Post by: bbarnes on March 06, 2009, 03:54:22 PM
Post by: RUTNBULL1 on March 06, 2009, 04:01:37 PM
You better look at the new game proposal's, if the wdfw has there way there will be no elk left.Just got home from the meeting in ellensburg, with the wdfw commission. I was shocked to see the proposal's,its not bad enough they want to starve them all to death but with these regs there will be complete elimination. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
So what kinda crap are they suggesting to propose and finalize Now? :bash:
Post by: gasman on March 06, 2009, 05:57:03 PM
Post by: InsideWDFW on March 06, 2009, 06:14:05 PM
Come on, give us the scoop............
Yes please, last I heard we were working with the tribes to slaughter the Colockum herd. I'll let people know that we can only slaughter one herd at a time. \end sarcasm
To the "starve them all to death" all comment, hey you give us the money to feed them and we'd do it in a heartbeat. I know of 100 or so coworkers who will be looking for work in a month or two. I'm sure they may need something to do. \end snarky comment.
Seriously while I'm learning that you guys don't believe me when I say that protecting wildlife is the number one priority of WDFW, it truly is. There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size. Would you rather come across a carcass in the spring while shed hunting or when you open your freezer to grab that TV dinner?
Post by: bucklucky on March 06, 2009, 06:16:51 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 06, 2009, 06:25:11 PM
Quote
Seriously while I'm learning that you guys don't believe me when I say that protecting wildlife is the number one priority of WDFW, it truly is.
There are those of us that realize you are doing what you can with the resources and manpower given, maybe it should read "SOME of you guys dont believe" ;)
On another note, think of the whining that would be going on if the state hired shooters to come in and thin the heard :bdid: At least hunters will be able to take advange of the extra harvest rather than just hired guns :twocents: Come on guys, which would you honestly rather see happen? :dunno:
Post by: runamuk on March 06, 2009, 06:42:42 PM
You better look at the new game proposal's, if the wdfw has there way there will be no elk left.Just got home from the meeting in ellensburg, with the wdfw commission. I was shocked to see the proposal's,its not bad enough they want to starve them all to death but with these regs there will be complete elimination. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
I thought that the elk were starving due to lack of habitat?? Which must mean there are more elk than the area can carry?? Thus opening more tags in that area would be proper management if you ask me.....reduce the herd and it will do better.......
Of course I wasn't at the meeting but that is one of the suggestions I have supported is reduce the numbers so the habitat can support the ones that remain.... :dunno:
WDFW does what it can within the parameters of the bureaucratic BS that they have to deal with I feel for the people losing jobs who have tried to manage wildlife with an administration that talks a big line about "green" and environment but really does diddly *censored* to actually manage wildlife/habitat/environment and greenspaces...
Post by: Diehard0123 on March 06, 2009, 06:51:27 PM
Post by: 270Shooter on March 06, 2009, 07:20:35 PM
Maybe I should consider a wet side tag. :dunno:
Post by: Wacenturion on March 07, 2009, 07:41:51 AM
Come on, give us the scoop............
Yes please, last I heard we were working with the tribes to slaughter the Colockum herd. I'll let people know that we can only slaughter one herd at a time. \end sarcasm
To the "starve them all to death" all comment, hey you give us the money to feed them and we'd do it in a heartbeat. I know of 100 or so coworkers who will be looking for work in a month or two. I'm sure they may need something to do. \end snarky comment.
Seriously while I'm learning that you guys don't believe me when I say that protecting wildlife is the number one priority of WDFW, it truly is. There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size. Would you rather come across a carcass in the spring while shed hunting or when you open your freezer to grab that TV dinner?
The key statement...."There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size."
Absolutely true......but what is a shame is that WDFW would rather meet and discuss problems like this than actually do something on the ground to improve it. It's like your yard isn't going to mow itself.....you have to get off your butt and do it it. Oh...and don't tell me all those thousands of dollars worth of seed aerial dropped on the old river bed of rocks and some sand years ago was doing what I would call habitat improvement. What a joke. The problem exists because WDFW doesn't know how to manipulate habitat...oh perhaps ...some may know, but just to lazy to want to get dirty doing it. Easier to keep discussing it in meetings and writing new plans from decade to decade.
Post by: billythekidrock on March 07, 2009, 07:46:25 AM
The key statement...."There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size."
Absolutely true......but what is a shame is that WDFW would rather meet and discuss problems like this than actually do something on the ground to improve it. It's like your yard isn't going to mow itself.....you have to get off your butt and do it it. Oh...and don't tell me all those thousands of dollars worth of seed aerial dropped on the old river bed of rocks and some sand years ago was doing what I would call habitat improvement. What a joke. The problem exists because WDFW doesn't know how to manipulate habitat...oh perhaps ...some may know, but just to lazy to want to get dirty doing it. Easier to keep discussing it in meetings and writing new plans from decade to decade.
How is F&W supposed to improve the habitat when they don't own it? Most of that land down there is owned by private timber companies that are in for the money.
I know on the coast DNR/F&W are doing something about elk habitat on state land, but how are they supposed to do anything on private land?
Post by: bucklucky on March 07, 2009, 07:50:56 AM
The key statement...."There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size."
Absolutely true......but what is a shame is that WDFW would rather meet and discuss problems like this than actually do something on the ground to improve it. It's like your yard isn't going to mow itself.....you have to get off your butt and do it it. Oh...and don't tell me all those thousands of dollars worth of seed aerial dropped on the old river bed of rocks and some sand years ago was doing what I would call habitat improvement. What a joke. The problem exists because WDFW doesn't know how to manipulate habitat...oh perhaps ...some may know, but just to lazy to want to get dirty doing it. Easier to keep discussing it in meetings and writing new plans from decade to decade.
How is F&W supposed to improve the habitat when they don't own it? Most of that land down there is owned by private timber companies that are in for the money.
I know on the coast DNR/F&W are doing something about habitat on state land, but how are they supposed to do anything on private land?
Great point Willie.
I dont think even working on making better habitat will help keep the elk all alive in the St helens heard. It would have to be a seriousely widespread habitat fix, like burning the whole unit ;) There is just too many elk there right now. They need to be hunted :twocents: If you ever go up there , elk will be all over the freshly seeded areas eating the grass. I say clearcut the whole unit :o
Post by: logger on March 07, 2009, 07:55:37 AM
Post by: billythekidrock on March 07, 2009, 07:58:02 AM
Many people have been able to enjoy the booming population thanks to the eruption and many public and private entities. Now it seems as if we are faced with the population bust due to declining habitat.
It is what it is. There are too many elk for the habitat and the private/timber industry is not going to provide much help for a herd that is over capacity.
Post by: Sneaky on March 07, 2009, 08:18:05 AM
Post by: CP on March 07, 2009, 08:24:29 AM
Post by: Wacenturion on March 07, 2009, 08:25:52 AM
The key statement...."There is a very good reason why the winter kill around St. Helen's is so great, it's because the habitat can not handle the herd size."
Absolutely true......but what is a shame is that WDFW would rather meet and discuss problems like this than actually do something on the ground to improve it. It's like your yard isn't going to mow itself.....you have to get off your butt and do it it. Oh...and don't tell me all those thousands of dollars worth of seed aerial dropped on the old river bed of rocks and some sand years ago was doing what I would call habitat improvement. What a joke. The problem exists because WDFW doesn't know how to manipulate habitat...oh perhaps ...some may know, but just to lazy to want to get dirty doing it. Easier to keep discussing it in meetings and writing new plans from decade to decade.
How is F&W supposed to improve the habitat when they don't own it? Most of that land down there is owned by private timber companies that are in for the money.
I know on the coast DNR/F&W are doing something about elk habitat on state land, but how are they supposed to do anything on private land?
It's called PARTNERSHIPS.......................it requires EFFORT! WDFW has had active partnership programs in the past such as Upland Wildlife Restoration which at one time in the 90's I believe had over 3 million acres of private land statewide under agreement, and a good portion of private timber lands on the westside.... but have cut them or reduced them to insignificant levels in lieu of other programs...such as research to study the problems over and over again as an example.You know you guys can continue to give WDFW a pass on actual habitat improvement if you want, but you kidding yourself to think that's not the problem.
Post by: BrushChimp on March 07, 2009, 08:32:06 AM
BTKR, hit the nail on the head.
Quote
It would be a major production to modify/improve enough habitat to save them all.
Many people have been able to enjoy the booming population thanks to the eruption and many public and private entities. Now it seems as if we are faced with the population bust due to declining habitat.
It is what it is. There are too many elk for the habitat and the private/timber industry is not going to provide much help for a herd that is over capacity.
As it's been said many times before, the eruption provided a lot of area for vegetation to come back just like a clearcut would do. Elk populations skyrocket. The planted trees grew larger, entered the stem exclusion age, and now there is less browse. Elk will have to culled and/or die back to pre-1980 levels.
As far as private industry goes, of course they aren't going to help the elk herds. They grow trees and log them. That's what they do. They don't get paid to create or "manipulate" elk habitat. They actually lose money from ungulates eating their trees. From their point of view it would be a waste of money. From our point of view it allows more elk to live, creating more hunting opportunities. Hopefully elk are culled back quickly so they WDFW doesn't have to keep wasting their money feeding them each winter.
Post by: yelp on March 07, 2009, 08:33:02 AM
Well if it was me I would get the Timber companies, RMEF, Tribes and other non goverment organizations that want to assist and see what could be developed. Then go to the WDFW with a plan and ask if they want to be a partner...why do we wait for the WDFW to something about the problem. There are lots of ways to skin a cat! Habitat that exists post eruption needs some attention period. The habitat needs to be tweeked. The reprod is so thick it needs to be thinned, edges need to be created, prescribed burning, aerial seeding. There are federal programs available for these types of projects..the conservation districts and NRCS offices could be contacted about projects. The elk need forage...grass..they need more of it. The volcanic ash layer, just like a lot of areas in eastern washington accumulated and created a crust which made it hard for native grasses and forbs to germinate. It is no different here. The St. Helens area can support a lot more elk if managed differently...and they wouldn't starve. It however will takes time and money lots and that is the issue nobodys got either. :twocents:
Post by: gasman on March 07, 2009, 08:39:46 AM
No one on here still knows what the referance to this thread is.
How about enlighting all of us on the topic at hand instead of letting the thoughts run wild.
Are you trying to "stir the pot" because you have contributed nothing to this thread?
:bdid:
Post by: jackelope on March 07, 2009, 08:47:45 AM
Post by: tmike on March 07, 2009, 08:49:50 AM
Post by: bucklucky on March 07, 2009, 08:53:06 AM
Burn the unit? Clearcut the whole unit? Those trees aren't even 30 years old... Why don't we get elk numbers back to what they were pre-1980 and quit bitchin'? There ain't nothing in that herd anyways. Special permits that no one can draw where a guy hunts a bunch of raghorn bulls.
I'm being sarcastic when I say to clearcut or burn the unit, Its called a tree farm for a reason :chuckle: Like I have been saying from the start, we need to get the elk population back to what it waas pre-eruption. I'm done with this St Helens BS........maybee :chuckle:
Post by: billythekidrock on March 07, 2009, 08:55:07 AM
The St. Helens area can support a lot more elk if managed differently...and they wouldn't starve. It however will takes time and money lots and that is the issue nobodys got either. :twocents:
I agree with that. The areacould support more elk if it were managed differently. But I doubt you would get the timber companies to change the way they do business (ie: potentially lose money) especially with the economy the way it is.
Post by: bullchaser on March 07, 2009, 08:55:30 AM
Can I at least see the numbers that constitute this "Slaughter" before I jump to any conclusions and rip into WDFW. I've heard people complain that decisions aren't based on Biology, I've done it myself. This one sounds like it makes sense on the surface. Can we get a link or see the numbers :dunno:
1+ WDFW probably needs to be ripped but I agree I would like to see it first. One thing I do know is we are not going to get more habitat so we need less elk.
Post by: huntnphool on March 07, 2009, 09:22:29 AM
Quote
There are federal programs available for these types of projects..
No *censored*, whats a couple more earmarks on top of the 8700+ already proposed :bash: I mean do they really need 7 Million to study pig flatulence. :dunno:
Post by: WDFW-SUX on March 07, 2009, 09:23:30 AM
Post by: bucklucky on March 07, 2009, 09:53:07 AM
Post by: ELKHOG on March 07, 2009, 12:11:32 PM
Post by: Bearhunter on March 07, 2009, 12:14:04 PM
Post by: yelp on March 07, 2009, 03:27:23 PM
QuoteThere are federal programs available for these types of projects..
No *censored*, whats a couple more earmarks on top of the 8700+ already proposed :bash: I mean do they really need 7 Million to study pig flatulence. :dunno:
There are positive federal programs out there...Federal money is already available.
Here is one example of a program that private timberlands could use to enhance properties for wildlife...Any landowner in washington can apply for this money to improve wildlife habitat on their property.
http://www.wa.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/whip/WHIP08/index.html
Also with partnerships you can have a greater impact.
Post by: Alchase on March 07, 2009, 04:08:55 PM
No *censored*, whats a couple more earmarks on top of the 8700+ already proposed :bash: I mean do they really need 7 Million to study pig flatulence. :dunno:
They study it so they can tax it. As stupid as this sounds, they are already considering carbon taxes on cow flatulence. :hello:
Post by: logger on March 07, 2009, 07:35:11 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on March 07, 2009, 07:36:57 PM
I would like to think that maybe thinning some of the forest service ground would lure them into somr other units like the lewis river perhaps. That way there would be no fedreral money being spent and not to sound to overly optimistic but maybe they could make a buck on it to boot. :twocents:
But I also notice that elk will be where they want to be. Sometimes for no rhyme or reason.
Post by: logger on March 07, 2009, 07:47:31 PM
Post by: Snapshot on March 08, 2009, 04:41:04 PM
DS
Post by: jackelope on March 08, 2009, 07:40:25 PM
if this goes by standard operating procedure, bbarnes won't be back anytime soon.
Post by: D_morg on March 09, 2009, 07:16:32 AM
No one on here still knows what the reference to this thread is.
How about en lighting all of us on the topic at hand instead of letting the thoughts run wild.
Are you trying to "stir the pot" because you have contributed nothing to this thread?
Isn't he the guy that said whee the hunters are to blame?
Post by: bbarnes on March 09, 2009, 08:36:53 PM
I understand some people might assume I would be stiring the pot by helping you all become educated and look further into things that are going on here in Washington State. I also have a full-time job, volunteer for Mt. Saint Helen's Rescue, go to all of the public meetings on the Mountain turning into a National Park, visit with our local Legislators and most importantly have a family to run. As an avid Hunter and Mt. Saint Helen's enthusiast I am very passionate about the Mountain and try and post comments for us all to become involved in what is going on in our state. My main objective is to educate you all by providing a different point of view and information for you to research.
Information on the proposals can be found at the WDFW website http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/seasonsetting/index.htm#recommendations
My concerns from the report are:
1. The excessive issuance of Cow Tags continuing through 2011, only to create INCOME, which in turn is not used to sustain the longevity of the Herds for us to hunt for generations to come.
2. No extensive studies done to understand the impact of the herbicides and pest controls done on the vegetation. The signs of sickness to elk and deer in our state all point to Disease, one the WDFW does not talk about called Necrotic Stomatitis, also called Fusobacterium necrophorum, it produces, hoof rot, calf diphtheria, oral cavity infections and can affect almost any body organ or joint. It is caused from animals being in poor health. Most of Washington elk are in poor health due to poor winter and summer habitat combined with over population. The disease stays with the animals all year, they never get well. The cure is Penacilen/Triamenic, or by increasing dietary protein levels to increase body condition. It was first discovered in Washington State, in Roosevelt elk, in the Olympic Peninsula in 1945. At that time they concluded that losses to this disease resulted both directly and indirectly from overpopulation and poor habitat. I urge you all to google Necrotic Stomatitis and learn for your self the symptoms and relate it to the elk dying in your area. We need to urge the WDFW spend some money to conduct a detailed study on elk an deer, before they are gone.
3. There seems to only be two sides to the argument on this site or when I speak with people either hunt them all off or no hunting. Where is the managed hunting group and why isn't that what we as hunters are requiring from our WDFW?
4. Living in the greatest hunting grounds on Earth we all should be concerned with the treatment and sustainability of these herds.
You can find additional information by:
#1 coming to the meetings
#2 reading the information on the WDFW website
#3 come to the rally March 13, 2009 at the State Capitol for information can be found at
www.wohva.org.The washington off highway vehicle alliance and many other user groups will be gathering on this day,to let state law makers know we want to use are state and Federal lands.Please join us and let your voice be heard, because we want to be part of the solution not the problem.
#4 researching the differences between a National Park and a National Forest
#5 volunteering to help on the Mountain to help create habitat for the animals
I again appreciate everyone's comments and concerns.
Thank you,
Bruce
Post by: banannaclip on March 09, 2009, 08:48:05 PM
Post by: bucklucky on March 09, 2009, 08:53:34 PM
READING ALL THIS NEGATIVITY MAKES ME WANT TOO JUST HANG UP THE SHOOT "IN IRON AND GIVE UP. :'( :bash: >:(
Thats the kind of negativity that comes from the mis-management of game in Washington for umptene years. Its gota come out sometime ;) Right or wrong at least someone has the balls to try and do something about it!
Post by: bbarnes on March 09, 2009, 09:19:35 PM
I pride myself on not concelling my name or contact information, I have laid it all out there for others to research and help in the efforts to make a positive change. I am in no way trying to be negative, however just trying to give an additional idea and bring awareness to my concerns.
The WDFW won't be selling tags if there are no Elk to hunt, an example of what can happen on Mt. Saint Helen's is the Colockem Elk herd. Please read the post Permit Only in the Colockum. He puts it very plain and simple for all to see. An excerpt:
In the past 5 years the branch bull population in the Colockum has been absolutely decimated. Currently the branch bull to cow ratio is 5:100. In 2002 there were 391 branch bulls in the Colockum and as of 2007 there are only 116 branch bulls left. This is a decline of 70%. LET ME REITERATE THAT. That is a decline of 70%. That is a decline of 14% a year. If this trend continues by 2011 there wont be any branch bulls left in the Colockum.
You need to act now, now 3 years from now. You need to go to permit only now. The elk need a stimulus package worse than our country does. There are various reasons why the branch bull population has been decimated. They are poaching, tribal-hunting, and far too much road access. Some of these are out of your hands and others will take alot of time and resources to change. Time that the Colockum elk do not have. You need to control what you can which is spike recruitment. You have the power to make things happen now which is what you need to do.
The main problem with the Colockum elk herd is spike recruitment. In the Colockum the average harvest is 135 per GMU. In the Yakima herd the average spike harvest per GMU is only 57. The Colockum has a spike harvest average per GMU of almost 3 times that of the Yakima Guns. 85% of all yearling bulls in the Colockum are killed every year. Only 15% of yearling bulls in the Colockum survive their first two years. In 2005 only 46 spikes made it through the hunting season in the entire Colockum.
The best course of action is to go to Permit Only now, not later. Do what is right even if it is unpopular. Sometimes the right choice isn't the popular choice. Often the popular opinion isn't always an ethical one. In any case during the surveys over the past year the public favored permit only over the "True Spike" proposition. So why did you not go to permit only like the public wanted? For those that oppose this what many people don't realize is that every year in the Colockum 300 or more spikes are harvested by hunters. If it were permit only this would mean 300 more spikes would survive to become branch antlered bulls every year. With special permit success rates being about 50% this would mean you could give out 600 branch bull permits in the Colockum every year instead of the 6 that were given out last year.
For the sake of the elk in the Colockum please do the right thing. True Spike might have been a good idea ten years ago but right now the True Spike concept would be too little and too late.
Thanks Again,
Bruce
Post by: bucklucky on March 09, 2009, 09:24:26 PM
Post by: saudog on March 10, 2009, 03:34:11 PM
Cory
Post by: heavy hauler on March 10, 2009, 05:45:29 PM
Post by: bucklucky on March 10, 2009, 06:13:57 PM
i think st helens will only get worse.there was some land sold to developers just north of hwy 504. by all those little lakes. i am not sure if anything has gone in yet , but i cant see it helping the elk. :twocents:
You had to go and remind me annout that, that really pisses me off.
Post by: bbarnes on March 10, 2009, 07:52:04 PM
Post by: bucklucky on March 10, 2009, 08:21:55 PM
Post by: KillzElk on March 11, 2009, 10:23:18 PM
Went to Rally last year WOW over 5000 ATV's and people there it was amazing, I will be there... :4w:
So what the Blank or these clowns trying to do now?
Why do The Hunters get to hunt Federal land and we don't?
***I think everyone should have a opportunity to hunt the pumas plains at Mt Saint Helens we are all equal right?
***I think this is discriminating against all hunters why should 1280 people out of 277 thousand get all the opportunity's are they special have some VIP card?
*** Lets talk about this I want to hear more of how we are about to get screwed Again on another issue...
WDFW Proposing to Kill 79 More Cow elk Annually Read it here, If you are ready to do something now is your chance.
Support of this petition Let them know what you think Click Here :( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/wdfw-proposing-to-kill-79-more-cow-elk-annually-in-the-packwood-area
PRELIMINARY AGENDA Meeting Minutes
FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION MEETING
March 6-7, 2009
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2009/03/agenda_mar0609.html
If they want to slaughter Mt Saint Helens Elk Herd lets get are guns out ... :mgun: Oh sorry .. I think who is in charge needs to speak up , STOP hiding behind your desk, tell everyone what the real deal is .. Why, What, Who :mor: :pee:
Post by: SHANE(WA) on March 12, 2009, 12:23:02 AM
Post by: jackelope on March 12, 2009, 07:11:20 AM
Post by: Guns4Fun on March 12, 2009, 08:49:22 AM
What the heck is going on now Rally to slaughter Mt Saint Helens Elk Herd..
Went to Rally last year WOW over 5000 ATV's and people there it was amazing, I will be there... :4w:
So what the Blank or these clowns trying to do now?
Why do The Hunters get to hunt Federal land and we don't?
***I think everyone should have a opportunity to hunt the pumas plains at Mt Saint Helens we are all equal right?
***I think this is discriminating against all hunters why should 1280 people out of 277 thousand get all the opportunity's are they special have some VIP card?
*** Lets talk about this I want to hear more of how we are about to get screwed Again on another issue...
WDFW Proposing to Kill 79 More Cow elk Annually Read it here, If you are ready to do something now is your chance.
Support of this petition Let them know what you think Click Here :( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/wdfw-proposing-to-kill-79-more-cow-elk-annually-in-the-packwood-area
PRELIMINARY AGENDA Meeting Minutes
FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION MEETING
March 6-7, 2009
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2009/03/agenda_mar0609.html
If they want to slaughter Mt Saint Helens Elk Herd lets get are guns out ... :mgun: Oh sorry .. I think who is in charge needs to speak up , STOP hiding behind your desk, tell everyone what the real deal is .. Why, What, Who :mor: :pee:
WTF?????
So you are Pro ATV and Anti Hunting?????
Post by: 180-GRAIN on March 13, 2009, 05:30:57 PM
Post by: bbarnes on March 13, 2009, 09:36:10 PM
Post by: Buckrub on March 15, 2009, 08:18:47 AM
THE WDFW CREATES REVENUE FROM PERMITS AND PERMIT STYLE MANAGEMENT BASED ON REVENUE WILL NEVER WORK.
Why is the population to large for the habitat?
Could it be the wdfw tried to create a hunt that would sell thousands of permit applications for a small area.
Elk starving is not my idea of management and this permit system bs is catching up to the wdfw.
Why is the Margret different than Ryderwood?
Elk numbers are good in the Ryderwood and if the antler restriction were 5 point instead of 3 point you would have a much higher quality of hunt FOR ALL!
Permit hunts for revenue is not the same as permit hunts for management.....if the St. Helens herd permit system was truly management would elk be starving?
Just my $.02, I know plenty of you believe permit style management is the way to go but that is not how it works....it is about money.
I would rather pay more for a license and see the entire state go to five point or better and manage the herd with hunting days per unit/herd rather than permits.
Cow hunting should be controlled by permit for every weapon.
Post by: lokidog on March 15, 2009, 09:44:27 AM
It is a simple matter of biological processes, remove all trees, grass grows great, grass-eaters increase, new trees grow in and produce more shade, grass production goes down, food supply for grass eaters goes down, health of huge grass-eating population of animals (elk), goes down. Solution - allow hunters to remove more cow elk.
And yes, I do have a BS in Zoology and Wldlife Ecology......
OR Bring wolves into the St. Helen's area. Oh yeah, :bdid:
Seriously though, no hunter should have a problem with hunting being used to manage population levels to fit the habitat available.
As far as funding, we need to figure out more ways the wildlife watchers can help support the wildlife they "love".
Post by: Buckrub on March 15, 2009, 10:30:07 AM
A classic example of how the wdfw has destroyed hunting in an effort to create permit sales.
The permits for Margerat or permit hunting in general are a failure to the herd and to the hunter.
Post by: Snapshot on March 15, 2009, 06:49:55 PM
Your "biological processes" paragraph is right on the spot. Nature (in this case, the eruption) giveth, nature taketh away. Artificial feeding :bdid: is not the solution. Increased predation is; and that is where we come in.
Post by: CastleRocker on March 15, 2009, 07:21:19 PM
i think st helens will only get worse.there was some land sold to developers just north of hwy 504. by all those little lakes. i am not sure if anything has gone in yet , but i cant see it helping the elk. :twocents:
One more thing about this that really gets me going. Do you know who the "developer" is that bought that 4100 acres from Weyerhaeuser? Does the name Cabela's ring a bell? Yep, just like they did in Montana. Bought a bunch of land, sold enough to show a profit and started charging a fee to hunt on the rest of it. Don't think it won't happen up at the High Lakes. They already sold a quarter of the land they bought and made enough to pay for the entire thing. Only one step left.
Yes there are too many elk in the Loowit. There are also too many in the Margret and Toutle. As far as hoof-rot goes....they seem to get it when they spend all their time in pastures eating grass. We have a herd behind our house that has it bad. They spend nearly all their time in the fields. Found 9 carcasses this past spring and summer, and it wasn't because there is too many for the habitat. Their was 23 head in the herd this morning, and they have many square miles of lowland field, clearcuts, etc. to run on. I'm no biologist, so I don't know why they are dying of hoof-rot down here, but they most certainly are.
The Toutle High School FFA used to help the WDFW up in the Loowit, but apparently no longer wants the extra bodies, as they are no longer "letting" them help with the tree planting, scotchbroom cutting, carcass counts in the spring, relocation set-ups, etc. Guess our WDFW is so good they don't even need the help. Too bad, the kids seemed to like it.
Post by: lokidog on March 15, 2009, 07:30:06 PM
Even better would also be to split the unit as there is very little pressure from the north, east, or west sides. I met all of the other 8 hunters in the field when I had my permit. By spreading the hunting pressure in this area out they could also increase the number of bull permits while still maintaining a "trophy" quality hunt.
My :twocents: and then some. :)
PS Yeah, I'm glad Cabelas is here, not. Now we have to pay sales tax as well as their high prices if we choose to shop there.
Post by: Buckrub on March 16, 2009, 05:41:40 AM
Post by: sturgeon seeker on March 16, 2009, 06:04:39 PM
Post by: Snapshot on March 16, 2009, 07:57:57 PM
Can it be proven that Cabela's bought up that land and is now charging access fees?
Snappy
Post by: TONTO on March 16, 2009, 09:22:30 PM
Mt St Hellens problems go way beyond the WDFW.Ever since the damn thing blew it's top all Olympia could see were dollar $ign$.They thought they had the new "Grand Canyon" in their back yard,as well as all the tourist money it would bring.The tourist industry never took off,sure lots of people have taken the drive up there to see it,but once you've seen it thats it,the pot of gold has never been there.This is why the Cold Water center is closed.Well the elk heard is all part of the experience the state is worried about what the non-hunting tourists would think if they actualy had to see elk being harvested.Now the state wants to build hotel resorts up there and conect Spirit Lake Hwy with Hwy 12.If somehow they would have been able to get National Park status they would be happy as hell.Federal money and hopefully more toursts.This would shut down all hunting in the area.Next will be the wolves,let the wolves controll the elk numbers and as a bonus the guests at the St Hellens Hilton can listen to the wolves howl at night,that should bring in a few more bucks.WDFW would like to see Spirit Lake opened up to fishing,but the lock it all up forever ppl are throwing a fit.Any new recreation opertunities in the area are going to be a very ruff battle.
Post by: JoeVon on March 16, 2009, 09:24:39 PM
CastleRocker,
Can it be proven that Cabela's bought up that land and is now charging access fees?
Snappy
Cabelas did not buy the property. Couple of Doctors/Investors from Seattle bought it.
Post by: bucklucky on March 17, 2009, 08:05:59 AM
Post by: jadeball1 on March 17, 2009, 09:42:00 AM
Post by: Buckrub on March 18, 2009, 07:42:35 PM
The Margaret unit is a classic example of for profit animal permit sales gone bad. It did not create a "trophy" hunt.
IMO I would put 400 youth "any elk tags out" and get some young people in the system.