December 8, 2011 in Sports, Outdoors

Landers: Results of outdoors surveys revealed

• Print
• Email
• Share

While an aerial survey has just detailed where northern ducks are congregating in the Columbia Basin, wildlife managers in Olympia are using a different type of survey to help guide changes in rules for hunting big game as well as waterfowl.

Read on for breaking news on both stories.

Hunting rule revisions for the next three years are months from being adopted, but hunters who aren’t email savvy are losing a vote in the process.

Public meetings were held last summer on six hunting rule changes proposed by the Fish and Wildlife Department managers. Since then, four more proposals have risen to the rank of being considered for the three-year rules package that would start next year.

Last month, WDFW conducted email surveys on each of those proposals to get sense of where hunters stood on the issues. To be included, your email had to be up to date in the profile you can edit when you go online to buy a fishing or hunting license.

People included in the survey had to purchase a pertinent licenses in both 2010 and 2011. That helped narrow the survey to hunters actively interested in the issues, said Dave Ware, WDFW wildlife manager.

Lighted nocks: The most surprising survey involved the proposal to allow lighted nocks on arrows used for bowhunting. Jim Sutton of Spokane has been pushing the proposal, contending lighted nocks would help archers recover wounded game as well as retrieve lost arrows from the field.

The survey results, which are being announced for the first time here, were overwhelming:

• 86 percent favored the use of lighted nocks,

• 10 percent said lighted nocks should remain prohibited,

• 4 percent were undecided.

Ware said 3,800 people responded to the email survey. Washington has about 24,000 licensed archery deer hunters and 22,000 archery elk hunters, he said.

East-West elk tags: Some elk hunters have lobbied to eliminate the East Side-West Side elk tag designations so they can apply for special permits on both sides of the Cascades.

The results in this survey were close, confirming that many hunters will be discontent either way the state goes:

• 53 percent favored changing to allow elk hunters to apply for permits on both sides of the state,

• 43 percent preferred status quo, limiting hunters to either East Side or West Side elk hunts,

• 4 percent had no preference.

“We had 8,000 responses, which is huge,” Ware said.

Electronic decoys: Several waterfowl hunting guides petitioned to allow electronic decoys for waterfowl hunting.

So-called Robo Ducks are allowed in Idaho and were allowed in Washington until 2002, when they were declared so effective in attracting waterfowl they might lead to shorter seasons.

Of the 3,500 waterfowlers who responded:

• 29 percent opposed use of electronic decoys,

• 57 percent favored them if it did not lead to hunting restrictions,

• 14 percent favored their use unconditionally.

Spring bear hunt: With the overall bear harvest being on target for goals in northeastern Washington, wildlife managers gave hunters who want a spring season a choice: A special spring season with 80 permits could be offered if the fall general season were shortened by a month.

The survey was sent to hunters who had pursued bears in northeastern Washington. Of the 888 respondents:

• 25 percent favored a spring season,

• 64 percent favored status quo to maintain fall general seasons,

• 11 percent, no opinion.

These four proposals will be worked into the package of revised proposals to be presented for more public review in January. The Fish and Wildlife Commission will adopt measures in March.

Basin waterfowl survey: Mikal Moore, state waterfowl biologist, compiled data Wednesday from the season’s first aerial waterfowl surveys over the Columbia River Basin on Monday and Tuesday.

Bottom line: Northerns are here.

“There a lot of new birds in the area, probably recently arrived, that seem to be staging in large groups at well-established reserves and private hunting clubs,” she said. The ducks were not yet well-distributed and widely available to hunters, but many opportunities exist, she said.

For details from the survey, go online to see my blog: spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors

Contact Rich Landers at (509) 459-5508 or email richl@spokesman.com.

Four comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  fishinjay on December 08 at 9:34 a.m.

  I’m not a bow hunter but I am curious about the “lighted nock” question. What is the argument against using lighted nocks?

  It seems like a no-brainer to me that if a hunter shoots an animal we want them to be able to track and find the wounded/dead animal rather than letting it suffer or, presumably if the hunter is unable to find the dead animal, the hunter would still be able to kill another animal resulting in greater take.

  Lighted nocks seem like a great way for hunters to not lose a wounded/dead animal and I don’t know how lighted nocks would provide any advantage in finding and shooting an animal in the first place. Am I missing something?

• 

  hughesfamily on December 08 at 10:33 a.m.

  I think the resistance to lighted nocks is based on the desire to keep the bowhunter from becoming so technologically advanced that he/she completely eliminates the more primitive & challenging aspect of archery hunting. I say; Too late. Bows shoot well over 300Ft./Sec now, with high let-off that allows pin-point accuracy to ever increasing ranges. Not all bowhunters take advantage of the longer range capabilitiy of their equipment. After this rule is adopted I believe we will see an increase it the amount of technology allowed to be added to a bow in short order.
  So when a rule to allow electronic sights, bow-mounted range finders and such is sought in several years it should not come as a surprise. It should also not come as a surprise when the archery season is cut down to the length of the modern rifle season, or moved to later in the year.
  I hunt with a traditional bow and enjoy it more than any compound I ever shot, it’s my personal favorite after hunting high-tech for many years. At the close ranges I hunt, I’m a more effective hunter than ever before. I have nothing against all the modern equipment out there or the folks that use it. I think they should be aware though, high-tech archery will lead to a short season for the modern archer.

• 

  fishinjay on December 08 at 10:59 a.m.

  Range finders, lighted sights, etc all help the hunter make a kill, so I completely understand keeping them out of primitive seasons. How do lighted sights help the hunter make a kill? If the opposition is to “technology” after the kill, then why not ban flashlights, Goretex, gps navigation for getting to and from your spot, tree stands, Thinsulate boots, binoculars, range finders (not attached to the bow), unpowered fiber optic sights, carbon fiber arrows, compund bows, chemically sharpened blades, the list goes on.

  In other words, if lighted nocks don’t give an advantage to making a kill, then I just don’t get the opposition, especially when there are plenty of other technological advances in use, many of which give a direct advantage to making a kill.

  When bow hunting season is limited to using recurve bows with wooden arrows then I’ll buy the whole “primitive” hunting aspect. Otherwise it seems awfully arbitrary to me to allow all kinds of technology that gives an advantage to making a kill, while disallowing lighted nocks that provide no advantage to making a kill. I don’t see any kind of consistency in the rationale.

• 

  fishinjay on December 08 at 11:01 a.m.

  In the first paragraph that should have red “How do lighted nocks help a hunter make a kill?”