Meeting with Dr. Martolrello (WDFW Carnivore Specialist)

[Kain]

I would like to see it go back to the way it was years ago, permit only statewide!

 I assume you mean for hounds.  ?

[Kain]

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

Do you think the harvest levels are too high?  How many cougars do you think should be harvested each year? 

We have had a permit system in place for the last three years for half the season.  The success rate was so low (less than one percent) that there was just no way to justify it.  That is a major reason they are getting rid of it.  I dont know why anyone would want to go to system like that for the whole season.  They would have to issue soo many permits to meet harvest goals that they would be giving everyone that applied a permit anyways....unless you think they are harvesting too many cougars.

[WAcoyotehunter]

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]

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.

I dont know if it is the wrong animals.  Boot hunters take a ratio of cats that matches the population.  There are more females and sub adults to take that is why the harvest reports show those numbers.  Most sources say there is three or four female home ranges for every adult male.  Yet boot hunters harvest around a 50/50 ratio of male and females.  If the overall goal is to keep populations stable then boot hunters do their part. 

If you believe the WDFW it is the older males that keep the population age and male/female ratios in check so the boot hunters taking the subadults (that would be killed anyways) is exactly the animals they want to be taken.  They are also the population that is most likely to cause human conflicts.  From what I can deduce from my research there are around 743-822 kittens born every year after adjusting for mortality rates.  Hunters only kill around 200 historically.  That means that it is not humans that limit cougar populations at all but cougar fighting, available prey and territory

If you want to target specific animals hounds are obviously the best choice.

[wraithen]

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've hunted a gmu that has no evidence of coyotes whatsoever but I've had cougar vocals in earshot half the time. Close vocals at that.

[luvtohnt]

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

[NWWABOWHNTR]

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. 

[Kain]

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.

Great points.  Like I said earlier this is my biggest concern is how they come up with these quota numbers.  He is going to explain the science behind all of this.  Like Pianoman mentioned there is a goal of 14% and +/- of 2 percent.  And in the season proposal it gives the Director the option to extend the season if the numbers are not met.  I assume it also gives him the option to extend the season even if they are met if, like you said, the harvest was made up of mostly males.  I will also ask him if they will consider recent complaints and incidence reports in each unit to allow a late season even if the quota is met.

[bearpaw]

First let me say, any state that knows cougar management knows that you can hunt males hard. Females control your population, you must prevent female overharvest.

I have guided cougar hunters in GMU's 101, 105, 108, 111, 113, 117, 121, and 124 since 1977. In one season, 1995 we shot 23 cougar and left 25 cougar in the tree. Most were killed in 101, 105, 108, 111, 113. I know all these units like the back of my hand, I have been on virtually every mountain in most of these units. I know 105 especially well and have killed 2 to 5 cougar a year for many years, year after year in that unit. There were plenty of other doggers than us who hunted those units and they killed cats too. My point is that the numbers they suggest are just idiotic.

Historically 8 to 30 cats were killed in each of these units each year. You cannot go by the recent years harvest records they are flawed by not having adequate seasons. Tell WDFW you want to see harvest statistics from 1980 to 1996. These units need 8-25 cats killed annually in each unit just to somewhat keep up with recruitment.

There are probably 7 to 14 females raisng kittens in GMU 105 right now. Most likely 1 or 2 females with kittens in the Moraski area, 2 to 4 females with kittens from sheep to flat creek area, 1 or 2 females with kittens in the fifteen mile area, 1 or 2 females with kittens in the Barstow area, 1 or 2 females with kittens in the First Thought and Pierre Lake area, 2 to 3 females with kittens in the Deep Creek Summit lake and Churchill area. This estimate does not include females without kittens, sub-adults, or toms.

(If needed I could break down by drainage a good estimate of how many cougar are in each unit)

Here are sensible and very conservative quotas for NE Washington's GMU's.

GMU 101...18 cougar - no more than 9 females   (this is a huge unit that has cougar throughout)
GMU 105.....8 cougar - no more than 4 females
GMU 108.....8 cougar - no more than 4 females
GMU 111...14 cougar - no more than 9 females  (there is a real surplus of females in this unit)
GMU 113...14 cougar - no more than 7 females
GMU 117...14 cougar - no more than 7 females
GMU 121...10 cougar - no more than 5 females
GMU 124.....8 cougar - no more than 4 females

FYI - There are several drainages in NE WA where I have taken 3 or 4 large adult toms out in a 1 or 2 month season. Contrary to textbook belief, toms commonly inhabit the same areas, harvest records prove that.

[bearpaw]

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.

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.

[bearpaw]

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

Brandon where did you get that info. The proposal they released that I saw said 2 cougar for GMU 105.

[Kain]

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.

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.

You are correct.  Martorello told us that they purposely allowed excessive harvest in some pilot program units as an experiment to see what effect it would have on populations.  They found that the population basically stayed the same.  Only the age structures changed.  Boot hunting harvest is soo low that I doubt we could have any significant effect on populations or age/male/female ratios at all.  Even with a year round season.  Most cougars are harvested as incidental encounters during deer and elk seasons.  The amount that would be harvested out of those season would be very small.

[Kain]

I looked through some of the harvest reports to compare past harvest numbers vs proposed quota's.  Did not find very many cases where regular season harvest was over the quotas. 

[luvtohnt]

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

Brandon 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.pdf

In 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.

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.

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

[WAcoyotehunter]

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".