(poll added) Management input on Colockum Elk

[Rainier10]

There are cattle up there. But I don't tho.k there is a lack of feed. Rainier if it went permit only you would only displace maybe 1,800 hunters. 12,000 guys already hunt the Yakima herd so another 1,800 wouldn't do much. Especially since in 2001 just ten years ago 23,000 hunters hunted the Yakima herd.

There is plenty of feed. I am not sure why their herd goal is only 4,500. In 2000 it was 6,500. The only thing I can Thu.k of is the WDFW lowered their standards and goals. Since they can't accomplish much.

Are you saying they are only displacing 1800 hunters because your proposal would be to have 1200 permits in the area for bull and cow harvest?

I think this question about hunters got missed.  Are you saying 1800 hunters will be displaced because there are currently 3000 hunting it and your proposal would give out 1200 permits if it went permit only or do you have numbers saying only 1800 people hunt it now?

[colockumelk]

Sorry yeah didn't see that.  Yes currently3,000 hunters (400 bowhunters and 2,600 rifle hunters) hunt in GMU 328 and 329.  If you add 251 then there are 500 rifle hunters that hunt there.  So if you made it permit only for 328/329 with the amount of permits I listed then you would only displace 1,800 hunters.  Now I say it wouldn't do much harm because of this reason.  In 2001 23,000 elk hunters reported hunting in the Yakima GMU's.  In 2010 12,000 hunters reported hunting in the Yakima GMU's.  So I don't think the additional 1,800 displaced hunters from the Colockum to the Yakima elk herd would have a very large impact, if any at all.   

[Happy Gilmore]

Road closure takes away recreational opportunities for the area. There are fewer and fewer areas where you can go for a ORV Ride or take a 4x4 up in the hills for an afternoon with friends, sight in your gun, look for sheds, campout...whatever.

Closing the roads negatively affects all of the other users while only doing a little to "reduce" access to elk by the tribal hunters. If you make a policy for the public or suggest a policy for the public with only ONE user in mind, it will fail.

The only arguement I've seen here in reading again is that road closures will keep out what we know are poachers. I've talked to F&W about it, my buddies who live in Ellensburg and have been hunting it all their lives talk to F&W about it. The only thing that people can do, that F&W can do is issue trespassing violations when the Tribal hunting is occuring.

Best policy would be to set up a citizens' patrol and report illegal off-roading to local Enforcement. So, make more roads off limits and it can give Enforcement a tool to reduce illegal use. Ok, but, that in turns limits use for the rest of the people and the rest of the year.

I am NEVER against limiting use of public land. It always bites hunters back later at some point and time. For each thing we give up, we'll never get back.

[colockumelk]

Sorry Happy I can't agree with you on this one.  Especially when there is such a huge ORV park on the south side of I-90.  The job of the WDFW is not to provide ORV recreation for the people.  Its job is to properly regulate and maintain healthy populations of wild game.  It uses hunting as a tool to do this.  Something which should never be taken away.  But if one of the main problems that hinders the health of an elk herd is too many roads then I am 100% for smart road management.  You can close the roads I have mentioned and still provide plenty of opportunity for ORV riders in the Colockum. 

Road closure takes away recreational opportunities for the area. There are fewer and fewer areas where you can go for a ORV Ride or take a 4x4 up in the hills for an afternoon with friends, sight in your gun, look for sheds, campout...whatever. There is still plenty of roads to drive in the Colockum.

Closing the roads negatively affects all of the other users while only doing a little to "reduce" access to elk by the tribal hunters. If you make a policy for the public or suggest a policy for the public with only ONE user in mind, it will fail. What will fail.  Road closures will do more to protect our elk herds and provide escapement than all the things you have listed.  Study after study proves this.

The only arguement I've seen here in reading again is that road closures will keep out what we know are poachers. I've talked to F&W about it, my buddies who live in Ellensburg and have been hunting it all their lives talk to F&W about it. The only thing that people can do, that F&W can do is issue trespassing violations when the Tribal hunting is occuring. Yes.  Or they could put up physical barriers instead of a red sign.  The red signs are a joke and local hunters take them down or disregard them all the time.

Best policy would be to set up a citizens' patrol and report illegal off-roading to local Enforcement. So, make more roads off limits and it can give Enforcement a tool to reduce illegal use. Ok, but, that in turns limits use for the rest of the people and the rest of the year. The citizens patrol isn't gonna work.  Why because people are not going to volunteer for this.  Or at least in numbers that will be effective.  Road management is the easiest, most effective and cheapest way to limit poaching, tribal harvest and to provide escapement for yearling bulls from hunters.

I am NEVER against limiting use of public land. It always bites hunters back later at some point and time. For each thing we give up, we'll never get back. Road managmnet ALWAYS make for a healthier game population.  There is a TON of road access in the Colockum.  The road managment ideas I provided isn't going to put a dent in the amount of miles you can still drive in the Colockum.  The sky isn't falling.  Its not going to become a wilderness area.  You shouldn't be able to drive up to a game reserve designed to protect elk. 

Happy Gilmore I appreciate your input and I hope you continue your stance on road managment.  Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean that I don't appreciate and welcome your input.  I think that you are wrong.  But that doesn't mean I'm 100% right either.   

[Rainier10]

Colockum, thanks for the clarification on the hunter numbers, now I see where you are coming from.  Those numbers for the Yakima area are interesting, that is quite a drop and probably a whole different discussion of what caused that.

To stay on topic I agree with Happy that I would prefer roads not close because I too use the area for hunting, recreation, atv and snowmobile use.  There are tons of user groups that would be affected but my main concern is the health of the herd and what is best for that.  That is where I have to agree with Colockum in that road closures are good for wildlife.

This is a tough one that the WDFW is struggling with also, nobody knows what the answer is but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  Well if they keep letting the tribes harvest unrestricted amounts of animals and expect the herd to recover they are insane.  If they don't enforce the green dot system they have now and expect people to obey it they are insane.

[Happy Gilmore]

Colockum, thanks for the clarification on the hunter numbers, now I see where you are coming from.  Those numbers for the Yakima area are interesting, that is quite a drop and probably a whole different discussion of what caused that.

To stay on topic I agree with Happy that I would prefer roads not close because I too use the area for hunting, recreation, atv and snowmobile use.  There are tons of user groups that would be affected but my main concern is the health of the herd and what is best for that.  That is where I have to agree with Colockum in that road closures are good for wildlife.

This is a tough one that the WDFW is struggling with also, nobody knows what the answer is but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  Well if they keep letting the tribes harvest unrestricted amounts of animals and expect the herd to recover they are insane.  If they don't enforce the green dot system they have now and expect people to obey it they are insane.

That is the entire problem with the road closure argument. It is limiting the recreational opportunities of ALL other users of the area. We all know why we want roads closed. To stop tribal hunting. Seasonal road closures would have to be significant to stop the poaching. As hunters, we've already got our hands tied by the general public and specifically looking at a major management change which only is aimed at reducing the harvest by ONE group of bad seeds isn't good for any of us and really isn't doing much more than taking away opportunities from the average guy who's been hunting the same spot, year after year.

It would upset me if it went to a draw area and all the roads were closed because that was the only way to keep "some" people out.

[C-Money]

I have said it 100 time before. I spend way more time camping during the spring/summer riding green dots, fishing, and wildlife viewing with my family to give up road access for one week of elk hunting. I follow the rules and dont ride where I am not suppost to.  Sure would be nice to see a few more LEO's up there writing tickes, as they could make a ton of $$ on any given weekend! I am finding that roads are being closed, roads I have rode for years are slowly getting yellow gates accross them. Access is already getting restricted. I would like to see these fancy yellow gates go up accross unauthorized roads instead of roads that are marked green dot on my maps. What a mess, I am sure this will get much worse before it gets better.

[Happy Gilmore]

The "other" greatest problem I see is when more roads are closed, it opens up the area to become a big private resort to the guys who have horses, pack mules, alpacas and such. It makes areas too difficult to reach by the guy who doesn't have big cash for long vacations or horse teams.

I'm on the CAB with F&W for the units from Carnation to Everett. I was pleasantly surprised that the lady representing the Tundra Swan group was not opposed to hunters and was interested in working WITH us to get more money from private groups to plant habitat, feed and remove blackberries and create more nesting areas.

After our last meeting I am more convinced that an open approach with various users of areas is positive and "responsible" management. There is a wildflower group interested in helping out, bird watchers etc. If we as "hunters" went in with the idea of closing access to our "huntable" areas, other groups will turn a cold shoulder on us. They'd rather just see hunting closed all together to solve the problem. Rather than closures, working together to gain momentum will be a positive. If people are up interested in picking flowers get to see elk grazing in their meadows, they in turn start having pride in the area. If bird watchers see elk in an area where they've installed some nesting boxes, they have more pride in the area, if kids are taken on field trips and given lectures on the habitat they take pride in that down the road.

I don't know the answer but, maybe limiting grazing, getting a group who is interested in wildflowers and meadow improvements to become involved, a bird watching group? I don't know? but, just saying "close the gates" for the elk doesn't seem like a responsible well thought out plan to make long term improvements to any public area.

[Rainier10]

I think by closing roads I was talking about some of the roads, I don't want to see it a wildneress walk in only area.  Right now there are roads everywhere and you can drive to every nook and cranny up there giving the elk no where to hide.  If you close some of the roads people can still get access, just not be able to drive every square inch, that would give the elk some room to have escapement and a place to calve.

And you are spot on about enforcement of the current road system and hunting rules, that is exactly what they need, the problem is that costs money and we all know that is limited.

[Happy Gilmore]

I think by closing roads I was talking about some of the roads, I don't want to see it a wildneress walk in only area.  Right now there are roads everywhere and you can drive to every nook and cranny up there giving the elk no where to hide.  If you close some of the roads people can still get access, just not be able to drive every square inch, that would give the elk some room to have escapement and a place to calve.

And you are spot on about enforcement of the current road system and hunting rules, that is exactly what they need, the problem is that costs money and we all know that is limited.

The reality is that escapement is only an issue during hunting season. Elk don't care about cars driving by. They care when they start getting shot at. Elk are happy to have their picture taken while grazing at all the feeding stations. They are just as happy to have their pictures taken when folks spot them in a canyon on a hillside from a nearby road. They don't panic and run.

This is my whole point. Maybe I've taken the discussion the wrong way? I'm hearing permanent closures or until further notice type of closures. I just wouldn't agree with that in any way shape or form. This is a specific closure which may "need" to happen during hunting season only. This closure "might" help reduce poaching of the big bulls during a specific period of time affecting only ONE group of users, hunters. I'd say 90% of the general population is fine with closing roads to hunters.

Do all the hunters here on this page agree we should close roads to reduce poachers and tribal harvests? I'd guess probably not.

[bobcat]

The reality is that escapement is only an issue during hunting season. Elk don't care about cars driving by. They care when they start getting shot at. Elk are happy to have their picture taken while grazing at all the feeding stations. They are just as happy to have their pictures taken when folks spot them in a canyon on a hillside from a nearby road. They don't panic and run.

That may be true, but isn't "hunting season" up there from the first of August through the end of March?

[Happy Gilmore]

The reality is that escapement is only an issue during hunting season. Elk don't care about cars driving by. They care when they start getting shot at. Elk are happy to have their picture taken while grazing at all the feeding stations. They are just as happy to have their pictures taken when folks spot them in a canyon on a hillside from a nearby road. They don't panic and run.

That may be true, but isn't "hunting season" up there from the first of August through the end of March?

Tribal? yeah....I know, it's kind of my whole point. Something needs to be done and I agree 100% but, closing access specifically due to a the poor use by a small group doing a lot of damage is tough to swallow for me.

[Rainier10]

Well in the area around my cabin they do alright if you don't get to close to them, but people never keep their distance, they have to drive closer and then when the elk run they drive around to the road in front of them and cut them off for a closer view.  Elk definately don't like the quads circling them and trying to get close enough to get pictures or the quads taking short cuts between roads and scaring the newborn calves laying down waiting for their mothers to return.  Or the snowmobilers chasing them down to get pictures of big bulls or worse chasing them to get the antlers to fall off so they can keep the sheds.  I ride quads on the roads, and I ride my snowmobile but don't harrass the wildlife, all I am saying is if they closed some of the roads it would give the animals a little more room to be animals without as much pressure.

We are probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one, we just have different opinion on the reality of escapement, I think it is a year round thing you think it only happens during the hunting season.

[predatorpro]

since when was the colockum hurting for elk? they are stupid thick up there!

[Happy Gilmore]

Well in the area around my cabin they do alright if you don't get to close to them, but people never keep their distance, they have to drive closer and then when the elk run they drive around to the road in front of them and cut them off for a closer view.  Elk definately don't like the quads circling them and trying to get close enough to get pictures or the quads taking short cuts between roads and scaring the newborn calves laying down waiting for their mothers to return.  Or the snowmobilers chasing them down to get pictures of big bulls or worse chasing them to get the antlers to fall off so they can keep the sheds.  I ride quads on the roads, and I ride my snowmobile but don't harrass the wildlife, all I am saying is if they closed some of the roads it would give the animals a little more room to be animals without as much pressure.

We are probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one, we just have different opinion on the reality of escapement, I think it is a year round thing you think it only happens during the hunting season.

No, you are right and I agree with that and know that it happens. I know that they are not going to be driven nearly as far as if someone is hunting. If hunting and folks are on quads they will likely continue pursuit with more devotion for the prize, especially those who can take long shots. I haven't ventured into the area during modern rifle for many years because the few times I did I was scared for my safety.