Post by: beauhunter on April 25, 2019, 09:36:02 AM
Post by: JJB11B on April 25, 2019, 09:37:39 AM
Post by: dreamingbig on April 25, 2019, 09:45:28 AM
Is there really that much of a shortage of elk going on, I bought all of the tags and special permit apps for the family then I saw the new quota for available tags in most of the area I like to put in for and there was q huge reduction in tags like 2018 over 40 tags this year only 3. Is Washington turning into another Oregon or Colorado where we are going to have to put in a draw just to hunt with no more over the counter hunts. Let me know if anybody else has seen thisYes. Washington is rapidly sprinting towards 100% draw with no OTC because the state refuses to address the rapidly increasing predator populations. Deer, elk and moose have bears, cougars and wolves all eating the heck out of them.
No wolf season + no bear baiting + no hound hunting + no OTC spring bear all points to a disaster of epic proportions.
Think California.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: elkrack on April 25, 2019, 09:47:44 AM
Post by: bobcat on April 25, 2019, 09:48:18 AM
Post by: Buzz2401 on April 25, 2019, 09:51:32 AM
Post by: Magnum_Willys on April 25, 2019, 09:52:21 AM
Basically turning east side bull tags into OIL tags.
We Wish!!! 99% of us won’t live that long!
Post by: Stein on April 25, 2019, 10:00:02 AM
The game plan is to sell as many tags and permits as possible while lowering the number of game taken to account for the reality of shrinking numbers of big game animals. Nothing will be done to actually attempt to resolve the shrinking herds until they are forced to - either by a change in heart in Olympia (not likely), a revolt from sportsmen (not likely so far), or they get such a budget hit from license sales drop that their existence as an organization requires it. The final option would be to just start closing up the recreational portion of the department and admitting the focus of the department is to preserve and save certain preferred species. I think there are plenty of people in Olympia that would care less if there was zero hunting or fishing in the state. Let the salmon feed the orcas and let the deer and elk feed the wolves and grizzlies "just like nature intended."
It wasn't that long ago that nobody could fathom the thought that the NW wouldn't be producing massive quantities of lumber forever. If you went back a generation and told them your lumber would come from BC, they would think you were crazy. Same story here I am afraid. If the feds don't do it, the state will. If the state doesn't do it, citizen's initiative will. It's way to easy to buy laws these days and we are far to uncoordinated and ineffective in fighting it without a partner in the state.
Post by: vandeman17 on April 25, 2019, 10:00:24 AM
Post by: elkrack on April 25, 2019, 10:04:12 AM
The worst part is so many of us feel like we are invested by having a handful of points and it keeps us playing the game. I have said it for years and stand by it, once mine are gone, they won't be started back up. Bring on quality deer this year and I am out:yeah:
Yup Out of state hunting is going to be in my near future
Post by: vandeman17 on April 25, 2019, 10:17:02 AM
The worst part is so many of us feel like we are invested by having a handful of points and it keeps us playing the game. I have said it for years and stand by it, once mine are gone, they won't be started back up. Bring on quality deer this year and I am out:yeah:
Yup Out of state hunting is going to be in my near future
I started years ago and have been spoiled when compared to Wa. It is a financial commitment but well worth it for me. I prioritize hunting season and want to get the most out of each season I am blessed enough to spend in the woods.
Post by: Pegasus on April 25, 2019, 10:24:10 AM
Post by: SkookumHntr on April 25, 2019, 10:37:29 AM
Post by: WSU on April 25, 2019, 10:51:22 AM
The worst part is so many of us feel like we are invested by having a handful of points and it keeps us playing the game. I have said it for years and stand by it, once mine are gone, they won't be started back up. Bring on quality deer this year and I am out:yeah:
Yup Out of state hunting is going to be in my near future
I started years ago and have been spoiled when compared to Wa. It is a financial commitment but well worth it for me. I prioritize hunting season and want to get the most out of each season I am blessed enough to spend in the woods.
It doesn't even seem like that big of a financial commitment to me. It's already damn expensive in WA if you factor in buying access, permits, etc.
Post by: vandeman17 on April 25, 2019, 11:00:20 AM
The worst part is so many of us feel like we are invested by having a handful of points and it keeps us playing the game. I have said it for years and stand by it, once mine are gone, they won't be started back up. Bring on quality deer this year and I am out:yeah:
Yup Out of state hunting is going to be in my near future
I started years ago and have been spoiled when compared to Wa. It is a financial commitment but well worth it for me. I prioritize hunting season and want to get the most out of each season I am blessed enough to spend in the woods.
It doesn't even seem like that big of a financial commitment to me. It's already damn expensive in WA if you factor in buying access, permits, etc.
So true. Basic license and tag isn't much money here but to get something similar to deer/elk as far as being able to hunt multiple seasons, you have to get lucky enough to draw multi, which not only costs money to apply for but also to then buy the tag. Add that on to your bill and you are then at closer to 1/3 or 1/2 of what an out of state costs. :yike:
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 25, 2019, 12:00:02 PM
Post by: dreamingbig on April 25, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
$111.90 for a deer and elk tag and a quality permit app for both. I pay more than that in almost every single state I apply in so for the opportunity to draw an incredible tag (still a random draw system), it's an acceptable expendature for me even if I dont take advantage of otc opportunities. Drawing tags is like darts. The more you throw at the board, the more likely you are to get a bullseye. If you are playing the tag game in other states and aren't taking advantage of your residency then you are losing opportunities at killer hunts :twocents:Good point and will probably always buy the lottery ticket for special permits but my days of relying on OTC opportunities in WA are done. Montana last year was a blast. Idaho is fun too. And you can shoot the wolves!
I will not be buying the cougar and bear piece. Protest vs. lack of predator management.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Stein on April 25, 2019, 01:00:39 PM
There are also several states with OTC or near OTC opportunities if you are willing to drive, so it's 100% possible to hunt far better options every year, put in for dream tags and never hunt WA.
The odds in WA are as low as the best elk hunts in the country and they aren't near the same quality - BEFORE the massive tag reductions. Now, you have worse odds as a WA resident than places we dream of hunting as a NR.
I don't have enough in the budget for everything, so something has to go. For me, that was WA this year which gave me the cash to get in draws where I have a better chance at a better tag.
Post by: vandeman17 on April 25, 2019, 01:02:45 PM
$111.90 for a deer and elk tag and a quality permit app for both. I pay more than that in almost every single state I apply in so for the opportunity to draw an incredible tag (still a random draw system), it's an acceptable expendature for me even if I dont take advantage of otc opportunities. Drawing tags is like darts. The more you throw at the board, the more likely you are to get a bullseye. If you are playing the tag game in other states and aren't taking advantage of your residency then you are losing opportunities at killer hunts :twocents:
my comment was more to do with how much better general seasons are out of state after you strike out here
Post by: beauhunter on April 25, 2019, 02:58:26 PM
Post by: greenhead_killer on April 25, 2019, 06:38:11 PM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 25, 2019, 07:22:56 PM
This really blows, no other real way to say it. Having said that, there are still opportunities to be had here. The permit game will hopefully fluctuate over time and as resources are replenished, we will be back to more opportunity. I like hunting here, it can be very tough, but I’m comfortable and knowledgeable here. I also hunt out of state, but wa will always get some time from me, permits or not. I lose more than I’d like to, I think everyone does in this sad state, but you can’t win if you’re not playing. Like Karl said, eventually you hit the bullseye. Just have to keep playing and have a backup plan for when you actually do draw lolspot on. I'm the guy that pulled two quality bull tags in three years :chuckle: we all scream for management but apparently only if it's a positive gain. If bull numbers are really down, then duh we need to cut tags. Of course theres a lot of speculation from me on that and endless other things that need addressing but tag allotments is part of the game. If tags quadrupled next year would all the sky is falling folks eat crow? I bet not. Numbers fluctuate and herd will increase. Tags will go back up and we will find something else to scream about :twocents:
Post by: Stein on April 25, 2019, 07:38:56 PM
If you like hunting here and get what you are looking for, I’m honestly happy for you. I hope you do well and have an awesome hunt. I love seeing great reports and stories here.
I don’t have a long history and knowledge of areas in WA, so that investment in time and money is better spent elsewhere. If I have two weeks a year to learn an area I am going to spend that in places that have a good outlook and the best odds at paying me back for many years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 25, 2019, 07:56:32 PM
I'd have to pull regs but our previous three year season cycle wdfw gave out literally thousands of cow permits along with general antlerless early and late cow seasons. They did this because our elk herds were bursting at the seams. Literally the largest they have ever been. This isnt 20 years ago, this was like 4 years ago. So we go to bang town on our resident elk populations, tribal guys double down on the jerky sales and then here comes winter of 2016/17. Winter kill was well above average and a metric crap ton of damage tags got filled. Congdons alone thumped probably a hundo out of their orchards alone.
But since then we have had mild winters. Habit has improved in some pretty key areas due to fires and some active logging going on up in bethel and bumping. Cow numbers are on the climb and almost back to objectives.
I still believe piss poor counting is to blame for the missing bulls. They either counted too early when the snow wasnt hear or they didnt go high enough because I know for a fact a lot of bachelor groups were too fat and happy to push down when the snow did hit. I was still seeing groups in those middle elevations where you dont normally see elk until April.
Some of that is just guestimation based off of what I am personally seeing but I do not believe it's all doom and gloom. Herds rise and fall and believe it or not I feel we are on the rise.
And for the record, I spend less time actually hunting deer and elk in washington than the fast majority of you. I hunt almost exclusively out of state. I still archery elk hunt because there is lots of them and it's a relatively easy freezer filler but I havent even hunted deer in a few years. I'm done depleting our mule deer populations. I still apply for a few hunts though because like I said previously, it's a darts at the wall game. If you wanna get one to stick you need all the darts you can come up with.
Hope all that rambling made sense :chuckle:
Post by: JimmyHoffa on April 25, 2019, 07:57:07 PM
Post by: Tbar on April 25, 2019, 08:04:43 PM
Is the recovery something that is actively going to be pursued? I assume the conversation is mostly eastside related, so are OTC dates being reduced to allow more spike escapement? It's just the bulls that have taken a big dip from what you guys have mentioned.Look for reduced objectives before recovery due to Timothy hay producers complaints.
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 25, 2019, 08:09:02 PM
Post by: fishngamereaper on April 25, 2019, 08:21:35 PM
Hay production has almost zero to do with yakima gmu herd objectives or management plans/goals. Kittitas yes, yakima no.
Don't remind me..I used to buck that hay...man those where long summers. Only benefit was I got to hand feed it come winter time.
Post by: BUTTER on April 26, 2019, 03:15:08 AM
Post by: outdooraddict on April 26, 2019, 07:21:17 AM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 07:47:47 AM
hahah the multi season deer tag, antlerless tags, and the second deer tag just cracks me up. id rather not fill my buck tag than give the state the moeny for a doe permit or the multi season permit. the thing people dont realize is "if you quit buying it, you dip into their slush fund" thus forces a change. but people dont view it that way, they will love to take your $6 antlerless permit fee, and the $111 multiseason deer. dont get me started on the $70 "second deer tag" what a joke. all because "i get to hunt all three weapons or all 3 seasons" i understand that logic a littel bit. but there are lots of things to hunt here, hunt deer with your bow and coyotes with your muzzy, or rifle, hunt birds with your shotgun etc. lots of opprtuniies, but unitl people stand together, the state will continue to love your donationsmulti season deer is $140 and second deer is $44 fyi.
Post by: Tbar on April 26, 2019, 08:03:20 AM
Don't forget the pending increase of $173.64 (hunting) or 245.20(sportsman).hahah the multi season deer tag, antlerless tags, and the second deer tag just cracks me up. id rather not fill my buck tag than give the state the moeny for a doe permit or the multi season permit. the thing people dont realize is "if you quit buying it, you dip into their slush fund" thus forces a change. but people dont view it that way, they will love to take your $6 antlerless permit fee, and the $111 multiseason deer. dont get me started on the $70 "second deer tag" what a joke. all because "i get to hunt all three weapons or all 3 seasons" i understand that logic a littel bit. but there are lots of things to hunt here, hunt deer with your bow and coyotes with your muzzy, or rifle, hunt birds with your shotgun etc. lots of opprtuniies, but unitl people stand together, the state will continue to love your donationsmulti season deer is $140 and second deer is $44 fyi.
Post by: Stein on April 26, 2019, 08:49:42 AM
Stein, to answer your questions I do believe they will rebound because they have in the past, and even in the last few years have increased.
I'd have to pull regs but our previous three year season cycle wdfw gave out literally thousands of cow permits along with general antlerless early and late cow seasons. They did this because our elk herds were bursting at the seams. Literally the largest they have ever been. This isnt 20 years ago, this was like 4 years ago. So we go to bang town on our resident elk populations, tribal guys double down on the jerky sales and then here comes winter of 2016/17. Winter kill was well above average and a metric crap ton of damage tags got filled. Congdons alone thumped probably a hundo out of their orchards alone.
But since then we have had mild winters. Habit has improved in some pretty key areas due to fires and some active logging going on up in bethel and bumping. Cow numbers are on the climb and almost back to objectives.
I still believe piss poor counting is to blame for the missing bulls. They either counted too early when the snow wasnt hear or they didnt go high enough because I know for a fact a lot of bachelor groups were too fat and happy to push down when the snow did hit. I was still seeing groups in those middle elevations where you dont normally see elk until April.
Some of that is just guestimation based off of what I am personally seeing but I do not believe it's all doom and gloom. Herds rise and fall and believe it or not I feel we are on the rise.
And for the record, I spend less time actually hunting deer and elk in washington than the fast majority of you. I hunt almost exclusively out of state. I still archery elk hunt because there is lots of them and it's a relatively easy freezer filler but I havent even hunted deer in a few years. I'm done depleting our mule deer populations. I still apply for a few hunts though because like I said previously, it's a darts at the wall game. If you wanna get one to stick you need all the darts you can come up with.
Hope all that rambling made sense :chuckle:
That makes sense, but the tag numbers don't seem to reflect any positive notes. Here are the numbers for tags offered for the Peaches archery tag I would have applied for this year:
2016 134
2017 104
2018 58
2019 10
So, we are at the point where we have 7% of the tags available as we did in 2016. There was a year by year reduction for 4 years now and 93% of the tags went away.
Even if you look at the pace of reductions, that is accelerating, double the loss over the previous year for the last three years as a percentage:
2016 - 2017 -22%
2017 - 2018 -44%
2018 - 2019 -82%
I get that fire may have something to do with 2019, but it didn't have anything to do with 2016, 2017 or 2018. You could also argue there will be a s-ton of super high quality feed in the burn area this year. I also checked the other area I apply for, Dayton, and it's a similar story although less tags to start with. Same timeframe was 7, 7, 4, 3, less than half the tags available.
I certainly hope the trend reverses, but am worried that WDFW controlled hunting is the only lever they are using.
Maybe I just need to trust the system and have a longer time horizon. If WDFW had a recovery plan I would probably be more of a glass half full guy.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on April 26, 2019, 09:16:22 AM
Am Increase of $173 dollars for hunting? I think you have some details messed up there... that would be near a %200 increase in costDon't forget the pending increase of $173.64 (hunting) or 245.20(sportsman).hahah the multi season deer tag, antlerless tags, and the second deer tag just cracks me up. id rather not fill my buck tag than give the state the moeny for a doe permit or the multi season permit. the thing people dont realize is "if you quit buying it, you dip into their slush fund" thus forces a change. but people dont view it that way, they will love to take your $6 antlerless permit fee, and the $111 multiseason deer. dont get me started on the $70 "second deer tag" what a joke. all because "i get to hunt all three weapons or all 3 seasons" i understand that logic a littel bit. but there are lots of things to hunt here, hunt deer with your bow and coyotes with your muzzy, or rifle, hunt birds with your shotgun etc. lots of opprtuniies, but unitl people stand together, the state will continue to love your donationsmulti season deer is $140 and second deer is $44 fyi.
The only proposals I’ve seen are a %12-15 increase. And haven’t seen if leg has moved to enact it.
Post by: Pegasus on April 26, 2019, 09:22:53 AM
Stein, to answer your questions I do believe they will rebound because they have in the past, and even in the last few years have increased.
I'd have to pull regs but our previous three year season cycle wdfw gave out literally thousands of cow permits along with general antlerless early and late cow seasons. They did this because our elk herds were bursting at the seams. Literally the largest they have ever been. This isnt 20 years ago, this was like 4 years ago. So we go to bang town on our resident elk populations, tribal guys double down on the jerky sales and then here comes winter of 2016/17. Winter kill was well above average and a metric crap ton of damage tags got filled. Congdons alone thumped probably a hundo out of their orchards alone.
But since then we have had mild winters. Habit has improved in some pretty key areas due to fires and some active logging going on up in bethel and bumping. Cow numbers are on the climb and almost back to objectives.
I still believe piss poor counting is to blame for the missing bulls. They either counted too early when the snow wasnt hear or they didnt go high enough because I know for a fact a lot of bachelor groups were too fat and happy to push down when the snow did hit. I was still seeing groups in those middle elevations where you dont normally see elk until April.
Some of that is just guestimation based off of what I am personally seeing but I do not believe it's all doom and gloom. Herds rise and fall and believe it or not I feel we are on the rise.
And for the record, I spend less time actually hunting deer and elk in washington than the fast majority of you. I hunt almost exclusively out of state. I still archery elk hunt because there is lots of them and it's a relatively easy freezer filler but I havent even hunted deer in a few years. I'm done depleting our mule deer populations. I still apply for a few hunts though because like I said previously, it's a darts at the wall game. If you wanna get one to stick you need all the darts you can come up with.
Hope all that rambling made sense :chuckle:
That makes sense, but the tag numbers don't seem to reflect any positive notes. Here are the numbers for tags offered for the Peaches archery tag I would have applied for this year:
2016 134
2017 104
2018 58
2019 10
So, we are at the point where we have 7% of the tags available as we did in 2016. There was a year by year reduction for 4 years now and 93% of the tags went away.
Even if you look at the pace of reductions, that is accelerating, double the loss over the previous year for the last three years as a percentage:
2016 - 2017 -22%
2017 - 2018 -44%
2018 - 2019 -82%
I get that fire may have something to do with 2019, but it didn't have anything to do with 2016, 2017 or 2018. You could also argue there will be a s-ton of super high quality feed in the burn area this year. I also checked the other area I apply for, Dayton, and it's a similar story although less tags to start with. Same timeframe was 7, 7, 4, 3, less than half the tags available.
I certainly hope the trend reverses, but am worried that WDFW controlled hunting is the only lever they are using.
Maybe I just need to trust the system and have a longer time horizon. If WDFW had a recovery plan I would probably be more of a glass half full guy.
Here is where the lunacy comes in. Archery permits for bulls in Peaches Ridge this year is 10 permits. Kill ratio for permits for bulls is about 10-20 percent so about ONE to TWO of the bull tags will fill. This has little to nothing to do with proper elk management in this huge permit area. You have predators including wolves, poachers and tribal hunters. The one time I ran into poachers in that unit was a night where they drove down the road shooting anything in sight and only stopped to retrieve animals that fell close to the road. The two times that I ran into tribal hunters it was during the day with one vehicle driving a trailer and another vehicle filled with shooters. When they spotted elk it turned into World War III. Shots fired endlessly and everywhere. I never saw them retrieve an elk. I suspect any elk killed had to be next to the road to be recovered. A year or two later I observed the exact same behavior in the same area.
Post by: sagerat on April 26, 2019, 09:44:25 AM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 09:46:20 AM
2016 134
2017 104
2018 58
2019 10
So, we are at the point where we have 7% of the tags available as we did in 2016. There was a year by year reduction for 4 years now and 93% of the tags went away.
Even if you look at the pace of reductions, that is accelerating, double the loss over the previous year for the last three years as a percentage:
2016 - 2017 -22%
2017 - 2018 -44%
2018 - 2019 -82%
I get that fire may have something to do with 2019, but it didn't have anything to do with 2016, 2017 or 2018. You could also argue there will be a s-ton of super high quality feed in the burn area this year. I also checked the other area I apply for, Dayton, and it's a similar story although less tags to start with. Same timeframe was 7, 7, 4, 3, less than half the tags available.
I certainly hope the trend reverses, but am worried that WDFW controlled hunting is the only lever they are using.
Maybe I just need to trust the system and have a longer time horizon. If WDFW had a recovery plan I would probably be more of a glass half full guy.
[/quote]
Have a bit more faith. If wdfw is all revenue based like everyone screams (I believe they are as well) cutting tags is not what they want to do. That results in lost revenue. Wildlife management is a long game, not an overnight failure or success. I cant remember exact numbers but between 2014 and 2017 we went from 13k(ish) to 8(iish) elk. That warrants cut backs in my opinion. Skim back, let them grow and then reevaluate tag allotments. We have the habitat to sustain more elk and it'll happen but not over night. We need a few septembers worth of lovin first.
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 09:50:38 AM
It’s a good feeling knowing we’re the ones getting saddled with higher license fees to manage the herd we don’t hardly even get to hunt anymore. Meanwhile those hunting under the treaty carry on basically with unlimited “governor tags” in their pocket. We’re really taking on the chin here.you can hunt them every single year. It's still an otc system.
Tribal thing is as frustrating as it gets but a treaty is a treaty. State cant touch it and the feds cant touch it. It's the one piece of the puzzle we can't control. We can dwell on what we can't change or we can engage in stuff we can :twocents:
Post by: Alchase on April 26, 2019, 10:01:31 AM
That makes sense, but the tag numbers don't seem to reflect any positive notes. Here are the numbers for tags offered for the Peaches archery tag I would have applied for this year:
2016 134
2017 104
2018 58
2019 10
So, we are at the point where we have 7% of the tags available as we did in 2016. There was a year by year reduction for 4 years now and 93% of the tags went away.
Even if you look at the pace of reductions, that is accelerating, double the loss over the previous year for the last three years as a percentage:
2016 - 2017 -22%
2017 - 2018 -44%
2018 - 2019 -82%
I get that fire may have something to do with 2019, but it didn't have anything to do with 2016, 2017 or 2018. You could also argue there will be a s-ton of super high quality feed in the burn area this year. I also checked the other area I apply for, Dayton, and it's a similar story although less tags to start with. Same timeframe was 7, 7, 4, 3, less than half the tags available.
I certainly hope the trend reverses, but am worried that WDFW controlled hunting is the only lever they are using.
Maybe I just need to trust the system and have a longer time horizon. If WDFW had a recovery plan I would probably be more of a glass half full guy.
Have a bit more faith. If wdfw is all revenue based like everyone screams (I believe they are as well) cutting tags is not what they want to do. That results in lost revenue. Wildlife management is a long game, not an overnight failure or success. I cant remember exact numbers but between 2014 and 2017 we went from 13k(ish) to 8(iish) elk. That warrants cut backs in my opinion. Skim back, let them grow and then reevaluate tag allotments. We have the habitat to sustain more elk and it'll happen but not over night. We need a few septembers worth of lovin first.
[/quote]
I agree with your bolded statement, but, if they do nothing about the predator situation those numbers will continue to decline at a rapid rate regardless of the decrees in tags.
Post by: bobcat on April 26, 2019, 10:15:07 AM
Quote
Have a bit more faith. If wdfw is all revenue based like everyone screams (I believe they are as well) cutting tags is not what they want to do. That results in lost revenue.
But they're not cutting tags, and they won't. They cut special permits, but that doesn't affect revenue. People still buy the applications, just not as many draw a permit. You have to buy a tag just to apply for a permit. Yeah, it's pretty much a scam.
Post by: Stein on April 26, 2019, 10:30:23 AM
In fact, the number of people applying has increased while the tags have decreased. Thus, they make more money while issuing less tags. Hence, little to no pressure to do anything other than hope next year is better.
For Peaches last year, here is what happened compared to 2017
Tags were reduced from 104 to 58.
Applications increased from 1282 to 1692
That's just one unit, but I bet if you pull statewide numbers, applications do not track with numbers of permits available. I bet they increase by an almost predictable amount every year.
I believe this is one major cause of the problem, there is no tie between their performance on managing the herd and the money they receive. You can take it a step further and argue the increases in permit applications shows more and more people think it is working.
So, there is zero financial incentive to do anything as the revenue won't move one way or another. On top of that, it's easy to delete a few e-mails from us while it is much harder to ignore lawsuits and calls from Olympia.
Add that all up and my theory is that nothing will change until we stop sending checks in. I don't buy the argument their hands are tied. Yes, there are treaties, disease, development, winters and stuff like that - just like they exist in other states that do a much better job. Wyoming and Montana have tribes and wolves, yet they have a huge amount of elk and their tags haven't dropped up to 93% in the last several years. In fact, they have more wolves, more grizzlies, far worse winter temperatures and they make it work.
For Montana, here are the tag numbers for my application (380):
2014 - 94
2015 - 98
2016 - 100
2017 - 110
2018 - 110
2019 - 135
While ours went down 93%, theirs went up 43%!
The difference is that hunters have a much larger voice in MT and they aren't under constant pressure from Helena to spend resources on pet projects or ignore science (at least to the same level and direction, pet projects always exist). We see them suing, fighting lawsuits, and in general, doing what their mandate requires.
If we all send our money in faithfully every year, expect what is going on now and the trends to continue. The plan is to do the same thing and expect different results.
Post by: bigmacc on April 26, 2019, 10:51:01 AM
It’s a good feeling knowing we’re the ones getting saddled with higher license fees to manage the herd we don’t hardly even get to hunt anymore. Meanwhile those hunting under the treaty carry on basically with unlimited “governor tags” in their pocket. We’re really taking on the chin here.you can hunt them every single year. It's still an otc system.
Tribal thing is as frustrating as it gets but a treaty is a treaty. State cant touch it and the feds cant touch it. It's the one piece of the puzzle we can't control. We can dwell on what we can't change or we can engage in stuff we can :twocents:
I agree with the tribal situation, as much as most of us don't like it, it aint gonna change anytime soon. On the other hand, the explosion of the other big 3(cougar, bear, wolf) which are picking off hundreds of deer, elk and moose every week across this state is what we should be engaging. The population of all 3 are growing rapidly and kill year round, 24/7, 365, in turn our ungulate populations have been and continue to tank. As Karl said "We can dwell on what we can't change or we can engage in stuff we can". Things will never return to what they once were, I myself accepted that long ago, but at the rate our herds AND predators are being mis-managed, IMHO, what will be left for my grandkids at the rate it is going now, heck just look what has happened in the last 30 years. The track record of the WDFW since their inception is not encouraging as far as our herds go moving forward. We (my group)are becoming bear and cougar hunters, never have been before, it used to be a rarity and actually kind of neat to see them while out elk or deer hunting, now between 6 of us we have seen over 25 or so bears and around 20 or so cats in the last 25 years(not to mention increasing numbers of kill sites), before that going back to the 1950,s all the way into the 90,s you could count on 2 hands how many bear and cougar combined we seen while out hunting, hiking, scouting etc., thats seeing 10 or less in 40 years compared to around 45 in the last 25 years! Yes I truly believe predator numbers are growing AND I believe over the last 30 years they are killing more and more elk , deer and moose and I believe this is the number 1 threat to the future of hunting in this state, not the ONLY issue but THE NUMBER 1 issue(IMHO), this is an issue that I choose to engage in, buy tags for, write into politicians about, talk and bitch about on forums and gripe about every chance I get(respectfully) to the WDFW..... :twocents:
Post by: bigmacc on April 26, 2019, 11:01:13 AM
QuoteHave a bit more faith. If wdfw is all revenue based like everyone screams (I believe they are as well) cutting tags is not what they want to do. That results in lost revenue.
But they're not cutting tags, and they won't. They cut special permits, but that doesn't affect revenue. People still buy the applications, just not as many draw a permit. You have to buy a tag just to apply for a permit. Yeah, it's pretty much a scam.
Bingo.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on April 26, 2019, 11:21:58 AM
Have a bit more faith. If wdfw is all revenue based like everyone screams (I believe they are as well) cutting tags is not what they want to do. That results in lost revenue. Wildlife management is a long game, not an overnight failure or success. I cant remember exact numbers but between 2014 and 2017 we went from 13k(ish) to 8(iish) elk. That warrants cut backs in my opinion. Skim back, let them grow and then reevaluate tag allotments. We have the habitat to sustain more elk and it'll happen but not over night. We need a few septembers worth of lovin first.
[/quote]
Although I mostly agree with this..... let’s not forget that the issuing of hundreds of cow permits played a big part in the herds condition today. That was not a long game.
Why does it seem that WDFW is either feast or famine on permit allotment? Should not be that hard to keep allotments from massive up and downs.
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 11:41:24 AM
Cutting tags doesn't result in lost revenue directly. You pay your $13 and if you draw they mail you the tag, they get no extra money if the double the number of tags issued (talking quality deer/elk here). It would only result in lost revenue if people stop applying, which doesn't seem to be the case at least through last year. Thus, their revenue is tied ONLY to how many people apply, not how many draw.Didnt you yourself say you were gonna dip out of WA because of the permit cutting and mismanagement? Is that not lost revenue?
In fact, the number of people applying has increased while the tags have decreased. Thus, they make more money while issuing less tags. Hence, little to no pressure to do anything other than hope next year is better.
For Peaches last year, here is what happened compared to 2017
Tags were reduced from 104 to 58.
Applications increased from 1282 to 1692
That's just one unit, but I bet if you pull statewide numbers, applications do not track with numbers of permits available. I bet they increase by an almost predictable amount every year.
I believe this is one major cause of the problem, there is no tie between their performance on managing the herd and the money they receive. You can take it a step further and argue the increases in permit applications shows more and more people think it is working.
So, there is zero financial incentive to do anything as the revenue won't move one way or another. On top of that, it's easy to delete a few e-mails from us while it is much harder to ignore lawsuits and calls from Olympia.
Add that all up and my theory is that nothing will change until we stop sending checks in. I don't buy the argument their hands are tied. Yes, there are treaties, disease, development, winters and stuff like that - just like they exist in other states that do a much better job. Wyoming and Montana have tribes and wolves, yet they have a huge amount of elk and their tags haven't dropped up to 93% in the last several years. In fact, they have more wolves, more grizzlies, far worse winter temperatures and they make it work.
For Montana, here are the tag numbers for my application (380):
2014 - 94
2015 - 98
2016 - 100
2017 - 110
2018 - 110
2019 - 135
While ours went down 93%, theirs went up 43%!
The difference is that hunters have a much larger voice in MT and they aren't under constant pressure from Helena to spend resources on pet projects or ignore science (at least to the same level and direction, pet projects always exist). We see them suing, fighting lawsuits, and in general, doing what their mandate requires.
If we all send our money in faithfully every year, expect what is going on now and the trends to continue. The plan is to do the same thing and expect different results.
MT is a different beast all together. Larger state with far fewer residents so it supports more game. Also NR license sales makes up something like 90%+ of their revenue.
To Alchases comment on predators I'll argue again that in my THOUSANDS of miles of boot travel in yakima county I see no more predators and or sign as I did 15 years ago so if there is more bear and cat around they must have gotten smarter and also only kill bulls now because cows are already back up to almost herd objective.
Post by: bobcat on April 26, 2019, 11:51:52 AM
Post by: kselkhunter on April 26, 2019, 11:54:09 AM
It seems to me that if bull elk numbers in the Yakima herd are THAT low, there should be no general season this year for spikes. :dunno::yeah:
Would be good to take a year off on the spikes, and see what impact it has the following year.
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 11:54:45 AM
It seems to me that if bull elk numbers in the Yakima herd are THAT low, there should be no general season this year for spikes. :dunno:common sense isnt very common sir :chuckle:
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 11:59:04 AM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 12:06:06 PM
Post by: kselkhunter on April 26, 2019, 12:08:37 PM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 12:13:02 PM
I can personally attest that spotting elk in the timber from a moving airplane is extremely difficult. I would agree if the elk were still holding up high, it would be hard to do a count from the air.agreed. Also I'm doubting those are areas they even fly because it's hard to spot as well as being untraditional winter range. Heck I saw a group of 31 bulls in the spot I shoot long. That IS NOT winter range.
Post by: jeffitz on April 26, 2019, 12:18:37 PM
Post by: Stein on April 26, 2019, 12:24:27 PM
Yes, I'm not putting in for any WA big game tags this year for myself or any of our family. That is lost revenue for me, but I would bet the same amount in cash that the number of permits sold this year are greater than last year. My one family doesn't make a measurable difference.
It is fact that when tags are cut substantially, more people still apply than the year before. I hold that as long as this is the case then we will see no change over the policy and actions we see today.
WDFW has no fear of the hunters. Just ask any MT FWP guy what would happen over there if they whacked the tags issued to residents by 50% or more in one year. They have direct and tangible accountability to hunters and WDFW does not, largely because we encourage them to continue by sending in more and more tag money every year.
Post by: dreamingbig on April 26, 2019, 02:04:12 PM
I will disagree some. The amount of bear sign and sightings in western Washington has increased dramatically.Cutting tags doesn't result in lost revenue directly. You pay your $13 and if you draw they mail you the tag, they get no extra money if the double the number of tags issued (talking quality deer/elk here). It would only result in lost revenue if people stop applying, which doesn't seem to be the case at least through last year. Thus, their revenue is tied ONLY to how many people apply, not how many draw.Didnt you yourself say you were gonna dip out of WA because of the permit cutting and mismanagement? Is that not lost revenue?
In fact, the number of people applying has increased while the tags have decreased. Thus, they make more money while issuing less tags. Hence, little to no pressure to do anything other than hope next year is better.
For Peaches last year, here is what happened compared to 2017
Tags were reduced from 104 to 58.
Applications increased from 1282 to 1692
That's just one unit, but I bet if you pull statewide numbers, applications do not track with numbers of permits available. I bet they increase by an almost predictable amount every year.
I believe this is one major cause of the problem, there is no tie between their performance on managing the herd and the money they receive. You can take it a step further and argue the increases in permit applications shows more and more people think it is working.
So, there is zero financial incentive to do anything as the revenue won't move one way or another. On top of that, it's easy to delete a few e-mails from us while it is much harder to ignore lawsuits and calls from Olympia.
Add that all up and my theory is that nothing will change until we stop sending checks in. I don't buy the argument their hands are tied. Yes, there are treaties, disease, development, winters and stuff like that - just like they exist in other states that do a much better job. Wyoming and Montana have tribes and wolves, yet they have a huge amount of elk and their tags haven't dropped up to 93% in the last several years. In fact, they have more wolves, more grizzlies, far worse winter temperatures and they make it work.
For Montana, here are the tag numbers for my application (380):
2014 - 94
2015 - 98
2016 - 100
2017 - 110
2018 - 110
2019 - 135
While ours went down 93%, theirs went up 43%!
The difference is that hunters have a much larger voice in MT and they aren't under constant pressure from Helena to spend resources on pet projects or ignore science (at least to the same level and direction, pet projects always exist). We see them suing, fighting lawsuits, and in general, doing what their mandate requires.
If we all send our money in faithfully every year, expect what is going on now and the trends to continue. The plan is to do the same thing and expect different results.
MT is a different beast all together. Larger state with far fewer residents so it supports more game. Also NR license sales makes up something like 90%+ of their revenue.
To Alchases comment on predators I'll argue again that in my THOUSANDS of miles of boot travel in yakima county I see no more predators and or sign as I did 15 years ago so if there is more bear and cat around they must have gotten smarter and also only kill bulls now because cows are already back up to almost herd objective.
My only experience in eastern Washington with any regularity is WOW wilderness (15 yrs hunting) and the bear sign and sightings has increased. Cougars are ghosts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: dreamingbig on April 26, 2019, 02:05:19 PM
It seems to me that if bull elk numbers in the Yakima herd are THAT low, there should be no general season this year for spikes. :dunno:But then they would have nothing to encourage folks to use their hunting license for. They aren’t dumb... let them search for unicorns. 🦄
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: dreamingbig on April 26, 2019, 02:07:28 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: greenhead_killer on April 26, 2019, 02:28:12 PM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 02:40:52 PM
I’ve talked to game wardens in the past and know not all the elk come down regardless of how bad the winters are. They know certain alpine bowls that bulls stay year round in. I don’t know how much effort they put into actually checking real time numbers, but knowing that bit of info, I don’t think they ever get accurate numbers. I think there are more politics involved with that process than anyone will ever admitright. Pretty impossible to get em all but on an average year you'll get a percentage of animals that push onto the winter range. This was not a normal winter. I'm sure someone can speak more accurately to the formula used when counting practices. @Doublelung
Post by: sagerat on April 26, 2019, 02:42:53 PM
Post by: kselkhunter on April 26, 2019, 02:43:46 PM
"
Population Surveys The Department estimates elk abundance in the Yakima herd area in spring by combining ground count data collected at established feed sites with estimates of elk abundance derived from areas adjacent to feed sites. We derive estimates of abundance and ratios in areas adjacent to feed sites by conducting helicopter surveys and using a sightability model developed for elk in Idaho to correct observed data for biases associated with effects of cover and group sizes (Unsworth et al. 1999). The Department does not conduct the aerial surveys when mild winter conditions fail to concentrate elk at lower elevations (2014, 2015, 2018). In February 2017, the Department estimated elk abundance within the survey area to be 8,326 elk (Figure 2), which is below objective. The bull:cow ratio had been increasing in recent years (Figure 3). The increase was attributable to winter weather making bulls more visible, as well as decreasing cow numbers. Estimates of post-hunt calf:cow ratios were relatively stable 2007–2016, but fell to a record low of 22 calves per 100 cows in 2017 (Figure 4). Feedsites with elk, as well as some surrounding winter range was ground surveyed in February 2018. A total of 3,908 elk were classified with resulting ratio estimates of 30 calves and 7 bulls per 100 cows. Based on harvest and recrutiment, the population likely declined during 2017-2018. Low total calves in 2016 led to low spike harvest in 2017, as well as record low recruitment of spikes into the bull population.
Management Concerns The Yakima elk herd had been at or above objective for much of the last decade and has been very productive. The surplus of elk allowed for significant recreational opportunity, including antlerless harvest. Recreational harvest, drought, and severe winter weather in 2015-2016 have reduced herd size and hunting opportunity. The herd has historically rebounded quickly after poor recruitment years, but did not in 2017. It will likely take some time to bring elk numbers back to objective. This may mean reduced antlerless opportunity. In 2018, all GMU’s will still be open to general season archery hunting, but the seasons will be shortened in an attempt to prevent overharvest. There are often questions about the winter feeding program and if there are ways to get elk to move from feedsites to natural winter range. WDFW owns or leases (from DNR) much of the available elk winter range. One of the management issues with elk feeding is human disturbance. Feedsites are closed to all access, but away from feedsites winter range is open to recreation throughout the winter. WDFW lands were originally obtained for elk and deer winter range, but these areas have become very popular for recreation. Elk seek security from human disturbance and would likely concentrate on closed areas even if they were not fed. Closing access to winter range can be controversial. For the foreseeable future, a large portion of the Yakima elk herd will be fed when winter dictates the need. The trend of managing lands for fire resilency may lead to more open stands with little security for elk. This is expected to result in a change in elk distribution. When elk do enter high road density areas with minimal cover during hunting seasons, there may be increased harvest. Managing for a specific harvest to meet population objectives could become more difficult.
Management Conclusions The Department had been meeting its management objective of maintaining a population with 12– 20 bulls:100 cows in the post-hunt population and expects that to continue. However, the overall number of bulls recruited into the population has declined as a result of poor calf recruitment in 2017 and an overall reduction in the number of cows in the population. As such, the Department may need to reduce opportunities to harvest bulls in the future to maintain bull:cow ratios that are within objective, in addition to reducing antlerless harvest to prevent further declines in the overall population. Finally, the Rattlesnake Hills sub-herd remains above objective because hunting is not allowed on ALE or the adjacent federal Hanford Site, which limits the Department’s ability to manage this sub-herd. "
Post by: bobcat on April 26, 2019, 02:54:28 PM
The permit cuts probably came in as a request from the tribe and WDFW obliged. “Sure we can cut the numbers, any thing else?” “How about some keys to the gates so it’s easier to kill elk?”
:yeah:
That's spot on.
The state bends over backwards to make the Indians happy.
Post by: Rainier10 on April 26, 2019, 02:55:26 PM
Post by: sagerat on April 26, 2019, 03:11:11 PM
My guess and my hope is with such deep cuts the herd will rebound quickly and numbers can be adjusted back up. One or two years of limited opportunity would massively increase numbers.
Especially if the tribe joined us in actually giving a *censored* about it
Post by: Rainier10 on April 26, 2019, 03:18:43 PM
Just my :twocents:
Post by: greenhead_killer on April 26, 2019, 03:58:22 PM
Post by: bigmacc on April 26, 2019, 05:11:40 PM
Cutting tags doesn't result in lost revenue directly. You pay your $13 and if you draw they mail you the tag, they get no extra money if the double the number of tags issued (talking quality deer/elk here). It would only result in lost revenue if people stop applying, which doesn't seem to be the case at least through last year. Thus, their revenue is tied ONLY to how many people apply, not how many draw.Didnt you yourself say you were gonna dip out of WA because of the permit cutting and mismanagement? Is that not lost revenue?
In fact, the number of people applying has increased while the tags have decreased. Thus, they make more money while issuing less tags. Hence, little to no pressure to do anything other than hope next year is better.
For Peaches last year, here is what happened compared to 2017
Tags were reduced from 104 to 58.
Applications increased from 1282 to 1692
That's just one unit, but I bet if you pull statewide numbers, applications do not track with numbers of permits available. I bet they increase by an almost predictable amount every year.
I believe this is one major cause of the problem, there is no tie between their performance on managing the herd and the money they receive. You can take it a step further and argue the increases in permit applications shows more and more people think it is working.
So, there is zero financial incentive to do anything as the revenue won't move one way or another. On top of that, it's easy to delete a few e-mails from us while it is much harder to ignore lawsuits and calls from Olympia.
Add that all up and my theory is that nothing will change until we stop sending checks in. I don't buy the argument their hands are tied. Yes, there are treaties, disease, development, winters and stuff like that - just like they exist in other states that do a much better job. Wyoming and Montana have tribes and wolves, yet they have a huge amount of elk and their tags haven't dropped up to 93% in the last several years. In fact, they have more wolves, more grizzlies, far worse winter temperatures and they make it work.
For Montana, here are the tag numbers for my application (380):
2014 - 94
2015 - 98
2016 - 100
2017 - 110
2018 - 110
2019 - 135
While ours went down 93%, theirs went up 43%!
The difference is that hunters have a much larger voice in MT and they aren't under constant pressure from Helena to spend resources on pet projects or ignore science (at least to the same level and direction, pet projects always exist). We see them suing, fighting lawsuits, and in general, doing what their mandate requires.
If we all send our money in faithfully every year, expect what is going on now and the trends to continue. The plan is to do the same thing and expect different results.
MT is a different beast all together. Larger state with far fewer residents so it supports more game. Also NR license sales makes up something like 90%+ of their revenue.
To Alchases comment on predators I'll argue again that in my THOUSANDS of miles of boot travel in yakima county I see no more predators and or sign as I did 15 years ago so if there is more bear and cat around they must have gotten smarter and also only kill bulls now because cows are already back up to almost herd objective.
Thats a fair statement Karl as far as what you have seen as predators go over the last 15 years, BUT take it back another 15(pre banning of hound hunting and controlling predators) and pre WDFW for that matter, what you get then is a DRASTIC difference. As far as Yakima county goes I can only go by folks I know that have put on the same or more boot miles as yourself but have been doing it a bit longer and they DO see the difference. As far as other counties go that I CAN speak to, predator numbers have put a whacking on deer and elk numbers and I would bet that in another 15 years your view may change in your area. I really hope I am wrong, but as I see it, the lack of management of these predators are not going to do anything good for us as hunters going into the future, maybe it hasn't had a full-blown effect on a county near you that you can see(yet), but it has in many other areas of the state and the momentum or distribution doesn't seem to be slowing.....with all due respect :tup:
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 26, 2019, 06:02:19 PM
Post by: Alchase on April 26, 2019, 06:35:53 PM
My last Methow hunt I saw too many cougar kills to count. Wolf tracks and wolves themselves where all over the Bluebuck and Lightning creek area. I was paced by two wolves as I was hunting they kept their distance but they watched me for about 15 minutes from the ridge line. On the Olympic Peninsula I saw cougar tracks and scat everywhere.
In the campground on the East Chewuch, my wife and I found seven cougar kills in the campground and that was just a day trip.
Post by: Jake T on April 28, 2019, 08:39:04 AM
In the campground on the East Chewuch, my wife and I found seven cougar kills in the campground and that was just a day trip.
How do you know it was a cougar kill? What is different about the kill that distinctly identifies it as cougar? Honest question.
Post by: KFhunter on April 28, 2019, 08:50:41 AM
Bears cover carcass much heavier and eat a lot more in one setting and crap everwhere
Yotea dont cover the carcass and the hind quarters are chewed mangled carcass is scattered
Wolves make a mess and carcass is scattered all over
If yhe carcass has been scavanged by mutiple species and birds its much harder to tell unless you can find cat tracks and scrape marks from their cache
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: SuperX on April 28, 2019, 08:57:18 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on April 28, 2019, 09:16:32 AM
Post by: funkster on April 28, 2019, 09:48:27 AM
Post by: Pegasus on April 28, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
weird that deer would be so attracted to campgrounds that a cougar could kill so many deer in the same place. they aren't spree killers so it couldn't be a case of finding a bunch of deer yarded up. I wonder if it was poachers and the cats were just feeding on carcasses? I've seen cat tracks all over a gut pile the morning after it was killed.
Cats are spree killers. The deer were probably pretty tame in the park making them easy pickings and were probably there to lick the human pee areas craving the minerals in our urine.
Post by: Pegasus on April 28, 2019, 10:01:19 AM
If the general season harvest rates don’t show a decline in elk harvested numbers, I don’t know what does. IMO, the special permits are just a trickle down. Someone is not managing our game properly. I don’t think it really has to do with predators, more so, miscalculating how many elk an area can sustain and issuing special permits based on those inaccurate figures :twocents:
If the bulls are declining at a rapid rate and the cows are not then it is likely not the predators creating the disparity. Big bulls are normally the last to join the lower altitude elk party and since we had a mild winter for most of the winter it can be a possibility that the bull count was flawed because they were still at higher elevations up in the timber and escaped counting. Of course poachers and tribal hunters targeting the bulls is the other possibility.
Post by: SuperX on April 28, 2019, 10:05:35 AM
Post by: bearpaw on April 28, 2019, 10:18:27 AM
Cougar will kill on a spree, they often do it with sheep. One time a rancher here in NE WA was having cougar problems, the warden finally told the rancher to put his sheep in the barn at night, that first night the cougar went through the window and killed every sheep in the barn, over 20 of them. She only ate off of 1 or 2 of them.
Often times cats will get a chance to kill again when they are laid up near a recent kill. Once they pretty much clean up a kill they will start hunting again, if they don't make a kill they will return to the old kill to chew up a few more bones. I have followed cats back to their old kills countless times when hound hunting. Another thing I learned is that a female will leave her kiittens at a kill and start hunting again, when she makes another kill she goes back and gets the kittens and takes them to the new kill. If the kittens are too small, the female will drag the animal back to the layer where she is safe keeping the kittens. I once found where a 90ish pound female drug an adult cow elk 1/2 to 1 mile back to the layer and kittens. She had used that layer for years as there were old bones from dozens of elk killed over the years around those rocks.
If a campground is in prime winter range and deer wander in there often I can see why there would be a lot of kills in and around a campground.
Post by: Pegasus on April 28, 2019, 10:24:39 AM
I didn't know cougars were spree killers, I've always heard the opposite until now. So when they spree kill do they still cover every kill and drag them off?
I have found several recent cougar kills in the same proximity. They were both covered and appeared to have been dead about the same amount of time. Both showed little signs of having been eaten.
Post by: SuperX on April 28, 2019, 10:40:00 AM
I didn't know cougars were spree killers, I've always heard the opposite until now. So when they spree kill do they still cover every kill and drag them off?
I have found several recent cougar kills in the same proximity. They were both covered and appeared to have been dead about the same amount of time. Both showed little signs of having been eaten.
wow, so now we can ask if a cougar eats one deer every 10-12 days, how many do they kill and not eat? Even more reason to manage them aggressively :(
Post by: JimmyHoffa on April 28, 2019, 10:43:46 AM
I didn't know cougars were spree killers, I've always heard the opposite until now. So when they spree kill do they still cover every kill and drag them off?Just one animal usually gets drug off from what I've seen. The rest are left laying where they died. Bobcats do it too, like when they get into a bird pen. Kill all the ducks or chickens and then only take one to eat.
Post by: huntnfmly on April 28, 2019, 10:54:49 AM
I know this might sound like captain obvious talking but it's just the way they are wired.I didn't know cougars were spree killers, I've always heard the opposite until now. So when they spree kill do they still cover every kill and drag them off?Just one animal usually gets drug off from what I've seen. The rest are left laying where they died. Bobcats do it too, like when they get into a bird pen. Kill all the ducks or chickens and then only take one to eat.
They don't just kill to eat it's like that jaguar that got loose in the zoo and killed like 7-8 animals as soon as it got out before they got it and you know it got fed good from the game keepers .
What I mean by that is the animals are well fed and I'm sure it did it just because
Post by: KFhunter on April 28, 2019, 11:50:53 AM
You should see the Calico Farm cat when I start tipping over hay bales loaded with mice especially oat hay, they just go into a frenzy and 1 cat will kill many many mice, she'll have several in each paw and several in her mouth and keeos swiping at more trying to not let the ones shes got escape so she'll bite them so they cant run off.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: bigmacc on April 28, 2019, 07:05:41 PM
The kills we have been seeing over the last decade in the Methow have been very obvious for even a novice cougar hunter like myself because of the scratch marks on the ground, or if fresh enough you can see obvious signs of "a cat" taking hold on the neck or shoulders. We found over 2 dozen in 1 area last year, we talked with a "cougar guy" we know and he said they kill, drag and bury the kill like a "turd in a sandbox". The ones we came across were partially eaten, mostly from the hind quarters up then left and buried. The rancher/packer we know said that cougars wont eat spoiled meat and when they come back to feed on their kill, if it has "turned" they just go and kill another, hence, 1 per week. Bearpaw will know better on how these things operate but from what I have seen over the last decade or so they are killing machines, maybe not the "thrill killers" that wolves are because they are teaching their young and they hunt in packs and will kill just to teach their young, cougars seem to be just as lethal because they need to kill more often.
Post by: bigmacc on April 28, 2019, 07:30:18 PM
Fair enough but I would argue that it's fairly irrelevant. Its 2019 not 1975. I in no way mean that as an insult or an "old timer" remark but management is never ending and always changing. Even at a 5 year low we still have a robust elk herd in yakima compared to what we had back when hounds were running around. So if predators have exploded like some have said why havent elk populations continually plummeted? I wanna connect the dots more than anyone but the dots dont line up :twocents:
Karl, thank you for "engaging", no insult taken as far as being an "old timer" :chuckle:. I am glad that the area you are hunting is doing well as far as numbers, I can go back a lot farther than "75" :chuckle: but I will tell you this, predators were something you pretty much read about or heard stories about pre 75, then we seen a few more each year and a few more the next year and so on and so on, now depending on the area or part of the state you are hunting it can be as different as night and day as far as "the predator" situation goes, some parts of the state are getting pounded by multiple predators, some may only have cats, some may only have bear, some may have a combination of some and some areas may have them all, for instance the Methow where I spend my time, our deer herd is getting whacked by all 4, bear, cougar, coyote and the wolf. All 4 populations are growing, thriving and killing deer every day..... :twocents:
Post by: SuperX on April 29, 2019, 10:51:26 AM
Looking at wolves, cougars and man only, here are some rough yearly numbers I've come up with to help me 'get it'.
Based on the 2018 harvest stats, combined deer/elk kills by hunters were ~32,000.
Wolves @ 20 deer a year (WI DNR numbers) for 126 wolves, leaves another ~2500 eaten.
WDFW estimated 2000 - 2500 cougar in the state back in 2015. At the same 20 deer/elk a year for cats, they would account for ~40,000 - 50,000 eaten a year.
All told, we would be seeing ~80,000 deer/elk EATEN per year without considering fawn mortality, predator spree killing, poaching, conflict management, killed but not recovered by hunters, vehicle mortality, death by disease / natural causes, or tribal hunting as factors.
The 2018 harvest report showed 220 cats killed and registered by hunters potentially saving 4500 deer/elk. Almost all of the areas open for hunting cougars met or exceeded harvest objectives for those areas, meaning there isn't much more we can do to limit the largest source of ungulate mortality without more tags.
I also looked at the 300 GMUs and the quota for them is only 23 cougars on the top end while the herd is struggling so badly that many are leaving the state to elk hunt. It sure makes you scratch your head.
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2019, 11:09:33 AM
I'm still trying to get my head around the health of our herds and the role of predators in their decline. I've come to the back-of-the-napkin conclusion that our biggest addressable problem is the cougars.Yes and those numbers are likely conservative. Wolf numbers are almost certainly north of 200, and (adult) cougar numbers are likely closer of 3,000. Add 30,000 black bears and lots of coyotes, and you're possibly looking at predation kill alone of close to 80,000.
Looking at wolves, cougars and man only, here are some rough yearly numbers I've come up with to help me 'get it'.
Based on the 2018 harvest stats, combined deer/elk kills by hunters were ~32,000.
Wolves @ 20 deer a year (WI DNR numbers) for 126 wolves, leaves another ~2500 eaten.
WDFW estimated 2000 - 2500 cougar in the state back in 2015. At the same 20 deer/elk a year for cats, they would account for ~40,000 - 50,000 eaten a year.
All told, we would be seeing ~80,000 deer/elk EATEN per year without considering fawn mortality, predator spree killing, poaching, conflict management, killed but not recovered by hunters, vehicle mortality, death by disease / natural causes, or tribal hunting as factors.
The 2018 harvest report showed 220 cats killed and registered by hunters potentially saving 4500 deer/elk. Almost all of the areas open for hunting cougars met or exceeded harvest objectives for those areas, meaning there isn't much more we can do to limit the largest source of ungulate mortality without more tags.
I also looked at the 300 GMUs and the quota for them is only 23 cougars on the top end while the herd is struggling so badly that many are leaving the state to elk hunt. It sure makes you scratch your head.
Post by: Stein on April 29, 2019, 11:30:26 AM
Post by: SuperX on April 29, 2019, 08:11:33 PM
Post by: SuperX on April 29, 2019, 08:12:59 PM
Good thing we don't have grizzlies and disease to deal with as well. :chuckle:LOL! The feds say they are here, but I think the state is still not sure :chuckle:
Post by: Tbar on April 29, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
I'm hunting out of state this year, but if there were tags I might be tempted to buy a big game license here to hunt cougars.If there were tags?
Post by: Special T on April 29, 2019, 09:29:51 PM
I would also add that Cougars and wolves provide no relief or safe place to hide for ungulates. Cougars are ambush hunters and wolves are sight predators. Open feild arnt safe nor the timber. Imo either by themselves are survivable both... killing spree.I'm still trying to get my head around the health of our herds and the role of predators in their decline. I've come to the back-of-the-napkin conclusion that our biggest addressable problem is the cougars.Yes and those numbers are likely conservative. Wolf numbers are almost certainly north of 200, and (adult) cougar numbers are likely closer of 3,000. Add 30,000 black bears and lots of coyotes, and you're possibly looking at predation kill alone of close to 80,000.
Looking at wolves, cougars and man only, here are some rough yearly numbers I've come up with to help me 'get it'.
Based on the 2018 harvest stats, combined deer/elk kills by hunters were ~32,000.
Wolves @ 20 deer a year (WI DNR numbers) for 126 wolves, leaves another ~2500 eaten.
WDFW estimated 2000 - 2500 cougar in the state back in 2015. At the same 20 deer/elk a year for cats, they would account for ~40,000 - 50,000 eaten a year.
All told, we would be seeing ~80,000 deer/elk EATEN per year without considering fawn mortality, predator spree killing, poaching, conflict management, killed but not recovered by hunters, vehicle mortality, death by disease / natural causes, or tribal hunting as factors.
The 2018 harvest report showed 220 cats killed and registered by hunters potentially saving 4500 deer/elk. Almost all of the areas open for hunting cougars met or exceeded harvest objectives for those areas, meaning there isn't much more we can do to limit the largest source of ungulate mortality without more tags.
I also looked at the 300 GMUs and the quota for them is only 23 cougars on the top end while the herd is struggling so badly that many are leaving the state to elk hunt. It sure makes you scratch your head.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: SuperX on April 29, 2019, 10:52:53 PM
I probably should have said quota but I don't think it is that - they manage to an objective and when it is done, they close that area to further hunting. In the harvest report they talked about the 72 hour delay to register hides as a concern for over harvest, and they wanted to go to 24 hours so they could close faster when they hit their objective. At least that was my reading of it, I didn't dwell on it for longer than it took to get some numbers.I'm hunting out of state this year, but if there were tags I might be tempted to buy a big game license here to hunt cougars.If there were tags?