Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 07:23:34 AM
Post by: SkookumHntr on March 13, 2010, 08:34:02 AM
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 13, 2010, 10:54:46 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 12:39:14 PM
Funny thing is they say the proposal for the new permit system has been known to the public for over a year, and the public supports it. A man from the Game Management Advisory Council was there and he got up and spoke to the commission, and was strongly in favor of the new permit system. Dave Ware, Game Division Manager, gave a report on the new proposed permit system. He mentioned how they discussed different options as to how points would be allocated. The option of letting individual hunters choose which category their points would go was determined to be not plausible due to the complications it would cause.
My biggest complaint, and I will be writing letters to Dave Ware, Jerry Nelson (Deer & Elk Section Manager,) and to the Commission, in regards to this, is that the public was NOT given the chance to provide input to this proposal. They are saying the public was given lots of opportunity to provide input, but we only knew about these changes to the permit system when they posted it on their website sometime in February (2010.) Apparently the GMAC (Game Management Advisory Council) has been involved in this all along. How come the general public was not notified about these changes sooner? I have never even heard of the GMAC until today.
It is obviously too late for them to change any of the proposals at this point. It's a done deal. The only possible thing I can think of that we could ask for, is that they put it off for one more year, to allow time for more public input and for some possible minor changes to the proposals. For me the only change I would really like to see is that points should not be allocated to all categories. But, due to the budget problems I am pretty sure there is no way they will back down on this as they are counting on the additional revenue it will bring in.
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 13, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 01:20:59 PM
Which was said to be something hunters have indicated they were in favor of, during the scoping process they conducted in 2008.
One other thing I should have said here is that the petition by Stevens County for a 4 point minimum antler restriction was denied.
Post by: Wacenturion on March 13, 2010, 01:45:54 PM
Once they start paying for it, the landowners willing to allow public access for free, or sometimes in exchange for shubs, enforcement, whatever..................ARE GOING TO WANT TO BE PAID ALSO. IF NOT THEY TOO WILL PULL OUT. THAT WILL HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE ISN'T THAT MUCH MONEY TO GO AROUND.....GET IT!
THEY DON'T!
By the way those GMAC and other committees are business as usual in Wildlife Management. They use that or other committee to tell the commission or others we have had lots of public input.....which is absurd....nothing but twisting the truth to get what they want. A lot like politicians.....WDFW knows so much better than us, so they will make the call without even considering your input or how it effects you.
Post by: Wacenturion on March 13, 2010, 01:50:24 PM
I don't remember if there was an estimate mentioned, but it was brought up that this extra money will be used to fund additional hunter access.
Which was said to be something hunters have indicated they were in favor of, during the scoping process they conducted in 2008.
One other thing I should have said here is that the petition by Stevens County for a 4 point minimum antler restriction was denied.
Of course hunters are in favor of additional hunter access. That's like asking if you like or dislike oxygen. There was no elaboration like do you favor hunting access if we set up a system costing you more for additional permit applications and futher reducing you ability to draw, bla, bla, bla........might get a different response....you think?
Post by: Bob33 on March 13, 2010, 01:51:33 PM
My biggest complaint, and I will be writing letters to Dave Ware, Jerry Nelson (Deer & Elk Section Manager,) and to the Commission, in regards to this, is that the public was NOT given the chance to provide input to this proposal. They are saying the public was given lots of opportunity to provide input, but we only knew about these changes to the permit system when they posted it on their website sometime in January (2010.) Apparently the GMAC (Game Management Advisory Council) has been involved in this all along. How come the general public was not notified about these changes sooner? I have never even heard of the GMAC until today.Indeed you are exactly correct. I have written a letter expressing those sentiments to the Commission. There was not adequate public input. Apparently GMAC spoke for all hunters. Up until now I thought they only financed Tahoes. (You can Google search them and that's about all you will find. :chuckle:)
But, due to the budget problems I am pretty sure there is no way they will back down on this as they are counting on the additional revenue it will bring in.
As for the increased revenue: as much as I hate to wish ill will on the department, I am encouraging my friends not to apply this year. Several of us have agreed to do so. We will be out for a year, but if enough people protested that revenues went down, they might try to undo this.
Heaven help us what Outdoor Central will do with this mess...
Post by: sako223 on March 13, 2010, 02:28:07 PM
I have stated for years, WDFW crafts a plan, claims public input, then activates the original plan.
I have also stated that we need to show in force, let them know we mean business. Rarely get a reply from hunters. They always expect it is their right and bitch when WDFW changes /reduces anything.
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 02:34:42 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 02:41:43 PM
Of course hunters are in favor of additional hunter access. That's like asking if you like or dislike oxygen. There was no elaboration like do you favor hunting access if we set up a system costing you more for additional permit applications and futher reducing you ability to draw, bla, bla, bla........might get a different response....you think?
Exactly, I agree. It's the same thing with the changes with the special permits. They asked for the public's opinion, and what they got out of it was that hunters wanted to have better odds of drawing permits. Of course hunters are going to be in favor of better odds. That's a given. Now they make these changes, saying it's for better odds of drawing permits, and hunters have told us they are in favor of this. Wrong. They never asked for opinions on changing the system this drastically. Only the Game Management Advisory Council was aware of the changes, apparently. I had heard it mentioned that they may make a separate pool for antlerless permits. And also that they were making some changes that would improve odds of drawing permits. But they never said what those changes were, until a couple months ago when it was posted on their website.
Post by: SkookumHntr on March 13, 2010, 03:52:33 PM
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2010, 04:09:28 PM
Post by: bbarnes on March 13, 2010, 04:22:50 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 04:25:41 PM
thanks for atending the meeting bobcat, I wish i coulda went, it sounds like if every hunter in the state said they didnt like this proposal they are still going to do it! Wdfw is such a joke, including the citizens commission and the whole agency, just a complete joke!
You're right, the proposal is a done deal. (as far as I can tell) Just look at all the time and money they've spent on it in the last year or so that they've been working on implementing it. Why don't they put the proposal out for public input BEFORE they've got a year of work into it ??? It's obvious they really don't care what we think.
Bobcat didn't mention what the first guy to give public input had to say: He thought the wolf recovery program needed more breeding pairs of wolves than what WDFW had stated and he wanted more done for wolves in the State. :o Must have been a defender of wildlife guy......I muttered something about SSS as he was coming back to sit down after.... :) but I didn't say it load enough for anyone but Bobcat to hear as not to offend anyone......(luckily the guy left shortly after he said his piece).
Yeah I couldn't believe that guy. Here we are, facing a shortage of huntable animals for various reasons, a major one being the last two bad winters we've had in a row, and this guy is concerned with having enough wolves? WTH is wrong with some people ???
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 05:21:46 PM
The thing that was the biggest disappointment is the lack of participation. People on this site and others I surf on will spend countless hours, cutting people and the WDFW down but can't spend the time to make a difference.
I agree, there was an obvious lack of people present at the meeting from the general public. I'd guess there was about 5 people in attendance that weren't required to be there, not counting the wolf lover. :D
I see they are use to the lack of participation from the public though, as the room was just big enough for those that were there. Any more people and the room would have been beyond capacity.
Post by: Bob33 on March 13, 2010, 05:36:07 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 05:39:14 PM
Maybe if they really cared what the public thought, more would attend...
Yes, I was thinking the same thing. I will probably mention something to that effect in my letter.
Post by: Ray on March 13, 2010, 05:39:24 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2010, 05:44:58 PM
In the meeting today I wouldn't say they cut people off, but they do have a policy of nobody can speak for more than 3 minutes. They have a timer that goes off when the 3 minutes is up.
Post by: Bob33 on March 13, 2010, 05:54:45 PM
They feel that this has been in the public's eye for over a year now and apparently they feel the majority approves of the new plan.Surely Dave Ware knows better. If they really wanted to know what the public thought, they would have released the details earlier.
In my letter to the commission I asked to see minutes of the meetings with GMAC and the other "hunter" organizations they surveyed to conclude the public liked this.
Post by: bbarnes on March 13, 2010, 07:50:57 PM
Post by: Special T on March 13, 2010, 08:23:43 PM
Unfortunately they have the goal in mind before they start.. If they wanted input from hunters they would have a forum like this set up that could only be accessed with your wild ID# that's how you would get REAL input from you customers.... But they don't car about that...Maybe if they really cared what the public thought, more would attend...
Yes, I was thinking the same thing. I will probably mention something to that effect in my letter.
Like BBarnes said the only way to get hier attention is to quite buying their tags... Unfortunately its harder for us to give up hunting for playing games on the Wii... That could change in a couple of years tho...
Post by: wolfbait on March 13, 2010, 08:33:15 PM
Post by: Bob33 on March 13, 2010, 08:37:51 PM
Advisory group: Game Management Advisory Group (GMAC)
Staff Contact: Dave Ware
Post by: bbarnes on March 13, 2010, 08:42:56 PM
Post by: Special T on March 13, 2010, 08:46:02 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on March 13, 2010, 08:57:24 PM
Post by: bbarnes on March 13, 2010, 10:16:14 PM
1.What studies have they done in the past 5 years.
2.What habitat studies have they done and what units.
3.How did they come up with the carrying capacity of each unit for the wildlife
4.How did they determine how many animals are in each unit.
5.Lastly ask for the information in writing under the freedom of information act.
I personally want some black and white proof to study myself ,the hunters of this stateknow the population.Whens the last time you have seen a WDFW employee out in the timber.
Post by: wolfbait on March 14, 2010, 07:54:16 AM
Well wolfbait i have some good news for you .I was told today, they won't be transplanting wolves anywhere in the state.They will though let them come here naturally,and in my op ion is reckless endangerment, and until we file a class action law suit, nothing will be done about that.So again start dialing your state reps and show them facts of the matter.The one thing i can guaranty is none of them are on this web site.Information is key in our success as outdoors people,so flood the law makers with it .
So what you were told is they will quit planting wolves throughout Washington? WDFW must figure they have enough wolves spread out around the state. Have you heard anything about their trans-locating plans?
Quote
(That's a bigger bureaucracy the combination of these agencies.One allows multiple land use,and the other allows none especially if your a offroad enthusiast.I want all of you to ask these questions of your Reps.
1.What studies have they done in the past 5 years.
2.What habitat studies have they done and what units.
3.How did they come up with the carrying capacity of each unit for the wildlife
4.How did they determine how many animals are in each unit.
5.Lastly ask for the information in writing under the freedom of information act.
I personally want some black and white proof to study myself ,the hunters of this stateknow the population.Whens the last time you have seen a WDFW employee out in the timber.)
Great idea Bbarnes, Unlike their wolves the WDFW are very elusive your hardly ever see one in the woods.
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2010, 09:29:46 AM
That's a bigger bureaucracy the combination of these agencies.One allows multiple land use,and the other allows none especially if your a offroad enthusiast.
Actually they both allow multiple uses on the state lands they manage. WDFW lands are open for ATV use, just like DNR lands, in general. Let's not make false accusations here. There's enough to use against them as it is without making things up.
Post by: Shootmoore on March 14, 2010, 09:37:34 AM
Shootmoore
Post by: backwoods_boy on March 14, 2010, 01:58:14 PM
thank you for who went.
what a mess.
Even more of a reason for me to look to the future and move to montana.
:chuckle:
Post by: Dirtsquirt on March 16, 2010, 09:42:37 AM
Post by: Wacenturion on March 16, 2010, 09:55:15 AM
Make them provide the basis for this and other decisions......on all management decisions and issues. Might as well get something for your hard earned license dollars. Two can play the "piss me off" game.
Post by: whacker1 on March 16, 2010, 10:21:16 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 10:28:02 AM
You know if you really want to attend a meeting the next one is in Leavenworth next month and that is when they suppossedly are going to decide whether to adopt the changes to the special permit system.
Post by: whacker1 on March 16, 2010, 10:32:01 AM
Post by: duckmen1 on March 18, 2010, 10:23:48 AM
how come i get drawn last year for a doe and loose all my points
why not loose my points just toward the antlerless catagory
same with my brother
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2010, 10:45:26 AM
if there talking about carrying point toward every catagory
how come i get drawn last year for a doe and loose all my points
why not loose my points just toward the antlerless catagory
same with my brother
You're right. That's why the new proposal is not fair. If they were going to be fair, they would do as you suggest. But they would have to go back to when the point system started in 1996. Which of course would be way too complicated, and that is why the best option would be for them to allow each person to pick one category in which their accumulated points will go.
Post by: Bob33 on March 18, 2010, 11:00:31 AM
if there talking about carrying point toward every catagoryIf I understand your question correctly, you lost all your points because there was only one deer category last year. If this new system is implemented, in the future you would lose points only in the category you drew in such as antlerless. However, because you currently have no points you would go into the new system with no points in all the categories.
how come i get drawn last year for a doe and loose all my points
why not loose my points just toward the antlerless catagory
same with my brother
Post by: winshooter88 on March 18, 2010, 11:26:59 AM
if there talking about carrying point toward every catagory
how come i get drawn last year for a doe and loose all my points
why not loose my points just toward the antlerless catagory
same with my brother
Everyone who got drawn for any tag, (doe, cow buck or bull) lost their points. Would it be fair to all the people who didn't get drawn last year to give you back points when you did get drawn last year.
Even if you didn't get a doe last year you made your choices when you applied last year, no one knew that this change was coming this year. No matter how the points are handled in this changeover some people aren't going to be happy. You can't change the past, if this change hadn't come down the pike you would have propably been fine with your doe permit last year. Some things you just have to live with.
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2010, 11:34:58 AM
Everyone who got drawn for any tag, (doe, cow buck or bull) lost their points. Would it be fair to all the people who didn't get drawn last year to give you back points when you did get drawn last year.
Even if you didn't get a doe last year you made your choices when you applied last year, no one knew that this change was coming this year. No matter how the points are handled in this changeover some people aren't going to be happy. You can't change the past, if this change hadn't come down the pike you would have propably been fine with your doe permit last year. Some things you just have to live with.
I mostly agree with all of the above, but Dave Ware also told me something similar to your statement that "No matter how the points are handled in this changeover some people aren't going to be happy" and I find that really hard to believe.
If each person was allowed to choose in which category their points were placed, do you really think ANYBODY would have a problem with that?
So those who had been applying generally for the "quality" permits could put their points in the Quality category, and others who mostly put in for the antlerless hunts, and therefore have less points than the "quality" hunt people, could put their points in the Antlerless category, etc, etc.
Post by: winshooter88 on March 18, 2010, 11:38:59 AM
What about the people who would like to have full points in all catagories, would they be happy with your plan?
Post by: Curly on March 18, 2010, 11:44:37 AM
Maybe I'm not seeing it correctly, but what would be unfair about requiring someone to select where their points should go?
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2010, 11:49:32 AM
Bobcat,
What about the people who would like to have full points in all catagories, would they be happy with your plan?
Sure. Why wouldn't they be happy? They only earned points in one category. Why should they have the points earned in one category placed into eight categories? I can't think of a more fair way to allocate the points than to allow each person to choose where they go. Can you?
Post by: duckmen1 on March 18, 2010, 12:16:37 PM
Post by: Curly on March 18, 2010, 12:20:27 PM
does this mean they are going to let you choose where your points go in one catagory, or are they going to put the points people have in all catagories?
No, the proposal is that they will apply your points into all categories. Then when you get drawn for that permit you only lose the points in that category..........(that part is fair, and sensible). The part about applying all your points accross the board into each of the 8 categories is the part many of us have a problem with. I'm hoping they will figure out a way to allow us to choose what category they would be placed......but it won't happen for this years draw....not enough time for OC to figure out the software.
Post by: winshooter88 on March 18, 2010, 12:21:13 PM
Bobcat,
What about the people who would like to have full points in all catagories, would they be happy with your plan?
Sure. Why wouldn't they be happy? They only earned points in one category. Why should they have the points earned in one category placed into eight categories? I can't think of a more fair way to allocate the points than to allow each person to choose where they go. Can you?
I really don't know that I have a right to say what is fair and what isn't, since I have had reasonable success on permits I have low points anyway. I guess what is fair is what the majority wants, that's the way a democracy works. Your opinion may vary.
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2010, 12:21:28 PM
does this mean they are going to let you choose where your points go in one catagory, or are they going to put the points people have in all catagories?
Allowing a person to choose in which category their points go is what I am suggesting. It was actually one of the options that was considered by the WDFW, but it was too complicated, according to Dave Ware.
The plan is to place a person's points into all the categories.
Post by: winshooter88 on March 18, 2010, 12:26:34 PM
If they implement the plan the way it is now, I doubt that they will try to go back next year and change it to your choice of where your points go.
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2010, 12:31:57 PM
Curly,
If they implement the plan the way it is now, I doubt that they will try to go back next year and change it to your choice of where your points go.
Of course they wouldn't do that. That is why they need to NOT implement the plan this year, and hold off for one more year. They simply did not provide enough time for public input on this plan.
Post by: Curly on March 18, 2010, 12:42:14 PM
Curly,
If they implement the plan the way it is now, I doubt that they will try to go back next year and change it to your choice of where your points go.
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that they could do it later. That wouldn't be possible. It would have to be held off for at least another year.......but I don't feel bad about it if they have to hold-off; they could have been more open about their plans and gotten public input a lot sooner. Then we could have voiced our opinion in time for them to actually make some changes. WDFW tried to be sneeky and I hope it bites them in the ass because of it. :twocents:
Post by: duckmen1 on March 19, 2010, 10:44:56 AM
but this whole thing is really going to screw them up when the last couple years they had as many problems as they did when it was simple
oh well
im still happy with my doe it put meat in the freezer and it was a really enjoyable hunt