Post by: idahohuntr on March 02, 2014, 05:31:52 PM
We met the new WDFW LE Chief, Steve Crown. He is originally from Idaho (a good start :chuckle: ) and remarked how different the two states operate their respective LE programs. Idaho focusing more on biological stuff (e.g., officers conducting creel data) relative to WA.
-Mr. Crown noted that he wants more "good" contacts between wardens and hunters and he wants to hire wardens who are hunters and anglers and have a passion for hunting and fishing.
-He recognizes that it is only a small portion of folks who violate laws and the rest are good folks.
-He noted that more and more cases are being made via social media and considers it an important tool and noted they have many technologically advanced officers.
-He discussed the state passing a state version of the Lacey Act which will allow them to handle wildlife trafficking cases across state lines etc. without engaging USFWS or other federal agencies...but I was unclear on exactly how this was possible and didn't ask any follow up questions.
-He also discussed the growing concern of marijuana on state lands and tips for identifying grow operations
-GMAC member questioned whether WDFW officers had ticket quotas...and he said they do set targets for performance so officers can be evaluated, but that they do prefer quality over quantity.
-GMAC member questioned about if/how the LE staff interfaced with License division staff because he cited several examples where License division staff gave incorrect advice that led to citations. Mr. Crown acknowledged that LE staff do not interface with Lic. Division staff at all and thought that number of officers (140) vs. number of lic vendors and lic staff that it was unlikely to occur in the future.
We next discussed the 2014-15 hunting regulations. Most everything discussed has already been mentioned in another thread on here. Very briefly, price reductions for multi-season tags and 2nd deer tags will be recommended.
-Master hunters and damage permit holders will have to buy tags now
-Goat permits will increase slightly
-Sheep ewe permits set to increase
-Master hunter moose permits may included antlered moose if those are the problematic animals
-Deer/Elk changes have been covered extensively on another thread
-Hunters with disabilities will be evaluated by the department instead of trying to make broad rules to fit everyone. Number of disabled hunters has doubled in past 6 years. GMAC members raised concerns about legitimacy of folks using crossbows...examples cited included folks with some shoulder or back pain getting doctors notes that allowed crossbow use and felt that there is some abuse of this rule. Dave Ware indicated they have not seen success rate increases for disabled folks with crossbows relative to normal archers.
Wolf Updates
-Wolf capture and monitoring is continuing. Several wolves captured this year and they are using more aerial capture methods.
-They have multiple trappers out all summer and discussed the difficulty in capturing wolves and how they are much more elusive than coyotes
-Estimate about 13 packs and 117 wolves in WA...still none confirmed in SW Washington
-WDFW staff noted that they are certain (like all other states) that they do not know of all packs in the state.
-There have been 10 known wolf mortalities in WA since 2008...5 occurred in 2013. 1 yearling was killed by a cougar, 1 vehicle collision, 2 killed by tribe on reservation, 1 killed in self defense. 2 Wa collared wolves were harvested legally outside of WA (1 in BC and 1 in Idaho). There is one mortality already in 2014 (a collared wolf that has been discussed on another thread).
-The observed increase in known wolf mortalities is expected...as wolf numbers increase so will incidental mortalities. The mortality observed is not likely to impact wolf population size in WA.
-WDFW has increased wildlife conflict staff in most regions of the state
-In 2013 20 depredation claims were investigated, and 4 were confirmed wolf kills.
-There are a couple of wolf research projects going on now, one more of a social study about whether consumers will respond to beef labeled in a way that notes whether the producer uses non-lethal preventive measures to reduce wolf depredation and another study that is monitoring calves and wolves by placing tracking collars on both.
-The wolf advisory group was discussed and it was mentioned by some GMAC members that they felt that advisory group had too few hunters...there were cattlemen, farm bureau, Conservation Northwest, Sierra club, and many others but seemed to lack hunting groups. WDFW noted that as wolves increase and have more impact on ungulates more hunting groups may be added but that many of the other interests (cattlemen, farm bureau etc) probably have similar views which are represented.
-Finally they discussed federal de-listing and how groups are challenging the USFWS on their sub-species classification information. I asked if wolves are not federally de-listed in the western 2/3 of washington if that would impact E. Washington...they said NO. If state de-lists wolves they can manage the Eastern 1/3 of wolves separately from the western 2/3.
-Some preliminary wolf population viability analyses by WDFW suggested we may hit state de-listing criteria by 2021
Game Management Plan Survey results are being evaluated:
-Received 8057 surveys back and 5000 additional comments
-The top responses were: 1. Predator impacts 2. wolf/ungulate conflicts 3. wolf depredation issues 4. wolf/livestock conflict management 5. combined length of elk season 6. Tribal hunting issues 7. Special permit drawing odds 8. Restore pronghorn 9. Access fees/timberlands 10. Game population status info.
Antler point restrictions (APR) were discussed in general management terms.
-WDFW noted general seasons (elk and deer) are valued highly in WA
-Noted that APR is one tool to manage population objectives and achieve buck:doe or bull:cow ratios
-Criticisms of APR are that you get reduced opportunity, abandoned kills (especially right after a rule change), and you get "Super 2's" (e.g., large 2 pts that never seem to grow that 3rd point).
-Noted that APR can not create trophies (need permit level restrictions to do that successfully) or change population genetics in most cases
-Substantial discussion occurred on GMU's 117 and 121 and whether to keep the existing 4pt rule in effect. The folks from NE Washington on GMAC strongly supported maintaining this rule. Others had concerns about this rule and its impact not just on those GMU's, but perhaps shifting hunter pressure to other units. A deer study in NE Wa was discussed about predation and apparently cougars were the #1 predator followed by domestic dogs. There will be much more conversation on the 4 pt rule in NE Wa at future GMAC meetings.
Point systems were discussed by GMAC and a presentation on various states systems were discussed. The presentation also discussed how the objectives of a point system must be very clear and it was not apparent that WDFW or others have truly defined specific objectives of a point system. The GMAC voted 18-1 in support of further discussing (or creating/refining) point system objectives such that future meetings could perhaps evaluate or analyze potential changes to the existing point system to better meet objectives.
The allocation of hunting opportunity between Archers, Muzzleloaders, and Modern Firearm hunters was discussed. The allocation of permits uses the following formula:
Permits = (Participation x Harvest Quota)/Success rate
So, if we want to determine the number of archery permits for a quality elk unit it would be statewide participation for archers or what proportion of hunters in WA Archery hunt for elk (Participation) x Harvest Quota (the total number of animals biologists believe should be harvested in that unit, inclusive of all weapon types) divided by the average success rate of archers over the last 3 or 5 years.
The numerical example would be something like this...If archers are 23% of the state elk hunters, biologists want to harvest 100 elk total in the unit, and the running average archery success rate for that unit is 25% then Permits = (.23 x 100)/.25 So there would be 92 archery permits for that unit. Now do the same calculation for Modern and Muzzleloaders and you have all the permits accounted for in that specific unit/area.
There has been some evaluation in the past looking at whether any one group has had a greater proportion of mature antlered harvest than other groups. Western WA archery seasons were discussed and WDFW staff mentioned that historically Archers were 18% of the hunters, but they killed 36% of the 5 or 6 pt. bulls...so they changed season dates around. Some GMAC members felt Archery deer hunters in NE Wa had much more opportunity and killed most of the big bucks...but WDFW stated that the data do not support that claim.
Agenda items were discussed for the June meeting and will include:
-Further point system discussion
-Hunter access information
-Game Mgmt. plan update
-Hunter recruitment/retention issues
-Cougar management plan (some GMAC members felt it was not reviewed in public domain and lacked transparency)
-wolf updates
One last item was discussed in relation to a brief discussion about the lack of public review on the cougar management plan. Apparently coyote derbies were in the press in WA recently and WDFW staff believe that it is almost certain that next legislative session a bill will be brought forward to ban all coyote derbies in WA state and would not be surprised if it passed. Some folks mentioned that given politics in this state that "flying under the radar" is not always a bad thing. WDFW received something like 550 emails in a couple days requesting that all coyote derbies be banned.
Post by: Curly on March 02, 2014, 05:40:57 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on March 02, 2014, 05:46:41 PM
Quote
One last item was discussed in relation to a brief discussion about the lack of public review on the cougar management plan. Apparently coyote derbies were in the press in WA recently and WDFW staff believe that it is almost certain that next legislative session a bill will be brought forward to ban all coyote derbies in WA state and would not be surprised if it passed. Some folks mentioned that given politics in this state that "flying under the radar" is not always a bad thing. WDFW received something like 550 emails in a couple days requesting that all coyote derbies be banned.
Seriously? What a bunch of bs. Where's the science?
Post by: bearpaw on March 02, 2014, 05:51:22 PM
Post by: KFhunter on March 02, 2014, 05:57:24 PM
Quote
-Finally they discussed federal de-listing and how groups are challenging the USFWS on their sub-species classification information. I asked if wolves are not federally de-listed in the western 2/3 of washington if that would impact E. Washington...they said NO. If state de-lists wolves they can manage the Eastern 1/3 of wolves separately from the western 2/3.
-Some preliminary wolf population viability analyses by WDFW suggested we may hit state de-listing criteria by 2021
So they need to be de-listed statewide before the E/WA third can be managed? And this is expected to be somewhere around 2021?
Post by: bearpaw on March 02, 2014, 06:01:53 PM
Thank you IdahohntrQuote-Some preliminary wolf population viability analyses by WDFW suggested we may hit state de-listing criteria by 2021:yike:
I saw that too, there is no hope for NE WA.... :bdid:
Post by: idahohuntr on March 03, 2014, 03:22:18 PM
This is not a scientific issue. WDFW is not suggesting this, it is the result of public comment from the enviros...spurred by some recent press coverage of coyote derbies apparently. There is a thread asking people to write the commission supporting derbies, and this might help in the very short-term but it sounds as though this will become a legislative issue...I'm afraid this is the beginning of taking away another predator management tool in WA. In fact, WDFW believes it is almost a certainty to occur...so go ahead and write your commissioner...but you would be forward thinking to also talk to your legislators. Bottom line though, anything that brings predator harvest to the attention of the public at large usually means a loss for hunters in WA...it would be worth hunters considering this as wolf and other predator management issues continue to be discussed in WA.QuoteOne last item was discussed in relation to a brief discussion about the lack of public review on the cougar management plan. Apparently coyote derbies were in the press in WA recently and WDFW staff believe that it is almost certain that next legislative session a bill will be brought forward to ban all coyote derbies in WA state and would not be surprised if it passed. Some folks mentioned that given politics in this state that "flying under the radar" is not always a bad thing. WDFW received something like 550 emails in a couple days requesting that all coyote derbies be banned.
Seriously? What a bunch of bs. Where's the science?
Post by: bearpaw on March 03, 2014, 03:27:38 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on March 03, 2014, 03:33:14 PM
Post by: bigtex on March 03, 2014, 03:42:26 PM
-He discussed the state passing a state version of the Lacey Act which will allow them to handle wildlife trafficking cases across state lines etc. without engaging USFWS or other federal agencies...but I was unclear on exactly how this was possible and didn't ask any follow up questions.
The WDFW Law Enforcement bill has passed the Senate but has not yet passed the House, however that is expected this week. The state version of the Lacey Act will be as follows:
A new section is added to chapter 77.15 RCW to read as follows:
(1) It is unlawful for any person to possess in Washington any fish, shellfish, or wildlife that the person knows was taken in another state or country in violation of that state's or country's laws or regulations relating to licenses or tags, seasons, areas, methods, or bag or possession limits.
(2) As used in this section, the terms "fish," "shellfish," and "wildlife" have the meaning ascribed to those terms in the applicable law or regulation of the state or country of the fish's, shellfish's, or wildlife's origin.
(3) Unlawful possession of fish, shellfish, or wildlife taken or possessed in violation of another state's or country's laws or regulations is a gross misdemeanor.
So the state version of the Lacey Act will be a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to a $5,000 fine and/or 364 days in jail.
The federal version of this unlawful activity is found in 16 USC 3372(a)(2)(a). Depending on the circumstances of the violation the individual can face federal Class A Misdemeanor charges (up to 1 year in jail and a $100,000 fine) or federal Class E Felony charges (up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine). However most likely they would face the Class A Misdemeanor charges. Now technically a federal can officer can issue a citation for this type of a Lacey Act violation however it is up to each federal court district. In eastern WA the fine on the citation is $500 plus $100 for each animal. Western WA does not allow for a federal Lacey Act "ticket"
Post by: bigtex on March 03, 2014, 03:45:51 PM
No. When the USFWS de-list they fall only under WDFW jurisdiction. So right now you have WDFW in the eastern 1/3, whereas you have USFWS & WDFW in the western 2/3.Quote-Finally they discussed federal de-listing and how groups are challenging the USFWS on their sub-species classification information. I asked if wolves are not federally de-listed in the western 2/3 of washington if that would impact E. Washington...they said NO. If state de-lists wolves they can manage the Eastern 1/3 of wolves separately from the western 2/3.So they need to be de-listed statewide before the E/WA third can be managed? And this is expected to be somewhere around 2021?
-Some preliminary wolf population viability analyses by WDFW suggested we may hit state de-listing criteria by 2021
Delisting by WDFW is set for 2021.
Post by: stevemiller on March 03, 2014, 06:03:02 PM
Post by: Special T on March 04, 2014, 03:00:21 PM
WDFW always complaines that there is not enough hunter involvement, speading the word goes a long ways to increasing involvement. That was a great post and please keep us posted if you attend other meetings. :tup:
Post by: buckfvr on March 04, 2014, 03:08:30 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on March 04, 2014, 03:53:43 PM
Idahoehnter THANKYOU! this is the kind of thing i was hoping some one would do and post up here. Honestly i thought that people that sit on those kinds of groups would post thier notes on here since they attend all the meetings...No problem...I post notes of every GMAC meeting I attend and will continue to do so. I think every issue we discuss is of great interest to most hunters in WA.
WDFW always complaines that there is not enough hunter involvement, speading the word goes a long ways to increasing involvement. That was a great post and please keep us posted if you attend other meetings. :tup:
Post by: blackdog on March 04, 2014, 04:52:28 PM
Post by: Todd_ID on March 04, 2014, 07:54:14 PM