collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission  (Read 10524 times)

Offline fishngamereaper

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 7989
  • Location: kitsap
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #45 on: April 17, 2022, 05:40:26 PM »
There's nothing wrong with bull to cow ratios in the central herds... actually probably the best I've seen in years....
Wdfw is just realizing they can offer less and still make a bunch of money. 

Offline elkchaser54

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2014
  • Posts: 395
  • Location: Western Washington
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #46 on: April 17, 2022, 06:28:33 PM »
I was referencing white tail DEER tags in the blues area.   Not elk they are vastly different .

Offline emac

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 1691
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #47 on: April 17, 2022, 08:09:49 PM »
I was referencing white tail DEER tags in the blues area.   Not elk they are vastly different .
The whitetail in the blues and the foothills aren't doing that great.  Numbers are down as the eye test shows

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


Offline bigdub257

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2014
  • Posts: 610
  • Groups: RMEF;Ducks Unlimited
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #48 on: April 17, 2022, 09:15:21 PM »
There's nothing wrong with bull to cow ratios in the central herds... actually probably the best I've seen in years....
Wdfw is just realizing they can offer less and still make a bunch of money.

Maybe they decided to factor in (wild guess) the (unknown) bull harvest by other user groups.   :dunno:

Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+26)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2889
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #49 on: April 17, 2022, 10:33:51 PM »
So they're now saying the Yakima elk herd is at or slightly above objective  :dunno: :dunno: :chuckle:

They increased cow tags in the Yakima units but decreased the bull permits. What could possibly be responsible for bull numbers to decrease while cows increase  :bash: :bash: :bash:
Shooting bulls is “trophy hunting”!   Duh! 

But to be serious, it makes no sense.  The 25% reduction in quality archery elk tags was not addressed at the meetings.  Not sure what WDFW is driving at other than perhaps knowing a lot of bulls are being taken by other user groups so hoping to get bull to cow ratio back inline?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has to be.  I can't think of any reason to do this other than the bull/cow ratio is incredibly bad.
Without knowing more than I witnessed at the feed lots, I see zero representation for this move.   :dunno: This is a reduction coming off of a 90+% reduction!  It screams naive or a lack of due diligence.  With it being above objective ( :dunno:) there was probably some flexibility to have a considerable bump in bull hunt but without clarity it leaves users guessing.  The entirety does not sit well.
I don’t think it was justified.  I have zero rationale for why they did it…. My guess was low bull to cow ratio.  Why else would they slash bull permits when herd is approaching objective again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your guess is as good as any I think, maybe better since you have quite a bit of knowledge of the central herd.  I just don't know why you always throw little jabs without representation.  I have heard nothing to justify anything but a return to normal at objective type of management.  Personally I'm always in favor of a more conservative approach in regards to the factory. I'd rather they increased bull harvest not cows.  There's usually more moving parts like ag concerns or  :dunno:. There are a bunch of red flags here that do not make the department look competent.  I hope I'm missing something like a crazy low spike escapement or lack of bulls overall but one would think this type of information is easy shared and understood.

Offline huntnphool

  • Chance favors the prepared mind!
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 32690
  • Location: Pacific NorthWest
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #50 on: April 17, 2022, 11:56:17 PM »
I was referencing white tail DEER tags in the blues area.   Not elk they are vastly different .
The whitetail in the blues and the foothills aren't doing that great.  Numbers are down as the eye test shows

 Numbers are down vs when?
The things that come to those who wait, may be the things left by those who got there first!

Offline Limhangerslayer

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Dryside
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #51 on: April 18, 2022, 06:49:14 AM »
So they're now saying the Yakima elk herd is at or slightly above objective  :dunno: :dunno: :chuckle:

They increased cow tags in the Yakima units but decreased the bull permits. What could possibly be responsible for bull numbers to decrease while cows increase  :bash: :bash: :bash:
Shooting bulls is “trophy hunting”!   Duh! 

But to be serious, it makes no sense.  The 25% reduction in quality archery elk tags was not addressed at the meetings.  Not sure what WDFW is driving at other than perhaps knowing a lot of bulls are being taken by other user groups so hoping to get bull to cow ratio back inline?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has to be.  I can't think of any reason to do this other than the bull/cow ratio is incredibly bad.
Without knowing more than I witnessed at the feed lots, I see zero representation for this move.   :dunno: This is a reduction coming off of a 90+% reduction!  It screams naive or a lack of due diligence.  With it being above objective ( :dunno:) there was probably some flexibility to have a considerable bump in bull hunt but without clarity it leaves users guessing.  The entirety does not sit well.
I don’t think it was justified.  I have zero rationale for why they did it…. My guess was low bull to cow ratio.  Why else would they slash bull permits when herd is approaching objective again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your guess is as good as any I think, maybe better since you have quite a bit of knowledge of the central herd.  I just don't know why you always throw little jabs without representation.  I have heard nothing to justify anything but a return to normal at objective type of management.  Personally I'm always in favor of a more conservative approach in regards to the factory. I'd rather they increased bull harvest not cows.  There's usually more moving parts like ag concerns or  :dunno:. There are a bunch of red flags here that do not make the department look competent.  I hope I'm missing something like a crazy low spike escapement or lack of bulls overall but one would think this type of information is easy shared and understood.
they have a standard of around 12-16 bulls per 100 cows in the Yakima herd, and supposedly with their count that’s what they are hovering at.  I had a lengthy conversation the other day about this with the biologist.  Predators and native harvest were 2 big factors.  And because the latter of the 2 can make $4-500 dollars on a set of antlers connected to the skull the branch bulls have a price on their head.  Then they turn the rest into jerky and pepperoni to sell they now have a business.  He tried to change the numbers with the higher ups not having it.  So be ready.  Unless something changes it’s going to be like this for the foreseeable future.

Offline trophyhunt

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 18678
  • Location: Wetside
  • Groups: Wa Wild Sheep Life Member
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #52 on: April 18, 2022, 07:25:48 AM »
So they're now saying the Yakima elk herd is at or slightly above objective  :dunno: :dunno: :chuckle:

They increased cow tags in the Yakima units but decreased the bull permits. What could possibly be responsible for bull numbers to decrease while cows increase  :bash: :bash: :bash:
Shooting bulls is “trophy hunting”!   Duh! 

But to be serious, it makes no sense.  The 25% reduction in quality archery elk tags was not addressed at the meetings.  Not sure what WDFW is driving at other than perhaps knowing a lot of bulls are being taken by other user groups so hoping to get bull to cow ratio back inline?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has to be.  I can't think of any reason to do this other than the bull/cow ratio is incredibly bad.
Without knowing more than I witnessed at the feed lots, I see zero representation for this move.   :dunno: This is a reduction coming off of a 90+% reduction!  It screams naive or a lack of due diligence.  With it being above objective ( :dunno:) there was probably some flexibility to have a considerable bump in bull hunt but without clarity it leaves users guessing.  The entirety does not sit well.
I don’t think it was justified.  I have zero rationale for why they did it…. My guess was low bull to cow ratio.  Why else would they slash bull permits when herd is approaching objective again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your guess is as good as any I think, maybe better since you have quite a bit of knowledge of the central herd.  I just don't know why you always throw little jabs without representation.  I have heard nothing to justify anything but a return to normal at objective type of management.  Personally I'm always in favor of a more conservative approach in regards to the factory. I'd rather they increased bull harvest not cows.  There's usually more moving parts like ag concerns or  :dunno:. There are a bunch of red flags here that do not make the department look competent.  I hope I'm missing something like a crazy low spike escapement or lack of bulls overall but one would think this type of information is easy shared and understood.
they have a standard of around 12-16 bulls per 100 cows in the Yakima herd, and supposedly with their count that’s what they are hovering at.  I had a lengthy conversation the other day about this with the biologist.  Predators and native harvest were 2 big factors.  And because the latter of the 2 can make $4-500 dollars on a set of antlers connected to the skull the branch bulls have a price on their head.  Then they turn the rest into jerky and pepperoni to sell they now have a business.  He tried to change the numbers with the higher ups not having it.  So be ready.  Unless something changes it’s going to be like this for the foreseeable future.
exactly why the WDFW should go to any bull in that area, sacrifice the elk to force a few to actually manage! Hard to sell bull heads when there are none!
“In common with”..... not so much!!

Offline fishngamereaper

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 7989
  • Location: kitsap
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #53 on: April 18, 2022, 07:29:18 AM »
So allowing potential harvest of roughly 10 percent of the (under)"estimated" branched bull population in any given unit with odds that average 8-12 percent...so wdfw thinks harvest of 1-2 percent of branched bulls is reasonable....

For reference 110 bulls where killed in district 8 last year on special permits.... that's all the quality 300 gmus...

Gets me all giddy just thinking about the opportunity.... :rolleyes:

Offline Limhangerslayer

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 1540
  • Location: Dryside
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #54 on: April 18, 2022, 07:49:10 AM »
So they're now saying the Yakima elk herd is at or slightly above objective  :dunno: :dunno: :chuckle:

They increased cow tags in the Yakima units but decreased the bull permits. What could possibly be responsible for bull numbers to decrease while cows increase  :bash: :bash: :bash:
Shooting bulls is “trophy hunting”!   Duh! 

But to be serious, it makes no sense.  The 25% reduction in quality archery elk tags was not addressed at the meetings.  Not sure what WDFW is driving at other than perhaps knowing a lot of bulls are being taken by other user groups so hoping to get bull to cow ratio back inline?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has to be.  I can't think of any reason to do this other than the bull/cow ratio is incredibly bad.
Without knowing more than I witnessed at the feed lots, I see zero representation for this move.   :dunno: This is a reduction coming off of a 90+% reduction!  It screams naive or a lack of due diligence.  With it being above objective ( :dunno:) there was probably some flexibility to have a considerable bump in bull hunt but without clarity it leaves users guessing.  The entirety does not sit well.
I don’t think it was justified.  I have zero rationale for why they did it…. My guess was low bull to cow ratio.  Why else would they slash bull permits when herd is approaching objective again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your guess is as good as any I think, maybe better since you have quite a bit of knowledge of the central herd.  I just don't know why you always throw little jabs without representation.  I have heard nothing to justify anything but a return to normal at objective type of management.  Personally I'm always in favor of a more conservative approach in regards to the factory. I'd rather they increased bull harvest not cows.  There's usually more moving parts like ag concerns or  :dunno:. There are a bunch of red flags here that do not make the department look competent.  I hope I'm missing something like a crazy low spike escapement or lack of bulls overall but one would think this type of information is easy shared and understood.
they have a standard of around 12-16 bulls per 100 cows in the Yakima herd, and supposedly with their count that’s what they are hovering at.  I had a lengthy conversation the other day about this with the biologist.  Predators and native harvest were 2 big factors.  And because the latter of the 2 can make $4-500 dollars on a set of antlers connected to the skull the branch bulls have a price on their head.  Then they turn the rest into jerky and pepperoni to sell they now have a business.  He tried to change the numbers with the higher ups not having it.  So be ready.  Unless something changes it’s going to be like this for the foreseeable future.
exactly why the WDFW should go to any bull in that area, sacrifice the elk to force a few to actually manage! Hard to sell bull heads when there are none!
he suggested that and was shot down at the last 3 year rule setting.

Offline trophyhunt

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 18678
  • Location: Wetside
  • Groups: Wa Wild Sheep Life Member
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #55 on: April 18, 2022, 08:07:31 AM »
Well good for him!!!! It’s too bad others didn’t agree w him. I’d like his opponents to come up w a better solution!
“In common with”..... not so much!!

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 12521
  • Location: Arlington
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #56 on: April 18, 2022, 08:21:04 AM »
Looks like they did.  Unfortunately.

If WDFW is given the choice between having to confront an issue or reducing the available tags, nobody is going to lose money on a bet which they will take.

Offline Tbar

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+26)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 2889
  • Location: Whatcom county
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #57 on: April 18, 2022, 09:44:34 AM »
Looks like they did.  Unfortunately.

If WDFW is given the choice between having to confront an issue or reducing the available tags, nobody is going to lose money on a bet which they will take.
Define issue to confront. Is there a set allocation?  Also if you'd like to wager I'll take the state harvest is several fold the tribal. And if there is a concern is there a disconnect between Bernie and Kyle.  Also did Bernie make that proposal  or did Brock read it as a public comment that they responded to?

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 38900
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #58 on: April 18, 2022, 09:54:50 AM »
The Yakama tribe kills bulls year around, so it's very likely they take more mature bulls than anyone or anything else. And, the state wants that and supports that. Nothing will ever change as long as politics in this state remain the same.

Offline fishngamereaper

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 7989
  • Location: kitsap
Re: 2022 Hunting proposals adopted by the commission
« Reply #59 on: April 18, 2022, 10:01:23 AM »
Honest question.
Is there any publicly available information on tribal harvest. Is it accurately tracked.

According to wdfw licensed hunter's average 5000 elk statewide per year and 3000 bulls. Give or take a couple hundred on both numbers.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Springer 2024 Columbia River by Reidus
[Today at 02:20:11 PM]


Springer Fishing Opportunity 3/29 & 3/30 by Blacklab
[Today at 12:48:56 PM]


Long Beach Clamming Tides by dilleytech
[Today at 12:39:19 PM]


Let’s see your best Washington buck by abhold87
[Today at 12:03:27 PM]


Bearpaw Season - Spring 2024 by bearpaw
[Today at 11:45:41 AM]


Walked a cougar down by Rainier10
[Today at 11:17:49 AM]


SB 5444 signed by Inslee on 03/26 Takes Effect on 06/06/24 by hughjorgan
[Today at 09:03:26 AM]


Average by lhrbull
[Today at 07:31:56 AM]


CVA optima V2 LR tapped hole for front sight by Remdawg
[Today at 07:09:22 AM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal