Post by: norsepeak on February 27, 2009, 10:47:30 PM
Thank you for sending me a copy of the project. I've read through most of it and found it interesting. However, I believe that we (WDFW, sportsmen and women) are missing out on a very good opportunity.
Just a little background, I have a degree in Wildlife Mgmt. from WSU, with a minor in Range Mgmt. I have been hunting, hiking, camping and recreating in the mountains of Central Washington for 30+ years. I have lived on Chinook Pass for the last 16 years doing those activities. In my career, I'm luck enough that I get to spend 200+ days a year in the mountains on and around Chinook Pass, and in those last 16 years, I've taken it upon myself to monitor the populations and progress of the goats in the Chinook Pass drainage.
Over the last 16 years I have seen a marked increase in the numbers of goats, especially mature Billies in all of the sub-populations on the Pass. I feel like we have a great opportunity to manage this valuable resource while at the same time offering a very special hunting opportunity that could rank up there with the likes of British Columbia and Alaska in terms of trophy potential and quality.
I obtained a copy of the "population Dynamics and Harvest Potential of Mountain Goat Herds in Alberta" study from Will Moore in the Yakima office. I read through it with great interest after a meeting with Mr. Moore. He told me that the study that was done here in Washington was modeled after the Alberta study. I can see where you came up with the acceptable population number for harvest, as it is stated several times in the Alberta study. However, it also states in the study under Management Implications that "management decisions should be herd-specific since goat population dynamics vary among populations despite geographical proximity." I believe that during our phone conversation that you said that in Washington we are not managing for total herds but rather isolated populations that are in close enough proximity to intermingle. Why?
The Alberta study also says "we should only issue tags for populatins that are increasing" which from my personal observations have shown that that is most definetly the case with all sub-populations in the drainage, so why not a couple more tags?
The Alberta study goes on to say "we should prevent harvest of adult females, particularly those older than 5 years." This has been a mainstay of large ungulate management for near 100 years and has proven to be successful, so why don't you issue goat tags to guides and/or outfitters trained in goat identification? Or offer a training program for tag holders? I understand the video that used to be sent out to tag holders was fairly successful, why did we stop doing it?
By offering a few more tags, and by hunting some sub-populations that have mature Billies dying of old age, we could generate more income for the WDFW, support local business like outfitters and lure out-of-state hunters here for trophy quality goat hunts without damaging the resource. One specific example is the herd on Devil's Slide in the Milk Lake drainage. Last summer the herd numbered 35-40 animals with at least 5 mature Billies in the 8-10 year old range. Why not harvest one Billy from this herd? Is it really going to damage the viability of the herd?
Your numbers from your study state that total population for the state is between 2401 and 3184 animals with a best estimate of 2815 animals. Why does the state only offer 18 tags statewide with a harvest of somewhat less than that? Do you not think the population could handle a harvest of at least twice that? 30 some animals out of 3000 give or take?
You mentioned in our phone conversation that a population needs to have at least 100 animals to even consider offering a tag. Here is a little information if found you might be interested in.
Colorado
Unit G2-stable population of 175, 8-12 tags in 2009
Unit G3-Stable population of 125, 8-12 tags in 2009
Unit G4-Declining population of 110, 6 tags in 2009
Unit G5-Stable population of 135, 12 tags in 2009
Unit G6-Stable population of 140, 12 tags in 2009
Unit G7-Stable population of 120, 5 tags in 2009
Unit G9-Stable population of 60, 5 tags in 2009
Unit G12-Stable population of 100, 8 tags in 2009
Unit G13-Stable population of 290, 20 tags in 2009
Unit G15-Stable population of 55, 4 tags in 2009
Unit G16-Stable population of 120, 9 tags in 2009
Unit G17-Stable population of 75, 7 tags in 2009
Here in Washington we are harvesting 1% of most populations numbering 100 or more based on our phone conversation. We are letting a lot of mature goats die of old age. There are a lot more goats than your aerial study suggests, especially in the Chinook Pass drainage, and I think if done properly we could sustain an addition 3-5 tags on the whole drainage. In my meeting with Mr. Moore I was able to tell him about sub-populations that he said were not included in the survey. I believe that in Washington we could have a hunting opportunity to rival any place on earth, and I'd like to help make that possible. Thank you for your time and effort.
Post by: norsepeak on February 27, 2009, 10:50:38 PM
Post by: addicted on February 27, 2009, 10:54:39 PM
Post by: norsepeak on February 27, 2009, 10:57:09 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on February 28, 2009, 06:34:03 AM
Post by: Slider on February 28, 2009, 08:39:32 AM
Post by: shanevg on February 28, 2009, 09:16:06 AM
BTW, do you have a digital copy of some of the research you talk about (e.g. the Alberta Study) I would love to read through it.
Post by: Buckrub on February 28, 2009, 09:40:51 AM
One needs to look at the spike only in E. Washington. They have never met the goals of bull to cow ratio.
You think it might have something to do with no spike escapement numbers? look at the bull harvest for the GMU's and then look at the bull permits.
You reference Colorado....look into the elk management vs: ours.
A good letter but I have NO faith in the dept. to do anything that makes any sense at all.
Post by: KNOPHISH on February 28, 2009, 01:12:05 PM
Post by: videoman on March 01, 2009, 09:18:36 AM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on March 01, 2009, 09:20:15 AM
Its really sad how incompetant they are proving themselves to be.
Post by: norsepeak on March 01, 2009, 01:29:22 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 01, 2009, 01:37:34 PM
Post by: SuperDave on March 01, 2009, 08:19:10 PM
Post by: gasman on March 01, 2009, 08:33:21 PM
That letter is great and on the spot, now we just have to educate the WDFW :DOH: to understand where we are coming from as sportsman's, and you hit the nail on the head.
:tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:
Post by: actionshooter on March 01, 2009, 08:36:30 PM
Post by: Falcon on March 02, 2009, 07:21:57 PM
Great letter with some sound thought involved. If the game dept doesn't start thinking about some population issues, I fear that the almighty mtn goat will soon be a non game animal in this state.
I have been blessed to have harvested 2 nice billies. The first in 84 in the Pratt
River which has been closed for over 15 years, and the second and my final back in 99 in the Coral Pass unit. My billy was shot out of a herd of about 30 goats !
Its a shame that the guys that really want a shot at this beautiful animal may never get a chance if the dept doesn't stop shutting down every unit because they haven't taken the time to survey them. If thats the case, let some trained volunteers get it done !
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 02, 2009, 08:10:41 PM
Post by: norsepeak on March 02, 2009, 10:31:06 PM
Post by: shanevg on March 02, 2009, 11:21:23 PM
Post by: Falcon on March 03, 2009, 08:48:42 PM
That goat was shot 84 in the Pratt River. He was shot early season, so his hair isn't real long. I haven't had him scored. My taxidermist said he looked to be around 6 years old. Horns measure 8.5 x 5. Not real long, but heavy enough to look good on the wall.
A mtn goat hunt is truley a once in a lifetime experience. I wish more guys had the opportunity to hunt these great animals !
Post by: TeacherMan on March 03, 2009, 09:14:27 PM
Post by: norsepeak on March 03, 2009, 10:08:00 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 04, 2009, 08:36:25 PM
I would be willing to bet their population is wrong. Dead wrong. I would get there is over 5000 goats in this state, maybe more. I base this on all my time in the mountains and goats I see everwhere from the alpine lakes to chelan. I truly don't think we see many of the goats. This type of managment is costing the wdfw lots of money. It's also costing hunters our valuable resources. If we are not going to give out any tags, why do we need the wdfw managers? Think about that one when you make your management recommendations.
I guess I'm putting my wildlife managment degree to good use after all...
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 04, 2009, 11:05:10 PM
Post by: andrew_12gauge on March 04, 2009, 11:09:26 PM
Post by: shanevg on March 05, 2009, 09:39:50 AM
Not that I really think they will listen to me, but the more often they hear it the better. I honestly am shocked that the WDFW doesn't require up front tag costs just to get the interest as they seem to try to think of anything they can think of to suck money out of us.
Post by: norsepeak on March 05, 2009, 04:44:55 PM