Post by: leed on November 05, 2013, 11:20:39 AM
11/5/2013
From: Kittitas County Field & Stream Club
WDFW has for the last several years placed a lot of emphasis on Quality Hunts. So much so that the new hunt category “Quality” took affect a few years back. This did two things. One, it created a quality hunting permit for either a trophy buck or bull in what is considered superior habitat with large mature “quality” bucks and bull. Second it also split out the buck and bull categories and with potentially two more options it would increase license sales and much needed revenue that would go to additional conservation efforts for those species. With this said I was surprised and shocked that the following events (see my BELOW letter to the WDFW Director) not only took place but so far WDFW has remained quiet and has yet to respond to my letter. It is for this reason that I am releasing it to the public, the media and our representatives in Olympia and here in Kittitas County. This issue of disrupting quality hunts by poor timing and planning and the lack of consideration to hunters is not sitting well within the hunting community. If there was such an urgent need to conduct a study that required capturing, sedating and collaring large branch antlered bulls then why wasn’t an alternate and reasonable plan developed to rectify a hunter losing the meat if they so choose to retain a trophy mount? My belief is that it never occurred to them that they would disrupt a quality bull permit hunt as they figured less than two dozen bulls would be collared out of hundreds within that unit and the chances were slim. Well, they thought wrong and they were extremely reckless in placing a collar on one of the largest trophy bulls within that unit knowing it would without question be harvested if seen. A bull of this size is not common. To date they have not offered to provide a cow tag or cow hunt to replace lost meat to this hunter but, they offered meat, they offered a poached animal. One in which she, our quality permit hunter, has no idea how well it was taken care of.
She spent most of the summer planning and getting excited about the hunt of a lifetime just as any hunter would. Then upon seeing a radio collar on such a huge trophy 8 by 9 point bull elk after the shot sent her hunt of a lifetime spiraling into multiple emotions realizing she either had to give up either the entire elk or just the meat. She wanted both and rightly so. Why should any law abiding hunter who obeyed all the rules be required to make a choice such as this when no other hunter had to? Her quality elk hunt was just ruined. The WDFW should have never placed her or any other hunter into that situation and they should have never collared bull elk during a hunting season. The drugs used render the meat nonedible and in fact this drug, Carfentanil citrate, has Federal Drug Limitations. See CFR522.300 below in parentheses.
( CFR522.300 states ” (3) Limitations. Inject into large muscle of neck, shoulder, back, or hindquarter. Avoid intrathoracic, intra-abdominal, or subcutaneous injection. To reverse effect, use 7 milligrams of diprenorphine for each milligram of carefentanil citrate, given intravenously or one-half intravenously and one-half intramuscularly or subcutaneously. Do not use in domestic animals intended for food. Do not use 30 days before or during hunting season. Do not use in animals that display clinical signs of severe cardiovascular or respiratory disease. Available data are inadequate to recommend use in pregnant animals. Avoid use during breeding season. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian. The licensed veterinarian shall be a veterinarian engaged in zoo and exotic animal practice, wildlife management programs, or research. “)
It’s done and they screwed up and WDFW should make this right and there is no reason not to. In fact in a recent wdfw release dated “Oct 24th, 2013” WDFW stated the following….
”The Colockum Elk Herd is also above WDFW’s management objective and increasing. That should mean increased antlerless tag opportunities in the future, especially with the temporary decline in habitat conditions resulting from this summer’s catastrophic wildfires that swept across the Colockum and L.T. Murray wildlife areas, as well as surrounding lands.”
So, they can’t say they don’t have enough elk to make this right!
It is my hope that your organizations members will inquire into this and help us seek a reasonable outcome for this hunter. I have filed a Freedom Of Information request today as well.
BELOW IS THE LETTER I SENT TO THE DIRECTOR
FROM: Kittitas County Field & Stream Club, Inc. 10/28/2013
SUBJECT: Bull Elk Study
TO: Phil Anderson, Director, WDFW
CC: Dave Ware, Game Division Manager, WDFW
Nate Pamplin/WDFW
Mike Livingston/WFW R3
WDFW Commissioners
Kittitas County Commissioners
Director Anderson,
Last month I received bits of information about a bull elk radio collar study that was started in Kittitas County by WDFW R3 Biologist William Moore. The study was reported to me to have been started on or about Sept 17th of this year. I am wondering why the study time frame was chosen for September? Why right after one and before three more Quality Bull permit hunts being Quality Bull Permit Hunt numbers 2018, 2019 and 2081 and at the beginning of the breeding season? These Quality Bull hunts are highly sought after and for the most part are considered a once in a lifetime chance to hunt a branch bull in GMU 328 or 329 here in Kittitas County. In 2012 a total of 3,262 permit applications were received for these hunts. There were only FIVE Quality Bull tags issued for GMU 328 & 329 for 2013. As you clearly see your odds of a draw for the tag are slim. Most disheartening is the fact that if a permit hunter did shoot a collared branch bull either knowingly or unknowingly they would NOT be able to consume the meat as it is highly contaminated for forty-five days after the tranquilizing drugs (Carfentanil Citrate) are used to sedate the bull for radio collar placement. I realize this only affected a select few individuals however; the tribes also legally hunt within that unit. If you are not aware this drug, Carfentanil citrate, has Federal Drug Limitations. See CFR522.300.
CFR522.300 states ” (3) Limitations. Inject into large muscle of neck, shoulder, back, or hindquarter. Avoid intrathoracic, intra-abdominal, or subcutaneous injection. To reverse effect, use 7 milligrams of diprenorphine for each milligram of carefentanil citrate, given intravenously or one-half intravenously and one-half intramuscularly or subcutaneously. Do not use in domestic animals intended for food. Do not use 30 days before or during hunting season. Do not use in animals that display clinical signs of severe cardiovascular or respiratory disease. Available data are inadequate to recommend use in pregnant animals. Avoid use during breeding season. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian. The licensed veterinarian shall be a veterinarian engaged in zoo and exotic animal practice, wildlife management programs, or research. “
I was informed this last week (Oct 21st) that a young lady, Dawn Garton, who had such a coveted permit, did take a branched bull within the unit. It was further reported that William Moore/WDFW R3 Biologist told her prior to the hunt, with witnesses, that the radio collars might not be very visible on bulls and that if she did take a bull with a collar she could take another bull to replace the meat lost. Unfortunately, the trophy eight by nine point bull she spotted and got extremely excited about turned out to have a radio collar. It was reported and William Moore confiscated the meat and refused to allow the taking of a cow to replace the lost meat. Why in the world would your department put a collar on one of the largest trophy bulls that they knew would be sought out? Why did your department originally tell the young lady if she shot a collared bull she could give it up and take another bull? Why would your department refuse to allow her to harvest a cow yet allow the taking of another bull if she gave the entire original bull up? Two animals would still be harvested but only one would be a bull in the way that she requested. The way your department presented it, the taking of TWO bulls would occur. This makes no sense at all especially when your biologists and herd composition data published recently state the bull to cow ratio is low. Greg Schirato/WDFW was briefed on this just last week and suddenly on Friday Oct 25th it was reported to me that the department offered the young lady a “poached elk” if one was seized in the future. I’m not sure this was Greg’s intentions as it’s a dumb idea. She obviously refused that and most anyone would. Why would your office now offer a “poaching case elk” to replace lost meat? She doesn’t know how the meat was treated, how cleanly it was field dressed etc. I cannot imagine a seasoned ethical hunter who takes pride in their field dressing skills and one who cares for their meat wanting it. Would you? This whole series of events is unfortunate and is almost unimaginable. In all my years of volunteering with WDFW and serving on several WDFW committees I have never heard of such incompetence and complete disregard for a hunters overall experience in the hunt. Several questions in my mind need clarified and this young lady should have the opportunity to harvest a cow even if she accompanies a master hunter on a depredation hunt. Phil, as the Director you have that ability to make this happen. In 2013 there are a total of 370 cow tag permits for just unit 328 & 329. This doesn’t include the dozens of cows harvested in the Ellensburg 3911 depredation hunt by Master Hunters. One more to correct your department’s poor management decision is the only reasonable solution.
Everyone in our county is certainly aware that these are particularly difficult times for your region 3 department personnel as a result of past poor land management decisions. While we are supportive of wildlife management and sound policies and procedures that are in place for the management of wildlife, we remain focused on ensuring that their continued management does not come at the expense of hunter rights and the continued alienation of hunters across the state. We simply must work together. With your region 3 staff in such a difficult negative public outreach and media relations trend, they are increasingly unwilling to listen to our concerns. This is yet another example. Once again your region three staff has acted without regard to hunter concerns and may have even placed the public at risk. Dawn’s request to keep, mount and honor the amazing trophy bull and only ask for the opportunity to harvest a cow on her own to replace lost meat is not unreasonable. In fact it makes more sense than the biologist’s idea of taking a second bull. This of course, the taking of two bulls makes no sense at all. If you harvested an amazing trophy eight by nine point bull elk would you want to give it up? Should a hunter be required to forgo the meat just to keep the mount? No. Not since it was your department’s poor timing, a rush job for quick results and an ill thought plan that ruined a trophy hunt for a young hunter.
At this time I would like to request that you issue a cow tag to her. I would also ask that you or your senior staff answer the several questions I have about this branched bull radio collar study. I am fully prepared to request this information through other channels but I would prefer a direct response from either you or your wildlife staff. I will not allow this to go away quietly.
My questions are:
1. What is the official working title of the Branched Bull Elk Collaring study that was started on or about September17th in Kittitas County?
2. Where was the funding for this study derived?
3. Who were ALL of the personnel involved with this study both paid or volunteer workers and what were their roles?
4. What Kittitas County agencies or organizations were informed of this study and how did you inform them?
5. What are the written goals of this study and where are they available to the public to view?
6. Why did the Department wait until Sept 17th to conduct the study?
7. How many bull elk were intended to be collared?
8. How many were successfully collared and if the intended total goal was not met why not?
9. How many survived and how many suffered from any post injection complications and what type of complications were they?
10. Were any local citizens highly knowledgeable of the geographic study area consulted in regards to best locations to find branched bull elk to be included in the study? If so, who? If not, why were they not consulted?
11. What was the GPS location of each elk where they were collared and what map datum was used for the gps?
12. What drugs and dosages were used to tranquilize the elk?
13. What drugs and dosages were used to revive the elk?
14. Who was the Veterinarian authorizing, supervising and or administering the drugs used and if authorization was issued on what date?
15. Did your staff consider or research any possible side effects the drugs may cause in regards to stress hormones and potential breeding issues or lack of breeding that may occur in the following weeks?
16. By what means did you inform the permit hunters for GMU’s 328 & 329 and Indian Tribes of the dangers involved with eating contaminated elk meat and what written precautions were provided to them?
17. What written policy or procedure was in place if a permit hunter harvested a collared elk?
18. What policy or procedures are in writing for; notifying permit hunters of the dangers of consuming drug contaminated meat, retrieving the radio collar, treatment, removal and disposition of contaminated meat, and awarding another hunt to replace meat confiscated by the department for public health reasons?
19. What is the department policy on treatment or disposition of the contaminated elk carcass in the field if a hunter did harvest?
20. Why did your department put a collar on one of the largest trophy bulls that they knew would be sought out since after all this is a Quality Bull Hunt area and within the same timing?
21. Why did your department originally tell the young lady if she shot a collared bull she could give it up and take another bull yet unreasonably decide the taking of two bulls was better than a bull and cow?
22. Why would your department refuse to allow her to harvest a cow yet allow the taking of another bull if she gave the entire original bull up?
I expect a complete response for every question and most importantly a new cow tag and hunt for Dawn. Written on behalf of the Kittitas County Field & Stream Club.
Sincerely,
Lee Davis
Kittitas County Field and Stream Club, Inc.
Past President & Current Board Member
Post by: C-Money on November 05, 2013, 11:34:46 AM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on November 05, 2013, 11:38:01 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on November 05, 2013, 11:38:49 AM
Surely poor timing on the states part. Why didn't she take the meat offered? I know it's a distant consolation prize, but it was probably the best they could do, right then. Should she be able to go kill another elk...hmmmm I don't know.
Post by: Skillet on November 05, 2013, 11:49:05 AM
While the timing of the collaring was really bad, I don't see the issue you are putting forth here. She took a bull with a collar, and has the same choices she had presented to her before the hunt. The comment about the collar being hard to see is clearly the bio telling her to be careful about pulling the trigger on a bull. You think a collar is hard to see? Ask a guy if that spike filtering in and out of the trees across the canyon has a 2" point somewhere on one of his antlers.
She knew the score going into the game. Was it idea that the WDFW effectively tainted the meat ahead of time? Absolutely not, and I think they need to be held to account for that. But should she get to change the rules as presented to her just because she killed a big bull with a collar, even though she was fully aware (with witnesses) that she would not be able to keep the meat from the bull if she killed it?
I don't think so.
Post by: KNOPHISH on November 05, 2013, 11:49:53 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on November 05, 2013, 11:56:39 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on November 05, 2013, 12:03:37 PM
Post by: baker5150 on November 05, 2013, 12:05:58 PM
"I was informed this last week (Oct 21st) that a young lady, Dawn Garton, who had such a coveted permit, did take a branched bull within the unit. It was further reported that William Moore/WDFW R3 Biologist told her prior to the hunt, with witnesses, that the radio collars might not be very visible on bulls and that if she did take a bull with a collar she could take another bull to replace the meat lost. "
While the timing of the collaring was really bad, I don't see the issue you are putting forth here. She took a bull with a collar, and has the same choices she had presented to her before the hunt. The comment about the collar being hard to see is clearly the bio telling her to be careful about pulling the trigger on a bull. You think a collar is hard to see? Ask a guy if that spike filtering in and out of the trees across the canyon has a 2" point somewhere on one of his antlers.
She knew the score going into the game. Was it idea that the WDFW effectively tainted the meat ahead of time? Absolutely not, and I think they need to be held to account for that. But should she get to change the rules as presented to her just because she killed a big bull with a collar, even though she was fully aware (with witnesses) that she would not be able to keep the meat from the bull if she killed it?
I don't think so.
If you read it as I do, she was given the option to take another bull PRIOR to the hunt, then after she shot a collared bull they refused to give her another tag, either cow or bull.
This is how I read it atleast.
Post by: gunboats on November 05, 2013, 12:06:57 PM
Post by: TheHunt on November 05, 2013, 12:21:30 PM
She can shoot it and they load the entire elk in the back of their truck. Done!!!
Post by: billythekidrock on November 05, 2013, 12:36:55 PM
"I was informed this last week (Oct 21st) that a young lady, Dawn Garton, who had such a coveted permit, did take a branched bull within the unit. It was further reported that William Moore/WDFW R3 Biologist told her prior to the hunt, with witnesses, that the radio collars might not be very visible on bulls and that if she did take a bull with a collar she could take another bull to replace the meat lost. "
While the timing of the collaring was really bad, I don't see the issue you are putting forth here. She took a bull with a collar, and has the same choices she had presented to her before the hunt. The comment about the collar being hard to see is clearly the bio telling her to be careful about pulling the trigger on a bull. You think a collar is hard to see? Ask a guy if that spike filtering in and out of the trees across the canyon has a 2" point somewhere on one of his antlers.
She knew the score going into the game. Was it idea that the WDFW effectively tainted the meat ahead of time? Absolutely not, and I think they need to be held to account for that. But should she get to change the rules as presented to her just because she killed a big bull with a collar, even though she was fully aware (with witnesses) that she would not be able to keep the meat from the bull if she killed it?
I don't think so.
I agree. WDFW needs to reconsider the timing of these events.
It really sucks but she was aware that this could happen and should not get another elk.
Post by: Tbar on November 05, 2013, 12:50:36 PM
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 05, 2013, 12:53:43 PM
That's a bunch of questions. I'm not sure about the importance of some of them- including needing to know the staff involved???
Surely poor timing on the states part. Why didn't she take the meat offered? I know it's a distant consolation prize, but it was probably the best they could do, right then. Should she be able to go kill another elk...hmmmm I don't know.
:yeah: it's good to get after the department on this but c'mon, 22 follow-up questions?
:dunno:
Post by: leed on November 05, 2013, 12:56:01 PM
This is how I read it atleast.
[/quote]
To clarify..........She was told that bulls were collared prior to her hunt. She was told that if she shot a collared bull that she could give up the entire aniaml and shoot another bull. What happened is that she saw the biggest flippin bull she has ever seen, got excited and shot it. That she did not anticipate. Now she is in a pickle! Keep the head, give up the meat or give up the entire animal? That's isn't right! Why did they put her or anyone in such a position? Why did they collar such a monster bull? Why the heck did they even collar during the rut and hunting season? Too many questions. It's just NOT RIGHT! No, I did not ask her if she knew if it had aollar when she shot because it's an irrelevant question. However, in my conversation I got the feeling she did not know but as I said it's irrelevant.
LD
Post by: leed on November 05, 2013, 01:01:50 PM
LD
Post by: bobcat on November 05, 2013, 01:04:31 PM
I don't see much room for any complaints here. It is unfortunate, but it sounds to me like the WDFW made a fair offer to make it right, and the hunter declined. Fine, that's her choice. But if she wanted elk meat she had the opportunity.
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 05, 2013, 01:05:52 PM
Anybody have any pictures of this stud bull?
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on November 05, 2013, 01:14:41 PM
It was poor timing considering the harvest restrictions with the drugs.
Post by: Pinetar on November 05, 2013, 01:22:45 PM
Post by: bobcat on November 05, 2013, 01:27:29 PM
Post by: Curly on November 05, 2013, 01:29:21 PM
She did not know the bull was collared before shooting. The collar was very thin and tan in color according to the guy that was hunting with her. I personally would not want a cow shot by someone else not knowing how it was taken care of. IMO They should let her shoot a cow for the meat, its not like we don't have plenty of elk around here.
I agree. They should give her a cow permit if they told her that if she shot a collared bull she could take another. Apparently the guy that told her that must have overstepped his authority. But they should try to make it right by letting her take a cow. :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on November 05, 2013, 01:34:02 PM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on November 05, 2013, 01:47:18 PM
Since it appears she accepted their terms as outlined, she now has at least some burden of responsibility, And I hope everything works out for her.
IMO neither alternative is a good one. And my GUESS is that the hunter and Bio didnt think that completley through when discussing this. Given the nature of the tag, the hunter should have at least entertained the possibility that she would kill an above average bull, with potential for a OIL type animal. The bio should have known this as well. Had she killed a 5x5 this may not have even been a discussion.
Post by: Pinetar on November 05, 2013, 07:32:07 PM
They were tagging any bulls (spikes, raghorns and mature) they could dart, not just mature big bulls.
Post by: Dave Workman on November 09, 2013, 04:01:06 PM
I really wouldn't have a problem with the state issuing her a cow permit either. Of course there's no guarantee she would fill it. That's why I said before that she should have taken the offer of a poached elk from the state when one became available.
Is that with or without maggots?
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on November 09, 2013, 04:39:32 PM
Post by: JLS on November 09, 2013, 04:41:05 PM
If she turned down the cow or another bull, it seems to me that's her choice to live with.
Post by: winshooter88 on November 10, 2013, 01:54:46 AM
Post by: winshooter88 on December 04, 2013, 10:25:16 PM
Post by: sakoshooter on December 06, 2013, 07:21:53 PM
I would at least want the cape w/horns for mounting and another tag issued with a generous season to go along with it - easy access depredation hunt etc.
I wouldn't have accepted a 'poached elk' either. An animal that was probably allowed to keep it's guts for most of the day and then trucked around on dusty roads the remainder of the day. Maybe not even skinned that day. Who knows???
Lee, I'm very glad you are taking the time to address this situation. The WDFW needs to be held accountable to US.
About 10 yrs ago the WDFW did a controlled burn in the Sinleheiken valley opening weekend of modern firearm deer season. I took a week's vacation with plans on camping in this area. The BAD smoke conditions and my allergies wouldn't allow it plus you could not see a darn thing. Deer hunting ruined. A short week for me scouting other areas. I'll bet a ruined week for many.
I wrote letters to many WDFW staff and after a long run around finally got a response from the Bio from that area:
Response: Sorry. Never thought about the deer season. Blah, blah, blah. I reminded him who he works for and who pays his wages and THE reason he has a job n the first place.
I think half of the WDFW has lost sight of the reason the WDFW was created to begin with. Most that I know of don't even hunt or fish.
Lee, keep at it and please let us know how it turns out. The media is a good options if you can find one with guts.
Post by: Mudman on December 06, 2013, 07:39:53 PM
Post by: winshooter88 on December 11, 2013, 03:07:53 AM
Edit, sorry about the poor image quality. The original file was a PDF and I couldn't get it to post.
Post by: winshooter88 on December 11, 2013, 03:27:21 AM
Edited to add a word I forgot.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on December 11, 2013, 05:16:34 AM
Post by: whacker1 on December 11, 2013, 05:50:21 AM
But she knew the options before going into this, her unfortunate outcome was that she killed a monster bull and now had a difficult decision to make.
I too would have had a difficult time giving up a trophy of that size, and I would have also had a difficult time accepting a poached animal, but that would have been the path I would have taken.
While I don't think it resolves the situation, WDFW did give a reasonable response to many of the questions and the letter in total.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 11, 2013, 06:50:51 AM
Post by: coachcw on December 11, 2013, 06:52:10 AM
Post by: boneaddict on December 11, 2013, 07:02:09 AM
She chose to shoot the biggest animal in the herd. She was aware of the consequences as I understand it. No she shouldn't get to go shoot another animal. Sorry I'm friends with friends of hers, and I hope I don't offend them, but that's my opinion.
They could have shut the unit down for the year and not drawn any permits at all so they could do their study?
Post by: whacker1 on December 11, 2013, 07:11:03 AM
a) enough time left in the season to hunt - 7 day muzzleloader season
b) an opportunity at an un-collared bull
Frustrating to be in a position where you have to make that decision, but I would take the trophy any day based on the factors above in addition to those we have already talked about.
Post by: Curly on December 11, 2013, 08:25:39 AM
She did not know the bull was collared before shooting. The collar was very thin and tan in color according to the guy that was hunting with her. I personally would not want a cow shot by someone else not knowing how it was taken care of. IMO They should let her shoot a cow for the meat, its not like we don't have plenty of elk around here.
I agree. They should give her a cow permit if they told her that if she shot a collared bull she could take another. Apparently the guy that told her that must have overstepped his authority. But they should try to make it right by letting her take a cow. :twocents:
I am going to disagree with myself here, after reading a little more closely. (I misread it before; I thought it said that the bio told her if she took a collared bull she could then take a cow.) Sounds like the bio told her correctly the WDFW policy on what would happen if she shot a collared bull. She just wants to go against their policy and wants them find a way for her to keep the trophy and get some meat.
While I think WDFW policy should change, they did do right by sticking to the policy they had set in place.......(even though I don't see what it would have hurt to have her take a cow, it would not have been fair since they didn't inform the other permit holders that if they killed a collared bull, then they could just go and take a cow to make up for the lost meat and still keep the antlers.)
It is just an unfortunate situation, and hopefully WDFW changes the timing of collaring the bulls (or the least they could do is not collar any bulls of that caliber).
Post by: buckfvr on December 11, 2013, 09:13:44 AM
Just think of all the things WDFW does that we don't even know about until after the fact.............. wolves come to mind first.
Add to that, That we pay for............unknowingly.
Post by: chukar58 on December 11, 2013, 09:17:54 AM
Post by: idahohuntr on December 11, 2013, 09:21:47 AM
This study is important...understanding where these bulls over-winter will improve the understanding of bull:cow ratios which are thought by many to be underestimated. This may result in more bull tags which means more hunting opportunity. In this case I very much support the study and find it is worth a little inconvenience to the hunters. :twocents:
Post by: Skillet on December 11, 2013, 09:34:51 AM
They even offered her an agriculture damage kill elk, not just a poached elk. She knew the rules ahead of time, it appears she was aware of the collar on the bull, and chose to kill it anyway. It appears the WDFW honored their end of the bargain, and she chose one of the options. This doesn't happen much on this site, but I'll give the WDFW a :tup: on this one.
Post by: bobcat on December 11, 2013, 09:50:07 AM
It's just too bad they had to waste time writing this letter.
Post by: 6x6in6 on December 11, 2013, 09:52:03 AM
I think wdfw handled the situation just fine. The hunter was informed of the situation and options in advance of the hunt. They also offered a cow elk to replace the meat in an effort to work with her.:yeah:
This study is important...understanding where these bulls over-winter will improve the understanding of bull:cow ratios which are thought by many to be underestimated. This may result in more bull tags which means more hunting opportunity. In this case I very much support the study and find it is worth a little inconvenience to the hunters. :twocents:
If the following statement in the WDFW's main body of the letter is accurate "Mrs. Garton and her hunting party were aware of the collar as they evaluated this bull......" (assumption of evaluated means pre-shot and not post in this instance), the options that were given to her prior to and post harvest of this bull, I really do not see what the issue here is.
Post by: gunnarnewt on December 11, 2013, 09:55:51 AM
Post by: JLS on December 11, 2013, 11:21:49 AM
Great job WDFW! :tup:
It's just too bad they had to waste time writing this letter.
No kidding. She knew exactly what she was getting into before the hunt.
It appears to me that DFW bent over backwards to accomodate her with a kill permit elk. This complaint is beyond stupid.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 11, 2013, 12:23:36 PM
Just think of all the things WDFW does that we don't even know about until after the fact.............. wolves come to mind first.
Add to that, That we pay for............unknowingly.
No kidding on how corrupt the gubmint is in my mind........
Post by: TheHunt on December 11, 2013, 12:31:22 PM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on December 11, 2013, 12:59:48 PM
Post by: leed on December 13, 2013, 09:34:57 AM
There are always two sides to every story. Keep in mind everything I posted is fact. My only point to this is the fact that the timing sucked, it should have been postponed and how would you like it if you were starring at a 400 plus bull and had to make those decisions? It's not right! We as hunters pay the way. We as hunters should be considered in every policy and action they take. We were not. They had a total disregard for the permit hunters and placed them all in precarious positions. It just wasn't the right thing to do at that time. I spent one and a half hours in the Directors office wed morning with Phil and his senior staff and we had a good conversation. I will not share it so don't ask please. There are allot of issues surrounding the Colockum herd that most don't understand and they department is working, I believe, to solve some internal issues in decision making now. A step forward. Overall they do a great job but we as hunters and fishers need to remind them on occasions that they work for us and it's our public land that they manage for us. A critical times the land and it's resources may be restricted in order to protect and conserve it for future use and to bring the health back up but it's ours and we should have access to it as long as it's a healthy landscape with a healthy population of game and non-game animals. LD
Post by: billythekidrock on December 15, 2013, 06:52:32 AM
Great job WDFW! :tup:
It's just too bad they had to waste time writing this letter.
No kidding. She knew exactly what she was getting into before the hunt.
It appears to me that DFW bent over backwards to accomodate her with a kill permit elk. This complaint is beyond stupid.
I agree 100%.
Post by: Bob33 on December 15, 2013, 07:25:11 AM
Just think of all the things WDFW does that we don't even know about until after the fact........Like spending hours and hours of precious time responding to frivolous complaints?
Post by: hogsniper on December 15, 2013, 07:26:35 AM
Post by: boneaddict on December 15, 2013, 07:41:05 AM
Just think of all the things WDFW does that we don't even know about until after the fact........Like spending hours and hours of precious time responding to frivolous complaints?
A-men!
Post by: Tbar on December 15, 2013, 10:27:01 AM
I wish you would look at it with a glass half full attitude, as things could have played out much differently with said bull. Hypothetically speaking lets say you scouted this very bull prior to the permit season. Would it be far fetched to think that after the capture and study word could have been leaked of a 400 inch bull and a tribal member goes up and shoots it. End of story.(that is hypothetical but not far fetched).
The last thing that bugs me is your thread title. Ruined, seriously? Show some respect for a truly magnificent animal that she was able to harvest with what has become basically a once in a lifetime draw.(and show these guys a pic of the ruined hunt)This is/was a bull of a lifetime and celebrate it for that.
Congrats to hunter and next time a field elk is offered smile and say thank you. :twocents: