Washington elk draw

[Superhunter333]

I voted yes because it would improve our elk heards and chances of actually shooting an elk. Elk hunters who tag out every year are few and far between. As it is we have the worst elk hunting in the west when we could have great elk hunting if hunters would just give up a couple years. insted of 5000 hunters trying to shoot an elk out of a herd of 100 elk we would have quality elk hunting. but it will never happen

[grundy53]

i voted no.... but i agree with bobcat about the eastside. so i will modify my vote a little... No UNLESS it's draw only on the eastside AND if you put in for the eastside you can't hunt the westside for elk. i think if you didn't put that second caveat in there the westside would be 10x more crowded then it already is. So you have to decide to either gamble on drawing a tag for the eastside (and a hopefully improved chance of shooting a bull) or getting a guaranteed hunt for a lowly old roosie. just my 

[jbeaumont21]

I voted no.  Instead they just need to keep all of the gates closed so that people actually have to work for their hunt.  We could still have a some select areas for disabled hunters.

[Boss .300 winmag]

I voted yes.

Look at what we have for a general season on the eastside of the state: spike only, with a success rate of around 5% for most GMU's. I'd rather see the number of hunters cut in half (by limited permit hunting) and have it be open for any bull, so a guy could actually go on an actual elk hunt instead of just a camping trip.

We could have some great elk hunting if hunters would be willing to accept not being able to have an elk tag in their pocket every single year. In years that you don't draw a permit you could still go hunting with others who did draw a permit. Or you could just spend more time hunting deer, bears, birds, predators, etc.

The number of permits could be very high still- high enough that everyone could hunt every other year.

[Alan K]

Theres nothing wrong with elk hunting on the west side.   

Don't know much of the east sides problems aside from Indians and poor spike recruitment.

[huntnnw]

alot this state could do, but its too money hungry to manage anything properly

[Buckrub]

I guess the question should be "should the state limit hunters so "I" can get an elk"

The state has done quite a job of dangling bulls in front of hunters in an effort to sell permits and create animosity between hunters.

If the E. side was like the wet side we wouldn't be having this conversation... ALL hunters should be able to hunt every year with the chance at an elk.

If the e side was 5 or hell 6... point or better would we be here?

Think about this.... Which bull has a better escapement chance? a spike or a 5 point?

ROAD CLOSURES AND ANTLER RESTRICTIONS LIKE THE REST OF THE STATE....

Ask the state why the difference between east and west?  Answer: There is more cover in the west?? OK so close some DAMN ROADS and plant trees.  

Escapement need not be in the form of limiting hunters.

[bobcat]

ALL hunters should be able to hunt every year with the chance at an elk.

But why?

Why don't other states let unlimited numbers of people hunt elk every year? States such as Arizona, California, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, and Utah? Why is Washington so much better that we should have no limits on the number of hunters and the number of elk harvested every year?

[C-Money]

No! It is more than just an elk harvest. I like to get out and see the elk and enjoy the feeling of the hunt. No way would I ever support a draw only. The Oregon residents I know draw elk around every 3 years.  That is not so bad, but i would imagine it would be two or three times longer to draw here, and that is way to long!

[boneaddict]

I voted No.   Fix the treaty problems first, then wolf, then maybe.

[Buckrub]

Why does the westside have unlimited hunters with three point or better and the hunting is fine?...According to the state!

Elk have cover on the west side the WDFW states.... so lets plants some trees and close some roads, stop unlimited cattle grazing and manage the herd accordingly.... If the state manages escapement rather than hunters all hunters would have the chance. At least it did when I was a kid with twice as many hunters??


You could lock up the entire east side and give out ten permits and all ten wouldn't get filled under current management.

[high country]

arizona, nevada and california have very localized herds of elk. if you hunt nevada I can all but guarentee you will buy your fuel in ely. if everyone was allowed to hunt the elk there it would be gravy to surround them. california and az are similar.

here in washington you can't go 100 miles anywhere in a line without being in elk country.....maybe even 50 miles. we have relatively few elk, but they are spread over a great area. we do have those concentrated areas that need to be protected, but to group the whole state as single group is like saying everyone that lives on the west side is a liberal that wants to destroy this country.....it simply does not work for the whole state.

[high country]

Why does the westside have unlimited hunters with three point or better and the hunting is fine?...According to the state!
Elk have cover on the west side the WDFW states.... so lets plants some trees and close some roads, stop unlimited cattle grazing and manage the herd accordingly.... If the state manages escapement rather than hunters all hunters would have the chance. At least it did when I was a kid with twice as many hunters??
You could lock up the entire east side and give out ten permits and all ten wouldn't get filled under current management.

escapemnet is a measurement of hunter success vs elk survival. if you increase the hunter chances, you decrease the elk survival unless you limit the area or the specifics of the species hunted. so as a byproduct, managing hunters is managing elk.

a good starting point would be to stop imigration. more people mean less land per human, which means less land per elk....which means.......

[bobcat]

What about Montana? Why do they limit the number of non-resident hunters? And Oregon- how is Oregon any different than Washington, other than they more elk and less people, yet they still have permit only hunting in eastern Oregon. It seems to work just fine there. Why not here? Sure we have elk all over much of the state, and some areas have more than others, that is why some areas would have more permits than others. It's called "wildlife management."

[krout81]

I have never hunted the eastside and I probably never will.  All the complaining about it on here makes me believe that there could be some benefit it limiting numbers a little better.  I would never support a westside draw.  I have hunted 18 years tagged 8 elk, but thats because I hunt my ass off.  The years I got elk I usually had to use my entire 2 weeks vacation to get one or even get a chance to get one.  Elk hunting is hard the only thing a draw system on the westside will do is make is you get to hunt maybe every 2-3 years, but I think the precents will remain nearly the same as they are now.  The state is obviously ok with the harvest numbers otherwise they would stop the hunting.  Maybe they don't do the best job, but I always see elk.  

Each side of the state is completly different so I agree with 2 different approaches to the issues.  If you apply for a eastside premit you cant hunt the westside and same should go for westside permit apps cant hunt east.