Why is it spike only for Eastside Elk

[BOWHUNTER45]

I thought the idea was to kill all the genetically deficient spike bulls, while letting the bigger bodied branch antlered bulls impregnate as many of the heard as possible, leading to more bigger bodied branch antler bulls in the future. Is this not correct?

 
No, I don't think that has anything to do with it. For one thing, how do you know the spikes are "genetically deficient?" Most spike bull elk are just yearlings and very well could be 6x6 bulls in their 3rd or 4th years. The spike only season is so that the WDFW can continue to sell over-the-counter elk tags, with no limit on the number sold, and still maintain a healthy bull/cow ratio. The younger spike elk are more numerous and therefore, more expendable.

I agree with Bobcat for sure !!!

[Deer slayer]

I have only hunted the west side and I think the best thing the game department ever did was make it branch bull only. I have been hunting elk since about 1975 and the elk hunting is better now than ever. More bulls now than when you could shoot spikes.

I completely agree and everybody else I talk to that has been around for a while say the same.  Numbers are up.  It drops a little off and on over the years with winter kills.

[hoytem]

all about the money...

[mulehunter]

Wdfw know how to keep population very good.  I wouldn't complaint about it.  Once Wolves packs move in. It will be big different.

Mulehunter

[teanawayslayer]

This is a dumb question, but it has been soooo long since I even thought about this one.. but what is the management philosophy behind having the Eastside be spike only?

If all you coasties stayed over on the west side and hunted the rosies we would probably be able to hunt branched bulls over here.  If you notice during elk season there are more people over here hunting than there is for a holiday weekend.  There wouldn't be any elk left!  Now we pay for it by true spike only!!

[gasman]

I have only hunted the west side and I think the best thing the game department ever did was make it branch bull only. I have been hunting elk since about 1975 and the elk hunting is better now than ever. More bulls now than when you could shoot spikes.

Would yoy contribute that to teh branch bull or the limited access and less land to hunt now then there was say 20 years ago 
One thing to remember, is 20 years ago Weyco. left all the land open so hunters can be every where, now they are cramed in to areas that they want them to be and the elk escapement is probably higher today, then it was then.

[dreamingbig]

This is a dumb question, but it has been soooo long since I even thought about this one.. but what is the management philosophy behind having the Eastside be spike only?

If all you coasties stayed over on the west side and hunted the rosies we would probably be able to hunt branched bulls over here.  If you notice during elk season there are more people over here hunting than there is for a holiday weekend.  There wouldn't be any elk left!  Now we pay for it by true spike only!!

C'mon man... that just isn't cool.  Not everyone from the coast is a liberal democrat looking to screw you over.  And tax revenue is spread statewide, it doesn't stay west of the crest my friend.

[GoldTip]

When this rule came out our hunting camp almost gave up elk hunting. But it has greatly improved the herd in the area I hunt. Before the spike only rule we had a bunch of raghorns. Now we have some of the best elk hunting in the state. There is no way to please everyone.  I don't mind shooting spikes, they really aren't that hard to find.

And for those wishing we would go to a draw to hunt type deal, I am totally 100 percent against that crap. I want to hunt each and every year and have lots of money invested in equipment and such to go hunting. So if i could not hunt one year I would probably just give it up and sell all my hunting stuff. Our state is not the best but it really ain't that bad neither.

With all due respect, I totally hear what you are saying, however, I do not think you understand how much MORE hunting you could do with the proper draw system. WA is WAAAAAY behind other western states when it comes to how they issue their tags.

For example.. in MT, you must be in for a draw every year.. more than likely as a resident, you will get your tag.. odds are in the 80s I think for most popular elk areas and near 100% in popular deer areas, such as the Missouri Breaks... FOR RESIDENTS. For NON residents.. the odds are WAY Lower.

The benefits are:

You actually get a season to hunt, months, not just weeks.


AND.. more importantly...

It keeps the "night before" hunters from going to the store and buying their tag and a cooler full of beer to come join you on the hill.

Besides....

What would happen if you did not get your elk tag that year.. BUT instead got several months to go after that Trophy Mule Deer you have been after?

I would take that in a heart beat because as you were saying.. you want the hunting time.. with a PROPER draw system.. we would get MORE of that and perhaps this "spike only" crap would go away too.

 

Take a look at populations in both states:
Washington - 6,395,798
Montana - 944,632

Washington has more than six times the human population and Montana has more much land and more game animals available to hunters

If Washington went to draw one would probably draw once every 5-7 years.

Plus out-of staters would also begin applying too.

I like hunting every year. I think with our game populations, amount of land probably best system possible for all. Even for non-pro team hunters

Draw only in

Comparing the population in both states is not all together sound. Not everyone in WA hunts. In fact most do not. So the proper comparison would be to see how many licenses for hunting each state issues. That would be an interesting statistic.

Finally, for all those against a draw system...

What i am talking about is the right draw system for RESIDENTS. MT residents hardly worry about getting their tag because they are more likely to get it than non residents. Also putting in for a draw requires work... Work a nom serious hunter would not do. WA caters to the non serious hunter by providing tags at will.

$0.02 :-)

I'm horribly confused about exactly what "draw" in Montana for resident elk and deer licenses you are referring to?  Because my  brother, sister, father, father in law, mother, mother in law, sister in law, multiple cousins and Uncles all live in Montana and the only drawing they do as residents for a deer or an elk tag is to "draw" money out of their wallets and hand it across the counter and then they are allowed to hunt somewhere around 90% of the state that hold either deer or elk.  There is also NO draw that they must be in for every year.  If your thinking that the draw rate is 80% for resident for elk in the Missouri breaks or in area's like the Beartooths or for late season Yellowstone migration hunts, I am sorry to tell you, but you are sadly mistaken.  Most popular elk hunting draw tags in MT are like GOLD, just like they are here.
 
They do have special permit area's that allow them to take any bull instead of a branch bull or take a doe in a buck area and things like that, but those draw tags are far from the slam dunks that you are insinuating.  And to compare WA to MT is ludicrous as far as hunting goes, just look at the land mass, you could stick the entire state of WA into MT about 3 times, and yet MT has less than 1/7 the population of WA?

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

I don't mind shooting spikes, they really aren't that hard to find.

I have been elk hunting in the blues since 2001 and have yet to see a spike during rifle season.  where the heck do you hunt!@??!?!?!?!?!?!?

[piledup]

I don't mind shooting spikes, they really aren't that hard to find.

I have been elk hunting in the blues since 2001 and have yet to see a spike during rifle season.  where the heck do you hunt!@??!?!?!?!?!?!?

Try the Yakima area. Last I heard there are more elk over there.
I believe this spike system is working to help maintain bigger bulls because if the spikes escape their "Spike years" then we would have more bigger bulls in the future. After every year, I know there are spikes who made it past the hunting seasons.

But maybe I would like to see some of the bull/quality elk hunts be OIL tags since I'm pretty sure some lucky guy has drawn the same tag twice before and others have not drawn it at all.

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

What really surprises me is that all the seemingly knowledgeable people answering this question are so far off the real reason, (bits and pieces)
Now, I might be wrong, as my memory isn't what it used to be, but .....
Back when I hunted and it was "Any Bull, visible antler" with special permits for cows (rifle/modern), or "Any Elk" for archery, the herd numbers were up, but bull escapement was low.
The majority of the harvested animals were yearling spikes, not due to restrictions, but due to the fact that very few elk survived their first few years.
Even though herd numbers were up, Bull/cow ratios were low (post season) and the number of 4-5 year old bulls was almost 1/100.
The majority of the herd was cows and yearling bulls, that were not old (mature) enough to breed, but tried anyways.
In an effort to increase Bull/cow ratio, something had to be done, so a reduction in Antlered harvest was necessary.
They (WDFW) actually INCREASED antlerless permits, and instituted antler restrictions, due to the nature of the habitat on the East-side (visibility) a "Spike Only" restriction was enacted, TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT HARVEST NUMBERS AND OPPORTUNITTY, WHILE ALLOWING SOME BULLS TO ESCAPE HARVEST.
This , in turn would allow opportunity for a few permit holders to harvest "mature" Bulls, while , at the same time, increase bull/cow ratio, and augment the number of "mature" (4-6 year old) bulls in relation to yearling (1-3 year) bulls, thereby improving the health of the whole herd.
AMAZINGLY, IT ACTUALLY WORKED !!
Within a few short years, Bull/cow ratio was at or above desired 15-20/100, and surviving bulls were in a decent mix of age classes.
In areas that were not showing significant improvement, (you know where I am talking about) in the number of "mature", or "branched" escapement (due to a variety of influences) they instituted "True Spike" restrictions, I mean if it worked in one place, why not another? (damn biologist/politicians/"Game commission") 
It was when they decided that the population was at or above "carrying capacity" (damn biologist) that they issued more "antlerless" and "any Elk" permits and reduced the herd numbers to what they are now, as compared to the '90's.
I honestly believe, if the Yakima herd was still at 14,000+ animals instead of the 9,000 (or 10,000) they feel is "population objective" there would be a lot less complaining.

And those of you that feel we should go to a "draw only"... THAT IS WHAT WE ARE AT !, SPIKE (or cow) ONLY, UNLESS DRAWN !!
If you want to hunt mature animals, either wait until drawn, or hunt in those units open to hunting them.
If you just want to hunt, then there is opportunity also.
And apply for permits, as we are almost at a "Draw Only" for branch bulls in most East-side units that have significant numbers of mature Bulls, and decent bull/cow ratios, DUE DIRECTLY TO THE RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT !!
If not for those restrictions, we would all be shooting spikes anyways, except for the lucky few, and there would be fewer than there are now.
Once again, a decent bull would be big news.

[MDGrand]

Goldtip.. my experience is much different than your family I guess... and my purchasing of tags for over 5 years in MT and going with probably half a dozen outfitters  has brought me to my conclusions. This is my first hand experience. Not experience of relatives.

The 80% quote was not for Elk in the Missouri breaks.... it was for Deer.

... and I am not comparing WA to MT.. I am trying to show that other Western states like MT do a better job with their Fish and Game dept.

But who gives a crap anyway right? .. it does not matter what they do too much in other states, since we are here in WA.. I am just trying to make a comparison to show other management practices that seem to work better..

And.. at the end of the day, MT and other states like CO and UT do a good job of favoring the tags in way so they go to residents, and for the more serious hunter. None of us like a ton of crowds and the little restrictions that WA has implemented because of the OTC tag system here in WA.

[huntnfmly]

one thing i read is that the spikes if allowed to breed because the more mature bulls are not getting the job done is that the spike bulls normally are not able to breed the cows till thier second estrus cycle and causes the calves to be born later in the year and less of a chance to be ready for the fall and winter months so less calf survival.This is just one reason of many

[bobcat]

teanawayslayer,  look at the bright side- if we weren't allowed to hunt over there because we don't live there, many of us would just move there. Would you rather we do that?   

[runamuk]

one thing i read is that the spikes if allowed to breed because the more mature bulls are not getting the job done is that the spike bulls normally are not able to breed the cows till thier second estrus cycle and causes the calves to be born later in the year and less of a chance to be ready for the fall and winter months so less calf survival.This is just one reason of many

if this were legitimate then it would make sense to be a statewide rule rather than just one side of the mountains.  they seem to use biology when they want to or when it backs up the politically motivated decisions