Post by: jdw12885 on October 25, 2013, 08:19:21 PM
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 25, 2013, 08:28:16 PM
ELK HUNTIN TOPIC: How do you hunters feel about Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) secretly bringing in Federal Agents with in the last couple days to shoot 15 bulls out of the Skagit River heard???? They are using spotlights and night vision/infared equipment to do this hunt. Don't you think we the citizens-hunters-taxpayers should be able to hunt these elk after all the money we pay into this joke of a department???
Pm sent
Post by: rosscrazyelk on October 25, 2013, 08:31:53 PM
Post by: Mfowl on October 25, 2013, 08:32:17 PM
Post by: whuppinstick on October 25, 2013, 08:33:18 PM
ELK HUNTIN TOPIC: How do you hunters feel about Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) secretly bringing in Federal Agents with in the last couple days to shoot 15 bulls out of the Skagit River heard???? They are using spotlights and night vision/infared equipment to do this hunt. Don't you think we the citizens-hunters-taxpayers should be able to hunt these elk after all the money we pay into this joke of a department???
Citation please.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 25, 2013, 08:39:46 PM
Post by: snowpack on October 25, 2013, 08:40:58 PM
Post by: jdw12885 on October 25, 2013, 08:41:34 PM
Would like to know more about this. Lots of hunters would love the opportunity to take those elk...and have been paying for the licenses, tags, permits, etc that fund the WDFW.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 25, 2013, 08:45:42 PM
ELK HUNTIN TOPIC: How do you hunters feel about Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) secretly bringing in Federal Agents with in the last couple days to shoot 15 bulls out of the Skagit River heard???? They are using spotlights and night vision/infared equipment to do this hunt. Don't you think we the citizens-hunters-taxpayers should be able to hunt these elk after all the money we pay into this joke of a department???
Citation please.
:yeah:
Post by: huntnphool on October 25, 2013, 08:46:50 PM
+1, Anyone have any documentation/pics/first hand knowledge?ELK HUNTIN TOPIC: How do you hunters feel about Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) secretly bringing in Federal Agents with in the last couple days to shoot 15 bulls out of the Skagit River heard???? They are using spotlights and night vision/infared equipment to do this hunt. Don't you think we the citizens-hunters-taxpayers should be able to hunt these elk after all the money we pay into this joke of a department???
Citation please.
Post by: meat hntr78 on October 25, 2013, 08:48:44 PM
Post by: jason stevens on October 25, 2013, 08:50:34 PM
Post by: jdw12885 on October 25, 2013, 08:51:22 PM
Post by: huntnphool on October 25, 2013, 08:54:12 PM
Wanna see all the proof in the world?? Get in your trucks right now and drive up the south Skagit hwy to Walberg Rd..........................Anybody close enough to do this?
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 25, 2013, 08:55:52 PM
You on the other hand live near by and are at least semi-computer literate. You could go and take some photographs, which you could then post here. In that way there would be a record of this event beyond anything that sounds like alarmist half-truths.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 25, 2013, 09:01:33 PM
Post by: huntnphool on October 25, 2013, 09:01:33 PM
That doesn't really answer anything. We who post here are flung across the state, and really can't drive up there tonight.+1
You on the other hand live near by and are at least semi-computer literate. You could go and take some photographs, which you could then post here. In that way there would be a record of this event beyond anything that sounds like alarmist half-truths.
Post by: wildweeds on October 25, 2013, 09:04:10 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 25, 2013, 09:10:34 PM
Surprises me not in the least,I remember a few years ago how fueled up ticked off I got on the shooting the mountain goats with .50 cals out the door gunners seat of the UH-1 in the Olympic national park to save a lichen moss found to be going extinct.
Never happened, sorry
http://db.lib.uidaho.edu/ereserve/courses/w/wildlife/440_01/mtgoats.pdf (http://db.lib.uidaho.edu/ereserve/courses/w/wildlife/440_01/mtgoats.pdf)
Post by: meat hntr78 on October 25, 2013, 09:11:31 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 25, 2013, 09:17:34 PM
Nothing on Breaking Skagit.
Tempted to drive up there. About 30 minutes away.
Post by: mulehunter on October 25, 2013, 09:19:56 PM
Post by: meat hntr78 on October 25, 2013, 09:24:12 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 25, 2013, 09:30:34 PM
Call City of Skagit on Monday and find out what's story? :peep:
That area is in the county. Maybe Clear Lake.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 25, 2013, 09:36:44 PM
We are having a Senate Resource meeting Tuesday in Mount Vernon with Kirk Pearson. The up river elk are on the agenda.
I doubt this.
Going to bed.
Will be up that way in am passing through for hunting.
Post by: Jingles on October 25, 2013, 10:12:07 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on October 25, 2013, 10:24:43 PM
Post by: jdw12885 on October 26, 2013, 07:17:23 AM
If my 2 boys weren't in bed I would drive up there right now . And really Walberg rd. Doubt it . wouldn't believe 15 bulls in there at all. Maybe its Day Creek poachers why wouldn't they have sent the guys with the rifle bull tags over there 2 weeks ago if they wanted bulls killed that area was open to them.Pilgrim, you crack me up! Ive been up to Walberg on 3 different properties since the beginning of September trying to fill my cow tag. I have seen 3 different heards and upwards to 25 bulls! Spikes, rag horns, heard bulls! You can pm me if you want and ill drive you up their myself to show you since evidently, your clueless! I wouldn't have take'n the time to comment about this post if I was making up some bull *censored* lie.
Post by: boneaddict on October 26, 2013, 07:21:43 AM
Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.:yeah: Didn't work too well with all that white snow on the ground. Looked like a massacre.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 26, 2013, 07:27:45 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 26, 2013, 07:30:33 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 26, 2013, 07:39:18 AM
Post by: Ccortez on October 26, 2013, 07:43:56 AM
Still waiting for the photo's of the trucks or gut piles
You won't see it during the day fyi
Post by: scout/sniper on October 26, 2013, 07:44:18 AM
Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.Why wouldn't they have a "special" hunt and let tag holders harvest them?
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 26, 2013, 07:55:49 AM
Post by: boneaddict on October 26, 2013, 07:57:26 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 26, 2013, 08:00:08 AM
Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.Why wouldn't they have a "special" hunt and let tag holders harvest them?
We'll find out. We need to get confirmation or denial from the DFW first and work from there. If this is accurate information - no offense to the OP - then this should indeed have been given to the hunters of WA to perform. Let's not get the cart in front of the elk, though. A systematic approach is prudent at this juncture.
Post by: Ccortez on October 26, 2013, 08:03:57 AM
Post by: addicted2hunting on October 26, 2013, 08:04:41 AM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 26, 2013, 08:06:00 AM
Post by: mulehunter on October 26, 2013, 08:07:05 AM
Post by: Ccortez on October 26, 2013, 08:07:25 AM
If this is true, too bad PETA wasn't there harassing the shooters. Maybe get what's coming to them, tickets and maybe some jail time. :tup:
Its true
Post by: boneaddict on October 26, 2013, 08:10:48 AM
Post by: Ccortez on October 26, 2013, 08:11:40 AM
:yeah: it would be 5,000-6,000 lbs meat... :rolleyes:
More then that
Two bulls weighed a combined weight of 922
Post by: boneaddict on October 26, 2013, 08:12:16 AM
on a side note, I hear they shot the last two rams in the tieton last week.
Post by: scout/sniper on October 26, 2013, 08:12:39 AM
I wonder if they are going to auction off the antlers :rolleyes:I'm sure the elite shooters will be allowed to keep their "trophies"
Post by: jay.sharkbait on October 26, 2013, 08:18:45 AM
I wonder if they are going to auction off the antlers :rolleyes:I'm sure the elite shooters will be allowed to keep their "trophies"
"Elite"
Now that's funny!
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 26, 2013, 08:40:40 AM
This really wouldn't surprise me at all if it's confirmed. After reading ucwarden's Operation Cody, it's very clear to me that the admin of the DFW cares little about wildlife or our hunters.
Post by: coachcw on October 26, 2013, 10:10:28 AM
pure meat though......dang it seems to me if those sheep made it through the last year maybe they wernt infected ? cant imagine none of those sheep made there way to clemans
on a side note, I hear they shot the last two rams in the tieton last week.
Post by: boneaddict on October 26, 2013, 11:08:11 AM
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on October 26, 2013, 11:26:07 AM
Post by: Bob33 on October 26, 2013, 11:50:45 AM
Post by: ellensburgpo on October 26, 2013, 12:10:00 PM
Here's a novel idea: let's wait until we have the facts before drawing too many conclusions.
Ha, this is the internet...cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war is more how things work here.
Post by: Ridgeratt on October 26, 2013, 12:10:47 PM
Here's a novel idea: let's wait until we have the facts before drawing too many conclusions.
What fun is that!
Post by: Bob33 on October 26, 2013, 12:22:47 PM
Yeah, you're right. I know the snipers came in unmarked vans with tinted windows, and had backup support from black helicopters. It was secretly planned by the Obama administration as a ploy to distract attention from the economy. The snipers used ammunition available only to the military, which has been hording it for an upcoming attack on the populace.Here's a novel idea: let's wait until we have the facts before drawing too many conclusions.
Ha, this is the internet...cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war is more how things work here.
I knew all that, but didn't want to alarm anyone. There - now it's out there.
Post by: Ccortez on October 26, 2013, 12:27:54 PM
Yeah, you're right. I know the snipers came in unmarked vans with tinted windows, and had backup support from black helicopters. It was secretly planned by the Obama administration as a ploy to distract attention from the economy. The snipers used ammunition available only to the military, which has been hording it for an upcoming attack on the populace.Here's a novel idea: let's wait until we have the facts before drawing too many conclusions.
Ha, this is the internet...cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war is more how things work here.
I knew all that, but didn't want to alarm anyone. There - now it's out there.
Lmfao not even close
Post by: Cougartail on October 26, 2013, 12:46:18 PM
Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.
....and I thought it was the wolves that wiped out the herd? I guess I'll be needing a tinfoil hat when reading these type of posts. :chuckle:
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on October 26, 2013, 01:05:51 PM
:yeah: it would be 5,000-6,000 lbs meat... :rolleyes:
More then that
Two bulls weighed a combined weight of 922
Are you directly involved in this event?
Care to share what your link is or how you know such specific information?
Post by: Bob33 on October 26, 2013, 01:27:57 PM
I guess the secret agents aren't very secret.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 26, 2013, 01:55:19 PM
Post by: doyourtime89 on October 26, 2013, 02:14:07 PM
Post by: mrolen on October 26, 2013, 02:51:18 PM
Cougartail, if I understand this comment, that that clean-out of the elk did not happen?? Or just another off the cuff comment to the wolf problem up there?Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.
....and I thought it was the wolves that wiped out the herd? I guess I'll be needing a tinfoil hat when reading these type of posts. :chuckle:
Post by: huntinggirl on October 26, 2013, 03:29:06 PM
Post by: Whitpirate on October 26, 2013, 09:11:44 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 26, 2013, 09:27:09 PM
I have emailed a game agent I know and the Master Hunter Hunt Coordinator.
Asked them for any info on this.
Waiting
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 26, 2013, 09:31:14 PM
Post by: Tbar on October 26, 2013, 09:49:22 PM
Well today elk were all along 20.Probably not going to get much out of either of them for a bit.
I have emailed a game agent I know and the Master Hunter Hunt Coordinator.
Asked them for any info on this.
Waiting
Post by: KFhunter on October 26, 2013, 10:02:46 PM
Post by: Tbar on October 26, 2013, 10:08:30 PM
ONce upon a time I planned on being a Master Hunter, until I learned via H-W just what a joke it was.It's the things that don't make it on to HW that would give justification to something like this.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 26, 2013, 10:23:23 PM
B
I was informed that something of this nature might happen. I do not know if
it has or not. Also received the link from one of the other Master Hunters.
I'll let you know if/what I hear about it.
-----
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 9:
There is a rumor on the hunt wa forum that elk are being shot on. walberg
rd. By state or federal hunters at night. Do you have any info about this.?
B
Sent from my iPad
Post by: Tbar on October 26, 2013, 10:27:40 PM
Post by: KFhunter on October 26, 2013, 10:28:40 PM
This does not bode well.
Did WDFW actually think this would stay a secret?
Post by: Tbar on October 26, 2013, 10:31:19 PM
Post by: jackelope on October 26, 2013, 10:37:35 PM
Yeah, you're right. I know the snipers came in unmarked vans with tinted windows, and had backup support from black helicopters. It was secretly planned by the Obama administration as a ploy to distract attention from the economy. The snipers used ammunition available only to the military, which has been hording it for an upcoming attack on the populace.Here's a novel idea: let's wait until we have the facts before drawing too many conclusions.
Ha, this is the internet...cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war is more how things work here.
G
I knew all that, but didn't want to alarm anyone. There - now it's out there.
Are you sure that's how it went down, Bob??
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 26, 2013, 11:03:56 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 26, 2013, 11:07:28 PM
I emailed all the news agencys about the claims. Lets see what shakes loose.
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 12:31:15 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on October 27, 2013, 01:16:28 AM
Post by: Bob Williams on October 27, 2013, 06:11:24 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 06:44:47 AM
Why would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Maybe because he has 21 posts, and started this thread about secret Federal agents shooting elk in the dark. His information is second hand, and to those who seek more proof he answers "go up there and look".
To you, Mr Elk247, I answer, why would you believe the OP? His post is incendiary and poorly supported, and there is no reason to take his word as gospel until more information is received
Post by: boneaddict on October 27, 2013, 06:57:51 AM
Post by: boneaddict on October 27, 2013, 07:02:35 AM
Laugh all you want. Wolves have nothing to do with the elk in the Methow, but you sound like you might know all about them.Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.
....and I thought it was the wolves that wiped out the herd? I guess I'll be needing a tinfoil hat when reading these type of posts. :chuckle:
Post by: huntnphool on October 27, 2013, 09:09:34 AM
+1Why would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Maybe because he has 21 posts, and started this thread about secret Federal agents shooting elk in the dark. His information is second hand, and to those who seek more proof he answers "go up there and look".
To you, Mr Elk247, I answer, why would you believe the OP? His post is incendiary and poorly supported, and there is no reason to take his word as gospel until more information is received
Post by: Mike450r on October 27, 2013, 09:22:28 AM
I could see WDFW wanting to control numbers in a way that they felt would get the job done quick and quiet.
Post by: mountainman on October 27, 2013, 09:26:19 AM
agree Bone, Cougartail just like to argue the wolf issue with no experience in the Okanogan area. Those of us who live/ lived there, grew up, know the history, WATCHED the wolves literally, are just "tender feet", lolLaugh all you want. Wolves have nothing to do with the elk in the Methow, but you sound like you might know all about them.Sounds like when WDFW came in and wiped out the elk herd here in the Methow because of the damage to the orchards.
....and I thought it was the wolves that wiped out the herd? I guess I'll be needing a tinfoil hat when reading these type of posts. :chuckle:
Post by: mountainman on October 27, 2013, 09:28:52 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 09:30:45 AM
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 09:44:01 AM
Post by: Dhoey07 on October 27, 2013, 09:51:56 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 09:56:59 AM
Who, from wdfw, can we email about this?
I would not bother with DFW . I would rattle local reps. Starting with Kirk Pearson.
He is holding a senate resource meeting in Mount Vernon on Tuesday.
The DFW is not afraid of us. They are afraid of law makers.
Post by: huntnphool on October 27, 2013, 09:58:15 AM
I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.The USDA? :chuckle: This is comical on so many different levels!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
Post by: Mfowl on October 27, 2013, 09:59:15 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 10:01:40 AM
I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
That is a little less than 100% convincing
Post by: snowpack on October 27, 2013, 10:02:02 AM
No it's not. The USDA oversees the USFS and a detachment known as Wildlife Services. Wildlife Services does lots of hunting and trapping of 'problem animals'. This includes deer, coyotes, used to include wolves, etc. They use lots of aerial gunning and even poison in some states. I think Wildlife Services takes out more coyotes than all of hunter combined. They like to hire former military/LEO snipers for some of their positions.I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.The USDA? :chuckle: This is comical on so many different levels!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 10:04:53 AM
Washington Wildlife Services State Director
720 O'Leary Street NW
Olympia, WA 98502
Phone: 360-753-9884
Toll Free: 1-866-4USDAWS
FAX: 360-753-9466
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/state_office/washington_info.shtml (http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/state_office/washington_info.shtml)
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 10:05:19 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 10:05:44 AM
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 10:11:47 AM
I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
That is a little less than 100% convincing
I understand, I doubted the OP too.
But I have been a Hunter Ed instructor for over 20 years. The two folks I talked too. Both have been in the DFW for many years. It is USDA.
You can take it to the bank.
Post by: Humptulips on October 27, 2013, 10:13:02 AM
No it's not. The USDA oversees the USFS and a detachment known as Wildlife Services. Wildlife Services does lots of hunting and trapping of 'problem animals'. This includes deer, coyotes, used to include wolves, etc. They use lots of aerial gunning and even poison in some states. I think Wildlife Services takes out more coyotes than all of hunter combined. They like to hire former military/LEO snipers for some of their positions.I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.The USDA? :chuckle: This is comical on so many different levels!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
It's actually called USDA APHIS (United States Department of Agriculture Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service) At one time they were a part of the USFWS but were transfered to USDA.
I know guys that work there and do nothing but shoot stuff all year long. They don't have to follow state laws so they can do a lot of stuff no one else can do.
Post by: turkeyfeather on October 27, 2013, 10:13:42 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 10:22:30 AM
I for one have seen enough to think that there very likely is something to all this. And heads should roll. Some of you all need to check your priorities. When a member comes on and informs us he believes he knows of a injustice that affects us all we should listen and help check into it. Not sit behind a keyboard like a coward and attack the guy just cause he is a new member. You all were new members once. Does that mean you first 50-100 posts were all B.S. too as you think everyone elses is
So every unsubstantiated claim on the net should be believed? When asked for more information, the OP replied we should go look ourselves, even though he himself lives with 25 miles?
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 10:22:43 AM
Is this gmu near the elk area that got all the bad press a few years ago when some people got video of the elk being arrowed in the pasture?Same herd. The dfw has an elk management plan that calls for limiting damage to private property and farm land by the river while at the same time allowing the herd to be photographed and maintain a watchable wildlife recreation area. A wildlife area along a hiway might seem like a good idea for the wildlife viewers, but having a 600# animal go through a windshield at 50 mph and kill an entire family is not worth the convenience. They need to choose one or the other imo. I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
I could see WDFW wanting to control numbers in a way that they felt would get the job done quick and quiet.
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 10:25:59 AM
What a shame! Not only are hunters denied opportunity that our money should provide but the WDFW gives itself another blackeye. I get that it may not be feasable to get hunters on private property to control this herd but why not trap and transport a portion of the herd to another area? Animals like these could be used to bolster another population or start a new population where elk currently don't reside. These elk could do much more for the future of hunting in our state instead of being covertly terminated. I'm sickened by this!:yeah: x100
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 10:27:28 AM
I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
Post by: turkeyfeather on October 27, 2013, 10:27:57 AM
Nope, didn't say that. As usual you didn't pay attention. I said it should be checked out BEFORE you blast a guy and basically call him a liar. If it's true it makes you look like a fool. And maybe he wanted others to see for themselves as several of you had already indicated you didn't believe him. It's really not that hard to figure out.I for one have seen enough to think that there very likely is something to all this. And heads should roll. Some of you all need to check your priorities. When a member comes on and informs us he believes he knows of a injustice that affects us all we should listen and help check into it. Not sit behind a keyboard like a coward and attack the guy just cause he is a new member. You all were new members once. Does that mean you first 50-100 posts were all B.S. too as you think everyone elses is
So every unsubstantiated claim on the net should be believed? When asked for more information, the OP replied we should go look ourselves, even though he himself lives with 25 miles?
Post by: huntnphool on October 27, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 10:45:46 AM
Do you just enjoy trying to discredit everyone? Go back and read my post about the problem elk on hiway 20 and the watchable wildlife area. The op was talking about S. Skagit, i was not. I have many co-workers that have these elk in there yards daily. I have second hand info from what i consider to be a reliable source, but sharing it here will be a waste of my time obviously.I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
Post by: snowpack on October 27, 2013, 10:52:52 AM
Are bulls the only problem in this area?I would imagine if it is anything like the herd that causes problems on the Olympic peninsula, that bulls aren't the only problem but they cause way more damage per animal than the cows. The herd of cows will feed on crops and trample some stuff, but usually have their routes long established and don't do a whole lot more unless pushed. The bulls like to rake out big wallows in fields and tear up fences and go out in all directions tearing stuff up. For the herd on the peninsula when they were left alone, the only real damage from the cows/calves was eating a percentage of the crops. Then all the wildlife watcher types have shown up trying to take photos and they keep trying to get closer and it causes the herd to run--leaving big trampled areas, some fence damage and chased elk out into the highway.
Post by: turkeyfeather on October 27, 2013, 10:53:03 AM
He likes to pretend he's the smartest man in the room. :chuckle:Do you just enjoy trying to discredit everyone? Go back and read my post about the problem elk on hiway 20 and the watchable wildlife area. The op was talking about S. Skagit, i was not. I have many co-workers that have these elk in there yards daily. I have second hand info from what i consider to be a reliable source, but sharing it here will be a waste of my time obviously.I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
Post by: huntnphool on October 27, 2013, 10:57:34 AM
This is why the bulls are being targeted?Are bulls the only problem in this area?I would imagine if it is anything like the herd that causes problems on the Olympic peninsula, that bulls aren't the only problem but they cause way more damage per animal than the cows. The herd of cows will feed on crops and trample some stuff, but usually have their routes long established and don't do a whole lot more unless pushed. The bulls like to rake out big wallows in fields and tear up fences and go out in all directions tearing stuff up. For the herd on the peninsula when they were left alone, the only real damage from the cows/calves was eating a percentage of the crops. Then all the wildlife watcher types have shown up trying to take photos and they keep trying to get closer and it causes the herd to run--leaving big trampled areas, some fence damage and chased elk out into the highway.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 11:01:44 AM
Do you just enjoy trying to discredit everyone? Go back and read my post about the problem elk on hiway 20 and the watchable wildlife area. The op was talking about S. Skagit, i was not. I have many co-workers that have these elk in there yards daily. I have second hand info from what i consider to be a reliable source, but sharing it here will be a waste of my time obviously.I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
What I was trying to point out, is that the problem is on the south side of the river, right where you want to relocate the north side animals to. One doesn't have to be the smartest man in the room to wonder if that would not exacerbate the problem.
Sorry I got you butt hurt
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 27, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
Why would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Why would anyone doubt anything that appears on the internet as fact? :dunno: No one's calling the OP a liar or anything else. Confirmation of something like this is always good before you go around asking for heads on spikes.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 27, 2013, 11:05:20 AM
I don't typically hover over a keyboard every day. Im not on here that often to prevent myself from getting into arguments and listen to people criticize unlike (people like yourself). In fact I am a hunter just like everyone on here, been hunting since I was 8, now im 28. I got the information from the land owners who have to deal with elk problems day in and day out 360 days a year (unlike yourself). These farmers loose thousands of dollars in there hay crops and I just wanted to inform the fellow hunters about this Bull $hit! So thanks to the people that wanted the info....I actually spoke with Brandon and the land owners today and they shut down for the weekend. They will start again next week. I was also informed that the meat is going to tribal food banks instead of our own which is crap! our hard earned money and tax dollars spent to provide more elk to the tribes, Shocker...... Also the reason why they are shooting bulls is because they dfw gave damage tags out and were all filled (total of 8) cows that I know of taken not to count the archery and muzzy tags for that unit. There is an over abundance of bulls in this area due to tags never given out....This is why they are getting rid of them the way they are.Why would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Maybe because he has 21 posts, and started this thread about secret Federal agents shooting elk in the dark. His information is second hand, and to those who seek more proof he answers "go up there and look".
To you, Mr Elk247, I answer, why would you believe the OP? His post is incendiary and poorly supported, and there is no reason to take his word as gospel until more information is received
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 27, 2013, 11:06:40 AM
Who, from wdfw, can we email about this?
I would not bother with DFW . I would rattle local reps. Starting with Kirk Pearson.
He is holding a senate resource meeting in Mount Vernon on Tuesday.
The DFW is not afraid of us. They are afraid of law makers.
I have emailed the DFW about this. I'm expecting some kind of response on Monday.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 27, 2013, 11:07:01 AM
Is this gmu near the elk area that got all the bad press a few years ago when some people got video of the elk being arrowed in the pasture?that hunt took place across the river from this area I mentioned. But yes, same unit just across the river.
I could see WDFW wanting to control numbers in a way that they felt would get the job done quick and quiet.
Post by: turkeyfeather on October 27, 2013, 11:08:01 AM
Maybe you should say that in the first place then instead of trying to bait someone into an argument. :twocents:Do you just enjoy trying to discredit everyone? Go back and read my post about the problem elk on hiway 20 and the watchable wildlife area. The op was talking about S. Skagit, i was not. I have many co-workers that have these elk in there yards daily. I have second hand info from what i consider to be a reliable source, but sharing it here will be a waste of my time obviously.I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
What I was trying to point out, is that the problem is on the south side of the river, right where you want to relocate the north side animals to. One doesn't have to be the smartest man in the room to wonder if that would not exacerbate the problem.
Sorry I got you butt hurt
Post by: jdw12885 on October 27, 2013, 11:08:17 AM
I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.Your Welcome!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
Post by: huntnphool on October 27, 2013, 11:11:57 AM
And one of the reasons why I said its comical and laughed that it's the USDA in charge. If it's not "USDA Approved" it's typically not ok'ed for donation, I guess it doesn't have to be for tribal consumption. :dunno:I was also informed that the meat is going to tribal food banks instead of our own which is crap! our hard earned money and tax dollars spent to provide more elk to the tribesWhy would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Maybe because he has 21 posts, and started this thread about secret Federal agents shooting elk in the dark. His information is second hand, and to those who seek more proof he answers "go up there and look".
To you, Mr Elk247, I answer, why would you believe the OP? His post is incendiary and poorly supported, and there is no reason to take his word as gospel until more information is received
Oh the irony!!! :chuckle:
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 11:12:17 AM
Ghost hunter I believe a public explanation will come. Calling Kirk Pearson accomplishes what? Many of his constituents come from the farm community and are begging for some sort of relief. This may be a overall popular decision outside the hunting community. I would call the wdfw with concerns.
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 11:13:55 AM
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 11:18:27 AM
Do you just enjoy trying to discredit everyone? Go back and read my post about the problem elk on hiway 20 and the watchable wildlife area. The op was talking about S. Skagit, i was not. I have many co-workers that have these elk in there yards daily. I have second hand info from what i consider to be a reliable source, but sharing it here will be a waste of my time obviously.I would like to see problem elk relocated across the river into the hills of the sauk unit.
The OP did say the shooting was on the S Skagit highway
What I was trying to point out, is that the problem is on the south side of the river, right where you want to relocate the north side animals to. One doesn't have to be the smartest man in the room to wonder if that would not exacerbate the problem.
Sorry I got you butt hurt
Knocker 437 is a large unit that has some awsome country with good habitat that could support a great herd (if they would stay). This is not simply taking them from one side of the river to the other.
Post by: RB on October 27, 2013, 11:24:31 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 27, 2013, 11:27:31 AM
Post by: turkeyfeather on October 27, 2013, 11:33:58 AM
How interesting that all of us posting on this comment think that, if this is confirmed, this sucks for hunters of WA. Yet, some of us are fighting amongst ourselves even as we agree with each other. Someone please explain this to me. :dunno:Exactly the same thing I was getting at. At what point are we gonna actually start to stick together to solve these things. WDFW probably keeps tabs on here laughing their butt's off knowing that they can do whatever they want cause we can't agree on anything. Hate to use a wolf analogy, but we could get more done as a pack than a lone wolf. :bash:
Post by: snowpack on October 27, 2013, 11:45:09 AM
The name Ranker seems to come to mind.... :yike: :peep:Who, from wdfw, can we email about this?
I would not bother with DFW . I would rattle local reps. Starting with Kirk Pearson.
He is holding a senate resource meeting in Mount Vernon on Tuesday.
The DFW is not afraid of us. They are afraid of law makers.
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 12:03:11 PM
I don't think you'll need to notify anyone. I suspect that once the story gets out, there will be plenty of (adverse) publicity.The name Ranker seems to come to mind.... :yike: :peep:Who, from wdfw, can we email about this?
I would not bother with DFW . I would rattle local reps. Starting with Kirk Pearson.
He is holding a senate resource meeting in Mount Vernon on Tuesday.
The DFW is not afraid of us. They are afraid of law makers.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 27, 2013, 12:09:59 PM
Contacting Kate Martin would not seem displaced
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 12:13:17 PM
These lawmakers have been begged by residents for relief of elk problems. Have you guys attended the elk meetings? This has become a huge problem in the valley and there are no easy answers.The name Ranker seems to come to mind.... :yike: :peep:Who, from wdfw, can we email about this?
I would not bother with DFW . I would rattle local reps. Starting with Kirk Pearson.
He is holding a senate resource meeting in Mount Vernon on Tuesday.
The DFW is not afraid of us. They are afraid of law makers.
Post by: boneaddict on October 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 12:27:51 PM
Post by: returnofsid on October 27, 2013, 12:30:31 PM
I'm not crying. I also have little sympathy for those who moved into elk country and are bothered by elk. The general hunt was messed up by archers. Lawmakers who depend on votes are not likley to tell the continuity to pound sand and deal with it. Brandon Griffith quite possibly has the toughest job in the wdfw right now.
Care to explain your stance that archers messed up the general hunt? Admittedly, I'm not very informed on this issue, living in Spokane, but I'm still curious to read the explanation.
Post by: snowpack on October 27, 2013, 12:36:02 PM
A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).I'm not crying. I also have little sympathy for those who moved into elk country and are bothered by elk. The general hunt was messed up by archers. Lawmakers who depend on votes are not likley to tell the continuity to pound sand and deal with it. Brandon Griffith quite possibly has the toughest job in the wdfw right now.
Care to explain your stance that archers messed up the general hunt? Admittedly, I'm not very informed on this issue, living in Spokane, but I'm still curious to read the explanation.
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 12:45:05 PM
Care to explain your stance that archers messed up the general hunt? Admittedly, I'm not very informed on this issue, living in Spokane, but I'm still curious to read the explanation.2009. Very public and ugly situation. WDFW had to publicly denounce that hunt and promise to not do it again.
http://nwsportsmanmag.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/skagit-valley-elk-culling-draws-comments/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/skagit-valley-elk-culling-draws-comments/)
http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/dec3009a/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/dec3009a/)
Post by: Oldguy on October 27, 2013, 12:51:34 PM
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 12:53:37 PM
A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).No. Master Hunters were not brought in until the following year.
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 27, 2013, 12:55:56 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 27, 2013, 01:09:33 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on October 27, 2013, 01:23:24 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 27, 2013, 01:28:12 PM
They should have ever transplanted them anyways.
Post by: CP on October 27, 2013, 01:40:39 PM
A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).No. Master Hunters were not brought in until the following year.
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Actually the MH started that year, at least a draw was held and permits issued. But the MH hunt was “forgotten” by the WDFW then cancelled along with all the other hunts after the bad publicity.
Post by: Pilot_Hunter on October 27, 2013, 01:50:32 PM
Post by: Special T on October 27, 2013, 01:54:19 PM
There is master hunter unts and a buddy of mine shot a cow this year. I would guess that the reason for the feds killing bulls is because they don't want land owner bull tags to become a big $$$ issue. Not an easy one to fix IMO
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 02:06:55 PM
That is correct, and the 2010 Master Hunter hunts occurred with no problems.A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).No. Master Hunters were not brought in until the following year.
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Actually the MH started that year, at least a draw was held and permits issued. But the MH hunt was “forgotten” by the WDFW then cancelled along with all the other hunts after the bad publicity.
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 27, 2013, 02:10:52 PM
Why would anyone doubt the op? I belive him. This is exactily why people aee upset with the dfw. Over 50 elk have been hit by rigs this year from those herds. There is a problem. They should have handled it through a general season late hunt. Too many of us buy tags to see animals go to the soup kitchen.
Maybe because he has 21 posts, and started this thread about secret Federal agents shooting elk in the dark. His information is second hand, and to those who seek more proof he answers "go up there and look".
To you, Mr Elk247, I answer, why would you believe the OP? His post is incendiary and poorly supported, and there is no reason to take his word as gospel until more information is received
Give the guy a break. He lives there and has reliable info. He doesn't gain anything by passing this along to the rest of us. With the sorted history of this heard and location I have no reason to not believe the OP.
What difference does it make how posts he has made?
Thanks to the OP for passing this along. He just wants his fellow hunters to be aware and stand up for ourselves
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 27, 2013, 02:14:03 PM
I for one have seen enough to think that there very likely is something to all this. And heads should roll. Some of you all need to check your priorities. When a member comes on and informs us he believes he knows of a injustice that affects us all we should listen and help check into it. Not sit behind a keyboard like a coward and attack the guy just cause he is a new member. You all were new members once. Does that mean you first 50-100 posts were all B.S. too as you think everyone elses is:yeah:
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 27, 2013, 02:16:06 PM
Post by: whuppinstick on October 27, 2013, 02:26:36 PM
Just wondering in a cituation like the elk becoming a problem couldn't/shouldn't the Rocky mountain elk foundation get a call to see if they could help with relocation?
The RMEF was a major player in relocating the elk TO the Nooksack (from St. Helens). My dad was on that project. Not saying they can't now relocate them back out, but it would be a little weird.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 27, 2013, 02:35:28 PM
There are answers....landowners, allow people to hunt on your land. :cryriver:I never had one land owner that turned me down. They all welcome elk tag hunters!
Post by: Twispriver on October 27, 2013, 02:48:09 PM
Post by: Green broke on October 27, 2013, 07:06:50 PM
Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
Post by: snowpack on October 27, 2013, 07:21:44 PM
Why isn't there an option where someone that bought a tag and put in for special permits to meet up with these guys and trade their elk tag for the meat?Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
Who's paying for this operation? Where does WDFW get most of its non-fish related money from?
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 07:31:05 PM
Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
I grew up hunting this herd. It was all but gone and should have been left to die out because no longer had a range when the tribe and the state started transplanting animals. It can only grow. There is no regular hunting possible. All the lands to the north of Hwy 20 are private and locked. The river valley is private. Except for land owner tags and master hunter tags it is a useless herd for the tax payer.
Why do the tribes get all the meat. Heck there are thousands of un filled elk tags in the pockets of people who's money was used for this boondoggle in the first place.
Where,s their piece of the pie?
I will tell you, they wanted this kept quiet so they went with the tribe.
I hiked in a mile or more to hunt deer this past weekend behind a locked gate on SP land. Only to have to two truck loads of Indians drive by me.
The average hunter in this state is taking it in the shorts.k
Post by: Ccortez on October 27, 2013, 07:34:07 PM
Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
I grew up hunting this herd. It was all but gone and should have been left to die out because no longer had a range when the tribe and the state started transplanting animals. It can only grow. There is no regular hunting possible. All the lands to the north of Hwy 20 are private and locked. The river valley is private. Except for land owner tags and master hunter tags it is a useless herd for the tax payer.
Why do the tribes get all the meat. Heck there are thousands of un filled elk tags in the pockets of people who's money was used for this boondoggle in the first place.
Where,s their piece of the pie?
I will tell you, they wanted this kept quiet so they went with the tribe.
I hiked in a mile or more to hunt deer this past weekend behind a locked gate on SP land. Only to have to two truck loads of Indians drive by me.
The average hunter in this state is taking it in the shorts.k
Food banks got some meat as well..
Not just the tribes
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 07:47:29 PM
I walked in more than 5 miles behind the saxon gate and had 3 trucks with white men in orange vests drive by me (not crying either). Lots of people have keys. I completely disagree about letting the herd go by and disappear. Maybe you can get your senator to make the wdfw publicly apologize for not getting Hw's approval. They issue many tags in many areas that are not "public" so to speak.Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
I grew up hunting this herd. It was all but gone and should have been left to die out because no longer had a range when the tribe and the state started transplanting animals. It can only grow. There is no regular hunting possible. All the lands to the north of Hwy 20 are private and locked. The river valley is private. Except for land owner tags and master hunter tags it is a useless herd for the tax payer.
Why do the tribes get all the meat. Heck there are thousands of un filled elk tags in the pockets of people who's money was used for this boondoggle in the first place.
Where,s their piece of the pie?
I will tell you, they wanted this kept quiet so they went with the tribe.
I hiked in a mile or more to hunt deer this past weekend behind a locked gate on SP land. Only to have to two truck loads of Indians drive by me.
The average hunter in this state is taking it in the shorts.k
Your statement is disturbing. No herd should die off because of a large tree farm and private landowners.
Post by: returnofsid on October 27, 2013, 07:56:30 PM
I'd also like to know why this seems to be so shrouded in secrecy, done at night and all. I'd imagine some state laws regarding discharging a firearm at night may have been violated.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 08:04:09 PM
I walked in more than 5 miles behind the saxon gate and had 3 trucks with white men in orange vests drive by me (not crying either). Lots of people have keys. I completely disagree about letting the herd go by and disappear. Maybe you can get your senator to make the wdfw publicly apologize for not getting Hw's approval. They issue many tags in many areas that are not "public" so to speak.Because the DFW transported these animals in and they do not have the Money to transport them out. Without tribe money.This is an ignorant statement. Have you done DNA studies and cross referenced to see what elk are from the core herd? How successful was the augmentation? How successful was the hunting moratorium? Was it a screw up or success? Was there land management changes at the county assessors office that allowed for more fragmentation of said river valley?
There is a huge area just across south Skagit Hwy for them. Cumberland ,Finny creek area.
But the elk need a river bottom. And will not stay in the highlands.
The whole thing was a screw up from the beginning .
To those upset with the meat donated to the tribes- since the jail quit taking meat and most food banks are unable to take it, what do you suggest is done with the meat? If we are unable to take it you are given a couple options. Would you like to pay a dead stock company to haul it off? Would you like the state to pay for proper disposal?
I grew up hunting this herd. It was all but gone and should have been left to die out because no longer had a range when the tribe and the state started transplanting animals. It can only grow. There is no regular hunting possible. All the lands to the north of Hwy 20 are private and locked. The river valley is private. Except for land owner tags and master hunter tags it is a useless herd for the tax payer.
Why do the tribes get all the meat. Heck there are thousands of un filled elk tags in the pockets of people who's money was used for this boondoggle in the first place.
Where,s their piece of the pie?
I will tell you, they wanted this kept quiet so they went with the tribe.
I hiked in a mile or more to hunt deer this past weekend behind a locked gate on SP land. Only to have to two truck loads of Indians drive by me.
The average hunter in this state is taking it in the shorts.k
I got no problem with locked gates. But if it says no motorized use that's the way it should be. I assume people have keys because their work requires it. No problem.
But all should have to adhere to the same hunting rules.
No problem with special tags, I have gotten a couple, as long as everyone gets a fair chance.
The majority of regular hunters will never benefit from the Nooksack herd. Because the majority of its range is all private holdings.
Post by: Stalker on October 27, 2013, 08:15:31 PM
Post by: Tbar on October 27, 2013, 08:17:51 PM
Post by: go4itlab on October 27, 2013, 08:29:33 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 08:34:49 PM
We are spending a lot of resources on a herd of 25 Master Hunter Tags and unknown land owner and tribal tags.
The money would be better spent some where else.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 08:40:03 PM
As a response to an earlier post. Blaming the USDA as hired guns for this. This is not the work of the USDA, Have a friend that works for USDA as a critter control officer ( Shooter, trapper, etc...) and I asked him about this today although this is not his coverage area his response is, "we have NO ONE involved in this and this is the first he has heard of it". This is not second hand info!!!!!!!
I was told by a game agent that it was USDA.
I received another PM tonight from a member of this forum that talked directly to a property owner in the kill area. The property owner confirmed they used USDA shooters because of the close proximity of homes.
The truth will come out sooner or later.
Post by: elk247 on October 27, 2013, 08:59:01 PM
Curious? How would you propose a general season elk hunt or permit hunt in a rural area with many small farms where hunters have already warn out their welcome? Are these elk available to hunters during the day or are they camped out on private property where hunters can not get at them?I would hold a disabled hunt out of ground blinds out back away from the hiway. If it needs to be archery or muzzleload only then so be it. Those elk need to be removed. They are a distraction, a safety concern for motorist and a constant nuisance for farmers and a reoccurring cost for the state through damage reimbursement. The elk herd that thrives in the river valley only continues to make matters worse because the calves never see the woods. They are raised in those private fields and will die in those same fields. They do cross the river but never go very far. Many disabled hunters and wounded warriors deserve a hunt like this as a way fill there elk tags. Some hunters may have worn out there welcome but we all can agree that the actions of a few 4 years ago is not an accurate reflection of all hunters. The only real alternative to this would be relocation. But that would cost far more money and miss a opportunity to meet a need within the disabled hunting community. :twocents:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 27, 2013, 09:03:25 PM
Post by: sled on October 27, 2013, 09:07:48 PM
Post by: Bob33 on October 27, 2013, 09:08:38 PM
To me that's one of the most troubling aspects of this: why WDFW believes keeping it a secret is wise. In this world of spying, satellite imagery, blogs, and so forth - nothing is secret. By trying to hide it, they are sending a message that transparency is not a virture in their operations.
One more black eye for WDFW.
Post by: bearpaw on October 27, 2013, 09:09:37 PM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 27, 2013, 09:48:13 PM
"I just talked with the wardens ...it is all true ...he ask me how I heard about it"
To me that's one of the most troubling aspects of this: why WDFW believes keeping it a secret is wise. In this world of spying, satellite imagery, blogs, and so forth - nothing is secret. By trying to hide it, they are sending a message that transparency is not a virture in their operations.
One more black eye for WDFW.
This is a highly visible herd. There are a lot of folks who do not want them killed.
I suspect darkness provided a way to keep what was happening out of the eye of the general public who might not like seeing it. :twocents:
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 27, 2013, 09:53:15 PM
Post by: sled on October 27, 2013, 10:38:49 PM
Post by: Little Dave on October 27, 2013, 10:54:46 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 28, 2013, 05:31:48 AM
I just talked with the wardens ...it is all true ...he ask me how I heard about it ...I told him I hear everything :dunno: :chuckle: :chuckle: One thing I will clarify ...it is 15 elk total ...not all bulls ....I am lost for words when I can not put one in my freezer :bash: :bash:
BH, can you give the name of the warden? I'm going to my state senator with this.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 06:50:29 AM
I am not getting involved with the wardens again ....they were here to see my wifes deer ....So I confronted them about it ...like I said it was to be a little secret but that did not last long ....They told me that the landowner was raising so much hell over the damage to his property that the feds stepped in ....Nothing to do with WDFW ....You know me by now ...I will defend what I believe in and I am peeeeeeeesed over this crap ....we need to write something because the way I see it there is room for elk to be hunted on that side of the river ...more timber ..out of sight ...out of mind ....they did not say much other than it is true and it was the feds ....but we need to get on this ...I am calling BS !!!!!! :tup: :dunno:I just talked with the wardens ...it is all true ...he ask me how I heard about it ...I told him I hear everything :dunno: :chuckle: :chuckle: One thing I will clarify ...it is 15 elk total ...not all bulls ....I am lost for words when I can not put one in my freezer :bash: :bash:
BH, can you give the name of the warden? I'm going to my state senator with this.
Post by: Hunting Cowboy on October 28, 2013, 06:51:35 AM
I would like to hear the reasoning when there are thousands of public hunters and even landowners who want to fill an elk tag? :dunno::yeah:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 06:57:00 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 28, 2013, 07:18:16 AM
Post by: Ccortez on October 28, 2013, 07:19:13 AM
THATS THE POINT !!!! How many people would 15 fat than heck elk feed in this valley ... :dunno: :bash: :bash: So I guess the Indians get them or they take them back to DC and feed Obama some !! :bash: :bash: :bash:
They are going to tribes and food banks...
Post by: Bob33 on October 28, 2013, 07:23:00 AM
“Nothing to do with WDFW.”
“Shooters from the USDA are doing it.”
“This is not the work of the USDA.”
And one wonders why there is skepticism over internet posts like this.
Post by: bigtex on October 28, 2013, 07:25:55 AM
“Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) is secretly bringing in Federal Agents.”
“Nothing to do with WDFW.”
“Shooters from the USDA are doing it.”
“This is not the work of the USDA.”
And one wonders why there is skepticism over internet posts like this.
You forgot "WDFW FEDERAL AGENTS"
When did WDFW start working as feds?
Post by: TheHunt on October 28, 2013, 07:57:56 AM
No it's not. The USDA oversees the USFS and a detachment known as Wildlife Services. Wildlife Services does lots of hunting and trapping of 'problem animals'. This includes deer, coyotes, used to include wolves, etc. They use lots of aerial gunning and even poison in some states. I think Wildlife Services takes out more coyotes than all of hunter combined. They like to hire former military/LEO snipers for some of their positions.I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.The USDA? :chuckle: This is comical on so many different levels!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
It's actually called USDA APHIS (United States Department of Agriculture Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service) At one time they were a part of the USFWS but were transfered to USDA.
I know guys that work there and do nothing but shoot stuff all year long. They don't have to follow state laws so they can do a lot of stuff no one else can do.
I know many of those people as well. I know of one person who shot an entire case of shells at pigeons which nest on sea vessels. He did not want to go waterfowl hunting because of it.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 28, 2013, 08:01:45 AM
No it's not. The USDA oversees the USFS and a detachment known as Wildlife Services. Wildlife Services does lots of hunting and trapping of 'problem animals'. This includes deer, coyotes, used to include wolves, etc. They use lots of aerial gunning and even poison in some states. I think Wildlife Services takes out more coyotes than all of hunter combined. They like to hire former military/LEO snipers for some of their positions.I received what I feel is the final conformation just now.The USDA? :chuckle: This is comical on so many different levels!
This is happening. Shooters from the USDA are doing it. I have known this person more than 20 years. He is straight up with me.
He said in a short answer to a email I sent Yes by the USDA.
So I was a doubter, now I am 100% convinced.
To the OP thank you for the heads up.
For myself I am sickened . The elk are a problem, but hunters could have been part of the solution. Why not shoot them if they must and let un filled tag holders tag the meat. At least some of the folks who plug down there cash for tags and permit draws could maybe get some thing back.
It's actually called USDA APHIS (United States Department of Agriculture Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service) At one time they were a part of the USFWS but were transfered to USDA.
I know guys that work there and do nothing but shoot stuff all year long. They don't have to follow state laws so they can do a lot of stuff no one else can do.
I know many of those people as well. I know of one person who shot an entire case of shells at pigeons which nest on sea vessels. He did not want to go waterfowl hunting because of it.
I would, though, find it very hard to believe that they did this without the knowledge and approval/cooperation of the DFW.
Post by: CP on October 28, 2013, 08:02:14 AM
That is correct, and the 2010 Master Hunter hunts occurred with no problems.A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).No. Master Hunters were not brought in until the following year.
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Actually the MH started that year, at least a draw was held and permits issued. But the MH hunt was “forgotten” by the WDFW then cancelled along with all the other hunts after the bad publicity.
Agreed, the MH program has been successfully helping control the elk problem in the valley since 2010. It could be doing more but is constrained by the number of permits issued. After the permits were exhausted, MHs have been used to haze elk off. Hazing doesn’t help much however; the elk just keep coming back.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on October 28, 2013, 08:16:31 AM
This is something that involves public money and resources, so is not shielded from disclosure if requested.
I would submit a request and encourage others to do so as well.
WDFW Freedom of Information request:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/public_disclosure/pdr_form.pdf (http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/public_disclosure/pdr_form.pdf)
USDA Freedom of Information request:
https://efoia-pal.usda.gov/palMain.aspx (https://efoia-pal.usda.gov/palMain.aspx)
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Post by: cougarbart on October 28, 2013, 08:59:02 AM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on October 28, 2013, 09:07:53 AM
“Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) is secretly bringing in Federal Agents.”
“Nothing to do with WDFW.”
“Shooters from the USDA are doing it.”
“This is not the work of the USDA.”
And one wonders why there is skepticism over internet posts like this.
Be careful Bob, you'll butt hurt people with posts like that
Post by: snowpack on October 28, 2013, 09:18:35 AM
Lol! ya allow hunting its such a smart way to do it! Ask any houndmen in Washington the same thing, why pay government hunters to kill cougars and bears that hunters could control! its the start of the new age of wildlife management and hunters are being phased out!I think that's one of the strong points--the money. Hunters will pay to have these opportunities--it's a net gain for cash strapped/budget worried agencies and states. Instead they go with an option to use government resources which keeps costing everyone. Not like the government is nearly $17 trillion in debt or anything.
WDFW could get creative, it doesn't have to be a one week free for all that will lead to another incident like a few years ago. They could have a six month or year long season by permits in that area to keep the pressure on those elk all year to keep them in the woods. They could probably make double the money of what is being spent on this.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 09:25:57 AM
look at that bull .....600 TO 700 HUNDRED OR BIGGER ON THE HOOF ....He would look a lot better in my freezer :dunno: :yeah:That is correct, and the 2010 Master Hunter hunts occurred with no problems.A group of them more or less chased a herd into a fenced pasture and started raining down arrows and making elk get tangled in fences and a huge mess---worst of all was there were lots of people watching (greeny types).No. Master Hunters were not brought in until the following year.
Weren't those Master Hunters on a damage control hunt?
Actually the MH started that year, at least a draw was held and permits issued. But the MH hunt was “forgotten” by the WDFW then cancelled along with all the other hunts after the bad publicity.
Agreed, the MH program has been successfully helping control the elk problem in the valley since 2010. It could be doing more but is constrained by the number of permits issued. After the permits were exhausted, MHs have been used to haze elk off. Hazing doesn’t help much however; the elk just keep coming back.
Post by: CP on October 28, 2013, 11:07:07 AM
Senate Natural Resources and Parks Committee Special Meeting in Mt Vernon
http://kirkpearson.src.wastateleg.org/senate-natural-resources-and-parks-committee-to-hold-special-meeting-in-mount-vernon/ (http://kirkpearson.src.wastateleg.org/senate-natural-resources-and-parks-committee-to-hold-special-meeting-in-mount-vernon/)
On Tuesday, Oct. 29, a special meeting of the Senate Natural Resources and Parks Committee will be held at the Skagit County Commission hearing room in Mount Vernon. Topics of discussion will include hunter-education programs, road closures on state natural-resource lands and an update on the management of the North Cascades elk herd. Each topic will include testimony from relevant state-agency personnel; the latter portion of the meeting will feature an opportunity for public comment.
Sen. Kirk Pearson, R-Monroe, chairs the committee and encourages anyone interested to attend the meeting and provide public testimony on the topics being addressed in the meeting, or any issue relating to the state’s natural resources.
“Residents of the Skagit Valley are passionate about natural-resource issues with good cause – this is one of the most beautiful and diverse areas of the state.” Pearson said. “This meeting is a unique opportunity for residents of our area to take part in forming public policy by speaking directly with legislators and state officials without traveling to Olympia. I hope those interested will join us and share their thoughts.”
Details about the meeting can be found below. Recognizing that some will not be able to attend in person, Pearson also encouraged interested parties to share their thoughts on the topics with him via email at Kirk.Pearson@leg.wa.gov or by phone in Olympia at (360) 786-7676.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 28, 2013, 11:20:40 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 28, 2013, 11:32:47 AM
Butcher said it was one of the biggest he had seen that year.
These are top notch eating elk coming out of this herd.
Post by: hrd2fnd on October 28, 2013, 11:34:14 AM
Post by: furiouzgeorge on October 28, 2013, 11:39:59 AM
Post by: returnofsid on October 28, 2013, 11:42:33 AM
Wish I could be there, but 1:30 meeting conflicts with my work hours.
I have no doubt that's what they were counting on when they scheduled this meeting. They purposely scheduled it at a time when the least amount of public can attend.
Post by: hrd2fnd on October 28, 2013, 11:43:58 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
For quality of meat these are some of the best in the state. In 2011 I killed a lead cow on a Master Hunter Tag. She went 400 lbs with legs , hide and everything off.Hey now ...just calm down ....they do not taste that great :yike:
Butcher said it was one of the biggest he had seen that year.
These are top notch eating elk coming out of this herd.
Post by: Netminder01 on October 28, 2013, 01:02:46 PM
There are answers....landowners, allow people to hunt on your land. :cryriver:
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah:
Post by: Netminder01 on October 28, 2013, 01:14:14 PM
There is a meeting tomorrow in Mount Vernon that is very pertinent to this issue. If you can please attend and support our hunting opportunities.
Senate Natural Resources and Parks Committee Special Meeting in Mt Vernon
http://kirkpearson.src.wastateleg.org/senate-natural-resources-and-parks-committee-to-hold-special-meeting-in-mount-vernon/ (http://kirkpearson.src.wastateleg.org/senate-natural-resources-and-parks-committee-to-hold-special-meeting-in-mount-vernon/)
On Tuesday, Oct. 29, a special meeting of the Senate Natural Resources and Parks Committee will be held at the Skagit County Commission hearing room in Mount Vernon. Topics of discussion will include hunter-education programs, road closures on state natural-resource lands and an update on the management of the North Cascades elk herd. Each topic will include testimony from relevant state-agency personnel; the latter portion of the meeting will feature an opportunity for public comment.
Sen. Kirk Pearson, R-Monroe, chairs the committee and encourages anyone interested to attend the meeting and provide public testimony on the topics being addressed in the meeting, or any issue relating to the state’s natural resources.
“Residents of the Skagit Valley are passionate about natural-resource issues with good cause – this is one of the most beautiful and diverse areas of the state.” Pearson said. “This meeting is a unique opportunity for residents of our area to take part in forming public policy by speaking directly with legislators and state officials without traveling to Olympia. I hope those interested will join us and share their thoughts.”
Details about the meeting can be found below. Recognizing that some will not be able to attend in person, Pearson also encouraged interested parties to share their thoughts on the topics with him via email at Kirk.Pearson@leg.wa.gov or by phone in Olympia at (360) 786-7676.
Tomorrow at 1:30 in the afternoon makes this tough to attend - go figure. I don't think I can get out of my meetings, but this thread is infuriating. I've read every post and all 8 pages (up to this point) and can't believe... yet believe all at the same time this occurred. Coming from a guy who has not hunted this unit but as a hunter and conservationist, this pisses me off.
If I'm unable to break away tomorrow, I'd love to get any update from those Hunt-WA members who ARE able to attend this meeting tomorrow. I expect there to be a bunch of tap dancing and skirting the how tax paying hunters could've helped solve this issue.
Net
Post by: NWWABOWHNTR on October 28, 2013, 01:17:05 PM
The following is an update on Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) recent activity regarding responding to elk damage the Day Creek area.
Over the last several months, elk have been congregating on the agricultural lands in the Day Creek area, trampling and eating crops and damaging farming infrastructure. WDFW staff have been working with the landowners to help keep elk off their farmland by using prevention measures such as herding and hazing, issuing damage hunting permits and directing licensed master hunters and other licensed hunters to the area. While this has resulted in several elk being lethally removed, additional removal of elk is necessary to bring elk numbers to a level that would help reduce damage to crops and property. To move forward in a safe and efficient manner, federal wildlife officials have been assisting in a pilot project to remove elk where damage to the landowners’ crops has been substantial. This collaborative effort has to-date resulted in the removal of 3 elk. WDFW has a contract with Wildlife Services for the removal of up to 15 elk. Removing these animals will not have an adverse effect on the greater Skagit elk population, which totals nearly 1,200 to 1,400 animals and continues to grow each year.
Elk meat has been and will continue to be donated to local tribes and local food banks.
As you know, to help resolve elk-related issues in the Skagit area, WDFW has formed a North Cascades Elk Management Group. This group will help guide the process to update the area’s elk management plan; which includes ways to minimize property damage and public safety risks associated with the animals. Thanks for your continuing involvement in this process.
As always, please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Russ
Russell Link
Wildlife Program Manager
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
16018 Mill Creek Blvd.
Mill Creek, WA 98012
Office: 425-775-1311 ext. 110
Post by: Stretch_8 on October 28, 2013, 01:54:09 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 28, 2013, 01:56:58 PM
I would be interested to know how many of these farmers allow hunting on their land. If they choose not to allow hunting, then cry about the elk damage to their crop, why should DFW act? Part of our hunting is the ability to get onto land and harvest these animals using the money we spent for tags, etc. If these farmers want to keep us out, then don't cry to the state when the animals we want are damaging your land. Let us hunt.
I seriously doubt the farmers are discounting any measures which would reduce the elk on their lands. This is money out of their pockets.
Post by: idahohuntr on October 28, 2013, 02:27:46 PM
What am I missing about why license buying hunters aren't being utilized by WDFW? Is it because of the fiasco a few years ago with the bowhunt? I can understand not wanting to have a general season, any john doe can show up, guns blazing kind of hunt...but it seems like it would be easy to get volunteers (MH's??) and brief them on what needs done and how to minimize visibility to the non-hunting public if that is a high priority. If the landowners are concerned about safety, give them tags for their friends and family??? Or, as a lady in the article link suggested, let the state buy some of those farms and make it a wma with a bunch of special bull and cow permit hunts.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 28, 2013, 06:27:39 PM
“Brandon Griffith with the WDFW (elk conflict specialist) is secretly bringing in Federal Agents.”Its kinda funny that Brandon's truck was parked at the farmers barn during all of this.....
“Nothing to do with WDFW.”
“Shooters from the USDA are doing it.”
“This is not the work of the USDA.”
And one wonders why there is skepticism over internet posts like this.
Post by: daradke on October 28, 2013, 07:26:42 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 28, 2013, 07:28:59 PM
It's going to take none stop pressure from humans to make them go back to being wild elk again. How does this get done?
Nonstop hunting pressure from Sept- oh let's say January from hunters.
If land owners were able to submit list of hunters they approve to the WDFW to obtain tags/ permits to hunt on their lands. Why this? Most farmers and land owners now the locals, and have family who they trust can call them on a moments notice to get the elk when they are on site to take care of the problem.
Oh and there is no bull vs cow, all must be hunted in he valley on private property (minus commercial timber co.)
Each hunter would only get one tag, weapon of land owners choice Sept- Jan.
WDFW should also put tracking collars on a cross section of the herd ( calves, cows, and bulls) to be ale to monitor reactions to the herd, to see how far they retreat and monitor them. The 437, and 418 units have plenty of elk habitat in the forest lands, so keeping them off private property is not going to hurt the herds here! :twocents:
Now I know I will get flamed for my idea, but I don't care, as I own a small farm, and have a wife plus two teenagers that have to dodge these nuisance elk on daily commutes. :bash:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 07:46:26 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 07:48:00 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on October 28, 2013, 07:51:34 PM
Post by: SKAGITVALLEYHUNTER on October 28, 2013, 07:51:51 PM
Another thing that you may not know is that much like the "bounties" that the "management teams" get for shooting coyotes, they got PAID to shoot elk in the dark...
you can request information including involvement, measurements, possible names "of people not to vote for" and maybe even photos. all info is below
WDFW Public Records Disclosure
Filing a Request
To file a public records disclosure request with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provide a detailed description of the requested records or information (subject, dates, location, etc.) to:
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Public Disclosure Officer
Mail: WDFW Public Disclosure Officer, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
E-mail: PublicDisclosureRequest@dfw.wa.gov
FAX: 360-902-2171
Telephone: 360-902-2623
The Public Records Request Form may be used but it is not required. If you choose to use the form, please download it in either PDF or Microsoft Word format to your computer, fill in the requested information and send it as described above.
Public Records Request Form: PDF | MS Word
Note: Adobe Reader does not save data entered in a PDF form.
The department cannot release lists of individuals for commercial purposes [See RCW 42.56.070 (9)]. If requesting a list of individuals, please use the WDFW Records Request Form. Read and sign the statement verifying that the list will not be used for commercial purposes.
Copy fees may be charged.
•Copying - $.10 per page
•Electronic data (i.e. audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs) - Actual cost of producing the record.
Records may be reviewed at WDFW offices at no cost.
How WDFW will respond to your request
Once a public records request is received WDFW staff will review the request and respond within five business days to let you know:
•If additional time is required to fulfill your request.
•If the records are available.
•If any of the records will be withheld for legal reasons.
•If copy charges will apply and, if so, the estimated amount.
For questions related to public records, contact the WDFW Public Disclosure Officer by telephone at 360-902-2623 or by e-mail at PublicDisclosureRequest@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 28, 2013, 07:57:29 PM
Isn't there already hunting pressure for extended seasons already?
No, only 38 permits issued in the large area of 418, and 4941 elk area. Little to no pressure on theses elk, most don't even see hunters in their life.
Post by: PlateauNDN on October 28, 2013, 08:03:10 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 28, 2013, 08:05:43 PM
Sorry I just read my post, I meant to say from a different user group aside from the State lic. Hunters.
Like who?
Post by: sled on October 28, 2013, 08:05:43 PM
the usda,dept of agriculture,wdfw were all involved in one way or another...Oh Boy! IM Calling!
Another thing that you may not know is that much like the "bounties" that the "management teams" get for shooting coyotes, they got PAID to shoot elk in the dark...
you can request information including involvement, measurements, possible names "of people not to vote for" and maybe even photos. all info is below
WDFW Public Records Disclosure
Filing a Request
To file a public records disclosure request with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provide a detailed description of the requested records or information (subject, dates, location, etc.) to:
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Public Disclosure Officer
Mail: WDFW Public Disclosure Officer, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
E-mail: PublicDisclosureRequest@dfw.wa.gov
FAX: 360-902-2171
Telephone: 360-902-2623
The Public Records Request Form may be used but it is not required. If you choose to use the form, please download it in either PDF or Microsoft Word format to your computer, fill in the requested information and send it as described above.
Public Records Request Form: PDF | MS Word
Note: Adobe Reader does not save data entered in a PDF form.
The department cannot release lists of individuals for commercial purposes [See RCW 42.56.070 (9)]. If requesting a list of individuals, please use the WDFW Records Request Form. Read and sign the statement verifying that the list will not be used for commercial purposes.
Copy fees may be charged.
•Copying - $.10 per page
•Electronic data (i.e. audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs) - Actual cost of producing the record.
Records may be reviewed at WDFW offices at no cost.
How WDFW will respond to your request
Once a public records request is received WDFW staff will review the request and respond within five business days to let you know:
•If additional time is required to fulfill your request.
•If the records are available.
•If any of the records will be withheld for legal reasons.
•If copy charges will apply and, if so, the estimated amount.
For questions related to public records, contact the WDFW Public Disclosure Officer by telephone at 360-902-2623 or by e-mail at PublicDisclosureRequest@dfw.wa.gov
Who's Going To The Meeting???
Post by: SKAGITVALLEYHUNTER on October 28, 2013, 08:24:09 PM
Post by: rosscrazyelk on October 28, 2013, 08:25:30 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 28, 2013, 08:29:24 PM
I know that yesterday a guy with a very special tag knocked on some doors yesterday. Was not granted permission. Must not be too big of a elk problem. Lol yeah right
And those people should not get reimbursed for their losses! :bash:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 09:11:02 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 07:15:26 AM
Post by: rosscrazyelk on October 29, 2013, 07:28:13 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 07:30:26 AM
Where is this meeting? And when?Today at 1 :30 at the court house ...I believe ...I am calling after 8 to make sure !
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 29, 2013, 07:43:46 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 29, 2013, 07:46:52 AM
Where is this meeting? And when?Today at 1 :30 at the court house ...I believe ...I am calling after 8 to make sure !
Not Court house.
Skagit County Commissioners’ Hearing Room; 1800 Continental Place, Mount Vernon.
See post 187 this thread.
Post by: LndShrk on October 29, 2013, 08:14:13 AM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/wildlife_weekly/2013/wildlife_weekly_2013oct14.pdf (http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/wildlife_weekly/2013/wildlife_weekly_2013oct14.pdf)
Skagit County Elk Conflict: Conflict Specialist Griffith talked to two landowners this week
regarding elk damages to their properties. Both are new complaints and are non-commercial
backyard orchards. Griffith advised the landowners on hazing, deterrents, and exclusionary
methods.
Griffith continued to work with the Master Hunter coordinator on last week’s assignments in
Day Creek, Concrete-Sauk, and Sedro-Woolley. Two of the three assigned Master Hunters
harvested on the first day of their hunt. The third is awaiting a call from the landowner once the
elk come back to their property.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 29, 2013, 11:38:26 AM
But I was out of town till the 23rd of Oct.
Post by: rosscrazyelk on October 29, 2013, 12:15:41 PM
Post by: Special T on October 29, 2013, 12:18:13 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 12:32:48 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 29, 2013, 12:37:09 PM
I have a buddy that tooka a cow through the MH program in this area. I think this is likely the best route to take/expand to solve the issue. It gives controlled harvest with straight forward guidelines. I wish you didn't have to be a MH to do it, but it may be the right tool for this problem...
MHs are a tool of the state DF&W. They could call in anyone they want to accomplish the goals they need to accomplish. In addition, they could send out a bulletin asking hunters to register for emergency free tags and have an orientation required before they can receive one. There's no shortage of free resources to accomplish what they need to accomplish. The problem is that the Department of Watchable Wildlife has to actually think of our state's 175,000 hunters as part of the solution. They don't, ever. In any situation where animals need to be culled, they reach for the purse strings instead of asking, "how can we make this a win-win for the state using hunters instead of throwing money at it?". The entire culture of the DFW needs to change and it needs to start at the top. If everyone isn't pounding their fists on their representatives' desks about this and about how the department is run in general, they should start immediately. We're only every going to lose if we don't seek to change the entire administration of this section of our government.
Post by: floatinghat on October 29, 2013, 12:43:46 PM
Post by: floatinghat on October 29, 2013, 12:45:52 PM
There's no shortage of free resources to accomplish what they need to accomplish. The problem is that the Department of Watchable Wildlife has to actually think of our state's 175,000 hunters as part of the solution. ...... We're only every going to lose if we don't seek to change the entire administration of this section of our government.
:yeah:
Post by: Goldeneye on October 29, 2013, 12:49:43 PM
Special T why MH? Why not General or Permit? Would spread hunters out more, as others have stated could push the elk back in the hills.
Part of the issue hear is safe shooting alleys. There are houses, livestock, roads, etc. in and around where these animals are. There needs to be a method of control to reduce the chance of collateral damage when the shot is taken.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 29, 2013, 12:54:16 PM
Special T why MH? Why not General or Permit? Would spread hunters out more, as others have stated could push the elk back in the hills.
Because of the high profile situation being that this is close to houses and farms, and right in the community. It could be done with general tag holders too, but they'd have to attend a briefing to go over specific rules, do's and don'ts, weapon choice, and ensure that everyone was keyed in on working with the landowners in a safe and ethical way. When there's a large MH effort, they have such a briefing done by the hunt coordinator to try and ensure that nothing goes wrong which would give hunting or conservation a black eye.
Post by: Special T on October 29, 2013, 12:56:15 PM
FH I like a general season. I wish they had a general for archery and/or muzzy like they did before. I just mention the MH program because its a program that is currently in place doing some of this work. It wouldn't be hard to expand it only the fly to take care of issues like this one. WDFW hates general bad press so i think that is why we no longer have a archery or Muzzy general in that area. there have been a couple of incidents that have created bad press. Unfortunately many people fail to realize that this area is less of a hunt, but more a of harvest situation. Killing large amounts of animals in general view of the public isn't PC. I think that is why the feds were doing it at night. :twocents:
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 29, 2013, 12:58:42 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 29, 2013, 01:05:25 PM
Pman your spot on. The WDFW culture does not see us sportmen as an asset, just a $$$.
FH I like a general season. I wish they had a general for archery and/or muzzy like they did before. I just mention the MH program because its a program that is currently in place doing some of this work. It wouldn't be hard to expand it only the fly to take care of issues like this one. WDFW hates general bad press so i think that is why we no longer have a archery or Muzzy general in that area. there have been a couple of incidents that have created bad press. Unfortunately many people fail to realize that this area is less of a hunt, but more a of harvest situation. Killing large amounts of animals in general view of the public isn't PC. I think that is why the feds were doing it at night. :twocents:
The restricted seasons are in place there because their target for that herd is 1900 animals and they're only at about 1400 now. This is a really good example of why you don't relocate critters except under very specific circumstances. In this case, the unforeseen consequence of restricting seasons AND moving animals has put the what are now excess animals into farmers' fields instead of having the intended result of filling the woods with elk. There's a reason that only so many animals lived there and we're now seeing what happens when you mess with nature's balance. But never fear, once the wolves show up, ALL of the elk will come down out of the hills and invade the valley. Another fine mess you've gotten us into, Ollie!
Post by: floatinghat on October 29, 2013, 03:11:54 PM
This is taught in HE and should be a refresher requirement too many people with short term memories. To much gets lost between the ears. Either way anything is better than what sounds like Anderson pushed forward.
Wonder if he will suggest Wolves....., when is he out?
Post by: Goldeneye on October 29, 2013, 03:15:06 PM
Post by: skeeter 20i on October 29, 2013, 03:37:18 PM
Post by: Bob33 on October 29, 2013, 03:48:52 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00772/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00772/)
"The North Cascade elk herd is the smallest of ten herds residing in the state. It is a small herd and the northern most herd in western Washington. Nevertheless, it is an important resource that provides significant recreational, aesthetic, and economic benefit to Washington citizens and a valued cultural, subsistence, and ceremonial resource to the Native American people of the area.
This is a reintroduced herd resulting from successful augmentations in 1946 and 1948 of eastern and western Washington elk. The estimated peak population of 1,700 elk occurred in 1984. Since then, the population has sharply declined to a current estimate of about 300 elk."
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 06:16:21 PM
Piano ...your right its a tool ....and T I Disagree ! Everyone who buys a tag should have the same chances as the other ... I went to the meeting and it will be my last ...its the same old BS .. Indians done this Indians done that :bash: :bash: What the hell have we done :dunno: What did our money do ? Who shot the sheeeet out of these elk back in the 8Os ...Ware kept saying how the Indians have helped Sooo much ...DAH !! tHEY SHOULD HELP BRING THEM BACK AND MANAGE THEM ...They are part of the problem why they were wiped out ...Now they have another 80 head that they have no idea where they came from !!! I thought they knew everything ....birrrrrr Dirrrrrrr !!! And now the elk are nocturnal we have to have federal agents hunting with spotlights ...Give me a dang tag and I will gladly show you how nocturnal they are ...with a 100 gr wasp ;) all ...and another thing ...we have a serious problem with the elk but lets increase the herd :iamwithstupid: :stup: Here is another problem they have ...they give out so many tags but without permission from the landowner you are not going to fill them ....they want to kill a certain amount but for the amount of tags they are giving out does not come close to what they want to kill :dunno: So here is what I suggest ...CLOSE DOWN HWY 20 AND GIVE THE ELK BACK THERE LAND ,,,SAME WITH THE IDIANS .....OR KILL THEM ALL AND NO ONE WILL NEED TO BE PEEESED WHO GETS TO EAT THEM BECAUSE THEY ALL WILL BE GONE :hello: THERE YA GO ! I will write my legislators ...they actually sounded like they cared about what happens or should be done !! Hopefully they will listen to some hunters ...because hunting is the only problem solver here !!! I stayed calm ...did not I .... :chuckle: :chuckle:I have a buddy that tooka a cow through the MH program in this area. I think this is likely the best route to take/expand to solve the issue. It gives controlled harvest with straight forward guidelines. I wish you didn't have to be a MH to do it, but it may be the right tool for this problem...
MHs are a tool of the state DF&W. They could call in anyone they want to accomplish the goals they need to accomplish. In addition, they could send out a bulletin asking hunters to register for emergency free tags and have an orientation required before they can receive one. There's no shortage of free resources to accomplish what they need to accomplish. The problem is that the Department of Watchable Wildlife has to actually think of our state's 175,000 hunters as part of the solution. They don't, ever. In any situation where animals need to be culled, they reach for the purse strings instead of asking, "how can we make this a win-win for the state using hunters instead of throwing money at it?". The entire culture of the DFW needs to change and it needs to start at the top. If everyone isn't pounding their fists on their representatives' desks about this and about how the department is run in general, they should start immediately. We're only every going to lose if we don't seek to change the entire administration of this section of our government.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 06:22:02 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 06:25:00 PM
Some interesting historical reading on the Northern Cascade herd from 2002:That 300 is now about 1900 :dunno: :yike: hOW ABOUT OUR CEREMONIAL RESOURCE :chuckle: :chuckle:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00772/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00772/)
"The North Cascade elk herd is the smallest of ten herds residing in the state. It is a small herd and the northern most herd in western Washington. Nevertheless, it is an important resource that provides significant recreational, aesthetic, and economic benefit to Washington citizens and a valued cultural, subsistence, and ceremonial resource to the Native American people of the area.
This is a reintroduced herd resulting from successful augmentations in 1946 and 1948 of eastern and western Washington elk. The estimated peak population of 1,700 elk occurred in 1984. Since then, the population has sharply declined to a current estimate of about 300 elk."
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 29, 2013, 06:36:42 PM
Not counting the fact they are in an area I chose to live So as a hunter I should be putting one in my freezer ..we will see what kinds crap they come up with for the next draft !I absolutely agree.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 29, 2013, 06:55:46 PM
Post by: ELK SHOT on October 29, 2013, 06:59:19 PM
Post by: SniperDanWA on October 29, 2013, 07:00:48 PM
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
Post by: KFhunter on October 29, 2013, 07:13:19 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 29, 2013, 07:16:58 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
Let me guess, you are one!
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 07:17:25 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.Well ...I wonder how many MH never get the call they dream of ?? I heard a few complaining about that :dunno:
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
Post by: KFhunter on October 29, 2013, 07:19:03 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.Well ...I wonder how many MH never get the call they dream of ?? I heard a few complaining about that :dunno:
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
exactly why I did not complete the MH program. It's a farce.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 07:22:13 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 07:23:11 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.:dunno: :chuckle: :hello:
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
Let me guess, you are one!
Post by: KFhunter on October 29, 2013, 07:24:49 PM
Is this the same herd that has been walking on Hwy 2? I heard from a friend in Monroe that WDFD was putting a call out to hunters to reduce car/elk accidents. Just curious.:dunno: :chuckle: :hello:
Oh, I think it should be any hunter qualified to hunt. Not all MHs are better (or worse) than the average hunter at shooting lanes.
The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment.
regardless, if I had a sensitive hunt outside of the regular seasons where public exposure was for certain - heck yes I'd choose a Master Hunter and I'd make sure the media knew all the steps required...I'd push the master hunter program for sure.
Let me guess, you are one!
No, but I recognize the potential - and need.
Post by: Bob33 on October 29, 2013, 07:39:17 PM
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment."
I think the odds are reduced.
Master Hunters are subject to a zero tolerance policy: one game (of fish) violation and you're banned from the program for life. That's a pretty hefty incentive to be careful.
It's a bit like a college degree: many employers wants college graduates not necessarily for what they know, but because they believe the individual had the drive and discipline to complete something. Do college graduates no more than the "average" person who didn't graduate? Maybe, maybe not but employers often use a degree as a gauge of the person.
If a landowner has a choice of giving hunting permission to someone he knows nothing about, or allowing someone who has gone through a special program that requires a fair amount of discipline and work and is expected to behave in a very ethical manner, the perception is often that he is better with the second option. Sure - there are lots of very ethical non master hunters, and certainly a few master hunters who aren't. Once they're busted they're gone, however.
Post by: bigtex on October 29, 2013, 07:51:22 PM
Master Hunters are subject to a zero tolerance policy: one game (of fish) violation and you're banned from the program for life. That's a pretty hefty incentive to be careful.
Yet you can become a MH if you've had violations in the past. As long as they were 10 years prior.....
Post by: Tbar on October 29, 2013, 07:56:23 PM
Post by: sled on October 29, 2013, 07:56:50 PM
"The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.If You Need Incentive To (Be Careful) You Shouldn't Have A Hunting
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment."
I think the odds are reduced.
Master Hunters are subject to a zero tolerance policy: one game (of fish) violation and you're banned from the program for life. That's a pretty hefty incentive to be careful.
It's a bit like a college degree: many employers wants college graduates not necessarily for what they know, but because they believe the individual had the drive and discipline to complete something. Do college graduates no more than the "average" person who didn't graduate? Maybe, maybe not but employers often use a degree as a gauge of the person.
If a landowner has a choice of giving hunting permission to someone he knows nothing about, or allowing someone who has gone through a special program that requires a fair amount of discipline and work and is expected to behave in a very ethical manner, the perception is often that he is better with the second option. Sure - there are lots of very ethical non master hunters, and certainly a few master hunters who aren't. Once they're busted they're gone, however.
License At All. :twocents:
Post by: sled on October 29, 2013, 08:00:29 PM
"The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.also Not Everyone Has The Free Time To Invest In Jumping Through Hoops For Better Hunting.
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment."
I think the odds are reduced.
Master Hunters are subject to a zero tolerance policy: one game (of fish) violation and you're banned from the program for life. That's a pretty hefty incentive to be careful.
It's a bit like a college degree: many employers wants college graduates not necessarily for what they know, but because they believe the individual had the drive and discipline to complete something. Do college graduates no more than the "average" person who didn't graduate? Maybe, maybe not but employers often use a degree as a gauge of the person.
If a landowner has a choice of giving hunting permission to someone he knows nothing about, or allowing someone who has gone through a special program that requires a fair amount of discipline and work and is expected to behave in a very ethical manner, the perception is often that he is better with the second option. Sure - there are lots of very ethical non master hunters, and certainly a few master hunters who aren't. Once they're busted they're gone, however.
I Thought That Is What Hunter Ed Was For.
Post by: Tbar on October 29, 2013, 08:14:58 PM
How much do you know about augmentations? You see what happens whiten you mess with nature? Are you aware of herd compositions throughout this state and country that are a result of "messing with nature" as you say. This is a very complex situation we have, and some tough decisions have to be made. We as hunters have compounded the complexity of it all by our actions (yes include your precious mh program). There were too many cited in muzzy, the archery debacle, and several mh citations last year. You act like it's a perfect program and it's a save all. The politics and logistics are the 2 biggest obstacles and 2 that aren't easily circumvented. That gives a little credibility to wdfw actions.Pman your spot on. The WDFW culture does not see us sportmen as an asset, just a $$$.
FH I like a general season. I wish they had a general for archery and/or muzzy like they did before. I just mention the MH program because its a program that is currently in place doing some of this work. It wouldn't be hard to expand it only the fly to take care of issues like this one. WDFW hates general bad press so i think that is why we no longer have a archery or Muzzy general in that area. there have been a couple of incidents that have created bad press. Unfortunately many people fail to realize that this area is less of a hunt, but more a of harvest situation. Killing large amounts of animals in general view of the public isn't PC. I think that is why the feds were doing it at night. :twocents:
The restricted seasons are in place there because their target for that herd is 1900 animals and they're only at about 1400 now. This is a really good example of why you don't relocate critters except under very specific circumstances. In this case, the unforeseen consequence of restricting seasons AND moving animals has put the what are now excess animals into farmers' fields instead of having the intended result of filling the woods with elk. There's a reason that only so many animals lived there and we're now seeing what happens when you mess with nature's balance. But never fear, once the wolves show up, ALL of the elk will come down out of the hills and invade the valley. Another fine mess you've gotten us into, Ollie!
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 29, 2013, 10:19:17 PM
Post by: Whitpirate on October 29, 2013, 10:23:07 PM
Post by: KFhunter on October 29, 2013, 10:23:34 PM
Post by: sled on October 29, 2013, 10:31:35 PM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.:yeah:
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 05:51:37 AM
I was not aware of the problems with the MH program until this thread, I may need to redact my statements.
This is precisely why I said that hunters with general tags could be considered, but they'd need to go through some kind of briefing, maybe even sign an agreement to follow the instructions of the hunt coordinator to the letter and to act in a manner which sheds a good light on our sport.
I took the MH course and worked hard for my certification. I don't believe that I should have all of the opportunities from wildlife damage situations, especially when so many animals are involved, as in this case. But, I do think that any participants should be vetted before we let them loose in a highly visible, possibly volatile scenario.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 06:01:32 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.It opens January 1 to new applicants.
Post by: skeeter 20i on October 30, 2013, 06:58:23 AM
So what went down at the meeting today? I couldn't make it.
:yeah:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 30, 2013, 07:11:57 AM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 07:14:57 AM
"The odds of getting a jack-wad are greatly reduced by making it a master hunter controlled hunt.If You Need Incentive To (Be Careful) You Shouldn't Have A Hunting
"Master Hunter" does not mean they are a better hunter, only that they took the initiative to prove their marksmanship skills, conservation efforts, volunteer work and some other stuff escaping me at the moment."
I think the odds are reduced.
Master Hunters are subject to a zero tolerance policy: one game (of fish) violation and you're banned from the program for life. That's a pretty hefty incentive to be careful.
It's a bit like a college degree: many employers wants college graduates not necessarily for what they know, but because they believe the individual had the drive and discipline to complete something. Do college graduates no more than the "average" person who didn't graduate? Maybe, maybe not but employers often use a degree as a gauge of the person.
If a landowner has a choice of giving hunting permission to someone he knows nothing about, or allowing someone who has gone through a special program that requires a fair amount of discipline and work and is expected to behave in a very ethical manner, the perception is often that he is better with the second option. Sure - there are lots of very ethical non master hunters, and certainly a few master hunters who aren't. Once they're busted they're gone, however.
License At All. :twocents:
:yeah: :yeah: :tup:
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 07:18:05 AM
I respectfully disagree bob. I will take experience and intimate local knowledge over master hunters. I would still require all hunters to be briefed on the given situation. I have witnessed many of the failures in the mh program in this very area. Yes their mh privileges were revoked and several, yes several citations issued. I know it's a mix but I have seen more that "can't " so to speak than those that are driven. The most driven hunters I know are not necessarily the"master" hunter mold (but I would consider them master hunters).
thats why my plan had locals/family that the farmer/landowners approved to hunt on thier land, and no one else!
Post by: returnofsid on October 30, 2013, 07:24:01 AM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 07:28:54 AM
Piano ...your right its a tool ....and T I Disagree ! Everyone who buys a tag should have the same chances as the other ... I went to the meeting and it will be my last ...its the same old BS .. Indians done this Indians done that :bash: :bash: What the hell have we done :dunno: What did our money do ? Who shot the sheeeet out of these elk back in the 8Os ...Ware kept saying how the Indians have helped Sooo much ...DAH !! tHEY SHOULD HELP BRING THEM BACK AND MANAGE THEM ...They are part of the problem why they were wiped out ...Now they have another 80 head that they have no idea where they came from !!! I thought they knew everything ....birrrrrr Dirrrrrrr !!! And now the elk are nocturnal we have to have federal agents hunting with spotlights ...Give me a dang tag and I will gladly show you how nocturnal they are ...with a 100 gr wasp ;) all ...and another thing ...we have a serious problem with the elk but lets increase the herd :iamwithstupid: :stup: Here is another problem they have ...they give out so many tags but without permission from the landowner you are not going to fill them ....they want to kill a certain amount but for the amount of tags they are giving out does not come close to what they want to kill :dunno: So here is what I suggest ...CLOSE DOWN HWY 20 AND GIVE THE ELK BACK THERE LAND ,,,SAME WITH THE IDIANS .....OR KILL THEM ALL AND NO ONE WILL NEED TO BE PEEESED WHO GETS TO EAT THEM BECAUSE THEY ALL WILL BE GONE :hello: THERE YA GO ! I will write my legislators ...they actually sounded like they cared about what happens or should be done !! Hopefully they will listen to some hunters ...because hunting is the only problem solver here !!! I stayed calm ...did not I .... :chuckle: :chuckle:I have a buddy that tooka a cow through the MH program in this area. I think this is likely the best route to take/expand to solve the issue. It gives controlled harvest with straight forward guidelines. I wish you didn't have to be a MH to do it, but it may be the right tool for this problem...
MHs are a tool of the state DF&W. They could call in anyone they want to accomplish the goals they need to accomplish. In addition, they could send out a bulletin asking hunters to register for emergency free tags and have an orientation required before they can receive one. There's no shortage of free resources to accomplish what they need to accomplish. The problem is that the Department of Watchable Wildlife has to actually think of our state's 175,000 hunters as part of the solution. They don't, ever. In any situation where animals need to be culled, they reach for the purse strings instead of asking, "how can we make this a win-win for the state using hunters instead of throwing money at it?". The entire culture of the DFW needs to change and it needs to start at the top. If everyone isn't pounding their fists on their representatives' desks about this and about how the department is run in general, they should start immediately. We're only every going to lose if we don't seek to change the entire administration of this section of our government.
bh45 commentary on meeting, see above.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 07:36:14 AM
That sounds good in theory but I don't think it would work very well. You would have hunters knocking on landowner doors asking for permission, causing irritation and complaints. You would have posts on here going multiple pages and letters written to representatives about how certain hunters are getting special privileges when "I should have the same rights at anyone else", etc.I respectfully disagree bob. I will take experience and intimate local knowledge over master hunters. I would still require all hunters to be briefed on the given situation. I have witnessed many of the failures in the mh program in this very area. Yes their mh privileges were revoked and several, yes several citations issued. I know it's a mix but I have seen more that "can't " so to speak than those that are driven. The most driven hunters I know are not necessarily the"master" hunter mold (but I would consider them master hunters).
thats why my plan had locals/family that the farmer/landowners approved to hunt on thier land, and no one else!
It's complicated, and any plan that includes citizen hunters will by definition exclude certain citizen hunters.
Tbar - I respect your opinion. Thank you.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 07:41:58 AM
That sounds good in theory but I don't think it would work very well. You would have hunters knocking on landowner doors asking for permission, causing irritation and complaints. You would have posts on here going multiple pages and letters written to representatives about how certain hunters are getting special privileges when "I should have the same rights at anyone else", etc.I respectfully disagree bob. I will take experience and intimate local knowledge over master hunters. I would still require all hunters to be briefed on the given situation. I have witnessed many of the failures in the mh program in this very area. Yes their mh privileges were revoked and several, yes several citations issued. I know it's a mix but I have seen more that "can't " so to speak than those that are driven. The most driven hunters I know are not necessarily the"master" hunter mold (but I would consider them master hunters).
thats why my plan had locals/family that the farmer/landowners approved to hunt on thier land, and no one else!
It's complicated, and any plan that includes citizen hunters will by definition exclude certain citizen hunters.
Tbar - I respect your opinion. Thank you.
well thats what we have now with master hunters! some people dont have the time to dedicate to such a program, but have the knowledge and common sence to be able to hunt in close quaters with people, and livestock.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 07:46:34 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 30, 2013, 07:56:21 AM
But Dave Ware had in his power point that they had the USDA come in and kill elk.
I think he said three had been killed.
The property owner where the elk were killed was there and thanked the Department for doing it. But still wanted payment for damage. One damage claim is said to be $25k.
Not one person raised a brow about the USDA issue.
Dave Ware got called on the boards about his under estimate of elk / car incidents. The audience groaned when he said 40. A uniformed State Trooper said it was closer to 60 reported and based on dead animals more than that.
The tribes were there at least three. One chairman got cut off before he could say much because they only had a 2 minute comment time per person.
Another talked about their need for elk meat and that the elk were native.
A third said nothing could be decided here because they were a nation and the government should be talking to them privately . He also blamed his diabetics on the lack of eating his Traditional elk meat.
There was a lot of comment about DNR closing roads without public process.
In the end my thought is that nothing will ever come of the USDA issue. No one was bothered about it at all. The land owners welcomed it.
I thinks it is now a dead issue.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 30, 2013, 08:01:17 AM
Post by: Houndhunter on October 30, 2013, 08:02:15 AM
I was at the meeting, I was invited for Hunter Ed, so I did not comment on the elk.
But Dave Ware had in his power point that they had the USDA come in and kill elk.
I think he said three had been killed.
The property owner where the elk were killed was there and thanked the Department for doing it. But still wanted payment for damage. One damage claim is said to be $25k.
Not one person raised a brow about the USDA issue.
Dave Ware got called on the boards about his under estimate of elk / car incidents. The audience groaned when he said 40. A uniformed State Trooper said it was closer to 60 reported and based on dead animals more than that.
The tribes were there at least three. One chairman got cut off before he could say much because they only had a 2 minute comment time per person.
Another talked about their need for elk meat and that the elk were native.
A third said nothing could be decided here because they were a nation and the government should be talking to them privately . He also blamed his diabetics on the lack of eating his Traditional elk meat.
There was a lot of comment about DNR closing roads without public process.
In the end my thought is that nothing will ever come of the USDA issue. No one was bothered about it at all. The land owners welcomed it.
I thinks it is now a dead issue.
Thats sad, diabetic from lack of elk meat...... Wow
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 08:06:44 AM
Dave Ware got called on the boards about his under estimate of elk / car incidents. The audience groaned when he said 40. A uniformed State Trooper said it was closer to 60 reported and based on dead animals more than that
the above is the biggest issues that most people in the valley have. we shouldn't have to dodge elk everyday on our commutes so the tribes have elk to eat, and land owners shoudn't have to pay to feed the elk, and have thier property damaged because of elk.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 08:08:48 AM
Post by: Whitpirate on October 30, 2013, 08:13:06 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years. I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters. It is a certification to be sure yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening. I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 08:19:49 AM
Like Hunter Education?
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 08:30:46 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years. I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters. It is a certification to be sure yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening. I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.
So, all due respects Whit, you'd like the extra opportunity but you're not willing to do the work to get it. Sorry bud, but that disqualifies you from lots of stuff throughout life. Not pursuing the certification because of poor tag opportunities is also not the spirit intended for those who participate in the program. The rewards of tags are icing on the cake of satisfaction for work well done for wildlife and conservation. Someone who joins the program only for the tag rewards will end up disappointed and most likely be a disappointment as a MH representative. I personally don't care about getting a tag and enjoy doing the required conservation.
My disagreement here with the DFW is not about the fact that they could've used MHs to perform this task, although they should have. My disagreement is that they used hired guns instead of ANY WA hunters. My problem with the DFW stems from the fact that the wildlife decisions they make are often proof of how little importance they place on our wildlife (as opposed to fish & shellfish), and the fact that they aren't constantly asking themselves "how can we make this a win-win for our state and for the hunters who pay our bills?". Someone in that administration should've been pounding his or her fist on the table demanding that this problem be solved with hunters as a tool. Unfortunately, that will never happen with this administration.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 30, 2013, 08:33:15 AM
I was at the meeting, I was invited for Hunter Ed, so I did not comment on the elk.
But Dave Ware had in his power point that they had the USDA come in and kill elk.
I think he said three had been killed.
The property owner where the elk were killed was there and thanked the Department for doing it. But still wanted payment for damage. One damage claim is said to be $25k.
Not one person raised a brow about the USDA issue.
Dave Ware got called on the boards about his under estimate of elk / car incidents. The audience groaned when he said 40. A uniformed State Trooper said it was closer to 60 reported and based on dead animals more than that.
The tribes were there at least three. One chairman got cut off before he could say much because they only had a 2 minute comment time per person.
Another talked about their need for elk meat and that the elk were native.
A third said nothing could be decided here because they were a nation and the government should be talking to them privately . He also blamed his diabetics on the lack of eating his Traditional elk meat.
There was a lot of comment about DNR closing roads without public process.
In the end my thought is that nothing will ever come of the USDA issue. No one was bothered about it at all. The land owners welcomed it.
I thinks it is now a dead issue.
Thats sad, diabetic from lack of elk meat...... Wow
More like diabetic from lack of exercise due to driving around in there trucks looking for elk to kill, and Laziness.....
These tribes haven't done anything to improve our elk and deer heard or our salmon runs for that matter. All they do is take, take, take! If they really gave a rats ass maybe they would start giving!! My dad once asked a wildlife biologist what are you guys going to when there is one elk left or one deer left. He replied what do you mean? He said, would the Indians get to kill those too? He said yes, they would be entitled to them.....
Post by: jdw12885 on October 30, 2013, 08:34:59 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years. I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters. It is a certification to be sure yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening. I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.
So, all due respects Whit, you'd like the extra opportunity but you're not willing to do the work to get it. Sorry bud, but that disqualifies you from lots of stuff throughout life. Not pursuing the certification because of poor tag opportunities is also not the spirit intended for those who participate in the program. The rewards of tags are icing on the cake of satisfaction for work well done for wildlife and conservation. Someone who joins the program only for the tag rewards will end up disappointed and most likely be a disappointment as a MH representative. I personally don't care about getting a tag and enjoy doing the required conservation.
My disagreement here with the DFW is not about the fact that they could've used MHs to perform this task, although they should have. My disagreement is that they used hired guns instead of ANY WA hunters. My problem with the DFW stems from the fact that the wildlife decisions they make are often proof of how little importance they place on our wildlife (as opposed to fish & shellfish), and the fact that they aren't constantly asking themselves "how can we make this a win-win for our state and for the hunters who pay our bills?". Someone in that administration should've been pounding his or her fist on the table demanding that this problem be solved with hunters as a tool. Unfortunately, that will never happen with this administration.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 08:41:31 AM
Well Boss, if you're really lucky, the elk that were transported will be shown to have also transported the hoof rot and you can benefit from that, too. Moving animals is rarely a good idea in many, many ways.
They don't seem to have the hoof rot like the Saint Helens herd, this herd (field elk) is healhty as a horse with basically no preditors except the ocassional hunter/tribe member, when they stray from the protection of private property.
Post by: Whitpirate on October 30, 2013, 08:52:03 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years. I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters. It is a certification to be sure yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening. I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.
So, all due respects Whit, you'd like the extra opportunity but you're not willing to do the work to get it. Sorry bud, but that disqualifies you from lots of stuff throughout life. Not pursuing the certification because of poor tag opportunities is also not the spirit intended for those who participate in the program. The rewards of tags are icing on the cake of satisfaction for work well done for wildlife and conservation. Someone who joins the program only for the tag rewards will end up disappointed and most likely be a disappointment as a MH representative. I personally don't care about getting a tag and enjoy doing the required conservation.
My disagreement here with the DFW is not about the fact that they could've used MHs to perform this task, although they should have. My disagreement is that they used hired guns instead of ANY WA hunters. My problem with the DFW stems from the fact that the wildlife decisions they make are often proof of how little importance they place on our wildlife (as opposed to fish & shellfish), and the fact that they aren't constantly asking themselves "how can we make this a win-win for our state and for the hunters who pay our bills?". Someone in that administration should've been pounding his or her fist on the table demanding that this problem be solved with hunters as a tool. Unfortunately, that will never happen with this administration.
Piano I've often enjoyed your posts and feel that if we met in person we'd get along well.... but I guess I've hit some sort of "piss on him" mode with you.
#1 I didn't pursue the MH program for tags but for all the talk of improved conservation etc.... it was not present where I was living in the NE corner of Washington. The 3 individuals that I spoke with detailed that not once had their projects or coordinator involved them in something that they didn't spoonfeed already on private land. As private landowners and friends of many folks with lots of ground I didn't see any impact on the public grounds in my neck of the woods. I will concede that now that I live over on the coast and I do see more opportunities for folks to work with conservation.
#2 I currently help maintain over 2400 acres of ground bordering one of the largest tracts of public hunting land north of Spokane and spend a number of days planting crops that are solely for wildlife and to bring increased opportunity to both my family and other hunters on the 11000 acres of state ground that borders us so I'm willing to do work without reflection or reward outside my own ground and purchased state tag.
#3 I know all about investment in work will lead to opportunity I hold 3 college degrees, 9 industry certifications and taught at the university level for over 15 years so if you tag me as "he wants a cheap tag and doesn't know how to work"; you've picked the wrong guy.
#4 I've farmed for at least 20 years of my adult life (with a job in town) and know the struggles of farmers etc.... but I also see when you close rolls and make something seemingly unattainable it becomes easier for folks to judge it unfavorably or hold a grudge (see commercial fishing books in SE Alaska, flower books for Pike's Place Market) etc.... being one of the lucky ones to get in while the getting is good is great but what about the folks on down the line. Diminished opportunity for all classes of hunters is a steamrolling trend in this state and I agree we cannot fight among ourselves to take away any potential opportunities to licensed, ethical hunters. I wrote two letters to my local reps detailing my frustration with the DFW administration's decision in this particular case to utilize USDA shooters and the loss of opportunity to hunters such as the MH program, youth, disabled etc....
#5 I understand that the closure of the MH applicant process was recent but in light of decisions by this administration at DFW and the general lack of opportunity how do you envision this program becoming less exclusive? I see the hunting opportunities of my boys growing up (8 and 3) diminishing over time. I sincerely regret sometimes waiting for as long as I did to have children as they could have had better opportunities 10-15 years ago. While I don't believe this is your attitude I've met a few "I'm a MH and I'm better than you" individuals (see above on one of the 3 that I met exploring the program) that put me off and tempered my desire to join the ranks.
Either way I despise the lack of opportunity for legal Washington hunters in this case, the destruction of private and public property and the secrecy behind the decision-makers at DFW. I won't speak on the tribe comments at the meeting as it will not be productive but let's just say I question the science of individual comments, the agendas behind them and more closed roll opportunities *wink*
Either way I'd be happy to buy you a beverage if you are in the Seattle area sometime or over in Spokane while I'm chasing whitetail.
I'm sitting in the Clockum now waiting on some movement below me to fill my cow tag so I appreciate the blood pressure increase you gave me for a few minutes (it was cold this morning).
Post by: Special T on October 30, 2013, 09:56:58 AM
I think that there were MANY options that could have been better than what they did. MH, Disabled, General, ANY of those would be preferable to the USDA coming in and shooting them. I won't argue the merits of MH vs General Vs Disabled because it DOESN'T"T matter, none of those choices were picked. We PAID to have elk shot and donated to the food bank instead of having some one PAY for the same kind of service. :bash:
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 09:58:52 AM
My difficulty is the current MH is no longer accepting new blood. I don't like special privilege for anyone. The wildlife belong to all of us.
How long have you been a hunter in WA? Was last year your first year here? Because, it's the first year I can remember when the MH program was at capacity and didn't except new applicants. This is not a special privilege. It's an earned certification and anyone who was a hunter before last year had the opportunity to enroll and fulfill the requirements to get the certification. It's not an easy process and many who apply don't complete the requirements.
I don't want to get into a peeing match over special privileges v. earned rewards, but I will say that the reason these opportunities are given to MHs is that the DFW has done everything they can by use of the MH course to limit the exposure to bad press for hunting in cases of high public profile hunts/culls. The most important aspects that I see are background checks to make sure someone hasn't committed crimes or offenses which would indicate a lack of care for nature, wildlife, and ethics, and the firearm or archery proficiency requirements which verify at least a minimum level of proficiency. What all of us hunters need even less than special privileges for some is some idiot in one of these culls who can't shoot or who doesn't care about how hunting is viewed by the general public, that same public who can make decisions about our hunting privileges in the ballot box.
I've been hunting in Washington for 25 years. I explored the MH program a few years ago and didn't like what I heard when talking to a number of hunters. It is a certification to be sure yet even with the hours of blood, sweat and tears you throw into the system the DFW doesn't utilize you in this case....maddening. I just don't like closed rolls for any "earned" rights and especially if it takes time for folks to complete.
So, all due respects Whit, you'd like the extra opportunity but you're not willing to do the work to get it. Sorry bud, but that disqualifies you from lots of stuff throughout life. Not pursuing the certification because of poor tag opportunities is also not the spirit intended for those who participate in the program. The rewards of tags are icing on the cake of satisfaction for work well done for wildlife and conservation. Someone who joins the program only for the tag rewards will end up disappointed and most likely be a disappointment as a MH representative. I personally don't care about getting a tag and enjoy doing the required conservation.
My disagreement here with the DFW is not about the fact that they could've used MHs to perform this task, although they should have. My disagreement is that they used hired guns instead of ANY WA hunters. My problem with the DFW stems from the fact that the wildlife decisions they make are often proof of how little importance they place on our wildlife (as opposed to fish & shellfish), and the fact that they aren't constantly asking themselves "how can we make this a win-win for our state and for the hunters who pay our bills?". Someone in that administration should've been pounding his or her fist on the table demanding that this problem be solved with hunters as a tool. Unfortunately, that will never happen with this administration.
Piano I've often enjoyed your posts and feel that if we met in person we'd get along well.... but I guess I've hit some sort of "piss on him" mode with you.
#1 I didn't pursue the MH program for tags but for all the talk of improved conservation etc.... it was not present where I was living in the NE corner of Washington. The 3 individuals that I spoke with detailed that not once had their projects or coordinator involved them in something that they didn't spoonfeed already on private land. As private landowners and friends of many folks with lots of ground I didn't see any impact on the public grounds in my neck of the woods. I will concede that now that I live over on the coast and I do see more opportunities for folks to work with conservation.
#2 I currently help maintain over 2400 acres of ground bordering one of the largest tracts of public hunting land north of Spokane and spend a number of days planting crops that are solely for wildlife and to bring increased opportunity to both my family and other hunters on the 11000 acres of state ground that borders us so I'm willing to do work without reflection or reward outside my own ground and purchased state tag.
#3 I know all about investment in work will lead to opportunity I hold 3 college degrees, 9 industry certifications and taught at the university level for over 15 years so if you tag me as "he wants a cheap tag and doesn't know how to work"; you've picked the wrong guy.
#4 I've farmed for at least 20 years of my adult life (with a job in town) and know the struggles of farmers etc.... but I also see when you close rolls and make something seemingly unattainable it becomes easier for folks to judge it unfavorably or hold a grudge (see commercial fishing books in SE Alaska, flower books for Pike's Place Market) etc.... being one of the lucky ones to get in while the getting is good is great but what about the folks on down the line. Diminished opportunity for all classes of hunters is a steamrolling trend in this state and I agree we cannot fight among ourselves to take away any potential opportunities to licensed, ethical hunters. I wrote two letters to my local reps detailing my frustration with the DFW administration's decision in this particular case to utilize USDA shooters and the loss of opportunity to hunters such as the MH program, youth, disabled etc....
#5 I understand that the closure of the MH applicant process was recent but in light of decisions by this administration at DFW and the general lack of opportunity how do you envision this program becoming less exclusive? I see the hunting opportunities of my boys growing up (8 and 3) diminishing over time. I sincerely regret sometimes waiting for as long as I did to have children as they could have had better opportunities 10-15 years ago. While I don't believe this is your attitude I've met a few "I'm a MH and I'm better than you" individuals (see above on one of the 3 that I met exploring the program) that put me off and tempered my desire to join the ranks.
Either way I despise the lack of opportunity for legal Washington hunters in this case, the destruction of private and public property and the secrecy behind the decision-makers at DFW. I won't speak on the tribe comments at the meeting as it will not be productive but let's just say I question the science of individual comments, the agendas behind them and more closed roll opportunities *wink*
Either way I'd be happy to buy you a beverage if you are in the Seattle area sometime or over in Spokane while I'm chasing whitetail.
I'm sitting in the Clockum now waiting on some movement below me to fill my cow tag so I appreciate the blood pressure increase you gave me for a few minutes (it was cold this morning).
No problem and I'll take you up on that beverage, my treat. I was referring to that one sentence of yours which I highlighted and I get now that's not what you meant. I have no problem opening this up to every licensed hunter with an elk tag. I just want hunters to do it, not some government slob in the middle of the night. I do think if this were to go out to more than MHs, there certainly needs to be an orientation to try and avoid any fiasco and/or bad public display or image that could give us and our sport a black eye.
I think you and I are very close if not perfectly aligned on this topic.
Post by: JLS on October 30, 2013, 10:01:09 AM
not some government slob
Really?
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 10:02:26 AM
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 10:05:30 AM
Post by: bigtex on October 30, 2013, 10:06:49 AM
I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
Post by: JLS on October 30, 2013, 10:10:54 AM
Poor choice of words. Sorry JLS. You were the shooter, eh?
Not hardly.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 10:11:15 AM
I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
Sorry Bob, I disagree. :chuckle: :chuckle: See how I did that? I'm very clever.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 10:12:42 AM
:chuckle:I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
Sorry Bob, I disagree. :chuckle: :chuckle: See how I did that? I'm very clever.
Post by: idahohuntr on October 30, 2013, 10:54:33 AM
I completely disagree with this statement. Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc. The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously!I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk. Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin :chuckle: But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 11:05:32 AM
I completely disagree with this statement. Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc. The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously!I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk. Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin :chuckle: But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.
:yeah: x2 Our disagreements are no excuse for the government to deny us these opportunities and use us to solve wildlife conflict.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 11:17:08 AM
Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.I completely disagree with this statement. Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc. The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously!I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk. Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin :chuckle: But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 11:37:14 AM
Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.I completely disagree with this statement. Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc. The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously!I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk. Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin :chuckle: But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.
That's a completely different issue from what we're addressing here. I agree that hunters get wrapped up in their own little cocoons, but this situation can't be tied to that. This is strictly due to the fact that the DFW doesn't give a damn about hunters and what they could be doing to better serve them.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 11:51:38 AM
What is your basis for knowing what WDFW has or has not heard about shooting elk?Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.I completely disagree with this statement. Hunters and Anglers (a fisher is a small mammal btw) care a lot about their resources and come from relatively diverse backgrounds/experiences etc. The fact that we don't concur on all, many, or even a few aspects of fish and wildlife management exemplifies this diversity but more importantly highlights that we all care enough about our heritage and resources that we speak up...some of us very vigorously!I think all the bitching, moaning, bickering, name calling, infighting and derogatory comments on here about everyone from WDFW to USDA to master hunters to landowners probably goes a long ways towards explaining why WDFW attempted to do this quietly. :twocents:
And why hunters/fishers biggest foes are hunters/fishers. They cant agree on anything....
It appears to me that most of us agree on one overarching principle: License buying hunters in this state should have been given more of an opportunity to harvest these elk. Now, whether it is MH's, locals, archers, disabled hunters....let the disagreements begin :chuckle: But I would be far, far more concerned if nobody really cared as opposed to the vigorous debate on a specific solution to this complex problem.
That's a completely different issue from what we're addressing here. I agree that hunters get wrapped up in their own little cocoons, but this situation can't be tied to that. This is strictly due to the fact that the DFW doesn't give a damn about hunters and what they could be doing to better serve them.
Post by: idahohuntr on October 30, 2013, 12:02:52 PM
Anti hunters are essentially united with one voice: "No hunting." And don't be fooled: there are plenty of them in the Skagit debate.You do see the fallacy of the point you are trying to make here don't you? Hunters are also united with one voice: "Hunt". And don't be fooled, there is plenty of disagreement amongst anti-hunters on tactics and methods for stopping hunting. In both groups the devil is in the details...and that is where the internal disagreements begin. :chuckle:
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:05:53 PM
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 12:12:42 PM
Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
Post by: returnofsid on October 30, 2013, 12:13:08 PM
Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.
And paying for it...
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:20:12 PM
The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on. This is how they do "game management" in many NJ townships. Otherwise, whenever wildlife need to be culled in this state, they should be trying to figure out a way for hunters to assist and benefit. Hopefully, they'll have learned from their 2009 fiasco and be better at pre-planning such an event so that the hunt coordinator(s) can implement it in a far different manner.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 12:25:23 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Post by: JLS on October 30, 2013, 12:29:30 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
I don't think WDFW can control whether or not folks are idiots. Even master hunters not exempt from being idiots, as I've heard of more than one being cited for rather egregious violations.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 12:29:45 PM
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:30:03 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
Post by: JLS on October 30, 2013, 12:31:40 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
And you blaming an agency for the actions of public hunters would be akin to me blaming the sporting goods store that sold a gun to a murderer.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 12:33:02 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
And you blaming an agency for the actions of public hunters would be akin to me blaming the sporting goods store that sold a gun to a murderer.
Nice! :chuckle:
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 12:34:28 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
Yep i agree, but we still have not had a general elk hunt in the area since! :bash:
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:38:26 PM
"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:39:29 PM
"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
However, this is not an apples to apples comparison. Elk are a game species and wolves are protected.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 12:41:00 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
Yep i agree, but we still have not had a general elk hunt in the area since! :bash:
And that's because the DFW is mismanaging. It's costing the farmers, the townspeople, and the hunters. If I lived up there, I'd be living on the doorsteps of my legislative reps and screaming at the top of my lungs.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 12:43:34 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is the botched handling of the 2009 hunt, which is directly attributable to poor management and planning on the part of the DFW. They are ultimately responsible for how that went down. They didn't put proper controls in place.
what controls? some hunters were given permission, and some took to tresspassing on a farmers field. if my facts are right.
in a rural area with farms its the hunters job to get permission to hunt, not the wdfw. some bad eggs made it so the rest of us can't hunt! :bash:
Then the illegal actions of hunters involved should have been addressed. That's still another issue. That's like saying I shouldn't get to own a gun because someone else killed someone with a gun. When I hunt, I obey the law. When someone doesn't they should lose their privileges. If a Master Hunter trespasses, they're supposed to immediately lose their certification.
That should have no effect whatsoever on the state's handling of problem wildlife issues.
Yep i agree, but we still have not had a general elk hunt in the area since! :bash:
And that's because the DFW is mismanaging. It's costing the farmers, the townspeople, and the hunters. If I lived up there, I'd be living on the doorsteps of my legislative reps and screaming at the top of my lungs.
oh just wait till someone dies from hitting one of these elk and dies, all the press about mismanagement and the such the state/wdfw is ripe for a big lawsuit. :hello:
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 12:44:12 PM
How would you select who was allowed to participate?"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 30, 2013, 12:56:26 PM
This is longer then I started out intending but it’s how I feel. JMO
Mike
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 01:01:38 PM
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 30, 2013, 01:05:01 PM
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 30, 2013, 01:06:22 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 01:10:25 PM
Now I know I’ll be flamed for this comment but if you move out into the country and plant crops ( apples wheat or what not) you can expect wildlife to come in and take advantage of this. If you don’t want them in your fields BUILD A FENCE!! Don’t figure that someone ought to come in and pay you for damages. On this side of the state cattlemen are being forced to build fences to keep their cattle from polluting the water supply. Hey cows need water just like elk and deer need food and they’ll get it anywhere they can. Many of these folks have been in the business for years and it is their lively hood not just a hobby farm. You move into country that has elk deer or moose guess what they find FEED!! No longer should anyone have to give you money to protect and or just keep out wildlife trying to survive. The native americans claim it’s their right to hunt when and where but do they have to buy tags for every animal they shoot? I don’t think so . Maybe a treaty many of years ago gave them rights but now a days I’m sure most don’t need the meat to survive any more than us white men. My daddy and even his parents were born in the US and I even have some Native American in my history ( not much but some) but I’m not considered like many others as being Native American?? He worked 3 jobs, put in 20 + years in the service and even spent 44 months as a guest of the Japanese. He raised 5 kids on a lot of wild meat but he never expected someone to give him a handout. Give me a break I am trying to live on a fixed income retirement where I have to watch gas ,food ( oh and the price of MY TAGS go way up ) and other things go up just not my income who’s problem is it? Mostly mine I’m sure but I don’t expect others to support me cause the deer and elk come in. I hunt cause I like to hunt, I eat many a tag but then I’m back out again but like I said I like to hunt. If I don’t want them on my property I should build a fence. Do folks that hit these elk with their car get reimbursed by WDFL? No I don’t think so it’s mostly up to your insurance to take care of it (and maybe drivers should slow down and pay attention in these areas) . Who should take care of this problem of animal damage I believe it’s up to the property owner build a fence to keep them out, allow hunters in or suck it up. Elk, deer ,moose, and yes even wolves were here first even before the Native Americans. . I still find it hard to believe that relocating these elk is that weird even if they were relocated here in the first place, but unfortunately have done better than anyone figured. Just seems to me if they are this much of a problem and nighttime snipers need to be called it, that it could be any more costly to dart them, then move them to other areas in the state. I’m not saying ship them out to other states but then again many states are willing to pay or trade to get elk brought back and or even just help the gene pool in their areas. I’m not sure what the cost is for damages but I remember back when elk use to swim the river at the West Bar and got onto the golf courses, I heard but don’t know for sure, that it was several hundred dollars per elk per day so relocation can’t be that bad.
This is longer then I started out intending but it’s how I feel. JMO
Mike
Said like a true flatlander. First of all, a good many of the farmers and their parents before them where here before the elk. Secondly, we need farmers to provide affordable food for us and we should support them in doing that. Requiring someone to build fences to raise wheat isn't going to help keep my bread at $1.50/loaf. Next, the government doesn't allow farmers to randomly kill animals which eat their crops - there are regulations and permits are issued. City boys need to find out a little more about farming before they make sweeping statements about what farmers should or shouldn't do.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 30, 2013, 01:11:16 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 01:13:25 PM
How would you select who was allowed to participate?"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
Completely off the topic, Bob. Wolves are protected. It feels like you're just trying to be argumentative. Weird right after your point that hunters hurt themselves by being argumentative. :dunno: This topic here is about game animals. I would select hunters to cull game animals.
Post by: Bob33 on October 30, 2013, 01:39:30 PM
The issue of how WDFW addresses adverse publicity and selects individuals to be involved in a damage control situation is what this entire thread is about.How would you select who was allowed to participate?"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
Completely off the topic, Bob. Wolves are protected. It feels like you're just trying to be argumentative. Weird right after your point that hunters hurt themselves by being argumentative. :dunno: This topic here is about game animals. I would select hunters to cull game animals.
As for being argumentative, I would suggest looking in a mirror.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 02:09:22 PM
The issue of how WDFW addresses adverse publicity and selects individuals to be involved in a damage control situation is what this entire thread is about.How would you select who was allowed to participate?"The second issue is that if their emphasis from now on, because of their piss-poor handling of the 2009 event, is going to be a perfect image for the public to see, they should discontinue all hunting in the state immediately and use only government snipers to control wildlife populations from now on."
or...wisely use a combination of both.
WDFW did not use licensed hunters to remove the six problem wolves from NE WA. Do you believe they should they have, given the intense scrutiny that any killing of wolves generates?
Absolutely. Instead of the near-$1million helicopter fun rides, you bet. The Pro-wolf people couldn't have howled any louder than they did and are still. The DFW threw away money that could've been saved.
Completely off the topic, Bob. Wolves are protected. It feels like you're just trying to be argumentative. Weird right after your point that hunters hurt themselves by being argumentative. :dunno: This topic here is about game animals. I would select hunters to cull game animals.
As for being argumentative, I would suggest looking in a mirror.
Wow, OK Bob, I'm done. Have a nice day.
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 02:14:48 PM
The wdfw took a huge pr hit in 09 and was forced into making decisions that may take opportunity from the general sportsman. So some may want to look in the mirror and shoulder some of the blame when it comes to the cluster _ we have now. It may have been the actions of a few be has had adverse decisions affecting many.
The timing of the cull is suspect at best (terrible when you have an impossible draw and lose any opportunity). The cull itself is an incredibly popular decision by both the majority and the local government.(that was evident at the meeting)
I see many more difficult and unpopular decisions that will be made.
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 02:22:17 PM
Your hoof rot comment touched a nerve too. To wish that suffering on any animal (especially the one I love the most) disgusts me to no end.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 02:35:35 PM
Pianoman still waiting on the dna study to justify where you are so quick to criticize. Since you obviously know so much about the science of elk, a question, have you been published? I know many bios that are searching long and hard for answers that you seem to have all figured out.
Your hoof rot comment touched a nerve too. To wish that suffering on any animal (especially the one I love the most) disgusts me to no end.
Sorry, but your comments are making no sense. I can't reply. I didn't wish hoof rot on any animal and I don't have any DNA tests for you.
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 02:45:26 PM
You keep commenting and blaming the relocation/augmentation. You are the only one with all the answers. Many people are and have dedicated thousands of hours to this problem (you play armchair quarterback and act like a biologist, which you may be). I have watched a specific herd grow from 26 to 140 with no st helens elk.
Pianoman still waiting on the dna study to justify where you are so quick to criticize. Since you obviously know so much about the science of elk, a question, have you been published? I know many bios that are searching long and hard for answers that you seem to have all figured out.
Your hoof rot comment touched a nerve too. To wish that suffering on any animal (especially the one I love the most) disgusts me to no end.
Have you been published comes from your vast animal science knowledge that you so willingly profess.
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 02:47:52 PM
Well Boss, if you're really lucky, the elk that were transported will be shown to have also transported the hoof rot and you can benefit from that, too. Moving animals is rarely a good idea in many, many ways.This is the hoof rot comment that bothered me.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 02:57:29 PM
Pianoman still waiting on the dna study to justify where you are so quick to criticize. Since you obviously know so much about the science of elk, a question, have you been published? I know many bios that are searching long and hard for answers that you seem to have all figured out.You keep commenting and blaming the relocation/augmentation. You are the only one with all the answers. Many people are and have dedicated thousands of hours to this problem (you play armchair quarterback and act like a biologist, which you may be). I have watched a specific herd grow from 26 to 140 with no st helens elk.
Your hoof rot comment touched a nerve too. To wish that suffering on any animal (especially the one I love the most) disgusts me to no end.
Have you been published comes from your vast animal science knowledge that you so willingly profess.
Yeah, I didn't see your remarks. Look, one of the first rules about conservation is that animals proliferate or don't in certain areas for very good reasons. Many times animals have been relocated with disastrous results. I think it's quite possible that's the case here. I don't have a degree but I do know a little something about conservation. As far as the hoof rot comment is concerned, the animals that were put into the Skagit River area came from the St Helens herd, as you know. I was simply stating that they may start showing hoof rot, being from the same herd that's having huge hoof rot problems now. That's really not a huge stretch of imagination. And, if you think you have a monopoly on loving elk, you don't. They're all I think about year 'round and I actually participate in regular conservation projects to help them. I sincerely hope you do too.
I'm really not sure why you got so butthurt by my comments unless you're working for the state and had something to do with moving these elk. But, I was stating my opinion just like everyone else. And, it's clear they're now having unintended consequences from bringing in more elk; the area is having car accidents and lots of cost to farmers. Get personal if you want, but I don't see why you need to. It's just a discussion. I do hold the DFW responsible for the problems associated with culling events in the past because ultimately, they ARE responsible for those. Whether it be the actions of individual hunters or the outcome of the event; they're in charge. See how you can post without getting personal? It's fairly easy. Try it. I'm going shooting now. Buh bye.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 02:58:07 PM
Well Boss, if you're really lucky, the elk that were transported will be shown to have also transported the hoof rot and you can benefit from that, too. Moving animals is rarely a good idea in many, many ways.This is the hoof rot comment that bothered me.
I'm sorry that you don't recognize sarcasm. :dunno:
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 03:14:00 PM
You realize the wdfw is ultimately responsible for sportsmans bad decisions as magnified in 09. Everyone is looking for answers, you however seem to know all of them.
Post by: go4itlab on October 30, 2013, 03:24:45 PM
Although I would like to see more opportunism for for local hunters to harvest from this herd. Especially as I do have part of this herd in my local area (whatcom county). I don't see it happening anytime soon. I agree with with what another members opinion on how poorly a display of sport manship was displayed in 2009. I don't remember seeing any WDFG officers forcing them to surround and shoot, wound and allow the animals to suffer. All along a heavily traveled section of Hwy. Seems to me the best thing to do was to bring in shooters that are capable of making a clean and ethical kill. Whether they be master hunters or paid marksmen: From the footage on the news in "09" that was not the case. Those that took part in that hunt are to BLAME!!!!!!. If it wasn't for camera man that is associated with a news crew that was traveling home with his family from a trip to the Methow, they might have gotten away with it.
As for the farmers and the state maybe its time to look at putting up some real fencing in these trouble areas. Like the fencing used around the Elensberg, SW, and around Turnbull. Seems to work there, although they do have some escapement..... but has to be better that continually paying out to the farmers and indangering the people that travel through that area.
This is a direct copy and paste not doctored up one:
Skagit County Elk Conflict: Conflict Specialist Griffith was in contact with seven landowners this week regarding elk damages in the Day Creek, Concrete, and Hamilton areas. All but one is a commercial operation and Griffith will be issuing a total of 11 damage permits. The remaining landowner is a resident that has a few elk grazing on his front lawn at night. Griffith advised him on practices that the landowner could implement to discourage the elk from grazing on his lawn and issued him a few 12 gauge rubber slugs for aversive conditioning the elk.
I do believe the truth will prevail, be what ever it may be
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 03:29:13 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 30, 2013, 05:14:08 PM
Yes I was there but as a volunteer. You come off as an internet know it all and are quick to discount the work of some pretty smart people. There have been many successes and failures when it comes to relocation.
You realize the wdfw is ultimately responsible for sportsmans bad decisions as magnified in 09. Everyone is looking for answers, you however seem to know all of them.
I'm glad you finally saw the light.
Post by: jdw12885 on October 30, 2013, 08:34:59 PM
Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
Post by: Houndhunter on October 30, 2013, 08:38:41 PM
Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
Pretty lame huh, and now the tribes have diabetes because of us..........
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 08:45:24 PM
It's way more complex than that. I don't think you know how many kill permits have been issued, but keep throwing blame around. A very uneducated comment.Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
Post by: RB on October 30, 2013, 08:49:26 PM
Post by: jdw12885 on October 30, 2013, 08:49:51 PM
:chuckle:Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
Pretty lame huh, and now the tribes have diabetes because of us..........
Post by: jdw12885 on October 30, 2013, 08:53:16 PM
It's way more complex than that. I don't think you know how many kill permits have been issued, but keep throwing blame around. A very uneducated comment.Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
I sure know how many were issued on the day creek area.. where this whole topic was based off of.....So I would consider that a little on the educated side......
Post by: Tbar on October 30, 2013, 09:02:30 PM
Do you know how many elk were killed when it was a general muzzy hunt? I know several guys who tagged an elk every one of those years(including some dandy bulls). Do you know why that hunt ended? That hunt was the most effective solution to date. It would be even better if the 110 boundary was in effect.
Post by: Nailed it on October 31, 2013, 05:03:06 AM
The sad irony to this issue is "hunters" and "sportsman" are the root of many of the issues. When there was a general muzzy hunt in 4941 you had it pretty good (don't think you were cursing tribes when you were the only group harvesting).Indians have never quit harvesting
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 06:00:08 AM
Yes I was there but as a volunteer. You come off as an internet know it all and are quick to discount the work of some pretty smart people. There have been many successes and failures when it comes to relocation.
You realize the wdfw is ultimately responsible for sportsmans bad decisions as magnified in 09. Everyone is looking for answers, you however seem to know all of them.
I really appreciate that you volunteered for this. I also think that because of the pride that you rightfully hold for doing a job well done, you think my comments somehow reflect on the hard conservation work that you did. They don't. I admire your volunteerism on this project. And, I have a hard time figuring out why you're not even more P-Od than I, seeing that you are among the guys who live there and should be getting the tags to help cull the problem animals instead of the gubmint just killing them and distributing the meat.
As far as the "work of smart people" is concerned, the wildlife conflicts in that area are an indication to me that the goals set for revitalization of that herd may have been set way too high. My opinion, and it's just that, is that the incredibly large number of wildlife/human conflicts bears me out. The animals didn't respond to the relocation that way the "smart people" intended and have now ended up in farmers' fields and back yards. One big consideration that may not have been considered heavily enough is that because of the changes to logging laws over the past three decades, the woods there can no longer support the size herd that it did previously. There's no longer enough forage and the elk now need to look elsewhere for food. Again, I believe (my opinion) that transporting more animals was not perhaps the wisest move.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 07:10:22 AM
Said like a true flatlander. First of all, a good many of the farmers and their parents before them where here before the elk. Secondly, we need farmers to provide affordable food for us and we should support them in doing that. Requiring someone to build fences to raise wheat isn't going to help keep my bread at $1.50/loaf. Next, the government doesn't allow farmers to randomly kill animals which eat their crops - there are regulations and permits are issued. City boys need to find out a little more about farming before they make sweeping statements about what farmers should or shouldn't do.
[/quote]
Interesting statement for not all drysiders live in the flatlands or are cityboys or have never been or worked on a wheat or cattle farm/ranch. That's like me saying all wetsider can't drive in the snow :sry:
I have no idea what area 4991 is like as far as open land compared to how much is farm land or hobby farms??? But from reading thru 14 pages so far, I'll guess most is small plots.
This incident really was mismanagement and not thought out well at all in either the bow hunt or the sniper hunt.:bash: You will never make everyone happy either hunter/landowners/ or animal lovers. Anyways it sounds like the elk did way to well and need to be thinned out.
Relocation doesn't seem an idea that most seem will work to get numbers down, so how about setting up 2 new units one where the population of people is high and one that is more open for public hunting. These 2 units could be setup with season that don't coinside with regular season so more Game Wardens could be use to regulate what is going on. In populated areas maybe a season where only muzzleloaders or a 12 ga shotgun with slugs ( very effective weapon at close range) and bow could be used. Landowners that let a few hunters at a time in could get extra damage tags if they wanted that they could use during a certain time aftewards if they still have a problem but would need to notify the local GW so they know what's going on, if you don't let hunters on I guess you really don't have a problem and need the tags. This could be a combined muzzy/modern season any elk and hunter orange required ( easier for GWs to keep track of most hunters). The other less populated area could have an any elk season for all 3 weapons either running a coupe of weeks each or maybe on for a month all legal hunting methods allowed hunter orange would also be required. Probably the 3 seperate seasons would be the one most hunters would rather see then everyone lumped together. just an idea the elk numbers would be reduced and might stay away from where their not wanted . hunter would have a good chance to fill their tags and landowners would have less elk to deal with :dunno:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 31, 2013, 07:17:16 AM
Said like a true flatlander. First of all, a good many of the farmers and their parents before them where here before the elk. Secondly, we need farmers to provide affordable food for us and we should support them in doing that. Requiring someone to build fences to raise wheat isn't going to help keep my bread at $1.50/loaf. Next, the government doesn't allow farmers to randomly kill animals which eat their crops - there are regulations and permits are issued. City boys need to find out a little more about farming before they make sweeping statements about what farmers should or shouldn't do.
Interesting statement for not all drysiders live in the flatlands or are cityboys or have never been or worked on a wheat or cattle farm/ranch. That's like me saying all wetsider can't drive in the snow :sry:
I have no idea what area 4991 is like as far as open land compared to how much is farm land or hobby farms??? But from reading thru 14 pages so far, I'll guess most is small plots.
This incident really was mismanagement and not thought out well at all in either the bow hunt or the sniper hunt.:bash: You will never make everyone happy either hunter/landowners/ or animal lovers. Anyways it sounds like the elk did way to well and need to be thinned out.
Relocation doesn't seem an idea that most seem will work to get numbers down, so how about setting up 2 new units one where the population of people is high and one that is more open for public hunting. These 2 units could be setup with season that don't coinside with regular season so more Game Wardens could be use to regulate what is going on. In populated areas maybe a season where only muzzleloaders or a 12 ga shotgun with slugs ( very effective weapon at close range) and bow could be used. Landowners that let a few hunters at a time in could get extra damage tags if they wanted that they could use during a certain time aftewards if they still have a problem but would need to notify the local GW so they know what's going on, if you don't let hunters on I guess you really don't have a problem and need the tags. This could be a combined muzzy/modern season any elk and hunter orange required ( easier for GWs to keep track of most hunters). The other less populated area could have an any elk season for all 3 weapons either running a coupe of weeks each or maybe on for a month all legal hunting methods allowed hunter orange would also be required. Probably the 3 seperate seasons would be the one most hunters would rather see then everyone lumped together. just an idea the elk numbers would be reduced and might stay away from where their not wanted . hunter would have a good chance to fill their tags and landowners would have less elk to deal with :dunno:
[/quote] :yike:I think I am sending this one to the legislators ....man I like you already :dunno: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 31, 2013, 07:22:25 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 07:28:00 AM
Relocation doesn't seem an idea that most seem will work to get numbers down, so how about setting up 2 new units one where the population of people is high and one that is more open for public hunting. These 2 units could be setup with season that don't coinside with regular season so more Game Wardens could be use to regulate what is going on. In populated areas maybe a season where only muzzleloaders or a 12 ga shotgun with slugs ( very effective weapon at close range) and bow could be used. Landowners that let a few hunters at a time in could get extra damage tags if they wanted that they could use during a certain time aftewards if they still have a problem but would need to notify the local GW so they know what's going on, if you don't let hunters on I guess you really don't have a problem and need the tags. This could be a combined muzzy/modern season any elk and hunter orange required ( easier for GWs to keep track of most hunters). The other less populated area could have an any elk season for all 3 weapons either running a coupe of weeks each or maybe on for a month all legal hunting methods allowed hunter orange would also be required. Probably the 3 seperate seasons would be the one most hunters would rather see then everyone lumped together. just an idea the elk numbers would be reduced and might stay away from where their not wanted . hunter would have a good chance to fill their tags and landowners would have less elk to deal with :dunno:
Why not just let the hunters and farmers kill the problem elk? Do we really need to now define new units and come up with tons of new regulations? There are simply too many elk down low. Let hunters work with farmers to kill them.
And as far as the farmers who don't want to work with hunters is concerned, that's their decision to make with their own land. They may have good reasons from past experience as to why they don't want people they don't know shooting on their land. They should be issued permits to cull elk which cause them crop damage. Just because you or I want these farmers to accept hunters to solve this problem doesn't mean we should turn our backs on them when they don't agree.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 07:31:42 AM
like I said .. a lot of this area is heavily timbered...once those elk are pushed out of the bottoms and up the hill you better be prepared to put on some boot leather ...and that's why they should have a season of some sort to keep the elk back in the timbered areas ...hunting pressure is the only solution ...and the hunting should be in the timber not in some farmers field ....OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF MIND (KINDA THING ) Birrrrr Dirrrrrr :bash: :bash: man I may have a heart attack over how stupid people are ....but politics and Indians are what runs this show :yeah:
But the elk don't have enough forage up in the timber. Why do you think they'll go where there isn't enough food to eat while there's plenty in the bottoms, all grown just for them?
Post by: ghosthunter on October 31, 2013, 07:51:53 AM
But I think that these land owners are so pissed and this has been dragged on for so long they are just fed up.
First if I am a land owner I am saying look, the elk were not here when I bought my land. The state brought them in. Why do I have to put up with elk?
They bought there land for the quiet, now they have to have hunters on their property to solve the states created problem.
Elk break down fences and do damage year round. This herd is on the valley floor all year. You can see them in June driving the hwy way. Sure some go up. Also remember this is not just hwy 20. These elk are in Acme area too.
This is a huge problem. In the end the only solution will be kill every elk on the valley floor Which will destroy this herd.
I talked to a old timer the other day. He said we never had trouble with the elk when Scott Paper Main Line was open to the public. And thus the crust of the problem.
The road closures both on Serra Pacific(old Scott Paper) and DNR lands have made this problem worse. When the roads were open and the herd was hunted no problems.
I think the hunting solution will only work with public access being improved. The state should try to get SP lands open for a two week elk season. And the DNR needs to stop closing roads. Coupled with pressure on the valley floor.
And what role do the safety zones play in all this. Hurn's Field just lures the elk to the valley floor.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 09:25:09 AM
Relocation doesn't seem an idea that most seem will work to get numbers down, so how about setting up 2 new units one where the population of people is high and one that is more open for public hunting. These 2 units could be setup with season that don't coinside with regular season so more Game Wardens could be use to regulate what is going on. In populated areas maybe a season where only muzzleloaders or a 12 ga shotgun with slugs ( very effective weapon at close range) and bow could be used. Landowners that let a few hunters at a time in could get extra damage tags if they wanted that they could use during a certain time aftewards if they still have a problem but would need to notify the local GW so they know what's going on, if you don't let hunters on I guess you really don't have a problem and need the tags. This could be a combined muzzy/modern season any elk and hunter orange required ( easier for GWs to keep track of most hunters). The other less populated area could have an any elk season for all 3 weapons either running a coupe of weeks each or maybe on for a month all legal hunting methods allowed hunter orange would also be required. Probably the 3 seperate seasons would be the one most hunters would rather see then everyone lumped together. just an idea the elk numbers would be reduced and might stay away from where their not wanted . hunter would have a good chance to fill their tags and landowners would have less elk to deal with :dunno:
Why not just let the hunters and farmers kill the problem elk? Do we really need to now define new units and come up with tons of new regulations? There are simply too many elk down low. Let hunters work with farmers to kill them.
And as far as the farmers who don't want to work with hunters is concerned, that's their decision to make with their own land. They may have good reasons from past experience as to why they don't want people they don't know shooting on their land. They should be issued permits to cull elk which cause them crop damage. Just because you or I want these farmers to accept hunters to solve this problem doesn't mean we should turn our backs on them when they don't agree.
PM I really think we are on the same page. You asked for ideas to fix the problem so I'm just throwing ideas out . I posted an idea which can more then likely be improved on it's just a starting post. The land owners can decide who they want in and what kind of weapon they use. All usage would be by writin permisson only and if after the season they still have a problem and need damage tags maybe they could contact the game department with info on how many hunters they let in and what was taken then they could get more damage tags. Hey if they only let family or friends in they are showing they are trying.
I don't think just giving out damage tags is going to fix the problem. Culling a few elk won't solve the problem it'll more then likely just push elk from one property to another. The problem has been created with the elk! do new areas and regs need to be put in place? Maybe? Do they have to let just anyone in? NO they can decide who and what kind of weapon can be used. But no I don't think they should figure the Game department should have to fix the problem by bring in snipers but then again they shouldn't be allowed to just shoot and leave them. Invite friends and relates they know and show they are also trying is all I'm saying. It's to late to say this is a problem and no one come up with an idea that will help fix it. If you see a way of modifing my idea PLEASE fell free to adjust it so it can work. Here again I'm just trying to show some ideas.
Mike
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 09:34:48 AM
solve a big problem at the same time.
Post by: huntnphool on October 31, 2013, 09:37:50 AM
The responsibility for wildlife issues and for how they're managed lies with the DFW. By allowing gunners to cull these elk instead of licensed hunters, they've robbed the hunters of opportunities to fill their freezers and help+1
solve a big problem at the same time.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 09:43:44 AM
I get it Mike and I agree that we're on the same page. I just want to be clear that it's not the farmers who've created this problem, not the car drivers, nor the hunters, nor the residents, nor the conservation volunteers. The responsibility for wildlife issues and for how they're managed lies with the DFW. By allowing gunners to cull these elk instead of licensed hunters, they've robbed the hunters of opportunities to fill their freezers and help
solve a big problem at the same time.
See I knew we were looking at this basically from the same point of view, now how to fix a problem? It's a plan that didn't work and now needs to be fixed and how to do that is the problem. Give me an idea how to modify my idea that work. Likie I said I know nothing of this area or what the lay of the land is but it's now a problem so. Do we just give landowners the right to shoot all of them then have someone come in and haul it off or figure a way to let folks that want the meat harvest it?
Post by: huntnphool on October 31, 2013, 09:49:58 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 09:53:07 AM
Just as the city government did with the old ladies parking garage in Seattle, eminent domain the land, take out the farms and give the animals more room and hunters access. :chuckle:
:yike: :yike: Yes, because that's what the government uses eminent domain for, helping out the citizens. :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: Oh God, this is funny stuff.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 10:00:10 AM
Just as the city government did with the old ladies parking garage in Seattle, eminent domain the land, take out the farms and give the animals more room and hunters access. :chuckle:
Great idea now we go back to the Native Americans having eminent domain and the rest of us can just go to the store and buy beef :bash: HOW CAN WE FIX THE PROBLEM?????
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 10:16:41 AM
I get it Mike and I agree that we're on the same page. I just want to be clear that it's not the farmers who've created this problem, not the car drivers, nor the hunters, nor the residents, nor the conservation volunteers. The responsibility for wildlife issues and for how they're managed lies with the DFW. By allowing gunners to cull these elk instead of licensed hunters, they've robbed the hunters of opportunities to fill their freezers and help
solve a big problem at the same time.
See I knew we were looking at this basically from the same point of view, now how to fix a problem? It's a plan that didn't work and now needs to be fixed and how to do that is the problem. Give me an idea how to modify my idea that work. Likie I said I know nothing of this area or what the lay of the land is but it's now a problem so. Do we just give landowners the right to shoot all of them then have someone come in and haul it off or figure a way to let folks that want the meat harvest it?
I think it's quite possible that the target herd size for that area of 1900 animals can't be supported by the available forage outside and above the bottoms where they're now creating the havoc. The DFW would need to re-analyze what the carrying capacity would be given the current state of the surrounding forest. I'm guessing that the number might be half of their present goal, but have no real idea. I just know that it seems really obvious the animals are being forced into the bottoms for food. None of us will know numbers anytime soon because for this to happen, the DFW would have to admit to making a costly mistake and they're not going to do that without some king of congressional mandate to do so. It's the same with the wolf problem. Everyone who's paying attention can see that they're already way in over their heads, yet they're unwilling to come out and say, "we screwed up. 15 pairs and a 3-year waiting period is idiotic and we were smoking crack with wolf lovers when we came up with that".
So, in the meantime, you treat the symptoms. You shoot animals which are creating problems and you continue to shoot them until they either get the idea and leave or until you kill enough so that the remaining animals are sustained by available forage in the forest and scared to come out near man.
Post by: cowboybilly on October 31, 2013, 10:16:59 AM
Post by: Bob33 on October 31, 2013, 10:59:02 AM
By allowing gunners to cull these elk instead of licensed hunters, they've robbed the hunters of opportunities to fill their freezers and help solve a big problem at the same time.
"This year, Fish and Wildlife expanded the regional elk hunting season and boundaries and increased the number of tags available. It streamlined the master hunter program that matches hunters with landowners enduring property damage and has issued 78 damage permits in Skagit and Whatcom counties. It has tried herding and hazing to deter the animals from trespassing."
It looks to me at though licensed hunter and landowners are in fact getting the majority of opportunities to harvest these animals and fill their freezers.
"Because the elk are hiding during the day and damaging crops and fences at night, Fish and Wildlife chose to recruit hunters with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services Division for this project, which began Oct. 23."
A push for general hunters to shoot animals at night does not sound very wise to me.
Post by: bobcat on October 31, 2013, 11:03:03 AM
If the elk are in fact only coming out in the open and doing the damage at night, then I could see where shooting them at night would be much more effective.
Unless the WDFW can authorize hunters to hunt at night with spotlights, then maybe this was the only feasible option.
Post by: KFhunter on October 31, 2013, 11:19:04 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on October 31, 2013, 11:50:49 AM
Take a drive up there, you will see 50 plus elk standing out in the open. Maybe 100 between Sedro and Concrete.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 12:04:57 PM
Post by: Bob33 on October 31, 2013, 12:18:52 PM
North Bend has a long standing issue with elk damage. Two years ago, a hunt was set to go until days before when the story was picked up by the local paper.
http://www.valleyrecord.com/news/135768838.html (http://www.valleyrecord.com/news/135768838.html)
"And as word spread of the hunting plan, announced by the city of Snoqualmie officially Monday, opposition grew. By Thursday afternoon, Dec. 15, the hunt had been put on hold at the request of the course, wildlife officials reported.
Snoqualmie Police Department, which had OK'd the hunt, fielded dozens of calls and e-mails, mostly in opposition to the shoot for reasons of safety and humane treatment of elk. One caller vowed to come to the Ridge to personally prevent the hunt.
Fall City resident Brad Canady was among the dozens of callers who spoke to local wildlife officials, urging them to call off the hunt. Canady applauded the decision to put it on hold. He says hunt planners haven't exhausted all their options.
"The idea of high powered weapons shooting around people, houses, just seemed absurd," Canady said—low risk is still risk, he added."
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 12:26:24 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 31, 2013, 12:34:33 PM
Post by: snowpack on October 31, 2013, 12:40:48 PM
hey ,,they just called me and told me to go ahead a fill your freezer ...since we like you so much :yike: LMAO !Wonder how many game wardens just got phone calls from this post? :hello: :sry: :chuckle:
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 12:42:13 PM
Post by: Curly on October 31, 2013, 12:54:32 PM
................I just know that it seems really obvious the animals are being forced into the bottoms for food. None of us will know numbers anytime soon because for this to happen, the DFW would have to admit to making a costly mistake and they're not going to do that without some king of congressional mandate to do so.
I wonder if they are actually being "forced" into the fields or is it just that they prefer the fields? It would be like saying I'm forced to go out for pizza vs. staying home and making top ramen. ;)
Elk like to eat in fields. It's good food. It's no secret that elk prefer to graze in grasses, and fields are like a magnet to elk. :twocents:
Post by: Special T on October 31, 2013, 12:57:42 PM
Post by: JLS on October 31, 2013, 01:39:12 PM
Post by: JLS on October 31, 2013, 01:41:34 PM
Scientific game management through public opinion. Still the way to go in WA! :tup:
Some areas may just never be suitable for hunting. I doin't agree with it, but it's reality. If DFW continues with the hunt, things go south, then DFW is taken to task for "allowing this to happen" and the county commissioners can opt to make an area a no shooting zone.
That really sounds like a win-win eh?
Post by: Curly on October 31, 2013, 01:42:43 PM
Or the elk have simply learned the valley floor is a safe place where they don't get chased by hunters, and there is good food.
:yeah: .......especially at night.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 01:46:39 PM
Scientific game management through public opinion. Still the way to go in WA! :tup:
Some areas may just never be suitable for hunting. I doin't agree with it, but it's reality. If DFW continues with the hunt, things go south, then DFW is taken to task for "allowing this to happen" and the county commissioners can opt to make an area a no shooting zone.
That really sounds like a win-win eh?
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here? There are always safer alternatives to doing nothing. Crossbows would be an effective culling tool in a populated area. Shotgun slugs would also ne appropriate. There are viable options for culling elk in a populated area.
Post by: JLS on October 31, 2013, 01:47:14 PM
Post by: JLS on October 31, 2013, 01:51:20 PM
Scientific game management through public opinion. Still the way to go in WA! :tup:
Some areas may just never be suitable for hunting. I doin't agree with it, but it's reality. If DFW continues with the hunt, things go south, then DFW is taken to task for "allowing this to happen" and the county commissioners can opt to make an area a no shooting zone.
That really sounds like a win-win eh?
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here? There are always safer alternatives to doing nothing. Crossbows would be an effective culling tool in a populated area. Shotgun slugs would also ne appropriate. There are viable options for culling elk in a populated area.
Maybe, maybe not. It all sounds good in theory until an elk wanders into an affluent residential neighborhood with a crossbow bolt buried in its hip, or a jaw shot off with a slug.
We can agree to disagree, but sometimes the reality is that hunters are maybe not the best tool when you weight benefits and costs. I certainly don't agree with letting the inmates run the asylum, but you also have to choose the battles you really want to commit to.
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2013, 01:57:38 PM
You guys are spot on. The reality is we have many if not most of the animals who have lived their entire life on the valley floor. After the general muzzy hunt ended the population has grown. People come on here and make up numbers that they pull out of the air to sound smart.Or the elk have simply learned the valley floor is a safe place where they don't get chased by hunters, and there is good food.
:yeah: .......especially at night.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 02:07:07 PM
You guys are spot on. The reality is we have many if not most of the animals who have lived their entire life on the valley floor. After the general muzzy hunt ended the population has grown. People come on here and make up numbers that they pull out of the air to sound smart.Or the elk have simply learned the valley floor is a safe place where they don't get chased by hunters, and there is good food.
:yeah: .......especially at night.
I'm not sure which people you're referring to, but I got mine from the DFW regarding the goals, estimated present numbers of animals, etc. Again, I'm not sure why you're so quick to turn on the others when it's you who's not getting the opportunities that the government shooters are taking away. No skin off my butt. I'm not driving up there to fill a tag. But it does bother me that you are missing out. And by "you", I mean any of the hunters in your area who are being overlooked by the DFW for these problems.
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 02:47:29 PM
How do you fix a problem that's out of hand?????????????????????????????????????????????
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 31, 2013, 02:50:14 PM
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 02:59:08 PM
I gave an idea you meen no one can come up or can't modify or come up with something else????? I know it's hard to buck the gov but come on many of you are a lot smarter then me and know how to let the right folks know our ideas or ideas posted here :dunno:
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 31, 2013, 03:03:45 PM
Post by: KFhunter on October 31, 2013, 04:57:34 PM
2) Grow and encourage special hunts on private lands where there is a continuing problem. Start off with cheap landowner permits then move on to open permits via lottery or other means. Allow hunters to step up to the plate and do what they do best. If a landowner has documented Elk problems WDFW could issue that landowner a fistful of permits, in turn the landowner could give those permits to family/friends or sell them openly. (say WHAT??) :o
3) Grow the ADC program. Encourage more trappers and houndsmen. Issue many more permits in areas where predator populations are suppressing ungulate population growth. The tools are in place, just expand upon them. Hunters for a specific area would be issued the permit then could retain certified houndsmen to run the cat for them. The permit could even stipulate male/female or other conditions.
All of this wouldn't be necessary if we had a Fish and Game department.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 31, 2013, 05:15:29 PM
West Coast politics are so ridiculous it makes me want to find a tree a take a sheet ! Back east they have hunting in populated areas ...all over the east coast ....whats the excuse of the westerners ?? And this area is very huntable ...its not along Hwy 20 where everyone in the county sees whats going on :dunno: like I said :stup:Scientific game management through public opinion. Still the way to go in WA! :tup:
Some areas may just never be suitable for hunting. I doin't agree with it, but it's reality. If DFW continues with the hunt, things go south, then DFW is taken to task for "allowing this to happen" and the county commissioners can opt to make an area a no shooting zone.
That really sounds like a win-win eh?
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here? There are always safer alternatives to doing nothing. Crossbows would be an effective culling tool in a populated area. Shotgun slugs would also ne appropriate. There are viable options for culling elk in a populated area.
Post by: elk247 on October 31, 2013, 05:23:21 PM
Try this ^ I didn"t suggest it to benefit myself. It solves the issue, keep the herd in check year after year, and provideds a easy to access hunt for our disabled and elderly hunters. The state will make it a special/draw hunt and get their cut. win-win-win. I completely agreee that allowing the landowners to "auction of tags" or profit from this situation is not what the RMEF had in mind.Curious? How would you propose a general season elk hunt or permit hunt in a rural area with many small farms where hunters have already warn out their welcome? Are these elk available to hunters during the day or are they camped out on private property where hunters can not get at them?I would hold a disabled hunt out of ground blinds out back away from the hiway. If it needs to be archery or muzzleload only then so be it. Those elk need to be removed. They are a distraction, a safety concern for motorist and a constant nuisance for farmers and a reoccurring cost for the state through damage reimbursement. The elk herd that thrives in the river valley only continues to make matters worse because the calves never see the woods. They are raised in those private fields and will die in those same fields. They do cross the river but never go very far. Many disabled hunters and wounded warriors deserve a hunt like this as a way fill there elk tags. Some hunters may have worn out there welcome but we all can agree that the actions of a few 4 years ago is not an accurate reflection of all hunters. The only real alternative to this would be relocation. But that would cost far more money and miss a opportunity to meet a need within the disabled hunting community. :twocents:
Post by: Bob33 on October 31, 2013, 05:26:12 PM
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here?
[/quote]
Are the 78 permit holders and master hunters using sticks?
"This year, Fish and Wildlife expanded the regional elk hunting season and boundaries and increased the number of tags available. It streamlined the master hunter program that matches hunters with landowners enduring property damage and has issued 78 damage permits in Skagit and Whatcom counties."
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2013, 05:45:35 PM
Are the 78 permit holders and master hunters using sticks?
Case dependant, mostly short range firearms or muzzleloaders. Although I think you knew that answer.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 31, 2013, 05:46:53 PM
[quote author=pianoman9701 link=topic=138062.msg1839984#msg1839984 date=1383252
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here?
Are the 78 permit holders and master hunters using sticks?
"This year, Fish and Wildlife expanded the regional elk hunting season and boundaries and increased the number of tags available. It streamlined the master hunter program that matches hunters with landowners enduring property damage and has issued 78 damage permits in Skagit and Whatcom counties."
[/quote] This has nothing to do with a no shooting zone ...people shoot all over place around here ....I shoot coyotes all the time with a high powered rifle ...and for the record even with all the crap that goes on around here there has never been any hunting accidents or residents getting a bullet threw there house ... THAT I AM AWARE OF ANYWAYS ! ITS ALL ABOUT WHAT GOES ON IN THE PUBLIC EYE ! :yeah:
Post by: T-Dozzer on October 31, 2013, 10:30:43 PM
Not sure what to think about this hunt anymore.
Post by: Green broke on November 01, 2013, 11:03:21 AM
Not saying any of that is a bad idea or would not work.What timeline are you referring to when the valley floor was void of elk? Maybe consult the hay farmers on the island and ask if the elk have always been there. Adding pressure to the tree farm would decrease the impact on the fields? Seriously? You don't know elk that well if that's your belief. They respond to pressure by seeking safe refuge, period.
But I think that these land owners are so pissed and this has been dragged on for so long they are just fed up.
First if I am a land owner I am saying look, the elk were not here when I bought my land. The state brought them in. Why do I have to put up with elk?
They bought there land for the quiet, now they have to have hunters on their property to solve the states created problem.
Elk break down fences and do damage year round. This herd is on the valley floor all year. You can see them in June driving the hwy way. Sure some go up. Also remember this is not just hwy 20. These elk are in Acme area too.
This is a huge problem. In the end the only solution will be kill every elk on the valley floor Which will destroy this herd.
I talked to a old timer the other day. He said we never had trouble with the elk when Scott Paper Main Line was open to the public. And thus the crust of the problem.
The road closures both on Serra Pacific(old Scott Paper) and DNR lands have made this problem worse. When the roads were open and the herd was hunted no problems.
I think the hunting solution will only work with public access being improved. The state should try to get SP lands open for a two week elk season. And the DNR needs to stop closing roads. Coupled with pressure on the valley floor.
And what role do the safety zones play in all this. Hurn's Field just lures the elk to the valley floor.
Post by: Green broke on November 01, 2013, 11:10:43 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on November 01, 2013, 11:28:51 AM
Some of the places I had lined up for this archery cow draw are now falling through due to the owners bringing in master hunters. :dunno:
Not sure what to think about this hunt anymore.
You might contact the regional DFW office and ask for farmer's names who have complaints on file so you might approach them. Just a thought.
Post by: pianoman9701 on November 01, 2013, 11:41:02 AM
[quote author=pianoman9701 link=topic=138062.msg1839984#msg1839984 date=1383252
Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here?
Are the 78 permit holders and master hunters using sticks?
"This year, Fish and Wildlife expanded the regional elk hunting season and boundaries and increased the number of tags available. It streamlined the master hunter program that matches hunters with landowners enduring property damage and has issued 78 damage permits in Skagit and Whatcom counties."
[/quote]
You're cutting and pasting from two different responses, so as you posted it, my comment is used completely out of context. My comment "Apparently, because of the court of public opinion, that sounds like a no-shooting zone already. What am I missing here?" was in reference to your post which cited that a hunt had been put on hold due to negative comments received. :dunno: It had nothing to do with any number of permits issued or used. As a matter of fact, the number of permits issued or used is of little significance. The fact that elk are being killed by other-than hunters is the issue I have here. Any elk not killed by hunters is opportunity lost for hunters.
Post by: PlateauNDN on November 01, 2013, 12:16:24 PM
It's way more complex than that. I don't think you know how many kill permits have been issued, but keep throwing blame around. A very uneducated comment.Sorry im a little late on this post, but the biggest issue the dfw faces and is very sensitive about are the INDIANS!! The Indians didn't want the "white man" shooting all "there elk" which raised too many problems between the dfw and the tribes which resulted in this fiasco!! They wouldn't give any land owner tags (damage) nor a drawing for bull tags because of the Indians! There entitled to 50% of all the elk....right....Bob, I don't think I understand your question. Are you saying you think it's possible that the Federal government took action regarding our state's wildlife without the DFW's cooperation or knowledge? If that's where you're coming from, I don't think that's even remotely possible. The feds will rarely take any action without the appropriate state agency at least getting a heads up, if not full participation in the operation.Not at all. What I am saying is that WDFW is very aware of the negative public perception that can result from shooting elk. Organized hunters of any sort, versus essentially "hired professional exterminators" can play differently in the public's eye when it comes to removing numbers of problem wildlfe. I am in no way saying that I am in agreement with bringing in snipers. I am saying that I don't believe the decision was made lightly, nor was it done without any regard for licensed hunters.
All licensed hunting was stopped during the 2009 season because of the worldwide condemnation that resulted with the archery shootings that occurred off Highway 20. I believe the department is still very sensitive about what they do to cull the herd.
I sure know how many were issued on the day creek area.. where this whole topic was based off of.....So I would consider that a little on the educated side......
As a matter of fact you're quite late to the debate. This debacle/hunt or whatever it is titled is taking place by the WDFW and the US Dept. of Ag. No where has it come up that the Tribes are responsible or taking part in this mess. I've followed this thread and have yet to an instance where any State Representative, State Employee or anybody else for that matter can say Tribes are involved and it's the Tribes fault that the elks' damage to private property is the fault of any Tribe.
By following this thread many scenarios have come to light and one I keep reading is that many landowners are not allowing tag holders or MHs' the opportunity to come onto their property and harvest an elk or elks for that matter. Another one is the State/WDFW decided they would contract the culling of elk in an effort to keep this elk herd from continuing to cause damage.
Also, the debacle/incident in 09 that was mentioned at the top involved MHs' and not Tribal Members. Get your facts straight before you start to lay blame on an incident that has nothing to do with Tribes.
On another note, I also acknowledge the argument that you have with Tribes and aware of the frustrations and dealings and fully understand the continuing situation between the State and Tribes. This situation however, is not the fault of the Tribes.
Post by: Special T on November 01, 2013, 03:47:07 PM
Post by: Widgeondeke on November 01, 2013, 09:59:23 PM
Floyd,
Thanks for taking the time to contact me regarding WDFW bringing in hired guns to kill elk in the Skagit area. After contacting WDFW this is what they sent me:
Because we have received several inquiries on elk conflict in Snohomish County, staff has prepared the following to help with legislative and constituent requests for information.
The following is an update on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s, Wildlife Program activities over the past few months that are aimed at addressing elk-related agricultural conflicts in Skagit Valley. Included is an update on recent activity regarding responding to elk damage the Day Creek area of the Skagit Valley.
Community Meetings
The North Cascades Elk Management Work Group has met twice and the four committees (Damage, Public Safety, Habitat Enhancement, Survey and Monitoring) have each met at least once (Damage Committee has met three times). The proposed meeting schedule for the work group is quarterly, while the working committees have agreed to meet on a monthly basis.
Some of these meetings have been challenging, with many landowners expressing their frustration with elk, economic damages they have incurred, and dis-satisfaction with the department’s ability to address this situation. On the positive side, a less vocal minority has been thankful for the opportunity to work collaboratively with the department. These individuals continue to attend Work Group and Committee meetings with the intent of advising the department on the development of an elk herd plan that balances the values and interests of all citizens of the area. Additionally, a contingent of the Point Elliott Tribes continues to be engaged in this process.
Changes to the 2013 Hunting Regulations
Prior to the hunting season, several changes were made to the hunting regulations to address ongoing elk-related agricultural conflicts. These include:
• Expansion of Elk Area 4941 boundary to include more areas with ongoing damage issues
• 20 new antlerless “draw only” elk tags in Skagit Valley elk conflict area (Elk Area 4941)
• Pooling of two separate master hunter groups to streamline coordination of 30 master hunters
• Inclusion of Skagit Valley elk conflict area (Elk Area 4941) in hunt area for GMU 418 bull tag holders
• Addition of early and late muzzleloader seasons in GMU 407 to address elk damage in the Acme area
• Extension of season dates and liberalized antler restrictions for archery seasons in GMU 407 to address elk damage in the Acme area
Hunter Coordination
As in past years, Wildlife Program staff met with Game Management Unit 418 bull tag hunters in August. Because the hunt area was expanded in 2013 to include Elk Area 4941, WDFW staff emphasized that this was an opportunity to harvest a quality bull while helping the department address elk conflict issues. Staff committed to help put hunters in touch with landowners that are having elk damage. As a result, several bull tag holders have contacted local landowners to secure permission to hunt private properties in Elk Area 4941. A minimum of three bulls have been harvested in Elk Area 4941 by these tag holders so far.
Wildlife Program staff contacted the 20 archery and muzzleloader antlerless tag holders for Elk Area 4941. Staff directed hunters to areas with chronic elk damage and specific landowners who are experiencing damage. At this time, it is unclear how many of the 10 early season hunters were able to harvest elk in Elk Area 4941.
Wildlife Program staff continue to work closely with a community based volunteer master hunt coordinator to assign hunters to specific properties as needed. Among the 30 hunters available, 13 have been assigned to properties. Eight of these have harvested an elk, while five are still hunting.
Damage Permits
Since Wildlife Program staff assumed the responsibility of Wildlife Conflicts in July, staff has been issuing elk damage permits – primarily in Skagit Valley within Elk Area 4941. For the calendar year, a total of 68 damage permits have been issued to landowners in Skagit and Whatcom Counties and 22 elk have been harvested as follows:
• GMU 418: 20 permits issued, 5 elk killed (4 cow/1 bull)
• GMU 437: 58 permits issued, 20 elk killed (17 cow/3 bull)
While many Point Elliott Tribes are working with the department to address elk damage issues, department staff has struggled to get tribal hunters assigned to private properties. Many landowners refuse to allow tribal hunters on their properties. To date, hunters from the Upper Skagit, Sauk-Suiattle, Stillaguamish, and Swinomish Tribes have been assigned to properties in Elk Area 4941. Four elk (included in totals above) have been killed by tribal hunters.
Day Creek Focus Area
Several landowners in the Day Creek area have become extremely intolerant of elk and are frustrated with the department’s efforts to date. They are particularly concerned about the disproportionate number of bulls in the area and are frustrated that the damage permits have been focused on antlerless elk.
Region 4 staff has met on several occasions to develop ways to address these issues. Examples include herding and hazing, issuing damage hunting permits and directing master hunters and other licensed hunters to the Day Creek area. In addition, a pilot project, launched in late September, resulted in a permit for multiple Day Creek landowners and allowed for the removal of six elk (four of these being “any elk”). To date, one cow and two bulls have been killed under this permit.
While the above hunting efforts have resulted in several elk being killed, additional removal of elk is necessary to bring elk numbers to a level that would help reduce damage to crops and property. Because the elk in this area have become even more nocturnal than normal due to the hunting efforts, it was decided to try removal actions at night. To move forward in a safe and efficient manner, federal wildlife officials from the Wildlife Service’s branch of USDA have been assisting in an effort to remove elk where damage to the landowners’ crops has been substantial. Any elk that could be safely killed were targeted and this collaborative effort has to-date resulted in the removal of 4 bull elk. WDFW has a contract with Wildlife Services for the removal of up to 15 elk. Removing these animals in the Skagit River bottom will not have an adverse effect on the North Cascades elk population, which totals nearly 1,200 to 1,400 animals and continues to grow each year.
Elk meat has been and will continue to be donated to local tribes and local food banks.
Cooperative Fencing
Wildlife Program staff has identified four potential fencing projects with willing landowners experiencing chronic elk damage. Contract language is being developed for two, negotiations for shared funding resources and specifications are underway for another, while the remaining project requires further development with the landowner. The amount of department funding available for fencing projects is not sufficient for all of these projects. So, Wildlife Program staff has proposed that the North Cascades Elk Damage Committee help develop some ranking criteria to help prioritize fencing projects. Until a ranking system is developed, Wildlife Program staff will implement fencing projects based on existing priorities until funding is expended.
Hopefully this update provides some perspective on the situation and the current approach the Region 4 Wildlife Program staff is taking to address this issue.
It appears that WDFW are doing what they can to focus hunting pressure on this area and lethally remove elk from agricultural areas. At the same time, they are engaging the community in a process that they hope will ultimately lead to a balanced approach to managing this population of elk. They have told me they will continue to engage the Point Elliott Tribes to, as co-managers, encourage their partnership in addressing this aspect of big game management. Thanks for bringing this to my attention Floyd and please feel free to contact me again if I can be of any further assistance.
Take care,
Steve
Post by: h2ofowlr on November 01, 2013, 10:13:18 PM
Post by: KFhunter on November 01, 2013, 10:19:37 PM
They had a write up and explanation on this in today's Skagit new paper. :tup:
Pretty well killed this thread too
Post by: Humptulips on November 01, 2013, 11:36:49 PM
Now my solution. It seems like reading this the elk are a problem. Shooting 20 elk over a couple months is not going to solve it. The elk need to be under constant pressure in the fields or fewer elk and probably both. I would think they could write permits on a limited time frame, maybe one or two a week. One hunter gets a permit for a week then the next guy and keep that up for at least 8 months. Time out for calving is the exception.
You'll kill enough elk so there will be less problems and if you harass the elk every day and kill one regularly maybe they learn to stay in the woods. And make it any elk. It is BS to write cow permits and then pay WS to shoot bulls.
WDFW is trying to do two things that are in opposition to each other, increase or sustain the elk population and decrease damage. That will fail.
I will say this though no matter what is done somebody will not like it.
Post by: full strutting on November 02, 2013, 02:07:42 PM