Post on 21-Sep-2020
2019 Big Game Regulationsand Tag Numbers
OregonFish and Wildlife Commission
September 14, 2018Bandon, Oregon
1
Meeting Overview
• 2019 Regulations Proposals─ Species Specific: season dates, tag numbers, etc.
Ungulates Carnivores
─ General Regulations Standard Regulation Process
Regulation Simplification Process
2
Species Specific Information
• Population Overview/Monitoring
• 2019 Hunting Season Structure
• 2019 Tag Number Proposals
3
Bighorn Sheep Population Monitoring
0500
1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,5005,000
Popu
latio
n
Year
Oregon Bighorn Population Trend
California Rocky Mountain
5
Bighorn Sheep Population Management
Capture planned for winter 2018 – 2019Disease Monitoring
• 10 in Burnt River• 20 in Steens Mountain• 20 Pueblo Mtns• 10 Coleman Rim• 20 Hart Mountain Refuge
6
Bighorn Sheep Tag & Season Proposals
10 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Tags in 2019• Includes 2 new hunts with 1 tag each
73 California Bighorn Tags in 2019
Expanded seasons for two Aldrich hunts
Six Non-Resident (7%)
One Day calendar shift for most hunts
7
Rocky Mtn. Goat Population Monitoring
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Popu
latio
n
Year
Oregon Rocky Mtn. Goat Population Trend
8
Rocky Mtn. Goat Tag & Season Proposals
One Day calendar shift in 2019
24 Tags in 2019
Two Nonresident tags (8%)
9
Pronghorn Population Monitoring
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Popu
latio
n
Year
Oregon Pronghorn Population
10
Controlled Pronghorn Tag Proposals
Hunt Type2018 Tags
Buck/Either Sex 1,395Bow/Muzzleloader 731Doe 164Youth 40Premium 27Total Pronghorn 2,357
2019 Tags
% Change
1,371 -1.7%719 -1.6%164 0%
40 0%27 0%
2,321 -1.5%
Combine North & South SumpterOne Day calendar shift for 2019
11
050,000
100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000
Popu
latio
n Si
ze
Year
Oregon Mule Deer Population
Population MO
Mule Deer Population Monitoring
12
100%
≤50%
51-75%
76-99%
% Of MO
2018 Mule Deer Population Status
SnakeRiver
Chesnimnus
SledSprings
Minam
WenahaWalla Walla
Mt. EmilyColumbiaBasinW
Biggs
Maupin
MalheurRiver
BeulahLookout Mt.
Keating
Imnaha
Starkey
Desolation
Northside
MurdersCreek
Silvies
Ochoco
Maury
Grizzly
Paulina
WhitehorseBeatysButte
Juniper
Interstate
SilverLake
Sprague
KlamathFalls
FortRock
Metolius
Pine Creek
E Biggs
Hood
13
General Deer Season Proposals
Season Bag Limit 2019 SeasonCoast Buck Rifle Buck, 2 pt+ Sept. 28 – Nov. 1
Cascade Buck Rifle Buck, 2 pt+ Sept. 28 – Oct. 11Oct. 19 – Nov. 1
Western General Bow Buck, 2 pt+ or One Deer Aug. 24 – Sept. 22
NW Late Deer Bow Buck, 2 pt+ or One Deer Nov. 16 – Dec. 8
SW Late Deer Bow Buck, 2 pt+ or One Deer Nov. 9 – Dec. 1
Eastern General Bow Buck w/Visible Antler Aug. 24 – Sept. 22
14
Controlled Deer Tag Proposals
Hunt Type2018 Tags
2019 Tags
% Change
Buck 51,472 50,626 -1.6%Bow/Muzzleloader 4,423 4,376 -1.1%Antlerless (600) 7,993 7,872 -1.5%Youth 1,196 1,243 3.9%Premium 67 67 0%Total Deer 65,151 64,184 -1.5%
2019 Hunt ChangesOne Day calendar shift for 2019Delete 619A Mill CreekDelete 624B East Tioga
15
Tiered approach for allocating Mule Deer LOP tagsTier 1: Population estimate > 80% of MO, 100 Series (Buck)
LOP mule deer issued based upon the acreage table in OAR (2-14 tags/property)
Tier 2: Population estimate 60%-79% of MO, LOP buck tags limited to five tags or 15% of the tags authorized for the public for each hunt, whichever is greater
Tier 3: Population estimate < 60% of MO, LOP buck tags limited to five tags or 10% of the tags authorized for the public for each hunt, whichever is greater
Exceptions: High % private land (143A E Biggs, 144 Columbia Basin,
167A NE Owyhee)
High % white-tailed deer in the harvest (154A, 154B)
Limited LOP Mule Deer Tags
16
Limited LOP Mule Deer Tags (cont.)• 4,896 Limited LOP buck tags for 2019 (-2%)• 13 Hunts changed tier
Hunt Status Change2018 LOP
Sold2019 LOP
Avail138 Grizzly Unit Tier 1 to Tier 2 124 160140 Maupin Tier 1 to Tier 2 13 66141B White River Tier 2 to Tier 3 46 165150 Desolation Tier 3 to Tier 2 9 148156 Wenaha Tier 2 to Tier 3 6 49156M N Wenaha - E Sled Springs Tier 2 to Tier 3 3 30156R1 Wenaha Tier 2 to Tier 3 0 27158 Chesnimnus Tier 2 to Tier 3 18 55166 Malheur River Tier 2 to Tier 3 114 121166M N Malheur River Tier 2 to Tier 3 3 5170A Beatys Butte Tier 2 to Tier 3 24 16176 Silver Lake Tier 2 to Tier 3 2 198176M Silver Lake - E Fort Rock Tier 2 to Tier 3 3 5 17
Mule Deer Population Monitoring
• 1,031 animals radio-collared ̶ Delineate herd ranges̶ Estimate annual adult female survival
• Over 650,000 Location Estimates
18
Mule Deer Population Monitoring (cont.)
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Jun2015
Jul2015
Aug2015
Sep2015
Oct2015
Nov2015
Dec2015
Jan2016
Feb2016
Mar2016
Apr2016
May2016
Adul
t Doe
Sur
viva
l
Month
Blue MtnsN Blue MtnsS Blue MtnsE Blue MtnsGrizzlyMauryOchocoSumpter
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Jun2016
Jul2016
Aug2016
Sep2016
Oct2016
Nov2016
Dec2016
Jan2017
Feb2017
Mar2017
Apr2017
May2017
Adul
t Doe
Sur
viva
l
Month
Blue Mtns N Blue MtnsS Blue Mtns E Blue MtnsGrizzly MauryOchoco Cath. CrKeating Lookout MtnPine Cr. Snake R.
19
Mule Deer Population Monitoring (cont.)
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
Jun2017
Jul2017
Aug2017
Sep2017
Oct2017
Nov2017
Dec2017
Jan2018
Feb2018
Mar2018
Apr2018
May2018
Adul
t Doe
Sur
viva
l
Month
Blue Mtns N Blue Mtns S Blue Mtns E Blue Mtns
Grizzly Maury Ochoco Cath. Cr
Keating Lookout Mtn Pine Cr. Snake R.
20
020,00040,00060,00080,000
Popu
latio
n Si
ze
Year
Population MO
Elk Population StatusRoosevelt Elk
020,00040,00060,00080,000
Popu
latio
n Si
ze
Year
Population MO
Rocky Mountain Elk
21
≥100%
≤50%
51-75%
76-99%
% Of MO
Roosevelt Elk Population MOs
Elk De-Emphasis Area
Applegate
EvansCreek
Chetco
Dixon
Indigo
Santiam
McKenzie
Powers
Tioga
Siuslaw
Alsea
Stott Mt. Trask
Wilson
SaddleMt.
Scappoose
Metolius
FortRock
22
≥100%
≤50%
51-75%
76-99%
% Of MO
Rocky Mtn. Elk Population MOs
Elk De-Emphasis Area
SnakeRiver
Chesnimnus
SledSprings
Minam
WenahaWalla Walla
Mt. EmilyColumbiaBasinBiggs
Hood
MalheurRiver
BeulahLookout Mt.
Keating
Imnaha
Starkey
Desolation
Northside
MurdersCreek
Silvies
Ochoco
Maury
Grizzly
Paulina
Sumpter
WhitehorseBeatysButte
Juniper
Interstate
SilverLake
Sprague
KlamathFalls
FortRock
Pine Creek
23
General Elk Season ProposalsSeason Bag Limit 2019 SeasonCoast 1st Season One Bull Nov. 9 – Nov. 12
Coast 2nd SeasonOne Bull
Nov. 16 – Nov. 22One Spike Bull(Wilson, Trask, Siuslaw)
Cascade One Bull Oct. 12 – Oct. 18Rocky Mtn. 1st Season One Bull Oct. 23 – Oct. 27Columbia Basin
Extended SeasonOne Elk
One AntlerlessOct. 23 – Nov. 30Dec. 1 – Dec. 31
Rocky Mtn. 2nd SeasonOne Spike Bull
Nov. 2 – Nov. 10One Bull(Hood, Maupin, White R.,
W. Biggs)
General Bow Legal Bull Aug. 24 – Sept. 2224
2019 Controlled Hunt Changes
One Day calendar shift for 2019
Delete 224A Callahan & 224B Old Blue
Delete 253M Mount Harris
Starkey Experimental Forest: • Existing Bull hunt changing to Either Sex• Two New Antlerless Hunts
25
Hunt Type2018 Tags
2019 Tags
% Change
Bull / Either Sex 35,956 35,640 -0.9%Bow/Muzzleloader 9,255 8,957 -3.1%Antlerless 14,291 14,094 -1.4%Youth 1,264 1,273 -0.7%Premium 64 64 0.0%Total Elk 60,830 60,028 -1.3%
Controlled Elk Tag Proposals
26
2019 Western Gray Squirrel Seasons
1 Day Calendar shifts proposed for 2019• Western and South-central Oregon
Aug. 24 – Nov. 65/day, 15 in Possession
• Hood & White River UnitsSept. 7 – Oct. 133/day, 6 in Possession
• Portion of Rogue UnitJan. 1 – Dec. 31No Bag/Possession Limit
27
• Harvest sustainable if median age of males >2 years, females >4 years, and all bears >3 years
• No indication of unsustainable take
Bear Population Monitoring
012345
Med
ian
Age L
Male Median Age
01234567
Med
ian
Age
Light Harvest (L)
0123456
Med
ian
Age
Median Age All Bears
L
Heavy Harvest (H)
Moderate Harvest (M)
MM
HH
Female Median Age
29
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
% M
ales
5+
Light
Moderate
Heavy
Bear Population Monitoring Cont.Sex-age criteria to assess take level of black bears in Oregon. Criteria based on 3-year running averages
Criteria Light Moderate Heavy
% Males ≥5 yr old >35% 25–35% <25%
30
Bear Population Monitoring Cont.Sex-age criteria to assess take level of black bears in Oregon. Criteria based on 3-year running averages Criteria Light Moderate Heavy
% Females <30% 30–40% >40%
Light
Moderate
Heavy
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
% F
emal
es
31
Spring Bear, 2019 Season Proposals
9,386 Spring Bear Tags • 4,986 Tags in 20 Controlled Hunts• 4,400 Tags in SW Oregon
Continue to Protect Cubs & Sows with CubsContinue Mandatory Check-in
Spring Bear
Year Estimated Harvest Teeth Check-In
Rate2015 577 533 92%2016 580 549 95%2017 607 545 90%2018 * 582 *
32
General Bear, 2019 Season ProposalsNo Change to General Season Dates
• Aug 1 – Dec 31 Western Oregon• Aug 1 – Nov 30 Eastern Oregon
Tag Sale Deadline September 27Maintain Season Structure
• 2 Bear Tag Opportunity• Protect Cubs & Sows with Cubs
Continue Mandatory Check-in
Fall General Season
Year Estimated Harvest Teeth Check-In
Rate2015 1,028 833 81%2016 1,003 825 82%2017 1,134 943 83% 33
General Bear Season Update
HB 2030 (2017) eliminated 3% limit on nonresident general season bear tagsHunt structure same for residents and nonresidentsGeneral Season Nonresident Tags • 2016 - 730 tags
• 2017 - 936 tags
• 2018 - 912 tags (as of Sept 5, 2018)Note: ~52,000 Resident General Bear Season Tags Sold Annually
34
ZONE EBLUE MOUNTAINS
Cougar Management Zones
ZONE ACOAST/
NORTH CASCADES
ZONE BSOUTHWEST CASCADES
ZONE CSOUTHEAST CASCADES
ZONE FSOUTHEAST
OREGON
ZONE DCOLUMBIA BASIN
35
Cougar Population MonitoringObjective 1: ODFW will manage for a stable cougar population that are to not to fall below 3,000 cougars statewide
Statewide Population Estimate of 6,643 in 2017
Zone A: Coast/N Cascades
Zone B: SW Cascades
Zone C: SE Cascades
Zone D: Columbia Basin
Zone E: Blue Mountains
Zone F: SE Oregon
36
Cougar Population Monitoring (cont.)• Three-year average proportion adult (3+ year old)
females in the total mortality ≤ 25-35%• No Cougar Zones exceed 35%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Prop
ortio
n Ad
ult F
emal
es
Year
Zone A Zone B Zone C Zone D Zone E Zone F
37
Cougar Population Monitoring (cont.)
Zone quotas (i.e. mortality caps) include all known cougar mortalities
When quotas are met, all harvest ceases for rest of calendar year, removals due to damage and conflict are still permitted
Quota
Total Mortality
Quota
Total Mortality
Zone 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017A Coast/North
Cascades 120 95 99 103 120 121 130 101 180 117 176 157
B SW Cascades 165 106 90 96 109 106 143 100 200 98 131 140C SE Cascades 65 25 25 20 15 24 21 17 80 25 42 43D Col. Basin 62 35 38 31 36 38 50 26 100 41 28 38E Blue Mts. 245 174 158 163 169 164 135 93 270 106 113 142F SE Oregon 120 57 63 69 57 77 52 45 140 42 54 51Total 777 492 473 482 506 530 531 383 970 427 544 571
38
39
Cougar, 2019 Season Proposals
Year-round Season
Two Cougar Tag Opportunity• September 27 Tag Sale Deadline for General Tag• No Deadline for Additional Cougar Tag
─ Must purchase first tag by deadline
Mandatory Check-in
Protect Kittens & Females with Kittens
Department Owned Managed or Controlled Areas Not Listed in OAR Division 008:
• Proposing one addition to the “standard” rules for these areas
• 635-008-0200 (4) Open fires are prohibited from June 1 through October 31 except in designated areas. Open fires are prohibited during designated fire closures.
Area Regulations
42
Taxidermist Record Keeping Requirements:• 635-043-0003 (c) For game mammals and game
birds requiring tags, record the confirmation number of electronic tags, record the date (month/day/year) and time (hour/minute) of issuance of paper tags.
Taxidermy Regulations
43
Proposal similar to regulation for game birds:• 635-065-0735
It is unlawful:(2) To shoot game mammals from or with the help of any motorboat or sailboat unless the motor has been shut off and/or sail furled and movement caused by any motor or sail has stopped.
Hunting From a Boat
44
Electronic Devices on BowsCameras on bows not currently allowed
• Common request from hunters• No advantage for hunting effectiveness• Concern allowing cameras could lead to more
electronics allowed in the future
Proposed change• 635-065-0720 (7) Hunters shall not use any
electronic device(s) attached to bow or arrow except lighted arrow nocks ….. and cameras that have no other function (such as range-finding)are allowed.
45
Computerized ScopesScopes with internal rangefinders are not legal for hunting. Proposed clarification plus addendum
• 635-065-0745 It is unlawful: (4) To use an artificial light for hunting any wildlife, except raccoon, bobcat, and opossum provided the light is not cast from or attached to a motor vehicle. This includes laser sights or any other sights which project a beam to the target, including scopes with electronic rangefinders and scopes that receive information from a rangefinder or any electronic device. This does not include battery operated sights which only light the reticle.
46
Night Vision EquipmentNight vision technology generally uses infrared energy (heat), or amplifies low levels of available light
• Cost now varies from ~$50 to thousands• Legal for game mammals as long as not a sight
Proposed change• 635-065-0745
It is unlawful: (5) To hunt or locate or scout for the purpose of hunting any wildlife with infrared or any other "night vision" sight or equipment except trail cameras.
47
Regulation Simplification Process
• 3 Phased approach; Phase 2 culmination today
• Public outreach started April 2018
• Commission presentation/testimony June 2018
• Public meetings in July 2018
• Commission consideration September 2018
• Summary table of proposals – Attachment 4
50
#2 – SW Limited Spring Bear Hunt
IssuesSimplification opportunities:
• Exceptions add complication to the regulations• SW Limited Over-the-Counter Spring Bear Hunt is the only
“Limited” hunt
Management opportunities:• Was previously a controlled hunt• Tags sell out by mid-January, however <45% of tag holders
actually hunt
Proposal• Return SW Spring Bear to a controlled hunt consistent with all
other spring bear hunts
51
#12 to 20 - Weapon Restriction Proposals
Focus of proposals:• Easier to understand weapon restrictions
• Support efforts to recruit, retain and reactivate hunters
• Give hunters the opportunity to choose equipment based on performance and personal preference
• Allow hunters to tailor their setup to their individual requirements, abilities, and hunting situation
52
Weight of Big Game Mammals
SpeciesMale Weight
(pounds)Pronghorn 88-140
Cougar 117-220Mt. Goat 99-309
Deer 100-330Bighorn 128-315
Bear 200-500Elk 600-1100
53
#13 - Minimum Centerfire Caliber
Issues• Minimum .24 - bighorn sheep and mountain goat• Minimum .22 - bear, cougar, deer, and pronghorn• Similar sized species with different restrictions• Complexity to regulations• Lethal .22 options
Proposal• Reduce minimum to .22 centerfire for sheep and goat• Elk remain at .24 • Anticipate very little change in weapons used for these
species54
#13 - Western States Minimum Caliber
StateMin Centerfire
Caliber State Min Centerfire CaliberAlaska None Nevada .22
Arizona None New Mexico None
California None Utah None
Colorado .24 Washington .22 cougar, .24 all other
Idaho None Wyoming .22 pronghorn, deer.24 bear, elk, moose, sheep, goat
Montana None Oregon .22 pronghorn, deer, bear.24, elk, sheep, goat
55
#14 - Minimum Muzzleloader Caliber
Issues• Minimum .50 - bighorn sheep and mountain goat• Minimum .40 - bear, cougar, deer, and pronghorn• Similar sized species with different restrictions• Complexity to regulations• Lethal options below .50
Proposal• Reduce minimum to .40 for sheep and goat• Elk remain at .50 • Anticipate no change to weapons used for these species
56
#14 - Western States Minimum Caliber
StateMin Muzzleloader
Caliber StateMin Muzzleloader
CaliberAlaska .45 Nevada .45
Arizona None New Mexico None
California .40 Utah None
Colorado .40 deer, pronghorn, bear, sheep, goat.50 elk or moose, larger if round ball
Washington .40 deer, pronghorn, bear.50 elk, sheep, goat
Idaho .45 deer, pronghorn,cougar, wolf.50 elk, sheep, goat
Wyoming .40
Montana .45 Oregon .40 pronghorn, deer, bear.50 elk, sheep, goat
57
#15 to 17 – Muzzleloader Restrictions
Issues• One of the most commonly confused sections of regulations• Have some of the most complicated regulations in the
country• Regulate caliber, ignition type and source, powder type,
bullet type, size and material, material of patches and type of sights
Objective• Primitive, short-range weapon
Approach• Accomplish objective through the least regulation possible
58
#15 – Muzzleloader Ignition
Issues• “Open Ignition” confuses customers• Intent is to keep weapon primitive• Muzzleloaders are primitive – hand loading, single
shot, and other restrictions
Proposal• Eliminate requirement for open ignition
59
#16 – Muzzleloader Projectiles
Issues• Complex and confusing• Many bullets in Oregon stores are not legal• Intent is to limit the range by not allowing advanced
bullets• Limited options for non-lead hunting
Proposal• It is unlawful to hunt with or have in possession while
hunting, sabots, or bullets with plastic or synthetic parts
60
#17 – Muzzleloader Propellant
Issues• It is illegal to hunt with pelletized powders or propellants• Intent is to limit the range Range is limited by other regulations - no scopes, no centerfire
primer ignition and bullet restrictions Primary advantage of pelletized powder is when used with 209
primers and sabots which are illegal
Proposal• Eliminate requirement to use granulated powder
61
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
• Oregon is one of two states that prohibit their use• Quality and performance has changed drastically since 1991• Oregon bowhunters have been requesting to use this tool• Department did not make a recommendation in June• Staff recommendation is to allow mechanical broadheads• Summary of justification for this recommendation
62
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
• When compared to fixed blade broadheadsLarger cutting diameter, more lethal woundsLess drag in flight, increased arrow speedFlight performance closer to field point, increased accuracy
• Disadvantage, less penetration
• Hunters can mitigate with increased arrow weight and reduced shot distance
• Fixed broadheads generally recommended with low draw weight bows, however there are mechanical alternatives
• Considered ethical means of harvest by P&Y Club
63
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
• Request for science to inform decision
• Only modern study we are aware of comparing the two broadheads
• “A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Fixed Blade and Mechanical Broadheads” – Journal of the SEAFWAControlled archery deer harvest at naval facility in MarylandBowhunters recovery rates with compound bowsoFixed blade – 82% (79.5-84.3)oMechanical – 88.8% (83.0-92.8)
Significantly less wounded animals with mechanical broadheads
64
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
In absence of published studies rely on:
• Experience from other states
• Industry data on performance
• Professional judgement
65
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
Table of other western states – legal or NotWestern State Legal Western State Legal
Alaska Yes Nevada Yes
Arizona Yes New Mexico Yes
California Yes Utah Yes
Colorado Yes Washington Yes
Idaho No Wyoming Yes
Montana Yes Oregon No
66
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
• Peterson’s Bowhunting 2017 and 2018 broadhead tests
• Each year test 10-16 broadheads; alternate fixed and mechanical
• Relevant results comparing mechanical to fixed:53% increase in cutting diameter36% less drag 0.5” group vs. 1.75” group
67
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
Broadhead Penetration (inches)
Fixed 1 16.33
Fixed 2 12.33
Mechanical 1 16.66
Mechanical 2 19.5
Mechanical 3 18.66
Hybrid 1 14
Hybrid 2 13.5
• Jon Syversen Penetration Test
• 70 pound bow, 30” draw, 3 trials
• Ballistics gel covered by cow hide
68
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
Broadhead Penetration (inches)
Fixed 1 7.042
Fixed 2 6.083
Mechanical 1 7.083
Mechanical 2 7.833
Mechanical 3 6.167
Hybrid 1 5.042
Hybrid 2 5.833
• Jon Syversen Penetration Test
• 40 pound bow, 26” draw, 3 trials
• Ballistics gel covered by cow hide
69
#18 – Mechanical Broadheads
Conclusions:• Accuracy and lethality of archery equipment is
complicated and based on many variables
• Most important is shot placement, mechanical can be easier to shoot accurately
• Hunters need to select gear based on personal preference, equipment performance, individual abilities, species hunted, and the hunting situation
• Staff propose mechanical broadheads as a viable option for big game hunting in Oregon
70
#20 – Minimum Archery Draw Weight
Minimum Archery Draw Weight:
• 50 pound minimum draw weight for elk, sheep and goat; 40 for all other big game
• Different minimum draw weights complicate the regulations
• Barrier to entry for some youth and small framed hunters
• Restrictions adopted in 1955
• Speed of compound bows has more than doubled since 1955 however draw weight has stayed the same
• Oregon is an outlier among western states
71
#20 – Minimum Archery Draw Weight
State Min Draw (lbs.) State Min Draw (lbs.)
Alaska 40 deer, bear, sheep50 elk, goat
Nevada 40
Arizona 30, 40 for buffalo New Mexico None
California None Utah 30
Colorado 35 Washington 40
Idaho 40 Wyoming 40, 50 elk and moose
Montana None Oregon 40,50 elk, sheep, goat
72