If anyone hunts in Idaho please read

[dsolsen]

If you hunt Idaho or intend on hunting in Idaho please read this link. We are asking for all the help we can get.
http://www.uplandidaho.com/discussion/t ... IC_ID=1217

[CEDDIE]

Ok I read the thread, so here are my thoughts dolsen,

First of all I live in Idaho, second I have no problem with the limit and date changes....

My brother and I went out on the opener last year to a place another Chuk hunter suggested, it was bout 90 degrees, the advise given was "dont hunt high, this time of year the birds have to have water and will be concentrated right on the creek" we hunted the dogs to exhaustion and got into rattle snakes!!! Good times.....

The big picture is 15 freakin days and two freakin birds........ so here's my sugestion once ya bag a limit of Chuks, bag a limit of Huns, then bag a limit of quail, then if thats not enough bag a limit of forest grouse too... so lets do the math here 6+6+10+4..... 26 birds in a day enough for ya My 2 cents

[dsolsen]

The problem I have is how they made the changes. The commissioners made the decision with out scoping what sportsman really thought. There is usually a preview of changes that they are going to make. This did not happen! The biologists did not recommend any changes. If the decision was based on science or ever the view of most sportsman then I would be ok with the decision. I agree with the date changes but can you show me any good reason why they changed the bag limit? It has been shown here that populations are boom and bust and it is not affected by hunting. The limiting factor is spring hatch success. you might not care about this change but someday you might care when they change something that affects you.

[DGFavor]

I think changing the dates was one of the most solid decisions made in years, regardless of the process - it might actually reflect (gasp) common sense from a government entity but it may well have just been a mistake that worked out for the best. Regardless of how it went down, it's good for hunting in Idaho. Regarding the change in bag limits, not as big a deal too me other than I think killing 6 birds of any species in a day is more than enough - if you have to kill more to have a good day then you might need to re-assess your reasons for being out there IMO.

Like any public issue, trying to rally support for your cause or position may just rally more support for the opposition - soooo, I say let's be vigilant but pick our battles. As interested sportsman, we do need to be aware of the ease or lack of apparent input that went into the decision and just try and be more involved next time. I commend the guys for going to the meetings, asking questions, getting involved, letting the powers that be know that folks are concerned and watching - I need to be better at that myself.

To the out of staters that have responded by saying they won't come to hunt in Idaho because the bag limits are too low, I say mission accomplished!

[Ryfly]

"Hit nail on head"

Mr. Miyagi

[CEDDIE]

Dolsen,

Im not trying to antagonize ya, just trying to make a point. My observation is this, we whine all the time about government red tape, waste of tax payers dollars etc..... yet out of the other side of our mouth we cry "foul" (no pun intended ) when someone in government grows a set and makes an executive decision without spending millions over years to make such a minor change. For the changes... I'm sure it cant hurt the population

Lastly please explain how these changes affects you or others more so then me??????? Oh and thanks for the list so I can contact the F&G and let them know of my support of the change.

[dsolsen]

Ceddie and others,

It is not the decision that I am upset with. I am more scared in the process in which the decision was made. Does this not scare anyone that a group of gentleman (only 1 of which is a bird hunter) made a decision based on thier own views? Does no one care that there is no formal scoping and biologists recomendations being followed? I would think that it would bother most people that public opinion and scientific facts do not have a voice in the way that regulations are made.

Dgfavor,

It is ok if I get more people agree with the current changes but I would hope that you would agree that this was not done in the propper fasion. I would just like the future decisions to be made by public oppionion and biologists recomendations.

[CEDDIE]

Ceddie and others,

It is not the decision that I am upset with. I am more scared in the process in which the decision was made. Does this not scare anyone that a group of gentleman (only 1 of which is a bird hunter) made a decision based on thier own views? Does no one care that there is no formal scoping and biologists recomendations being followed? I would think that it would bother most people that public opinion and scientific facts do not have a voice in the way that regulations are made.

DO, If ya put it that way I can see your point... I guess I just wished you would have said that and posted your concerns vs. put a link to the other forum. This decison I think is a good/wise choice where in the worst case scenario no harm will come of it. Like I said before I think it was a breathe of fresh air for a gvmt entity to make a logical decison without all bureaucracy getting in the way. Now if it was a decison I didnt like I would protest the process too. I think its good for people to pay attention to these things and get involved..

I just get sick and tired of the F&G bashing here in Idaho. Do I think they do a stellar job.. nope. It's a job I would never want, nobody is ever happy. Even me. But I think they got this one right. Based on all the big d!ck slingin (link to other forum) on how much land joe blow owns up north blah blah blah. To me none of that has a frickin thing to do with chukar limits and season. Wasnt a forum about a process problem, just a bunch of people p/o cause they will have to change dates on a trip till after Oct 1st.............

[dsolsen]

Ceddie,

It was just easier to post the link since it had a summary of what and why we are trying to do this and also had emails of all the commissioners on this link.

[CEDDIE]

Cool mawn, I like people taking a position and doing something about it, even when its not the same view as mine. Yer just doing what you feel you can and I respect that. So here is to good Chukar numbers and great hunts in the future Cam

[perro gordo]

Not sure if this is relevant to this discussion, but I thought this was interesting -

"Perhaps one of the most unusual chukar seasons held
in the United States, and one that illustrates the efforts
that are being taken in order to try and tempt hunters
into relatively inaccessible and unhunted areas, was the
1969 Idaho special chukar hunt near the middle fork of
the Salmon River. The only access to this area is by boat
and the season was from August 9 to September 19 with
a bag and possession limit of 10 and 20 birds respectively.
It was legal to hunt or kill chukar with a shotgun,
rifle or pistol of any kind, including an air rifle or air pistol.
This was followed by a regular season commencing
September 20 and lasting to January 25, 1970 with 10
birds daily and in possession. This 169 day season,
which was preceded by a good information-education
program, is the longest held in the United States to date
(not included in the 1968 poll, Table 12)."

From the same article:

"The recommendations that are made for setting the
hunting season should be consistent with the status of
the current population. When there is a high population
there should be a long season and a liberal bag
and possession limit. When the population bottoms
out the season should be shortened and the bag and
possession limit reduced. Similarly, there should be a
moderate season and bag and possession limit for
years when the population is between the boom and
the bust."

"The format of having the hunting season reflect the
general status of the chukar population level is essential
to indicate to the hunters what they may expect in
terms of hunting success and to build up long term confidence
in the Department’s hunting season recommendations.
Nothing is more damaging to a management
program or to the biologist’s image than to recommend
a liberal season when the game population is low (even
though the biologist is convinced it will do no harm)
unless the hunting public has been educated to accept it.
Properly informed hunters are an integral part of good
game management."

CHRISENSEN NDOW 1970

[dsolsen]

wow that is an old article! I would like to see what that gentleman would say about the subject now. I have to disagree with a lot of his points.

[CEDDIE]

sent email today in support of changes, already recieved response of a positive nature. If you believe the changes are a good thing shoot them an email of support. Cam

[Upland Idaho]

The point of this post has little to do with limits and dates. The reason so many hunters are pissed about this is how the change happened; no scoping, ignoring F&G biologist recommendations and absolutely no regard for the biology of partridge. The original argument was that hunters were complaining about low numbers so they had to do something to help populations. The commissioners ignored the biological and historical facts and made a decision based on complaints from about 30 individuals that hunt mostly in one region of the State! The season dates and limits haven't changed in Idaho since the 80's and the bird populations have rebounded from record lows in one season from 1993 and yet again from the historic lows of the last 2 years with one good breeding season.

You can argue the merits of the opener or limits but that isn't the point DS is making, Hunters in Idaho were left out of the loop. Only those that were able to bend the ear of one commissioner were listened to and biological and historical facts were ignored or worse not even understood. Idaho has a public input process that is supposed to be followed...it was ignored.

[Upland Idaho]

Ceddie you mentioned being tired of the F&G bashing in Idaho. I totally agree, I support them myself. I've worked for 2 State F&G agencies and 2 Federal agencies.

If you read the posts on the "other forum" about the partridge season changes there is no F&G bashing. The system here failed at the Commissioner level, private individuals appointed by a governor that has a proven track record of not liking the F&G. Like you said if it were something you disagreed with you'd be in the fight yourself. The commissioners had an open meeting Wednesday night, didn't mention the fact they were considering changing the rules before the meeting or at the meeting and so the public couldn't have their input and then Thursday announced in addition to the topics they talked about the night before they were making changes to the upland season too?

The point of the other forum isn't to argue the point of the season changes but the way it was handled. There is a solid and historical reason for having the public input instead of just some politicians making the decisions for everyone...too many of them (right and left) make their decisions based on what's best for their friends instead of the facts.