WDFW Answers thru the WAG 2012-2016

Discussion in 'Washington Flyway Forum' started by john4wdh, Jun 19, 2012.

  1. DR. DUX

    DR. DUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    6,662
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    Othello, WA
    Lots of good stuff here guys

    The 3 scoter limit was actually discussed numerous times in previous WAG meetings. It just didn't go anywhere. A 2-4 harvest management option gave a lot more hunting opportunity than a 1-3 or worse a 3-5 (keep in mind the population number thresholds would likely close or lower the limits we currently have).
     
  2. NWRINGNECK

    NWRINGNECK Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,122
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2001
    Location:
    Spokane,Wa.,USA
    So where is the April 2 meeting being held and is it still open to the public
     
  3. Billy Bob

    Billy Bob Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    5,479
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Location:
    Washington
    I've brought up the 3 scoter option to bios in the past. It's like talking to a brick wall. They never seem to quite understand what we as hunters are suggesting. What I am asking is why can't there be options for 2, 3 or 4 birds, not just options for 2 or 4.
     
  4. DR. DUX

    DR. DUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    6,662
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    Othello, WA
    I'll take my best stab at answering this so take it for what it is worth. Waterfowl management is very complicated. It has years and years of scientific research behind it.......but it's still a work in progress. The degree of micromanagement you are requesting would require much more accuracy and thus much more data. That data would need to be collected and there really isn't that sort of mechanism to do that. So the game managers have to use what they have to do that. So population thresholds have to be managed with larger gaps to account for the lack of data to protect the populations we pursue.

    We as hunters though could demand more extensive management to allow better opportunities but we'd have to pay for that data collection. With that said I don't think the waterfowling community would accept a $1000 duck hunting license to provide the funds necessary to collect that data......for one more scoter.
     
  5. Billy Bob

    Billy Bob Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    5,479
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Location:
    Washington
    That answer makes more sense than any answer I've received from a bio. I still don't think it would be that hard to create a middle range from the upper end of the 2 bird numbers and the lower end of the 4 bird numbers. Thank you for taking the time to explain. Would there be any chance of a higher limit with reduced days?
     
  6. DR. DUX

    DR. DUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    6,662
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    Othello, WA
    That was my suggestion originally but it was rejected by the dept.

    I see there point though. They really want to avoid seasons inside seasons when at all possible. To many times accidental harvests make law breakers out of folks not intending to. Plus it complicates the regs which is another thing they try to avoid.
     
  7. john4wdh

    john4wdh Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Location:
    Washington


    Brad --

    I have an email inquiry into Don Kraege to get you a timely answer well before April 2nd.

    In my relatively short tenure on the WAG, I have not seen it open to the public, other than non-members who might be making a presentation to the WAG.

    In my review of the posted roster of WAG members on the website, I believe it is current.

    John
     
  8. NWRINGNECK

    NWRINGNECK Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,122
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2001
    Location:
    Spokane,Wa.,USA
    Thanks John...I have attended twice but had reason to be in the area anyway so just dropped in......maybe my presence was just tolerated? :)

    I think there have been discussions in the past sort of challenging the process and the stands of the WAG members. If it is an open meeting I think that those that are skeptical of the WAG and the process should go and watch. The two times I attended I felt that things were presented and handled fairly. There was some challenging discussions between the members and it was just not a rubber stamp thing like some may suspect. I hope it is an open meeting so any skeptics can observe the process.

    just my two cents.
     
  9. john4wdh

    john4wdh Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Location:
    Washington
    Thor, Curt --

    Again I have an email in to Martha Jordon of the Washington Swan Stewards, the WA
    branch of The Trumpeter Swan Society (TTSS) for their current position on a WA Swan Hunting Season. As the Dr. Dux has previously posted, they as a group have been very supportive of other hunting endeavors in the past.

    At one point in the past when Rodney Vandersypen of Whatcom County was chairman of the WAG, Martha had indicated that though The Trumpeter Swan Society (TTSS) was not in support of a WA Swan Season, they would not oppose it. This was in the days [2008] when most of the Swan rescues and rehabilitation from lead poisoning was being performed by volunteers in Whatcom County with many coming from the WWA-Whatcom Chapter including Vandersypen, and WWA Corporate had donated some $13,000 that year towards those efforts.

    However in a presentation to the WWA-Seattle Chapter last March, Martha seemed to walk back from that [would not oppose it] position.

    It will be interesting to hear the current position of the Washington Swan Stewards is.
     
  10. john4wdh

    john4wdh Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Location:
    Washington


    Rick, Bob --

    Capt. Dave Drewry [Peninsula Sportsmen out of Port Townsend and saltdux on this forum] is one of only a few professional waterfowl guides that I know of that specifically targets Scoters. In each of the three (3) years he has been on the WAG, he has advocated for a 3 Scoter limit, and I have tried to support him in this endeavor. His goal is to be able to give his clients [some of whom come all the way from the East Coast] the opportunity of taking the grand slam of Scoters [Black, Surf and White Wing] all in a single hunting outing.

    Each year the Department's numbers won't justify it. [See posts #128 and #129 above on page 13]. Last year when Dave had a scheduling conflict, I made the motion for him [for a 3 Scoter limit]. My motion didn't even muster a Second to enable a vote on the proposition -- which frankly I don't understand. After all, the WAG is not making any decisions for the Department... only recommendations. What's the harm in making such a recommendation?

    At the 6-28-2014 WAG meeting the motion to increase the scoter limit from 2 to 3 was voted down 3-7, but a subsequent vote to make a recommendation to the WDFW Commission "to set a midpoint trigger between red (restrictive) and yellow (moderate) line to establish a 3 bird bag for scoters" was passed 7 to 1. I never have found out what, if any, "midpoint trigger" was established.

    My guess is that Dave will continue to argue for a 3 Scoter limit this year and every year he is on the WAG.
     

Share This Page