Spring Bear Hunt

And those commissioners basically gave a big FU to all of the hard working WDFW biologists and others in the field who have first hand information and the realities of animal populations in this state. "Ragen, a former director of the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, said he needs much more precise information such as the minimum number of bears in specifically defined areas, a measure of that population’s trend, an estimate of its maximum growth rate and an accounting of all human causes of mortality in addition to hunting."

I am not a biologist, however I do have quite a bit of experience volunteering with the Upper Snoqualmie Valley Elk Management Group and I have assisted in collaring elk and population surveys. I could tell you the minimum amount of elk that we saw. But the minimum amount of elk sightings was used to compute populations based on scientific formulas used by the biologists. Our population estimates were all that, estimates. But the estimates were based off of scientific principles used by wildlife biologists globally. The one thing I can tell you is that herd has a boat load of elk. Basically the requirements Ragen is putting down, if they get extended to other game animals within this state, will be the basis for shutting down hunting entirely.
 
While I dislike political crap as much as anyone on the site, I'd be hard pressed to say that "don't elect {politician X}" is off topic in a conversation that is specifically about politician X's political appointees making hunting/fishing related decisions.

That said, this kind of thing is a step too far:

Rob Allen said:
Well them you know what the people who vote for him think of hunters and anglers..
Click to expand...
Not everyone is a one issue voter and for most folks there are exactly zero politicians who have views that match up completely with their own views. Most of us pick the issues that are most important to us, vote that way, and hold our noses about the rest. Such is life in a two party system.

To pretend otherwise by implying that someone voting for a particular politician couldn't possibly care about hunting or fishing is disrespectful and adds nothing to the conversation.
 
I feel like I’ve done my part. I’ve signed everything I could and sent Emails to those that would matter about keeping spring Bear going. All that’s left to do for me is to sit back and cross my fingers and hope that I and others don’t see another hunting opportunity slip throw our fingers.
 
I truely feel at this point we need the tribes to start sueing on behalf of their rights to sustained deer and elk populations.

The Blue Mountain elk herd for example is crashing hard and it's like some of these people in charge of our wildlife management don't have a fricking clue or care😠 I would bet some of our commission has never even been to the areas getting hit by an abundance of predators other then to maybe sip wine in Walla Walla...
 
Josh said:
While I dislike political crap as much as anyone on the site, I'd be hard pressed to say that "don't elect {politician X}" is off topic in a conversation that is specifically about politician X's political appointees making hunting/fishing related decisions.

That said, this kind of thing is a step too far:


Not everyone is a one issue voter and for most folks there are exactly zero politicians who have views that match up completely with their own views. Most of us pick the issues that are most important to us, vote that way, and hold our noses about the rest. Such is life in a two party system.

To pretend otherwise by implying that someone voting for a particular politician couldn't possibly care about hunting or fishing is disrespectful and adds nothing to the conversation.
Click to expand...

I am sorry you took my comments as disrespectful they were not intended as such.
 
Billy said:
Mountain carabou went extinct few years back in this state and not a peep of action from our, "commission."
Click to expand...
Simply put. Politics needs to be taken out or minimized in fish and wildlife management.
The concept that our politicians represent the will of the people is absurd.
 
Rob Allen said:
I am sorry you took my comments as disrespectful they were not intended as such.
Click to expand...
Rob not to speak for Josh but just try to make a point not a generalization.

There is plenty of reasons and examples on behalf of fish and wildlife why our "commission" is not leading this state in a good direction when it comes to our resources. Focus on the issues is all we ask. Don't throw a huge net out there leading to a political shit storm.
 
Billy said:
Rob not to speak for Josh but just try to make a point not a generalization.

There is plenty of reasons and examples on behalf of fish and wildlife why our "commission" is not leading this state in a good direction when it comes to our resources. Focus on the issues is all we ask. Don't throw a huge net out there leading to a political shit storm.
Click to expand...
Ok
 
WonkyWapiti said:
Basically the requirements Ragen is putting down, if they get extended to other game animals within this state, will be the basis for shutting down hunting entirely.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I thought. And if extended to other fish populations would be the basis to shut down fishing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JS
WonkyWapiti said:
And those commissioners basically gave a big FU to all of the hard working WDFW biologists and others in the field who have first hand information and the realities of animal populations in this state. "Ragen, a former director of the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, said he needs much more precise information such as the minimum number of bears in specifically defined areas, a measure of that population’s trend, an estimate of its maximum growth rate and an accounting of all human causes of mortality in addition to hunting."

I am not a biologist, however I do have quite a bit of experience volunteering with the Upper Snoqualmie Valley Elk Management Group and I have assisted in collaring elk and population surveys. I could tell you the minimum amount of elk that we saw. But the minimum amount of elk sightings was used to compute populations based on scientific formulas used by the biologists. Our population estimates were all that, estimates. But the estimates were based off of scientific principles used by wildlife biologists globally. The one thing I can tell you is that herd has a boat load of elk. Basically the requirements Ragen is putting down, if they get extended to other game animals within this state, will be the basis for shutting down hunting entirely.
Click to expand...
I agree that it seems like, all of a sudden, and contrary to all evidence, Ragen and Smith are applying new, higher standards for data resolution that would seem to be more appropriate for a population of animals that is known or at least suspected of being threatened in some way. That does not seem to be the case here, according to what sounds to me like pretty darn good information--good enough that the biologists seem unified in their recommendation to allow the spring bear hunt.

“If we say yes, there will be dead bears,” she said. “As Commissioner Ragen said, we don’t really know what effect that is going to have.”

But, it sounds like we do.

"[Stephanie Simek, game section manager for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife] said agency biologists use age and sex data collected from bears harvested during hunting seasons and DNA analysis of hair samples collected in separate density studies to estimate and monitor the black bear population. Both techniques result in an estimated Washington population of 20,000 to 25,000 bears, stable and robust enough, Simek said, to sustain the modest harvest proposed in the spring season."
"Simek told commissioners the proposal to issue 644 spring black bear permits, including 158 in the Blue Mountains, was likely to result in the harvest of fewer than 150 bears statewide. The proposal includes a prohibition on the taking of sows with cubs."

Sounds to me like, in the most extreme estimated scenario, there'd be at least ~19,850 bears in Washington come summertime. The bios and managers are comfortable with that; it sounds reasonable. I don't see what the issue might be for these two commissioners other than emotional arguments. And that is concerning.
 
Never having hunted bears, do you have to report if you harvest one? Is there any yearly harvest records?
 
A lot of data will be lost without a hunt this year. Hunter success and failure along with effort and sightings reports. Then there is the loss of revenue from tag applications and tag sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top