Rule changes for Eastern Idaho

300Winnie · Mar 2, 2004

Don't know if anyone else saw it on the local news (would have to live in the Idaho Falls viewing area), but part of the proposal the Idaho Fish and Game is going to put forth to the public (to let us know what they have already decided)is to take the general deer season in Unit 66 and make it a totally controlled hunt. They said the rationale was that it was to difficult to take harvest statistics ect. withouth doing so. The meeting has not been held yet so I do not know the platform they are proposing to use on the unit, but it does not sound good to me. They also said that they are proposing to move the deer and elk seasons to later dates. I'm sure this will help solve the problem.

I think taking one unit out of a region or the State for that matter and making it completely controlled is a bad idea. There are many units in the State with restrictive hunting but still have some form of general hunt in them (ie., point restrictions ect.)

If anyone is interested in having their voice heard on this issue (not that is does a lot of good)the meetings are tonight, tomorrow night (Idaho Falls), and Thursday night. For times and places see the Idaho Fish and Game website under "Whats New".

Martin · Mar 2, 2004

According to the report, they would still allow a general archery season in that unit for deer. I am all for it. Last year they combined both the controlled hunts in 66 and 69 and only allowed 50 permits. Quality deer numbers are very low in this once highly regarded unit. It is good to see some type of action taken towards boosting deer numbers. I don't know much about setting the seasons to a later start date. I will show up on Wed night to find out though.

idhunters · Mar 2, 2004

All that will do is push more hunters into other units that are still "general" tags. IMO all mule deer tags in Idaho should be on a controlled basis.

I too will try and make the meeting to voice my opinon.

Shane · Mar 3, 2004

I think they should go back to having the elk season before the deer season and do not overlap them at all. A lot of elk hunters kill meat bucks while driving the timber for elk. It use to open for elk in the beginning of October and deer was Oct 15th to November 3rd. The deer hunting in 66 has been terrible the last several years. Elk numbers are way up though.
Shane

300Winnie · Mar 3, 2004

For those that have posted to this thread I hope this is not taken wrong as I believe all people have the right to they're own opinion whether I agree with it or not.

What I want to point out however is that this thread is a good example of why the Dept. can make rule changes on the frequent basis they do. I posted my opinion and over the course of two days there have been three responses...all with different opinions. We, as a hunting population do not agree on what needs to be done, so when the Dept. decides something there is not a unified way to oppose them.

I agree, the numbers of quality deer in unit 66 are few. What the reason is...I don't claim to know, but the fact that the Dept. offered either-sex tags in that unit for several years (they finally removed it in 2003)that went until November 8th does not give me a great deal of confidence that the Dept. knows what is going on there either. This problem we have didn't start last year, or the year before, yet we had either sex tags through the potential start of the rut.

Also, are they considering what happens in unit 69. Many years provide enough snow by the time the either-sex hunt closes in 69 to have pushed bucks out of unit 66 to winter ranges located in 69. In addition, what about controlling the general hunt in 69. I have a brother-in-law that has roughly 2500 acres of prime transition habitat (late fall to early winter) in unit 69. Over the past 5 years we have seen a significant drop in the number of deer using this area.

Ya, I've got frustrations with the Dept. Thanks for letting me vent. Who knows, when we get to the meeting tonight maybe they will propose a whole new management plan since the last one (implemented not long ago)does not seem to be working.

See you there.

Martin · Mar 4, 2004

So what did everyone think about the meeting on Wednesday?

BrianID · Mar 4, 2004

I wasn't able to go to the meeting but from what I have heard the F&G have more big changes planned than I would have ever imagined.
With so many changes proposed this year the F&G has already made many deer hunters very unhappy and I am one of them. The F&G already have all of the ATV "hunters" mad at them and now they are going to have half of the other hunters mad at them. I wouldn't doubt that the public?s approval of the Idaho F&G is going to fall to an all time low in the next couple months.

300Winnie · Mar 5, 2004

Well, I went, and due to the expected disgust I was going to have I haven't even had the ambition to follow up on this thread.

I agree with BriadID with the fact that the Dept. has bigger plans up its sleeve. It does not bother them to displace 1300 hunters to save 40-50 bucks in the unit. It also appears that they are using the rationale of getting along with the southeast region as a way to get out of changing the proposal.

According to our region, Unit 66 is our guinea pig, while I believe Unit 70 or 71 and 73 are Region 5's guinea pigs. We have a lot of hunters in Unit 66, but I believe most are opportunists that hunt deer in conjunction with elk. I doubt if there would be half as many if the elk hunt did not correspond with the deer hunt. In contrast there are not many elk in the units that region 5 is proposing so you have very minimal kills on happenstance while hunting elk. However, in 2002 (from the FaG website) there were 2575 hunters in Unit 73, 1334 hunters in Unit 71 and 921 hunters in Unit 70. Now we are talking some major displacement here. Minimum calculations show displacement of between 4500 and 5000 hunters. Give me a break. I am sure that won't hurt deer numbers, buck to doe ratios and every other biological measure in all of the other units that hunters are going to go to. Let alone the quality of the experience. Region 5 is already griping about how bad they're numbers are, and I don't disagree in total, but what is this going to do to units like 76. You don't see them limiting the number of non-resident tags down there. They don't need to. The hunting has gone to pot so bad that the non-residents don't want to come hunt there anymore. They used to sell those permits out in the first few hours, now they can't get enough people to apply to fill the hunt without selling leftovers. If this doesn't point to the state of affairs we are in, nothing does.

Also, to touch another subject concerning ATV's. I don't want to get into a bash one way or another concerning these but if it comes down to ATV's or general hunting opportunity I am going to take the general hunting opportunity every time. With that said, I believe that if they restricted the ATV use in Unit 66 and got the deer season away from the elk season (which they have moved the general cow season to November 15th) they wouldn't have the problems with deer numbers in that unit years and they would be able to leave the general hunting opportunity for people that really want to hunt deer in that unit.

But as my feeling always is about these meeting, and I have no reason to feel differently about this one, the FaG has made up they're mind and the public meeting is a formality.

My .02

Pappabull · Mar 5, 2004

If this change goes through forget about it ever coming out of a controlled hunt and back into a general hunt.

This change will impact all of the other hunts putting more pressure on the other general hunts.

I for one am getting sick of the F&G constantly changing dates of hunt openings and all their other changes. Their rational for the changes doesn't make sense. They love to make changes every year. It won't be long before we will see a proposal that states you can use short range weapons on even days and long range weapons on odd days. That would be a good proposal since change means progress.

Deerlove · Mar 5, 2004

I archery hunted 66 last fall for deer and wasnt to impressed
Lots of good country, but few deer. As far as the controlled hunt, I would hate to see all those hunters displaced to other crowded areas.

Martin · Mar 7, 2004

I probably have quite a different oppinion than most on this issue. True, I don't know how displacing 1300 hunters will affect surrounding units. Only time will tell. As far as the rational to continue business as usual....wildlife is a science and science is based on theory, not fact. Changes are sometimes required to combat changes in habitat, climate and hunting social issues. So what if it goes to a controlled hunt. There were only 100-150 deer being shot on the general. I am for developing a unit into a "trophy or quality" unit like surrounding states have. It would be unique to Idaho and there are already so many other units that provide general hunting opportunity. If it is not successful, than great, we tried move on. Better to be proactive than being stagnant with stupidity with the thought that all is well.
The ATV issue has finally affected me and I am not sure what to think about it. I own an ATV and use it to haul in bait to hunt bears. It never left the trailer or cabin last fall to hunt deer or elk. With the new plan, a person will not be able to haul in bait on established Forest service trails durring the fall months. This will finish my routine fall bear hunting. Some things have to be given up for the benefit of others. I guesse I can live with that if deer numbers increase. Should be interesting in SE Idaho in the coming years.