Closing Spike Bull Hunting

[nebo12000]

What would you think of closing individual elk units on a rotating basis (LE and Open Bull) to Any Weapon hunting for Spike bulls for one year at a time ? It would be similar to what is done on the Monroe unit presently but would only be for one year at a time. It seems that it would give a big boost to bull numbers especially on Any Bull units. The next several years would probably have more and larger bulls to hunt.
What's your opinion ?

 

[Deerlove]

I think it's great, but what about moving the dates back and giving more tags??

 

[mulecreek]

I am not sure I understand what you are asking. Are you suggesting that LE and Open bull be closed all together or are you suggesting that they be limited to Spike Only? If you are suggesting the latter then I think its a great idea. If I remember correctly changing most open units to Spike only in the early 90's is what created so many huge bulls in the early 2000's.

Now if we can just try that with deer I think we will be on to something. Nothing bigger than a 2 point for 5 years. Might as well give it a shot. The western states have tried everything else and nothing seems to work all that great.

 

[Packout]

I don't like the idea.

For it to work, 20% of the units would need to be closed each year which means a loss of 7,500 permits. 7,500 people sitting home to grow a few more elk which would--
-either get shot the following year on Anybull units or
-on Spike units, the "saved" bulls would have a negligible impact on age objectives, which would not result in more LE permits.

The spike and anybull hunts provide people the ability to hunt with minimal impact on the herds (12-20% success rates). I see no need to curtail tag numbers just to grow few more bulls which may or may not add to sustainable bull numbers.

Which brings us to another issue with this idea. Saving bulls means reducing cows on many units. There can only be X number of elk on a unit and if you want to carry more bulls then you have to shoot cows. Shooting cows reduces the productivity of the herd, which is simply less bull and heifer calves born.....

 

[mntman]

I said UT should do this years ago when prooutdoors was pushing for changes. You could rotate it between units so that every 3rd year spikes could not be hunted on the LE units. This ensures there is enough bulls to make it through to continue having quality standards met for each unit.


Mntman

"Hunting is where you prove yourself"

 

[coyoteslayer]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-08-15 AT 07:03PM (MST)[p]Nebo, I have thought this would be a good idea for many years. However, I have changed my mind the past few years. There seems to be plenty of spikes making it to replenish the big bulls on the units I observe. If they are going to kill 425 cows off of a unit this year, I cannot be in favor of not killing spikes. If there are an extra 100 spikes live on the unit, do we have to kill an extra 100 cows next year? Some of these units already have more cows than bulls. If we want bigger bulls, then they need to give fewer limited entry tags. I look at the southwest desert for example. They are giving approximately 160 bull tags and 425 cow tags. when you give 160 bull tags, the quality of bulls is going to drop. However on the Beaver, they are giving 40 or so tags, and the quality is much better. The sw desert used to be great for big bulls. Now there are a few good bulls out there, but not like what it was, and finding cows is tougher every year.

My idea lately is to not shoot spikes on any bull units.

 

[elkassassin]

JFP!!!

Shootin the Future Big Bulls when they are Babies!

This Sshhitt still Amazes me!

But Most Spike Shooters/PISSCUTTER Killers have the same Mentality:

And I Quote:

"Somebody is gonna kill them,I might as well get in on the Action too"

WAFJ!!!

Let em Grow!

Let them reach their Potential!

And Offer some More Quality Permits!

POUNDIN Cows & Spikes!

Makes alot of Sense Right there!

Especially in LE Units!

GOOD-GAWD A Mighty!

This Ain't Rocket Science!

If You're trying to Improve a Herd/Herd Numbers?

Do You Kill/Shoot the Breeding Stock & The Future Crop?

I said several years ago:Start 3 Units up for Spike/Cow/any Elk!

You know,A Free for all!

Ground Pound them 3 Units for whatever you want!

But Don't Come Whinning Your Asses in to LE Units wanting to shoot them out!

If You haven't Noticed some major decline in Cow & Young Bull numbers on several LE Units the Last couple years you're Perty Damn Blind!

OK!

If this doesn't generate Founder some BandWidth Usage I don't know what will & I'll Feel as I failed!




Go Ahead!

Make Me take it down!

 

[elkassassin]

Take a Close look at BIGJOHNS Daughters Bull!

Then Take a Close look at your F'N Spike!

Which would you rather have/Harvest?

Remember:Her Bull was a Spike Once!




Go Ahead!

Make Me take it down!

 

[scopenstalk]

My opinion is, I like big bulls but there needs to be a balance between opportunity and trophy hunting. If we limit opportunity to the point where people hang up their rifles and quite going because they only get to every 3 to 5 years hunting will become a thing of the past. My two cents. Besides the meat is the true trophy not the antlers.... but the antlers are still pretty cool haha.

 

[BrowningRage]

I guess it could work... But I imagine that the following year there would be a lot of 2-year-old bulls killed..??

The problem I see is that (as stated previously) you could be looking at a reduction of as many as 7,500 tags. At $50 a pop, that's $375,000 that the DWR would miss. And I think its obvious that they are in the business of tag management, not wildlife management... So how would they recoup that money..??

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24

 

[nebo12000]

What if spike hunting was closed on only one unit per year that still had room for more growth. I appreciate all your comments and opinions. I have heard that some of the Any bull/ Open bull units are very poor to say the least. Just wondering if you thought it would help to close spike hunting (rifle/any weapon season only). Thought that would impact the least amount of hunters. The Monroe unit is experiencing a big increase in bull numbers because of the closure to any weapon spike hunting. I'm sure that it will be changed within a few years and then maybe the DWR could close another unit and do the same.

 

[nebo12000]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-09-15 AT 09:15AM (MST)[p]The DWR didn't decrease the spike tags when the WB voted to close the Monroe to Rifle / Spike hunting.By the way, the DWR sold every spike permit this year.So no loss in revenue has occurred because of the closure on the Monroe.
There may be a lot of 2 1/2 year old bulls on an Any Bull Unit killed the next year but I think that the number of older bulls on the unit would last for several years. I'm sure with an extra year of experience some of the bulls would be better at escaping and survival. If the unit could handle a few more bulls without having to kill more antlerless elk it might be work for hunters.

 

[Packout]

AnyBull units are either--

1-Places elk are not wanted, with low herd numbers. Can't grow more bulls where the UDWR doesn't want them.

2-Private lands which control harvest because of access. No reason to close hunting in an already controlled unit.

3-Public land units meant for opportunity, not trophy quality. Many of these units are already at or over objective.

Close the North Slope and let Wyoming shoot them after the migration. Close the South Slope and let the reservation shoot them after the migration. And people who think the AnyBull units are poor hunts have never hunted them or expect too much from them.

 

[nebo12000]

Thanks for your thoughts on this. About one year ago the DWR asked the RAC's for suggestions of areas where they could grow more elk in the state. Seems to me that some of the Any/Open Bull units in the state would be the best places to look. I know that many of the units are already over population objective so they wouldn't work for this approach. Packout, I believe you have served on the Elk committee but I believe that the general hunting public needs to express their sentiments. This thread was started in response to a few hunters who expressed concern, especially in Open Bull units, of the decreased number of elk. Did the Elk committee ever ask for open public comment? I know it had a representative from just about every conceivable agency in the state so you had a great cross section of the stake holders. Some of the best things that have occurred in regards to management of big game in this state has come from a single ordinary hunter who came up with a great idea that worked.

 

[Packout]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-09-15 AT 01:24PM (MST)[p]Yes, I served on the Elk Committee 6 years ago, but not the current one. Of course the public should have a say in the management, which is why there are RACs. When I served on the Elk Committee, there was a public survey. I actively sought and asked for public comment (more so than any other Rep if I had to wager). Now I am just a member of the general public- and have no say in the matter-- but you do.

And your correct, some of the best ideas are those that come from individuals-- which is why it is sad to see the RACs lose attendance due to the special interest voting record and the lack of respect given to public who take time to comment. I am hopeful, even confident your leadership will change that trend.

Increasing elk numbers where the unit can sustain more would be great. I wish you the best in that endeavor.

Anyway, I rarely post or visit MM. Just happened to see your thread and thought that I'd give my opinion.

 

[elkboy32]

That's a tough call. Being from Idaho, I sure do like the opportunity to elk hunt every year. And seeing the number of Utah plates heading north for the opener of Idaho deer tomorrow, I would say a lot of our neighbors like hunting opportunity too. I love chasing big bulls, but I sure do like elk burger, and spikes are about as tasty as they get.

The other thing that comes to mind is our upcoming generation of hunters. If it takes them 10 years to draw a LE tag, we may have lost them by them. There needs to be a balance of quality hunts and opportunity. I feel like Utah may be already pushing that balance. My two cents, which doesn't really matter, as an outsider looking in.

 

[Shadow]

I think it's a pretty good balance of older and young bulls on the LE units even with the spike hunting. Monroe for example is over ran with recruit Bulls (3-4year olds) that mysteriously made through their spike year of rifle hunting. I'm no rocket scientist but I would venture a guess that upwards of 50% of the spikes make it through the hunts to grow up, otherwise how would the Fishlake, wasatch, Manti units have grown any big Bulls for the last 25 years? I would say before we eliminate spike hunting on a rotating basis, we reduce the tag numbers a little, so the Keystone Light crowd that grabbed a tag the week before the hunt just for an excuse to get out can just stay home and watch football.

 

[c3]

Packout, I think you have it mixed up here.

There are only 15,000 spike tags sold each year. Shutting down one unit a year to spike hunting wouldn't be 20% of those tags. Not sure where you came up with 20% or the 7500.

The idea would be you could then have more big bull tags with better quality in future years on any unit that closed the spike hunt for a year.

Sounds like a reasonable idea to me, as I despise the spike hunts to begin with. Just get rid of them completely and give out 4 times as many primitive weapons LE tags and we'd all get to hunt big bulls every 5 or 8 years.

Anyway just curious how you came up with those numbers of 20% and 7500 tags by closing one spike hunt a year rotating around all the LE units?

Cheers,
Pete

 

[Packout]

Pete- I guess it just seemed that to rotate through the Anybull and Spike units, and have any impact, each unit would be closed every 5 years. So if we close 20% of the units each year, that would equate to each unit being closed every 5 years. If we close 20% of the units then we can't put that pressure on other units or we are defeating the purpose of "saving" bulls-- so we'd have to cut tags by 6-7,000. If you are talking only spike units then that would mean 3,000 tags cut if rotating closures are implemented.

It takes 5-8 years for those "saved" spikes to come into a "huntable" age class. Over that 5-8 year period of time, many units would see antlerless tags increased to offset the additional bulls. It is simple math. Bulls add into the overall herd numbers.

I also disliked the spike hunts, but after watching my kids tip over spikes it has grown on me. Although I admit the AnyBull hunt is one of my favorites.

 

[wileywapati]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-09-15 AT 10:05PM (MST)[p]CAT what did I tell you 15 years ago.

For God's sake listen to Packout.

By this time next year I'll be tagged out or boiling a big pot of tag soup.
Either way I'm done with elk.

Pronghorn, now we're talking.




"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15

 

[huntin50]

I think it's a good idea in areas below objective or areas with lower bull to cow ratios.
A lot of LE hunters shoot 3-5 year old bulls are are happy, because it has 6 points. If we could give more people a chance at just a 6 point it may give more an opportunity as well. Rotating appropriate units every 4-5 years and not allowing spike hunting wont hurt opportunity hunting very much, but might provide more opportunity for bigger bulls in 3-5 years.

They could try it on another couple units besides Monroe and see what happens IMO.

 

[elkassassin]

>LAST EDITED ON Oct-09-15
>AT 10:05?PM (MST)
>
>CAT what did I tell you
>15 years ago.
>
>For God's sake listen to Packout.
>
>
>By this time next year I'll
>be tagged out or boiling
>a big pot of tag
>soup.
>Either way I'm done with elk.
>
>
>Pronghorn, now we're talking.
>
>
>
>
>"The State of Utah has not
>given BGF anything.
>They have invested in BGF to
>protect their
>interests."
>Birdman 4/15/15

15 Years?

You F'N Rookie!

When You get up around 20+ You let me know!






Go Ahead!

Make Me take it down!

 

[PleaseDear]

You make a dang good argument Packout---

I could live with it on a rotating basis on the LE units----or making the Spike tag a Gen elk tag draw and reducing numbers of Spike tags available thru a Gen Spike draw...

Mainly because what Bessy stated about every big bull was a Spike first ~~

WW it sure seems like what your said back in the day is for sure looking very accurate.....

Thanks for your interest in the public nebo....

Robb

 

[Vanilla]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-24-15 AT 08:27AM (MST)[p]There is no reason to close down any bull units. If you did that for a year I would be willing to bet you would not see any impact on the herd. Bulls don't have babies. Sure, a few more bulls might get shot the following year, but this will have zero impact on herd health.

I think you have to look at every unit individually and determine the herd health and viability of each hunt, including spike only hunts. If a unit is in a dire situation, then don't do the hunt. Spike hunts have very little impact on the health of a herd. If you did this no spike hunting rotation you MIGHT see a small uptick in mature bulls every 5-8 years, but then go back to "normal" after that. Packout is correct here.

If you want more elk to hunt, address the antlerless tags. Spike and any bull tags aren't killing off our herds.

 

[bowhunt]

Great comment Vanilla!!
You are spot on.
I think closing spike units is DUMB! I am too worn out to comment why, go read what Packout and Vanilla said.