Free: Contests & Raffles.
Kain, isn't there still a list of wants and wishes from the cougar committee? http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=80186.0http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=78275.0
2. Points dispersion. Anyone having left over points in the cougar category should be allowed to move those points into any category he/she sees fit. Though I could be swayed either way wether or not to allow them to go into OIL tag categories.
I'd like to see them allow the use of a deer tag or elk tag for cougars. Or just give out free cougar tags with the purchase of deer or elk tags.But I know WDFW would never entertain such a suggestion, so I won't even suggest it to them.
Quote from: Curly on February 14, 2012, 02:04:58 PMI'd like to see them allow the use of a deer tag or elk tag for cougars. Or just give out free cougar tags with the purchase of deer or elk tags.But I know WDFW would never entertain such a suggestion, so I won't even suggest it to them.I think they pretty much do this already. Individual tagsBear tag $22Cougar Tag $22Deer Tag $42.90Elk Tag $48.40---------------------------Total $135.30Combo License for all four $93.50
Quote from: Kain on February 14, 2012, 02:19:12 PMQuote from: Curly on February 14, 2012, 02:04:58 PMI'd like to see them allow the use of a deer tag or elk tag for cougars. Or just give out free cougar tags with the purchase of deer or elk tags.But I know WDFW would never entertain such a suggestion, so I won't even suggest it to them.I think they pretty much do this already. Individual tagsBear tag $22Cougar Tag $22Deer Tag $42.90Elk Tag $48.40---------------------------Total $135.30Combo License for all four $93.50What if you didn't want all 4? For the first time ever last year I didn't buy a bear tag or cougar tag; I only bought deer and elk because of the crappy economy and trying to save money wherever I could.
I would like to see it go back to the way it was years ago, permit only statewide!
Nope Permits only statewide for everyone just like it used to be. Everyone makes such a fuss over lions, they think they are killing all the deer. When coyotes kill many more. Yeah there are alot of lions in this state but not as many as the deer and elk hunters make it seem. just my
I don't know if harvest numbers are too high, but I think the wrong cats are getting killed in WA. Boot hunters are killing subadults and females far more regulalry than hound hunters. Aside from hound hunting, I cannot think of a single thing thatnthe WDFW should do differently for cougar management.
Kain,Have him explain what happens if say a quota is 7-9, and they reach 7... and the kills are mostly juvenile cats... will they allow the season to continue after Jan 1st, since the majority was juvenile kills? Dave Ware was questioned about this at our meeting last weekend.Next I'd like to know why GMU 335 which has a very high cougar population has such a low quota? This was brought up by the Cattlemans association member of the GMAC and I don't think he ever got a real answer.
I think this current (proposed plan) is by far the best option we have had since the hound ban. I am not sure where fair-chase got the info about GMU 105 because the plan I was reading has new CMU's (Cougar Management Unit's). 105 would be in Unit 7 Which has a 10 female quota. This would achieve the goal of managing the cougars at a 2007 level. Unit 7 has been overharvested for several years, that is why it produces good. There was a doctoral student who did population analysis of cougars in the northeast, and the population is in a massive sink. If I can find the link I will post it.I believe this method will be ideal for preventing the "source" and "sink" populations they want to avoid. It also allows for better management of cougars in certain areas based more geographical barriers, rather than trying to manage the entire state the same way.Brandon
Quote from: NWWABOWHNTR on February 14, 2012, 06:41:10 PMKain,Have him explain what happens if say a quota is 7-9, and they reach 7... and the kills are mostly juvenile cats... will they allow the season to continue after Jan 1st, since the majority was juvenile kills? Dave Ware was questioned about this at our meeting last weekend.Next I'd like to know why GMU 335 which has a very high cougar population has such a low quota? This was brought up by the Cattlemans association member of the GMAC and I don't think he ever got a real answer. If you kill young cougar or toms you are not impacting the population much. The cougar that really matter are your 3 to 10 year old females, they are the reproductive backbone of the population.
Quote from: luvtohnt on February 14, 2012, 06:33:42 PMI think this current (proposed plan) is by far the best option we have had since the hound ban. I am not sure where fair-chase got the info about GMU 105 because the plan I was reading has new CMU's (Cougar Management Unit's). 105 would be in Unit 7 Which has a 10 female quota. This would achieve the goal of managing the cougars at a 2007 level. Unit 7 has been overharvested for several years, that is why it produces good. There was a doctoral student who did population analysis of cougars in the northeast, and the population is in a massive sink. If I can find the link I will post it.I believe this method will be ideal for preventing the "source" and "sink" populations they want to avoid. It also allows for better management of cougars in certain areas based more geographical barriers, rather than trying to manage the entire state the same way.BrandonBrandon where did you get that info. The proposal they released that I saw said 2 cougar for GMU 105.
If you kill young cougar or toms you are not impacting the population much. The cougar that really matter are your 3 to 10 year old females, they are the reproductive backbone of the population.
I would also like to see the population estimate protocol tightened up. I think a regional population estimate would make far more sense than the one they use developed in Kittitas County. It really is comparing apples to oranges up here. We need to develop a more comprehensive 'available habitat' model and then a better guess at the total number. This is particularly important considering that everyone is beating this "12% harvest drum".
Quote from: bearpaw on February 14, 2012, 08:26:01 PMQuote from: luvtohnt on February 14, 2012, 06:33:42 PMI think this current (proposed plan) is by far the best option we have had since the hound ban. I am not sure where fair-chase got the info about GMU 105 because the plan I was reading has new CMU's (Cougar Management Unit's). 105 would be in Unit 7 Which has a 10 female quota. This would achieve the goal of managing the cougars at a 2007 level. Unit 7 has been overharvested for several years, that is why it produces good. There was a doctoral student who did population analysis of cougars in the northeast, and the population is in a massive sink. If I can find the link I will post it.I believe this method will be ideal for preventing the "source" and "sink" populations they want to avoid. It also allows for better management of cougars in certain areas based more geographical barriers, rather than trying to manage the entire state the same way.BrandonBrandon where did you get that info. The proposal they released that I saw said 2 cougar for GMU 105.I saw Kain's other post with the actual proposed seasons, and see that GMU 105 has only 2 (females). I included the link below for the document I was reading. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00433/wdfw00433.pdfIn all honesty I think this is the first step towards bringing hounds back to Washington. Once this program is unsuccessful because boot hunters generally can't control what they take, the only logical move from here is to go back to permit with hounds in order to manage cougar numbers correctly. Quote from: bearpaw on February 14, 2012, 08:23:28 PMIf you kill young cougar or toms you are not impacting the population much. The cougar that really matter are your 3 to 10 year old females, they are the reproductive backbone of the population. There is some truth in this statement, but you have to remember that if you kill to many of the <3 year old females you will have a sudden drop in overall poulation. So realisticly you need to target females >8 years old and males of all age classes.I just noticed that the document I was reading talks about everything being based on female harvest. However in the proposed language of the new regulations it says nothing about females. It makes me wonder if they forgot some language referring to female quotas! The only other thing I can see is that they want population numbers in the NE to matching those in 2007, this may also explain the low quota number to start.Brandon
http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/07-0352.1http://www.esajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1890/08-1805.1http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00256.x/fullHere are a couple of recent findings from NE WashingtonBrandon
I think this current (proposed plan) is by far the best option we have had since the hound ban. I believe this method will be ideal for preventing the "source" and "sink" populations they want to avoid. It also allows for better management of cougars in certain areas based more geographical barriers, rather than trying to manage the entire state the same way.Brandon
Particularly since hunters killed MORE unmarked cats in the "lightly hunted" area than they did in the 'heavily hunted' area... what gives? Hunters probably killed more unmarked cats in the lightly hunted area because it had a stable population and overall more cougars and is considered a source population for other areas. On the flip side, the heavyily hunted area had lower density, was considered a sink population and just had fewer cougars to begin with so most cats were able to be collared in this area compared to the lightly hunted area.
They make the claim that heavy hunting will result in cats from neighboring units moving in. Of course that happens, less competition. If you want to reduce the incidence of that occurring you simply increase the hunting pressure in the units the cats are coming from.
I can also see that this study shows the need for hound hunting to give managers the ability to target male or female segments of the overall cougar population to more carefully control numbers and population growth. Hound seasons can be set to remove a specific number of male or female cougar from a GMU.
Does anyone here know exactly how the WDFW determines cougar populations in WA?
Quote from: WAcoyotehunter on February 15, 2012, 04:29:32 PMDoes anyone here know exactly how the WDFW determines cougar populations in WA?They don't. (Seriously)
No reliable estimate of statewide cougar abundance isavailable for Washington. In 2003, two techniqueswere used to provide an approximate range ofstatewide cougar abundance. A rough estimate frompopulation reconstruction indicated that the minimumnumber of cougars in Washington might be around900 animals. An extrapolation across the state withthe highest cougar density reported in the literaturesuggested the maximum number of cougars inWashington might be around 4,100 animals. Since2003, cougar population size has been assessed in three project areas in Washington. Currently,the best available estimate of statewide abundance is from an extrapolation from those projects,corresponding to about 1,900 to 2,100 animals (excluding kittens).
Distribution and abundanceCougar (Puma concolor) occur throughout most of theforested regions of Washington State, encompassingabout half of the State (Fig. 1). There is no reliableestimate of statewide cougar abundance. However,cougar population size has been estimated in threeproject areas in eastern Washington; extrapolation fromthose projects corresponds to roughly about 1,900 to2,100 animals (excluding kittens) statewide
Managers have to be careful though because the immigration causes kitten mortality to increase drastically. So if they increase quotas in the neighboring area and the immigrant males kill kittens you essentially create 2 neighboring sink populations (especially since our regulations run in 3 year cycles). Having a possible net result of total collapse, and closure of cougar hunting in the areas. We all know how hard it is to reopen some kinds of hunting after they are closed!!
