Early high country rifle deer hunt

Hi I've been researching and planning on an early rifle hunt for a few years.

I always wanted to hunt 74 or 82 but I feel like I'm wasting time chasing them. In the time it takes to draw them I could have hunted a 0-3 point archery or muzzy unit plenty of times to scare a couple mature bucks out of the Colorado high country.

This year most of the hunts start on the 8th except for a few that start on the first I believe. Next year most will start on the 14th and a few will start on the 7th. There is a big advantage to starting a week earlier, but the later early hunts this year start only one day later then the earliest early hunts next year.

So I am really contemplating using my points this year. The units I am looking at are 12, 43, 48, and 65. Here are my thoughts on the different hunts.

12 early. Lots of area, only 10 tags, starts a week earlier which is the main reason I'm looking at this unit.

43 early. 35 tags which is kind of a lot. Big bucks come from there every year. I've been in the 43 high country before. Probably will have the most pressure of these 4 units and I would rather not combat hunt.

48 early. Lots of area. Only 20 tags. I have scouted it a little and know a guy that hunted it.

65 early. I know nothing about it. Only 20 tags. Starts the same time as 43 and 48. This hunt takes the most points for residents to draw of the 4 hunts I mentioned which might mean something or it might not.

I would love to hear about the hunts in 12 and 65 if anyone has hunted them recently. These are the 2 units that I can't find much info on. I appreciate any and all thoughts whether good or bad. I wouldn't mind a PM instead of a general forum post if you are going to really praise a unit.

Regards, Branden

LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-18 AT 08:29PM (MST)[p]Not sure where you are getting your numbers, but CO parks and wildlife data says last 2 years there were 2 hunters each year in 12 with 0 bucks killed both years. That would rule that out for me.

48 new and not much track record, but not really known as a big buck area that I know of. There is a post somewhere of a guy who hunted it last year, so you might research that.

For me that would make it between 43 and 65. Both have some big bucks every year. Both have good success rates (65 is sl. better). More tags in 43, but looks like lots more area to hunt, so not sure you would be any more crowded

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

Here is the thread on 48:

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID6/26848.html

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

It sounds like you have experience in 43 so you are aware that deer densities in just about all the early high alpine units is relatively low to almost non-existent. There is likely a reason why some units issue hardly any tags. As mentioned above harvest success also reflects this. Also keep in mind that many of these hunts are at the same time as OTC archery elk plus deer. There also may bird hunters in the hills as well as hikers, bikers, etc. I was in a high alpine area last year and just about every other hiker I saw had a dog that spooked game! Where I was scouting I was more concerned with hikers with dogs than other hunters!

It also sounds like you are aware that the earlier the season the better. Once muley bucks shed their velvet they usually disappear into the trees until winter rut! The first fairly deep snow...the same thing. There would be a definite advantage hitting an earlier season date.

It sounds like you are already familiar with 43. That may be a great option since you are ahead of the ball game figuring out access, hunting pressure, and possibly buck hangouts. There is a heck of a lot of high country with few bucks so be prepared to spend a lot of time glassing, hiking, and figuring it out!

>LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-18
>AT 08:29?PM (MST)
>
>Not sure where you are getting
>your numbers, but CO parks
>and wildlife data says last
>2 years there were 2
>hunters each year in 12
>with 0 bucks killed both
>years. That would rule
>that out for me.
>
>48 new and not much track
>record, but not really known
>as a big buck area
>that I know of.
>There is a post somewhere
>of a guy who hunted
>it last year, so you
>might research that.
>
>For me that would make it
>between 43 and 65.
>Both have some big bucks
>every year. Both have
>good success rates (65 is
>sl. better). More tags
>in 43, but looks like
>lots more area to hunt,
>so not sure you would
>be any more crowded
>
>txhunter58
>
>venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore
>I am)


I don't really put much stock in CPW success rates etc since like in unit 12 they only sampled 20% of the hunters. If you look at the draw stats it shows that there are 10 tags for the early hunt in unit 12. Maybe the other 8 hunters all tagged out? Maybe none of them did? Idk either way.

48 borders 55 so there has to be some of the same genetics in 48 as 55.

Still lots of time to research and decide what to do.

Thanks so far for all the thoughts on the different units from everyone. It's really appreciated.

LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-18 AT 07:38PM (MST)[p]Just remember 48 is STEEP!

And in 12, in 2014, they surveyed 4 hunters and no kills either. So out of 10 hunters over 3 years surveyed, there are 0 reported bucks. I would call and visit with the local DOW officer about that before putting in

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

I was in 43 last year and between the rifle and muzzleloader guys it was pretty crowded. Only basin I found bucks in had 6 other hunters trying to stalk them and this was a 4 hour hike to get there.