Post by: bobcat on February 23, 2011, 02:50:16 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2011/03/agenda_mar0511.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2011/03/agenda_mar0511.html)
This is an important meeting as this is the meeting in which they will discuss the proposed changes for the 2011 big game regulations. I won't be attending but I already sent in my written comments (which were due by Feb. 9).
A few of the topics that are most interesting to me:
Quote
6. HUNT TAG DRAWINGS, STATUS REVIEW – BRIEFING:
At the request of the Commission, Department staff will provide a briefing on results from rules implemented last year that created new categories for permit hunts.
Staff Report: Dave Ware, Game Division Manager, Wildlife Program
Quote
14. SPRING BLACK BEAR SEASONS AND REGULATIONS – RULE BRIEFING & PUBLIC HEARING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on proposed amendments to WAC 232-28-286 2010, 2011, and 2012 Spring Black Bear Seasons and Regulations. The Commission will consider adoption of permanent amendments at its April 8-9, 2011, meeting in Olympia.
Staff Report:
Donny Martorello, Ph.D., Carnivore, Furbearer, and Special Species Section Manager, Wildlife Program
Quote
17. DEER GENERAL SEASONS AND DEER AND ELK SPECIAL PERMIT REGULATIONS – RULE BRIEFING & PUBLIC HEARING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on proposed amendments to deer general season and deer and elk special permit regulations that would address crop and property damage problems, changes in population levels due to environmental conditions or disease outbreaks and to balance harvest levels with established population objectives. The Commission will consider adoption of permanent amendments at its April 8-9, 2011, meeting in Olympia.
WAC 232-28-351, 2009-2011 Deer General seasons and definitions;
WAC 232-28-355, 2011 Deer special permits; and
WAC 232-28-356, 2011 Elk Special Permits.
Staff Report:
Jerry Nelson, Ph.D., Deer and Elk Section Manager, Wildlife Program
Hopefully someone from here will attend and give us all a report back.
Post by: MtnMuley on February 23, 2011, 02:54:38 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 23, 2011, 02:59:35 PM
That's what it means by "results." The resulting amount of revenue that was generated, due to the ridiculous number of extra categories they created. :bash:
Post by: MtnMuley on February 23, 2011, 03:08:48 PM
Post by: Curly on February 23, 2011, 06:48:10 PM
Post by: dreamingbig on February 24, 2011, 01:16:18 PM
Thanks
Post by: bobcat on February 24, 2011, 01:19:30 PM
Post by: ramslam on February 24, 2011, 02:08:32 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on February 24, 2011, 08:36:52 PM
I'm not sure of the meaning on #6. Briefing on results??
Actually guys, they want to know how many applicants got drawn for more than one permit in the deer or elk categories to see if Mr Wares numbers got skewed since unless it's a second animal tag, you can only kill one critter. I was there last March in Leavenworth and used that possibility of this scenario to TRY to get the commission to tank the plan. I spoke of it on the side with Mr Douvier, he brought it up in discussion and they ( the Commission) directed Ware and his buddies to give this briefing at this years spring meeting.
Chances probably aren't good at all, but if there's a big brewhaha over it happening a lot, it could go away.
A guy can dream can't he??
Post by: billythekidrock on February 28, 2011, 04:57:42 PM
The category thing was Dave Ware's baby, so I'm sure he'll be claiming how great it was and how there are so many happy hunters now that that system is in place......... :rolleyes:
I know for a fact that he got his butt chewed before and after by both hunters and F&W employees.
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on February 28, 2011, 04:59:16 PM
Post by: Curly on February 28, 2011, 06:11:10 PM
The category thing was Dave Ware's baby, so I'm sure he'll be claiming how great it was and how there are so many happy hunters now that that system is in place......... :rolleyes:
I know for a fact that he got his butt chewed before and after by both hunters and F&W employees.
Good. I hope he gets it chewed on some more. :)
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 01, 2011, 09:19:12 AM
I'm not sure of the meaning on #6. Briefing on results??
Actually guys, they want to know how many applicants got drawn for more than one permit in the deer or elk categories to see if Mr Wares numbers got skewed since unless it's a second animal tag, you can only kill one critter. I was there last March in Leavenworth and used that possibility of this scenario to TRY to get the commission to tank the plan. I spoke of it on the side with Mr Douvier, he brought it up in discussion and they ( the Commission) directed Ware and his buddies to give this briefing at this years spring meeting.
Chances probably aren't good at all, but if there's a big brewhaha over it happening a lot, it could go away.
A guy can dream can't he??
Skewed numbers Eh..../ Look at this From Yakima Herald Republic......
Specifically THIS part
“I’m still trying to figure out what happened (with the low antlerless harvest),” Bernatowicz said. “I look at two things — hunter success rate and permit success rate. This year, just looking at the raw report, it looks like the number of people who didn’t hunt their permit went way up. When I look at that, I ask why?
“Last year for the first time you could apply for and get drawn for multiple permits. You could only shoot one elk, but you could possibly have been drawn for a branch-antler permit and an antlerless permit. The hunter success rate really wasn’t that low. But when you look at the permit success rate — total harvest based on the number of permits — that was really low.”
http://sportsyakima.com/2011/02/elk-count-shows-strength-in-numbers/ (http://sportsyakima.com/2011/02/elk-count-shows-strength-in-numbers/)
There you go! Ammo to try to kill it again. (Still Dreaming)
Post by: Curly on March 01, 2011, 09:23:03 AM
And DW said at the commission meeting last year that the chances of someone drawing 2 permits was unlikely to happen......... :bash:
Post by: bobcat on March 01, 2011, 09:41:23 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 01, 2011, 09:53:47 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 01, 2011, 09:57:41 AM
As evident by?????
The article you posted.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 01, 2011, 10:17:36 AM
As evident by?????
The article you posted.
"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Numbers, statistics. Yes I could be wrong ,but the Statistics (if available to the commission- which Ware did NOT have 2009's available in 2010) will prove that one way or the other.
Now as for your thoughts......The are no statistics available anywhere to prove or disprove them.
"It may not be just that people got drawn for two permits and therefore didn't participate in the cow permit hunt they drew. It seems that there were probably just many people putting in for those cow permits for the first time ever just because they had nothing to lose. So they put in and maybe drew one but their motivation to hunt it wasn't like it would be for those people who put in only for cow permits every year."
Post by: bobcat on March 01, 2011, 10:40:33 AM
Should I just remove my post that I'm guessing you disagree with?
It was a simple comment, not something that I would try to prove with statistics. It makes sense to me but maybe I didn't spell it out clear enough.
I just thought people who have primarily been putting in for bull permits all these years, and then all of a sudden when the rules change and they can apply for a cow elk permit without losing the points they have been saving for that bull permit, that they may not put as much effort into killing a cow as others might, or they may decide not to hunt at all.
I've stated on here many times that I disagree with the changes they made to the permit system last year and I don't think a person should be able to draw more than one permit for species. And it is likely that some of the decrease in cow elk harvest COULD be due to some of the permit holders also having a bull elk permit.
But even that theory I don't think can be proven one way or the other with statistics. :dunno:
Post by: dreamingbig on March 01, 2011, 10:42:59 AM
Post by: Curly on March 01, 2011, 10:46:14 AM
It may not be just that people got drawn for two permits and therefore didn't participate in the cow permit hunt they drew. It seems that there were probably just many people putting in for those cow permits for the first time ever just because they had nothing to lose. So they put in and maybe drew one but their motivation to hunt it wasn't like it would be for those people who put in only for cow permits every year.
I agree. Very possible that is the scenario. Hard to come up with stats on the theory too, but common sense would say that it is likely.....
Post by: bobcat on March 01, 2011, 10:47:25 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 01, 2011, 10:54:09 AM
2 years ago it was in Ellensburg, I was there as was Colockumelk and others. And I agree central part of the state is best!
another point:
If the legislature F/U the whole system,this could be one of the last meetings where it matters at all!
:mgun: Please attend if possible