Post by: AKBowman on December 09, 2009, 06:38:34 PM
Post by: AKBowman on December 09, 2009, 07:13:06 PM
Post by: bankwalker on December 09, 2009, 08:02:51 PM
Post by: NWHydroprint on December 09, 2009, 09:30:35 PM
We used to hunt were the gravel pit is but don't know if they allow that anymore. Have seen lots of elk even seen a few monster bulls. Hunted that area for over twenty 20 years till I moved to Grays Harbor.
NWH
Post by: Axle on December 09, 2009, 09:44:42 PM
I've heard that it is a dumping grounds for problem cougars. Especially Taylor Mt., McDonald Mt., Rattlesnake ridge, and that is the area most want to hunt.
This area could produce the largest elk in the state if it weren't for the cats eating most of them up. There are a few that make it but they are very few.
Post by: Galpster on December 09, 2009, 10:23:38 PM
Post by: SGM R on December 10, 2009, 01:10:49 PM
Post by: Ray on December 10, 2009, 01:17:45 PM
Access is king in 454.
Post by: tmike on December 10, 2009, 02:00:54 PM
Just curious where you heard that :dunno: A couple years ago the the game department was trying to capture and collar cats in the Taylor Mt. area. In 454 you definetly have to be in the right place at the right time.
Post by: mtbiker on December 10, 2009, 04:20:33 PM
Post by: Axle on December 10, 2009, 05:05:15 PM
Quote
Just curious where you heard that A couple years ago the the game department was trying to capture and collar cats in the Taylor Mt. area. In 454 you definetly have to be in the right place at the right time.
It is hear-say from people who live in the woods (I won't say exactly where. I wouldn't really want folks talking about me in an open forum without my permission). They have seen the elk diminish over the years and they have seen the cats increase and they have witnessed things that I will not repeat. They new the gamies and they can go on with stories.
They had a lot of elk around till the cats ate them up. They had the cats in their yard a lot and they can't keep pets due to them.
There were incredible numbers of elk in the '80s on Taylor, McDonald, and Rattlesnake, and I hunted them a bit but when the cats started to slaughter them, it only took a couple years. The few that survived were mostly the ones that found private land (ie, Hobart and North Bend).
A couple years ago my neighbor was looking for one of his dogs up on the east side of Tiger Mt. He ran into somebody on the back side that was in the process of treeing cougars on Tiger. They told my neighbor that they had treed three cats in the previous 4 weeks (all on the back side of Tiger Mt.) and one of them was known to them. It was in excess of 250lbs and roamed Tiger and Taylor.
I wish this unit was still like it was in the '80s.
Post by: Galpster on December 10, 2009, 06:51:37 PM
Anyone interested I would love to get this unit back to what it was with alot less predators on it.
PM me and lets get a hunting plan in action.
Is kittie hunting legal in this unit? I guess I better look that up first.
Post by: Pazn25 on December 10, 2009, 07:25:50 PM
Post by: tmike on December 11, 2009, 07:09:36 PM
Post by: Axle on December 12, 2009, 05:35:06 PM
Quote
They had some traps in that area we were checking to hopefully collar a few more.
*censored*s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If they would kill them instead of putting collars on them, it would bring back the animals. Our game department loves predators more than deer and elk. I have no idea why they hate deer and elk. They will never be done with their studies. This is because they are stupid government-trained idiots. Those type of people will never learn. Especially from those who have gone before them. I really don't like stupid people (as you can see).
And to think - we pay these stupid idiots and they get things like nice trucks, good pay, and 'retirement pay' from us. Yet all they do is deplete the deer and elk herds with stupid management and stupid continuous studies!
Post by: npaull on December 12, 2009, 08:24:33 PM
Post by: tmike on December 12, 2009, 11:03:11 PM
Post by: AKBowman on December 13, 2009, 08:46:05 AM
Post by: Axle on December 13, 2009, 08:48:26 AM
Quote
Cougar definitely haven't helped any, but I feel that the development of the rural areas in the 454 has had a tremendous amount to do with the decreased populations of deer and elk. Human population here has gotten way bigger in the last decade, and an awful lot of habitat has gone to houses etc. I think people are underestimating the effects of all the development and loss of habitat.
There has been very little development in the areas where the elk have been over the past 3 decades. The development that has taken place has been good to them. The big cats will normally stay away from most developed areas. When the elk live among the farms and housing areas, they survive and they get used to people (habituated). The only reason some of them are left is because they came out of the hills and into the housing areas. Otherwise they would get eaten if they stayed up there. There is still more than enough room for them back up in the hills! They are more afraid of the predators than humans. They can adapt to humans. They can't adapt to something that is constantly trying to kill them. When game is plentiful, cougars kill for fun just like wolves do. That's just playtime for a big cat.
Blaming the decline and problems on human expansion is what the media will do (along with people who listen to them). Most hunters know what kills elk and deer - and it isn't a house.
I'm not attacking anyone's opinion here, just giving out good info on this.
Post by: Galpster on December 13, 2009, 10:07:46 AM
I think the biggest threat in this unit is it is heavily hunted. I have driven by Taylor mountain and seen a half dozen trucks parked at each and every gate.
Predators would be my second guess though I haven't seen a kittie yet up there. I would love to go kill a few though.
Post by: npaull on December 13, 2009, 07:31:03 PM
Again, Axle, I think we probably agree for the most part on this issue we are just talking up different sides of the coin.
Post by: Dmanmastertracker on December 13, 2009, 07:42:03 PM
Post by: Axle on December 13, 2009, 07:59:03 PM
Quote
How late is cougar open this year in 454? There are still a lot of elk in 454, I know of a trophy bull taken just last year and have a friend with private acreage in there that has seen as many as 16 branch antlered bulls running together. Truth be told some areas that were cut, or thinned have grown up, I'm seeing less deer in the area also this year on the public ground. I do know of one cow also taken, I will just say that it was packed out on horses, it was a ways back there.
Cougar is open through March 31st.
If your buddy needs help thinning them out, just let me know. We only have two more days and I would be happy to put meat in his freezer. Yours too.
Last year, my son and I saw a lot less deer around where we normally hunt in the unit (about 60% less). There was a cougar or two working the area and there still is. One was seen about 3 weeks ago. I need more time and energy to get it.
Post by: swanny on December 15, 2009, 06:46:40 AM
Post by: Bigbuckoholic on December 16, 2009, 10:59:59 AM
Post by: Axle on December 16, 2009, 11:04:52 AM
Can I say idiots in this post?
Post by: tmike on December 16, 2009, 11:25:03 AM
Post by: Axle on December 16, 2009, 11:31:26 AM
Quote
So are you saying part of the problem is human expansion?
Oh no, not at all. Expansion has been extremely limited here for a long time. The deer and elk love to hang around housing areas. It gives them more rose bushes and green lawns to eat from.
If they had not come off the mountains and into the residential areas, most of the elk would be all gone. They have refuge in the housing area. Plus it is nice to see them in the fields but I would rather they were up on the mountains so I can hunt them like I used to.
Post by: tmike on December 16, 2009, 11:42:14 AM
Post by: Axle on December 16, 2009, 12:18:51 PM
Quote
OK.. so the creation of the park, making that area no hunting, has led to more cougars because they aren't being harvested and the elk concentrate their also? or it pushes the cougar to surrounding areas thus concentrating them? Is that what you mean?
The creation of that 'park' keeps hunters from hunting in there. There are a lot of bears in there. I have no doubt the cougars would seek refuge in there. It is almost like the watershed. We don't have access to hunt the shed. This allows the predators to over-populate. They will then move out into surrounding areas when they have consumed the game within their area but they still have refuge in the shed when needed.
I've seen a few guys who were running bears in the stampede unit (years ago) and had to call off the dogs due to the wathershed because they couldn't go in there. Locking us out of certain areas is bad for the area around it. It ends up having an effect on a much larger piece of land and it isn't the deer and elk that are winning in this case.
Post by: tmike on December 16, 2009, 01:05:51 PM
Post by: hoytem on December 16, 2009, 01:13:52 PM
Post by: Crunchy on December 16, 2009, 01:18:11 PM
Post by: tmike on December 16, 2009, 01:26:18 PM
Post by: swanny on December 16, 2009, 02:47:20 PM
Saw some guys on the east side of Tiger bow hunting around 9:30 this morning on my way up to Snoqualmie. Was that you hoytem?
Post by: Axle on December 16, 2009, 03:34:50 PM
Quote
Which Park are you talking about? As far as the Green River watershed the elk got hammered in there by both Non native and Native hunters for several years. It borders 454. The Stampede is still getting pounded by the Natives.You should know weren't there 50 plus bull tags given to the non natives for several years in a row in the Green River watershed? To me that's another impact you can't ignore. I try to look at the big picture.
I've been looking at the big picture in this state since 1983. I've lived in and hunted the 454 unit since 1985. You are talking mostly about the green river watershed now, not 454. The stampede gets hammered by Indians (cougars too) and 454 gets hunted year-round by Indians whenever they want.
As far as the green river watershed, the elk did not get 'hammered' by us. There are 'x number' of tags given out due to 'x number' of elk that reside in an area. The Indians might 'hammer' them, but the rest of us are limited to harvesting certain numbers of them. 50 tags is nothing for a unit that size and only 'x number' of tags get filled anyway. The department will not give us so many tags that it will deplete the elk in a unit. We get left-overs. They can't stop the Indians from shooting all of them but they can ask them to cool off for a bit and let the critters come back to better numbers.
A friend of mine used to keep up on the green river watershed for years. According to him, there used to be well over 800 elk in it. I'm certain this is a good number. I used to ride snowmobile and go over to the old town of Lester and view the elk in winter. There were large numbers of elk back then. Some huge bulls too. In the early '90s, the cougar numbers went through the roof in this area. The area where the elk would winter suddenly became a blood bath. There are a few who witnessed this. Some watershed personnel saw this too.
The excessive harvest by tribes and cougars brought the herd size down to about 160 elk in 2 or 3 years. The game department 'asked' the Indians not to take any more till the numbers increased. They then took some elk from the St. Helens area and put them in the watershed. This was probably done so the Indians could shoot them as they ran out of the trucks and nobody was around to witness the atrocity. The reason the department gave out for transplanting elk in there was to 'get the genetics into better shape and increase herd size and strength'. You can't increase the herd size and keep all the cougars too. It doesn't work that way.
The 'park' I am referring to is contained in these parcel numbers which can be found on King counties web site: http://www5.kingcounty.gov/parcelviewer/viewer/kingcounty/viewer.asp
Parcel numbers 3123079003, 3223079011, 3223079027, 3223079021, 3223079021, and several others. It goes all the way to the Seattle watershed. This type of park is not like Mt Rainier or Lake Sammamish park but there is still no hunting allowed in it. Indians can hunt it though - and I'm not saying that is bad but I will say they need to do their part in getting rid of predators. This is something they have failed at doing.
There is also some property that is north of this area and is owned by Sirios Timber Partners LP. They don't want hunters on their property now. Yet another chunk of land we are locked out of.
Post by: hoytem on December 16, 2009, 03:37:12 PM
I'm guessing the park is Taylor Mt?
Saw some guys on the east side of Tiger bow hunting around 9:30 this morning on my way up to Snoqualmie. Was that you hoytem?
wasn't me this all happened from 3:00 pm to dark. and wasn't near tiger mt. more by ______
Post by: hoytem on December 16, 2009, 03:45:07 PM
Post by: tmike on December 16, 2009, 07:31:50 PM
Post by: Dmanmastertracker on December 16, 2009, 08:11:42 PM
I've seen a few guys who were running bears in the stampede unit (years ago) and had to call off the dogs due to the wathershed because they couldn't go in there. Locking us out of certain areas is bad for the area around it. It ends up having an effect on a much larger piece of land and it isn't the deer and elk that are winning in this case.
[/quote]
I have to agree with you Axle. I've been hounding the State every years to open up the watersheds to at least selective hunting for years. This story, well no really just plain bullcrap that they must keep it closed to human access just doesn't hold any water when the tribes are in there hauling out deer and elk every year in the Cedar. Just another hypocritical element of our politician's view of our right's in this State. If there's game there and it's State land, then it should be open for hunting (same for City's too, when did they also get the right to act like independent Countries and put game out of reach?). After all, the watersheds are not within any City limits, yet they are treated like they are.
Post by: Axle on December 16, 2009, 10:05:44 PM
Quote
When the Watershed herd was around 900 animals the Non Native permits went near 100% filled the first few years, that along with Native harvest it had an impact. The cats did too.
And we agree.
Quote
The only reason I brought it up was because you did Axle to make your point. I also don't see how you can compare your 500 acre, 80 acre and 161 acre areas, zoned residential,('Parks') to any watershed.
It's more than that (there are more parcels) and I made a simple analogy that we are being locked out of these areas just like watersheds. I didn't add anymore till you expanded on it.
We can't hunt this new park, and now the private investment LP back east doesn't want us hunting their land either (which is just north of this park). Between those two, that is a lot of land and perhaps the best part of Taylor Mt on the west side of it.
Quote
You say those are good for the elk, but bad for you because you can't hunt there. To me those are human expansion and development. I think I'm missing your point.
The area is good for elk when predators aren't eating them up. Problem is, we can't go in there for elk or predators either one. This is another area off limits now and the predators populate quickly when you don't keep their numbers in check. Anyone who has been in predator control will know this. I used to be a trapper and it is not easy to keep up with controlling numbers.
The land has not been developed. It was only sold and categorized as a park. This isn't human expansion because nothing was built, we are simply locked out of the area from hunting due to regulations. The elk moved out of there long ago (for the most part) due to cats.
Quote
One thing I do agree on is that it isn't what it used to be.
Not even close my friend! Not even close.