The Sheep That Stopped The Grizzly

Sarah Gilman of High Country News provided us with an informative piece on the little sheep station that could - talking, of course, about the feds' ARS Sheep Experiment Station.  The station, headquartered near Dubois, ID, has been minding its own business for years, providing research information to the sheep industry.  But then came the grizzly bear, the Endangered Species Act, and other federal agencies whose conservationist mandates have come into direct conflict with the station's sheep experimentation.

The place is the Centennial Mountains, an east to west range on the Idaho-Montana border.  If you're having a hard time pinning the place in your mind, think of the range on the border that stretches from Island Park west toward Spencer.  The station grazes sheep there as part of their research, as they always have.  The problem is that the grizzly bears are moving into the area, and conservationists who want the grizzly population to do what it will, know that the sheep are their biggest obstacle.

But how do the sheep keep the grizzlies from moving on, further up and further in to the rest of Idaho's and Montana's unadulterated grizzly habitat?  It's simple.  If a grizzly eats a sheep, he's a dead grizzly.  The fear is that the grizzlies may become such a predation problem that the only solution is to put them down.  But the sheep station doesn't see it the same way. 

The station says it won't be a problem.  The conservationists say it will.  Who's right?  I don't know, but it would seem that the conservationists probably are.  If the grizzly gets a taste of one lamb, the station might not scream.  But if he comes back for more, and then more, and then more... well, the scream will come sooner or later from a research station running out of sheep to research.  And I do imagine that the grizzly will come back for more chops.

But this sort of internal bickering, while amusing, doesn't even get to the crux of the related issue that nobody seems to be talking about.  That is - why exactly do we want the grizzly bears to spread anyway?

I understand that conservationists, and the federal agencies that carry out the agenda, want the wild to transform back to the way that Lewis and Clark found it.  And the Centennial Mountains are the link to getting grizzlies back up into Montana, and up all the way into the Selway Wilderness.  That is their goal, and it's not one that I share.

So for now, I hope the little sheep hold in there as the trap that can keep the grizzlies back.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Squeaking & Why The Caribou Issue Is Important

As I reported here and here, the United States Fish & Wildlife Service has proposed that nearly 600 square miles of North Idaho and Eastern Washington be designated as critical habitat for the woodland caribou that frequent the area.  And just to give you some specific numbers, in case you are just getting up to speed on the issue, we are talking about 3 caribou that are sometimes seen in Idaho.  No caribou have been counted in Washington.  Most of the woodland caribou reside permanently in British Columbia.

But this 600 square miles in the Selkirk Mountains is within the borders of Boundary County in Idaho, and residents there have concerns about the designation - most notably are questions on how it will affect the economy and access to the area.  

"There has been tremendous concern raised in Boundary County, where most of this critical habitat is proposed, about what this proposal will do to the people here as regards its impact on the local economy, recreation, limitations on how that land may be used and accessed, how our emergency service providers can go about responding to situations on these lands when fire breaks out or when someone's life is on the line," commission chair Ron Smith said. "We're looking for a lot of answers, and we look forward being able to present the questions."

County Commissioners acted quickly and formed coalitions with other counties and various interested parties.  After Boundary County formally invoked the U.S. Constitution in order to establish a working relationship with the USF&WS, the feds responded by agreeing to hold meetings and hearings before the final decision will be made on the designation.

But the USF&WS was stunned that the local residents who might be impacted by the designation wanted answers to questions, wanted to raise concerns, and wanted their voice to be heard.

Thanks to the efforts of Boundary County Commissioners, working with the KVRI, the USFWS, whose representatives appeared stunned by the vociferous outcry expressed January 9, as they expected only an informational meeting with a dedicated group of people they have worked with for years largely outside the public eye, may now have a better understanding of the concerns of the community, and they will be better able to prepare their information and data so as to provide the detailed information the citizens of Boundary County are demanding and need.

Stunned?  Wow.  

Most of you won't be impacted by any caribou any time soon.  But there is a likely chance that you will be impacted by the USF&WS, especially when they might find themselves twiddling their thumbs, and looking for something to do.

So learn the lesson from Boundary County.  Squeak when things don't seem quite right.  Instead of being plowed over with a critical habitat designation handed down from on high, a designation that they have no idea what the consequences might be, they squeaked.  And in return they received an agreement to hold two public meetings, where information can be obtained, and two public hearings, where the informed public can raise their concerns.

What will happen in the end?  There will be no vote.  In the end the USF&WS will do what they want.

As an example for those of you on the far side of the state from the caribou issue, keep an eye on the Bear River Watershed Conservation Area that is being proposed by the USF&WS (here is that story).  They want to work to purchase conservation easements from willing sellers in the Bear River Watershed in Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah.  If this proposed program provokes any questions on how it will affect you, sqeak.

Here is the full story from www.ruralnorthwest.com.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Round 1: Panhandle Elk Zone vs. Tex Creek Elk Zone

This is the fifth installment on a series of posts comparing Idaho's any-weapon, antlered, general season elk hunts. For an intro to this series, go here.

For the first post in this series, read Dworshak Elk Zone vs. Bear River Elk Zone.

For the second post in this series, read Snake River Elk Zone vs. Palisades Elk Zone.

For the third post in this series, read Palouse Elk Zone vs. McCall Elk Zone.

For the fourth post in this series, read Selway Elk Zone v. Salmon Elk Zone.

Here we go comparing the Panhandle Elk Zone to the Tex Creek Elk Zone. First up, the Panhandle.

The Hunt

Idaho has two types of over-the-counter elk tags that can be chosen.  An A-tag and the B-tag are usually offered for each elk zone.  The difference between the two will differ from elk zone to elk zone, but the differences usually lie in season dates, weapon options, or sex of animal to hunt.

The Panhandle Zone offers OTC, any-weapon, antlered hunts on both the A-tag and the B-tag.  Here's the breakdown.  On the 2011 A-tag you could hunt Unit 1, 2, 3, 4, 4A & 5 from Oct. 25 - Oct. 31.  You could also hunt Unit 6, 7 & 9 from Oct. 25 - Oct. 29.  So, mark that - that is the A-tag.

The B-tag begins a little earlier, and adds some variety.  You could hunt Unit 1, 2, 3, 4, 4A & 5 from Oct. 10 - Oct. 31.  And in those you Units you had the option of harvesting any elk on Oct. 15 - Oct. 19.  Also on the B-tag: you could hunt Unit 6, 7 & 9 from Oct. 10 - Oct. 24, and you could harvest any elk in Unit 6 on Oct. 15 - Oct. 16.

Got it?

As I look at the options for any-weapon hunters, I don't know why you would purchase anything beside the B-tag.  The B-tag has longer seasons, they begin earlier, and there is a brief window where you can fill your freezer with a cow if you haven't chased down the monster bull.  Archers will probably find the A-tag more interesting, as it allows for a late season archery hunt in December.  Muzzleloaders will also probably find the A-tag more attractive as well.

As far as when hunters will first be in the woods in the Zone, early archery dates began August 30 and lasted until September 30.  Then there's a break until the any-weapon seasons begin on Oct. 10.

Location

This Zone basically encompasses the entirety of the northern Idaho panhandle.  The north boundary is the Canadian border.  The west boundary is the State of Washington.  On the east, Montana.  The southern part of the Zone is the only somewhat tricky part.  From east to west, the boundary follows the divide between the St. Joe River and the N. Fork of the Clearwater River.  From there... well, I could bore you with all of the other watershed divides as the boundary makes its way from Montana to Washington, but I'd rather spend my time giving you a link to the maps so that you can see for yourself.

This is a big area; probably only second in size to the large Owyhee - South Hills Elk Zone in Southern Idaho.  To be precise, the Panhandle Zone is 4,978,871 acres, or 7,780 square miles.

Terrain/Land Ownership

Most of the Zone contains the Coeur d'Alene Mountains, the Selkirk Mountains, and the Cabinet Mountain range.  This is the "Northern Woods" of Idaho, and if you're traveling to them from the south, you'll see the habitat change in short order from Lewiston on up to Sandpoint.  It's one of the reasons that Idaho is a great state - there's a lot of variety here, and that should become clear when comparing the Panhandle Zone to Southeast Idaho's Tex Creek Zone.

It is wooded here.  And it is thick.  In an earlier post in this series, I mentioned that the Dworshak Zone is like hunting in a rainforest.  It is even more so in the great north of the Panhandle.  This is thick and brushy terrain, and only for those who know what they're getting themselves into, because what you're getting yourself into is something difficult to get yourself out of.  The brush is always thicker when climbing out.

It is hilly and mountainous, and very wooded.  I can't emphasize enough that this is a different world than the semi-open nature of some of the other Zones we've looked at so far, such as the Salmon or Snake River Zones.  I am tempted to say that the Panhandle Zone is more archery friendly, but maybe that's just my terrain bias coming out.  It just seems that the archers might have quite an edge by getting a good setup, and then calling a rutting bull in.  Rifle hunters are on the tail end of the rut, at best, and aren't getting any animals coming their way.  That is, of course, generally speaking, and I'm sure there's plenty of rifle hunters who could show me wrong.

Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 4A & 5 are 43% private, 44% Forest Service, and 9% State of Idaho.  It is 72% forested, 19% of it is designated as dryland agriculture.  Units 6, 7 & 9 are 32% private, 60% Forest Service, and 6% State of Idaho.  It is 89% forested, and 9% is designated as rangeland.  Some of that private ground is corporate timber ground, and open for hunting.  Lack of finding ground to hunt is not an issue in this Zone.  If you don't want to rough it, Bonners Ferry, Sandpoint, and Coeur d'Alene are all big enough to have chain hotels.  If you really don't want to rough it, then stay at the Coeur d'Alene Resort & Casino and play golf.

But as with most or all places in Idaho, getting deep into the woods is the name of the game.  And this is the kind of area where scouting can really pay off.  If you're looking at coming to Idaho to hunt, this Zone might be a good choice if you're accustomed to hunting in this kind of terrain, or you can adjust easily.  Otherwise, you can easily be swallowed up in the forested mountains of the Panhandle.

Herd Health & Stats

The goal for the Panhandle Zone is to maintain 2,900-3,900 cows and 600-800 bulls (of which 350-475 are mature bulls).  2009 surveys showed that the elk population is exceeding those objectives in every category, but there is reason to be concerned for decline.  The 2009 survey showed there were 4,339 cows and 1,256 bulls (of which 538 were mature bulls).  However, no data was collected for Units 1, 2, 3, 4A & 5.  Units 1, 3 & 5 are some of the more successful areas to hunt in the Panhandle Zone, so the stats given below are heavily skewed, as they depend on this data.  The elk/square mile and bulls/square mile should probably be doubled, at the very least.

In the early 1900's there were very low numbers of elk in this area.  After 1910 some massive forest fires created excellent elk habitat, and the population began to grow.  In the 1940's some elk were translocated to Units 1, 4 & 6 from Yellowstone, and the population continued to grow steadily.  Elk habitat in the wake of the fires was excellent through the 1950's & 1960's, and then started to decline again as thick underbrush took over.  Extensive logging helped the herd's cause in the 1980's & 1990's, but now the habitat decline is steady, and will not be significantly helped until or unless another big fire comes along.

Another major factor for the herd's current health is the impact that the winters of 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 had.  These were record setting snowfall years, and the snow piled up, even at the lowest elevations.  That first winter was so wild that nobody could have predicted that '08-'09 could be worse.  This led to big worries over calf recruitment rates, which were appearing to be low following those winters.  However, the next winter was milder, and recruitment rates began to improve.

And while logging activities helped elk habitat in the short term, in the long term they left logging roads that are still accessible to vehicles.  That, of course, reduces the amount of land that the elk would otherwise tromp around in more freely.

And I haven't even gotten to wolves yet.  There's over 20 established packs in the Panhandle region.  As of January 11, 2012, 29 wolves were harvested with a firearm, and 9 more have been trapped.  There are a lot of wolves in this area, and the bears and mountain lions are other effective predators.

So right now the herd is in a precarious position.  It has seen growth and decline, and the balance is figured by a lot of complex factors - predators, weather, and habitat.  I see the herd as being fair, number-wise, right now.  But I do not see it improving in the short term, unless we have some big fires and serious reduction of wolves.

Here's the stats, but let me qualify these. In previous posts I've felt that my stats were within reason, even if there was some creative, yet informed, guesswork involved.  I'm a little hesitant to even put numbers to the Panhandle Zone because I'm not confident with the info I have.  So having said that, I'll slap these numbers down as the best I could do without sitting down with a biologist for a couple of hours.  I would appreciate any feedback if others have better guesses.

Elk/Square Mile: 0.72 (See above comments.)

Hunters/Square Mile: 1.0

Bulls/Square Mile: 0.16 (See above comments.)

Average Hunter Days: 6.6

Bull Harvest Percentage: 13%

Percent Spikes Harvested: 28%

Percent 6+ points Harvested: 25%

Tex Creek Elk Zone

The Hunt

In 2011, archery seasons preceded the any-weapon seasons from August 30 - September 30.  The A-tag any-weapon season is a cow only hunt that lasts from Oct. 22 - Nov. 30.  The B-tag is the one we'll be focusing on here because it's the one that offers the any-weapon antlered tag.  That season lasted from Oct. 15 - Oct. 21.

Location

The southwest corner of the Tex Creek Zone starts at Fort Hall.  The border then follows I-15 north to the junction with HWY 91.  From there, the border follows HWY 91 north to Shelley, where it basically becomes HWY 26.  HWY 26 continues north through Idaho Falls, right past a Forest Service station in case you need some last minute maps, and then curls east towards the metropolis of Ririe.  After Ririe, the north border of the Zone changes from HWY 26 to the South Fork of the Snake River.  The South Fork is a fly-fishing destination, so plan a few extra days with your fly rod.  You'll regret it if you don't, especially once you see it for the first time.  The north border follows the South Fork through Palisades Reservoir to the Wyoming border.

The south borders get a little tricky with numerous Forest Service roads and watershed divides.  The Tex Creek Zone is made up of Unit 66 and 69.  To the south are the Diamond Creek Zone and the Bannock Zone.  The Snake River Zone is on the east, and the Palisades Zone is to the north.  There are 1,149,591 acres, or 1,796 square miles.

Terrain/Land Ownership

As you can see on this land ownership map, the Caribou National Forest Service ground (shaded green) is located in the northeast corner of the Tex Creek Zone.  State of Idaho owned ground is checkered in the middle (shaded blue) among the private ground (shaded white).  The Fort Hall Indian Reservation (shaded pink) is located in the southwest corner of the Zone.

49% of the ground in the Zone is private, 19% is Forest Service, 15% is Indian Reservation, and 12% is State of Idaho.  Do not hunt on the Reservation unless or until you get permission.  I'm unsure of the hunting rules that the Tribe has, but I would not want to be caught dead trespassing with a gun in hand.  I know that the tribe issues spendy waterfowl hunting permits, but I don't know about big game.  Call ahead. 

The Forest Service land just south of the South Fork is where the exciting terrain is.  The closer you get to Palisades Reservoir, the more mountainous it becomes.  Peaks approach 9,000 ft. in elevation, but most of the canyons in the area will range from 6,400 ft. up to 7,000 or 8,000 ft.  The rest of the Zone has an average elevation somewhere between 6,000 and 6,500 ft., but the steepest areas to hunt are in the Forest Service ground.

The terrain is semi-open, as can be seen in the aerial photo above.  In the mountains, the north slopes will be timbered, and the south facing slopes will be open.  As you go in and out of drainages, you go in and out of the woods.  It is plenty open to spend time glassing before chasing.  Outside of the Forest Service ground, the Zone really opens up.  It is hilly, and the creeks and canyons in those hills will hold aspens and shrubs.  If you hunt here, you'll find it's excellent moose habitat just about all over.

Access to happy hunting grounds is not difficult.  There are plenty of Forest Service roads to take you where you want to go.  This, of course, makes it a popular unit.  There's plenty of hunters with their ATV's here.

Heard Health/Stats

I really can't report any bad news about the Tex Creek Zone herd health.  The habitat here holds elk well, and there's plenty of wintering ground.  People will report mixed reports on how many elk they see, but all indications are that the herd is strong.  A factor that determines elk visibility is the weather.  Many Tex Creek elk spend the summer to the south in Unit 66A, which is in the Diamond Creek Zone, and then winter back in the Tex Creek Zone.  So to a certain extent, this is a weather depending hunt.  If there aren't early snows, many of the elk may hang up in the Diamond Creek Zone.  Note that the Diamond Creek Zone does not have a general season, any-weapon hunt.

The objectives are to winter 2,000-3,000 cows and 425-625 bulls (of which 250-350 mature bulls are desired).  The 2010 survey counted 2,277 cows and 577 bulls (of which 325 were mature).  That all sounds good, but the numbers won't be as good during the Oct. 15-21 time period, as some of those may still be in the Diamond Creek Zone.  The IF&G has hinted that it makes more sense to manage this herd by including Unit 66A (Diamond Creek Zone) with the Tex Creek Zone.  However, I suspect that there are other reasons ($) that will prevent that from happening, as the Diamond Creek Zone draws a lot of non-resident archery hunters.

The bear density is low and steady, and mountain lions are present.  Wolves are not a huge factor here.  Yes, they are seen occasionally in the Tex Creek Zone, but the only established pack in the Zone was annihilated in 2009 due to depradation complaints.  No wolves have been harvested in the 2011-2012 wolf hunting season in either the Tex Creek Zone or the Diamond Creek Zone.

Overall, the herd is healthy.  Typically, bulls have been over-harvested and cows have been under-harvested here.  Thus, we have a lengthy cow tag on the A-tag, and only a week-long antlered tag on the B-tag.

Here's the stats:

Elk/Square Mile: 1.6

Hunters/Square Mile: 1.6

Bulls/Square Mile: 0.32

Average Hunter Days: 4.2

Bull Harvest Percentage: 7%

Percent Spikes Harvested: 24%

Percent 6+ points Harvested: 25%

Analysis & The Winner

This is not purely about comparing the stats, as my Panhandle Elk Zone stats are not scientific enough (I should be pretty close with the Tex Creek stats).  Both Zones are popular hunting grounds.  If you're the kind of person that just wants to get away from other hunters, then the Panhandle Zone should be your choice.  In the Panhandle it won't take long for you to hike a few miles up a gated logging road, and it will be just you and the wild.  Not so with the Tex Creek Zone.  There you will find a ton of road hunters, and just when you think you've left it all behind, somebody will be zipping atop the opposite canyon on their four-wheeler.  It would not be fair to categorize the entire Tex Creek Zone that way, but when you hunt there, you will see other hunters.

The biggest difference between the two Zones is terrain.  These Zones are on complete opposite sides of the state, and it takes two opposite styles of hunting.  In Tex Creek you can glass - spot and stalk.  No such thing in the Panhandle.  In the Panhandle you have to be ready to beat the brush, literally.  Tex Creek is easier hunting, no doubt about it.

In the end, I'm going to declare the Tex Creek Elk Zone as the winner here.  I think it is easier to kill a bull there.  Unless you have trail cams set up over wallows in the Panhandle's timber, or you have time to hit the trails on multiple scouting trips, or you are a logger who knows where the elk are, then you can have a tough time of it.  That's not to say you can't be successful by hitting the Panhandle cold, it's just a lot harder, and expectations of success should be kept in check.  On the other hand, anybody can hunt Tex Creek, and it's a matter of hunters pushing the elk around.  And it's a matter of weather.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Interview With Idaho Waterfowl Association - Part 4

One of the hot topics facing the Idaho outdoorsman is the issue of guided bird hunts.  Currently, Idaho does not license and allow guided waterfowl hunts (actually, there are 4 licensed guides grandfathered in after the moratorium), but it is considering changing that.  Believe it or not, change from that current structure will have all sorts of impacts on the way we hunt waterfowl.  The Idaho Waterfowl Association agreed to answer some questions I had regarding the issue, so many thanks go to them for giving us the lowdown of their stance.  This is the fourth and final part of the interview. You can read the first part here, the second installment here, and the third one here. Enjoy...  ~ J. Bunch

 

Idahoman: How is the IWA fighting against outfitting/guiding of waterfowl in Idaho? Why is it important to join IWA, and how can one join?

Answer IWA: The IWA has taken the fight to the general waterfowl hunter in Idaho by placing a variety of topics and discussion threads on various waterfowl hunting sites. Our main place for the discussion on this topic being the forums on the IWA website: http://www.idahowaterfowl.org/ . And of course interest from such outdoors enthusiast as you giving the IWA a forum to be able to open this topic up to all the public in Idaho certainly helps.

By completing your request to do this series, we hope the information is less sporadic and misunderstood with many that were not sure that this issue was even being considered or evaluated by the OGLB.

For that the IWA thanks you, and I am sure the Idaho Public thanks you for opening the door to something that could take away one of Idaho’s sportsmen/women’s precious natural resources if they don’t become and stay active in this venture.

We have been, and still are one of the principle participants and a voting member of a group of individuals brought together by the IDFG and the OGLB to discuss and evaluate waterfowl and turkey outfitting and guiding in Idaho. 

IWA has also used online polling to get a pulse of how water-fowlers in Idaho really feel on this subject. The IWA found that there is a pretty significant base out there that is against the implementation of outfitting/guiding for waterfowl. We have also found that there is also a significant number of individuals, as with any movement, that are against something, but fear stepping up and voicing their opinion for fear of retaliation from those on the opposite side of an issue. 

IWA is also a member of the Idaho Sportsmen’s Caucus Advisory Council (ISCAC) which has also expressed concern about additional outfitting and guiding programs in Idaho. ISCAC represents over 22,000 enthusiastic sportsmen/women through their various Sportsmen’s groups (www.idahoscac.org » About ISCAC) ISCAC took a formal position against any further guiding or outfitting for waterfowl in Idaho. http://idahowaterfowl.org/library/PDF/2012/guiding/ISCAC%20position%20statement.pdf 

IWA has continually pushed on the Idaho press/media members to generate articles on this subject also, and this will continue.

The IWA stays in continual contact with the IDFG on this issue as well as monitoring the OGLB for any changes that take place. This is especially important since there seems to be information pertaining to this topic placed on their website or discussed in their meetings that is not passed on to the Waterfowl/turkey Advisory Group as has been demonstrated in prior postings of this series.

The importance of joining the IWA is very important to water-fowlers. We all know that with any organization, not everyone agrees in total on all issues, but, those differences help to formulate a stronger and much stronger stance on issues that affect what that group stands for, and that is no different with the IWA. But, in most cases, a strong organization in many cases can influence and have a much stronger relationship and partnership with other agencies and individuals than an individual can.

The IWA also encourages it’s members as individuals to also speak up and talk to their legislators, Agency representatives, and other elected individuals throughout Idaho to show them that they are engaged in activities such as this and that they do have an opinion and voice in what and how Idaho’s natural resources are going to be managed and used.

If your readers don’t think that the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association (different than the Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board) don’t lobby your state legislators, one is fooled. So it becomes very critical that the IWA and individuals throughout Idaho have a similar voice. And that is why it is very critical to have a group such as the IWA to be able to work with and talk to these different Idaho Agencies.

Readers can join the IWA in several ways. By going to the IWA website (Idaho Waterfowl Association) and there is a link that allows one to join by direct payments to the IWA or by use of credit card and/or Pay Pal. The IWA is a 501c organization so your dues are tax deductible. But, being a 501c organization, we are also limited in what lobbying and such that we can do.

The IWA mission statement is:

“Idaho Waterfowl Association is an organization dedicated to enhancement and preservation of waterfowl and waterfowl hunting in Idaho.”

With the goals of the IWA being:

• Interaction with policy makers

One of IWA's primary goals is to work in conjunction with the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to promote waterfowl hunting regulations based on the best available biological data. Part of this goal will be achieved by becoming a resource of scientifically sound information pertinent to our state, gathered from USFWS and national waterfowl organizations. IWA will present a unified voice to the IDFG Commission for the state's waterfowl hunters.

• Conservation and habitat

While major habitat restoration efforts are best managed by larger organizations and agencies, IWA will do what we can to assist other waterfowl organizations and government agencies, as well as organizing smaller projects among our membership. We understand that it is the responsibility of each waterfowl hunter to do what he or she is able to do to preserve the conditions required for waterfowl populations to thrive. IWA will promote the wise use of our natural resources in the best interest of waterfowl.

• Education and recruitment

We recognize the importance of involving the next generation of hunters in waterfowl hunting. To that end, IWA plans to be involved at reasonable levels in youth hunt organization and educational presentations on the subject of safety, ethics and waterfowl identification.
We also recognize that many adult hunters would benefit from similar educational events, and will strive to provide opportunities where hunters and future hunters of all ages can enjoy learning about waterfowl and waterfowl hunting.

• Community awareness

One of the problems facing waterfowl hunting in Idaho is the encroachment of development on our state's rivers and wetlands. Many of the state's new residents are not familiar or comfortable with the hunting heritage that Idaho has been defined by for so long. We recognize that it is our responsibility as hunters to be good neighbors and work so that safety of all is maintained.

We hope that more of your readers will from time to time stop by the IWA website and learn more about issues and projects that the IWA is working on to meet our goals and mission statement, keeping all water-fowlers in mind, member or not.

Even if you are not a member of the IWA, we encourage all sportsmen and women of Idaho to become involved on this topic if you want to preserve your waterfowl hunting experience.

The IWA would like to thank you for you taking the time to put this topic out there helping to educate Idaho’s Sportsmen and women on a topic that the majority of Idahoan’s had no idea was going on or how complex and contentious it is.

If there are more questions that you or your readers have, please feel free to contact the IWA and we will try to answer them for you. We can be contacted by the following e-mail account:
iwabod@gmail.com

Read More

Why Sagebrush Matters

It is estimated that nearly 50% of Idaho is sagebrush steppe rangeland/high desert.  Mule deer, elk, and antelope depend upon it for protection and concealment, and coyotes and mountain lions find it ideal for stalking stealthily through.  Hawks and eagles battle with the squirrels and rabbits continually, and the battlefield is that sagebrush covered high desert.

It is important habitat for a lot of reasons.  Besides that, it is beautiful.  I was born in the wet rainforests of Western Oregon, and whenever we would cross over the Cascades to visit the dry side, I was engulfed with the vast sea of sagebrush - a mysterious place, where over any rim-rocked plateau might stand a dozen mule deer, their white nose bridges staring back.

Nothing got my heart racing like a little excursion and adventure to the high desert.  And I still feel the same way.  But conservation of the things we love does take work, at least from time to time.  It was hard for me to ever believe that there could be a shortage of sagebrush.  I have traveled everywhere in the U.S. where it exists, and the impression I got was that sagebrush was the noxious weed.  I thought nothing could stop it or threaten it, and I had pictures of the Great Basin to prove it.

But in Idaho, there are some things that do threaten the sagebrush that holds important habitat, namely fires and real noxious weeds.  The battle with noxious weeds is continual, and it unfortunately takes a great deal of public resources to fight.  Fires are generally speaking an act of God.  There's not much that can be done when dry lightning strikes the dry Southern Idaho deserts.  

Great efforts go into re-seeding burnt areas, or areas that are deficient of the sagebrush that they should have.  But this is hard work.  There's no grand commercial sagebrush seed farms.  Most of the seed comes from volunteers who go out into the desert and hand-harvest the seed.

With fires that devastated large tracts of critical mule deer habitat this past year in South Idaho, a lot of seed is needed.  If you're interested in volunteering, or in just finding out more about the issue, here's a couple of links that will lead you to some good reading:

From the Idaho Statesman, and then this one from Boise State Radio.

~ J. Bunch

Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/01/10/1947622/u-of-i-master-gardener-with-minimal.html#storylink=cpy

Read More

IF&G Listens; Summit Dates Changed - But will the new days work?

Idaho Fish & Game moved the Summit dates back to August 24-26, 2012, due to complaints from archery hunters who were upset that the Summit had initially been planned on the opening weekend of archery season.

But the Summit's very own intention was to garner discussion with the public about the IF&G's mandate.  The initial dates were simply poor planning.  The complaints were the reason the dates were moved back.

Unfortunately, archery hunters are now complaining that the earlier dates that are now set are when they are in the woods scouting for elk prior to the season.  That weekend will not work either.  Just kidding.

You can read the IF&G's press statement on the matter here.

Good move, IF&G.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Interview With Idaho Waterfowl Association - Part 3

One of the hot topics facing the Idaho outdoorsman is the issue of guided bird hunts.  Currently, Idaho does not license and allow guided waterfowl hunts (actually, there are 4 licensed guides grandfathered in after the moratorium), but it is considering changing that.  Believe it or not, change from that current structure will have all sorts of impacts on the way we hunt waterfowl.  The Idaho Waterfowl Association agreed to answer some questions I had regarding the issue, so many thanks go to them for giving us the lowdown of their stance.  This is the third part of the interview, with one more to follow in coming days.  You can read the first part here, and the second installment here.     Enjoy...  ~ J. Bunch

IDAHOMAN: What reasons would the IOGLB and the IF&G have for licensing waterfowl outfitters and guides, other than having another regulatory task for the OGLB's administration?

Answer IWA: The Idaho Fish and Game (IDFG) does not license outfitting and guiding activities. The Idaho Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board (OGLB) has sole responsibility for this as declared in Idaho Statute, (http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/statutes_and_rules/2010_Idaho_Statutes.pdf)

Four OGLB board members are appointed by the Governor and one by IDFG. An excerpt from Idaho code 36-2105 as shown below sets up the board:

“36-2105.CREATION OF IDAHO OUTFITTERS AND GUIDES LICENSING BOARD. There is hereby created in the department of self-governing agencies the Idaho outfitters and guides licensing board, herein referred to as "the board," consisting of four (4) members appointed by the governor, and one (1) member appointed by the Idaho fish and game commission, as provided in section 36-2106, Idaho Code.”

This means the IDFG has the authority to have one member on the OGLB board, but otherwise they only act as an advisory body for potential effects of any proposed activity. With the remaining members appointed by the Governor they really only have to answer to the Governor’s office and primarily complaints from the outfitters/guides they oversee. They don’t get or ask for a lot of general public input.

The reason that the OGLB has proposed this activity, as the IWA and the Advisory Group has been informed, but not proven, is that apparently there has been a request by some individuals that have made applications or request to expand this activity in different parts of the State. Who these individuals are, is unknown, and neither the IWA nor the public have any idea as to where these applications to outfit/guide are located. This is one of the reasons it is so hard to evaluate, because we do not know where the activity is wanted and what those specific impacts would or could be. The only known interest seen was from Mike Lawson with Henry’s Fork Anglers wanting to expand his operation to some new private land. Mr. Lawson was on the Advisory Group representing the outfitters.

IDFG commissions have consistently come out against any expansion for waterfowl outfitting and guiding. The IWA does not foresee any benefit or reason to cause IDFG to change their mind.

As for the OGLB implementing another program beyond what exists, the IWA and other groups and individuals are struggling to understand why the OGLB wants to expand this program. This is especially true in light of their own financial status and statements. The OGLB has stated in several of their semi-annual newsletters (http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/newsletters/2010_Fall_newsletter_with_attachments.pdf, http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/newsletters/2011_Fee_Increase_Compromise_Newsletter.pdf), that they are strapped for cash and cannot currently meet their financial obligations. So the question was asked, how can they adequately administer and implant basically a new program. The IWA and other Sportsmen’s groups do not believe they can with the limited resources and track record that they have. The IWA believes this for several reasons.

Currently, and ever since guiding for waterfowl was permitted for the four grandfathered outfitters, the OGLB has not followed their own regulations or MOU with the IDFG requiring data and information from the existing waterfowl outfitters to be provide annually to the Idaho Fish and Game showing harvest, user, and other requested information. (http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/mou/mou_idfg.pdf and http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/statutes_and_rules/2010_Idaho_Statutes.pdf.)

In section 25.01.01 - RULES OF THE IDAHO OUTFITTERS AND GUIDES LICENSING BOARD rule 049 is very specific as to the reporting of harvest and use by outfitters and guides. It says,

”049. REPORTS. The licensee shall submit to the Board on an annual basis or as otherwise required by the Board, an activity, use, and harvest report and other information about outfitting or guiding activities as may be required by the Board.”

The IWA and all of the other Sportsmen’s groups on the Waterfowl Advisory group asked for this information, not only from the OGLB, but also from the IDFG to see if the OGLB had complied with this requirement. As of this posting, there had never been a report filed that has been provided to the Advisory Group as requested.

As for the IDFG wanting or supporting any further outfitting and/or guiding for waterfowl, they have come out multiple times in favor of the moratorium. (http://idahowaterfowl.org/library/PDF/2012/guiding/ISCAC%20position%20statement.pdf). (http://www.idahowaterfowl.org/library/PDF/2012/guiding/fg_commission_11_18_2009_minutes.pdf)

Specifically, in the minutes of the F&G Commissioners, which read: “Deputy Director Moore explained that an informal moratorium was established in 1992 with IOGLB limiting outfitted Waterfowl, Upland Game Bird and later Turkey Hunting and that more recently, the Commission had expressed their opposition to licensing these activities.”

So, what changed and why the push to go further with this proposal is still not totally understood as to where it really came from other than a push from the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board (OGLB).

IDAHOMAN: Let’s say that legislation is passed (I'm assuming it will take legislation) that requires waterfowl outfitters and guides to be licensed, and the state goes down that track. What would the waterfowl hunting scene in Idaho look like after 10 years?

Answer IWA: In Idaho, it does not require legislation to implement outfitting/guiding for waterfowl or any other wildlife species. The Idaho OGLB has legal authority to implement and license all outfitting and guiding activities within the State of Idaho.

Under the Memorandum of Understanding between IDFG and OGLB, all it generally takes is for the Idaho OGLB to ask for consultation or input by IDFG. The OGLB only has to consider that input and then they have the legal/administrative authority to implement the program. If it involves public lands, i.e.; US Forest Service and or BLM, further processes are required to approve and implement commercial outfitting and guiding on Public Lands or waters administered by these agencies.

The OGLB’s legal authorities can be found at the following website: http://oglb.idaho.gov/rules/

To predict what Idaho waterfowl hunting would look in 10 years if guiding was allowed one should look to other states that already have guiding. In other states throughout the country, you would see a good majority of the huntable waterfowl land and water tied up by the commercial waterfowl hunting industry. In a survey that the IDFG did with other State’s wildlife management agencies, the majority showed and indicated that the general public had nothing but problems and issues with commercial outfitting/guiding for waterfowl. http://idahowaterfowl.org/library/PDF/2012/guiding/FG_state_agency_questionnaire.pdf

There has been a myriad of discussions on many different websites and forums discussing waterfowl guiding in Idaho. If guiding/outfitting is allowed for waterfowl in Idaho you will see it very quickly added to the list of complaints for lost access by the general hunter. The list already includes clubs, monetary leases, development/growth, and other reasons. Why take the risk of further access being lost?

Idaho has a limited resource of huntable waterfowl areas and habitat with the majority being along the Snake River corridor in southern Idaho and a few isolated locations in the Idaho Panhandle. As some of the reports and discussions have shown during the Waterfowl/Turkey Advisory Groups meetings, Idaho is losing acres upon acres of agricultural lands yearly. Those agricultural lands are not considered waterfowl habitat, but, they definitely support a large population of migrating waterfowl every year. Imagine losing more of this land to the commercialization of waterfowl hunting. Do you have the money and/or financial support to pay the big bucks that many of Idaho’s surrounding states see that do allow guiding for waterfowl? The IWA is guessing that the general public of Idaho does not.

Read More

IF&G May Be Softening On Summit Dates

As reported earlier, the IF&G planned their Summit, a three day public input opportunity on all things Fish & Game related, on the opening weekend of archery season.  That was a good way to start the Summit - with a move that shows that the IF&G is out of touch with the ones it serves.  Turns out, the complaining has been heard, and the dates may be softening.

From Local News 8:

The summit is tentatively scheduled for Sept. 7 through Sept. 9, but that's the beginning of archery season. Gamblin said he is hearing people's complaints, and the agency is trying to work it out.

"Because we hunt, too. The Fish and Game department understands inherently why that is of great concern to hunters," Gamblin said.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Wolf Harvest Update 1/12/2012

Just a few observations.

Too bad that the wolf seasons in Beaverhead and Island Park had to close at the end of the year without the quotas even being close to filled. Not sure of the reasoning here. Maybe they thought elk wintering would get disturbed with the hunting, or... I don't know.

I'm kind of surprised that zero wolves were taken out of the Southern Idaho Zone. I thought that somebody would have at least harvested one in the Tex Creek area after reports of wolves being in there. Especially with such little snow, I thought someone would have been able to do some good. Perhaps they are in there less than some locals would tout.

It's interesting that more wolves have been trapped in the Selway than by firearm. It goes to show that hunting wolves in the wilderness is not a cake walk.

North Idaho has done well. 75 wolves have been taken out of the Panhandle Zone and the Dworshak/Elk City Zone.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Place: Island Park, Idaho

Read More

Rex Rammell Will Seek Office Again

This is somewhat old news, but I wanted to wait a little while before I talked about it here.  I was thinking up a whole bunch of entertaining one liners to accompany this report.  But I was also entertaining interviewing Mr. Rammell for IDAHOMAN.COM, so I figured I shouldn't tic him off too bad yet.

But after some pondering, I really couldn't think of too many questions to ask Mr. Rammell once the interview got going.  I'm sure I would just end up asking him, over and over, "Really?!?"

If you do recall, I noticed that Rex had been out of the news for quite some time, and thus prophesied that it would be any day now that he would do something to get back under the spotlight.  Shortly after, he announced he would be running for the Idaho Legislature.

From the Boise Weekly:

Perennial political candidate Rex Rammell has confirmed that he once more will be running for office in 2012, this time for the House of Representatives in Idaho's District 7, currently represented by Republican Rep. Jeff Nesset and Democratic Rep. John Rusche (the minority leader).

Rammell pleaded guilty last August to criminal contempt, following accusations of jury tampering in Bonneville County.

District 7, once a rather small region including the City of Lewiston, is now significantly larger thanks to reapportionment. The district now includes part of Kootenai County and all of Shoshone, Clearwater and Idaho counties, and encompasses more than 13,500 square miles. It's larger than nine U.S. states.
In announcing his candidacy, Rammell said he believed there was "widespread corruption" in state leadership.

 Frankly, I think the entertainment value of this would be worth your vote, District 7.

~ J. Bunch

Read More

Guest Post: Growler Is Dead

Today's guest post comes courtesy of Dirk Durham of Moscow, ID.  Dirk is one of the Pro Staff at elk101.com, a very valuable elk hunting site with a friendly forum.  Lots of good stuff on hunting elk in Idaho there as well.  Also check out extremeelk.com.  Extreme Elk Magazine will give you lots of good stuff to stew over, especially now that we're in the "off-season," so SUSCRIBE  now!  ~ J. Bunch

About a decade ago when giant bulls still wandered many back-country hideaways here in North Idaho, I matched wits with a monster of unforgettable proportions.  These were the days when it was not uncommon to find huge rubs on trees of eight inches or more in diameter, and pie plate sized hoof prints in the mud.  Large herds of cows were the norm, and wolves were a bed time story. "Growler Bull" was the name given to this behemoth by my brother Lance and I due to his unique bugle.  Many years and thousands of vocal cord-damaging bugles had given this old monarch his distinctive voice. Rather than a typical three note bugle, his was a raspy wheeze-like scream, minus the high notes.

 

My first encounter with the Growler was on the last day of bow season with with none other than Corey Jacobsen.  We had spent a long hard week chasing bulls, and had ran out of fresh buglers. Corey asked if I had any other spots where we could find a last minute bull. I scanned my memory bank and remembered a growly bugle that I had heard early in the season, but due to the nasty nature of the terrain my brother and I opted out, looking elsewhere for an easier target. When I mentioned the place, Corey jumped at the notion.

Daylight found us at the top of a large drainage with bugles in hand. Corey called and the Growler answered back immediately, almost like he had been waiting there for us to return. He was located on a ridge that plummeted deep into the drainage. Since the morning thermals were headed down hill we had to drop straight off  to get on his level, then side hill over to the bull.  No easy task due to the nearly vertical, brush choked hillside. We called, scrambled, and fought our way down and over toward the bull through ten foot high brush until we had climbed onto the bulls ridge.

I was in the lead with Corey following close behind when the bull decided to make his move.  With a thunderous crash, Growler herded his ladies our way with screaming guttural insults.  Cows started streaming by us at fifteen yards in a single file line. Cow number thirty went by with a spike following up the rear, and following them was an elk colored "army tank". His body dwarfed every cow in his harem, and his beautiful sweeping six point rack was equally impressive. With a very quiet cow call, I stopped him at eighteen yards… right behind a bark-less snag who's dead twisted branches covered his vitals. Meanwhile, the cows were all pooled up in the brush over by Corey, waiting for their marching orders.  At full draw and burning a hole through the branches with my site pin, the cows spooked returning on the same path they had just traveled. Confident the bull would take a step in my favor, I held my eighty pound round wheel bow at full draw for what seemed an eternity as the cows filed by. When the spike who was heading up the rear finally ran by, Growler lunged, turned, and following his harem to safety. Rubbing our eyes in disbelief, we giggled like school girls.

My next encounter with the old monarch was the following year. It was near the end of September again and had snowed a light skiff the night before. My brother Lance and I had several bulls answering our calls down and across the drainage. One bull's wheezy growly bugle had me zeroed in on his location. Struggling down through the cold, wet snow covered vegetation, we closed the gap with the bull. We set up shop, close as we dared, as I fired up again working the bull without much luck.  He wouldn't budge, but continued a constant flurry of bugles. I urged Lance to move forward and stalk in on the bull as I kept him talking. Lance got setup and I could see him in the distance motioning me to move up. Crashing down the hill like an elephant screaming insults was all the Growler needed to hear. He wheezed his reply and came in on a string to Lance.

At five yards, Growler passed behind a hemlock sapling allowing Lance to draw his bow. Since this was back in the days before D-loops, his arrow had been nocked for quite a while with his release putting pressure on the back of the nock, causing it to push forward. As Lance drew his bow, the nock pushed off the string causing it to fall, clanking against the riser then to the ground.  Miraculously, the bull looked the opposite direction allowing Lance to recover his arrow, and draw back  just in time for the Growler to turn around and return from where he came.

My last meeting with the giant bull was two years later. It had been pretty slow, due to warm dry conditions. I was camped by myself that year except for three guys who were across the same campsite from me.  One fellow at the neighboring camp had invited me over for a cold beverage when his compadres went to town that night, so I walked over to his camp to join him. We talked about elk hunting long into the night and then I bid him good luck and good night. When I awoke the next morning, the sun was fairly high and my pounding headache reaffirmed why cold beverages should come after your tag is notched. I shuffled around camp head hung low, loaded my gear and headed out to salvage the remainder of the day.

Mad at myself for being so foolish, I mumbled and scolded myself as I walked through the waist high huckleberry brush. I made a few quiet cow calls trying to disguise the cornflake crunching noise as I made my way across the ridge. Then it happened, Growler ripped a devastatingly growling bugle just out of site, less than fifty yards away in a thicket of hemlock saplings . Much to my chagrin, he was almost directly down wind. Backtracking a bit, I tried in a last ditch effort to gain the wind's favor, but with no luck. His huge hooves crashed off safely, back into his secret place.

With my skull splitting headache and uneasy stomach, I reasoned that if I were to bail off into the hole where the Growler had went, I could hang out till evening and perhaps get a second chance. Walking down the ridge on remnants of an old game trail, I dropped in elevation looking for an ideal place to make my set-up. Crash! A spike that was bedded about ten yards away jumped up running and barked, giving up my charade. With a quick witted idea, I turned the spike's bark into a series of grunts since he was still only about fifty yards away. Evidently, it worked like a charm because Growler fired up again. I positioned myself to where he would have to crest the ridge to see his challenger, giving me a perfect shot. He bugled five times within about one minute while he closed the gap. Brush began to pop and swish just out of sight and I readied my bow as the wind started fanning my sweaty neck. He crashed off, so I sprinted to an opening hoping to catch a glimpse of my unseen Growler.  I found a clearing just in time to watch him run up to the fringe of a huge, head high brush field. He began to make motions like he was going to rake his enormous rack, but instead he was trying to part the brush.  His giant rack was huge, freakishly long curly tines, beams with "baseball bat" like mass carried all the way back to his sweeping whale tails. Finally, he leaped into the thicket, and all I could do is watch as his head and horns floated through the sea of brush. I guess he didnt like the smell of barley and hops!

At this point in my life I was overtaken by my obsession to kill this bull. All I could do is eat, sleep, and plot against Growler. Hours of pouring over maps, running scenarios, scouting, and only talking to my closest of friends recounting all the details. I'm sure my wife was quite annoyed by my blank stare and bugling in my sleep for the next two years.

The following two seasons I couldn't find him. I checked all his old haunts and new areas where I thought he might have relocated to. I hadn't heard of any hunters bagging a bull of his magnitude in the area, and hoped he had temporarily moved away due to the new presence of wolves in the mountains.  In the spring following his second year hiatus, I learned of a local dirt bike enthusiast finding a huge dead bull in the trail at the bottom of Growler's drainage. Appeared to be a wolf kill. When I finally saw a picture of the rack, I had to hold back the tears. It was him. His horns had regressed a bit but were still very impressive and still carried all his old character, and some new.  Heartbroken, I did what any elk hunting fanatic would do, I set out looking for the next one. Call it crazy, but I've carried a picture of his rack every year since then, just to remind me to never give up till I put my own arrow or bullet into a bull of a lifetime like Growler.

Here we go boys! I was able to catch up with the guy who found Growler's rack……..Enjoy! ~ Dirk Durham

Read More

My New Christmas Present

Yeah, right.  Apparently I wasn't that good this year.

But you can dream along with me by viewing the specs and seeing all of the pics here.

Read More

Interview With Idaho Waterfowl Association - Part 2

One of the hot topics facing the Idaho outdoorsman is the issue of guided bird hunts.  Currently, Idaho does not license and allow guided waterfowl hunts (actually, there are 4 licensed guides - more on that later), but it is considering changing that.  Believe it or not, change from that current structure will have all sorts of impacts on the way we hunt waterfowl.  The Idaho Waterfowl Association agreed to answer some questions I had regarding the issue (and concerned I am!), so many thanks go to them for giving us the lowdown of their stance.  This is the second part of the interview, with a couple more to follow in coming days.  You can read the first part here.  Enjoy...  ~ J. Bunch

IDAHOMAN: It seems like the big issue here would be that if waterfowl outfitting were legal, it would tie up a lot of private ground access by the outfitters, making hunting access difficult for the average Joe who doesn't have the money to hire an outfitter. Do I have that right - is that the primary problem that IWA has with this motion?

Answer IWA: As the IWA stated in the first part of this series, the issue of outfitting/guiding for waterfowl is not strictly being considered on private lands in Idaho, which makes this more than a private land issue. Outfitting/guiding for waterfowl has and still is being considered to be allowed on public lands. The OGLB has discussed this issue before and is still discussing the issue. See motion made by IOGLB board member Chris Korell in IOGLB minutes from May, 2011, page 6. (http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/minutes/MAY%20FINAL%20MINUTES_20111205114239.PDF)

Public and private land for waterfowl hunting in Idaho is limited. The best measure the Advisory Group could come up with to measure public land suitable for waterfowl hunting was to take all bodies of water larger than ½ acre and rivers. This gives 374,716 acres in Idaho, or 0.7% of the state. Keep in mind that numerous large bodies counted here are closed for hunting or only huntable for a portion of the season.

To determine private land for waterfowl hunting IDFG compiled a land survey. The results of this survey, 2010 Ag Stats by County, are here, (Web Discussion on Waterfowl Guiding in Idaho). This survey shows that the majority of the private land suitable for waterfowl hunting is near the public waterways and concentrated. This would put outfitters and non-outfitted hunters in the same areas and competing for access. It also included a map, (Web Discussion on Waterfowl Guiding in Idaho), that showed where this land is located. (Water Fowl_1LandUse map.pdf)

The “average Joe” you speak of may not be able to afford an outfitter/guide, but they also may not want to have to pay one or hunt in the manner the guide chooses. Due to no outfitting and guiding for waterfowl in Idaho most of the resident hunters are freelance and prefer to do it themselves. During the IWA waterfowl guiding petition we had numerous non-resident hunters from Utah contact us on how to help this fight strictly because in their home state if they wanted to get good access for waterfowl they had to pay a guide and hunt how the guide chooses.

The hunters who do not want to pay a guide are not going away. There will always be those that get together and lease private ground for access. The combination of outfitters and private clubs will lead to less ground available to the “average Joe” who makes a solid relationship with a landowner and hunts private ground.

You do have a right to lease private ground or access. This lies in fundamental private property rights and trespass. You do not have a right to hire an outfitter or guide. The IDFG and OGLB MOU specifically states, “the IDFG and IOGLB recognize that the fish and wildlife resources of Idaho are owned and sustained by the people of Idaho and that commercial outfitting enterprise is a regulated privilege; where outfitters who provide hunting and fishing opportunities using Idaho fish and wildlife resources are licensed by IOGLB for benefit of the public at large;”

Hiring an outfitter or being an outfitter is a regulated privilege. In the case of waterfowl, and due to the high non-outfitted demand and limited access, the IWA believes there is not a benefit for the public at large or common Joe as you describe it.

The Idaho Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board’s statute (IC 36-2101) clearly states: “…nor is it the intent of this legislation to interfere in any way with the right of the general public to enjoy the recreational value of Idaho’s deserts, mountains, rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, and other natural resources when the services of commercial outfitters and guides are not utilized…”

IWA believes again, that in the case of waterfowl, due to the high non-outfitted demand and limited access, it is impossible for outfitted waterfowl hunting to not interfere with non-outfitted hunting.

During the Advisory Group meetings the outfitter representatives also insisted that if outfitting was only allowed on private land that this would include the public waterway either surrounded or bordered by the private land. This would impact public waterway hunters significantly and is unacceptable to the IWA.

As one can see, the impacts to the general public, or Average Joe goes on and on and the IWA, other agencies, and sportsmen’s groups feel that the negatives outweigh any benefit of allowing guiding for waterfowl.

One item that needs to be cleared up and apparently is causing some confusion is that there currently are four (4) grandfathered licensed outfitters for waterfowl in the State. All four of those outfitters are in East Idaho. Only one of those outfitters is permitted to guide for waterfowl on Public Lands/water. The others are only permitted to guide for waterfowl on private land/water. The permitted outfitters for waterfowl are:

Black Dog Outfitter, INC.

Henry’s Fork Anglers LLC

Teton Valley Lodge, INC

Three Rivers Ranch

IDAHOMAN: I can see some landowners push back on your stance, as they might argue that they want all the options available to them to do what they want with their land, including profiting from waterfowl outfitting. What would be your response? And do you hear this argument from landowners?

Answer IWA: This is one of the biggest responses to the issue of guiding for waterfowl on private lands. Some individuals that are pro-guiding say that denying outfitting/guiding for waterfowl on private lands takes away a person’s private property rights. One has to remember that waterfowl are migratory birds and are governed under the Migratory Bird Treaty and the Idaho Fish and Game has responsibility to manage these species. Also, one has to remember, that under the OGLB’s own rules and regulations, Outfitting and Guiding are a privilege. This is discussed in the response to the question above. The OGLB and IDFG both agree that this is a privilege and not a right, as described in their joint MOU in the question above.

Due to the nature of waterfowl being migratory and having particular patterns there are issues that arise when guides and outfitters have access to private land. The incentive to make money causes outfitters to change traditional farming practices which changes bird feeding and flight patterns. This also causes waterfowl to congregate in large numbers where they normally would not and be more susceptible to disease. In an area like Idaho where the waterfowl habitat is concentrated and limited, this causes concern. Changed flight and feeding patterns have already been seen and caused by hunting clubs in Southern Idaho.

Once again, the IWA takes the stance that there is a myriad of options available for the private land owner to make money off of their private land. But, by tying up land that is/was once accessible to the general public by allowing an individual to use it only for outfitting and/or guiding takes it out of the availability base for the general public to use.

IWA also reminds the readers of this. The IWA continues to state that there has been ‘No Demonstrated” need by the public or existing outfitters for further expansion of the existing

outfitting/guiding activities in Idaho. In fact, the OGLB’s own policies for determining if a license to outfit or guide for a particular activity is warranted is based on a demonstrated need.

To quote the OGLB’s policies, “It is Board policy that 'public need' will be determined through quantitative and qualitative analysis of objective information. Ordinarily this information will be obtained from other agencies, industry representatives, the outfitted public and the public at large often through collaborative efforts.” (Web Discussion on Waterfowl Guiding in Idaho)

The IWA and other sportsmen’s groups continually ask for, and to date have not received, any information to show a public need as required by the OGLB’s own policies, let alone a quantitative or qualitative analysis of any such information provided by the OGLB.

As of the posting of this part of the series on guiding for waterfowl, we have not heard anything from any private land owners on this other than comments made during the Advisory Groups meetings from Wally Butler (Range Conservationist for the Idaho Farm Bureau) and Mike Reggear – (Clearwater Management Council), both of whom served on the Advisory Board. But, during these meetings, it was made clear by Wally Butler that none of the discussions about guiding for waterfowl had been discussed with any land owners, as he did not feel that there was enough information to provide to them. The same statement was made by the Outfitters Representative, Mike Lawson.

Now that the Idaho Farm Bureau, OGLB, and the F&G have sent out and received comments and results back from the private land owner’s survey, the IWA, and we are sure other groups and individuals are anxious to see what those results will be. The one problem with the survey, if it was sent out as recommended by the OGLB, and as documented in their August 25-26 Board Meeting, they only targeted private land owners who can target guiding for waterfowl and turkey in prime hunting areas ( http://oglb.idaho.gov/pdf/minutes/2011-08%20MINUTES%20FINAL_12-5-2011%201205083554.pdf), instead of the 20,000+ private land owner base that the Idaho Farm Bureau has. The OGLB hoped to get a return of at least 350 responses. How many they received is unknown as of this posting.

The IWA’s initial feeling on this is that the survey is biased towards land owners who already lease out their property for waterfowl hunting and it skews the reliability of the survey, but the final results will have to be seen first before the IWA has a formal position on this survey.

A copy of the private land owner survey can be found at: (http://www.surveymonkey.com/IdahoLandownerSurvey)

Read More