Post by: Screaminreelz on November 01, 2017, 01:03:52 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 01, 2017, 01:08:00 PM
Post by: Screaminreelz on November 01, 2017, 02:23:00 PM
Urea is an inexpensive form of nitrogen fertilizer with an NPK (nitrogen-phosphorus-potassium) ratio of 46-0-0. Although urea is naturally produced in humans and animals, synthetic urea is manufactured with anhydrous ammonia.
Post by: elkchaser54 on November 01, 2017, 04:50:29 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 01, 2017, 07:52:23 PM
Post by: RB on November 01, 2017, 08:31:16 PM
Post by: Remnar on November 01, 2017, 09:01:26 PM
For those not familiar with what this is.
Urea is an inexpensive form of nitrogen fertilizer with an NPK (nitrogen-phosphorus-potassium) ratio of 46-0-0. Although urea is naturally produced in humans and animals, synthetic urea is manufactured with anhydrous ammonia.
Im dont know that it is any worse for a person than any other nitro fertilizer , but can smell like a meth lab for miles .
Post by: jbeaumont21 on November 02, 2017, 08:15:55 AM
So if it’s safe, why evacuate the area?
No Anhydrous ammonia is not safe at all. They put that stuff in the corn fields back in the Midwest. I walked into some vapors once that were leaking from a tanker and it nearly killed me.
Post by: bobcat on November 02, 2017, 08:26:02 AM
Post by: skeeter 20i on November 02, 2017, 10:25:27 AM
So if it’s safe, why evacuate the area?
No Anhydrous ammonia is not safe at all. They put that stuff in the corn fields back in the Midwest. I walked into some vapors once that were leaking from a tanker and it nearly killed me.
Yes this is nasty stuff. This is from the MSDS sheet.
Statement of Health Hazard
Hazard Description
Ammonia is an irritant and corrosive to the skin, eyes, respiratory tract and mucous membranes. Exposure to liquid or rapidly expanding gases may cause severe chemical burns and frostbite to the eyes, lungs and skin. Skin and respiratory related diseases could be aggravated by exposure.
• Not recognized by OSHA as a carcinogen
• Not listed in the National Toxicology Program
• Not listed as a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer
Emergency Treatment
Effects of Overexposure
Eye: May cause severe irritation, eye burns or permanent eye damage.
Skin: Irritation, corrosive burns, blister formation may result. Contact with liquid may produce a caustic burn and frostbite.
Inhalation: Exposure may result in severe irritation and / or burns of the nose, throat and respiratory tract. It may cause bronchospasm, pulmonary edema or respiratory arrest. Extreme exposure may result in death from spasm, inflammation or edema. Brief inhalation exposure to 5,000 ppm may be fatal.
Ingestion: Ingestion is unlikely since the material is a gas under normal atmospheric conditions. If ingested, it may cause burns and severe pain of the mouth, throat, esophagus and stomach or may be fatal.
Post by: powderbounder on November 02, 2017, 12:19:40 PM
Post by: slowhand on November 02, 2017, 12:25:08 PM
Post by: highbuckklr on November 02, 2017, 12:36:30 PM
Post by: slowhand on November 02, 2017, 01:32:21 PM
I hunt 8+ miles behind the gate. Most people would not even consider it. :nono:
Post by: highbuckklr on November 02, 2017, 01:34:47 PM
Post by: Screaminreelz on November 02, 2017, 02:00:21 PM
Just wait on the edges for the animals to come running out then blam blam blam
Be safe everyone.
Post by: Antlershed on November 03, 2017, 10:53:48 AM
Post by: bobcat on November 03, 2017, 10:58:25 AM
Post by: slowhand on November 03, 2017, 11:40:47 AM
Post by: Screaminreelz on November 03, 2017, 12:18:25 PM
just my :twocents:
Post by: Antlershed on November 03, 2017, 12:56:28 PM
Almost sounds like the change wasn't due to the weather but the complaints received from hunters. :dunno:Definitely seems weird to cite the weather, but then apologize for making people upset.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on November 03, 2017, 01:01:46 PM
Post by: Antlershed on November 03, 2017, 01:04:05 PM
It sounds like there were several complains about the initial notice, so it just seems appropriate that after setting one date, then a couple days later changing it, to appologize...Then why say they are changing it due to weather? Changing the date isn’t what upset people.
Post by: jpharcher on November 03, 2017, 01:08:20 PM
Out of state looks like an every year reality instead of every other year anymore.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on November 03, 2017, 01:30:14 PM
It sounds like there were several complains about the initial notice, so it just seems appropriate that after setting one date, then a couple days later changing it, to appologize...Then why say they are changing it due to weather? Changing the date isn’t what upset people.
Let me try and break it down, maybe I didn't word it right.
They announced a date for a closure that effected permit holders.
Now, they certainly received complaints about it having an impact on those permit holders planning to hunt elk in that area.
Now they are, by their words a few days later, rescheduling due to weather issues. I don't know if that is why or not, maybe too much snow expected to fertilize properly, I don't know. :dunno:
Since the initial notice caused people to have to change or cancel plans, and now there is a different time frame, which will/could again effect new plans that may have been made which may now be affected by the new time frame, or by those who were not effected by the initial dates, but are now.
It just seems that they are just trying to say, "Hey, sorry, we know this sucks!"
And trying appease a group of people that are going to be inconvienced in one way or more, who have invested money and lost opportunity and are going to be upset.
I suppose they didn't have to send the second email out and just kept the closure from the original date and just extended it...
It sucks that to get to hunt there it costs so much, but it is clear when buying the permit that there may (read will) closures at times and that is just part of the package.
The tree farm and day to day operations will always take precedence.
Trying keep everyone notified as quickly as possible of changes like this just seems to be a considerate thing to do...
Post by: Screaminreelz on November 03, 2017, 01:47:46 PM
Post by: whtbuck on November 09, 2017, 05:07:04 PM
Post by: huntnfmly on November 09, 2017, 05:17:06 PM
This goes along with the 1400 head of Elk that were euthanized and airlifted out of the 520 two years ago...Huh?
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on November 09, 2017, 06:34:10 PM
This goes along with the 1400 head of Elk that were euthanized and airlifted out of the 520 two years ago...
Source?
By what agency?
Post by: Salmonmoocher12 on November 09, 2017, 08:55:57 PM
Post by: funkster on November 09, 2017, 09:27:46 PM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/wdfw-plans-begin-killing-worst-elk-sw-wa/
One thing is for sure, everyone has a theory about the severe decrease of elk in the SW area.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on November 10, 2017, 01:08:33 PM
But airlifting 1400 dead elk, gonna need a little bit more verification on that part...
Post by: funkster on November 10, 2017, 02:51:47 PM
I remember when that was being discussed. No questions there.
But airlifting 1400 dead elk, gonna need a little bit more verification on that part...
Yeah, no doubt. Like I said, a lot of rumors are floating around and everyone has an opinion, kinda like that old telephone game. Only thing I know for sure is, there isn't even close to the number of elk there used to be in the St.Helens tree farm. Not seeing elk is one thing but seeing very limited elk sign is very alarming.
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on November 10, 2017, 02:56:03 PM
Combine that with increased antlerless and opening of Margaret to general...
WDFW is now in the tree growing business..
Post by: elkchaser54 on November 10, 2017, 04:00:29 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00771/sthelens_01.pdf
Post by: BA Mongor on November 10, 2017, 07:02:45 PM
I'm in my mid 50's, and was born and raised on the border of the Weyerhaeuser woods. I've spent my entire life up there, and still spend well over 200 days a year up there. As far as the area being well over the objectives, this was specific to a small area of the St. Helens herd. Mainly the animals concentrating around the mudflow The fact that the state handed out thousands of cow permits, while the herd was decreasing at a dramatic rate, was ridiculous.
Couple that with we now have more big cats than I have ever seen, hoof rot, and you have herds that are decimated, and at their lowest point ever. It's exactly what Weyerhaeuser wanted. How they continue to call the Toutle a Quality Tag, is beyond me. Is it better than the surrounding units, yes, but not by much.
Bottom line is, the herds should be allowed to rebuild, and they won't due that until we reduce the permits, kill more predators, and hopefully find a cure for hoof rot.
BA
Post by: ph-10 bow on November 10, 2017, 08:49:51 PM
Post by: funkster on November 11, 2017, 02:07:44 AM
Elk Chaser,
I'm in my mid 50's, and was born and raised on the border of the Weyerhaeuser woods. I've spent my entire life up there, and still spend well over 200 days a year up there. As far as the area being well over the objectives, this was specific to a small area of the St. Helens herd. Mainly the animals concentrating around the mudflow The fact that the state handed out thousands of cow permits, while the herd was decreasing at a dramatic rate, was ridiculous.
Couple that with we now have more big cats than I have ever seen, hoof rot, and you have herds that are decimated, and at their lowest point ever. It's exactly what Weyerhaeuser wanted. How they continue to call the Toutle a Quality Tag, is beyond me. Is it better than the surrounding units, yes, but not by much.
Bottom line is, the herds should be allowed to rebuild, and they won't due that until we reduce the permits, kill more predators, and hopefully find a cure for hoof rot.
BA
From my experience in the area, this sounds like the closet to the truth that I've heard.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on November 11, 2017, 07:21:26 AM
Elk Chaser,
I'm in my mid 50's, and was born and raised on the border of the Weyerhaeuser woods. I've spent my entire life up there, and still spend well over 200 days a year up there. As far as the area being well over the objectives, this was specific to a small area of the St. Helens herd. Mainly the animals concentrating around the mudflow The fact that the state handed out thousands of cow permits, while the herd was decreasing at a dramatic rate, was ridiculous.
Couple that with we now have more big cats than I have ever seen, hoof rot, and you have herds that are decimated, and at their lowest point ever. It's exactly what Weyerhaeuser wanted. How they continue to call the Toutle a Quality Tag, is beyond me. Is it better than the surrounding units, yes, but not by much.
Bottom line is, the herds should be allowed to rebuild, and they won't due that until we reduce the permits, kill more predators, and hopefully find a cure for hoof rot.
BA
From my experience in the area, this sounds like the closet to the truth that I've heard.
:yeah: