Budweiser Biologists

R

rock5150

Guest
Budweiser Biologist.

I had a most interesting conversation with one of the DWR lead biologists today. Due to the many questions that are coming up about Management bulls, state wide spike elk hunts and this I400 deal.

Let me tell you what was said and then you tell me what you think should be done.
I was told that the management elk tooth data was not in due to the fact the teeth had not been sent off yet. So no one knows how old the bulls were that were killed yet, but it will be available in the next couple of months.

I asked about LE tags and this was the scenario that was given. I looked up the data to verify, see on web sight or sample below.
Example:
The management plan for SWD calls for 975 elk on the whole unit. As of 2004 they said there were 1400 elk. They were told they had to cut the over all herd numbers by 425. If you look at he cow permits for 04, 05, 06 you will see them trying to kill a couple hundred cows to be in compliance with the management plan, Total bull tags high 30s to mid 40s depending on the year.
All premium units are managed for age 5-6 year old bull that is all, not 8-9 like some may think. See below.
Most units are 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 years over age objectives. The DWR has tried to add more tags the last 3 years to give more opportunity and KEEP THE HERDS HEALTHY. Each year the racks are okaying it and then the big game board is cutting the numbers that the biologists are saying need to be taken to maintain healthy herds. Why?

Therefore, they have to take more cows and the herds ? are getting genetically messed up? ? Turned up side down? bull to cow ratios are 1 bull to 2 cows or even worse one to one in some cases. AKA management hunts.

This is why the DWR is pushing the spike elk hunt to cut the numbers of OVER ALL ELK. So it looks to me like either, give more tags to meet the age objective or end up with a statewide spike hunt.

How do you all see this ??????? Please chime in. I do not want a statewide elk hunt.

Rock5150

http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/ Statewide big game management plans You can see the full stats here. Elk

Table 1. Elk herd population estimates 2000-2004.

Plan Population Population Population Population

Unit Population Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate

Objective post-2000 post-2001 post-2002 post-2003

Southwest Desert 975 925 950 970 1400

Fillmore 1425 1000 1400 1400 1400

STATEWIDE TOTALS 68400 62635 60150 60595 5802515



Table 2. Average age of harvested bull elk 2000-2004.

Hunt Age Objective 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Southwest Desert, Indian Peaks 5-6 7.5 7.9 8.1 7.2 7.7

Fillmore, Pahvant 5-6 8.7 8.2 7.6 7.1 7.5
 
Most units are 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 years over age objectives. The DWR has tried to add more tags the last 3 years to give more opportunity and KEEP THE HERDS HEALTHY. Each year the racks are okaying it and then the big game board is cutting the numbers that the biologists are saying need to be taken to maintain healthy herds. Why?

I hate to say it, I have been a member for 5 years now. But as long as the SFW controls the wildlife board the way they do there will never be more opportunity! SFW has a lot at stake in the way of Conservation tag prices, to keep the quality super high. It is about time the wildlife board took recomendations from their own bioligist. If we go spike only statewide you had better draw any tag possible in the next 5 years or it won't be worth having.
 
I have been a member of SWF and they do a lot of good. However, you have something here I think. In any aspect of life follow the money and it sometime tells a different story.

Still looking for people to reply to this post. Is the DWR getting a bad rap for things they do not control. Is an uneducated public part of the issue?

Are we talking about issues that matter or just saying ( good pic). This matters to me lets find a way to fix it. Does it matter to any of you? Or are you just going to one of those people who never post cause " you don't have anything good or cleaver to say" SO WHAT. Quit being part of the silent majority. SPEEK UP. THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHO IS RIGHT AND WHO IS WRONG. IT IS ABOUT IDIAS.
 
If you guys attended the rack meetings it was the opposite, the numbers were proposed and the racks shut it down, I was there personally on the south eastern rack. Also I did not hear anyone that attended the rack get up and want more tags, it was the opposite there were many there that fought against the increase of bull permits.

I think your assumption that the SFW is doing it is wrong, Sfw is proposing the increase of elk herds to give more opportunity.
More elk, more tags, the trouble is getting everyone on board with increasing the elk heards, but it is happening, they proposed and increase of 15% in southeastern utah.

YOu can blame one thing on the SFW that is that they are fighting to create more wildlife for people to hunt, doing great projects and helping sustain herd growth.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-08 AT 10:14AM (MST)[p]As I said in the management elk hunts post, I do not want a statewide spike hunt. If you need to eliminate a few bulls for herd health, add a FEW tags across the board. Screw the management tags and just add tags. Give one or two tags in every unit to a youth LE draw. Give one or two tags in every unit to an over 65 draw. Give one tag to me each year.

That should do it.
 
The biologist I talked to said much of what you are saying about the people at the racks not understanding the need to up the numbers and therefore not supporting tag increases. However the DWR has asked for an increase in tags at the feb/march racks for the last 3 years and says they will again this year. I have been at the racks in southern Utah and know this to be true. As to the big game board they are not giving the increases the biologists are asking for!!! They call the shots. Every one else lives with what they say!!!

Rock5150
 
Sure SFW makes a lot of $ on the tags, but if the dwr issues more tags across the board SFW still gets their 5 percent of the tags. There in a win win situation, just sell more tags for a little less money.
 
I think the SFW has done wonderful things in Utah. I have been a member for five years. My problem is not with the SFW. It is with the wildlife board. When we have bioligist in the state of utah who are frustrated with the board because they accept special interest groups numbers over theirs then there is a problem.

I know this is a little off subject. But similar in concept. I was told by a reputable source that the Southern region RAC voted to move back to a nine day deer hunt. In the mean time the Dixie wildlife club convinced the wildlife board to keep the hunt at five days. So what do we have a five day hunt.

It sounds like there needs to be a big number of bulls taken off of most of the Utah LE units to preserve herd quality. How do you propose this gets done?
 
The spike hunt is a good way to get rid of some bulls without ruining the quality of the anybull hunt, people that draw the anybull tag can look at shooting a good bull since it is pretty much a once in a life time hunt, you give to many anybull permits then we go back to the rag horn hunts, me personally I would rather be able to shoot a 350+ bull when I draw a tag, rather that giving to many permits and only being able to shoot a 300 bull. The spike hunt is a great idea to thin out bulls.
 
SFW... I doubt they would want the quality to go down at all. If it did, what do you think the auction tag prices would do?? You think a guy is going to pay the same for a 400 bull and a 360 bull?
Keep that in mind
 
I heard there would be about a 12% increase in permit numbers in most units. Many units were over age objectives. People who have management tags will burn their points. Everyone, res and non res will have to buy a license to apply. I see some improvements. More could be done.
 
I am not sure with this statewide spike hunt on many of the LE units you would not get just what you don't want in about 5 years. Big bull hunting was not intended to be a once in a life time event however, that is what it has become. lets manage to the age objective and see what happens.

I have not drown and want a good chance at a 350+ bull. I am just not convinced that will be the case if you look at the long term model of the spike hunt kill ratio and then the mortality rates of young bulls. By the time a bull gets to be 5,6,7, years old what are you left with in a herd that is managed for 1000 elk. 10-15% of the bulls born in each year and how many would that be. 53 bulls at 15% if you have 350 bulls born each year. That is a best case situation. Most of the LE units are not in a best case situation with number of bull to cow ratio. Best case would be 750-800 cows 250-200 two + year old bull now. Take the SWD its managed for 5-6 year old bull and they give 47 reg tags + 1 con tag and 2 land owner 1 out of state and 2 prem = 53 tags a year that want a 350+ bull.
You only have 200 to 250 Two + year old bulls. There is not 50, 350 class bull in that #. no way. Your total tag numbers would have to like 25 to have, even a chance.

No way that can be done with current draw numbers and current health of the herd.

What is the best way out???????

Rock5150
 
IMHO, the best way 'out' is issuing more LE tags with a higher percentage of the tags being issued to primitive weapon hunters. This will lower the bull/cow ratio yet still allow plenty of older bulls to survive year to year, and be available for those who are willing to hunt hard enough to find them. Look at the N Cache unit, it has a harvest age average of just over 4 year old bulls, the bull/cow ratio is around 35/100, and the overall success rate for the last 3 years is aroung 62%. Yet there are some B&C quality bulls harvested each year, with atleast 3 400+ bulls taken of this unit in the last 4 years, which is MORE than the number of 400+ bulls taken of the vaunted Monroe unit. It can be done, it should be done,, and if we don't come up with a better plan, there will be a statewide spike hunt implemented.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
PRO - if you DO increase tag numbers I think it such tags should be evenly distributed to the three hunts. In other words if you issued 12 new tags, 4 each would go to rifle, muzz, and archery. This means that 66% of the new tags go to primitive weapons. Is that what you have in mind? Or do you want an increase in only Muzz and archery?
 
Pro,

Why would issuing more primitive tags be the answer? You guys never kill anything? I agree with the post above. All types of hunters should be involved in solving the problem. I am getting tired of your "bow" getting stuffed down my throat.

I am going to be brutally honest here. I like hunting 8-12 year old bulls. After hunting 3 straight years, if I honestly have one concern, it is not 10 year old bulls, it is not the very limited tags, it is not elk dying of old age, it is the 1 to 2, or 1 to 3, bull to cow ratio. The rut has not been like I envisioned it. Could it be that nature is changing course due to the high ratios? Maybe so? The bulls do not call, you do not see the herd bull and satellite bulls calling and fighting, it is wierd. This is just my observation through Budweiser colored glasses.

If something needs to happen, protect those older age bulls. Do not get greedy to your style of hunting, nor do something stupid. I tend to think we got a problem of sorts and it needs to be addressed. However, keep the quality animals and hunting experience for those guys who are waiting with years and years invested!?!?
 
BTW, statewide spike hunt sucks. Plain and simple that plan sucks the big one! They cannot sell the damn spike tags they have right now. Who wants to shoot a stinkin cow with horns? Just shoot a cow.
 
Antler1,

What is wrong with Monroe? For some reason the draw odds suck like Pahvant and they have never even come close to killing the size of bulls most every other unit in Utah has killed? Kind of wierd if you ask me. 350 bulls are great bulls, but this seems to be the top end?
 
ktc,
It's a small unit with to much access and open on most of the mountain. The elk don't have anywhere to get away and grow old like some units.
I don't think they have the genetics to get the mass elk do on other units.

The wildlife board understands that. Thats why it was one of the only units not to get an increase in tags last year other then the management tags.
 
Pro, KTC

I think both of you are right. We all agree the spike hunt idea SUCKS. We all agree the ratio has to be fixed. WE ALL AGREE MORE TAGS. Some difference in how and when.

I like what bragabit has said in his Utah hunt proposal, some good stuff there. The only thing I am not sure of is if you increase early rifle hunt tags? The other 3 for sure.

What do you all think, people grow some stones and post. Speak up or button it. This forum doe's more good than you may think. You do not have to agree!! Just post!!

Rock5150
 
Good post Rock.

Antler1,

That helps me understand? Monroe has been a unit that has baffled me. Tough draw odds, less than top-end bulls, but every year people are lining up to get these tags with maximum points when they could easily switch units and kill as big if not bigger bulls. Don't get me wrong, Monroe always produces great bulls in the 350ish range, but not those 400 types that come from most every other unit? If I were looking for inches, which me and most others do, Monroe would NOT be my pick!

Thanks, just some out loud thinking my friend.
 
I agree that we should try an keep the quality of the hunts and not take away from the hunters that have 10+ years already invested, I dont agree that we should increase all the tags to do this, an increase of tags is needed but lets not give them for the rut hunts, create another late season hunt a 2nd late season hunt that people can go and hunt bulls, but will have an extremely hard time finding the bigger bulls. Keep the Archery, Muzzleloader, and early rifle as is, actually take some of the early rifle tags back and issue them else where, to many big bulls are being killed already.
A second late season will alow opportunity for people to hunt and if willing to hunt hard can find descent bulls, but this hunt will allow bigger bulls to make it another year.
 
Antler1 is partly right on the Monroe. Way too much access, no escapement, compared to N Cache which has high escapement due to limited access and a state line. I disagree on the genetics however, it is the access more than anything. The Monroe has the same genetics as the surrounding units. As for the Monroe being so popular, I think it is a combonation of the easy access, and the carried over reputation from the 80's when it was the premier trophy elk unit in the state. I wouldn't put the Monroe in the Top 10 myself.

ktc, I wish you would get off the rifle vs archery kick. It is YOU that makes the division, not me. I am stating FACTS, primitive weapons kill at lower success rates, and they are less likely to kill the older class bulls, so by issuing higher percentages of tags to the primitive weapons means MORE tags can be issued W/O knocking the quality way down. The 'extra' bulls killed due to the increase in tags would be more likely younger/middle aged bulls rather than the 8-10 year old bulls. This isn't/shouldn't be about rifle hunters vs primitive weapon hunters, it should be about how can we maximize opportunity w/o the least amount of negative impact on quality. I am baffled as to why this is such a hard concept to grasp.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
i agree the spike hunt idea sucks. i think one problem with the monroe nobody has talked about is all the cow permits over the past years has got the bull cow ratio all screwed up. and yes i am biased about the muzz tags cause i am a muzz hunter, but i dont think it will have a negative affect by giving more muzz and archery tags for more opportunity..
 
encore, when the 'masses' wail and gnash teeth EVERY time bull tags are increased, the DWR is given NO othe roption than to issue cow tags, the unit can only sustain some many elk, and if we don't kill the bulls all that is left is cows.

Get the bull/cow ratios down and issue more tags to less effective weapons and the quality will hardly see a blip, yet the health of the herd will greatly improve, allowing for MORE opportunity.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
>encore, when the 'masses' wail and
>gnash teeth EVERY time bull
>tags are increased, the DWR
>is given NO othe roption
>than to issue cow tags,
>the unit can only sustain
>some many elk, and if
>we don't kill the bulls
>all that is left is
>cows.
>
>Get the bull/cow ratios down and
>issue more tags to less
>effective weapons and the quality
>will hardly see a blip,
>yet the health of the
>herd will greatly improve, allowing
>for MORE opportunity.
>
>PRO
>
>Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy
>and opportunity hunts throughout the
>state of Utah.


PRO i agree 100% i was just sayiny that the bull cow rotio is all messed up on the monroe, now you have to kill more bulls to get it back in check. but that also gets people all crazy. damned if you do damned if you dont.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-11-08 AT 12:34PM (MST)[p]The Monroe odds stink because the Monroe WAS one of the best units in the state. 15 years ago, but it was the best. As such people got it into their heads that the Monroe was the place to go and they still put in for it. The Pahvant, Dutton, Beaver, etc were not producing huge bulls, in fact a 300 inch bull on those units 15 years ago was HUGE.

This quality phenomenon is new. It is about 10 years old and is due to the fact the DWR has not been allowed to manage to the set objectives (or the objectives were set too high). Those who drew in the last 5 years should be elated that they didn't draw 12 years ago and only get to hunt 320 bulls.

It is good to see other people coming around to the same line of thinking as I have posted on this subject for 5 years. I have taken my beatings, been threatened at the RACs, and even had a higher-up in a group threaten my business (not SFW). But the facts remain, we can kill more bulls and still produce quality. Just not as much quality.

I knew we could get KTC back into the discussion. I do agree with KTC on the primitive weapons portion of this subject. The resource should be divided between weapon types as percentages of hunters preferring each weapon. The break down right now shows there are about 15-20% archery hunters, 15-20% muzzleloader hunters, and 60-70% rifle hunters. (and I do archery hunt, if that makes any difference)

-------------------------
www.sagebasin.com
-------------------------
 
encore,
They haven't had any cow tags for a few years on Monroe. In 2002 and 2003 I think they gave about 50 each year. I think it was 2003 they flew it and found the unit is about 700 elk under objective. Cow killer hunts are not the problem with Monroe lately.

Pro,
If the AR301 hunts were still available would the bow/rifle tag allocation be an issue now? I know you archery guys feel slighted and rightfully so. I hate changing the rules in the middle of the game more then anyone.

I am to the point where I'd say take your 5 I400 units and get it done. Just don't come back every year wanting 5 more units.

Good Luck
 
I can't believe I am going to admit this. Pro is making a lot of sense. Giving 10 additional early rifle tags would affect the quality more than 30 archery tags would. KTC you admitted it yourself that a 330 bull with a bow is a great bull. Would you shoot it with a rifle? probably not. If you gave 30 more bow tags 15 bulls would be killed maybe 5 would be 6 plus years old and the other 10 less desirable bull. 10 early rifle tags would kill 10 bulls with 8 being 6 year old plus bulls. Just my thought no fact just an educational guess. More bulls need to be killed to get ratios inline.
 
>encore,
>They haven't had any cow tags
>for a few years on
>Monroe. In 2002 and 2003
>I think they gave about
>50 each year. I think
>it was 2003 they flew
>it and found the unit
>is about 700 elk under
>objective. Cow killer hunts are
>not the problem with Monroe
>lately.
>
>Pro,
>If the AR301 hunts were still
>available would the bow/rifle tag
>allocation be an issue now?
>I know you archery guys
>feel slighted and rightfully so.
>I hate changing the rules
>in the middle of the
>game more then anyone.
>
>I am to the point where
>I'd say take your 5
>I400 units and get it
>done. Just don't come back
>every year wanting 5 more
>units.
>
>Good Luck
>
>


Again, this is NOT about rifle vs archery to me. It comes down to how to maximize opportunity with little/no negative effects on quality. If you tripled, I am NOT advocating such, the number of archery tags the quality would be barely if at all effected by doing so on MOST LE units. Since they started issuing LE archery tags in 2004 the success rate for archers has gone down by 10+% due to increased pressure from more hunters in the field. Rifle hunters have basically falt-lined on success rates staying between 87-91%. Muzzy has stayed the around the same as well, I think mostly due to lower number of muzzy hunters even with the increases in tag numbers.

If/when I400 goes through, I will NOT be hunting/applying on those units. I am not pushing this for "me", but for increased opportunity since I constantly get told how this is a need and a desire from MOST Utah hunters. I'll draw my tag this year, I am willing to be done with LE elk hunting, or willing to wait another 15+ years for another LE archery tag on a premium LE unit.

Packout, as I have said many times before, many who apply for LE RIFLE tags are archers/muzzy hunters who apply for the season/weapon with the highest success rates due to the basically once in a lifetime hunt. Many chose to hunt with rifle because they are not willing to burn their points on an archery tag and then have a great bull at 100 yards away and can't close the deal. Make the primitive weapon hunts more appealing and make it possible to draw more than once/twice in a lifetime and MORE hunters will become primitive weapon hunters. Look at the archery deer season, the last three years they have reached the cap on tags, and each year it has happened earlier. This is due to the desire to hunt and the limited rifle tags available.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
You see, I am a dumbass and I need pro to help me understand things. There for a minute I thought pro was about equality until I remembered he is El Presidente or the UBA or whatever they call themselves. Certainly it is only coincidence. It will never be archery vs. rifle as long as he gets his own way. He makes it sound like bowhunters are the purists in our sport. I hate to break it to him, but this year I saw 3 problems; one big bull left to rot with half an arrow in it, and 2 buck deer sporting new arrow fletches hanging out the sides of them. This will help the ratios for sure. Have you noticed a big increase in quality since AR-301 went away on Dutton pro? I sure did. Guess archers did have an impact. That is a Fact Jack. What he forgets is some people cannot pull back a bow and twist their hips to go hunt with the damn things anyway. Guess you do not give a sh!t about that right? Think a little deeper and come up with a fair plan buddy.

I am with Antler1. Take your 5 units and go play.

I am not involved in this PO. Just stopped by to see some old friends.;-) I better go eat my Alzhiemer pills now.
 
Please do not forget the 'Pro' bowhunters extra 5 days.... OOPS I mean early 5 days... August 16th for primo elk hunt dates....WTF.....?

'Claim to Fame'........ bowhunters having August 16th for a HUGE benefit......

Robb
 
I promise, I like bow hunters and admire the dedication they have. brag, yes, a 330 bull is a great bull with bow...or rifle! Would I feel good with a 330 bull with a rifle, probably. Sure my dreams would be higher, but Utards seems to have this 380 or nothing menatality.

pro, I apologize. I get wound up trying to argue with you more than anything. However, I think you need to look past the bow and arrow and realize the majority rifle hunt. Some concessions to your factoids with bow and arrow must be made. Otherwise, you are going to be in for a fight I doubt you can win. I tried to be honest a few posts back in my observations the last 3 years. Ratios need to be put into check some what, but these guys with dreams or years and years invested need their interests protected. "And that is all I got to say about that!"

Keep trying to do what is best, but look past the archer is all I am saying.
 
I am as guilty as anyone when it comes to wanting quality bulls to hunt when I finally draw my tag. And I have been against tag increases in the past, but we are getting to the point where something has to change. Tags are going to be increased and most instances they need to be. I am a bowhunter and I would love to see more tags go to the archers, but the percentages have already been set on who gets what.

If we are going to do it and try and maintain the quality of elk that Utah is now famous for. We need to move the early rifle hunt back and start them some time in October. This allows you to issue more tags and kill fewer of the larger bulls. And the big ones that do get gunned down will have already passed on there superior genes. The rifle hunters will still get their bull, but they will have to work a little harder for it than they have been.

This isn't a new concept most look around us most states already do this.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-11-08 AT 04:54PM (MST)[p]No to the state wide spike hunt for me! We have the room and the need, to take more mature bulls so why not?
We could issue enough tags to the rifle hunters to get the herds in check, which would mean more top end bulls would be killed.
We could evenly distribute the desired number of tags, then it would be fair to all who hunt, but then same problem, more top end bulls would be killed.
We could give those tags out slowly to the primitive weapon hunters, Far fewer top end bulls would be killed, yet still thinning out the bulls, slowly.
It is a fact, that the average bull taken with a rifle is bigger than the average with primitive weapons. Yet everyone wants to maintain the quality of elk for years to come, but yet some want more rifle tags? As one great philosiphor said: "Its like wipin before you poop, it don't make no sense!"
The other problem I see to the state wide spike hunt would be if the herds start to crash as far as quality, how hard will it be to pull those tags from all the spike hunters? Impossible?
Second, the board has major problems if they refuse to listen to the state biologists! That is why we have them isn't it? To tell us whats best for the future of our animal populations? Keep them healthy?
 
How about NO NEW RUT rifle tags and distribute extra tags to archery, muzzle, and late rifle evenly or according to kill success ratios in the past harvest reports. This way everyone will get a piece of the pie. It will allow more tags, less harvest on big bulls. I don't think expanding spike hunting makes sense when the demand for trophy hunts are so high.
 
This less harvest on big bulls with archery is garbage.You might want to look at Doyles site and see who's killing what.The biggest bull's off SW Desert the past 3 years have been archery.
 
Huntin100,
I beleive you are on to something. This way the rifle hunters could get their share of new tags. If we want to keep the rifle hunt in the rut, which I am for then we need to keep those numbers down.

Right now Utah distributes tags planning for 100% kill. Early rifle that is pretty close. Archery kill rates around 40 percent and muzzleloader somewhere around 80.
 
>This less harvest on big bulls
>with archery is garbage.You might
>want to look at Doyles
>site and see who's killing
>what.The biggest bull's off SW
>Desert the past 3 years
>have been archery.


the biggest bulls go to probably 10% of the hunting population the fact is that most of your average Joe hunters are very happy with a 330 to 350 class bull . you can't look at Doyles results and take them as gospel for the the whole hunting population ! the guys and gals that hunt with Mossback are paying for that kind of bull period .

I agree that they just need to move more tags out of the rut and put them in the other hunts with less success .
I think that a state Wide spike hunt is a bad Idea and anybody that has hunted the North cache since they made it a spike hunt would probably agree .
 
From one blow hard to another.

Pro is correct with his ideas. This is how Arizona runs theirs hunts. Arizona gives out 150 archery tags at least per unit and Utah gives out 20. Arizona still kills just as many 400? bulls every year as Utah.

The difference is more people are willing to risk using their points and hunt with their bow because they can hunt every 5 years or so. ?They don't have waiting periods either? They might not kill a 400? bull but they get to hunt many more times in their life. If you apply with friends on same unit but not as a group you could almost hunt every year.

The benefit to you rifle hunters is this takes out a hell of a lot more people that put in for the rifle tags. ?Gives you die hard rifle hunters like KTC a better chance at drawing the tag.?

It really is a win win.




Archery is a year round sport!!
 
huntin100,

You are a genius. That is the kind of thinking we need out there. No special interest in any weapon type, but tries to resolve the issue through the best and most current means.

I got/get excited when the archers complain, but realize the rifle hunters are very lethal. Without crying the blues of the weapon difficulty you consider the current status of what is happening and offer the rifle hunters late tags. You are about give and take. Not just take.

Your post is about the most level headed post I have seen in this debate.
 
been out for a few hours, but i definitely think huntin100 is on to something here...
 
Pleasedear wrote: "Please do not forget the 'Pro' bowhunters extra 5 days.... OOPS I mean early 5 days... August 16th for primo elk hunt dates....WTF.....?
'Claim to Fame'........ bowhunters having August 16th for a HUGE benefit......"

Do you really want to go down this road Robb? I am willing if you are!

ktc, you just don't get it, probably never will. I am NOT advocating 'taking away' anything from rifle hunters. The question is; how do we increase opportunity with minimal impact on quality? You keep saying archers affect quality as much as rifle hunters. That is ABSURD. Rifle hunters tag out at 90% success rates, not including unrecovered animals, and YES they happen EVERY year during the rifle hunt. There is no way archers kill anywhere near that many animals EVER! Look at the Wasatch Front, it is an OTC tag that has bucks that rival ANY LE deer unit in Utah, including the Henries. How is that possible with over a THOUSAND hunters hunting it each year if archers kill so many animals ans kill so many big animals? The proof is in the pudding.

So, back to reality, I am NOT the president or "el presidente" of UBA, nor have I EVER claimed to be. I am merely a Board member. But, that has NOTHING to do with this topic nor I400 (which is not being pushed/endorsed by UBA). What I post is 100% my opinion and what I believe could/should be implemented to increase opportunity while maintaining quality. Like I and others have stated, change WILL occur in 2009, you/I can choose to play a part in the direction it goes, or we can sit on our collective butts and do NOTHING and complain after a 'bad' idea is implemented, just as Please Dear has chosen to do on the changes to the archery elk season dates!

PRO


Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Pro I have to agree with you on this on, as much as
I hate too. More archery tags with one week later to hunt and the rifle hunters odds will increase cause a lot more studs will archery hunt. Ktc should want this to happen.
 
I am thinking A-Team.
I LOVE IT WHEN A PLAN COMES TOGETHER!!!!
Please see post 19.
New Question, how many of you are going to the racks in feb/march when this increase of tags is going to be proposed?
If most are for giving more tags to 3 out of the 4 hunts how do you get the % allocation put to all but early rifle? Can it even be done?

Rock5150
 
PRO,

I guess I will never get it. You are not advocating taking away anything, but what you do advocate is not equally diving out the profit sharing. That I do get. You are an endless circle of bulllshit PRO. I even go on record saying I apologize that I get a rise out of arguing with you and you are so determined to push your agendas you missed that part I guess.

Like I said, I respect any archer who picks his weapon and gives it hell. When the dust settles he is happy with his hunt and the results. Not those cry babies who find it necessary to blame the DWR for the dates they set or the range of their bow. You know who I am talking about. We hear it every year, "You can hunt Arizona every 5 years, why don't archers get the rut, anyone can kill an elk with a rifle, blah, blah, blah. I will make it rifle vs bow because there are SOME bow hunters who have made it this for many years.

I know you are not El Presidente of anything Pro, just like I said, giving you some sh!t you cannot take. The thing that cracks me up is a guy gives a good idea about elk and tag allocations, since it is not your agenda, it sucks. It is not a bad idea, just bad agenda.

Just for the record pro I get it. Your round-a-bout way of telling me I am stupid I also get. We can further discuss that at a later time if you prefer. What I get in your eyes, is archery is a great management tool, archery hardly kills a thing, archery needs more tags, archery needs longer and more preferrable dates, and if you are an elite purist, you bow hunt. Does that sound right? If not, that is the message you portray. The thing that cracks me up is just about every person since huntin100 suggested the tag allocations percentage to weapon minus the early rifle has thought this to be a viable option. Everyone but YOU! Don't tell me you don't have motives.
 
"Just for the record pro I get it. Your round-a-bout way of telling me I am stupid I also get. We can further discuss that at a later time if you prefer. What I get in your eyes, is archery is a great management tool, archery hardly kills a thing, archery needs more tags, archery needs longer and more preferrable dates, and if you are an elite purist, you bow hunt. Does that sound right? If not, that is the message you portray. The thing that cracks me up is just about every person since huntin100 suggested the tag allocations percentage to weapon minus the early rifle has thought this to be a viable option. Everyone but YOU! Don't tell me you don't have motives."

For the record ktc, I do NOT think you are stupid, I do believe archery is a great management tool, archers kill way fewer animals than rifle hunters, the best way to increase opportunity w/o hurting quality is with arhcery tags, I am NOT an elite purist. I like huntin100's idea, I have been thinking it over as far as pros/cons. I think it would be a huge improvement over what we currently have, I just don't know YET if it is the 'best' option out there. HAPPY NOW?!

PRO


Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Someone said you can hunt elk in Arizona every 5 years using archery equipment on elk.I want to know what I am doing wrong sitting on 11 points and have not drawn even once and yes that is applying for archery permits.The truth is residents and non-residents do not get to hunt every 5 years in the better units thats a fact.How many have hunted Arizona during the archery elk every 5 years if its good hunting on those units please let me know I would like to go every 5 years instead of holding out for the better units and try and make a once in lifetime tag be worth it when and if I do draw.
 
Pro

What do you think of bragabits thoughts on his hunt proposal idea? Along with giving the new tag % to the bow, muzz, and late rifle? How would it be done? That is some thing different. That answers your question that is at the bottom of every one of your posts.
I think.

Warbirdum thanks for that insight good call.

Rock5150
 
I like hunt100s idea,

I also think this is how you whould implement the tags, if you was to raise the number of tags by 100%

45% increase in Archery tags.

35% increase in Muzz tags.

20%increase in late rifle tags.

That is a 100% increase of tags, maybe 100% is to much I dont know but I do think there sould be more Bow and muzzy tags given out than fifle.

I personaly dont think it is fair for there to be so many more rifle tags in the first place, even if there are more people who hunt rifle, it is your choice what you want to hunt with. I think there should be a few more rifle tags for the older and younger people that cant hunt with a bow, but not what it is at now.

Jake H. MM Member since 1999.
458738e374dfcb10.jpg
 
Hang in there Pro, these rifle blasters want 100 percent kill rates in the rut and the same amount of tags as the primitive weapons. It just makes zero sense. If a primitive weapon has 50 percent kill rate, they should have twice the tags. Common guys its not rocket science. Russ
 
WHAT??????

Who says (THEY) want a 100% increase in tags. 100% of the break down to bow, muzz and late rifle, if you have more tags what ever those #s are. As much as a 100% is suggested ( personly I am not in favor of that big of an increase). Did you read the other posts?????????? WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER THE QUESTIONS POSED.

"<If a primitive weapon has 50 percent kill rate, they should have twice the tags.>"

This is only the case if you are saying every weapon should harvest about the same Number of animals and, that has not even be suggested tell you? Is that what you are saying?

Rock5150
 
WARBIRDUM Not trying to take a hit at you.

I don't know why you have 11 points and haven't drawn a tag. Maybe you don't research your units. Maybe you are putting in for the very best unit this is killing your chances at hunting every year. We have been putting in for lesser quality units and drawing tags, "getting hunting opportunity."

Maybe you saw midnights post on Arizona they drew that tag with zero points and killed a 320" bull and a 410" bull. They will be able to put in this years draw and possible be able to draw in 2008 with zero point.

A Friends dad and uncle drew with 2 points. They didn't kill any thing but missed a bull at 20 yards that would go 360". These are rifle guys that don't practice and just missed. Their hunt also ended early when one of them fell out of the tree and broke his femur.

Another friend drew with 3 points and didn't kill anything once again had bulls in to forty yards but they didn't give him the shot.

Every one of these hunts would have been over in the first 2 days if they had a rifle. There would be 5 dead bulls instead of 2. Each and every one of my friend?s hunts lasted at least 5 to 11 days. You can bet they are hungry to hunt again but unlike Utah they will get their chance again.

Archery equipment can offer more opportunity to the general public without the high success rates. Therefore more tags can be given out more people can hunt ?The facts.? That is the way it should be.

Unlike Utah?s once in a life time, 100 percent success rate, 2 day shoots.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-08 AT 05:54PM (MST)[p]KTC wrote

?You and Russ sound like either elite bowhunting purists or bunny huggers. Not sure which side of the fence you are on?"

I am a converted rifle hunter only because Utah has a unit I can hunt deer in every year that has an over the counter 35 dollar tag with 200? deer running around in. I hated hunting on skyline drive and never seeing anything except orange shirts, 4-wheelers, and 2 point deer.

?Let me tell you something swb. WARBIRDUM knows more about elk hunting than you and your friend's dad and uncle will probably ever know.?

He probably does!

?Just like everyone, they had a chance at a 360 but missed. Sure it was not 380? ?

Does it matter the score? They had an opportunity to hunt.

?Their hunts lasted 5-11? What the hell does that prove? They suck at elk hunting or they just suck at bow hunting?? it just shows how hard it is to take a bull if you do draw. There are no guarantees in hunting only shooting.

?The last rifle elk hunt I went on lasted 4 days? Does that mean something special??

NO it only means you took the time and killed a better than average bull. Which I saw, By the way it was a great bull. I wish you had the chance to do it again. But you wont the way it is now.

?I cannot believe some of you morons. Why don't you pull your nose out of pro's ass swb??

Pro is proposing changes and getting things changed in Utah which I agree with if I agree with you or anybody else?s proposals I will push them through also.
 
Uncle.

You guys win.

Please help the elk herd the best way you guys see fit.

I only hoped to offer a differing point of view.

Enjoy!

It was fun.

May the bugles be loud, the arrows fly true, and the steaks taste great.
 
100% raise in tags give me a break! 30 percent would be pushing it. I agree primitive weapons seccess rate is lower than rifle. I also remember attending a RAC meeting and being told that the age data on teeth from elk showed that the average age of elk killed with rifle, bow and muzzleloader were all the same. That throws Pro's theory out the window that bow hunters kill "lesser" animals that rifle hunters.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-08 AT 09:53PM (MST)[p]swbuckmaster,
You must have Arizona archery elk units figured out with this talk of 320-410 bulls and talk of guys killing 320-410 bulls in units that dont take but 0-2 points to draw ect...
I want to thank you for opening my eyes on Arizona archery elk odds.
I now want to cash all 11 points that I have now on a unit that I can draw every year.WHAT WAS I THINKING?I know many residents in Arizona that get less tags than you say you are getting.I would keep that unit very hush, hush if I were you.Good luck drawing another elk tag for 320-410 Arizona archery bulls,with 0-5 points.Did you know you have more knowledge on odds and units than all NOT JUST SOME BUT all of the big name guides in Arizona have.
Congrats now why in the hell would you worry about Utah odds when you can go kill those kind of bulls in Arizona every other year if not every year with a bow?
<Ishi-The Last Yana>
Passing The Torch
Little did Ishi realize in 1911,as he hesitantly stepped into the modern world,tired,scared,and starving,that he would provide the vehicle for which the primitive hunting
of wildlife with a bow and arrow would be resurrected and thrive in the century to follow.Literally tens of thousands who trailed in his hesitant footsteps have enjoyed the ancient rituals and connections between man and his envoroment found through what we simply refer to as BOWHUNTING.
As with all things in history,bowhunting too will continue to evolve.Hopefully,we,and our bowhunting way of life-true,ethical,and natural-will not "EVOLVE TOO FAR."
 
One last response to a thread spiraling out of control fast.

bragabit wrote: "100% raise in tags give me a break! 30 percent would be pushing it. I agree primitive weapons seccess rate is lower than rifle. I also remember attending a RAC meeting and being told that the age data on teeth from elk showed that the average age of elk killed with rifle, bow and muzzleloader were all the same. That throws Pro's theory out the window that bow hunters kill "lesser" animals that rifle hunters."

Odd, when I directly asked the former AND the current Big Game Coordinators for the DWR if such data was available, they BOTH told me no, but that they would work on getting such data compiled for me. I am still waiting for the data!

Overall success rates for different weapons:
2004 Archery = 52.6%
2005 Archery = 45.3%
2006 Archery = 36.1%
Three year average = 43.8% with a steady DECREASE in success rates as tag numbers have increased. In 2006 there were 49 more tags issued with 19 FEWER bulls killed than in 2005.

2004 Muzzy = 78.1%
2005 Muzzy = 69.5%
2006 Muzzy = 72.0%
Three year average = 71.3% holding fairly stable the last two years. In 2006 muzzy tags were 200 lower in number yet they killed 34 MORE bulls.

2004 Rifle = 89.6%
2005 E Rifle = 88.9%
2005 L Rifle = 75.6%
2006 E Rifle = 90.2%
2006 L Rifle = 87.6%
Three year Early Rifle average = 88.9%
Two year Late Rifle average = 82.3%. That is 6.6% LOWER success rate on the late hunt in comparison to the early hunt.

2004 Overall = 79.5%
2005 Overall = 74.3%
2006 Overall = 74.6%
Three year average = 75.1%. Rifle hunters in 2006 got 60% of the tags and killed 72.5% of the bulls, muzzy hunters got 15% of the tags and killed 13.3% of the bulls, archery hunters got 25% of the tags and killed 10.9% of the bulls.

Looking at this data shows why the bulk of those applying put in for early rifle, they get MORE tags and harvest at higher rates, and have the best dates. If I were a rifle hunter I would look for ways to improve my odds, and I do NOT believe making the early rifle hunt MORE attractive is the way to do so. I have been accused of having an "archery driven agenda" and that somehow what I am advocating will benefit archers more than other weapons. Nonsense! If I were to be selfish, I would want the fewest applicants I could get to improve MY odds and looking at the data shows the ONLY weapon greatly/consistently affected in a negative way on success rates when more tags are issued, is ARCHERY. So, again what do I as an archery have to gain by suggesting that archery is the BEST way to increase overall opprotunity and have the least negative impact on quality? Help me out here, please!

PRO


Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
You guys are all saying that we need more tags to help the herds, so you give 50 more bow tags and 10 kill, is this the answer? This is going to have a minimal effect on helping the herds when they still have to kill 250 cows off a unit to keep the herds in objective.

What would be wrong with a state wide spike hunt if they keep the #'s of spike tags where they are currently at??

It seems to be the Boulder (spike unit) killed the biggest bulls in the state this year.

I think this is the only way to keep the quality, and get the Bull/cow ratio's back in order. I agree with an earlier post, that the rut is way different the past few years at least on the swd unit. You have 6 bulls fighting over 4 cows. The big bull fights one bull off and another is there to fight him again. Pretty soon he is wiped out by a smaller bull because he is to tired from fighting other bulls.

I said it once before and I will say it again. There is not much difference for me shooting a 300 bull or a spike. Niether one are going on the wall, and they both have good meat. First priority is we must keep the quality!!!! Maybe I am spoiled, but I have 11 bonus points in Co. and have no desire to even use them on what they have to offer me.
By the way I have killed 3 300 bulls 3 spikes and no bigger elk, but have sure enjoyed watching others kill them, and call them in.
 
I don't know why I love these discussions this time of year but I do. I guess I just like to argue or talk hunting to anybody that wants to listen. Please don't take anything I say too personal.

I just hope I can personally hunt elk on a LE unit in Utah or another state some day and I really don't care if it is with a bow or a rifle I just want a chance to hunt them. When it comes to hunting LE units I am always the brides? maid so to speak always at the wedding but never the one getting married.
 
all of these were posted by Rock5150

"Who says (THEY) want a 100% increase in tags. 100% of the break down to bow, muzz and late rifle, if you have more tags what ever those #s are. As much as a 100% is suggested ( personly I am not in favor of that big of an increase). Did you read the other posts?????????? WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER THE QUESTIONS POSED.

Pro
What do you think of bragabits thoughts on his hunt proposal idea? Along with giving the new tag % to the bow, muzz, and late rifle? How would it be done? That is some thing different.


If most are for giving more tags to 3 out of the 4 hunts how do you get the % allocation put to all but early rifle? Can it even be done?

What do you all think, people grow some stones and post. Speak up or button it. This forum doe's more good than you may think. You do not have to agree!! Just post!!

Rock5150
"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is what I posted.

I like hunt100s idea,
I also think this is how you whould implement the tags, if you was to raise the number of tags by 100%

45% increase in Archery tags.

35% increase in Muzz tags.

20%increase in late rifle tags.

That is a 100% increase of tags, maybe 100% is to much I dont know but I do think there sould be more Bow and muzzy tags given out than rifle.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



Dude you are a douche, you ask for an oppion ANY oppion, tell us to grow some stones, and then when I give one you bash me because you dont like it, WHAT A DOUCHE. I CLEARLY stated that I liked huntin100's idea, and then I awnsered your question about how we should dole out the tags.

The only question I didnt awnser was the one about going to the racs, are you ready for it. Probly not!!!!!

Reread my post, I said plan as day that I didnt know if a 100% increase was needed I basicly used it to give a breakdown of the percentages and how they should allocate the new tags if they was to give them out.

Here let me try again, someone said 30% is enough, so of that 30% break it down into the percentages I gave and there you go.

Ktc, I didnt get to see what you posted befor you edited it but it must not of been good or you wouldnt have edited it, I know it refered to me because of what SW Buck hunter quoted from it, no I am not a Tree Hugger or a bow hunting purist, I hunt with Rifle and bow, I was mearly stateing my oppion on the matter but I guess you didnt like that to much.

You know what I think I will just stay out of this descusion, I have only been on one LE unit and it isnt even one of the ones being talked about, so WTF do I know.



Jake H. MM Member since 1999.
458738e374dfcb10.jpg
 
Why do we need to ##### with ##### that ain't broke? There are plenty of places to hunt. Do we really want an elk herd that mirrors our ##### up deer herd? Go to colorado and hunt their 300" ##### bulls! SAY YES TO NO MORE TAGS. More will be less!
 
Jake,

No, it was not geared toward you at all. I had to delete my posts because I was getting too mouthy again.;-)

NUNYA,

You take over. Maybe you can get your point across because I sure suck at it.

I will never understand why an archer needs to pound his chest and take pot shots at a guy who hunts with a rifle? I swear to God we got Bob Barker trolling the forums.

What would Ishi do? Probably get himself a Hoyt and go shoot stuff instead of playing on MM? I know one thing, he would be in Arizona shooting 410 bulls every year.
 
I'D SAY SOMETHING BUT!!!

LIL WAYNE ALREADY SAID IT!!!

WHAT THE #### MORE CAN I SAY???

THIS IS MY NEW GUN,YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT,YOU'LL LIKE IT A HELL OF A LOT LESS WHEN IT HITS ITS DESTINATION!!!
47654abd5a8fd79a.jpg


469ff2b8110d7f4e.jpg


THE ONLY bobcat THAT KNOWS ALOT OF YOU HAVE HAD THIS IMAGE IN YOUR PEA BRAIN BUT DUE TO POOR SHOOTING TACTICS I'M STILL KICKIN!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-08 AT 09:06AM (MST)[p]More elk tags? Stink would even say it Stinks.
 
I have no gripe with bow hunters. I have said that 100 times. I would never tear a guy's trophy apart because he shot it with a bow either, However, it sure seems that people like to rip my methods.

I am sure B&C, Teddy Roosevelt, and most American gun manufacturers would love to see the simple minded, and greedy, attitudes of the hunters today. The NRA fights for our rights to bear arms and hunt, yet most of the people on this thread act like they are a cut above the rest.

swb made comment about giving up his rifle for a better experience. If you are tired of Skyline Drive and the masses, then maybe you should lobby to decrease tags and spread hunter densities rather than beg for increases? If all you saw was 2 points while rifle hunting then maybe you should hone your skills? I am with you, bagging a true trophy with a rifle is tough. I cannot impress on you enough how difficult it is to kill a record book animal and I do not care what unit you are hunting.

You bow hunters also impress upon me and others how important opportunity is to you. Is your idea of opportunity and days in the field on a quality hunt taking away someone else's opportunity? What you are saying is if less people cn rifle hunt and you give them less opportunity then some how that equates to more opportunity? I agree if you bow hunt. If you do not bow hunt then what?

I applied for a lot of years to draw elk. I waited my turn. In 4 more years I can apply for a bow tag with better draw odds or apply for another any weapon tag. For personal reasons I will apply for an any weapon tag. That is my decision to make. Do not tell me about draw odds or anything else. I can make up my mind and I promise I will not try to take away from your sport in the meantime.

swb, I think you need to research your thoughts on Arizona. Draw odds there are very tough. I hear the same gripes in Arizona I hear here. Tough draw odds for quality animals. NM also has tough draw odds for quality animals. I would hope when you do draw, you do not come home empty or a sub 300 bull, then gripe at the guy who drew the better tag or chose the rifle hunt.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-08 AT 10:18AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-08 AT 09:54?AM (MST)

Pro,
when I said the DWR bioligist told us at a RAC meeting that all seasons, and all weapons killed basically the same age class bulls. It was from the hunt in 2005. I don;t think things ahve changes drastically in two years.

For those of you that want no change in the way, and number of tags that Utah issues need to go spend a few days in the field. Just because there are 400 inch bulls being killed doesn't mean the herds are anywhere near healthy. 1 to 1 bull cow ratios aren't good. There have been years on the SW Desert in the recent past when there were 40 bulls killed and 400 cows. No that is not a misprint 10 times more cows than bulls, There is something wrong with that. If this keeps up there will be no rut to fight over who gets to hunt it.

Spike only would be the quickest fix, without hurting immediate quality. If they went this route I would like to see limited numbers to keep harvest at around 50% of the spikes.
Most of us agree more bulls need to be killed, we just differ by how, and by whom. I don't know why we are woried about it. The wildlife board will do as they please. It really doesn't matter what we, or the DWR Bioligist think.
 
Bragabit, having spent "little or no time in the field" I apologize for wishing no tag increase at this time. In the future I will endeavor to spend more time in field to better educate myself on the health issues of our utah elk herd. Please continue on with your fight to ##### up our elk herd, that we may each and everyone have equal rights and opportunity in hunting what I would term "dink" bulls. Thanks.
 
> Bragabit, having spent "little or
>no time in the field"
>I apologize for wishing no
>tag increase at this time.
>In the future I will
>endeavor to spend more time
>in field to better educate
>myself on the health issues
>of our utah elk herd.
>Please continue on with your
>fight to ##### up our
>elk herd, that we may
>each and everyone have equal
>rights and opportunity in hunting
>what I would term "dink"
>bulls. Thanks.

NUNYA, there are several LE units that are NOT healthy. Having as many bulls as cows in a herd is not healthy/normal/desirable from a biological standpoint. There are units that have LOWER bull/cow ratios than the unit you guided on in 2007 (Monroe) that have BIGGER bulls. Having excess bulls does NOT ensure quality, a healthy herd does improve the odds.

You, ktc, and others imply those of us wanting more opportunity and healthier elk herds are selfish, yet it is YOU guys advocating keeping tag numbers down even at the expense of the health of the herds and the day WILL come when there will be some ugly outcomes to the herds if we don't get them inline with where the Elk Management Plan and it's objectives say the elk herds should be. I doubt most of you against tag increases and lower bull/cow ratios even know what the objectives are and why they are set where they are. Lower age averages to OBJECTIVES and getting bull/cow ratios inline does NOT equate to "dink" bulls. Since when is a 6-7 year bull a "dink bull, especially when that is the AVERAGE age harvested, not the maximum age harvested?

bragabit, you summed up why I am NOT in favor of a statewide spike hunt, it is the "easy" way out, while bypassing BETTER options that are more appealing to MOST hunters, yet allows for the herds to be better balanced as far as bull/cow ratios and calf/cow ratios are concerned, while maintaining quality at high levels.

Why should my chances of drawing, since ktc has AGAIN accused me of being selfish, be hindered by a rifle hunters desires to hunt when he has 100% chance to kill a 330+ bull? Who the hell is being selfish, the guy looking for ways to increase tags, or the guy wanting a "CANNED" hunt?

PRO


Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
bragabit do you feel SW Desert has too many elk? The 40 bulls don't seem to be the problem,but 400 cows sure does.Would have to agree with you 1to1 ratios suck.The overall herd numbers appear too have declined the past 10 years.
 
Pro,I know excess bulls do not ensure quality. Genetics and age ensure quality. Monroe sucks as far as I am concerned. Poor genetics there. However with an excess of bulls on surounding units some bulls OF A HIGHER GENETIC CALIBER MAY AND DO TRAVEL ON TO THE MONROE, KICKING ASS TAKING NAMES AND BREEDING COWS. THUS ENSURING QUALITY.
Now to be honest I have taken 2 mature bulls from LE units in utah and one in Az so I really have no desire to kill another large elk for myself. Have at it. However I do have a fetish for seeing exceptionally large bulls on the ground dead, dead, dead in my home state of Ut. so I will continue seeking them out and hunting them with those who want to take them. Go ahead and give every mother ##### with a bow and $280 a tag. I will take the year off from elk hunting and go rock climbing.
How can you people not see?????? Look at the surrounding states Az. Co. Nm. look at the tag numbers the give compared to us. Then look at the quality of elk we are killing over them.
IF IT ISN"T BROKE DON"T ##### FIX IT!!!!!!!! Lets just keep killing those sickly, unhealthy 400+ inch bulls.
 
But NUNYA, we are dancing with the devil. How long will there be "400 inch bulls" to stand over and admire when the herds crash? I love and enjoy seeing the 400 class bulls on the hoof and on the ground every bit as much as you or any other forum member. But, we can't ignore reason/logic/biology in the long term for the short term pleasures. We keep going the direction we are going and we won't stay on top very long. I'm willing to put money on it!

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Crash?? Why would they crash? What difference does it make if there are 30 360+ bulls or 30 280+ bulls.
The crash I see would be similar to the crash on the fishlake when the DWR gave everybody with a DL and 10 dollars a ##### elk tag. That was a crash. Do you honestly believe having twice as many morons with bows and muzzleloaders running around wounding elk is going to HELP the herd????
Really, I am getting way to passionate about something I really don't care all that much about. I would rather hunt Mule deer, bighorn sheep, climb rocks and ride my trials bike than hunt elk anyway. Already killed 3 and will draw two other good elk hunts out of state long before I even have the opption of putting in for elk in Ut again. ##### it.
 
The crash will be from EXCESS bulls, not "30 360" bulls but bull/cow ratios that LIMIT the number of calves born each year. The size of the bulls has NOTHING to do with the health of the herd. What happens WHEN we have another drought and there are few cows to to sustain the population? From a biological standing, these excess bulls are NOT healthy for the herd in the long term. We MUST look beyond today and see where we are headed. When you are on the Monroe/Dutton/Pahvant/San Juan/SW Desert, you are likely to see more bulls than cows, that is not good/normal. Right now under great climate conditions we are avoiding disaster, but WHEN we hit bumpy weather, the herds will have nothing to hold them up but a bunch of old bulls that can/will do NOTHING to help the herds survive during rough times. The bulls are getting older on most LE units, this is due to several factors, one is the limited amount of new bulls being recruited into the herds due to loss calf production that is a direct result of low cow numbers that are a result of the DWR being pressured into having excess bulls in the herd which mandates lower cow numbers in the mix. Any one who has been around livestock can tell you how upside down the elk bull/cow ratios are on many LE units here in Utah.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
WTF BART??? Great climate conditions? I thought we were in a drought.
"old bulls that can/will do nothing to help the herd survive???? WTF does that mean???? Do the young bulls help the calve across the road in heavy snow storms and bring bales of hay to the starving cows??? WTF BART?????
 
Missing the point again WAYNE. Maybe I missed the "drought" since I found water and good feed everywhere I went in 2007. Do OLD bulls help the "calve" across the road in heavy snow storms and bring bales of hay to starving cows??? WTF WAYNE????

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
>
>Dude you are a douche, you
>ask for an oppion ANY
>oppion, tell us to grow
>some stones, and then when
>I give one you bash
>me because you dont like
>it, WHAT A DOUCHE.
>I CLEARLY stated that I
>liked huntin100's idea, and then
>I awnsered your question about
>how we should dole out
>the tags.
>
>The only question I didnt awnser
>was the one about going
>to the racs, are you
>ready for it. Probly
>not!!!!!
>
>Reread my post, I said plan
>as day that I didnt
>know if a 100% increase
>was needed I basicly used
>it to give a breakdown
>of the percentages and how
>they should allocate the new
>tags if they was to
>give them out.
>
>Here let me try again, someone
>said 30% is enough, so
>of that 30% break it
>down into the percentages I
>gave and there you go.
>
>
>Ktc, I didnt get to see
>what you posted befor you
>edited it but it must
>not of been good or
>you wouldnt have edited it,
>I know it refered to
>me because of what SW
>Buck hunter quoted from it,
>no I am not a
>Tree Hugger or a bow
>hunting purist, I hunt with
>Rifle and bow, I was
>mearly stateing my oppion on
>the matter but I guess
>you didnt like that to
>much.
>
>You know what I think I
>will just stay out of
>this descusion, I have only
>been on one LE unit
>and it isnt even one
>of the ones being talked
>about, so WTF do I
>know.
>
>
>
>Jake H. MM Member since
>1999.
>
458738e374dfcb10.jpg



Jake H

My friend I was not calling you out. I was calling out DEERLOVE for not reading what you were commenting on. I like the fact you gave your opinion on this and only disagree on there being a 100% increase. However, I am not sure you were even advocating this.

Your post is accurate you did comment on what I had asked and I thank you.

Rock5150
 
ok then, I take back you being a douche. I got a little riled up when I see you responding right after my post saying what you said. Next time say the persons name in your post, that would clear up alot of confusion.

Im still going to stay out of this debate, I'm still putting in for deer. I dont know what to think sometimes, I dont want to mess up the quality, but if what is said in your origanl post is true it sounds like something needs to be done.



Jake H. MM Member since 1999.
458738e374dfcb10.jpg
 
PRO

On the above posts you are right. You cannot sustain 1/1 AND HAVE ANY KIND OF HEALTH IN ANY HERD!!!!.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR POST # 62

MY OPPINION IS THERE ARE CLOSE IF NOT THE SAME # OF BULLS KILLED BY BOW AND MUZZ. KILLED NOT HARVESTED. NOW DON?T FREEK OUT, LET ME EXPLAIN WHY I THINK THIS.

COULD THERE BE ANY TRUTH TO( MOST not all) AVID BOW HUNTERS HAVE DRAWN. MANY OF THE PEOPLE PUTTNG IN TO HUNT WITH A BOW NOW OUR PLAYING THE ODDS. YES OR NO

Thus, the bow is not there first choice of weapon and therefore not the most polished. This could account for the decrease in % of elk killed with a bow in the last several years.
Just a thought.
Every one on MM could tell story?s of bulls killed and not found with all weapons.
As you would know you don't shoot at an elk at 80 yards with a bow. However, with more less experienced bow hunters in the field is more of his happening? As you well know I have no facts to back this up just a thought.
People moving to muzz have a greater margin of error than with a bow, if not there preferred weapon. I believe this is happening with a muzz, just not as much.
This has been my experience
This is why I think the kill numbers are close to the same.

What do you think. Pro

Rock5150
 
holy crap you guys have run in circles on this one. 80 posts on about 5 ideas. i had no idea the ratos were 1/1. what is a healthy ratio? 1/3? 1/4? are there cow tags still available in these units? the current mgmt. bull hunt will hurt quality.this only works on ranches when the rancher goes along on the hunt and says yup shoot that one.he knows whats on his land and what has to harvested to keep genes and ratios.if you're on this this type of hunt with rules you try to take the biggest you can and still be in the rules. this type of hunt cant go on much longer.what about transplanting or trading bulls for cows from regular units?just a thought.i would like to know the cow hunting facts before i would give a suggestion on how to better the ratios. i am no pro or bioligst on these matters.i am a big game enthusiast that dreams of a bright hunting future for my children.
 
Rock, I have guided archery/muzzy/rifle elk hunters for over 15 years. I hvae hunted with all 3 weapons myself over the last 25+ years. I have seen/found more unrecovered bulls wounded by muzzleloader hunters than rifle/archery hunters combined. While this is by no means 'scientific', it is what I have seen while guiding close to 300 elk hunters over the years. In the field I feel comfortable saying that ALL weapopn types wound and kill unrecovered animals at close to the same rates. With smokepoles being shot at further distances and rifles being shot at MUCH further distances than in the past, I believe the percentage for the more effective weapons is at least as high as archery. Until I see 'evidence' to show me otherwise that is what I'll believe. I also stand by my claim that archers kill smaller/younger animals, just look at the record books for the top end and minimum score requirements to see 'proof'.

slcmuley, removing a specific genetic trait has proven ineffective even on high fence ranches. It is IMPOSSIBLE to remove the cows/does carrying the genetic trait as well as bulls/bucks carrying but not 'showing' the genetic trait. The management tag idea is a way to dupe the public into believing quality will be uneffected and somehow the gentics are being improved all the while giving more 'opportunity'. If they DWR would simply issue MORE tags the outcome would be the same as under this nonsensical 'management tag'.

Good posts guys!

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-08 AT 06:19PM (MST)[p]PRO
THANKS FOR THE REPLY.

As i said there is no data just my opinion. We will just have to disagree on that one. As to the degrease in % bow killed in the last couple of years could it be as I have suggested?

The DWR has said the age of killed bull with Bow rifle and muzz on LE units ( top end even more so) is ALMOST the same. If you can get them to give you the break down before they average all bulls killed you will see this.

I am with you on the management tags give them to bow muzz and late rifle. Odds would get much better if they did this with the 35 management tags on the SWD they now give for management.

Rock5150
 
>slcmuley, removing a specific genetic trait
>has proven ineffective even on
>high fence ranches. It is
>IMPOSSIBLE to remove the cows/does
>carrying the genetic trait as
>well as bulls/bucks carrying but
>not 'showing' the genetic trait.
>The management tag idea is
>a way to dupe the
>public into believing quality will
>be uneffected and somehow the
>gentics are being improved all
>the while giving more 'opportunity'.
>If they DWR would simply
>issue MORE tags the outcome
>would be the same as
>under this nonsensical 'management tag'.
>
>
>Good posts guys!
>
. i agree 100% on the mgmt.hunt.what is the cow hunting like on these LE areas? not trying to introduce new genes. trying to help the ratio by bringing in more cows and taking out some bulls. they dont have to be huge bulls take out the mgmt. bulls.
and heck if some of the genes did happen into our general areas then great.this would improve yearly opprotunity and quality on our general hunt. we could even trade these animals to other states and get somethin in return. i dont really know what our states financial situation is but i dont think we need more elk tag sales to generate revenue we just gained both state and federal monies from this sm.game liscence change
 
Pro???

JUST WONDERING IF YOU'RE AVERAGING 20 HUNTERS A YEAR BY YOURSELF???

NOT TRYING TO STIR IT NIETHER!!!

THIS IS MY NEW GUN,YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT,YOU'LL LIKE IT A HELL OF A LOT LESS WHEN IT HITS ITS DESTINATION!!!
47654abd5a8fd79a.jpg


469ff2b8110d7f4e.jpg


THE ONLY bobcat THAT KNOWS ALOT OF YOU HAVE HAD THIS IMAGE IN YOUR PEA BRAIN BUT DUE TO POOR SHOOTING TACTICS I'M STILL KICKIN!!!
 
Back when I ran a ranch in Colorado I would guide between 30-50 elk hunters each year. This was in southwest Colrado, where elk are plentiful and nobody passes up a 'legal' bull. I did this for 7 years plus all the 'trophy' hunts here in Utah.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Isa, I agree with you 100% that we have to keep the quality in our elk herd. My concern is on some of these units right now over the past 5 years combined they have given 1,000 cow tags and 200 bull tags. When does this begin to hurt the overall health of the herd? We need to keep the quality up, but get rid of some bulls. I don't know what the best option is, but killing 300 class bulls suck. I would rather hunt spikes and big 350+ bulls than have everyone killing 300 bulls.

Maybe they could draw for spikes on some of these units instead of opening it up?? Just a thought. Kill 50 a year or something like that.
I am afraid if we keep the trend up, there will be a limit of 1,000 elk on a unit and 800 of them will be bulls. Good if you have a tag that year, but not good for the future.
 
This thread is VERY aptly named! It should be required reading in wildlife management classes so that future biologists know what they are getting into.
 
O.K. Pro!!!

"NOBODY PASSES UP A LEGAL BULL"???

IF YOU TURN ALL THE TARDS LOOSE IT WILL BE THE SAME WAY HERE!!!

THERE WOULDN'T BE A FRICKEN THING LEFT!!!

WE SURE THE HELL DON'T WANT THAT!!!

I'LL BE GLAD WHEN YOU GET YOUR UNITS UP & GOING!!!

NOT A PLACE I'LL WANT TO BE BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD PLAN TO ME!!!

HOW MANY AVERAGE JOE HUNTERS ARE YOU GONNA BE ABLE TO SATISFY WITH YOUR NEW UNITS & NEW PLANS???

THIS IS MY NEW GUN,YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT,YOU'LL LIKE IT A HELL OF A LOT LESS WHEN IT HITS ITS DESTINATION!!!
47654abd5a8fd79a.jpg


469ff2b8110d7f4e.jpg


THE ONLY bobcat THAT KNOWS ALOT OF YOU HAVE HAD THIS IMAGE IN YOUR PEA BRAIN BUT DUE TO POOR SHOOTING TACTICS I'M STILL KICKIN!!!
 
We all agree the problem is the unhealthy bull/cow ratios. The spike hunt is no the way to do it. How will the state keep track of how many spikes are harvested every year? I guess what I'm saying, is I have no faith in the states ability to collect and gather harvest information. Just issue more LE bull tags as needed and where needed. The tags should be issued on the cautious side, slowly. As far as who gets them? Well its really apparent we all have our own views on that. My 2 pennies, majority of the tags should go to the primitive weapon hunts. More opportunity, less impact.
 

Similar threads

C
Wasatch thoughts
2
Replies
193
Views
5k
elkassassin
elkassassin
Founder
Colorado DIY Private Land Hunts
Replies
2
Views
2k
Founder
Founder
BrianID
Thoughts on new Special license fees
2
Replies
107
Views
4k
BuzzH
BuzzH

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

7.jpg
Screenshot_20210820-081828_Photos.jpg
20210727_112930.jpg
0BB2EF7C-AA58-4D63-8EEB-FDC2701C854D.jpeg
392E31C2-0F71-4234-AE12-D30EBF35B93F.jpeg
IMG_0143.jpeg
2.jpg
IMG_4784.jpeg
2006 blacktail.jpg
IMG_8735.png
3D125494-FA78-4CC9-B758-499518996A1B.jpeg
decade-apart.jpg
Back
Top Bottom