|
|
|
See also:
Final
Game Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement: DRAFTS, SUPPLEMENTALS & NEWS November, 2002 October 18, 2002 July 26, 2002 June 7, 2002
|
Final Game Management Plan: July 2003 - June 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Game Management Plan (GMP) will
guide the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife’s management of hunted
wildlife for the next six years. The focus is
on the scientific management of game
populations, harvest management, and
other significant factors affecting game
populations.
As mandated by the Washington State Legislature (RCW
77.04.012), “… the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate,
and manage the wildlife…”; “the department shall conserve the wildlife…
in a manner that does not impair the resource…”; and “The commission shall
attempt to maximize the public recreational… hunting opportunities of
all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.” It is
this mandate that sets the overall policy and direction for managing hunted
wildlife. Hunters and hunting will continue to play a significant role
in the conservation and management of Washington’s wildlife.
Washington’s citizens played a strong role in
developing this plan. A variety of public
involvement opportunities were used to
solicit ideas. In all, several thousand
citizens provided comments, edits, and
priority issues. The Game Management
Advisory Council, a group of citizens
representing conservation and hunting
organizations, landowners, and biologists,
was continually involved in identifying and
refining issues. The Wildlife Diversity
Advisory Council, representing
environmental organizations and mostly
non-consumptive viewpoints, also provided
important counsel on key predator
management issues. In addition, an
extensive public opinion survey was
conducted for the Department by the
private consulting firm, Responsive
Management.
A panel of scientists, from several
universities and specialists from across the
west reviewed key issues associated with
Washington’s elk management and made
recommendations to WDFW for
management direction and strategies to
incorporate into the plan. Consultations
with cougar scientists were also conducted
as peer review of the cougar management
section.
The priority issues identified by the public
include:
An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
was completed on November 27, 2002, after public review of draft and supplemental
EIS documents. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission formally adopted
the Game Management Plan on December 7, 2002. This comprehensive process
facilitated public discussion and understanding, while cooperatively developing
the priority strategies. Success and accountability will be measured through
the reporting of accomplishments in the annual Game Status and Trend Report.
The overall goals are to protect, sustain,
and manage hunted wildlife, provide stable,
regulated recreational hunting opportunity
to all citizens, protect and enhance wildlife
habitat, and minimize adverse impacts to
residents, other wildlife, and the
environment.
With all of these issues, it is understood
that the implementation of strategies are
conditioned first on meeting game
population objectives. Science is the core
of wildlife management, supporting WDFW’s
Legislative mandate to preserve, protect,
and perpetuate wildlife populations while
maximizing recreation.
General Management Issues
With science and the goal of sustaining
game populations as the foundation, many
of the preferred strategies in chapter two
emphasize education, public involvement in
decisions and participation in data
collection, and subsequent monitoring of
public satisfaction. Hunter ethics/fair chase
issues such as the development of
equipment restrictions are largely based on
public opinion because any biological or
environmental impacts from equipment
technology can be mitigated in other ways.
Techniques for mitigating equipment
impacts on hunted species include
adjustment of season length and timing,
bag limits, and other harvest adjustments.
Tribal hunting strategies hinge on the
development of cooperative harvest
management plans and increased
coordination in the management of our
respective hunters. Strategies to review
and improve private land programs and
address game damage rely on working
groups of stakeholders to develop
recommendations for future actions.
Attention is given to those values identified
in recent public opinion surveys for predator
management and hunting season
preferences. The intent is to provide
intensive public education on key issues
that maintain public support for hunting;
address human/wildlife conflicts with
focused hunting strategies; and provide a
variety of hunting opportunities that satisfy
different preferences while meeting game
population objectives.
Road management issues are complicated
with a precarious balance between
protection of wildlife and hunter access.
The development of road management
plans is the key strategy to develop and
maintain an appropriate balance.
As mentioned previously, the foundation for
all objectives and strategies identified in this
plan is science and the professional
judgment of biologists. At times, the
science may not be as strong as managers
would like. In those instances,
management actions will be more
conservative to minimize the potential for
significant negative impacts to hunted
wildlife species. Chapter three focuses on
the science and management of hunted
species and lays out how those populations
will be monitored to ensure perpetuation of
these species over the long term.
Elk Management
The principal strategies are designed to
maintain or increase the number of mature
(five year old/six points or greater) bulls
that survive after hunting seasons; to
determine habitat limitations and estimate
carrying capacity for several herds, and
where populations are meeting or
exceeding goals, to increase harvest of
antlerless animals. These measures will be
phased in and monitored over six years with
expected improvements to recruitment and
herd dynamics. Improvements are planned
to better monitor population status and
determine herd composition. Distinct
population management units will be
reviewed and updated to form the
geographic boundaries for achieving herd
objectives.
From the recreational standpoint, current
general season strategies will be maintained
to the extent possible with a variety of
hunting opportunities available and
balanced for archers, muzzleloaders, and
modern firearm hunters within each of
WDFW’s seventeen districts. Spike only
management will continue to be
emphasized in most of eastern Washington,
using branch bull permit levels to achieve
sex ratio objectives and three point or
better regulations will be retained in
western Washington, mainly relying on road
management to achieve sex ratio
objectives.
Deer Management
Recommended changes to deer
management are subtle, since many factors
that determine population levels are beyond
the control of state wildlife managers-such
as weather, wild fires, disease, and timber
harvest. Preferred strategies will emphasize
improvements in population monitoring,
mule deer research, and refinement of
population model inputs such as mortality
and recruitment rates. Actions will be
increased for surveillance of chronic wasting
disease and determination of population
impacts from hair slip syndrome.
Hunting season changes will be similar to
elk regarding maintenance of current
general season strategies while ensuring
that a variety of hunting opportunities are
available and balanced within each of
WDFW’s seventeen districts. These
guidelines will allow continued debate
regarding hunter preferences for season
regulations while maintaining the minimum
population objective of 15 bucks per 100
does after the hunting season.
Special Species Management
Management strategies for bighorn sheep,
mountain goats, and moose will largely
continue along current paths. The greatest
issue for bighorns continues to be a slow
recovery of Rocky Mountain bighorns along
the Snake and Grande Ronde rivers. The
main strategy for California bighorns is to
continue reintroductions in suitable portions
of their historic range. With populations of
mountain goats in apparent decline and
subsequent reductions in hunting
opportunity, a new mountain goat research
project is being initiated with federal
funding. Moose populations continue to
expand and management will focus on
better documentation of suitable range and
development of appropriate levels of
harvest. Carefully regulated hunting will
continue for all three species by issuing
limited numbers of permits and managing
for high success rates in these once-in-alifetime
opportunities.
Black Bear Management
Preferred strategies for black bear
management will emphasize resolution of
public concerns for public safety, pet and
livestock depredation, and property
damage. Hunting opportunities will focus
on these concerns as well as providing
recreational harvest. The potential
development of a spring hunting season to
help address timber and property damage
will be considered through strategies
identified in the plan.
Cougar Management
Population objectives and female harvest
guidelines for each cougar management
unit (CMU) have been identified in the plan.
Monitoring strategies will be increased in
units designated for cougar population
reductions to provide greater assurances
that hunting will not have a significant
negative impact on the perpetuation of
cougar populations. The strategies identify
ways to improve monitoring protocols and
data collection. WDFW will also identify
areas where cougar survival is high and
acting as a source for areas where survival
is lower.
Similar to black bear management
strategies, harvest will be focused in those
areas with concerns for public safety and
pet and livestock depredation. A recently
initiated cougar research project will be
continued to determine behavior and
habitat use of cougars with an emphasis on
the urban-wild lands interface.
Management of Migratory Birds
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
Pacific Flyway states, including Washington,
cooperatively manage migratory birds.
Management efforts will continue to
emphasize protection and enhancement of
declining wetland habitats and to closely
monitor harvest management. Refinement
of harvest strategies will further emphasize
regional differences and address crop
damage concerns, while protecting
populations of migratory birds of
management concern. Studies will be
developed to determine the impact, of snipe
hunting on other wildlife (especially
shorebirds) and investigate hunting impacts
on mourning doves.
Management of Upland Game Birds
Strategies for upland game birds (pheasant,
quail, and partridge) and wild turkeys will
continue to focus on enhancing populations
in suitable habitats and providing
appropriate harvest opportunities for these
largely non-native species. Wild turkey
populations have expanded dramatically
due to enhancement activities over the past
twenty years. Several strategies were
developed to re-evaluate current
management direction, gauge the success
of introductions, consider impacts to native
wildlife, and determine future direction.
Mountain quail are considered native to
parts of south central and southeast
Washington. Strategies are identified to reestablish
mountain quail in their native
range in eastern Washington and to better
monitor harvest in western Washington.
Pheasants continue to be the focus of
upland bird management efforts. Other
upland bird populations such as California
quail are either considered healthier or
receive less attention from hunters.
Dedicated and targeted funding for
pheasant management is discussed with
identified strategies for changes in funding
emphasis. Access to private lands
continues to be emphasized with strategies
to focus on expanding opportunities in
higher quality pheasant habitat and hunting
areas. Forest grouse management
strategies suggest emphasis on improving
harvest management and population
monitoring.
Management of Small Game Animals, Furbearers, and Unclassified Wildlife
Small game animal management strategies
are largely focused on refining distribution
information and addressing nuisance
problems. Harvest and education strategies
will attempt to minimize negative humanwildlife
interactions and potential accidental
harvest of protected wildlife.
|
