Utah's wasted resource?

[fishon]

What a great story the Henry Mtn deer herd is. Nearly 45 bucks per 100 does. A 244" monster shot on the unit last year. So many bucks that some of them are dying of old age. Uncrowded hunts since there is only 24 permits a year given. 13 rifle 5 archery 5 muzzleloader 1 Non resident. 3,123 applicants for 24 permits.

Is this really a great story or is this a wasted resource. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on the Henry Mtn deer herd and 24 people get to enjoy it.

I ask you, is this worth it? At one time this was an open unit that many of family and friends enjoyed and now it is only a sliver of that.

Sure Utah can brag about how great the deer are, but how many people relly enjoy it? Better yet how many will ever hunt it? As it currently sits it would take 136 years for everyone that applied last year to draw, and that is only if no new people put in. So for all of you that have max bonus points you will draw it sometime in your life. For the rest of you I suggest you by a lottery ticket.

The only other option is attend you rac meeting this month and demand more opportunity on the Henry Mtn deer unit. The DWR is proposing a modest 5 permit increase, in other words 2 more for max point holders and then 3 for everyone. That won't cut it as far as I am concerned.

I would like to see the permits go to 35 minimum this year and perferably 40. Lets see how the Mtn can handle it. We know that deer are dying of old age on that Mtn and we know that 3,100 of you won't draw a tag there this year. I suggest we hunt more deer.

What are your thoughts?

tony abbott

 

[bobcatbess]

fishon!!!

I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME NUMBERS,LIKE ACTUAL SIZE OF THE ENTIRE HERD???

THE LAST COUNT I HEARD WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO,ACCORDING TO THE COUNT THAT IS ONE SMALL HERD ALLTOGETHER???

THERE ARE VERY FEW TROPHY'S IN UTAH DIEING OF OLD AGE,I DO KNOW THAT!!!

I'M NOT SAYING IT DON'T HAPPEN,WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT'S DAMN RARE!!!

HOPEFULLY THE DWR HASN'T BRAIN WASHED YOU???

HOPEFULLY THIS ISN'T TO PUT MORE MONEY IN SOMEBODIES REAR POCKET???

THE ONLY bobcat NOT BUYING ALL THESE OLD AGE ANIMALS DIEING OFF,SORRY!!!

 

[Prism]

Great post Tony!

With all of the money that's been spent down there, you better believe that I think the average joe hunter should have a better shot at hunting it.

That's part of the conservation tag equation that irks me. Much of the money is spent on units and projects that the average guy will never get to enjoy, while the guys that can afford to purchase the tags hunt the unit year after year.

That being said, my dream would be for every unit in Utah to have buck to doe ratios like that. There are second choice units in Colorado that are near those numbers and they produce just as big of bucks as the Henries.

If Utah had more than 3 great deer units it would spread the guys with the points and take some of the application pressure off of the Henries, Pauns, and Book Cliffs.

I understand that building up units to those ratios require sacrifice and better management than 99% of the state is now receiving.

 

[Foreman4x4]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-06-06 AT 09:03PM (MST)[p]I don't know much about the Henry's other than there's some whopper bucks down there, but I'd have to see some real numbers before I could make any kind of judgement about increasing tag numbers, harvest objectives, etc. One other thing to consider, I'll bet there's as many deer poached on the Henry's every year as there are killed legally, so that's something that has to be taken in to consideration.

My general thoughts are, I'd like to see the DWR start managing the whole state more for quality than quantity. I love to hunt deer as much as the next guy, but I'd be willing to only hunt every second or third year if I knew I had a better chance at a quality buck. I know there's guys who are thrilled to take a young/small buck, and there's nothing wrong with that, but I'm all for quality over quantity. Other states do it successfully, so why can't Utah?......

 

[Roy]

That doesn't sound like a wasted resource to me, rather an un-exploited one. I personally don't think it is a bad thing that bucks are dying of old age. I wish the Book Cliffs were more like that. I know there are a lot of people willing to pay good money to hunt, and a lot of people waiting to hunt good areas, but I would rather err on the side of caution than open every great deer and elk area up to a flood of hunters who don't care if the hunting is any better or worse even two years down the road. That is exactly what happened to the Bookcliffs in the 80's and why it is just now becoming a premium area again. If money becomes our only concern then why not privatize the whole state and make it like Texas where landowners determine the price of the quality of animal hunted so only he who pays like the big cats harvests like one too! Just my little opinion.

ROY

 

[ColoradoOak]

Maybe the DWR can double the licenses in the Henrys, auction the additional 24 licenses to rich guys to raise more money to improve habitat in the Henrys so they can increase license numbers and auction off more licenses to rich guys so they can raise more......

 

[pinenut]

I think you are on to something CO Oak.

Perhaps the Henry's could take a few more buck tags. Give em to the public though and please Tony stop the conservation tag program...you have to realize who the program is benefitting and who it is hurting dont you?

A lot of people are very turned off by the whole concept...myself included and the quantity sold is getting way too far out of hand.

Oh and one more thing...please work to end the Sportsmans and statewide auction hunts something like November 15th...no buck or bull or ram or whatever deserves to take a bullet the last week of December completely vulnerable on its winter range.

IMO

-RPinenut

 

[B_F_E]

Tony I think it's kind of sad that we have one area that really shows whats possible & you would like to experiment with it, possibly threatening it in the same manner thats happened to every other limited entry deer unit in the state, most recently the Pausagaunt. In my opinion its a Marxist approach your taking on this one & I disagree with that type of reasoning.

Now if you really would like to use some resources that are verified as being wasted, try putting something together for opportunities on Antelope Island.

 

[Founder]

I agree with you Tony. I think there should be more tags available down there. I think 40 is a safe number to maintain top quality and offer more opportunity.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com

 

[fishon]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-06 AT 09:30AM (MST)[p]I appreciate all the comments. As you, I agree with some and disagree with others. My point to the DWR last week was simple, They said they had a project on the Henry Mtns that they would like to know if MDF would fund it. It was about $30,000. I told them that MDF would love to help if we thought that some of our members might have a chance of drawing the permit.

This is what has sparked this post. Should MDF dump $30,000 into a place that almost noone will ever hunt or should we do it into a place that many of us will hunt?

Should there be more permits to justify the dollars that have been spent there? I simply would like to know what is the best bang for our buck, and should we spend money that benefits a few or should we spend money that benefits alot.

tony

 

[TopWater225]

I agree as well that the unit could support more tags for the limited draw. But, without knowing all of the exact numbers, I could not even guess on how many more. The problem with this post is that most people read thru the lines, including myself. I know that there are individuals and groups that want to increase the number of tags for $$$$ only, and I would rather have the unit under utilized than make it more available to only the wealthy.

 

[utrednek]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-06 AT 09:46AM (MST)[p]Tony--

Your answer is simple--keep with the goals and objectives of MDF. I don't recall any that state we want to have more permits for our membership to hunt.

MDF is about conservation of the species and habitat period. While I agree that there could and ought to be a few more like twice the number of permits given, I don't think your personal opinion should get in the way of funding a project that will protect and conserve mule deer on the mtn.

Shawn

 

[Daxter]

According to a pretty extensive data set collected from limited hunting units and large private ranches the average B&C score of harvest mule deer is very strongly correlated to the percent of bucks that you are shooting each year (R Square > 0.9). To average 200" B&C you can only harvest 1% of your bucks each year. If you want to average 160" B&C you can harvest something like 10%. If hunters want to shoot 200" deer you can't shoot very many. If you have more tags there will still probably be a few 200"ers, but there will be a handful of guys that shoot 150 bucks too.

My personal opinion is that Utah doens't allow enough hunting of elk in most LE units, and that they could harvest more bucks on the Henries. One would have to see the latest pop esitmates and buck to doe ratios to determine a number though. I wish that there were more middle ground hunting opportunities in Utah. It seems like most of the seasons are Heaven or Hell. You wait for 10+ years and you get hunting Heaven, or you hunt a general tag and it is hunting Hell. I think it would be nice to have more areas that a guy could draw every 2-5 years and have a chance at a nice animal if he worked hard. I also think that the bulk of Conservation Tag dollars and other monies that come from Conservation Orgs should go to benefit the general season units to improve opportunity for average joe hunter. Just my two cents though. Good debate.

 

[fishon]

Shawn

You are exactly right, I might of used a wrong word when I said our members, it should of been the public. So the question now is does MDF get better results by treating and enhancing an area that very few will benefit from or do we treat an area that many benefit from?

tony

 

[ColoradoOak]

I didn't realize that the MDF was about hunters. I thought it was about mule deer. I think the MDF would do well to stay out of hunting issues, period.

I'm probably one of the most avid hunters you don't know, and I will drop my membership immediately if I think the MDF has become a group that will support only those projects that benefit hunters with increased opportunities. It's not about hunters, it's about protecting and enhancing habitat for mule deer. The MDF better be very careful about how it chooses to promote itself. I'm sure there are some very short-sighted people that disagree with this stance, but the alternative runs a high risk of being corrupted by big money.

A MDF member for now,
Colorado Oak

 

[Hunterted]

I agree with Tony,

That unit used to be an open unit and large bucks were still taken. I remember in the nintys when some guys who had never hunted the Henrys would go down on a wim and get a nice buck.

The goal for the UDWR should be to get the deer herd to a level where they could give out several hundred permits. If they are going to keep it very restricted, then they should auction the tags off to the highest bidder and use the unit as a revenue generator.

 

[Silentstalker]

Tony,

I agree with you and would support an increase on the Henrys. I believe as with our elk that this state is too conservative. My only objection with increasing permit numbers is it means you and the other groups will take more permits from the public to auction off to your buddies and outfitters for the highest price with no waiting periods or loss of bonus points. I also think that the $30,000 you might spend on the Henry's might benefit mule deer in other places in utah where the herds are struggling. My vote would be to raise permits to 40, spend the $30,000 on a general area in bad shape, and resolve to cut conservation permits on elk and deer by 50% minimum. I believe if you were concerned about the general public hunter you would not be a part of the ever increasing conservation tags, you would fight to get them back into check. Thanks for all the good you do and for actually asking us what we think. You guy's do a lot of good.

Chad

 

[tooele]

I'll tell you how to make it easier to draw on the henry's. Divide the state into smaller units. Manage every unit as though it were a limited entry hunt. With a low number of hunters per unit. All of a sudden we have a lot of excellent units with big bucks, less hunters, the average Joe hunts once every seven years or so, but gets a whopper. The years he doesn't hunt, he can camp, fish and take beautiful photos of monster muleys. Then the pressure would be off of the henry's and the paunsagaunt for that matter.

T

 

[utrednek]

Tony--you still do what is right for the resource right?

The quesiton you and MDF have to ask yourselves and your people is this..Could the same amount of money be spent some where else where more of the 'public' gets to hunt, probably so. Is it better for us to spend the money in a high profile area to toot our horn or in a less high profile area and still toot our horn. More people know about the Heneries MDF wide than know about some little pidly mountain range in NW Utah or NV. It is my understanding that this is why MDF has or at least use to have a TACs and proposals process where these things were all evaulated to get the best bang for the MDF buck.
Are you and the board the only one who decides these kind of things now this now or is something like this still in place?

Shawn

 

[utrednek]

Great idea T. this was presented by the UDWR at the RAC and Board meetings a few years ago and it was that one orgaization that Tony use to be employed by that shot it down. If we are going to ever have quality deer herds again, this is what must be done period!

Shawn

 

[ktg]

I don't know what the answer is but I've been pondering the point situation in many states. As it stands, I'll probably draw a half dozen premium tags in my lifetime in the 6 states I apply for and one of them most likely won't be a Henry's deer tag. My kids will probably draw half that many. Soon, the odds will favor 1 or 2 tags in a lifetime on the premium units. Like I read on another thread, if you don't have more than 10 points for CO unit 10 elk, you'll die before you draw. I'm thinking that premium areas may not be the answer. Perhaps we should manage the whole state for the same quality, say a ratio of 25:100 and let residents hunt every 2 or 3 years. Leave the premium hunts to the other states. I guess I'm just bummed that the UNSUCESSFULLs have started again.

 

[ktc]

Just when I thought I had seen it all this shows up.

Geez Fish-On, why is your MDF intinerary to fix everything that is not broken? I am going to let you in on a little secret that no one but a few know about. 3000+ people applied for the Henries to have a chance at one of those monster bucks. They are not addicted to the beauty of the Henries, they are after the big bucks.

I have a little piece of advice Fish-On. You have 5 areas in the state for mule deer. 97,000 permits spread out in these five units. Do you think making a 10% difference in deer numbers, permits, and quality would be a better bet to make a lot of people happy than focusing on 20 permits where nothing is broken? I honestly think this is the arena I would get involved in. Vernon and Oak Creek seem to be struggling. Maybe some help there would be nice?

My Henry Mountain example on the Elk Number Thread was only a sarcastic joke. I hope I did not give you any ideas.

 

[DallanC]

Perhaps they need to make it so you either apply for a General or LT Entry deer tag but not both... or conversely, make the entire state Lt Entry with smaller sub units. It would certainly reduce the load on certain current LE's.


-DallanC

 

[ktg]

>Perhaps they need to make it
>so you either apply for
>a General or LT Entry
>deer tag but not both...
>or conversely, make the entire
>state Lt Entry with smaller
>sub units. It would certainly
>reduce the load on certain
>current LE's.
>
>
>-DallanC



+1

 

[Founder]

If you ask me, the $30,000 is better spent elsewhere.

However, if you dump money into the Henry's, then everytime a big deer is killed there you can say, "We helped make that happen". It's a nice promotional tool, but doesn't serve the interest of most Utah MDF members.

I think the money is better spent in areas that more people hunt. Maybe another limited entry unit.???
If I were to vote at a board meeting, I would vote to spend the money in another area of the state. Enough has been dumped into the Henry mtns. Let's work on other areas now.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com

 

[nvmuley]

I think the conservation of mule deer and hunting go hand in hand. Are not most MDF members hunters? Their "reward" should be more deer and increased quality hunting opportunity. 45 bucks per hundred does is a pretty high ratio. Some quality Co units were over 50/100 last year and they upped quotas to bring it down some. 35/100 seems to produce a lot of older class bucks and seems to be a worthy target. Wouldn't that be awesome to have in the general units.

----------------------------------------
Measure wealth by the things you have,, for which you would not take money.

 

[Elksnuffer]

Tony,

would you please enlighten all of us,on the expenditures the MDF has put forth on the Henry's in the last,say 5years??

All of the projects,MDF's cooperation(percent),the future plans to improve the deer herd/habitat/hunting quality,etc???

Please also elighten us on the funds raised with the conservation permits both unit specific/statewide(dollars)???

Please let us know that your increase in permit's,is not setting the stage for a run to secure moore conservation permit's???

One other question that I feel needs to be answered is eventhough the buck/doe ratio is high why is there so few does???
Wouldn't that skew the basis of having the ratio????

Idea!!
Let's take some of that 156K that you guy's raised and use it for a deer transplant(does) to the Henry's.
Instead of offering quite as many doe permit's statewide???
Eventhough the DWR does not like to do that,It has worked in the past.

I feel that would be a pro-active approach to correcting our low deer number problem in Utah.
Quit shooting does and start transplanting them!!!!


Just some food for thought,
Thanx,
Snuffer

 

[Dahlmer]

Tony,

Spend the money where the public is most likely to benefit from it. I'm of the belief that most of the LE units are being managed very well and already get the majority of the funding. I would personally like to see more money dedicated to improving the the general season areas where I can at least reep the benefit every couple of years. I'm not even going to waste my time putting in for the Henry's...what's the point unless I'm just looking to bank a few bonus points.

 

[Packout]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-06 AT 05:06PM (MST)[p]To get more permits you need to change the current management plan of the unit. The current plan calls for an average age of bucks harvested to be 5 years old. The average age has hovered between 4.2 and 4.8 for the past few years. The DWR CAN NOT raise permits unless the management objective is met or you change the objective.

I personally feel that the objective age of 5 years is TOO OLD. Look at the pigs that are harvested from the unit and it averages less than 5 years of age. WHo here is going to pass on a 210 4 year old buck to shoot a 180 6 year old buck. THAT is the problem with most of these "Age Objectives", the best animals get shot BEFORE they meet the objective and the lesser antlered NEVER get shot. But heck What do I know.

Hey Tony---- How was the shed hunting last Thursday?? You and R* find any good ones?

 

[MULEYFANATIC]

The Henery Mountains are as good as they are because they have been managed the way they are. Why do you think that a general season hunt is not as good as a limited entry... because they limit the tags and manage for older age class bucks... I have never heard anyone complain about a unit where first you can go and see a healthy deer herd with big bucks anytime you want, and second if you do draw then you will have a hunt of a lifetime...Do you have to kill a big buck to enjoy him? Also for those who might not have known that the Henery's was a good unit for deer then you just spilled the beans....We just need to enjoy a good thing end of story!

 

[MULEYFANATIC]

Daxter you nailed on the head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[oakbrush]

Tony

The Henrys are in great shape. And since it has reached the potential that everyone wanted, why spend more money there? Lets spend it where the deer herd is hurting and needs the help. And in the process maybe provide a better hunt down the road for the public. Both the muledeer species and the hunter win in this senario. Isn't that what the foundation is all about?

Thanks
Jason Crow

 

[shotgunjim]

Yea, something needs to be done! There are way too many big deer in that unit for Utah. Let's hunt the crap out of it so there are only spikes, 2 points and the occasional 3 point like the rest of the state. So what if we all don't get a chance to hunt it in our lifetime. Lifes a bithc. The Henerys is a perfect example of what can happen with proper management. Instead of allowing more permits we should manage more units like the Henerys. Yes that would take permits away from the general season and allow less oppertunity for the 2 point hunter, but with the way the deer population trend is going 85,000 people hunting deer in Utah isn't going to last for very long anyway.

 

[257Tony]

Let me tell you about Utahs wasted resource! Oil! We should be paying 50 cents for diesel, thats what Im talkin 'bout!

 

[fishon]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-06 AT 11:40PM (MST)[p]Again

Thanks for everyone's intrest. I am glad that this has stayed civilized. I cannot address every question that was posted unless I stay up all night. So since I am about to go to bed I can say this. MDF is about the conservation of Mule Deer, Blacktail deer and their habitat. That is a very broad mission statement.

It means we support hunting and managment. It means we support predator control and habitat projects. It means we want more hunters in the field because then we have a bigger voice to get things accomplished.

I do not have a personal agenda other then I want to make sure my kids and your kids get to hunt. That is what is driving me period. The Henry MTNs was taken away from the average guy just like the bookcliffs was back in the 90's. Now they are both incredible deer farms that few will ever hunt. Over 3100 people applied for Henry tags last year and 24 got to enjoy it. This year I am sure more then 3100 will apply and we will be lucky if 30 enjoy it.

I did not start this post to get critisized on Quantity versus Quality.I did not start it to be told how bad the conservation program is. I started it to see if people want more opportunity on the Henry MTN and if MDF should entertain spending its members dollars on a unit that noone will benefit from.

It was simple and I appreciate the response. MDF does meet with its people and the states DWR to discuss projects to be funded in every state. It is a process that I am very involved with.

Do any of you think there would be many if any MDF members if we didn't support hunting opportunity? Do any of you think MDF would survive if we didn't get involved? I think I know the answer.

I will share a story with you all on the General fourm page about my 11 year old sons experience last year deer hunting in New Mexico. You would all be wise to read it to understand what we really face in our hunting future.

Thanks to all of you

Tony Abbott

 

[moneyman]

How does Arizona give out 1,200+ tags on the Kaibab every year and still continue to produce big bucks? Also, they give out hundreds of rifle tags in some of their best Elk units, but still they hold 5 of the top 10 spots in the P&Y book and keep adding more top racks every year?

 

[388Net]

Utah is going to up the number of elk tags on each unit so they can reach the desired age limit 4 and 5 year old bulls. So I think within a few years your chance of killing a 370 + bull are over. I don't want to see them up the tags on deer units and kill all the big bucks also.

 

[SMELLYBUCK]

Tony,

I agree with your approach to this regarding not spending money on areas that the public hardly enjoy. Time and time again the DWR & conservation groups will sell off some public opportunity in the name of better hunting for all. Rarely does the general public see any improvement in public areas open for general hunts.

 

[nontypical]

Being a non-resident,it would be nice to draw a Henry's tag;but since only one goes to the non-res,fat chance.Even with 10 pts.,I won't waste my time.I also will NOT waste my money on any organization that does NOT openly support hunting.I hardly see how increasing tag numbers by a handful could hurt the Henry's.If it is seen after a couple years that is does hurt quality,then go back to what you have now.I think MDF should spend a little more money in good ole' Wyoming,where the deer hunting is beginning to look like Utah's did 10 yrs ago!