Harvest reports what's the point?

[CedarPants]

The fact that this thread is even happening makes me believe that this state is in worse shape then I thought.

 

[colockumelk]

The fact that this thread is even happening makes me believe that this state is in worse shape then I thought.

Exactly.  And its only going to get worse.  It seems our resources are only getting less and less.  With land being lost to development and the introduction of wolves, and our states' refusal to properly manage predators (except your tribe Coastal which our state should take a lesson from.)  I feel that in ten years its going to be extremely ugly. 

[Coastal_native]

It's going to get really expensive for management activities like enforcement, aerial monitoring, population counts, and capture work too.  Reporting and population reconstruction models might be the most cost effective managment tool the state has available.  I look forward to tribes stepping up and chipping in on management efforts.

[colockumelk]

It's going to get really expensive for management activities like enforcement, aerial monitoring, population counts, and capture work too.  Reporting and population reconstruction models might be the most cost effective managment tool the state has available.  I look forward to tribes stepping up and chipping in on management efforts.

I agree about it getting more and more expensive.  Especially the enforcement.  And I have always wondered why the WDFW spends the money on aerial monitoring EVERY year.  Instead of every other year and using the population reconstruction models for the other years to save money.  You can still watch a trend develope without spending millions on aerial monitoring every year. 

You know what I wish for.  I wish that the WDFW would split into three entities.  A Department of Fish and a Department of Wildlife.  The Department of Wildlife would have two separate departments.  One Department would be consumptive wildlife only (elk, deer, bear, pheasant etc) and the other department would be non-consumptive (frogs, snails various non-game birds etc).  Each of these three departments would be self sustaining and have their own budget.  Oh if only I could find a genie. 

[Coastal_native]

I eat frogs and snails!  How would that benefit me!!!  You big game hunters only think about yourselves...waaaahhhhh

Sorry, someone was bound to say it eventually.

[colockumelk]

Hey I listed small game as part of the consumptive part.  Hence the pheasants etc.  You should try hooked on phonics.  It worked for me.   

[Special T]

Thier argument is that they "Save" $$$ by having them all together... Not all the problems are WDFW people. A change in the attitude of government would go a long way in changing the way they do thier work. 

[Practical Approach]

Bigtex, good point.

Here is the question though. Why fine or charge unreporting anyway? Do the numbers they glean from the reporting actually truly help the managers "manage" game populations? Are game numbers reported this fall really truly altering how they manage next years hunt?  I would have expected managers to have a bigger plan than this yearly reporting. They should be able to manage on a long range plan, and not be quick to fine somebody for that immediate answer they do not need.

Don't wildlife managers already estimate the number of game animals poached or killed by vehicles, or tribal take (reported and not...). 

Are we going to start citing drivers who do not report striking a deer with their car?

Wildlife managers are paid to do what? Wait for hunters to report what they "said happened", and then blindly manage game populations based upon these numbers? This is not what they studied for all those years in college. Let's throw away all our education and place all of our career decisions based upon what alot of pissed off hunters report....yeah! Yeah, this is how we will manage game populations!

I bet wildlife already has a "false reporting" average built into their number gathering. They already suspect that a whole lot of the reports are false, and therefore are pushing this mandatory reporting issue as revenue source plain and simple.

Yes, these are only my BS observations and assumptions. So be it, this is how I see it.

You fine people for not reporting so that hopefully they remember to report next time.  If most people actually gave two sheets about management and quit buying into all of the conspiracy theory BS then maybe there wouldn't have to be fines.  Yes the information truly helps managers.  Yes, managers can manage off this falls data.  It is called emergency closures if needed.  Managers do manage based off a big picture, but the big picture is painted from annual snapshots of data. 

People must have the perception that wildlife managers are rolling in money and that they only manage hunted species and that they get to choose where they focus their time.  There is not enough time or money in a year to survey every GMU annually. 

DOT keeps a database of road killed animals which are reported, discovered poached animals are reported and a large portion of tribal harvest is reported. 


Iceman, I will ignore your ignorance on what wildlife managers are paid to do and what they went to school for. You obviously have a small vision of what it takes to manage wildlife and what resources this state has to do it.  I can't fathom why it is so difficult to report your harvest.  If so called sportsmen who claim they care about the resource can't fill out a simple harvest report, then in my opinion you have no business hunting.  You obviously are someone who disregards rules and does not have the best intent for wildlife in general.

But thats my observation.  I probably have it all wrong. 

[pianoman9701]

Accurate reporting is your responsibility as an ethical hunter. We all must do what we can to assist the WDFW in obtaining accurate harvest data to ensure as best we can the future of our sport. We are responsible for our future, like it or not.

[Special T]

PA so by your own words it would seem that you think is the duty of all hunters including the Yakima's to produce good numbers so that the herd can be managed.

[buckhorn2]

I report our hunting but always feel maybe it will be like giving out fishing information at the boat ramp. Either not enough fish wrong kind of fish or to many fish and anyway you report will somehow shut you down somehow or bring out the crowds. So when I fill out the report does it help or hurt my next years chances with to much harvest or not enough harvest or the wrong number of certain anamals harvested. It;s the law and I do it but wonder what the future will bring.

[Coastal_native]

I report our hunting but always feel maybe it will be like giving out fishing information at the boat ramp. Either not enough fish wrong kind of fish or to many fish and anyway you report will somehow shut you down somehow or bring out the crowds. So when I fill out the report does it help or hurt my next years chances with to much harvest or not enough harvest or the wrong number of certain anamals harvested. It;s the law and I do it but wonder what the future will bring.

If the amount of harvest that is occuring warrants conservation measures, don't you want that to be known?  Or would you rather hold on to your opportunity to harvest as the resource slowly dwindles? 

That's a rhetorical question of course.  We're talking about shared resources, so I assume everyone would sacrifice some opportunity if it was in the name of conservation.

[Practical Approach]

PA so by your own words it would seem that you think is the duty of all hunters including the Yakima's to produce good numbers so that the herd can be managed.

Yes I think everyone should report their harvest for management purposes.

[Rainier10]

I report our hunting but always feel maybe it will be like giving out fishing information at the boat ramp. Either not enough fish wrong kind of fish or to many fish and anyway you report will somehow shut you down somehow or bring out the crowds. So when I fill out the report does it help or hurt my next years chances with to much harvest or not enough harvest or the wrong number of certain anamals harvested. It;s the law and I do it but wonder what the future will bring.

If the amount of harvest that is occuring warrants conservation measures, don't you want that to be known?  Or would you rather hold on to your opportunity to harvest as the resource slowly dwindles? 

That's a rhetorical question of course.  We're talking about shared resources, so I assume everyone would sacrifice some opportunity if it was in the name of conservation.

Coastal you just made the point I was thinking of after reading all of this.  If reporting a kill means that your area is going to get more restricted by management isn't that what we want?  We want them to manage and if that means closing an area because harvest is to high so be it.  The flip side is they may even increase opportunity because success is high and that means there are more animals to be taken.  The hunter reports are only one aspect that gets taken into consideration and if that portion is incorrect it throws off the whole equation.

I report where I hunt and how I do and then let the WDFW manage from there, bad information makes for bad decisions.  I hunt, they manage and if I don't give them good information I am to blame for bad decisions.

If a check bounces in my checking account when my wife doesn't report taken out $500 at the cash machine how can I be at fault, if she would have told me what she really took out of the account I could have made a better decision on what I did with the money that was still there.  If WDFW doesn't know how many animals we are taking how can they manage the account?

[CedarPants]

I report our hunting but always feel maybe it will be like giving out fishing information at the boat ramp. Either not enough fish wrong kind of fish or to many fish and anyway you report will somehow shut you down somehow or bring out the crowds. So when I fill out the report does it help or hurt my next years chances with to much harvest or not enough harvest or the wrong number of certain anamals harvested. It;s the law and I do it but wonder what the future will bring.

If the amount of harvest that is occuring warrants conservation measures, don't you want that to be known?  Or would you rather hold on to your opportunity to harvest as the resource slowly dwindles? 

That's a rhetorical question of course.  We're talking about shared resources, so I assume everyone would sacrifice some opportunity if it was in the name of conservation.

Coastal you just made the point I was thinking of after reading all of this.  If reporting a kill means that your area is going to get more restricted by management isn't that what we want?  We want them to manage and if that means closing an area because harvest is to high so be it.  The flip side is they may even increase opportunity because success is high and that means there are more animals to be taken.  The hunter reports are only one aspect that gets taken into consideration and if that portion is incorrect it throws off the whole equation.

I report where I hunt and how I do and then let the WDFW manage from there, bad information makes for bad decisions.  I hunt, they manage and if I don't give them good information I am to blame for bad decisions.

If a check bounces in my checking account when my wife doesn't report taken out $500 at the cash machine how can I be at fault, if she would have told me what she really took out of the account I could have made a better decision on what I did with the money that was still there.  If WDFW doesn't know how many animals we are taking how can they manage the account?

Well said.

It's ridiculously ironic to me as well how many people we have on here who on one hand scream to the high heavens about the lack of tribal harvest reporting ..... then on the other hand decry the fact that WDFW expects us to report our kills.

As I've said before, we sure are a hard group to please.