Post by: jstone on November 11, 2019, 09:29:12 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on November 11, 2019, 09:37:06 AM
Post by: jstone on November 11, 2019, 09:41:52 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on November 11, 2019, 09:52:27 AM
I put this in the deer hunting section since you mentioned deer in your post. My guess is it will apply to elk as well. Hopefully some chime in and explain why they would like to see it changed.
Post by: zwickeyman on November 11, 2019, 10:03:28 AM
I would be more than willing to give up some general and all the quality permits for a few years if I thought it would help a bunch. The problem I have with it is with all the poaching, tribal over harvest and the state being a predator pit it would only benefit those 3 groups
Post by: no.cen.wa on November 11, 2019, 10:10:09 AM
But, I do think the pressure, or days the deer are hunted, by all groups could be shortened. I only hunt the mule deer herd in the Methow so this thought may not apply to all deer. :twocents:
John G
Post by: Rainier10 on November 11, 2019, 10:18:37 AM
Here is the tough part of that question for me.:yeah:
I would be more than willing to give up some general and all the quality permits for a few years if I thought it would help a bunch. The problem I have with it is with all the poaching, tribal over harvest and the state being a predator pit it would only benefit those 3 groups
A compromise in my opinion that I mentioned in another thread would be to hunt deer every other year and elk every other year opposite the year you can deer hunt.
Make a larger portion of antlerless hunts youth and senior hunts.
It would be something to try for a three year cycle like the 4 pt minimum they tried a few years ago. My guess is just like that after three years of it the majority will want it back the way it was.
I am fine with it the way it is now and if they change I will adjust and still enjoy my time in the field with friends and family.
Post by: LongBomb on November 11, 2019, 10:23:48 AM
Post by: 7mmfan on November 11, 2019, 10:31:55 AM
How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughts
Then only like 100 people would be able to hunt the next year.
Post by: HntnFsh on November 11, 2019, 10:52:47 AM
How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughts
Then only like 100 people would be able to hunt the next year.
Yep, that would thin the ranks!
Post by: MeatMissile on November 11, 2019, 11:01:21 AM
Post by: scrapperdude on November 11, 2019, 11:25:26 AM
Post by: Jimmy33 on November 11, 2019, 11:38:13 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 11, 2019, 11:56:06 AM
Post by: Buckhunter24 on November 11, 2019, 11:59:34 AM
Post by: Katmai Guy on November 11, 2019, 12:29:22 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 11, 2019, 01:01:18 PM
Post by: Bob33 on November 11, 2019, 01:12:10 PM
Craigslist "Used coyote, like new!" ads will take off.How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughts
Then only like 100 people would be able to hunt the next year.
Yep, that would thin the ranks!
Post by: Ironhead on November 11, 2019, 01:30:05 PM
Post by: mburrows on November 11, 2019, 01:35:06 PM
Post by: buckfvr on November 11, 2019, 01:43:21 PM
All young bucks and does walk. Youth and seniors get any buck. Mule deer needs to go to resident draw or every other year. Deer should go the way of elk......east/west tags.
Wholesale changes need to be made but with maintaining as much opportunity to hunt as the primary goal.
Less opportunity, lower fees , way fewer special hunts, less confusing regs. WIDE OPEN predator hunting.
Post by: Rainier10 on November 11, 2019, 01:48:54 PM
Second and a very close second in my opinion is poaching, non native overharvest. There are estimates that say that for every deer taken legally there are at least 3 others taken illegally. That is a massive amount of deer that could be harvested by legal hunters.
I think these two should be addressed before limiting opportunity. Unfortunately limiting opportunity is way easier than fixing the other two.
Post by: JakeLand on November 11, 2019, 02:06:12 PM
Post by: skidynastar33 on November 11, 2019, 02:14:39 PM
1. What are we comparing herd size too?
- I think we all probably compare herd sizes to when they were at record highs vs comparing to what would be a healthy herd size for the landscape.
- also deer use the landscape differently. They adjust to pressure, predators, ect. So stating things like “I have done this hunted this one spot for 20years and this is the lowest herd size I’ve ever seen” may not add much value because deer can use the landscape differently.
2. Habitat
- this is the most important of all. Deer need places to live. How do we protect existing habitat? Or do we create more?
3. Do we want Washington to be more of a quality hunting state? Or opportunity?
I think it needs to be a opportunity state. Look at California. We need all the hunters we can or we will be out voted of hunter opportunity.
How then do we manage wildlife while creating opportunity
- no doe tags in areas that need to grow herd size
- I think permit only is a bad idea for this state. There are other ways to limit pressure instead.
- you have to choose a unit? Mule deer, black tail, or whitetail only? While ideas like this are kinda painful. I think it’s a good middle ground that keep opportunity high.
- late tags, I don’t see a reason to eliminate? I think you can adjust tag numbers up and down without going to 0. Go from 15 tags to 5, ect. Shooting 5 big bucks in a unit is not going to make a huge difference in the bigger picture. But will keep money flowing into wildlife.
4. Wildlife need our money, I don’t think blaming wdfw for everything solves anything.
- also there are a ton of great biologists that manage these wildlife for what best for the wildlife.
- biologist don’t care about how big of a buck you shoot, and they shouldn’t care for it. They should be focused on the health of the herd.
Post by: ljsommer on November 11, 2019, 02:26:04 PM
I have said this before and will say it again and probably get flamed for it but habitat loss is a huge issue. There isn't enough good habitat for the amount of animals that we want so that more people can fill tags. The habitat that is left will only hold so many animals and only allow so many animals to survive liberal seasons. They have to have plenty of cover to escape the pressure and ensure their are more animals to hunt the next year.
Second and a very close second in my opinion is poaching, non native overharvest. There are estimates that say that for every deer taken legally there are at least 3 others taken illegally. That is a massive amount of deer that could be harvested by legal hunters.
I think these two should be addressed before limiting opportunity. Unfortunately limiting opportunity is way easier than fixing the other two.
I have two questions: where was the 1/3 number sourced from regarding poaching? That seems extremely high.
Second, let's say a state did have rampant poaching, and did have resources available (as we do), what can be done to effectively combat poaching, given how distributed the wilds are and how thin our game wardens are spread? How do you stop poaching?
Post by: buckfvr on November 11, 2019, 02:30:33 PM
We have been railroaded down the wrong path for 50 years I know of and the last 20 being the most damaging.
There wont be a miracle fix and there wont be an easy fast one, but again......wdfw cowtowing to the governor is by far the biggest problem.
Post by: Bob33 on November 11, 2019, 02:34:51 PM
Everyone is in step with the political agenda of the governor and his constituents.....make no mistakes about that.That's amazing. You know every single biologist for WDFW and his political agendas.
Post by: TriggerMike on November 11, 2019, 02:44:44 PM
Post by: buckfvr on November 11, 2019, 02:45:05 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on November 11, 2019, 03:03:12 PM
Here is an article that talks about poaching taking more animals than legal harvest and the issue with stopping it. Even if you arrest someone they know they aren't going to be prosecuted to the fullest extent so they get off easy and keep doing it.I have said this before and will say it again and probably get flamed for it but habitat loss is a huge issue. There isn't enough good habitat for the amount of animals that we want so that more people can fill tags. The habitat that is left will only hold so many animals and only allow so many animals to survive liberal seasons. They have to have plenty of cover to escape the pressure and ensure their are more animals to hunt the next year.
Second and a very close second in my opinion is poaching, non native overharvest. There are estimates that say that for every deer taken legally there are at least 3 others taken illegally. That is a massive amount of deer that could be harvested by legal hunters.
I think these two should be addressed before limiting opportunity. Unfortunately limiting opportunity is way easier than fixing the other two.
I have two questions: where was the 1/3 number sourced from regarding poaching? That seems extremely high.
Second, let's say a state did have rampant poaching, and did have resources available (as we do), what can be done to effectively combat poaching, given how distributed the wilds are and how thin our game wardens are spread? How do you stop poaching?
https://www.kuow.org/stories/northwest-poachers-rarely-caught-and-lightly-punished
Post by: jstone on November 11, 2019, 04:15:19 PM
I have hunted the swakane sense I was a kid. I think some roads need to be closed. And NO one can get in to shoot the deer. Just like the side roads up the Entiat and so on. There are son many more homes up on the hill sides that they are losing there habitat.
Keep the ideas coming. Maybe we can put stuff together and make something work.
Post by: Igor on November 11, 2019, 04:18:20 PM
Lots won’t like this either.!! But, we need to gate roads that lead to wintering grounds.
I have hunted the swakane sense I was a kid. I think some roads need to be closed. And NO one can get in to shoot the deer. Just like the side roads up the Entiat and so on. There are son many more homes up on the hill sides that they are losing there habitat.
Keep the ideas coming. Maybe we can put stuff together and make something work.
I think it's called "preaching to the choir"....................
Post by: bigmacc on November 11, 2019, 04:46:27 PM
I think it was huntnphool :dunno: that a few years ago came up with the "every other year" idea based on the last digits of your wild ID, it would immediately cut all pressure in half. My add on to it was to include all species(mule deer, whitetail, blacktail and elk), set it up so a guy could hunt 2 every year, example- if your ID ends in odd on a particular year you can hunt elk and whitetail if you choose, if it ends in an even number you can hunt mule deer and blacktail. There are ways to construct the every other year idea so you will be at least hunting every year and every other you will be hunting your favorites. Do away with ALL special permits and extend seasons a little, example- mule deer, 2 weeks ending on the 31st of October, no matter what day the 31st falls on.
Post by: jrebel on November 11, 2019, 04:54:53 PM
The argument of shutting down season or limiting opportunity will increase herds is like the liberal anti gunners saying taking away guns will make our streets safer. Not that easy folks.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on November 11, 2019, 05:15:11 PM
How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughtsMight be a little much, but I might think that giving points rewards for predators as the 'bounty' could help. For example, if you shoot a cougar, you could get 10 extra points to use in a category of your choice. Shoot a bear and get five or three points, etc. I don't see WDFW offering cash bounties for predators, but points? I'd imagine the guys with 20+ points trying for blues tags would be hitting the cat calls pretty hard. Maybe the predator for extra points has to come from the permit area the hunter would intend to apply the points toward?
Post by: vandeman17 on November 11, 2019, 05:17:44 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on November 11, 2019, 05:30:10 PM
My main question is if anybody on here can say with complete honesty that they believe there is a chance that there will be a change in predator management in the foreseeable future? If not, anything we do about seasons will have minimal long term effects :twocents::yeah: screw limiting our seasons, others will just keep killing what they want!
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 05:58:49 PM
And like some of us have been saying since then, it’s going to happen regardless how much you whine, only difference is it will be far worse if WDFW come up with a compromise/solution than if we as hunters do.
Get your crying towels ready! :chuckle:
Post by: bullcanyon on November 11, 2019, 06:10:44 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on November 11, 2019, 06:37:20 PM
No sense closing an area. Tribes will go in and shoot what they want. Lock it up for everyone or leave it open for all..oh boy, you said the T word, now you're a racist! Or your entitled if you feel you should be able to hunt every year! This site is losing its touch, getting less interesting more and more. And your right, I don’t need to be here if I don’t like it.
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 06:44:45 PM
No sense closing an area. Tribes will go in and shoot what they want. Lock it up for everyone or leave it open for all..
Yeah right, cut off your nose to spite your face....brilliant! :chuckle:
Post by: Buckhunter24 on November 11, 2019, 06:46:02 PM
How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughtsMight be a little much, but I might think that giving points rewards for predators as the 'bounty' could help. For example, if you shoot a cougar, you could get 10 extra points to use in a category of your choice. Shoot a bear and get five or three points, etc. I don't see WDFW offering cash bounties for predators, but points? I'd imagine the guys with 20+ points trying for blues tags would be hitting the cat calls pretty hard. Maybe the predator for extra points has to come from the permit area the hunter would intend to apply the points toward?
Probably right.about that on the cash bounties at this poin, but wasnt there one on coyotes years ago for at least one year though?
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 06:46:39 PM
No sense closing an area. Tribes will go in and shoot what they want. Lock it up for everyone or leave it open for all..oh boy, you said the T word, now you're a racist! Or your entitled if you feel you should be able to hunt every year! This site is losing its touch, getting less interesting more and more. And your right, I don’t need to be here if I don’t like it.
Come on man, you are smarter than that.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on November 11, 2019, 06:53:42 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on November 11, 2019, 06:55:01 PM
Can't remember when that was. There was a cash bounty in Oregon I think about eight years ago(?). You could bring the ears in and get like $15. That was down by christmas valley, supposedly to get the yotes off the antelope fawns for a bit.How about you have to shoot a cougar this year to hunt deer or elk next year sort of thing? Or a bear or X many coyotes. Change the poaching reward to pick of any special draw tag instead of just points. Some off the cuff thoughtsMight be a little much, but I might think that giving points rewards for predators as the 'bounty' could help. For example, if you shoot a cougar, you could get 10 extra points to use in a category of your choice. Shoot a bear and get five or three points, etc. I don't see WDFW offering cash bounties for predators, but points? I'd imagine the guys with 20+ points trying for blues tags would be hitting the cat calls pretty hard. Maybe the predator for extra points has to come from the permit area the hunter would intend to apply the points toward?
Probably right.about that on the cash bounties at this poin, but wasnt there one on coyotes years ago for at least one year though?
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 11, 2019, 07:06:21 PM
Post by: Bushcraft on November 11, 2019, 07:35:49 PM
Fix these and I guarantee the internet typer-sniper griping will evaporate overnight.
There are more predators in this state than WDFW will admit (or knows) to having.
Poaching is also rampant. The 140ish WDFW "enforcement agents" in a state of nearly 7.5 million people is a <insert justifiably massive inflammatory swear word or phrase here> joke.
We desperately need more boots-on-the-ground GAME WARDENS and genuine sustainable, science-based BIOLOGISTS working throughout the state and a helluva lot fewer lying CYA political hacks in Olympia.
Post by: X-Force on November 11, 2019, 07:38:04 PM
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 07:38:42 PM
#1 thing to start. Human predators. Do away with multi season permits completely, way to much pressure on the herds. This could be achieved only if a way was figured out to keep WDFW lifeblood (money) at the same income level.
I gave a example of how that could be done too, and how to eliminate the point system in the process!
Post by: X-Force on November 11, 2019, 07:44:54 PM
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 08:11:08 PM
#1 thing to start. Human predators. Do away with multi season permits completely, way to much pressure on the herds. This could be achieved only if a way was figured out to keep WDFW lifeblood (money) at the same income level.
I gave a example of how that could be done too, and how to eliminate the point system in the process!
Here you go.
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
Post by: bigmacc on November 11, 2019, 09:47:57 PM
Same old argument many of you have had for years, “screw that, I’m entitled and have to hunt every year!”
And like some of us have been saying since then, it’s going to happen regardless how much you whine, only difference is it will be far worse if WDFW come up with a compromise/solution than if we as hunters do.
Get your crying towels ready! :chuckle:
Well, I guess I got to agree with this, phool just poked it in the eye :tup:.....phool ,when we gonna meet for that beer?
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 09:57:43 PM
Same old argument many of you have had for years, “screw that, I’m entitled and have to hunt every year!”
And like some of us have been saying since then, it’s going to happen regardless how much you whine, only difference is it will be far worse if WDFW come up with a compromise/solution than if we as hunters do.
Get your crying towels ready! :chuckle:
Well, I guess I got to agree with this, phool just poked it in the eye :tup:.....phool ,when we gonna meet for that beer?
Honestly I’ll drive 5 hours for a beer and good conversation! ;)
Post by: KFhunter on November 11, 2019, 10:05:11 PM
But we can do other things, make use of available habitat and improve where we can.
Theres many areas of the state where available habitat is severely underutilized...huge dead zones nearly devoid of herds, just a few hangers on here and there. Those dead areas could make up for areas of the state where habitat may be the limiting factor, easily so.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 10:07:06 PM
Wake the £¥$# up people! :bash:
Post by: KFhunter on November 11, 2019, 10:17:50 PM
Habitat loss is pure BS!Yup
Wake the £¥$# up people! :bash:
Its predators far and away the biggest factor of herd decline, and until we address that I'm in favor of scorched earth. Kill all the elk, deer and starve them out. Make the skinny cats kill skinnier cats, coyotes have tiny litters that don't survive, bears that have bad early summers and go to sleep underweight, and wolves that come into urban areas and scare the sheeple
Scorched earth is a policy where we dont have to change a thing, dont lift a finger, just continue as we have been and it'll arrive. Has arrived.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 10:56:06 PM
Habitat loss is pure BS!Yup
Wake the £¥$# up people! :bash:
Its predators far and away the biggest factor of herd decline, and until we address that I'm in favor of scorched earth. Kill all the elk, deer and starve them out. Make the skinny cats kill skinnier cats, coyotes have tiny litters that don't survive, bears that have bad early summers and go to sleep underweight, and wolves that come into urban areas and scare the sheeple
Scorched earth is a policy where we dont have to change a thing, dont lift a finger, just continue as we have been and it'll arrive. Has arrived.
But let’s watch as the unaware continue to soak up the liberal excuses and left wing solutions...such as the Weilgus cougar “study”!
Post by: jmscon on November 11, 2019, 11:06:51 PM
Downhill spiral
Post by: jmscon on November 11, 2019, 11:12:39 PM
Post by: huntnphool on November 11, 2019, 11:51:32 PM
The problem is if you start to limit tags issued then you either need to raise the price to make up for lost revenue or the state will have even less funds to pay enforcement officers, bios,etc.
Downhill spiral
Did you bother to read what I wrote?
Post by: jmscon on November 12, 2019, 12:01:21 AM
The problem is if you start to limit tags issued then you either need to raise the price to make up for lost revenue or the state will have even less funds to pay enforcement officers, bios,etc.
Downhill spiral
Did you bother to read what I wrote?
Which part?
I didn’t think I read anything that had to do with what I just wrote about funds and what our say will be once the funds from hunters starts to dry up.
Post by: huntnphool on November 12, 2019, 12:17:50 AM
The problem is if you start to limit tags issued then you either need to raise the price to make up for lost revenue or the state will have even less funds to pay enforcement officers, bios,etc.
Downhill spiral
Did you bother to read what I wrote?
Which part?
I didn’t think I read anything that had to do with what I just wrote about funds and what our say will be once the funds from hunters starts to dry up.
I didn’t think so.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 12, 2019, 04:51:19 AM
As a percentage of hunters in that draw drop out, they are creating a additional group/% of hunters with "0" points. Each year, adjust the percentage of permits in the "point group" with those in the "0" point group, so that even though they are no longer in the "point group", they still have a chance to draw a permit, albeit a small chance.........no different than now. :chuckle:
Once you get to the 51/49 area, you can drop out of the point group if you want and join the "0" point group since the higher percentage of permits would then be in the "0" point group.
Yes this would take years to do, but it would eliminate the point system, while at the same time NOT eliminating the "investment" everybody to date has made, also increasing the odds of those still in, rather than reducing their odds.
Post by: huntnnw on November 12, 2019, 05:41:35 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 12, 2019, 05:49:58 AM
Post by: huntnnw on November 12, 2019, 06:25:11 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on November 12, 2019, 06:41:28 AM
Post by: jmscon on November 12, 2019, 06:56:47 AM
The problem is if you start to limit tags issued then you either need to raise the price to make up for lost revenue or the state will have even less funds to pay enforcement officers, bios,etc.
Downhill spiral
Did you bother to read what I wrote?
Which part?
I didn’t think I read anything that had to do with what I just wrote about funds and what our say will be once the funds from hunters starts to dry up.
I didn’t think so.
Because you didn’t.
Post by: bobcat on November 12, 2019, 07:36:48 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 12, 2019, 08:16:15 AM
Start next year, no more accruing points, those that draw a permit go to zero and have no more points going forward in that category. Each year a chunk of hunters drop out of that pool, increasing the odds of those still in the game.
As a percentage of hunters in that draw drop out, they are creating a additional group/% of hunters with "0" points. Each year, adjust the percentage of permits in the "point group" with those in the "0" point group, so that even though they are no longer in the "point group", they still have a chance to draw a permit, albeit a small chance.........no different than now. :chuckle:
Once you get to the 51/49 area, you can drop out of the point group if you want and join the "0" point group since the higher percentage of permits would then be in the "0" point group.
Yes this would take years to do, but it would eliminate the point system, while at the same time NOT eliminating the "investment" everybody to date has made, also increasing the odds of those still in, rather than reducing their odds.
This was Phool's suggestion
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 08:19:06 AM
I don't believe we could go to permit only mule deer hunting and not do the same for blacktails and whitetails. All the hunting pressure would just be transferred from mule deer to the other two. Although in many blacktail areas, hunting pressure is controlled by Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies, so you wouldn't need to limit the number of tags issued for those areas.
If it goes permit only, it'll never go back to OTC and we'll see a decline in permits over time.
We screw ourselves to make it better for predators, tribes and poachers?
No thanks.
Post by: Tinmaniac on November 12, 2019, 08:19:22 AM
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 08:30:27 AM
now we gotta get bears sealed, cougar sealed, bobcat sealed..wouldn't be hard to turn in coyote tails too.
turn in predators and get point/s added to some quality hunt. We could argue all day about specifics, but I think something simple could be done to incentivise predator hunting in this way.
Doesn't cost the state a dime and would actually add money to their coffers because people sick of WDFW management might see this positive step and buy back in.
Post by: Bob33 on November 12, 2019, 08:48:43 AM
In the last 50 years I’ve hunted with permits once. All other deer hunting has been general season.
Taking away general seasons for deer would do far more damage than good in the long run.
Post by: jmscon on November 12, 2019, 09:54:48 AM
What if two gmus on each side of the state were shut down to deer hunting for five years on a rotation? It would increase pressure in other areas but not as much as closing down one side of the state. It could be done for elk too.
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 10:29:31 AM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/how-much-of-your-washington-fishing-hunting-license-dollars-actually-goes-to-wdfw/
Post by: idahohuntr on November 12, 2019, 10:31:51 AM
Nobody is limiting deer hunting. Nobody is wanting reduced or permit Whitetail or blacktail. It’s mule deer that is the problem. Majority of population of people in this state lives either around blacktails or Whitetails. The mule deer herds need managing! It’s unbelievable that this state is a free for all modern firearm , muzzy and archery. We have the least amount of habitat for mule deer of any western state and highest people population of any western state excluding CA. These units need managing not saying it should be giving out 50 permits and making them quality , but managing hunter numbers and getting accurate harvest numbers . Some of the these units could be done like ID where it’s unlimited permit . You have to apply there and that’s the only unit you get to hunt. If you could save 25 bucks in a given unit ever year over a few years the unit would start to look better .Completely agree.
There are areas in the state where mule deer buck escapement is a joke. I see no reason we could not take at least several areas where hunter harvest is severely limiting escapement and make those permit only buck hunts to stop the slaughter of every muley buck with a 1 inch 3rd point. WT and BT can stay general season OTC, and units where mule deer bucks are not being limited by hunter harvest...leave it the way it is. But in many GMU's go permit only for mule deer...it would increase the mule deer hunting experience, not take away from general OTC WT/BT seasons, and it would help spread out hunts/points issues. :twocents:
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 10:42:26 AM
Post by: Lapua07 on November 12, 2019, 10:53:09 AM
Post by: TriggerMike on November 12, 2019, 11:19:51 AM
Post by: idahohuntr on November 12, 2019, 11:22:19 AM
When have we seen WDFW manage wildlife with a scalpel, rather than an axe?Special permit hunts...where they micro manage permit numbers and categories to an extreme.
But I understand your overall point...WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
Post by: Rainier10 on November 12, 2019, 11:36:52 AM
Another thought I had on this. If we reduce the amount of deer hunters in the field in a given year or couple year time frame we'll also be reducing the amount of cougars,bears and coyotes taken. The vast majority of predators in this state are killed opportunistically by hunters that randomly come across them while hunting deer and elk. Food for thought.Great point that I hadn't thought of.
Post by: jmscon on November 12, 2019, 12:19:50 PM
Here's a great read on what our hunting and fishing licenses actually fund.
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/how-much-of-your-washington-fishing-hunting-license-dollars-actually-goes-to-wdfw/
Interesting, the numbers are pretty amazing.
One thing that sticks out, pertaining to this conversation, is this:
Quote
Of note, the formula for sharing PR and DJ funds between the states is based in part on how many fishing and hunting licenses that WDFW and other agencies sell,That’s a big chunk of the federal money that the state receives. $3 of fed money for every one matched.
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
There’s a million and one ways to skin this cat. I’m not overly familiar to hunting in most of this state. Having only been hunting away from the NE corner a hand full of times. That being said our deer numbers whitetail and muleys alike have gone to hell in a hand basket. I’ve literally seen more elk than deer this year.. not something to complain about I know. The moose numbers have dropped tremendously as well. I believe Washington has made a pretty good leap in the right direction with the extra days and tags offered for bear hunting. Predator control is a must. Bounty on coyotes will bring revenue even if it’s a minimal amount paid back to the public. When we have lions in town regularly over the last several years that should be enough of an eye opener to the problem we’ve created for the lack of management. The wolf topic I won’t even attempt to address in this post due to the amount of controversy it brings up between outdoorsmen themselves and political hypocrisy that started the *censored* in the first place. I’d purpose deer tags are put to at the bare minimum no draw for quality hunts for 5-10 years. Tags are to be sold like wise as elk (east/west). No multi season. No doe permits. Mule deer closed completely in the tri-county area for a minimum 10 years. Once if ever the herd recovers.. drawing only and 4 point minimum. Baiting and dogs brought back for bears and cats. Even if they are permit only. But that just covers an opinion on what’s going on here in the corner.
I'd be right in line asking for reductions to deer/elk harvests *IF* predators were addressed in a meaningful way, but without that any deer/elk WE don't take is food for predators, poachers and tribes.
<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Post by: Tbar on November 12, 2019, 12:43:47 PM
I realize you know EVERYTHING that tribes do and where and how we manage but riddle me this. Why are the only two elk herds growing in this state the ones with the most tribal involvement? Never mind, go ahead with your smart ass comments and divisive rhetoric.....There’s a million and one ways to skin this cat. I’m not overly familiar to hunting in most of this state. Having only been hunting away from the NE corner a hand full of times. That being said our deer numbers whitetail and muleys alike have gone to hell in a hand basket. I’ve literally seen more elk than deer this year.. not something to complain about I know. The moose numbers have dropped tremendously as well. I believe Washington has made a pretty good leap in the right direction with the extra days and tags offered for bear hunting. Predator control is a must. Bounty on coyotes will bring revenue even if it’s a minimal amount paid back to the public. When we have lions in town regularly over the last several years that should be enough of an eye opener to the problem we’ve created for the lack of management. The wolf topic I won’t even attempt to address in this post due to the amount of controversy it brings up between outdoorsmen themselves and political hypocrisy that started the *censored* in the first place. I’d purpose deer tags are put to at the bare minimum no draw for quality hunts for 5-10 years. Tags are to be sold like wise as elk (east/west). No multi season. No doe permits. Mule deer closed completely in the tri-county area for a minimum 10 years. Once if ever the herd recovers.. drawing only and 4 point minimum. Baiting and dogs brought back for bears and cats. Even if they are permit only. But that just covers an opinion on what’s going on here in the corner.
I'd be right in line asking for reductions to deer/elk harvests *IF* predators were addressed in a meaningful way, but without that any deer/elk WE don't take is food for predators, poachers and tribes.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 12:45:47 PM
FYI: the two largest elk herds in WA are the Yakima and MT Saint Helens herds, both those herds are subject to tribal and non-tribal harvest and both herds suffering declines in overall numbers.
I'm happy your tribe is doing a great job managing your small herd of elk and experiencing growth, would that all tribes do as much as yours. Why aren't you calling in the Yakima's to grow their herd and work with WDFW?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on November 12, 2019, 12:53:31 PM
I don't believe we could go to permit only mule deer hunting and not do the same for blacktails and whitetails. All the hunting pressure would just be transferred from mule deer to the other two. Although in many blacktail areas, hunting pressure is controlled by Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies, so you wouldn't need to limit the number of tags issued for those areas.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
See this play out often with fishing. Wdfw closes one group of rivers then everyone moves to the next and fishes it into a closure.
Post by: Tbar on November 12, 2019, 01:07:19 PM
You need to take your victim glasses off, and read what I wrote.Thanks for the population info, really puts things in perspective to how meaningless my work is. Victim glasses? KMA, I need to take a break from your site.
FYI: the two largest elk herds in WA are the Yakima and MT Saint Helens herds, both those herds are subject to tribal and non-tribal harvest and both herds suffering declines in overall numbers.
I'm happy your tribe is doing a great job managing your small herd of elk and experiencing growth, would that all tribes do as much as yours. Why aren't you calling in the Yakima's to grow their herd and work with WDFW?
Post by: idahohuntr on November 12, 2019, 01:23:23 PM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 01:25:02 PM
You need to take your victim glasses off, and read what I wrote.
FYI: the two largest elk herds in WA are the Yakima and MT Saint Helens herds, both those herds are subject to tribal and non-tribal harvest and both herds suffering declines in overall numbers.
I'm happy your tribe is doing a great job managing your small herd of elk and experiencing growth, would that all tribes do as much as yours. Why aren't you calling in the Yakima's to grow their herd and work with WDFW?
Thanks for the population info, really puts things in perspective to how meaningless my work is. Victim glasses? KMA, I need to take a break from your site.
I've read your ever increasing resentment on this forum for a while now and you're far too ready to eviscerate anyone who dare talk about tribal issues, far too ready to throw out the racist card to anyone dare question a tribe, any tribe.
Perhaps you do need a break and I'd be happy to provide that for you if needed. I'll not ban you for your "KMA" comment and instead hope you'd think about it some.
We're in this together like it or not, most of WA's herds of mule deer/elk are a shared resource.
Post by: huntnphool on November 12, 2019, 01:29:10 PM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
+1
Post by: Lapua07 on November 12, 2019, 02:17:31 PM
Post by: huntnphool on November 12, 2019, 02:55:31 PM
These deer are under attack unknowingly by poor judgement by things that were never put to vote for the people.
It’s their MO... https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,243491.msg3271735.html#msg3271735
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 03:00:44 PM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
It's equally, perhaps even more simplistic, to say that mule deer are affected by hunting moreso than predation by lions and other predators. Unless you can show me where does aren't getting bred? We take bucks, and its true a lot of bucks don't live past 3yrs due to hunters, but a 2yr old forkie can breed a doe too.
I'm not interested in talking about quality of hunt for large mature bucks, I'm interested in herd size and growth yet keeping hunters hunting. A permit only, or 3 or 4 pt minimum buck, means less people hunting, less money for WDFW and management. Means less fish get planted. Let's grow the herd, then discuss quality. I don't really care to get into a quality vs quantity debate, I only care about overall numbers for now. The huge bucks will come later.
Post by: huntnphool on November 12, 2019, 03:38:14 PM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
It's equally, perhaps even more simplistic, to say that mule deer are affected by hunting moreso than predation by lions and other predators. Unless you can show me where does aren't getting bred? We take bucks, and its true a lot of bucks don't live past 3yrs due to hunters, but a 2yr old forkie can breed a doe too.
I'm not interested in talking about quality of hunt for large mature bucks, I'm interested in herd size and growth yet keeping hunters hunting. A permit only, or 3 or 4 pt minimum buck, means less people hunting, less money for WDFW and management. Means less fish get planted. Let's grow the herd, then discuss quality. I don't really care to get into a quality vs quantity debate, I only care about overall numbers for now. The huge bucks will come later.
You can start by reducing the amount of pressure/hunters. Eliminate the late tags and extend the general season to the end of the month or through the last weekend.
Post by: KFhunter on November 12, 2019, 03:45:45 PM
I'm only interested in growing herds in most areas of the state where we've been seeing declines, to do that end all doe hunts, make sure does get bred, and reduce predator loads. Pretty simple really.
Post by: Lapua07 on November 12, 2019, 05:50:39 PM
Post by: Piscatory_5 on November 12, 2019, 08:31:27 PM
Why limit to big game, hunting and fishing every other year. small game every other year regardless. It's fine to hear or read some folks posts complaining about the over hunting but they still apply for special hunt permits and harvest bucks. Hipocritical maybe a little. Just as well stop people from buying property out in the country to build there home on so they don't take away habitat.
I think it was huntnphool :dunno: that a few years ago came up with the "every other year" idea based on the last digits of your wild ID, it would immediately cut all pressure in half. My add on to it was to include all species(mule deer, whitetail, blacktail and elk), set it up so a guy could hunt 2 every year, example- if your ID ends in odd on a particular year you can hunt elk and whitetail if you choose, if it ends in an even number you can hunt mule deer and blacktail. There are ways to construct the every other year idea so you will be at least hunting every year and every other you will be hunting your favorites. Do away with ALL special permits and extend seasons a little, example- mule deer, 2 weeks ending on the 31st of October, no matter what day the 31st falls on.
Post by: huntnphool on November 12, 2019, 08:41:52 PM
Are you talking about a specific GMU or the whole state? We already have a short season for mule
Which I will argue is part of the problem!
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 13, 2019, 03:53:56 AM
Post by: Lapua07 on November 13, 2019, 05:32:36 AM
Do we agree nothing will get done and we will just continue to talk about it
Yep! That’s a given!
Post by: huntnnw on November 13, 2019, 05:51:48 AM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
Post by: Lapua07 on November 13, 2019, 06:04:53 AM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
Bear tags will be the only thing I buy here next year. 😉
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
Post by: boneaddict on November 13, 2019, 06:13:02 AM
Do we agree nothing will get done and we will just continue to talk about it
Yep!
No excuse for anyone shooting doe. Legal or not. All doe hunts need to stop. It used to be a management tool. Now it’s a money grab. Get back to wildlife management!
Post by: JimmyHoffa on November 13, 2019, 06:40:30 AM
There are still some areas for blacktails where they seriously need to be thinned out and does should be fair game. These areas tend to be predator free and hard to get much hunting access.Do we agree nothing will get done and we will just continue to talk about it
Yep!
No excuse for anyone shooting doe. Legal or not. All doe hunts need to stop. It used to be a management tool. Now it’s a money grab. Get back to wildlife management!
Post by: KFhunter on November 13, 2019, 08:21:53 AM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
I understand that hunting 3pt or better changes the genetics and we end up with huge forkies and lots of spikes. Not a fan of 3pt or larger.
I also understand your and other's desire to make it permit only to better the quality of the hunt, and it would, but it would also reduce the overall amount of hunters.
If the state is getting $3.00 of federal monies for every $1.00 of state money spent, there's a big incentive to keep as many people hunting as possible.
I just think that if permit hunting replaced a lot of our current OTC hunts we'd see far fewer people buy in, and that matched federal dollars would dry up and it would have a profound effect on the management budget which then prompts more and more reduced services, which means less and less hunters.... it's a snowball effect until there's very little hunting left and zero predator management or any management for that matter for lack of funding.
Post by: bornhunter on November 13, 2019, 08:27:25 AM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
I understand that hunting 3pt or better changes the genetics and we end up with huge forkies and lots of spikes. Not a fan of 3pt or larger.
I also understand your and other's desire to make it permit only to better the quality of the hunt, and it would, but it would also reduce the overall amount of hunters.
If the state is getting $3.00 of federal monies for every $1.00 of state money spent, there's a big incentive to keep as many people hunting as possible.
I just think that if permit hunting replaced a lot of our current OTC hunts we'd see far fewer people buy in, and that matched federal dollars would dry up and it would have a profound effect on the management budget which then prompts more and more reduced services, which means less and less hunters.... it's a snowball effect until there's very little hunting left and zero predator management or any management for that matter for lack of funding.
Darn good point KF.
Post by: Rainier10 on November 13, 2019, 08:31:31 AM
There is an easy way to lessen the pressure, remove the Monday and Tuesday hunting days after the last weekend if you are in the camp that too many deer are being taken.
Post by: KFhunter on November 13, 2019, 08:36:09 AM
They just increased the general season for mulies a few years ago, lengthened it by two days and a bunch of bucks got shot in those two extra days the first year as I recall.
There is an easy way to lessen the pressure, remove the Monday and Tuesday hunting days after the last weekend if you are in the camp that too many deer are being taken.
Ya I know, poor management decision I can't figure out why they had that herd slaughtered like that. especially after the fire where everyone could see a long ways and make pokes at deer way out there.
Post by: ne kid on November 13, 2019, 08:42:20 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 13, 2019, 08:59:12 AM
Post by: Sundance on November 13, 2019, 09:29:57 AM
1st Tag
Tag holder picks a GMU, they are allowed to hunt all general & late seasons in that GMU only (essentially giving them a multi-season tag) and may only apply for special permit hunts in that specific GMU (they are still allowed to enter for ghost points). This caters to the hunter who chooses to hunt locally, buys an access permit or doesn't play the permit game. You may only hunt the High Buck season under this tag if your specified a GMU that is open to High Buck.
2nd Tag
Primitive weapons, archery and muzzleloader tag. Tag holders are allowed to hunt BOTH archery and muzzleloader seasons but must select Eastern or Western Washington GMU's (similar to elk). Tag holders may only apply for special permits in GMU's for the side of the state they choose and may only apply for permits pertaining to archery and muzzleloader hunts. This alleviates statewide pressure, forces tag holders to hunt the side of the state they choose without being able to put in for permits on both sides of the state. The kicker is tag holder may now hunt both primitive weapon(s) seasons. High Buck season for muzzleloaders is closed.
3rd Tag
Rifle tag. Tag holders must select Eastern or Western Washington GMU's to hunt. Eastern WA modern rifle deer season remains the current length, Western WA modern rifle season remain the current length. ALL LATE RIFLE SEASONS ARE CLOSED, those hunting opportunities move to a draw only system under the Buck Deer category with permit numbers set based off historical harvest statistics and current herd populations. Tag holders mat only apply for special permit hunts for the side of the state they select. High buck season is still open, however you must hunt the side of the state for the tag you purchase.
All multi-season deer tags are eliminated. This will lose the WDFW roughly $1,800,000 in revenue. In 2018 it shows 108,729 deer hunters. Increase the deer tag cost by $10.00 and the remainder could either be absorbed as a loss of covered under the increased sale of Buck Deer category entries (for the late rifle opportunity to 3rd tag holders).
Post by: huntnphool on November 13, 2019, 10:30:55 AM
Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
I understand that hunting 3pt or better changes the genetics and we end up with huge forkies and lots of spikes. Not a fan of 3pt or larger.
I also understand your and other's desire to make it permit only to better the quality of the hunt, and it would, but it would also reduce the overall amount of hunters.
If the state is getting $3.00 of federal monies for every $1.00 of state money spent, there's a big incentive to keep as many people hunting as possible.
I just think that if permit hunting replaced a lot of our current OTC hunts we'd see far fewer people buy in, and that matched federal dollars would dry up and it would have a profound effect on the management budget which then prompts more and more reduced services, which means less and less hunters.... it's a snowball effect until there's very little hunting left and zero predator management or any management for that matter for lack of funding.
So which is it?
You stated you are only interested in growing the herds, now you are concerned with federal money and budgets?
Do you really think less hunters money is going to negatively effect government greed and funding whatever they feel needs more money? Did you just read your ballet and vote on the any of the advisory issues?
“The legislature increased, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature imposed, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature expanded, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
And you are seriously concerned that less money being misappropriated from hunters is actually going to effect management? Clearly they do whatever they want/need, in order to get the money they need.
There is no “management” now, what difference is it really going to make?
Post by: jmscon on November 13, 2019, 10:49:39 AM
Carry on
Post by: jmscon on November 13, 2019, 10:54:38 AM
Post by: huntnphool on November 13, 2019, 10:55:43 AM
Lawmakers have been imposing taxes without the vote of the people since statehood. The advisory voting is just a waste of paper.
Carry on
Agreed
Post by: idahohuntr on November 13, 2019, 10:58:52 AM
:chuckle: Exactly...sounds like your issue KF is growing the deer management budget...not the deer herds!Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
I understand that hunting 3pt or better changes the genetics and we end up with huge forkies and lots of spikes. Not a fan of 3pt or larger.
I also understand your and other's desire to make it permit only to better the quality of the hunt, and it would, but it would also reduce the overall amount of hunters.
If the state is getting $3.00 of federal monies for every $1.00 of state money spent, there's a big incentive to keep as many people hunting as possible.
I just think that if permit hunting replaced a lot of our current OTC hunts we'd see far fewer people buy in, and that matched federal dollars would dry up and it would have a profound effect on the management budget which then prompts more and more reduced services, which means less and less hunters.... it's a snowball effect until there's very little hunting left and zero predator management or any management for that matter for lack of funding.
So which is it?
You stated you are only interested in growing the herds, now you are concerned with federal money and budgets?
Do you really think less hunters money is going to negatively effect government greed and funding whatever they feel needs more money? Did you just read your ballet and vote on the any of the advisory issues?
“The legislature increased, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature imposed, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature expanded, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
And you are seriously concerned that less money being misappropriated from hunters is actually going to effect management? Clearly they do whatever they want/need, in order to get the money they need.
There is no “management” now, what difference is it really going to make?
Money is not an issue. WDFW could do 3x the job they do now with 1/4 the funding they get if they had their priorities straight. Bottom line - important management changes should not be dictated by revenue needs...thats how wdfw has operated for the last several decades, its what gave us this convoluted mess of a points system, and so many other dumb things.
Post by: Ironhead on November 13, 2019, 11:32:48 AM
Post by: Sundance on November 13, 2019, 11:48:28 AM
Post by: KFhunter on November 13, 2019, 11:52:36 AM
:chuckle: Exactly...sounds like your issue KF is growing the deer management budget...not the deer herds!Your statements are based on the false and simplistic view that all herds in all places are limited by non-human predation. The reality is - there are areas where HUNTER harvest is why virtually no mule deer bucks make it past 2.5 years old. Unless you can explain to me how it is cougars, wolves, and bears are only eating 3pt or bigger bucks...those are the areas where going to permit only would be successful. If there are no deer surviving because of predators or other non-hunting factors, then I would agree...pointless to limit hunting as it would not do anything. But in the real world - hunter harvest has a very significant effect on populations and their composition and it needs to be managed, not ignored by WDFW.<snip> WDFW's resting state is incompetence or laziness when it comes to game management...sadly...unlike predators...they really could do something here without worrying about interference from the Governor's office.
This is the truth of the matter folks, Inslee will sink anything meaningful regarding Predators. In light of this fact calling for reductions in opportunity is shooting ourselves in the foot. Without predator control the population will continue its decline, the predators will grow in population to suck up what we don't take and the decline will continue. Any deer/elk WE don't take is one more for a cat, a wolf, a bear or a tribal member that rejoices there's a few less white guys to compete with.
With inslee sinking predator control, I don't see a win no matter how much WE sacrifice.
Exactly! On my late tag there couldn’t be any more glaring evidence of hunters wiping out 3pt or better bucks. I saw tons of forks, spikes and 2x1’s yet only 2 3pt bucks . Somehow predators ate them all as they must be following the state 3pt min.
Something everyone on this forum can do legally is hunt bears and yotes. Bears wreak havoc in June on calves and fawns ! Idaho just released a study in Clearwater and selway where 44-46% of the elk calf mortality was due to bears. Yet I’d be willing to bet 10% of the guys bitching about elk and deer numbers don’t even attempt to hunt bears.
I understand that hunting 3pt or better changes the genetics and we end up with huge forkies and lots of spikes. Not a fan of 3pt or larger.
I also understand your and other's desire to make it permit only to better the quality of the hunt, and it would, but it would also reduce the overall amount of hunters.
If the state is getting $3.00 of federal monies for every $1.00 of state money spent, there's a big incentive to keep as many people hunting as possible.
I just think that if permit hunting replaced a lot of our current OTC hunts we'd see far fewer people buy in, and that matched federal dollars would dry up and it would have a profound effect on the management budget which then prompts more and more reduced services, which means less and less hunters.... it's a snowball effect until there's very little hunting left and zero predator management or any management for that matter for lack of funding.
So which is it?
You stated you are only interested in growing the herds, now you are concerned with federal money and budgets?
Do you really think less hunters money is going to negatively effect government greed and funding whatever they feel needs more money? Did you just read your ballet and vote on the any of the advisory issues?
“The legislature increased, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature imposed, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature expanded, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
“The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, a tax...”
And you are seriously concerned that less money being misappropriated from hunters is actually going to effect management? Clearly they do whatever they want/need, in order to get the money they need.
There is no “management” now, what difference is it really going to make?
Money is not an issue. WDFW could do 3x the job they do now with 1/4 the funding they get if they had their priorities straight. Bottom line - important management changes should not be dictated by revenue needs...thats how wdfw has operated for the last several decades, its what gave us this convoluted mess of a points system, and so many other dumb things.
good points both of you, and I'm just as jaded as the both of you on management of our herds.
I think its going to take a lot of $$ for the state to manage predators, I don't think hunters will get it done without states' help. If we don't have hunters funding, then the state isn't going too, but I digress, the state isn't no matter how much && they get right now, gotta have a lot more pain.
So I'm back to scorched earth, kill them all and starve the predators.
If we have a couple "good" areas of the state with well managed mule herds your draw odds will work its way to .01% just like most of our elk draws.
You just know someone like Rinella is going to draw a coveted WA mule tag and make a tv show :chuckle: