Utah Elk

L

Livetahunt

Active Member
Messages
367
Im a NR with six points. Just wanting to kill my first bull.Anyweapon ?? Muzzleloader?? Unit?? Would like to kill a 300 bull. Pm if you like.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-31-06 AT 04:37PM (MST)[p]300?? pick the LE unit with the best odds of drawing. If you can't kill a 300 bull in any UT LE unit you would have to be blind and have no legs for the most part. The kill odds are high, and the age class is over what most 300 bulls need in most all LE units. Getting the tag is the hardest part
 
If you can shoot a bow put in for the Wasatch archery! You should draw for sure.
 
LOl.. thats funny. Maybe think about a new modern bow and do some practicing and you may be surprised what you can do. But otherwise go for the easiest rifle or muzz draw you can find and a 300 bull opportunity should be there if you hunt hard for a week. UT Elk hunting is the best it's ever been according to the results
 
Sorry to break the bad news. 6 points as a NR will not get you much especially since the NR pool of tags will be significantly reduced (as much as 1/3) because of the "convention tags". If it will be your first bull, why not try an over the counter any bull tag. Then you can build a few elk hunting skills. Hunt hard and you can find a 300 inch bull in an any bull unit in Utah.
 
Where did you get the info that the NR tags will be reduced by as much as 1/3? If they are only giving out 1 or 2 tags per species for each unit and the the number of tags has increased every year, I dont see your math?! Please inform me UGAhunter. From what I see there will be INCREASES in NR tags for most if not all LE units.
 
Livetahunt,

Check your PM if you have not already.

I agree Pro, there should NOT be a decrease in any tags this year for elk. If anything, there will be an increase. Those convention tags will be taken from the increase that all could have had. While I do not agree with the tags, it is wrong to say they will decrease permit numbers by 1/3. That is incorrect. Good luck to you all in the draws!

Chad
 
Sorry Proutdoors, I was a bit over exaggerated - I had to go back and check the numbers.

Half of the Convention tag quota comes from the Non-Resident pool of tags (see "Wildlife Convention Permits" rule on the DWR website R657-55 see http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/rules/R657-55.html ). In 2006 there were 145 NR elk tags. There are 51 Convention elk tags in 2007 - 26 will come from the NR pool. Now here is the math, watch closely now.

26 less permits/145 permits in 2006 = 18% reduction in NR tags. That is a bit less than 33% (but to my credit I did say up to 1/3). However, it is still a significant number considering there is only one or two NR permits for most hunts anyways.

Additionally, the Wildlife board raised the age objective on all Elk units this year, and that COULD mean a decrease in permit numbers (although most units are above age objective as is, so my GUESS is the permit #'s will stay about the same.

To me this all adds up to less NR tags in 2007. I hope not. I hope I'm wrong. But, I don't think I am.
 
Chad,

Not exactly sure what you meant by "Those convention tags will be taken from the increase that all could have had", but the rule is clear in that it states that the allocation of permits will be "a percentage of the permits available to nonresidents in the annual big game drawing matched by an equal number on resident permits."

This means half the permits come from the NR pool. Now, I hope this is not the case and that the DWR ignores this part of the rule, but that is what it says, like it or not (and I don't like it!).

UGA


>Livetahunt,
>
>Check your PM if you have
>not already.
>
>I agree Pro, there should NOT
>be a decrease in any
>tags this year for elk.
> If anything, there will
>be an increase. Those
>convention tags will be taken
>from the increase that all
>could have had. While
>I do not agree with
>the tags, it is wrong
>to say they will decrease
>permit numbers by 1/3.
>That is incorrect. Good
>luck to you all in
>the draws!
>
>Chad
 
Your math is fuzzy because the number of tags has gone up every year and as you stated EVERY unit in Utah in over age objectives, even with the new ages. Therefore I see no indication of fewer tags be issued for 2007 from 2006, in fact I dare say you will see an INCREASE in NR tags for most if not all LE units even with the deduction of convention tags. This adds up to more not LESS NR tags in 2007. Trying to spin a bad light on the convention tags with 'fuzzy' math only lessens your reasons for opposing these tags. There are legit reasons to oppose them, this is NOT one of them. I like these tags and believe the wildlife will benefit and hence so will myself and my family.
 
For residents, your position hold true.

For Non-residents, I maintain they are being robbed, and there will be fewer permits.

Here is an example of why my math is not at all fuzzy. In 2006 16/28 elk units had less than 4 NR permits, and 7 of those had 0 or 1 NR permit. That is an average of 2 NR permits per unit. By inference, that means there are around 20 permits available per unit (on average). The permit allocation would have to increase an average of 50% (10 permits) for NR to get one (1). That is not going to happen in a year that just saw the age objectives increase.

The Convention will take 9 permits from these units (Three corners (2), Book Cliffs?Roadless (2), La Sal (1), Pahvant (1), Beaver (1), Monroe (1), North Cache (1) and half (4 or 5) of them will be from the NR pool. I seriously doubt we will se an increase of 10 or more permits in any one of these units, and certainly not 4 or 5 of these units!

The same ?fuzzy math? trend holds true of the 12 units with more than 4 NR permits (20-21 NR permits were taken from these units. It was easy to take 26 permits from nonresidents for this convention, but it is quite hard to get them back. Overall the permit #?s will need to increase by 260 permits spread across all 28 units (that's nearly 20% increase across the board. I don't see that happening. But happy wishing!
 
Those convention tags you are talking about are taken after the tags have been increased. Check your numbers with last years proclamation. Almost every LE unit has an increase in tags across the board (including NR tags). Even with the convention tags pulled out there are still more tags available to NR this year than last.

As far as being robbed....I don't know what state you call home but I would expect if tags were cut in your state they would come from NR tags. You don't pay property, income or sales tax in this state so why do you think you are being robbed? I am not trying to start an arguement. I am just curious about your justification.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
AWHOLELOTTABULL,

1) Permit numbers for 2007 are NOT out yet so how can you say that? They will be set in April (#'s in the proclamation are from 2006). Remember 2007 is the first year of the convention tag, and the first year that 18% of NR tags will be removed. We will revisit this issue when the numbers are set, and to my disgust I will be proven right.

2) The state I call home for hunting purpose is Idaho, and IMO they have the best permit allocation system in the west!

3) I work in Utah, pay Utah State income taxes, expend 95% of my income in Utah, and have done so for the past 20 years (not that it should even matter because not one cent of the DWR money comes from income, property, or sale taxes!!!!!!! It comes mostly from license sales (NR pay more!) and P-R federal funds from sale of sporting goods (NR pay more). Not to mention the majority of Utah wildlife lives on Federal lands (more non-residents own that). But all of this is off topic.

I'm glad to be able to debate this topic because it is a real sore spot with me. Even Don Peay evidently doesn't realize that the NR hunter is really getting clobbered with this rule. It seems that very few people have discussed and examined its effect. Then again, it's all about habitat improvement!
 
The 2007 Proc. shows several muzzle-loader and late hunt units that have not had NR permits in the past but will have in 2007. It's all a guessing game right now but I would bet that the permit increases for 2007 more then offset any tags taken for the convention.
 
It's too bad that it is a guessing game! It would be nice to have the permit numbers set BEFORE we have to apply.

Is Utah the only state that requires an application before permit numbers are set?
 
>AWHOLELOTTABULL,
>
>1>3) I work in Utah, pay
>Utah State income taxes, expend
>95% of my income in
>Utah, and have done so
>for the past 20 years
>(not that it should even
>matter because not one cent
>of the DWR money comes
>from income, property, or sale
>taxes!!!!!!!
Amen, too many tardo use the "I pay Taxes" line with not a clue as to where the money comes from. Taxes do not pay JACK
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-06-07 AT 06:40AM (MST)[p]Easy there Schmalts. You and UGA are right. I do know that not one red cent goes into wildlife from taxes. I work and pay taxes in Oregon but I sure as hell don't think that they should give me opportunity over Residents. I fully expect to pay more for my NR tag in any other state that I hunt. I would expect that if they raised the tag allotment in Idaho that the residents would get the increase before the NR's. I used the "tax" thing simply for establishing where you reside. I could have used a better example. The auction tags DID NOT decrease any NR tags. Although the numbers are not published yet I have heard some numbers from some very reliable sources and they didn't take anything away from the NR hunters. In fact, just the opposite.

It's always an adventure!!!
 
UGA- Where do you get this quote : "a percentage of the permits available to nonresidents in the annual big game drawing matched by an equal number on resident permits." ???? That is not the language that passed the Wildlife Board.

By the way, Utah does give a lot of red pennies to the UDWR budget to accomplish many things, such as wildlife transplants, retriement, studies, etc.

And Wyoming also takes your money far ahead of when they set permit numbers.
 
Packout,

Don Peay also told me that was not the language. BUT, click on the link I provide above (post 11 I think) and it will open the Wildlife Board Rule on Convention Tags. Scroll down to the section on Permit Allocation. It is there in black and white. I have said over and over again that I hope this is not the case, but this is the official rule.

awholelotofbull (whatamouthfull), I hope your sources are right!
 
Idaho doesn't assign permits to residents and non-residents. Everyone is in the same draw pool and they simply cap the number of permits drawn to non-residents at 10% overal and that is not unit specific. Odds of drawing a permit for residents and nonresidents is the same as long as there are not more than 10% of the applicants classified ans non-residents. That is different than Utah where there is a 10% set aside for non-residents. It is this reason that some Utah Bear permits are easier to draw as a non-resident than a resident - they were set aside and there are few non-res applicants. This is also true in some other limited entry hunts (the one I hope to draw this year for example.)

Utah's Convention tags are the ONLY example I have ever heard of in ANY state where permits set aside for Non-residents have been taken away and given to Concervation organizations.
 
I say good on Utah for 'taking' these tags from NR's and Res. and giving them to conservation groups to BENEFIT the wildlife of Utah for ALL to enjoy and BENEFIT from, the habitat improvements from these tags will increase NR tags dramatically. Thus, NR hunters will get MORE tags in the long run not less. We have to look at the whole picture not just right in front of our noses. I see why you ase concerned as a NR hoping to draw a tag, and I probably feel the same as you do if I were in your shoes, but since I am not in your shoes I see this as a win for most if not all in the long run. I still stand by my comment that you will see INCREASES in most/all units even for NR hunters.

I was mistaken in thinking most were opposed to conservation tags because it was turning hunting into a 'richmans' sport, yet these tags WILL NOT go to the highest bidder and all who want a shot have the same odds as everyone else. Maybe its that some feel the DWR 'owes' them a tag and that somehow these tags going to the PUBLIC is taking away their tag. These are the people calling us "horn hunters" selfish.
 
The problem I have with these tags is the lost opportunity to those who cannot attend. They could have raised MUCH more $$$$$ for wildlife by allowing EVERYONE a shot at the tags. But apparently that is not what these tags are about. As for conservation tags, they are turning hunting into a rich mans sport and unfortunatly they are also the tail wagging the dog here in Utah when it comes to management here in Utah.

That said, I beleive that permit numbers should go up or at a minimum remain the same. I do not see them going down.

Chad
 
Gov. Huntsman agreed to these tags because it would bring in money for the state, thus encouraging him to earmark more money for wildlife in Utah. Hotels, resturants, etc will benefit this way, if people were not required to come to Utah and the show LESS money would be raised to benefit Utah wildlife not MORE.

I also disagree with conservation tags turning hunting into a rich mans sport, I say the opposite is a result of these tags. By selling a few tags to the 'rich' it keeps the costs DOWN for the rest of us, yet the wildlife benefit immensely. How many tags would the DWR need to issue to equal the ONE conservation tag bought on the San Jaun Unit for a elk tag($70,000)? How much of these 'EXTRA' tags revenue would be used to improve habitat in that Unit? Look at the amount of good ONE tag brings to that one unit for EVERY hunter in the future on that Unit.
 
"By selling a
few tags to the 'rich'
it keeps the costs DOWN
for the rest of us,
yet the wildlife benefit immensely.
How many tags would the
DWR need to issue to
equal the ONE conservation tag
bought on the San Jaun
Unit for a elk tag($70,000)?
How much of these 'EXTRA'
tags revenue would be used
to improve habitat in that
Unit? Look at the amount
of good ONE tag brings
to that one unit for
EVERY hunter in the future
on that Unit."

Well said Pro. You make a great point! If anybody is interested, Hunting Illustrated did a great article on conservation tags and LE tags. Very well done and very informative.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
I still think your heading down the wrong road to sell any tags to big money boys. It's all the publics land and under resonable circumstance's everyone should get the same opportunity to get all tags. If you can guarentee that 70,000 dollars went directly to wildlife and not in Utah's general fund then I might look at it a little differently. Tell me what habitat they improved. I really wonder how much of this money is going back to wildlife and not perks like brand new truck's evey year for the fish and game so they can drive to the coffee shop. How do's selling a few tags to the rich keep the price down for the rest of us. You know as well as I do that the more money they get the more money they are going to waste. They need to manage or miss manage what they do on what the regular joe gives.(I say no to big money.) Maybe I am the only one.
 
90% of the $70,000 by law MUST go to habitat. This money canNOT go to buy trucks for the F&G, therefore the money is not wqasted by the DWR. The fact that these tags generate huge amounts of money frees up the DWR to not spend as much on these projects, let the millionares pay for it so I dont have to. Plain and simple, wildlife need habitat and the best way to pay for it is thru PRIVATE money rather than government generated money. Why put it on the shoulders of "the regular joes" if there are those who can afford it are willing to pay for it?
 
It is true, the DWR approves the projects and the group who auctioned off the tag MUST use all but 10%(for overhead costs) in that unit within a certain time frame. Those who are against these tags either do no know what these tags do, or are blind to the long term benefits these tags bring.
 
>Those who are against these
>tags either do no know
>what these tags do, or
>are blind to the long
>term benefits these tags bring.

Correct. So show us. If indeed so many wonderful things for wildlife are being done with this money, 90% of the opposition to conservation tags would disappear as soon as evidence is presented. Show us the books.
 
The groups should be more open I agree, but the DWR has all the "books" as well. I am not anything other than a member of SFW for now, I am on the Board of Diretors for UBA and promise in writing that we will openly account for every penny of the money we will get for our two archery deer tags being sold next month. Craig McLaughlin admitted to me that the DWR should have this info more available to the public, I believe the conservation groups should make it more available as well.

PRO
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-07-07 AT 09:40AM (MST)[p]AS nonresidents we keep hearing how it will benefit us in the long run. It really is pathetic to see the minimal changes in tag increases in the regular draw pool. Lets face it, Guys like Don Peay can spout all they want about how it help everyone but we all know (anyone with a brain) that elk herds are maxed to capacity in most units,(hence the management bull idea) and the tag increases are over. So, as they added all these conservation tags out of the pool, like 100 percent or more, what percent did the NR regular drawing odds go up?? squat
Face it, the NR will never see a benefit from this. The rich guys buying the tags will, and a few of the residents will.
You guys that disagree better do some math. Take a look at the last 5 years worth of NR tag increases VS all the rest. And you will never convice me the Elk herd is not maxed out to healthy capacity when you have to have spike, and 5 point managment hunts. Why the F&G didnt just add more regular LE tags instead of me i cannot comprehend
 
EVERY LE unit in Utah will see INCREASES in the number of tags issued, so the resource is not 'tapped out'. I guess because I will go on record and say there will be increases I haven't a brain. NR should NOT complain that the state does not manage for you but for all, residents first.

The 200 convention tags will go to lucky draws, not the highest bidder ,yet the money raised will go top continue to improve the hunting in Utah, which is now the premier state to hunt elk. And still one of the best for deer.
 
COOL IT schmalts!!!

HOW MUCH TIME HAVE YOU SPENT IN ANY OF THE L.E. ELK UNITS???

YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN BRAINWASHED WITH THE UDWR'S 1 TO 1 BULL TO COW RATIO!!!

NOW THE RATIO'S ARE HIGH IN SOME OF THE UNITS BUT THEY AIN'T 1 TO 1!!!

I DO AGREE WITH YOU ON THE 5 POINT BULL MANAGEMENT HUNTS,I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THESE HUNTS!!!

I SEEN THE POINTS RESTRICTIONS TRIED IN THE BOOK CLIFFS ON DEER & IT FAILED,MISERABLY!!!

THERE WILL BE A FEW GUYS FIND GIANT 5 POINT BULLS BUT FOR THE MOST PART ITS A CROOKED SITUATION!!!

AND DON'T EVEN TRY AND COMPREHEND OUR FISH & GAME schmalts CUZZ YOU CAN'T DO IT!!!

THEIR INITIAL IDEA WAS TO ADD MORE REGULAR PERMITS BUT THE BIG STINKY BULL HUNTERS DON'T WANT THE QUALITY DESTROYED!!!

THE ONLY bobcat WONDERING WHAT TYPE OF BIG STINKY BULL PERMITS WILL BE ADDED NEXT YEAR,MAYBE WE COULD ADD A 'LIMP' HUNT,IF YOU SEE A BULL THAT LIMPS YOU CAN SHOOT HIM NO MATTER THE SIZE AND IF YOU TURN HIM IN YOU'LL GET YOUR POINTS BACK & MAYBE A 100.00 BONUS,DAMN I'D BETTER SHUT UP!!!
 
UGAhunter is right, not fuzzy math. THe bottom line is if NR loose one permit to the convention, and we get 10% of tags, then it takes a 10 tag increase to maintain NR numbers after the convention tags are reduced! Pretty simple actually, Like he said most units offer very few tags, and half go to max pnt holders. Bottom line is guys like me without max pnts (like most NR) can get hurt. If a unit has 1 tag, it might go away! If there are 2, and one goes we are ok, if there are 3 and one leaves, then one goes to max pnt holders, and that leaves us with 1 tag, (again we do not have max pnts) that is a 50% decrease. With odds tough already doubling them is not good.

I have a question are where the tags coming from (units set)? Can I know what tags will be taken from NR?
 
UGAhunter or anyone else.How do you know which of these units such as the Manti Archery for example work?They are giving out 3 of these tags at the expo.Do you know whether 1 or 2 of these tags come from the NR pool or do I have to wait until after I put in for the draw to find out.I am a NR with 6 points and this convention is a big slap in the face.Thank you Utah for making it even harder for me to draw this year.I am now forced into switching to archery or muzzy this year because I am sick of this crap and just want to draw and be done with this BS.My brother was able to make the expo.I hope he gets lucky,but I couldn't get the time off work to drive over there to put in for the tags that I feel like were taken away from me.
 
nvguy2 I have the same question I should have been more clear. I found the list of tags, but what if there is 1 tag at the convention? Will it come from NR or res? Can I know? I am looking at a bow elk unit that offered 3 tags last year, without max pnts that leaves me going for 2 tags, one is listed for the convention, if it comes from NR my odds of drawing doubled. Big difference.
 
Exactly what Im thinking.I was also contemplating on one of those archery units giving out 3 tags.Not knowing how many come out on the NR quota makes me wonder,so I have changed my mind.Isn't this game sooo much fun.
 

Similar threads

Bigbucks
Fillmore Pahvant vs Plateau Boulder Muzzleloader Elk
Replies
16
Views
2k
wstrntines
wstrntines
marley
elk question
Replies
27
Views
1k
elkassassin
elkassassin
willfrye027
CO 66 vs 67 elk rifle
Replies
4
Views
943
Joe2Kool
Joe2Kool

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

C0961C50-0951-4E78-BE07-DD10C0B59921.jpeg
B9978AF7-E0BA-4B81-B90F-A3169BBE470C.jpeg
MNZ_3068sm.jpg
6676D0EB-3B8E-4040-97B2-3A6C9538F675.png
20181005_123626.jpg
fullsizeoutput_1e.jpeg
Couple High Country Bucks
AF92AC1F-1C59-4DE1-BE45-E87577BB3D28.jpeg
236A5215 MM.JPG
9190C546-EF1A-4A97-B73E-EC6CF081DF6E.jpeg
C67B63EA-CAAF-4E14-8A3A-EE9DCEEA7F84.jpeg
IMG_2296.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom