closed with no where to spread the hunters out? I personally think they should have asked more than just the archery clubs in Yakima as well because there probably are more archers that hunt up there that live outside of the Yakima valley. All I have to say is until people loose the selfish attitude and agree to an even odd system or to go draw only on the eastside, the WDFW will have to manage hunters more so than manage the elk.

Brandon

[MIKEXRAY]

After reading the response it sure sounds like more of a done deal than I hoped. I have hunted 356 for 6 years archery & if the regs stay ( which seems almost certain in my mind ) it will be very tuff to figure out where to hunt. What is funny is the last two years in the Bumping unit is the most elk I have ever seen out of the last six. Even my hunting buddy commented last year that " elk are everywhere". Thanks to all for sending emails & going to the meetings. Maybe we can get one unit back ? That would be a victory. Mike

[bobcat]

What I got from the meeting today, there is no chance that they would consider having 352 or 356 open for antlerless elk during the early archery general season. From what Jerry Nelson (Deer & Elk Section Manager) stated in his report to the commission, elk numbers are down in those units and they want to bring them back up or stabilize them. Don't quote me on that as that is just what I got out of it. They decided Little Naches could take handle the additional pressure.

[norsepeak]

the reason they say the population is down is because there serveys are flawed.  They are based on the feed station.   The last two winters have been mild, so not very many elk have come down to the feed station.  I have been seeing a lot of elk staying higher up in the mtns. the last two winters, which don't get counted in their surveys.  Makes for scewed results.

[bobcat]

They said they realize the winter was different this year and they are taking that into account.

[jstone]

In a few years they will say they screwed up or they will give some stupid excuse to try to save face

[dreamingbig]

If they are really worried about the population in GMU 356 then they would also eliminate the 25 muzzleloader and 15 modern firearm permits for 356.  Bowhunters took 40 cows in 2008 and 37 cows in 2007; 2009 is yet to be published.  Why is the user group that hunts with the most restrictive equipment being reduced to zero opportunities to harvest cows while the other two groups have a combined 40 opportunities?  At minimum the archers should have a proportional opportunity to harvest anterless elk.  Of course the answer is MONEY but they will not admit that.

Reduction in anterless opportunities in GMU 356 by user group (2009 to 2010):

Archery 100%
Modern Firearm 80%
Muzzleloader 58%

Bull permits stayed the same across all user groups.  Does this make sense to anyone???  Changing GMU 356 to spike only for archery will bring the success rate of that user group to almost zero for those without a special permit.

[colockumelk]

They said they realize the winter was different this year and they are taking that into account.

Yeah that's what they told me as well.  I call BS.  They do a ground count at the feed station.  And then (this is according to their website) they do an aerial survey of 75% of their WINTERING GROUNDS!  And come up with an estimation.  It's amazing how stupid the WDFW can actually be. 

FYI in the Colockum since it's smaller they do an aerial survey of 100% of the unit.

[colockumelk]

Despite all the letters sent it looks like the change will be final.  I'd like to say thankyou for all of you that took the time to either send in my letter or for those that wrote their own letter.  We may have lost this time but our efforts were not in vain.  At the very least it is going to show the WDFW that we ARE paying attention and have our own valid thoughts and arguments.  We the people WILL hold them accountable.  It's people like us that make changes and keep the WDFW on the somewhat strait and narrow.  Some were "negative nancy's" but don't ever let people like that keep you down.  There will always be negative people out there that claim "whats the point it wont change anything."  Of course those are also the same people that don't vote and then complain about the President.  Remember if you don't try then you've already failed, and it's better to shoot for the stars and miss than to shoot for *censored*. and hit.  So again thank you all that have put your time and effort forward.  It will be people like you that ensure that our children have better hunting than we do.   

[BENCHLEG]

verry well said.

[BAR C3]

This is Crap! This is exactly why 336 is open to cows and spikes. So let's put every bow hunter in the Little Naches now? Bad idea! Have fun people, I'll be hunting out of state!

[dreamingbig]

Very disappointing indeed.  The fact that they eliminated all antlerless opportunities for bowhunters in GMU 356 but kept 40 cow permits between modern firearm and muzzleloader is a head scratcher.  If you were concerned with herd size, wouldn't you eliminate all of them?

Oh wait, that is logical and this is the WDFW making the decision.  My bad...  To steal a quote, "It is all about the 'Benjamins'."

[colockumelk]

The reasons they gave me was to keep hunters happy.  Many will be unhappy about the spike only thing in the Bumping and Nile.  So they threw us a bone in the form of GMU346.  What chaps me is all they care about is the slobbering masses.  What about guys who want some quality hunting somewhere?  What about us.  Why is it that some guys opinion that the only thing he contributes to wildlife is the money he spends on a tag more important than someone like myself or others who are active in wildlife managment and continuously strives to make things better?  Shouldn't our voice count too.   Like someone else said as soon as I get drawn for elk I'm done with this state.