UBA Wasatch Front Proposals?

P

Prism

Guest
I'm hearing lots of rumors about what UBA and the DWR invision for the near future of the extended hunt on the Wasatch Front.

Can anybody give us the scoop?

I'm hearing that archers are going to be required to harvest a doe if they want to hunt bucks later in the season. Is this true?

I know that the main reason for the hunt is to harvest so many animals from these areas, but is the front really that over run with deer that we want a higher doe harvest.

I've hunted the Wasatch plenty, and will say that I think the deer heard is healthy, but I'm not sure we should be killing a bunch of does just so guys can have a whack at a buck during the rut.
 
what is UBA?

and I am thinking that if everyone that I know hunts and whacks a doe each year, wont that basically cripple the population?

I mean I see a fair number of deer, but I dont think the population could handle the killing of that many does.

Maybe if we could kill some spikes and forked horns also in that with the taking of a doe maybe there would be some does left to carry on the genes.
 
Prism I will shoot you a copy of the proposals
when I get to work on monday.
The RAC heard the proposals at the last round of RACs and have asked the DWR and UBA to come up with a good solution to help out on the front.
 
UBA (Utah Bowman's Association) proposed:

-That the Wasatch will be either sex during the regular archery hunt. Then it will be Doe only until Oct 31. A hunter must harvest a doe by Oct 31 and have it checked by the DWR to be able to hunt the front from Nov 1-30.

-That the extended boundary be pushed south to Provo canyon.

-That every hunter who takes the Bow Ed course will receive a bonus point (? on which specie).

Anyway, the Biologist over the Front, (who is a great guy with an intimate knowledge of the area), pretty much dismissed the idea that the extended hunt is a "Management Tool". He said the deer herd is not that big and that harvesting doe in that manner may not be the best for the herd. He said that the extended hunt only goes to the 15th of Dec, so that if the herd needs to be managed there could be a gun hunt between the 16th-31st. Interesting points to ponder.

I think the recommendation is meant to eliminate Dedicated Hunters and Youth hunters from participating in the late season rut hunt. If the hunter must harvest their doe before the 31st of Oct then most Dedicated hunters and Youth will not do it, seeing the rifle hunt goes as late as the 31st. Also think of they guy from Loa, St George, or Logan who would have to travel to the front in an attempt to bag a doe. Wouldn't it be great to have 1,000s of hunters trying to shoot doe deer in Sept and Oct while those canyons are at their peak of use by the Non-Hunting public??

As for the bonus point idea... Is it fair that some guy who never will bow hunt has to go to a bow ed class to "earn" a point to stay in the race for a tag??

But UBA will get what they want, because they have the dedication and guts to go the RAC state their ideas.
 
Before you all jump the gun maybe you ought to check out the road kill data on US 89 between Weber Canyon and Bountiful - it runs about 300 deer a year. And if the DWR guy you speak of is Larry Davis I'd rather not hear his ideas for the hunt. The Wasatch Front hunt is a novelty, occasional big deer, and fairly easy access. the herds will never be big enough to sustain a viable trophy quality hunt. There's simply no winter habitat and what bit exists is cut off by US 89. Better to harvest those mulies that traditionally get nailed by automobiles than waste it.
 
Thanks for the posts.

I don't archery hunt as much as I use to, but I still carry the bow around a few days each year, I shoot my bow throughout the year. That being said, I'm a hunter that will hunt with rifle, muzzleloader or bow.

I've said it many times that dedicated hunters should be pulled from the extended hunt, and that it should be an unlimited draw hunt seperate from the other draws-would not affect bonus points, but it would be your only deer hunt for the year.

I think the idea that archers should get a bonus point for taking an archery hunter ed class is BOGUS! I guess if they can then only use that point towards an archery hunt it may make some sense.

I went out with kid tonight up Parleys and couldn't believe the amount of hunters-even w/o any snow. I did see a game warden which is the first I've ever seen on the extended hunt in 10 years of spending some time on it!

What's this about a rifle hunt??? Only in my wildest dreams could I imagine packing a rifle south of I80. I bet that tag could fetch some big $$$ at a banquet. I'd gladly take 10% of it for the trouble of selling it:)
 
The late management hunt would have been for doe. (You manage deer numbers by shooting doe, as all of us Arn-Chair biologists know.) The extended was put in place years ago, before there was Traverse Ridge, high bench developements, etc. so I doubt you'll ever see a rifle hunt there (maybe shotgun like they did 5 years ago).

No, the biologist isn't Larry. Larry is not a field biologist, rather he is a manager. I don't name people on the net, but the biologist over this area is one of the best, most respected Field Biologists in the UDWR. He is a great guy, great manager, great spokesman for Utah's wildlife.

There was talk of a bonus point being given OR giving limited entry tags for the Bow Ed grads to draw. So UBA is now trying to get some of the piece of the tag pie.

As for who can hunt the Wasatch and who can't... Either you make it a draw hunt like Prism mentioned or you leave it the way it is. I get fed up with the exclusion that so many hunters try to place on others to protect their turf.
 
Extending the hunt to Provo canyon would be a big mistake! No explanation needed.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
If the extended region is taken to the mouth of Provo Canyon, how far to the East would it go? As hard as it is to find any access along the front, I think it'd be just as hard or harder south of the point of the mountain. I can hear all the folks in happy valley screaming now. It be nice if the DWR could work out some arrangements with some landowners to allow access in certain areas, sadly I think that we'd (hunters) screw it up though.

As a past and likely future dedicated hunter, my idea to not allow dedicated hunters on the front would take me out of the hunt as well. I'm more concerned about the bad press the hunt has give ALL HUNTERS than my own chance to chase bucks around during the rut.

I think that kids under 18 should be able to hunt it, along with the others serious enough to draw it as their only hunt. I'm willing to bet that very few slob hunters would put in for it if it was a draw, and would be their only hunt!

Anybody have the exact numbers on how many hunters hit the front? Should be a fairly accurate count with the new "test" in place.
 
My input was very simple, if we are going to retain the WF options.

Break the WF into 3 area's; Parleys south to the south boundary, Parleys north to Weber Canyon, Weber Canyon North to the Sardine Canyon-north boundary.

Make it a general deer/elk draw for the archery WF sub-units. Restricted to ONLY hunting the WF sub-unit drawn (no Statewide hunting then WF) Hunt-Dates remain reasonable to current dates.

Mandatory Bow Education---PRIOR-- to application dates in January and ofcourse the WF Ethics course after draw results. Forget about some LE tag for taking the course.... take Bow Ed to apply for bow only LE hunts or the WF hunt. This has only folks that want to bow hunt take the Bow Ed. class not putting others in an un needed class for them to rifle or mzzldr hunt.

Change the 'bounded on the west' by I-15 to be bounded on the west by the National Forest boundary.

DH would have to select Northern Region as the region to hunt (no Statewide bow buck option) and take the Bow Ed. class.
 
Packout,
I agree completely that the extended archery hunt is not much of a management tool. If thinning the city deer is the objective, it fails miserably. First, of all you can't shoot the deer in the city. Some do and its hell on hunter/homeowner relations. The deer that stay in the hills where they are "supposed to be" are the hunted. Second, there is enormous amount of pressure on the herd for 4 months. The deer don't let down their guard from opening day until the snow comes - even the does are more weary than. Third, few hunters are concerned with just filling a tag and getting out - which is crucial to an effective depredation hunt. There are a lot of people that hunt & hunt & hunt & hunt....

If they really want it to be a "management tool." It should be anterless only for a shorter amount of time. They should also give out more any weapon anterless tags durning the rifle deer hunt.
 
I have noted my opinions at the RAC meetings for the last time, and unless you have 100,000 names on a petition, good luck getting your voice heard.

I have recommended having the WF put into a limited entry archery only. Meaning you would have to burn some deer bonus points. Limit the numbers as so you would have a fighting chance at getting on a big buck before 1/2 the slc population blows your stalk. If antlerless deer need to be harvested, have an entlerless doe deer hunt with a rifle south of I80, just as they do for cow elk.

PS--Bringing back the NOV muzzleloader deer hunt would be a miracle in itself.

snowman
 
Contrary to popular opinion the WF extended archery hunt is not a trophy hunt. It has become that way because it has not been gun hunted for many years and bowhunters plain do not have the same amount of success as rifle hunters. This is a population control hunt (which all hunts are) in an area where rifle hunting is not considered a safe method of take because of close proximity to homes, buildings, trails, roads, etc. Even with the large amounts of pressure, and long seasons, the herd is doing so well that more deer need to be taken to keep the population in check and to try to keep you "I want to live in the mountains" east siders from bouncing your SUV's off of deer that are in the street.
Making this hunt a Limited entry hunt defeats the entire purpose of the hunt.
Because of this I think earning a buck tag by shooting a doe would be a great thing (UBA proposal). It would still allow everyone willing a chance to hunt those awesome bucks that are there, and would give some serious incentive to shoot does to better control the population.
I for one am tired of sitting at home on my ass waiting for 15 years to draw a tag before I can go hunting. The last thing we need is one more hunt that requires that. We've got plenty of those already with our LE elk hunts. Let's leave this one alone!!

If you like waiting around for your name to be drawn why don't you do us all a favor and start buying lottery tickets instead of putting in for hunts.
 
there is no way that it could be hunted with a rifle or at that a muzzle loader its a little to close to house and buildings and as far as dedicated hunters hunting it its there choice they have every right to hunt it as much as you do and the whole shooting a doe before you can hunt buck WOW i dont see that happening
 
>Because of this I think earning
>a buck tag by shooting
>a doe would be a
>great thing (UBA proposal).
>It would still allow everyone
>willing a chance to hunt
>those awesome bucks that are
>there, and would give some
>serious incentive to shoot does
>to better control the population.


If we have enough deer in that area to let people shoot TWO deer per year, when the rest of the state is now going 1 in 2 odds to hunt general, I THINK WE SHOULD TRAP AND RELOCATE DEER TO AREAS WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED.

Shooting two deer per year in Utah just isnt needed right now when others are only able to get a *single* deer tag every 2 years or more.


-DallanC
 
Dallan,

Anyone that really wants a deer tag in Utah can get one each and every year. Sure, if they wait too long to buy that rifle tag they might miss out, but does a guy that waits until the night before the hunt to buy his tag really want one????

The point is, archery hunting has been determined as the only safe way to hunt the wasatch front deer and even with all the hunters on that unit, and all the time they have to hunt they are not shooting enough deer according to the DWR (who, although they may not know as much as they should, or could, definately know more than you or I about how many deer there actually are). So, they are looking for ways to encourage or allow hunters that are willing to hunt on that unit to take more deer, especially does, and the proposed plan should work.

If it goes through, you can get two tags just like anyone else. Just get yourself a bow, and go to it. It's not unfair to Southern unit rifle hunters, its simply a way to entice hunters to pick up a bow and use it to help manage a particular herd of deer that have some special needs. It's ridiculous to say that if extended unit bow hunters get two tags then southern unit rifle hunters should too. The two areas are completely different, with completely different needs.
 
>Dallan,
>
>Anyone that really wants a deer
>tag in Utah can get
>one each and every year.
> Sure, if they wait
>too long to buy that
>rifle tag they might miss
>out, but does a guy
>that waits until the night
>before the hunt to buy
>his tag really want one????

What are you talking about? Utah general tags are Draw only. The central region which I hunt is now 1 in 1.9 odds to draw. I want a deer tag every year but in 2004 I failed to draw. My wife failed to draw this year. Its an every other year thing to hunt my area with my weapon of choice... now that hunters are failing to draw in their areas, more and more are now putting in that "2nd" choice in other units like NE and I dont think it will be very long at all until there are no left over tags after the draw in any unit. Was there a single tag of any big game species that didnt sell out this year? I dont think so... so we have more people who wanted tags than got tags.


>The point is, archery hunting has
>been determined as the only
>safe way to hunt the
>wasatch front deer and even
>with all the hunters on
>that unit, and all the
>time they have to hunt
>they are not shooting enough
>deer according to the DWR
>(who, although they may not
>know as much as they
>should, or could, definately know
>more than you or I
>about how many deer there
>actually are). So, they
>are looking for ways to
>encourage or allow hunters that
>are willing to hunt on
>that unit to take more
>deer, especially does, and the
>proposed plan should work.

That is what I find ironic and sad. If they have such an overabundance of deer there I say trap'em and move'em to areas that are struggling to recover. If nothing else a fresh influx of new genetics couldnt hurt.


>If it goes through, you can
>get two tags just like
>anyone else. Just get
>yourself a bow, and go
>to it. It's not
>unfair to Southern unit rifle
>hunters, its simply a way

Yes it is because the same people hunting the Extended can also be hunting Southern.

>to entice hunters to pick
>up a bow and use
>it to help manage a
>particular herd of deer that
>have some special needs.
>It's ridiculous to say that
>if extended unit bow hunters
>get two tags then southern
>unit rifle hunters should too.
> The two areas are
>completely different, with completely different
>needs.

Dont try to change what I said...I never argued any group should be able to kill 2 deer, I said if they think we have so many deer in a single unit to allow harvesting of two animals then instead of killing them we should trap and move them to struggling units.


-DallanC
 
bigsd,
Where are you talking about too many houses to hunt with a rifle? The north side of Parleys Canyon is in the rifle area - and heavily hunted with bows, muzzleloaders, and rifles. Emigration Canyon is also in the rifle area if you can find a spot 1 mile from a house - & it has a lot more homes than Mill Creek or Lambs Canyon which are in the archery only area.
 
headgear,
There isn't a better concentration of huntable big bucks than the Wasatch after a big snow storm. Ask anyone that hunted after Thanksgiving in 2001. That's the year they shut it down early.
 
"The point is, archery hunting has been determined as the only safe way to hunt the wasatch front deer and even with all the hunters on that unit, and all the time they have to hunt they are not shooting enough deer according to the DWR (who, although they may not know as much as they should, or could, definately know more than you or I about how many deer there actually are). So, they are looking for ways to encourage or allow hunters that are willing to hunt on that unit to take more deer, especially does, and the proposed plan should work."

The biologist over this area said the exact opposite of what is stated above. Archers are not controling this deer herd, cars are. He has said that this deer herd is not in need of a major reduction of numbers. He stated that there is no real reason to take more doe off the Front and that archers are not an effective tool to manage the herd.

Who decided that "archery hunting has been determined as the only safe way to hunt the wasatch front deer"? Just 5 years ago we had a shotgun hunt for deer on that unit. It could occur again.

Wouldn't it be nice if the DWR used dedicated hunters to assist in trapping and moving surplus deer to areas where herds are way down. I wouldn't care if half of the deer died during transport as long as the other half lived.

This is an attempt to exclude dedicated hunters and youth hunters from hunting the Front after Nov 1. Nothing more than a "protect your turf" attitude. Unfortunately it will exclude more than just dedicated hunters and youth. It excludes NonResident archers, resident archers who live Off the Front, and the archer who can't afford to hunt until he kills a doe.
 
see thats what im saying is the really only safe way to hunt the wf is with a bow there is just to many roads houses buildings etc to be hunted with a rifle or at that a muzzle loader
 
I can see this spiraling out of control pretty
fast and have debated even replying.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID23/822.html

The above link was posted on Oct 6th at 1:00PM. It was an open invitation for everyone to attend the meeting where these proposals were discussed and either accepted or rejected.

The only proposals that came from Bowhunters were for the southern expansion to Provo Canyon, Bowhunter Education,
and the once in a lifetime archery tags. These are proposals we have asked for for the last five years at the RACs without getting.

Every other proposal came from another source and was presented by UBA because it dealt with Bowhunting but did not come from UBA. Yeah we discussed the idea's and accepted them but the group in attendance at the meeting did not come to the table with the doe proposal or the boundary change moving the boundary for the Wasatch Front extended area farther east from where it is now at I-15. Read into this what you will.

These proposals were not meant to exclude any hunter from hunting the Wasatch Front Extended Area. If anyone could tell me how to exclude the slob hunters that got the hunt shut down in 2001 I would promise you I would live at the Legislature in February untill this became law.

I would suggest that those concerned about problem deer speak with the people that deal with the problem deer day in and day out, not the person that translates an aerial survey every spring or tallies check station harvest stats, But the men and women that clean up road kill from foothill blvd or Parleys canyon or deal with home owners in Draper because the trees in the neighborhood don't have any branches below three feet, they are just twigs, or the frantic mother in Alpine that has cougars in her kids playground in February because they have followed the deer down the mountain.

These proposal were meant to help handle issues that are pertinent at this time, this is not an attempt by bowhunters trying to get over on anyone. We as a group are simply trying to help solve issues presented to us as well as we can.
 
> or deal with
>home owners in Draper because
>the trees in the neighborhood
>don't have any branches below
>three feet, they are just
>twigs, or the frantic mother
>in Alpine that has cougars
>in her kids playground in
>February because they have followed
>the deer down the mountain.

To these people I say tough crap, they build homes in the deers natural habitat, they should take on the responsibility much like those who build homes in areas known to flood or have slides etc etc. When the developers get subdivision approval there should be releases enforced or easments that state the owner has to deal with these issues himself.
 
"This is an attempt to exclude dedicated hunters and youth hunters from hunting the Front after Nov 1. Nothing more than a "protect your turf" attitude. Unfortunately it will exclude more than just dedicated hunters and youth. It excludes NonResident archers, resident archers who live Off the Front, and the archer who can't afford to hunt until he kills a doe."


You made a couple of very good points in the above quote, Packout. I had not thought about the fact that this would exclude some people. Interesting??

I don't think however that the idea was to exclude the Dedicated hunters or youth. The idea is to try and make the hunt accomplish the desired task of properly managing the herd numbers. Obviously there is no perfect solution.

I don't know which biologist you were talking to but I would sure like to know who it was and when, and where he made those statements. It's not anything that I've ever heard, and I would say that if those things are true the hunt would have already been long done away with. The herd needs to be managed, more does need to be taken than are currently being taken and so they are looking at ways to encourage hunters to do it. No one is talking about taking huge numbers of animals. We're talking about ways to turn the focus from shooting only trophy bucks and letting does walk to actually harvesting a few does.

The shotgun hunt obviously didn't work. It didn't last long anyway. I couldn't tell you why for sure, but I have an idea.

Transplanting deer is a great idea, I agree, but I'm certain there are reasons that it cannot or has not been done (cost, logistics, man power, etc.) Don't forget, we're not talking about shooting alot more deer, only changing which deer we shoot, bucks or does.

All I have said is, of course according to my understanding. I don't pretend to have all the answers, and I certainly could be wrong. Just my thoughts.
 
Dallan unfortunately hunters only make up 10%
of society. So you and I do get it. The other 10% being anti hunters with the 80% majority that really don't mind hunting one way or the other but want to be able to see the bulbs they planted in the fall survive to be more than an inch or two tall in the spring are the people we need to reach out to, not disillusion.
Hunting and wildlife is unfortunately not the top of their priorities. The deer they run over, the cougars that have mothers shi%%$#@ their pants and expensive landscape going away is the top of the list. We as a group are trying to help with solving these problems
 
I don't understand the argument made by several people that the only hunters who are able to enjoy the wasatch front are people who live nearby. The WF extended area can be reached in a few hours from 95% of the state. I am sure most of you drive a fair distance to hunt, so why can't those who live a ways out drive up to the front? I know my family has driven several hours to hunt forever.

The distance argument seems a little weak to me.
 
I am a dedicated hunter and like to hunt the W.F. extended area. I am not able to rible hunt only 1-2 days if I am lucky. I Don't have a muzzloader, so when ever possible, I try to get out for a morning on the w.f. I usually get out 2 times some years 3 times. I think that it should all stay the same. KEEP IT THE WAY IT HAS BEEN FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS!!!
 
I am also not saying that I have the answer to this dilema. I am just putting together a lot of facts and statements that have been made over the past couple years.

Wiley Wapiti is dead wrong. UBA proposals have been stated on the Web for all to see for a couple weeks now. Part of that proposal, the first bulletin point, is the "Take a Doe first" idea. The UBA Reps stated this idea before any other idea in their RAC presentations. To say that the idea is not backed by UBA is 100% false.

I said before that I won't name a biologist on the web, but you can call the Springville or Salt Lake offices to find his number and talk with him. He made his statments when asked the DWR's position on the UBA (yes UBA) proposal. Argue all you guys want, but the numbers show he is right. Who will do the leg work to find out? Or you could just get the minutes from the Central RAC.

Now to claim that bowhunters will aleviate any landscape damage or keep the cougars off Mary's lawn is just not right. I have been in the meetings where "Mary" claims a cougar will kill her kids, but she is dead set against having a camo clad bowhunter shooting the deer in her backyard.

I don't have all the answers either, but the steps proposed by UBA (yes, UBA) are meant to exclude other hunters. I wish the world were perfect and we could stop all slob hunters, but it never will be.

Here is what I feel could be done to curb (not eliminate) the problem hunters on the Front: Bow Ed. Mandatory Bow Ed certificate must be presented at any regional UDWR to receive a permit(+ $5 handing fee) to hunt the Front. Any archery tag holder, youth hunter, or dedicated hunter who takes the course, presents the certificate, and pays the $5 handling fee can hunt the Front.
 
I have to agree with leaving it the same. I have hunted every year of the extended hunt since 93 when they introduced this hunt. What is the problem? Some times deer get hit and run through someones backyard. Dont buy a house in the deers wintering grounds. The problem here is we are so close to the city when a deer runs through the city with an arrow stuck in him, the news gets a hold of it and every one thinks the worst. Lets say for instance the news could get a hold of half of the stuff that goes on during other hunts! Im not trying to bash on other hunters, or anyone for that matter but things do happen.

Im not sure on the killing of a doe before Oct.31 would do any good. How is the DWR going to go out and check every single person on the hill if they have shot a doe or not. I have yet to be checked in the last 13 years on the front. That may introduce a new set of problems.

Just a thought but what if you could only hunt certain days of the week? Maybe for the first week of November no hunting? I dont know the answer but I sure love hunting 10 minutes from my house and having the chance of killing a quality buck on a general tag.

Dustin
www.wasatchfrontmuleys.com

437a71a76a94a1ce.jpg
 
Packout no kidding the proposals have been posted for a while
the meeting was around the middle of October.

UBA presented these proposals BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DO WITH BOWHUNTING. THEY DID NOT BRING THE DOE FIRST THING TO THE TABLE IT CAME FROM THE DWR AND THE UBA RAC REPS READ IT AT THE RACS.

Do you understand??? As a group the people at the meeting decided to work with the DWR to solve a problem but this was not a UBA idea. I don't know how to be more plain or to say it
any clearer. Just like moving the boundary from I-15 farther east it was brought to the table by the division and we agreed to it and presented it at the RACs for them and gave it the support from the bowhunting comunity.
 
No, I do not understand. On Bowsite, Cliffe published the reccommendations that came out of the UBA meeting. First and fore most , bullet #1, is the Doe Proposal. Then when the UBA rep talked at the RACs, the Doe proposal was the first item put on the table. The item was pushed at the RACs by UBA. Not the DWR.

If the DWR really wants it as you claim then why did their head biologist over the area say the DWR did NOT need the Doe proposal to manage the herd? Why would the DWR not put it in as a proposal in their Management Plan? Why did the DWR include the Boundary Change in their 2006 Management Plan (which you say is UBA's idea), but not include the Doe Proposal (which you say is the DWR's idea)? So, NO, I really don't understand.

It sounds like when SFW WY said they don't really support the guides getting tags, yet they spoke for it in public meetings.

John Kerry "I first voted against it, before I voted for it."

I am a bow hunter. Am I part of the bow hunting community which UBA represents? We are all hunters so does SFW represent all of us?

You definately have me confused. I respect your views, but I just don't like this idea. I can stomach some of the other proposals, except for the limited entry tag idea.
 
Packout both of the things you mentioned were DWR Idea's
weather you choose to believe this or not UBA only presented the idea's or proposals for the DWR at the RACs.

Like I mentioned above the biologist's don't spend every day in the field like other division employee's do. Perhaps one side of the Division doesn't know what the other is doing or wants to get accomplished. In plain terms the DWR people that deal with this situation daily were for taking some doe's, and right now bowhunters are not doing this, and yeah I am as guilty as anyone
in not shooting doe's but waiting for a good buck( and believe me it's been one heck of a long wait )

Please know that we as a group had no intention of excluding anyone from this great opportunity or trying to shoot ourselves out of deer in one year, It makes know sense to kill the golden goose.

Now bear with me on the LTD entry tag thing. To help with the irresponsible behavior that has occured it is common sense that an educated person in any aspect of life is more effecient more responsible and more successful than someone flying by the seat of their pants. Speaking for only myself I have pushed for years trying to have a mandatory Bowhunter Education requirement to be able to hunt the Wasatch Front. Well to accomplish this task you need to have instructors to teach the students, You need to give everyone interested in hunting this area a fair chance to take the class in one year so nobody is excluded. To get this requirement done it must go before the legislature, the DWR has very little if anything to do with this untill this requirement becomes a law. Well it is going to take a few years to get the instructors in place to handle the amount of students that will probably want to take this class to hunt the Front, and it will take some planning to handle the logistics of training students statewide. As a group we looked for a way to incent people to
take the class without going with a full blown requirement.
the LTD Entry tag idea seemed like a good place to start, I can guarantee it won't be hundreds of tags like you are probably imagining the numbers would probably be 10 or less and would be for archery hunts such as archery only moose or archery only elk tags. I see your point of view why should bowhunters get something like this, Well if you have a moose tearing up the canyons near Brighton ski resort I would personally feel better knowing a Bowhunter Education Graduate is going to be up there making a clean humane kill and has the ability of dealing with the residents in the area. Other than being for Bowhunter Education Grads only this should effect you in no way. these tags would come from the archery pool of tags not any weapon.

If I as a Bowhunter Education instructor can help one person not act irresponsibly while in the field it will not only reflect on Bowhunters but all hunters in general. The hiker that comes running through your set up will probably think a lot more of the hunter that say's hello good morning instead of hearing " HEY DUMBA@# ARE YOU BLIND GET THE f&*% OUT OF HERE"

Just know that we are trying to make things better and we are not out to screw or exclude anyone from anything
 

Similar threads

M
JCR, statistics, counts, objectives and harvest reports
Replies
33
Views
2k
mightyhunter
M
C
Wasatch thoughts
2
Replies
193
Views
5k
elkassassin
elkassassin
V
Looking for a great mule deer unit in Colorado for youth (my son) with 5 points (last year as a youth)
Replies
4
Views
1k
VWiddi1
V

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Screenshot_20231001_143846_Gallery.jpg
C2F6ECC0-4383-4653-A440-94BB02ADD3FB.jpeg
Screenshot_20201006-091138_Gallery.jpg
IMG_8383.JPG
44376.jpeg
44375.jpeg
Bull_04b.jpg
BE945F13-6611-48AB-AB17-745B590D2791.jpeg
IMG_0772.JPEG
DDF4B6C2-0FF2-4016-A8B3-A6A64237A6B7.jpeg
3010C766-F9D1-437E-8D5F-06AFFC828D63.jpeg
IMG_4743.JPG
Back
Top Bottom