Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 10:39:41 AM
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: HoytHunter24 on June 25, 2019, 10:50:43 AM
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 10:52:37 AM
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 01:36:02 PM
I have a few thoughts, or I guess it is a wish list, of potential changes I would like to suggest for the upcoming spring bear reg proposal.
According to the department, most fall black bear harvest is opportunistic. Most bears are taken incidentally by people hunting deer and elk who have a bear tag "just in case," rather than by hunters specifically targeting bears.
Also according to the department, you do not have official population estimates, instead you rely on hunter harvest statistics as a surrogate for population monitoring. So the greater the harvest, the larger the population is assumed to be.
So, taking these two things in mind, I would like to suggest as one means of increasing spring opportunity, opening up a spring hunt in unit 204. If you look at the fall harvest statistics for 2018, you will see unit 204 has a significantly higher fall bear harvest than any northeast unit. Compare unit 204 fall harvest with the highest fall harvest unit in the northeast:
Unit 204: Total harvest 47
Number of hunters 636
Days hunted per harvest 84
Unit 101: Total harvest 38
Number of hunters 781
Days hunted per harvest 129
So, based off of those numbers, and your own policy of using hunter success rates for estimating population densities, plus your statement about fall bears being largely incidental take, it is very clear that 204 has a large, thriving bear population that could easily support a spring season.
I would also like to see spring opportunity opened in unit 113, which has the second highest fall bear harvest in the northeast.
113 fall harvest statistics 2018:
Total harvest 32
Number of hunters 547
Days per harvest 107
Now I understand the reason behind not having a spring hunt in 113 is due to it being a grizzly recovery zone. However, I do not feel that it is a valid, logical reason to keep it closed to spring hunters. For one thing, it is still open to fall bear hunting. To think that a person who would mistake a grizzly for a black bear in the spring wouldn't make that same mistake in the fall is absurd. This is especially true when looking at your belief that most fall bears are incidental harvest. Unlike fall bear hunters, spring bear hunters are all specifically targeting bears. This means they are more dedicated bear hunters, and in theory should be better at identifying bear species. For this reason I believe spring bear hunters would be less likely to misidentify a grizzly than your average fall bear hunter. Also, we now have the mandatory grizzly identification test, which is required to hunt bear in most northeast units. So anybody legally hunting bears would have passed the identification test. Is there an actual law on the books against spring hunting in grizzly recovery zones, or is it just WDFW policy? If it is not a law that needs to be changed, then let's open 113 to spring bear hunting.
A couple more ideas to expand spring bear opportunity:
Open select units in the northeast and southeast regions to otc spring bear, while leaving the more sought after tags draw only. This way many people would still purchase an application to apply for the more desired hunts, but can hunt otc units if not selected for the more desirable units.
Another possibility would be to open all northeast units to otc spring bear hunting. To offset a loss of application fees, you could make a spring bear license / tag a separate license from a fall tag. So we can purchase a spring bear license over the counter, and if we want to hunt bear in the fall, even if the spring tag did not get filled, that spring license / tag would not be valid for the fall season. A separate fall license and tag would have to be purchased. This idea may actually increase total revenue despite the loss of spring application fees for northeast units, and the department would still be collecting application fees from those looking to hunt the southeast or west side units.
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on June 25, 2019, 02:31:58 PM
I am interested to see what they are proposing for changes:yeah:
I am a little worried, past performance of WDFW and recent disclosure of permit sales would lead me to suspect a fee increase and size reduction of existing permit areas, forming "new increased opportunity" by offering more permits in same GMU's.
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 02:34:51 PM
I am interested to see what they are proposing for changes:yeah:
I am a little worried, past performance of WDFW and recent disclosure of permit sales would lead me to suspect a fee increase and size reduction of existing permit areas, forming "new increased opportunity" by offering more permits in same GMU's.
So many pessimists on here :rolleyes:
Look at the first couple pages of the fall bear reg thread. Lot of people saying i was full of crap, zero chance, etc etc. Now its damn near a done deal.
Post by: bobcat on June 25, 2019, 02:39:39 PM
Post by: justyhntr on June 25, 2019, 02:43:29 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on June 25, 2019, 02:53:18 PM
Post by: dmoua on June 25, 2019, 03:32:04 PM
There should be spring permits in just about every GMU in western Washington. Probably all units in the Cascades on the east side as well. There's no reason not to have some spring permits in all of those units, even if it's only 10.
This is a good idea. There are many units that hold a ton of blackbear in Eastern Wa that is not open for spring hunts.
Post by: BreezyBear on June 25, 2019, 03:51:18 PM
I would think spring bear in the colockum and yakima units that the elk are struggling in would be a great idea. Bears hammer the newborn fawn and calves.
[/quote
Excellent suggestion! :tup:
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on June 25, 2019, 05:02:59 PM
Post by: Jpmiller on June 25, 2019, 05:17:30 PM
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 11:04:05 PM
I'd love an otc spring bear season. I can't get myself worked up to hunt turkeys so being able to get after a bear in spring gets me out in the woods which is good for everyone lol email sent.
Same here. I live in the middle of the best turkey hunting in the state and im just not interested. But id sure love it if i could hunt bear here every spring, then go out and get another bear every august.
Post by: huntnnw on June 25, 2019, 11:32:43 PM
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 11:39:16 PM
should be statewide spring bear season otc. I would not like to see certain GMU's open and others closed packing people in units just open all of them and keep pressure where people want to hunt. There is no reason that every unit in NE corner and the blues dont have a otc spring bear season.
There is a reason. money. they want the app fees. thats why i suggested all ne units being otc, with spring licenses invalid for fall hunting. Ne would have pressure spread out among all units, people would pay the 24 bucks or whatever for their otc spring license instead of 7 bucks for an app fee, and se and west side would all still require permit app sales. If you have another idea that will convince them they could go otc without losing money, let em know. But whatever your proposal, if they think it will result in a loss of revenue, it will be rejected, so keep that in mind when making your case.
Post by: huntnnw on June 25, 2019, 11:43:49 PM
Post by: Bango skank on June 25, 2019, 11:50:24 PM
nothing in this state is done for wildlife its all about the mighty dollar and then they try and tell us how they manage this or that, no it boils down to dollars :rolleyes:
Exactly. And i fully agree with you when you say spring bear should be otc statewide, that would be ideal, but im trying to come up with more realistic ideas that wont be rejected out of hand.
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on June 26, 2019, 12:14:49 AM
Yeah, I know I sound like a "Negative Nancy"
So many pessimists on here :rolleyes:
Look at the first couple pages of the fall bear reg thread. Lot of people saying i was full of crap, zero chance, etc etc. Now its damn near a done deal.
But I remember the days of a otc spring bear seasons in certain areas, baiting, hounds, etc..
I have watched the "Fish and Game" department cater to special interest groups and be more concerned with their political agenda and personal financial betterment than actually managing our recreational interests (fishing/hunting)
"Watchable Wildlife" has become a focus, planter trout fishing is more important than Salmon/steelhead.
Wolves get more $$ than any of our huntable species.
Private timber companies have limited access in direct opposition of "increased landowner participation"
(Or is charging access fees participating?)
It just all seems like a sleight of hand trick to keep us spending more for less.
The WDFW should be run by sportsmen and not politicians.
Their jobs should be dependent on results and customer satisfaction.
.
I hope for the better, and the outlook is good, but once the shine wears off I hope we are not wishing it would be like the "good old days" of 2020...
Post by: grade-creek-rd on June 26, 2019, 08:07:11 AM
Grade
Post by: aaronoto on June 26, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Currently we are allowed to harvest two bears per year in Western Washington...yet there is no OTC spring bear season, which makes no sense, especially since it is used a tool to reduce tree damage and a lot of timber harvest occurs in Western Washington. Why not make an OTC spring bear season in Western Washington with a "spring bear tag" and still have the permit season in Eastern Washington...heck, WDFW can make even more money! You need to buy a Spring Bear Tag to apply for the special permits, plus the permit application fees, and also have to buy a fall bear tag if you want to hunt bears in the fall...
Grade
This right here! I would gladly buy separate spring and fall bear tags for the opportunity to buy a spring bear tag OTC. Whether you take 2 in the fall or 1 in the spring and 1 in the fall, 2 bears is 2 bears, which has always left me scratching my head as to why there's no OTC spring season in W. WA.
Post by: hunter399 on June 26, 2019, 09:01:18 AM
Another truth is if we see second bear tags in eastern wa in 2019 my jaw is gonna be dragging on the ground. And will be only ccause of some added revenues.
nothing in this state is done for wildlife its all about the mighty dollar and then they try and tell us how they manage this or that, no it boils down to dollars :rolleyes:Agree with this statement :tup:
Post by: Oh Mah on June 26, 2019, 09:19:22 AM
I'd love an otc spring bear season. I can't get myself worked up to hunt turkeys so being able to get after a bear in spring gets me out in the woods which is good for everyone lol email sent.This is a great idea and as was said keep some areas in a draw only.
Post by: grundy53 on June 26, 2019, 10:11:45 AM
should be statewide spring bear season otc. I would not like to see certain GMU's open and others closed packing people in units just open all of them and keep pressure where people want to hunt. There is no reason that every unit in NE corner and the blues dont have a otc spring bear season.Agreed
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Post by: grundy53 on June 26, 2019, 10:14:47 AM
How about state wide OTC spring bear tags. With the opportunity to apply for a "quality" permit that would allow you to hunt the whole month of June. Which would make it a rut hunt like deer and elk quality tags are.should be statewide spring bear season otc. I would not like to see certain GMU's open and others closed packing people in units just open all of them and keep pressure where people want to hunt. There is no reason that every unit in NE corner and the blues dont have a otc spring bear season.
There is a reason. money. they want the app fees. thats why i suggested all ne units being otc, with spring licenses invalid for fall hunting. Ne would have pressure spread out among all units, people would pay the 24 bucks or whatever for their otc spring license instead of 7 bucks for an app fee, and se and west side would all still require permit app sales. If you have another idea that will convince them they could go otc without losing money, let em know. But whatever your proposal, if they think it will result in a loss of revenue, it will be rejected, so keep that in mind when making your case.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Post by: dilleytech on June 26, 2019, 11:16:54 AM
Post by: bowhunterforever on June 26, 2019, 11:54:46 AM
Post by: Bango skank on June 26, 2019, 12:00:43 PM
Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
Post by: Timberstalker on June 26, 2019, 12:14:27 PM
Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
So then, the Hound Season we had ~10 years ago was brought on by initiative?
Post by: Bango skank on June 26, 2019, 12:19:26 PM
Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
So then, the Hound Season we had ~10 years ago was brought on by initiative?
I dont know how the hell that was possible, but it obviously got squashed. If you want to waste your breath asking wdfw to bring back hounds, be my guest.
Post by: Timberstalker on June 26, 2019, 07:25:14 PM
Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
So then, the Hound Season we had ~10 years ago was brought on by initiative?
I dont know how the hell that was possible, but it obviously got squashed. If you want to waste your breath asking wdfw to bring back hounds, be my guest.
I’m not questioning you. Don’t let your panties get bunched up. :chuckle: too soon?
I think it’s important that we keep this forward motion moving.
If there’s a chance to get baiting or hounds back, I’d love to explore it. That’s all I’m wondering.
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on June 26, 2019, 07:43:47 PM
There is wording in the law to allow special permits by WDFW, that is how private timber companies are allowed to do it.Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
Post by: Jpmiller on June 26, 2019, 08:14:27 PM
There is wording in the law to allow special permits by WDFW, that is how private timber companies are allowed to do it.Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
Sounds like a special draw baiting/hound permit to me, not that I'm in a position to take advantage of either.
Post by: dilleytech on June 27, 2019, 12:27:34 PM
There is wording in the law to allow special permits by WDFW, that is how private timber companies are allowed to do it.Is bringing back bear baiting totally out of the question at this point?
As far as asking wdfw to bring it back, yes, totally out of the question. The ban on baiting is state law, not wdfw policy. Wdfw does not have legal authority to restore baiting or hounds.
Sounds like a special draw baiting/hound permit to me, not that I'm in a position to take advantage of either.
Special draw bear baiting tag would be a good start.
Post by: Bango skank on June 27, 2019, 12:42:55 PM
We will have more of an effect if everybody is asking for more or less the same thing, and will be taken more seriously if we are asking for something that is actually up for review.
Send emails supporting expanded spring bear opportunity to:
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: Timberstalker on June 27, 2019, 12:45:38 PM
If you guys want baiting, hounds, all that, id suggest you make that an entirely separate issue with the department. Whats on the table now is changes to spring bear season. Dates, permit numbers, etc. I think it would be best if any emails sent in right now focused on the matter currently currently at hand, spring bear regulations. That is what they are open to making changes to currently. If theyre getting a bunch of emails about a bunch of other random stuff like baiting and hounds, its just going to be a mess of background noise that i feel will take away from the effect of a generally unified voice pushing for the same thing, increased spring opportunity. focus on what is currently in reach, worry about the other stuff next, after we get this. :twocents:
I agree 100%. They'll listen to ideas about Spring Bear; get it while we can.
Post by: Oh Mah on June 27, 2019, 11:03:40 PM
If you guys want baiting, hounds, all that, id suggest you make that an entirely separate issue with the department. Whats on the table now is changes to spring bear season. Dates, permit numbers, etc. I think it would be best if any emails sent in right now focused on the matter currently at hand, spring bear regulations. That is what they are open to making changes to right now. If theyre getting a bunch of emails about a bunch of other random stuff like baiting and hounds, its just going to be a mess of background noise that i feel will take away from the effect of a generally unified voice pushing for the same thing, increased spring opportunity. focus on what is currently in reach, worry about the other stuff next, after we get this. :twocents:I agree :yeah:.It would be awesome to have baiting and hounds again but if we want it we need to get there first.
We will have more of an effect if everybody is asking for more or less the same thing, and will be taken more seriously if we are asking for something that is actually up for review.
Send emails supporting expanded spring bear opportunity to:
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
OTC tags spring and fall would be a great start.We want (i hope all of us)the bears to have good numbers not to many and not too few either.Before we bring baiting and hounds to the table we need to get some numbers (true numbers) of how many bears that is.If we have over that amount and we hunters can't get them down to that number without baiting or hounds then and only then can we even have a discussion about it. :twocents: MUDDYING THE WATER WILL NOT GET US ANYWHERE ON ANYTHING.How many on here in WA. even have hounds to hunt bear?
Post by: Eric M on June 28, 2019, 01:45:30 AM
Ill bet a lot of guys would get hounds if they could use them.If you guys want baiting, hounds, all that, id suggest you make that an entirely separate issue with the department. Whats on the table now is changes to spring bear season. Dates, permit numbers, etc. I think it would be best if any emails sent in right now focused on the matter currently at hand, spring bear regulations. That is what they are open to making changes to right now. If theyre getting a bunch of emails about a bunch of other random stuff like baiting and hounds, its just going to be a mess of background noise that i feel will take away from the effect of a generally unified voice pushing for the same thing, increased spring opportunity. focus on what is currently in reach, worry about the other stuff next, after we get this. :twocents:I agree :yeah:.It would be awesome to have baiting and hounds again but if we want it we need to get there first.
We will have more of an effect if everybody is asking for more or less the same thing, and will be taken more seriously if we are asking for something that is actually up for review.
Send emails supporting expanded spring bear opportunity to:
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
OTC tags spring and fall would be a great start.We want (i hope all of us)the bears to have good numbers not to many and not too few either.Before we bring baiting and hounds to the table we need to get some numbers (true numbers) of how many bears that is.If we have over that amount and we hunters can't get them down to that number without baiting or hounds then and only then can we even have a discussion about it. :twocents: MUDDYING THE WATER WILL NOT GET US ANYWHERE ON ANYTHING.How many on here in WA. even have hounds to hunt bear?
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on June 28, 2019, 08:58:54 AM
Post by: Bango skank on June 28, 2019, 09:38:04 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on June 28, 2019, 09:41:20 AM
Our voices were heard and we got the fall bear regs change, now lets keep it up and get the spring regs improved too! Send those emails!is it official now?
Post by: Bango skank on June 28, 2019, 09:47:19 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on June 28, 2019, 10:05:40 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on June 28, 2019, 11:13:25 AM
Post by: JeffRaines on July 01, 2019, 12:37:05 PM
Our voices were heard and we got the fall bear regs change, now lets keep it up and get the spring regs improved too! Send those emails!
Sorry for derailment - does that take effect next year or this year? Regulations are the same as of right now which is why I'm asking
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 12:38:16 PM
Our voices were heard and we got the fall bear regs change, now lets keep it up and get the spring regs improved too! Send those emails!
Sorry for derailment - does that take effect next year or this year? Regulations are the same as of right now which is why I'm asking
This year. It was just approved on friday. Official notices should be put out soon.
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 12:50:13 PM
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on July 01, 2019, 02:07:20 PM
The changes will take effect Aug. 1, 2019.
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 02:22:33 PM
https://wdfw.wa.gov/news/commission-approves-changes-fall-bear-hunting-rules
The changes will take effect Aug. 1, 2019.
Thanks for posting that, i hadnt seen it yet. Surprised i didnt get it in an email. Ill post that link on the fall bear reg thread.
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on July 01, 2019, 02:28:19 PM
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 03:07:45 PM
https://wdfw.wa.gov/news/commission-approves-changes-fall-bear-hunting-rules
The changes will take effect Aug. 1, 2019.
Thanks for posting that, i hadnt seen it yet. Surprised i didnt get it in an email. Ill post that link on the fall bear reg thread.
The email just now came through for me.
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 01, 2019, 03:14:43 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on July 01, 2019, 04:28:31 PM
Post by: dilleytech on July 01, 2019, 04:40:08 PM
What are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
There aren’t any changes for spring bear yet.
Post by: trophyhunt on July 01, 2019, 05:11:11 PM
true, I’m wondering if the possible changes are in print?What are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
There aren’t any changes for spring bear yet.
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 06:34:02 PM
What are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
I believe the proposal will be announced and opened for public comment in september, which leads me to believe the proposed changes havent been finalized yet. this is why its important that we all contact wdfw now to tell them what we want, before the possible changes are set in stone. if you look at the screenshot in the first post of this thread, it just says "season dates and permit numbers." It says nothing about additional units opening or otc opportunities. we need to be loud and persistent so that we can change that.
Post by: jasnt on July 01, 2019, 10:52:44 PM
agreed and I’m already at work lobbying the internet. Other than a jerk hounds man we got lots of folks want otc spring bear seasonWhat are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
I believe the proposal will be announced and opened for public comment in september, which leads me to believe the proposed changes havent been finalized yet. this is why its important that we all contact wdfw now to tell them what we want, before the possible changes are set in stone. if you look at the screenshot in the first post of this thread, it just says "season dates and permit numbers." It says nothing about additional units opening or otc opportunities. we need to be loud and persistent so that we can change that.
Post by: Bango skank on July 01, 2019, 11:50:31 PM
agreed and I’m already at work lobbying the internet. Other than a jerk hounds man we got lots of folks want otc spring bear seasonWhat are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
I believe the proposal will be announced and opened for public comment in september, which leads me to believe the proposed changes havent been finalized yet. this is why its important that we all contact wdfw now to tell them what we want, before the possible changes are set in stone. if you look at the screenshot in the first post of this thread, it just says "season dates and permit numbers." It says nothing about additional units opening or otc opportunities. we need to be loud and persistent so that we can change that.
Theres going to be at least one jerk in every crowd. See the above poll in both this thread and the fall bear reg thread for proof.
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 12:45:31 AM
Our bears will not be wiped out. Right next door in Idaho they have otc spring bear, baiting, hound hunting, second bear tags, and lots of out of state hunters to boot, and they sure haven't extirpated their bears even with all of that. Not by a long shot.
Take a look at the "permits issued" vs "number of hunters." Across the board, all northeast units, about 50% of permit holders did not even participate in the hunt! Half of all successful applicants didnt even bother trying! An otc season, running from april 1st to june 15th will not result in massive pressure and crowded woods like a short modern firearm deer season does. Hunter numbers would not be all that high, and they would be spread out over a greater period of time, unlike modern deer or elk where everybody hits the woods on the same day.
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 01:41:41 AM
agreed and I’m already at work lobbying the internet. Other than a jerk hounds man we got lots of folks want otc spring bear seasonWhat are the changes for spring bear, when are they supposed to come out???
I believe the proposal will be announced and opened for public comment in september, which leads me to believe the proposed changes havent been finalized yet. this is why its important that we all contact wdfw now to tell them what we want, before the possible changes are set in stone. if you look at the screenshot in the first post of this thread, it just says "season dates and permit numbers." It says nothing about additional units opening or otc opportunities. we need to be loud and persistent so that we can change that.
A lot of us have been really apathetic about this stuff for a long time, feeling like positive changes cant be made. Hopefully our success with the fall bear and bag limit proposal will change that, and get more people to step up and participate since its been shown that positive change is in fact possible if we show enough support.
Post by: luvmystang67 on July 02, 2019, 03:44:49 AM
Asked for significantly expanded spring permits and areas. (I told them that I thought this was as good as I could expect from WDFW).
My second proposal was for a spring general season at no extra cost. I told them that perhaps they could get some of us back on their side by expanding opportunity without additional cost. I said the only reason this is #2 is for that exact reason... they don't seem to be interest in expanding opportunity without some revenue generation.
I also mentioned that if harvest totals are a concern with two general seasons... they could make hunters pick one, spring or fall. I think I would pick spring for something to do!
Post by: jasnt on July 02, 2019, 05:14:31 AM
Post by: CackleBird98 on July 02, 2019, 05:45:31 AM
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 08:27:56 AM
Make bear season harvest reports due by the end of November. Based on the harvest data and a couple other metrics (conflict reports, fawn/calf survival rate, total bear population) on a unit to unit basis statewide provide spring tags that would match the desired harvest levels. This would allow yearly changes that would maximize opportunity without threatening the long term health of the population. Since they no longer publish spring hunts in the pamphlet, little changes on our end other than hunts may look a little different each year when we go to apply.
I don’t like the call in quota thing they have set up for lions as it prevents any long term planning because you never know if it’ll be open or not. If they set tag allotments every winter, then issue draw tags they still get their money and we are still able to plan trips in advance. I think adding more units would increase applicants as well, boosting revenue for WDFW without pissing hunters off.
If you see holes in my plan I would like to hear them.
Post by: zackmioli on July 02, 2019, 08:51:34 AM
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 12:01:18 PM
I think we all agree more spring opportunity is in order. Having watched and listened to how the fall changes were presented, questioned and discussed I doubt OTC is going to happen because they love to ask worst case scenario questions. Depending on the math used the 23% overall success rate on spring hunts will stop that. So here is my suggestion for managing spring seasons.
Make bear season harvest reports due by the end of November. Based on the harvest data and a couple other metrics (conflict reports, fawn/calf survival rate, total bear population) on a unit to unit basis statewide provide spring tags that would match the desired harvest levels. This would allow yearly changes that would maximize opportunity without threatening the long term health of the population. Since they no longer publish spring hunts in the pamphlet, little changes on our end other than hunts may look a little different each year when we go to apply.
I don’t like the call in quota thing they have set up for lions as it prevents any long term planning because you never know if it’ll be open or not. If they set tag allotments every winter, then issue draw tags they still get their money and we are still able to plan trips in advance. I think adding more units would increase applicants as well, boosting revenue for WDFW without pissing hunters off.
If you see holes in my plan I would like to hear them.
Holes in your plan: to have a desired harvest level they would have to know how many bears there are in each unit / region. They dont. there are no official population estimates.
Even if they did come up with official popiulation estimates, they would be absurdly low, and so would our quotas. Just look at our cougar problem if you doubt that.
An otc spring hunt would never "threaten the long term health of the population." Idaho has otc spring, second bear tags, plus they have baiting, hound hunting, aand lots of non res hunters too, and their bear numbers arent in any danger. we do NOT need quotas, we need our bear numbers reduced to help our ungulates, and guaranteed if we did end up with a quota system it would prevent that by being set absurdly low. i think we would be worse off with a quota system than we are now in regards to our predator numbers.
Another hole in your plan. in order to have a quota type system be meaningful at all, they would have to have a mandatory hide sealing program like with lions, to ensure everybody is actually reporting their harvest. Who wants to deal with that? I sure dont, and im sure wdfw doesnt. And no the tooth submittal isnt the same thing. lots of guys still dont submit teeth or report harvest. But a hide sealing requirement would have to be followed or a taxi wouldnt touch a bear, just like with lions.
Seriously, if they have a quota / harvest guideline type system that will determine spring permit numbers, but they do not have mandatory hide sealing in effect, a lot of folks simply wont report, in order to have more spring opportunity. thats the reality. We want our bear numbers reduced, and if hunters just not reporting their harvest and paying the $10 fee was seen as a way to accomplish that, then thats exactly what would happen.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 01:04:54 PM
Holes in your plan: to have a desired harvest level they would have to know how many bears there are in each unit / region. They dont. there are no official population estimates.
Even if they did come up with official popiulation estimates, they would be absurdly low, and so would our quotas. Just look at our cougar problem if you doubt that.
An otc spring hunt would never "threaten the long term health of the population." Idaho has otc spring, second bear tags, plus they have baiting, hound hunting, aand lots of non res hunters too, and their bear numbers arent in any danger. we do NOT need quotas, we need our bear numbers reduced to help our ungulates, and guaranteed if we did end up with a quota system it would prevent that by being set absurdly low. i think we would be worse off with a quota system than we are now in regards to our predator numbers.
Another hole in your plan. in order to have a quota type system be meaningful at all, they would have to have a mandatory hide sealing program like with lions, to ensure everybody is actually reporting their harvest. Who wants to deal with that? And no the tooth submittal isnt the same thing. lots of guys still dont submit teeth or report harvest. But a hide sealing requirement would have to be followed or a taxi wouldnt touch a bear, just like with lions.
Seriously, if they have a quota / harvest guideline type system that will determine spring permit numbers, but they do not have mandatory hide sealing in effect, a lot of folks simply wont report, in order to have more spring opportunity. thats the reality. We want our bear numbers reduced.
I concede they don’t have good population data right now however there is a study coming out that is supposed to layout the scientific method for obtaining that data in a cost effective manner. In the meantime, they could use another metric such as not allowing harvest greater than 80% of the historical highest harvest (spring+fall). I recognize the metric would be decided in house of WDFW and that they would most likely estimate low, conservative management is their style.
While an OTC hunt wouldn’t threaten the population (you know and I know) I am talking about the the commission and the plan standing up to public scrutiny. This ain’t Idaho. Wa has 4.3X the population, ID has 2.67X as much public land and a population that isn’t made up of drug addled tranny SJW’s.
When it comes to quotas, they already exist to some degree it just isn’t transparent to those outside the department. They allow x amount of spring tags per unit. How they come up with them I don’t know. I also hate the lion system we have but 1 thing at a time.
In regards to actual harvest reporting, they can require a tooth to be submitted or you receive a fine and can’t buy a tag the next year. There are ways that can be enforced without having to set up an appointment and doing it in person. Taxidermists and tanneries are choke points that enforcement could watch. There are always ways to game the system but DNA would make it pretty easy to prosecute anyone trying to cheat.
Nothing is perfect and we just received a big bump in fall hunting opportunities so I think our best bet is for incremental change in the right direction. Swinging for OTC spring bear may result in no change at all, similar to what you said about bait and dogs. From what I have heard from bios during the fall season procedure they are pretty reasonable and do what they can in the limits of data and an overly emotional and uneducated general population. Bear hunters that buy a tag make up .0028% of the population in this state. Right or wrong, better or worse we have to work with WDFW to have any progress.
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 01:15:34 PM
Holes in your plan: to have a desired harvest level they would have to know how many bears there are in each unit / region. They dont. there are no official population estimates.
Even if they did come up with official popiulation estimates, they would be absurdly low, and so would our quotas. Just look at our cougar problem if you doubt that.
An otc spring hunt would never "threaten the long term health of the population." Idaho has otc spring, second bear tags, plus they have baiting, hound hunting, aand lots of non res hunters too, and their bear numbers arent in any danger. we do NOT need quotas, we need our bear numbers reduced to help our ungulates, and guaranteed if we did end up with a quota system it would prevent that by being set absurdly low. i think we would be worse off with a quota system than we are now in regards to our predator numbers.
Another hole in your plan. in order to have a quota type system be meaningful at all, they would have to have a mandatory hide sealing program like with lions, to ensure everybody is actually reporting their harvest. Who wants to deal with that? And no the tooth submittal isnt the same thing. lots of guys still dont submit teeth or report harvest. But a hide sealing requirement would have to be followed or a taxi wouldnt touch a bear, just like with lions.
Seriously, if they have a quota / harvest guideline type system that will determine spring permit numbers, but they do not have mandatory hide sealing in effect, a lot of folks simply wont report, in order to have more spring opportunity. thats the reality. We want our bear numbers reduced.
In regards to actual harvest reporting, they can require a tooth to be submitted or you receive a fine and can’t buy a tag the next year. There are ways that can be enforced without having to set up an appointment and doing it in person. Taxidermists and tanneries are choke points that enforcement could watch. There are always ways to game the system but DNA would make it pretty easy to prosecute anyone trying to cheat.
How could they fine you for not submitting a tooth if they dont know if you harvested or not due to you not doing your hunt reporting? So basically the fine would be for not reporting. that already exists. the only change, based off what youre saying, would be to not allow somebody to purchase a license the following year if they dont report. not gonna happen, loss of revenue.. and if they WERE to start denying people licenses for not reporting, then would they end up applying that to deer elk and cougar too? Huge loss of revenue. no, they will never prevent you from buying a license for not reporting, and if you dont report they dont know if you harvested and cant nail you for not submitting a tooth. A quota type system absolutely would require a physical check in and sealing of every bear, just like cougar. thats why they do cougar the way they do.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 01:38:21 PM
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 01:45:55 PM
By having taxidermist/tanneries take a sample for DNA sequencing compared to a DNA bank from tooth samples they can be matched to confirm reporting. If no match track down hunter and apply penalties.
Sorry, but i see that as totally unrealistic. a burden on the state, and a burden on the taxidermist, expensive, and a huge logistical mess trying to implement and run, with a high likelihood of screwups on wdfws part resulting in major headaches for hunters, and a high liklihood of screwups on the taxidermists part also resulting in giant headaches for hunters. it would never happen. A physical check in like for cougars would be much simpler and more likely to happen. the better option is simply to not use a quota system, especially considering our lack of a formal population estimate, and the absolute guarantee that if wdfw does come up with a formal population estimate for each unit, it will be way off base from reality, just like cougar numbers.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 02:07:08 PM
We have been given the chance to get bear populations in check with 2 tags statewide and 3 1/2 months in the fall to fill said tags. I view spring as an opportunity to get out during a different season and put some pressure on the predators so they can’t just camp on fawning grounds with impunity.
I also recognize you’re coming from the perspective of the NE. I love your trail cam thread and obviously the area needs lots of hunter attention. I think you would be well suited to speak at a commission meeting with a slide show to prove this is an issue
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 02:11:46 PM
Another opportunity to be heard...
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 02:12:45 PM
It really isn’t much of a burden. Taxis already send in teeth, hair is even easier. The state already has the labs, tech and people to do it. It would cost more but if they made spring bear an actual quality hunt with units statewide and appropriate numbers of tags I would have no problem paying the extra 6 bucks for a quality app.
We have been given the chance to get bear populations in check with 2 tags statewide and 3 1/2 months in the fall to fill said tags. I view spring as an opportunity to get out during a different season and put some pressure on the predators so they can’t just camp on fawning grounds with impunity.
I also recognize you’re coming from the perspective of the NE. I love your trail cam thread and obviously the area needs lots of hunter attention. I think you would be well suited to speak at a commission meeting with a slide show to prove this is an issue
Taxis already send in teeth, but if they screw up and get the names confused on them it wont end up causing legal trouble for the hunter. and yes we have an opportunity to address bear overpopulation with our 2 bear bag limit and august opener now, but as soon as some absurd desired harvest guideline is implemented, that could go right out the window. It would open the doors for them to decide on limiting fall harvest. I think youre making everything more complicated than it needs to be, and your idea creates too much wiggle room for the state to restrict harvest, even in the fall, taking away our chamce for more aggressive predator management that we have achieved through the last proposal. Everything about what youre suggesting would be excessively complicated and burdensome with too much room for screwups. Better to keep everything simple. Like just doubling current permit numbers, adding additional units, and thats that if no otc.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 02:15:39 PM
Post by: Seabass on July 02, 2019, 02:18:06 PM
Post by: shanevg on July 02, 2019, 02:58:10 PM
It really isn’t much of a burden. Taxis already send in teeth, hair is even easier. The state already has the labs, tech and people to do it. It would cost more but if they made spring bear an actual quality hunt with units statewide and appropriate numbers of tags I would have no problem paying the extra 6 bucks for a quality app.
We have been given the chance to get bear populations in check with 2 tags statewide and 3 1/2 months in the fall to fill said tags. I view spring as an opportunity to get out during a different season and put some pressure on the predators so they can’t just camp on fawning grounds with impunity.
I also recognize you’re coming from the perspective of the NE. I love your trail cam thread and obviously the area needs lots of hunter attention. I think you would be well suited to speak at a commission meeting with a slide show to prove this is an issue
You're also assuming people take bears to a taxi. I've taken less than 10% of the bears I've ever harvested to a taxi.
Post by: Bango skank on July 02, 2019, 03:19:09 PM
It really isn’t much of a burden. Taxis already send in teeth, hair is even easier. The state already has the labs, tech and people to do it. It would cost more but if they made spring bear an actual quality hunt with units statewide and appropriate numbers of tags I would have no problem paying the extra 6 bucks for a quality app.
We have been given the chance to get bear populations in check with 2 tags statewide and 3 1/2 months in the fall to fill said tags. I view spring as an opportunity to get out during a different season and put some pressure on the predators so they can’t just camp on fawning grounds with impunity.
I also recognize you’re coming from the perspective of the NE. I love your trail cam thread and obviously the area needs lots of hunter attention. I think you would be well suited to speak at a commission meeting with a slide show to prove this is an issue
You're also assuming people take bears to a taxi. I've taken less than 10% of the bears I've ever harvested to a taxi.
Yup. Especially with august being open, more guys will be taking bears with hides that arent really worth saving, and just keeping meat / skull / claws. and a guy can clean up skulls and claws himself. Can also just send a hide in to an out of state tannery if you just want the tanned hide, no rug or mount or anything.
The only 2 ways to make sure people report would be massively increasing the non reporting fee, or not allowing people to buy a license the following year if they dont report. and even then, whats to stop people from falsely reporting as unsuccessful in order to keep the quotas up? It just wouldnt work.
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 02, 2019, 03:36:12 PM
Don’t forget to send an email encouraging more spring bear opportunity in one form or another.
Post by: shanevg on July 02, 2019, 06:57:50 PM
This is true. The reporting issue is another long issue that is probably taking away from the intended purpose of the thread, so I concede that isn’t a way to fix reporting issues.
Don’t forget to send an email encouraging more spring bear opportunity in one form or another.
Done! :)
Post by: Bango skank on July 04, 2019, 02:16:12 PM
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: Bango skank on July 07, 2019, 11:55:53 AM
This weekend would be a good time to get more emails out for anybody who hasnt done so yet, have those inboxes flooded when everybody comes back from their holiday weekend.
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Just a reminder
Post by: Bango skank on July 10, 2019, 11:18:08 AM
Thank you for your email and concerns, I will pass them on to the carnivore section manager in the Game Division. I will be filing the CR-102 on or before August 7, 2019. This will detail the changes in the WAC that the agency will be proposing and also will initiate public comment. At this time, the agency is still gathering information from our regional biologists and others to develop the recommendations.
So we will know what the proposed changes are in less than a month, but they are not finalized yet, so if you have ideas that you want wdfw to consider, get those emails sent!
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on July 10, 2019, 06:44:44 PM
Post by: Bango skank on July 11, 2019, 11:58:57 PM
Less than a month to get comments in...
Less than a month before the proposal is finalized anyway. Official public comment period doesnt start until then. What we have all been doing is sending them unsolicited advice in the hopes that they will cave to our whining and be more generous with the reg changes :chuckle:
Once the proposal is made, then the official public comment period begins and we will all have to comment again, for or against. at that point, it will be a "what you see is what you get, take it or leave it" situation, so if its any improvement at all, we need to support it or get nothing. hopefully they are going to give us a good increase in opportunity after all the noise we have been making.
Post by: Bango skank on July 19, 2019, 04:24:24 AM
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: Bango skank on July 23, 2019, 04:23:32 PM
Post by: bowhunterforever on July 23, 2019, 04:47:42 PM
This is why its important that we all contact wdfw and ask for increased spring bear opportunity. Even if you dont personally want to hunt bear, if you want to hunt deer, elk and/or moose, increasing bear harvest benefits you by benefitting our ungulate populations! https://collaboration.idfg.idaho.gov/WildlifeTechnicalReports/W-160-R-33-31%20Completion.pdf:yeah: Agreed need to get bear populations down. All predator numbers for that matter
Post by: skagitsteel on July 23, 2019, 04:52:20 PM
This is why its important that we all contact wdfw and ask for increased spring bear opportunity. Even if you dont personally want to hunt bear, if you want to hunt deer, elk and/or moose, increasing bear harvest benefits you by benefitting our ungulate populations! https://collaboration.idfg.idaho.gov/WildlifeTechnicalReports/W-160-R-33-31%20Completion.pdf
Time to whack some bears! I have been guilty of letting a lot of bears walk away and am changing my tune and going to try and help see as many tags filled as I can this year.
Post by: Bango skank on August 04, 2019, 03:24:35 PM
Post by: TriggerMike on August 06, 2019, 12:08:28 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on August 06, 2019, 12:55:51 PM
Post by: TriggerMike on August 07, 2019, 02:52:00 PM
Post by: Bango skank on August 07, 2019, 02:53:21 PM
Post by: Bango skank on August 09, 2019, 04:22:08 AM
From an email i received today:
Thank you for your email and concerns, I will pass them on to the carnivore section manager in the Game Division. I will be filing the CR-102 on or before August 7, 2019. This will detail the changes in the WAC that the agency will be proposing and also will initiate public comment. At this time, the agency is still gathering information from our regional biologists and others to develop the recommendations.
So we will know what the proposed changes are in less than a month, but they are not finalized yet, so if you have ideas that you want wdfw to consider, get those emails sent!
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Well, its past the 7th, so i replied to this persons email to see what the score is. Will be out of phone signal most of today hunting. Hopefully will have some news at the end of the day.
Post by: Bango skank on August 09, 2019, 09:43:14 AM
Morning,
I have attached a website link to where the next steps will be posted. https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development#19-13-096
Right now, the CR-101 has been filed. This is just a form to let the public know that we are “thinking” about changes.
Our field staff need more time to gather all of the information needed to make the correct proposals. I will be filing the CR-102 no later than noon on Sept. 4th. It will be posted in the same place I shared with you.
The CR-102 will have all of the information in one place. It will tell you when the public comment period is, when and where the Commission meetings are located, etc.
The way the process goes, after the first Commission meeting in October, where we will conduct a briefing and public hearing, we then wait until, in this case, the next conference call, November 15th to get our decision. After our decision, I file a CR-103P (posted again on the website), it takes 31 days after the filing for the rule to become permanent.
I hope this helps with you questions. Please let me know if you have any others. Thank you,
Post by: trophyhunt on August 09, 2019, 10:41:48 AM
Post by: TheStovePipeKid on August 09, 2019, 10:46:14 AM
Post by: TriggerMike on August 09, 2019, 11:21:18 AM
Post by: Bango skank on August 09, 2019, 12:15:36 PM
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on August 09, 2019, 01:28:37 PM
Commission@dfw.wa.gov
Wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Director@dfw.wa.gov
Send an email, let them know they need to expand spring bear opportunity.
Post by: Rainier10 on August 19, 2019, 03:07:32 PM
Post by: Bango skank on August 19, 2019, 03:34:20 PM
Even if they dont do any otc or new units, im thinking we will at the least get higher permit numbers. With less than 50% participation among permit holders, and abysmall success rates, i dont see why not. Ill be in with 4 pts next year, so hoping to get to hunt spring bear, otc or no otc.
Post by: Rainier10 on August 19, 2019, 04:27:33 PM
I also added a line at the end that they should adjust the cougar season to open on August 1st as well so if a cougar came in to a bear calling sequence the hunter could harvest the cat as well.
Post by: Bango skank on September 03, 2019, 11:35:25 PM
https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development#19-13-096
Post by: Bango skank on September 03, 2019, 11:37:28 PM
Post by: Bango skank on September 03, 2019, 11:45:43 PM
So all they did besides that is add a very minimal increase in SE permits, take away kapowsin, and add peola with 5 permits. If they do a survey, im voting opposed.
So a total of 39 additional permits in the SE, and a loss of all 150 kapowsin permits. So a net reduction of 111 available spring permits, and now a mandatory 72 hour report and hide sealing.
Basically, we got hosed.
Post by: HillHound on September 04, 2019, 04:18:10 AM
Not the direction we were hoping to go.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 05:10:19 AM
:bash:
Not the direction we were hoping to go.
Now instead of 262 west side permits available, there will be only 112. Thats a 57% decrease in west side permits. Just making it harder to draw northeast tags. Thanks wdfw.
Post by: jasnt on September 04, 2019, 05:35:55 AM
Post by: X-Force on September 04, 2019, 06:11:48 AM
Post by: buckfvr on September 04, 2019, 07:51:13 AM
We the hunters, are the last to know whats going on AND we are too few to do anything substantial about it......we have no representation by lawyers who could/would make it hard for wdfw to continue to be led by anti/non hunting masses who only want to stop hunting and collect legally owned guns.
I dont ever see it getting better........that is not part of the agenda of the leaders of this state.
Post by: Jpmiller on September 04, 2019, 08:43:11 AM
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 08:46:35 AM
I agree with the increase in permits (especially in the SE), but I think that overall we need more spring bear hunting across the state. A few permits in most units would not be detrimental to the overall health of black bear populations throughout the state.
While I understand the sensitivity to this idea due to local grizzly populations, the NE in particular needs spring bear tags issued. Predators are a real problem up there. In 121 alone I've had numerous encounters with multiple bears per day while deer hunting. The deer herd has been on a massive decline in that area over the last several years and reducing the bear population a bit could be a real help.
It's already mandatory to take a bear ID test in the NE. At some point we need to make science-based rules for these issues rather than fear-based. Yes, someone could potentially harvest a grizzly bear on accident. If that happens, WDFW has done everything possible with mandatory training, several printouts in the regulations, and warnings across the board.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 08:47:45 AM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 08:49:00 AM
To be honest this looks like a step in the right direction. Maybe they're playing politics and using a less left-sensitive area as a beta site to show that increased spring bear hunting won't eliminate all of the precious bears.
Its not increased. Statewide we lost 111 permits. They added 39 to the southeast, and took away 150 from the west side. This is a decrease in spring hunting.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 08:51:13 AM
To be honest this looks like a step in the right direction. Maybe they're playing politics and using a less left-sensitive area as a beta site to show that increased spring bear hunting won't eliminate all of the precious bears.
Its not increased. Statewide we lost 111 permits.
Only if you include Kapowsin. Who knows what will happen there over the next couple years. The dog show is still ongoing.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 08:53:08 AM
Post by: bobcat on September 04, 2019, 08:54:12 AM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 08:55:21 AM
Kapowsin was a joke anyway, from what I understand.
That may be, but the 150 people who drew those tags didnt draw east side tags. And even those who chose kapowsin as one of their 4 choices and didnt draw, theyll now probably be adding another east side tag to their selections. Already about 50% of permit holders dont even bother to hunt at all. With more people from the west side applying for more east side permits, that percentage will likely increase.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 08:56:21 AM
You looking for predator control on the east side or are you looking for more personal hunting opportunities? :chuckle:
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 08:59:00 AM
Bango,
You looking for predator control on the east side or are you looking for more personal hunting opportunities? :chuckle:
Both. But more predator control is the main one. I want people killing bears, and half the people that draw dont even come over to try at all. Locals who draw kill bears. A lot of west siders that draw never even show up, for a 76 day spring season, they cant be bothered to come hunt a single day the whole time.
Post by: buckfvr on September 04, 2019, 09:58:48 AM
Bango,
You looking for predator control on the east side or are you looking for more personal hunting opportunities? :chuckle:
Everyone I know over here just wants those permits put to a productive end......when they are drawn and go unused it is a wasted opportunity for removing another predator from our burgeoning populations.
Predators are a big problem here and if youre given an opportunity to hunt them and dont, its a missed opportunity. If enough people came here to hunt predators, and actually made an impact, our ungulate herds might even start to get back to their once glorious state......that they are now only a shadow of.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 10:05:03 AM
Bango,
You looking for predator control on the east side or are you looking for more personal hunting opportunities? :chuckle:
Everyone I know over here just wants those permits put to a productive end......when they are drawn and go unused it is a wasted opportunity for removing another predator from our burgeoning populations.
Predators are a big problem here and if youre given an opportunity to hunt them and dont, its a missed opportunity. If enough people came here to hunt predators, and actually made an impact, our ungulate herds might even start to get back to their once glorious state......that they are now only a shadow of.
The numbers aren't lining up fellas.
2018: Kapowsin had a 51% hunter rate, and Wenaha had a 65% hunter rate. Wenaha had about 1/4 of the amount of permits that Kapowsin did, so the data is likely a little unfair.
Overall though the trend isn't showing a significant drop in tag utilization from west --> east.... Technically the opposite. I looked up several more east side permits and they're really all over ~50% utilization.
So if they add 15 more tags to an area, you should expect another 7-8 hunters out there in the spring.
Post by: buckfvr on September 04, 2019, 10:19:25 AM
Post by: WildlifeAssassin on September 04, 2019, 10:32:06 AM
Post by: bobcat on September 04, 2019, 10:40:17 AM
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 10:47:01 AM
As I've said before, nearly all of western Washington should have some spring permits for every GMU. Even if it were only 5 or 10 in each unit that would add up to a lot, and that would more hunting opportunity AND more revenue to the state. Why they won't listen I don't know.
My theory is that this is all politics. I think the wildlife managers know we need more predator control but they know it's an uphill battle internally to get it approved.
Shutting down Kapowsin and showing a net reduction in tags is a joke since Hancock hires hound hunters anyways. Overall the state is getting more tags, which is a win. If they can take data from these increases to show that there was no real harm done to the overall long term health of the black bear population, they might be able to open up the hunting regs a bit more each year.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 11:16:24 AM
Bango,
You looking for predator control on the east side or are you looking for more personal hunting opportunities? :chuckle:
Everyone I know over here just wants those permits put to a productive end......when they are drawn and go unused it is a wasted opportunity for removing another predator from our burgeoning populations.
Predators are a big problem here and if youre given an opportunity to hunt them and dont, its a missed opportunity. If enough people came here to hunt predators, and actually made an impact, our ungulate herds might even start to get back to their once glorious state......that they are now only a shadow of.
The numbers aren't lining up fellas.
Overall though the trend isn't showing a significant drop in tag utilization from west --> east.... Technically the opposite. I looked up several more east side permits and they're really all over ~50% utilization.
B.S., right around 50 % of participation from successful applicants over here.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 11:17:15 AM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 11:23:17 AM
We're saying the same thing :)
No, you said east side permits are really all over 50% utilization. Theyre not. Not unless youre calling 51-54% "over 50," in which case youre being nitpicky and misleading.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 11:34:56 AM
We're saying the same thing :)
No, you said east side permits are really all over 50% utilization. Theyre not. Not unless youre calling 51-54% "over 50," in which case youre being nitpicky and misleading.
51-54 is over 50.
That being said, I also mentioned that due to fewer tags, it was really hard to compare the east side areas to Kapowsin because each tag is worth a higher percentage value. Overall though, it looks like there isn't a significant difference in utilization between east side and west side spring bear tags. Meaning that someone is just as likely to not use their Kapowsin tag as they are their Huckleberry or Wenaha tag.
My point was to address the concern that those of us who aren't your neighbors are drawing tags and not using them. While people not using tags is definitely happening, I don't see anywhere or any number that says it's only happening because of folks who don't live near you.
The only numbers I see are this: Generally, we see about a 50% tag utilization rate in WA for spring bear. So if they add 15 tags, we should expect to see 7-8 additional hunters.
In addition to this, I addressed the drop in net tags being issued - we had a 150 tag drop due to Kapowsin. Who cares? I live right next door to Kapowsin. You could issue 500 tags in there - all you're doing is making Hancock richer.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 11:49:04 AM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 11:55:24 AM
As I've said before, nearly all of western Washington should have some spring permits for every GMU. Even if it were only 5 or 10 in each unit that would add up to a lot, and that would more hunting opportunity AND more revenue to the state. Why they won't listen I don't know.
Shutting down Kapowsin and showing a net reduction in tags is a joke since Hancock hires hound hunters anyways. Overall the state is getting more tags, which is a win. If they can take data from these increases to show that there was no real harm done to the overall long term health of the black bear population, they might be able to open up the hunting regs a bit more each year.
Dude, the state us NOT getting more tags overall! This is NOT an increase! They added 39 and removed 150! Thats a total of 111 LESS spring permits. What dont you understand there?
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 12:01:09 PM
So 50% of west side permits arent used. Do you think for a second that anybody in the northeast applys for those tags? Get real. Thats all west siders applying for those. So even permits closer to home, they dont use them. And a LOT of west siders draw ne tags. 150 less permits in kapowsin means more west siders drawing northeast tags, meaning more tags going unused. So yes i care that wdfw reducued available west side permits by 67%. That means more west siders applying and drawing here, which means more of these permits collecting dust.I think that on average, our average spring bear tag utilization is around 50%. East side or west side, it doesn't matter.
Also, your is only supported by emotions. I can tell you're getting heated here, and I don't want to instigate or insult you, but your math doesn't make sense.
You've tried to establish two mathematical rules: East siders who draw have a higher participation rate, and nobody on the east puts in for west side tags.
Logically, this would be shown by west side permits having a drastic lower participation rate than east side tags because only west siders are participating in those drawings and they don't hunt as much. That is clearly not the case.
At the end of the day, we get about 50% participation after the drawings. It doesn't matter if you're a lowly west sider or a holy east sider - your odds of participating are about 50%.
As I've said before, nearly all of western Washington should have some spring permits for every GMU. Even if it were only 5 or 10 in each unit that would add up to a lot, and that would more hunting opportunity AND more revenue to the state. Why they won't listen I don't know.
Shutting down Kapowsin and showing a net reduction in tags is a joke since Hancock hires hound hunters anyways. Overall the state is getting more tags, which is a win. If they can take data from these increases to show that there was no real harm done to the overall long term health of the black bear population, they might be able to open up the hunting regs a bit more each year.
Dude, the state us NOT getting more tags overall! This is NOT an increase! They added 39 and removed 150! Thats a total of 111 LESS spring permits. What dont you understand there?
I don't think you understand how the Kapowsin unit works. It's a private land hunt and the land owners requested that the spring bear hunts be stopped. Why issue tags if the land owners aren't going to grant access? WDFW is increasing public land hunts and not taking a chance that someone will put in for a tag they can't use.
Might be easier to work this out over a phone call or something because overall, I would bet we agree on 99% of this.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 12:11:26 PM
Post by: Woodchuck on September 04, 2019, 12:18:28 PM
Post by: grundy53 on September 04, 2019, 12:18:36 PM
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Post by: grundy53 on September 04, 2019, 12:19:20 PM
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Post by: bobcat on September 04, 2019, 12:20:24 PM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 12:28:01 PM
It looks like they got rid of the Kapowsin permits because Hancock (the land owner) asked them too. They probably want to do spring feeding and or run hounds. But I don't really see this as the game department taking them away but as the landowner doing it.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I really dont care WHY they were removed, the fact is that we now have 111 less spring permits available, so you cant call it an increase in permits. We have less permits available now for the same number of applicants.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 12:29:24 PM
Look at the number of harvest reports that are submitted for spring bear permits. It's a very low percentage. So, kind of pointless to argue numbers when the data isn't even close to being complete.
Its not complete data, no, but its a good indicator. And every year i either know locals who draw, or people i know know locals who draw, and they all use the tags.
Post by: bobcat on September 04, 2019, 12:32:48 PM
Look at the number of harvest reports that are submitted for spring bear permits. It's a very low percentage. So, kind of pointless to argue numbers when the data isn't even close to being complete.
Its not complete data, no, but its a good indicator. And every year i either know locals who draw, or people i know know locals who draw, and they all use the tags.
I meant to say "hunter" reports, not harvest. People aren't submitting their reports as they're required to do, so in reality, the WDFW does not have reliable data to show how many are hunting or not hunting.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 04, 2019, 12:39:10 PM
Post by: MerriamMagician on September 04, 2019, 01:36:15 PM
Post by: baker5150 on September 04, 2019, 01:39:54 PM
It looks like they got rid of the Kapowsin permits because Hancock (the land owner) asked them too. They probably want to do spring feeding and or run hounds. But I don't really see this as the game department taking them away but as the landowner doing it.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I really dont care WHY they were removed, the fact is that we now have 111 less spring permits available, so you cant call it an increase in permits. We have less permits available now for the same number of applicants.
I would bet that the applicant number will drop.
You assume applicants will put in for other areas, but I would bet locals to the Kapowsin area only put in because it's their backyard, they know the area, and know where to hunt.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 01:40:58 PM
Absurd. :bash: WDFW really does cater to the leftist, anti-hunting crowd. I wrote them a long detailed letter on the survey board explaining the flaws in the new proposals and questioning why all the ideas that we proposed to them were not incorporated. But I'm sure my comments will be completely ignored and disregarded like all hunter comments and intelligent input are. :)
I didnt see a survey yet. Got a link for me?
Post by: ctwiggs1 on September 04, 2019, 01:48:32 PM
It looks like they got rid of the Kapowsin permits because Hancock (the land owner) asked them too. They probably want to do spring feeding and or run hounds. But I don't really see this as the game department taking them away but as the landowner doing it.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I really dont care WHY they were removed, the fact is that we now have 111 less spring permits available, so you cant call it an increase in permits. We have less permits available now for the same number of applicants.
I would bet that the applicant number will drop.
You assume applicants will put in for other areas, but I would bet locals to the Kapowsin area only put in because it's their backyard, they know the area, and know where to hunt.
I was thinking the same thing. Someone who is willing to put in for a tag that requires a $300 access permit is likely trying to do Saturday walk-ins.
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 02:18:17 PM
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GBQYXCN
Post by: BreezyBear on September 04, 2019, 02:43:27 PM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 02:53:42 PM
Post by: Machias on September 04, 2019, 03:13:31 PM
Post by: Bango skank on September 04, 2019, 03:15:51 PM
Please don't take this the wrong way or me being snarky, but you guys can't be surprised by this outcome?!?! They would have had to do an complete 180 on predator management plans that they have been following for a very long time now. I'm not surprised at this at all. They don't want you to kill predators in WA. More predators equal less game animals which ends up equaling less hunters in the field. Stuff more and more of you into smaller and smaller game units to chase after fewer and fewer game animals.
Yeah, but our big win with the fall bear regs really made me optimistic. Im hoping our new cougar proposal wont be a giant disappointment like the spring bear proposal, but it most likely will be. Cougars rank even higher on the cuddly wuddly index to the antis. :tree1:
Post by: Bango skank on October 15, 2019, 01:19:43 AM
The commission will also hear a briefing and public comment on proposed amendments to the spring black bear rule (WAC 220-415-080). The proposed amendments include minor permit adjustments in southeast Washington GMUs, mandatory check in of bears harvested, and some boundary clarifications.
During Saturday's meeting, staff will brief the commission on current cougar management. The briefing will include how the department currently manages cougars, the science behind it and comparison to neighboring states.
A full agenda is available online at wdfw.wa.gov/about/commission/meetings. TVW will live stream the meetings at tvw.org/watch/?eventID=2019101048 (Friday) and tvw.org/watch/?eventID=2019101051 (Saturday).
Post by: Bango skank on October 18, 2019, 02:03:26 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on October 18, 2019, 03:54:05 PM
Post by: Bango skank on October 18, 2019, 04:06:06 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on October 18, 2019, 04:09:08 PM
Im not there, im floating around on the bering sea. Thats why im asking if anybody is there.:tup: I think you missed a "t" in your original post. It read "...is anybody here.." Be safe out there. We are having some stormy weather here.
Post by: Bango skank on October 18, 2019, 04:12:38 PM
Post by: snake on October 19, 2019, 07:34:27 AM
Post by: Bango skank on October 19, 2019, 12:46:38 PM
The 2 bear limit and August opener is one of the most significant changes to Washington hunting regs to occur in the last 20 years in my opinion.
I agree, and thats why i was optimistic about getting some substantial spring season improvements. Pretty disappointed with the spring proposal, but still the august / 2 bear thing has given us what we need to manage bears more effectively. Would be really nice though to be able to take one of those 2 in the spring every year. I just dont see why we shouldnt be able to.
Post by: Bango skank on October 19, 2019, 01:20:57 PM
Post by: Special T on October 24, 2019, 07:07:11 AM
,start about the 30 min mark
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: Bango skank on October 24, 2019, 12:13:33 PM
Post by: Odell on October 24, 2019, 02:42:36 PM
Anything of significance said? What was the general mood of the speakers there in olympia during mf deer season ? :rolleyes: what was said about cougars? I cant watch video on my crappy satellite wifi, im in dutch harbor.
I watched it. I don't know if I have a good understanding of where the commission is at so I could be reading it wrong, but it seems like they are pretty concerned about the rise in conflict with cougars and they are encouraging a new look at the cougar management plan. One commissioner noted the math regarding 12-16% population growth and harvest target and said we aren't killing enough cougars by the numbers. All of it was based on the scientific estimation of the number of cougars in the state. Lots of talk about scientific uncertainty on how to take and manage cougars but for some reason no uncertainty on the estimation of how many we actually have. Generally it seemed like a step in the right direction but there were some very weird comments from commissioners I don't understand, including a strong recommendation to keep public safety and hunting as two complete separate things. I didn't get that.
Bob McCoy was the only citizen that commented. He said the problem is we are hunting too many cougars.
Lots of public comment from the bass fishing crowd, didn't see anything other public comments on cougar hunting but I might have missed it.
Post by: Special T on October 24, 2019, 03:34:06 PM
https://mountainlion.org/aboutboard.php
Bob McCoy
Chair
Issaquah, Washington
Bob started researching Puma concolor and joined the Mountain Lion Foundation in 2009. The following year, he testified against the Washington Cougar Hounding Pilot Program, formed the Washington Cougar Coalition (WA Cougar), and became the Foundation's Washington State Field Representative. Since then, he and volunteers have repeatedly stopped bills that would have harmed cougars. In 2013, Bob represented the Foundation on a panel at the 13th Mountain Lion Workshops in Utah. In 2015, Bob spurred WA Cougar to appeal the Washington Commission's failure to follow proper procedure in setting cougar hunting guidelines. Led by HSUS lawyers, we achieved the first overturn of a citizen commission ruling by a governor in state history. The Commission returned in 2016 to the prior hunting quota. Bob is now working to keep the state from taking measures against cougars in retaliation for the successful return of wolves to Washington. Bob McCoy became a member of the Board of Directors in July 2016.
Post by: Bango skank on October 24, 2019, 03:40:25 PM
Post by: Odell on October 26, 2019, 06:24:35 PM
Id like to tie mr mcoy up to a tree in my back yard with an ecaller in his lap and drape a fresh deer hide over him. Hunting too many cougars? Get real. I have enough cougars using my 21 acres each year to exceed the quota for my entire unit.
Do you think he believes the stuff he is saying? Or is dishonest Intentionally? I always wonder with folks like him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Bucks2Ducks on October 26, 2019, 07:04:38 PM
What's an appropriate number of cougars to be harvested look like to Bob? Is anything more then 0 acceptable?Id like to tie mr mcoy up to a tree in my back yard with an ecaller in his lap and drape a fresh deer hide over him. Hunting too many cougars? Get real. I have enough cougars using my 21 acres each year to exceed the quota for my entire unit.
Do you think he believes the stuff he is saying? Or is dishonest Intentionally? I always wonder with folks like him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What a joke. Curious what his background is that allows him to be on the anti hunting board, I imagine he's from a big city in California and has never actually seen a cougar in the wild. Nobody in there right mind could claim we are killing too many cats. There are more issues and sightings now then ever before. I'd like to trap a live one and put it in his Prius.
Post by: slowhand on December 12, 2019, 12:53:56 PM
When do they announce the 2020 spring bear permit locations and numbers.
I've put this hi on My list for 2020. This will be My first year for bear hunting so lots to learn.
Thanks in advance.
Post by: Antlershed on December 12, 2019, 01:22:35 PM
Easy question to answer I'm sure, but I have not been able to find the answer.The proposed changes were presented at the October 18-19 meeting, and they deferred a decision to the November 1st conference call. The minutes of that call haven’t been released, so not sure if they adopted the changes or not. Changes were removing the Kapowsin Hunt, increasing tags in the Blues, and adding a new hunt in Peola.
When do they announce the 2020 spring bear permit locations and numbers.
I've put this hi on My list for 2020. This will be My first year for bear hunting so lots to learn.
Thanks in advance.