Lost River Range Idaho

WC · Feb 26, 2009

I will be finishing school soon and I will be applying for some jobs in central Idaho and so I am looking to find out information about hunting the Lost River Range in Idaho near Mackay. Is this in an area that it is difficult to draw a tag? How is the muley population there? How are the genetics? Is there a lot of back country where you can get away from other hunters? Any information would be appreciated and you are welcome to send me a private email with any info. Thanks

[email protected]

kilowatt · Feb 26, 2009

Deer tags can be bought over the counter for that area or at least they were in 2000. Lots of wolves in that area now, just ask D13er. He even took pictures of the tracks back a few years ago when he was in that area around Mackay for Elk.

Brian

BucksBullsandBroncs · Feb 27, 2009

I haven't seen a buck in the little lost for 5 years. I hike all that country during the summer/fall and everyday we either hear or see wolves. The deer season is only a week and numbers are about 4 bucks per 100 doe's. And that is being generous.
Elk numbers are low as well. Didn't see a single elk until the last day of the season. We were there for 16 days up every canyon, drainage, ect. Didn't see a bull all last year.
It is the consenses of all the folks that hunt that country. Except for Gemjake. He will tell you elk are in abundance... he's the only one that will tell you that. He's wrong.
I have seen wolves take down Mule Deer in Mackay during my summer excersions. Ugly.
Sorry the grim outlook, but it is what it is.

Idahoron · Feb 27, 2009

There was a time not that long ago when a guy could see herds of elk that numbered into the hundreds. I have seen herds as large as 300 elk in september in unit 50. I have seen lots of deer but never any MONSTERS. I took a lot of 150 class 4 points when I was learning how to hunt deer. The last time I was there I never saw a deer and only two elk. I quit hunting that unit and it bums me out. I loved the country in unit 50. The wolves have ruined that area. Ron

D13er · Feb 27, 2009

I started hunting that area around Mackay 15 years ago....was full of deer then...big bucks too....then the elk took over and like mentioned earlier herds of several hundred were seen. It was a bowhunters paradise for elk...every canyon had bulls bugling.....then the wolves......hardly worth the bother now. My guess is the moose are gone too.

Wolf lovers and studs like gem can deny it but I watched it happen over the last 1o years.

great post/pic, thanks for sharing

JB

ironhead · Feb 28, 2009

I have also hunted 50 and 51 for years and what the others are saying is spot on. If you want to deer hunt that area stay over by Antelope creek and the Pioneers, better deer numbers there.
Also more pressure.

Frontier · Feb 28, 2009

I agree with what the others are saying. That is neat country to hunt, but now it's just nice country to hike in. Wolf lovers can deny and say BS that the wolves have no impact, but wolves have had a tremendous impact on the game herds. That country really isn't worth hunting anymore, if part of an enjoyable hunt is looking at game and taking game, due to the wolf and solely the wolf. The problem with moving to other units where the wolf have not had such an impact is everyone else is doing the same thing and those units are becoming over crowded.

Salmonfg · Mar 2, 2009

2008 draft harvest statistics:

Gen deer (includes gen rifle and archery - have not been aplit be weapon type yet) -
GMU 37: 447 hunters harvested 173 bucks, 1 doe (152 rifle, 11 bow, 10 muzzleloader). Overall success rate = 39%.
Of bucks, 51% were 4-pt or larger.

Muzzleloader controlled buck (hunt area is GMUs 37 and 37A) -
72 hunters harvested 32 bucks (44% success), 34% were 4-pt or larger.

Controlled elk hunts -
GMU 37 bull: 50 hunters harvested 25 bulls (50% success), 52% were 6-pt or larger.

GMU 37 cow (2 public land hunts): 145 hunters harvested 56 cows (39% success)

GMU 37 cow (within 1 mile of agriculture): 91 hunters harvested 56 cows (62% success).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

WC · Mar 3, 2009

Salmonfg I sent you a pm.

BucksBullsandBroncs · Mar 3, 2009

Thats a bunch of Bull Salmonfg and you know it. Talk to all the hunters that hunt that unit and you will know those numbers are stretched. Funny that when I spoke to one of your biologists, they said that the deer numbers were dropping and success rates were low. And that the elk were hanging out on Private Property down in the valley with a few straglers still up in the hills. The success rates for that unit are NOT that high, you and I both know it. Why don't you spread that crap all over the internet some more so now everyone in the country is going to think that it is just a hot spot for deer and elk and its not. Why do you people do this crap. This is why people disrespect you and don't like what you do.
Why don't you add in there the number of Wolves in Unit 37. HUH? How about the resident Wolf pack on Double Springs Pass that has all but wipped out the elk and deer in that area. Ever see elk or deer on the pass.. no, neither have I, nor will you.
How about those numbers. EVERYDAY I hunted in that unit I heard or saw wolves along with kill caracases. I saw more wolves than I saw deer and elk. You've got some balls posting fictitious numbers like that on here.

THERE YOU GO EVERYONE.. THE ELK AND DEER ARE DOING JUST FINE IN WOLF COUNTRY.. SEE LOOK AT THE NUMBERS.. SEE! YOU CAN GO KILL A BIG OL BUCK AND A BIG OL BULL IN 37! SEE, LOOKY AT THOSE NUMBERS! BS! Some people are going to be mad at this post, but so what.

Salmonfg · Mar 3, 2009

These are draft numbers and do include estimation for non-reporting (people who fail to report are called in a follow-up survey to identify differences between those who report and those who do not, then differences are applied to each specific hunt estimate). Estimated success can go up or down from raw numbers which are supplied directly by hunters.

For comparison purposes I've added in the raw numbers for the GMU 37 data:

Gen deer (includes gen rifle and archery - have not been split by weapon type yet) - GMU 37:
Estimate: 447 hunters harvested 173 bucks, 1 doe (152 rifle, 11 bow, 10 muzzleloader). Overall success rate = 39%.
Of bucks, 51% were 4-pt or larger.
Actual raw hunter data: 327 hunters contacted, 126 reported harvesting deer (39% success), 64 reported harvesting 4-pt or larger bucks.

Muzzleloader controlled buck (hunt area is GMUs 37 and 37A) -
Estimate: 72 hunters harvested 32 bucks (44% success), 34% were 4-pt or larger.
Actual raw hunter data: 45 hunters reported harvesting 18 bucks (40% success), 6 of which were 4-pt or larger.

Controlled elk hunts -
GMU 37 bull
Estimate: 50 hunters harvested 25 bulls (50% success), 52% were 6-pt or larger.
Actual raw hunter data: 40 hunters reported harvesting 25 bulls (62.5% success), 13 of which were 6-pt or larger.

GMU 37 cow (2 public land hunts combined)
Estimate:145 hunters harvested 56 cows (39% success)
Actual raw hunter data: 125 hunters reported harvesting 51 cows (37% success).

GMU 37 cow (within 1 mile of agriculture)
Estimate: 91 hunters harvested 56 cows (62% success).
Actual raw hunter data: 75 hunters reported harvesting 41 cows (59% success).

Of course, intentional or unintentional errors by those reporting their hunting activity would introduce errors into the system.

Obtaining wolf numbers is challenging. The Doublespring pack of 8 was observed in fall 2007 and 1 collar was placed in the pack. Six were killed during summer 2008 (unfortunately including the collared animal, so further radio monitoring was not possible). Two wolves were removed last month, but they were across and down the valley - outside the pack range known from the previous radio-collar, so may not have been from that pack. As always, reports of wolf sightings with as much specific information as possible (entered through the IDFG web site) are desirable and helpful in our attempts to monitor wolf locations and numbers.

Sincerely,

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

livingthedream · Mar 3, 2009

You are right on.Idaho is going to the dogs literally.Hunting in Idaho will be no more not to long off.Idaho is the state where you come to when you did'nt draw in another state just to take your rifle for a walk and drink beer and hang out with your buddys.Thats all the fish and game wants to do is sell the license and tag.They became just a mediocre state for hunting and they can't even maintain that with the wolves.They just try to down play the situation.The state does not fund them they have to sell the tag.wolves are regularly seen in and around Salmon.I wish it was'nt so but it is.

gemstatejake · Mar 3, 2009

LMAO!! BucksandbullsBigmouth just got freakin pwned, owned, and chumped HARD! There it is in Black and White bud! How did all those critters possibly get by you?

There are elk and deer there as is evident. It may not be what it once was but I'm pretty certain someone who really wants to hunt it has a chance.

I honestly think your actually killing the hell out of elk and deer every year and trying to discourage everyone from stumbling into your honeyhole................fess up!

3bigelkid · Mar 3, 2009

Tom,
I appreciate all the numbers. Now the gentleman who asked the original question can come up with an informed decision instead of relying on speculation, personal observation(which varies), and sometimes premeditated fibbing. Yes, some areas are seeing a large effect from wolves and years of unchanged tag numbers but there is still game in the hills of Idaho for those who want to put in the time. Good luck on your move to central Idaho and enjoy the lifestyle.
Jake

fullcry · Mar 3, 2009

Someone is lying...

greatbasin · Mar 3, 2009

I have never hunted elk in those ranges but I have hunted antelope, twice. I'll tell you there was a lot less antelope in the Pashimeroi this year then there was in 2000 when I had the tag last. I don't know why...but it still sucks just the same.

critterstalker · Mar 3, 2009

If the elk are doing so good, then why are the dec. cow hunts in 37 gone!!! the cow hunts that are left have been cut in half or more!Yeah maybe the harvest rates seem good,until you look back a couple years ago. I have watched the tags in 36-2 go from 300 to 40 in 3-4 years.You can't tell me the wolves are not hurting elk numbers.

Yoyak · Mar 3, 2009

I guess this goes to show you that its very important that people are honest on their harvest reports, because F&G believes what you say. So no BS, report honestly. The F&G needs all the help we can give them I think.

Greatbasin- I think a wolf would be foolish to try to catch a speed goat. That being said, I'm sure they could find a way.

WC · Mar 4, 2009

I would like to thank those who gave helpful information on my question. Some people in the hunting world regardless of where you go in this country think the fish and game departments are ruining everything. I think that when we have a valid disagreement with them we should let our voices be heard in a respectful manner in the appropriate forum. The world in which we hunt is a changing world and I certainly have passionate feelings regarding the sport that I love. The world in which I hunt is far different from the world in which my father and grandfather hunted but I absolutely love the time I have to be outdoors. Every year I talk to hunters who are just plain fed up with everything. I try to adapt and work tons harder than the average Joe and as a result we are able to get some respectable bucks every year in a place that is regarded as the worst hunting location in the state of Utah. Enjoy your time hunting and teach your sons to be grateful that they live in a place where they can enjoy such a wonderful opportunity. Absolutely be passionate about your stances on critical issues that effect your sport but be respectful.

Some of you have probably already seen these but if not here are some of our Northern Utah bucks.
www.muledeermadness.blogspot.com

livingthedream · Mar 4, 2009

just look at the decrease in permits in the Salmon Region last year.It was either mis-management by the fish & game , wolves or both.Tom Keegan can take his pick on that.

3bigelkid · Mar 4, 2009

WC,
That is all a person can ask for isn't it-the opportunity to do what he/she loves to do! There are always the F&G haters and sometimes the F&G desivers to be called out. Unfortunetly, their hands are tied when it comes to wolf managment. They probrably were slow in reducing tag numbers but who would have been able to quantify the actual effects of the predetors??? The long-and-short of it is central Idaho is a beautiful place to live for the outdoorsman.

So, enjoy central Idaho if you move! It is not what it once was but with hard/smart work you will find sucess up there.
Jake

Frontier · Mar 4, 2009

Here's a few more numbers to chew on from the IDFG web site from units 50 and 51, which I consider part of the Lost River range.

General Unit 50 had 545 hunters which took a total of 76 elk for a success rate of 14%.

General Unit 51 had 422 hunters which took a total of 59 elk for a success rate of 14% also.

Controlled cow unit 50 had 782 hunters and harvested 193 cows for 25% success.

Controlled cow unit 51 had 583 hunters and harvested 129 cows for a success rate of 22%.

Controlled bull unit 50, if you're lucky on the draw, had 175 hunters and 85 bulls harvested for a success of 49%

Controlled bull unit 51, which is hard to draw, had 150 permits with 48 harvested for a success of 32%.

All of the above numbers were 2007, 2008 has not yet been posted. It will be interesting to see those numbers.

ironhead · Mar 4, 2009

If there are are so many Elk in these units why did the they cut the controlled hunt bull tags from 175 to 75 last year. Alot of those deer harvested are whitetails along the pasemeroi on the private land. Yea there are still animals in these units just not what it was pre- Wolf introduction.

Salmonfg · Mar 5, 2009

In regards to whitetail harvest in Unit 37 - of the 447 estimated deer hunters, 55 indicated they hunted primarily for whitetails and the estimated harvest was 27 whitetails (I do not have the raw numbers for that portion of the harvest survey).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

BucksBullsandBroncs · Mar 5, 2009

RE: GFY

I said I killed only two deer in THAT unit... dumbazz. Pay attention. I didn't say I only killed two deer in 15 years. I harvest my deer EVERY year. Full belly and full freezer. I concider harvesting an elk bonus. Its all about the senery for me up their. What, go hunt the ugly azz desert and just drive my pickup around until I bump something. Jake takes the cake on idiocracy. I'll pass. I have strong convictions about that unit and what is happening and people like you dismiss it and fish and game down play it. I took another look at the regs from years ago...

FOR SEVERAL YEARS THERE WERE ONLY *20* TAGS FOR THAT UNIT! ONLY *20*! Now how in the he!!'s of fire can they compair success rates over the years when the number of tags has drastically changed so much. Its a bunch of bullarky. And the people who aren't aware of the drastic tag number drop look at composite numbers and think its ok. When it is sinking.
Good point about the whitetails on the river. I forgot about them. He didn't say weither or not they were muley or whitey. Why do they lump them into one catagory? Answer.. to boost the numbers. Obvious.

BucksBullsandBroncs · Mar 5, 2009

Estimates.. more estimates. So are you saying that you think the numbers are great and deer and elk are thriving over there? I am willing to venture an estimate that more whitetails were killed than that which flopps the success rate. Most people are thinking the numbers reflect mule deer only.
Oh, and how many of those elk killed were killed down on the private property? Fee's to kill one. I don't have access to the private property to kill one.
How about the Verizon CEO's place down on the river. I'm sure he lets people shoot elk for a fee.
The system is flawed and the numbers do not accuratly reflect what is really happening.

Frontier · Mar 5, 2009

An interesting number would be to see the trend of cows killed by hunters within 1 mile of cultivated fields. I'm thinking that number is increasing also. The one thing I've observed when wolves move into an area is the elk don't run farther into the back country, but just the opposite. To get away from them they'll run to the valleys and into the fields, hence the increase of kills on cows lately near cultived fields. You don't have to be a math genius to see where it's headed.

gemstatejake · Mar 5, 2009

RE: GFY

>I said I killed only two
>deer in THAT unit... dumbazz.
>Pay attention. I didn't say
>I only killed two deer
>in 15 years. I harvest
>my deer EVERY year. Full
>belly and full freezer. I
>concider harvesting an elk bonus.
>Its all about the senery
>for me up their. What,
>go hunt the ugly azz
>desert and just drive my
>pickup around until I bump
>something. Jake takes the cake
>on idiocracy. I'll pass. I
>have strong convictions about that
>unit and what is happening
>and people like you dismiss
>it and fish and game
>down play it. I took
>another look at the regs
>from years ago...
>
>
>FOR SEVERAL YEARS THERE WERE ONLY
>*20* TAGS FOR THAT UNIT!
>ONLY *20*! Now how in
>the he!!'s of fire can
>they compair success rates over
>the years when the number
>of tags has drastically changed
>so much. Its a bunch
>of bullarky. And the people
>who aren't aware of the
>drastic tag number drop look
>at composite numbers and think
>its ok. When it is
>sinking.
>Good point about the whitetails on
>the river. I forgot about
>them. He didn't say weither
>or not they were muley
>or whitey. Why do they
>lump them into one catagory?
>Answer.. to boost the numbers.
>Obvious.

More laffin................you and the whole crew from over there supply more entertainment than you'll ever realize.

gznokes · Mar 5, 2009

Interesting discussion. A little science and a little art--the truth is in there somewhere.

Tom, thanks for your post. I think it would be cool if more F&G people like you would post on here. The hard numbers really add to the discussion.

When it comes to the questions about statistical estimation I'll leave the discusson about confidence intervals and p values for another day.