Sportsmen are taking it in the shorts!

[wimpy]

Sportsmen are taking it in the shorts! Especially if you are a SFW member. When SFW first started in Utah, it was pushing for the sportsmen. Don Peay personally came to the RAC meetings and the DWR to fight hard to get the lions off of limited entry, and on to a quota system, so they could be managed. Now the two top guys in SFW are both houndsmen and are pushing just the opposite, pushing for the lions to go into a draw system. So you, as sportsmen, have to try to draw a tag to try to manage these lions. This TWELVE-YEAR PLAN has been totally pushed through by houndsmen and SFW board members; the objective is to have all the lion units on a draw system as soon as any deer herd is off the predator management plan. Last night at the RAC meeting, the DWR kept stating that San Juan was 90% of objective of the deer management plan. The question is, of who's objective? Because the deer in southeastern Utah are no where near where they used to be. The worst part of the whole thing is that the sportsmen don't seem to care.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting

 

[redfrog]

Its time that SFW get their damn hads out of the DWR. Its about changing things for the poeple at the head of SFW for their own benift now. Its not about getting quility animals nore is it about every sportsmen. Its about Rifle hunters and money anymore. I see nothing wrong with cat hunting the way it is right now. Just cause those dumb bass terds want to drive a road for tracks and don't see them they think the cats numbers are hurting. I Hate to say this but cats are NOT dumb. Those of us the hike during the winter season know just how many cats could be out there. If you got chased everytime you crossed a road don't you think you would try hard not to cross it. LETS CHANGE IT FOR TWO GUYS WITHH DOGS? I hope there is a better reason for it then that but I dought there is. Sad thing is the reason most poeple won't say anything at a rack meeting is that they have already made up their mind and what you and I have to say means nothing. The rack meetings are no longer for sportsmens voices to be herd they only have them because they have to say that poeple had there chance talk about there views on it.

 

[HoundDawgJr]

Hey Lloyd,

I went riding on the mountain Saturday with my buddy and we saw a zillion elk and two deer. I was cussing the DWR all day for the state of deer hunting in Utah. We really lit into them.

Came home and my neighbor came and picked me up... drove down the pavement two minutes from my house and there were 25 bucks in the hayfield and three or four of them were real dandies. Two other friends of mine in the valley have 30" caliber deer living right near their houses and they aren't in the foothills.

Maybe your mistake is looking for deer on the mountain bud!! ;-) Up here all the deer live down in the valley now.

Besides, what are you worried about? Since when did any of you people in San Juan county pay any attention to laws or game regulations? Doesn't seem like any changes will effect any of you down there? LOL!!

Hell dude, I just found out there is now a Summer Bear Pursuit season. I thought we always had that, come to find out it's just a new thing. News to me. ;-)

 

[swbuckmaster]

I hunt an area where there are over the counter deer tags and over the counter elk tags. You can just as easily kill a 200" buck as you can a 350" bull "it happens every year." The deer numbers are at objective and the only thing that keeps them from going over objective is the hard winters we keep having. the elk numbers keep climbing

Guess what,in this are there are loads of cougars that you cant hunt with a dog, starting to see bears every year on the trail cameras. The coyotes and foxes are out of control. I see coyotes every time im up. we also have deer getting killed by cars.

the only thing missing in this equation is?

So I'm not so sure cougars are the problem with the deer numbers anymore!

Archery is a year round commitment!!

 

[nontypical]

Utah DWR probably learned the Wyoming G&F trick:If you can't get your herd up to objective level,LOWER THE OBJECTIVE!There ya go!You are suddenly at or near objective!

 

[elkantlers]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-30-09 AT 10:30PM (MST)[p]redfrog, That is about the most unintelligent post I have ever seen on this board. You have got to be kidding me. A lion won't cross the road because it will get chased by dogs. Come on...

Maybe you are the "Dumb bass terd" that wants to see hundreds of deer from the road because your to LAZY to actually get out and hunt them.


I don't hunt lions with dogs but I do trap so I am out and about all winter. I can tell you that there are alot less lions right now than there were ten years ago, alot less.

Killing all the lions is not going to fix the deer herds in Utah. There are other factors (coyotes, winter kill, over hunting) out there that do a heck of alot more harm to the deer.

 

[cantkillathing]

Elkantlers, I dont think anyone wants to eliminate the mountain lion, they want to keep them under control, the best way to manage lions is to keep a steady number of lions taken each year, the best way to accomplish this is by using the Harvest objective method, this way the dwr can set the tag numbers that seem to manage the lions and houndsmen and who ever wants to hunt lions can all hunt until the quota is filled. On the draw units they limit hunters, not all hunters will fill their tags therefore lions could increase in numbers. The objective is to maintain the lions not destroy them and not let them get out of control either.
One thing I found with the new 12 year lion plan is that it was totally made up by houndsman, Houndsman have 200 members in their association and When they came up with a board to make the plan it has 2 houndsmen on the board under the houndsmans association, and 2 other houndsmen that represent other groups, wolfe in sheeps clothing, so the plan is biest in what they want, which is more lions and that is what it is set up for. Majority of hunters in Utah want want more deer, yes lions do play a part in keeping numbers down, every study I have read says that lions main prey is muledeer or whitetail deer, on average a lion will take one mule deer a week, a female lion with kittens may take 2-3 a week, this is off of the colorado fish&game website, study and info was update as of last year. So lets do the math, Utah claims to have between 2600-3000 lions in the state, we will take the minimum 2600 X 52 = 135,200 deer taken each year from lions, also take in consideration that this is an average of 1 deer a week and not considering the 2-3 a week a female with kittens will take. So in my opinion lions do need to be maintained and should not be allowed to grow in big numbers.

 

[redfrog]

"Maybe you are the "Dumb bass terd" that wants to see hundreds of deer from the road because your to LAZY to actually get out and hunt them."

You have alot to learn.

LAZY.....Far from it. I'm willing to hike my ass off to find an animal worth taking. I can prove that cat will not cross roads in areas were hound hunter drive the edges looking for tacks many time is a day. They will go out of their way to go around those areas.


I'm not out to kill every cat out there. Your right killing every cat won't fix the herds. As far as I see it there is not much that is wrong with the herds other then deer quility. Cats have their place just like most things.

What I don't like is the idea to make more areas limited entry.
There is nothing wrong with harvest objective Anyone can get a tag and everyone can hunt until the objective is met. It keeps the numbers in check.

This comes down to A FEW PEOPLE WANTING TO CHANGE WHAT IS IN PLACE NOW FOR THEIR OWN BENIFIT. Not the rest of us sportsmen.

 

[HoundDawgJr]

Just a couple of things, and then you guys can continue talking about how houndsmen are now running the Utah wildlife scene. (Oh man that is priceless stuff)

The two hound guys you have mentioned on the SFW board, just keep in mind they helped orchestrate the biggest lion slaughter ever in Utah and most hound guys still have very bitter feelings over that. They gave hound guys everywhere the finger and followed the company line. And most guys have not forgotten it. So to imply they are "scratching our backs" and looking out for hound guys interests is comical. They'll tow the SFW line, no matter what it is and that's what they should do. They are doing their jobs.

And the 200 hound club members that have now supposedly taken over the Wildlife scene and are controlling it... keep in mind many of them are what we call "Deer hunters with dogs"... they are in the sport purely to kill lions and they kill a bunch, and not just trophy lions. They will rarely admit that but almost never turn a lion loose when they catch it. Their numbers are MANY.

So you guys are over reacting a bit. I feel for Whimpy and I see his point because if they switch back, it makes it harder for the Outfitters. Draw units are always better for the guy who draws the tag... he has a chance at killing a quality lion. You have NO CHANCE of this on a quota unit.

I laugh my ass off every time someone goes and buys an over the counter tag and tells me, "I'd like to kill a big tom." Funny stuff there!! ;-)

So quotas stink for outfitters like Lloyd, but they will help the guy who draws a tag and wants to kill a good lion.

And we can argue the state of lions in Utah until the cows come home but their numbers are at the lowest they've ever been in any of your lifetimes in Utah, and the harvest data backs that up.

But this is a mule deer site and I understand that lions eat mule deer and you don't like them. I get that. But whatever happens or doesn't happen with the lion hunting in Utah...

Anybody that believes killing more lions will fix all of Utah's deer problems is a total dumbass, period. Help it? Sure. Fix it? No chance.

I wouldn't worry too much Lloyd because if the Hound Club is in favor of it, I'm sure it won't pass. If the hound club opposes it then it will pass with flying colors!! That's how it's always been.

I don't know why I even care, I can't catch a lion anyway.
I should leave the arguing to someone who actually can. LOL!

 

[HoundDawgJr]

Hey Lloyd,

What exactly is it they are trying to pass? Is it just moving the San Juan or a few other units back to a draw?

I know they will never move the whole state back to a draw, just wondered what units they were trying this on?

Do you have any details? Thanks. I'm totally out of the loop these days.

I'll be down your way bear hunting in a couple of weeks, better come to camp and restock us with some homemade moonshine you boys brew down there!! ;-)

 

[redfrog]

Here is the proposed plan. If you would like to read it.


http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/info/july14.pdf

 

[HoundDawgJr]

Thanks.

I had to chuckle when I saw one of the guys on the committee was from the Wool Growers Association.

A lion has been killing some sheep up here and I've been talking with the herder a bit about it.

If you think deer hunters don't like lions, talk to someone in the Wool Growers association. LOL!!

If they let that guy write the draft it would be one page:

KILL 'EM ALL!!!

I can see the guy from the Wool Growers Association sitting there about 10 minutes into their first meeting, "Excuse me, you mean we are going to let some of them live? I don't understand." LOL!!

 

[redfrog]

LOL. That is a good one.

 

[wimpy]

HoundDawg, they are trying to make San Juan a split season this year. If the proposed plan passes, then any unit that goes off of predator management will either be limited entry or split season.

I am not questioning the amount of lions that are up north. I do not hunt there, so I do not know.

I have two questions. One is for Byron Bateman--I know that you represented SFW. In the plan, we need to go back to split season when it goes off predator management. The question is when a unit stays open past March 1, using San Juan as an example (that is still open), how does that benefit even one hunter to go to a split season?

Second question is for Kevin Bunnell. How does an organization of 200 members qualify for two members on a cougar management plan committee?

 

[wimpy]

I've been reading through their management plan again, and came up with two more questions for Byron Bateman. I noticed in the goals that there is no mention of hunting opportunity, and just have to wonder why someone who is supposed to be representing sportsmen didn't push for that?

In the goal, it says considering "economic concerns". Does not doing this split season on every unit take away from the economy? (Motels, gas stations, restaurants, outfitters, etc., and tens of thousands of dollars lost to the DWR in tag revenue). Is this not a conflict of interest?

 

[10r]

Wimpy, I think that next time you call and ask a rac member to support you at the rac, it would be wise to not get on the net and throw them under the bus the next day. You told me on the phone that you hate lions and the reason you hunt then is to kill them. You also said that you need quota tags because you are an outfitter. You dont give a crap about lions. You just want to have over the counter clients. Be honest This is about Loyds outfitting and not lions. Not that I have a problem with that, but at least be honest about it. Most Houndsmen I know think quota sucks. Me included. But it has its place. SFW is being ti lion friendly.....NEVER heard that one before. And if you want to talk to Byron, grow a set and call him. I know you have his #. He aint much for web chat. John Bair

P.S.I'll pay 500$ to whoever turns in the S O B that broke into my dads truck yesterday on the south Manti and stole my TRX 1000 trackin equipment. 216 freq.

 

[wimpy]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-01-09 AT 11:19 AM (MST)
"If you want to talk to Byron, Man up and call him."

I have called and talked to Byron.

"You told me on the phone that you hated lions and hunted them to kill them."

John, do not twist my words around. I told you on the phone that most houndsmen in San Juan County had hounds for one reason. I have never said that was my intention. I have pushed for the lions for several years and am still pushing for lions. I make my living hunting lions during the winter. I think you guys are leaving the sportsmen totally out of this. When there is a plan made, and a representative of the sportsmen does not push in the goals to have hunter opportunity, there is something wrong. When he pushes for the hunters to be left out during the best part of the season; when it does not benefit one single hunter, there is something wrong with that. (So you tell me, how you as a sportsman, can answer these question to the people you represent.)

"Most every Hound dogger I know thinks quota sucks."

Then you better start checking in other states, where the quota system is working far superior than anything we've even done. We sit in the RAC meeting and hear about learning from other states for turkeys. What is wrong with learning from other states for lions?

"SFW had one seat at the table."

That is true. But how does somebody who respresents the sportsmen, support a plan like this. We were told in the RAC meetings that this plan was endorsed by all members. So like I asked in the other thread: Tell me how putting San Juan on a split season would benefit one -- just one -- of your fellow hunters.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting

P.S. This is my answer to his other post in the "lion question" thread.

 

[wimpy]

Since I have stirred it up, I thought I would explain myself. I have been hunting these lions for 29 years, and guiding them professionally 17 years. Going to the lions? meeting every year since before they were called RAC meetings.

As far as this Lion Plan goes, I think that for the most part it is excellent, but I think that without a few changes, that it is not good for the sportsmen in Utah.

I think that any plan needs to have hunter opportunity in its goals. Then in the Strategies part, it uses Limited entry or split hunt strategies. The limited entry uses way too much guess work and robs the hunter of hunting opportunity, the division of hunting revenue and the state of economic income. The split hunt is a great tool, when used for what it was designed for. Which was, if a unit was closing down in just a few days or up to four weeks, then the hunter was in too big of a hurry to fill and had to harvest the first lion that he could, resulting in a lot of females being taken. But if a unit does not fill after about four or five weeks, the plan to go to split seasons will just cost hunters opportunity and revenue from the DWR and the state?s economy, without benefiting the hunter one bit. The harvest objective that this plan is trying to go away from is used in most of the states as their choice for managing the lions, while providing the greatest hunting opportunities. Here are a couple of excerpts form Colorado and Wyoming that show this:

??The goal of mountain lion management in Wyoming is to sustain mountain lion populations throughout core habitat at varying densities depending on management objectives to provide for recreational/hunting opportunity, maintain ungulate populations at established objectives or in line with current habitat conditions, and minimize mountain lion depredation to pets and livestock and reduce the potential for human injury? (WGFD 2006).
Use of the quota system allows for a more rigorous assessment of harvest effects as well as evaluation of management objectives throughout the state. Delineating source, sink, and stable population management objectives within MLMU?s allows for long term viability through immigration/emigration. General seasons may result in uneven hunting pressure, (where more accessible areas are likely to see overharvest and vice versa); limiting control over harvest level, harvest composition, and distribution of harvest (WGFD 2006). Cougar harvest and management deals largely with upholding scientific integrity while providing recreational opportunity, maintaining population viability, and addressing stakeholder?s opinions, which the current WGFD cougar management plan strives for.? Wyoming

?At present, the Division of Wildlife does not have an accurate estimate of mountain lion populations. Given this lack of information, there has been much speculation about the appropriate level of harvest. Without a cost effective and reliable census technique we must rely on other indices such as those found in the data analysis unit plans and through annual monitoring of mortality composition changes. None of these mechanisms are absolute; therefore harvest limit recommendations by Division of Wildlife staff tend to be conservative. Harvest limits represent the maximum level of possible harvest for that year. On a statewide basis, harvest limits are never reached since in some management units both the harvest objective and harvest limit are greater than hunters ever take. Functionally, these units provide unlimited hunting recreation opportunity during lion seasons. In other management units the harvest limits are regularly reached and hunter harvest is a tool to increase or decrease the lion population. Since hunter harvest and non-hunting mortality is annually variable and dependent upon influences such as weather, snow conditions, and damage conflicts; lion mortality is monitored on five and ten year running averages.? Colorado

As for the DWR supporting this plan when it decreases so much hunting opportunity, revenue, and economics from the state, I think it is almost criminal.

As for the RAC members,
Sportsmen representatives should not vote for this plan because all it does is take hunting opportunity away and revenues from not only the DWR, but businesses all over the state, and yes, even outfitters. The plan benefits nobody.

Agriculture representatives should not vote for this plan because the draw system is not as efficient as the harvest objective to manage these animals.

Why would an elected official want to support this plan when it takes so much revenue out of the economy?

Non-consumptive: In this plan, they use the limited entry or split season until the lions increase so much that it affects the prey basis, then they come up with the harvest objective and increase tags 50%-75%. So would it not be better just to use the harvest objective and manage the lion numbers at an even pace, rather than like an up-and-down yoyo? (The plan to go back to harvest objective shows us that harvest objective is the superior plan for managing the population of lions).

At-large representatives should fit in one of these four categories.

I would like comments from others, pro or con.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting

 

[swbuckmaster]

I personaly would like to see a draw first and only allow the guys that draw the tag to be able to hunt the male lions only. During this hunt I don't want to see guys that don't have tags able to pursue, video, or chase until this hunt is over. Then I would open it up to the harvest objective tags and allow them to pursue, video, or kill a female lion until the harvest objective is met. I would also like to see the guys that draw the tags season extend until the lion season is over for both harvest objective and LE.

My own personal feelings are the mature male lions have been taken out and this is the reason for lack of quality. I also believe the female lions are more plentiful then ever. this is the only thing that enplanes to me why they are being seen in peoples garages and in town.

what do I know I am just a deer hunter that would like to hunt lions once or twice in my life.

 

[10r]

Lloyd, I dont represent hunters from other states on the rac. I represent utah sportsmen. And once again you are up in the night on the committee. There was two hound clubs with seats on the committee. I have talked with both of them many times and can promise you that quota units are not a popular option. Most sportsman with hounds want to chase and catch cats and dont need to kill one every week to pay bills. Not that I have a problem with outfitters at all. But dont keep sayin that sportsmen are left out of the conversation. They are not. If you havea problem with the plan as an outfitter, just say so. You need the quota season to stay in business. And thats fine. But to say houndsmen in the state prefer a quota system for the opportunity to hunt is just not the case.
The DWR can kill as many lions as they want with any of the season structures. The quota system is a big cluster on our northern units that get good snow. It is not a good hunt. If you want a quota on your favorite unit, have at. But to say that the average "UTAH" hound dogger wants quota units is just not the case. John Bair

 

[wimpy]

John, I am not the one who is up in the night, it's you that is posting at 10:42 P.M. while I am in bed.

I have never said that the houndsmen support quota units. I am well aware that the Federation of Houndsmen support the limited entry plans. My hat goes off to them for all they have accomplished to achieve their goals. My problem is that this 12-year plan has a goal to eliminate all harvest objective units, when it is not the best plan at all.

I have also never hidden the fact that I am an outfitter, and this does affect my livelihood. Going to a draw affects the economic revenues of not only my small business, but many businesses that are affected by the hunters' revenues.

I have also said that I am aware on the busy northern units that a limited entry might work better than harvest objective. But on a unit that doesn't fill the harvest objective unit anyway, it is not smart to close it down to a split season unit. But this twelve-year plan forces us to go to limited entry or split season as soon as our deer units are out of predator management.

 

[killroy]

I've had an interest in lion management for the past 18 years. John said, houndsman are against the quota and in favor of the draw. I hunt mostley in the southern end of the state. Most of the houndsmen I hunt with or have talked to are against the draw. The houndsmen I have talked to from the nothern end of the state are for the draw. I myself unlike my brother Lloyd, who thinks the split season might be helpful, I do not.I do not believe you can manage units that have small numbers when you cannot control who draws the tags and who actually will be hunting.

what I favor is similar to the six states that surround Utah. I would like to see all the units harvest objective with the quota numbers low. If we are going to error lets error in favor of the lion. I would like to see all the units open on the same day....Novemeber 1st. All the units close the same day... the last day of May.

To show stats that prove my point, you only need to look at the 2008 - 2009 Cougar Split Hunting Units Stats.
The draw tags started the season with 171 tags. In three months they took 62 lions for 38% success rate. The harvest objective season opened with 106 lions available. 78 lions harvested for a 73% success rate. There were two units; West Desert, Mountain Ranges and Plateau, Thousand Lakes that never even harvested a lion during the draw season. Two units; southwest desert and Fillmore oak creek that only harvested one lion each during the draw. Four units took the whole first three months of the season, the best months of the hunting season to only take two lions. Hundreds of sportsman who tried to draw tags but didn't were not allowed to hunt. this is not fair to the sportsman who would like to harvest a lion. With these stats this is a management tool that shouldn't be used to manage anything.

You said the draw takes pressure off of units. This doesn't make sense to me, you yourself said that the houndsman are not out to kill lions only to work their dogs. As long as God blesses us with snow, and the DWR sells pursuit permits, these units will be hit hard, it doesn't matter if they are draw or harvest. It has been my own experience on the pine valley unit, that houndsman with only a pursuit permit in their pocket run roads all night long, leaving no place untouched when the sun came up. Try telling a hunter how lucky he is to have a draw tag in his pocket when there is no place left to hunt.

Another myth is that you have more of a chance for a trophy lion if you have a draw tag. I have had three different hunters who had drawn tags, one out of state, pine valley one out of state paunsaugunt, one resident pausaugunt, all three wanted big toms we turned down a lot of smaller lions and all three hunters went home empty handed. I have taken at least 10 lions in those three years that have made the minimum requirements for the pope and young record book, all book lions were taken on harvest objective units.

You know the old saying "Two wrongs don't make a right" we all know that when the quota first started, too many lions were killed. That was wrong. But to go in the complete opposite direction and make everything a draw unit is also wrong. We know the quota works we just need to get the numbers right this time.

If this plan continues we only need to look at the bear management in this state to see the future for lions. The bear management uses small units with small number of draw tags. Bear management in this state is a dissaster. There are campgrounds closed to people camping in tents. Last summer a boy was drug out of his tent and killed by a bear. Bears are being shot by people who are being harrased in their own back yards. Government trappers are killing bears because sportsmen who would actually harvest a bear put in year after year after year and can not draw a tag.

Anthor old saying becareful what you wish for. It may come true. If this plan reaches its goals, in 10 or 12 years you will have what you want, "a lion under every tree".
When this happens the DWR will have every cattleman, sheep man, sportsman and anyone who has conections to the outdoors, screeming at the top of their lungs wondering what kind of management program are they running.

I attended the southeastern RAC meeting where ten out of eleven RAC members voted to leave San Juan harvest objective. They also voted for the four Manti units to be turned from draw units to harvest objective units. I hear in the southern unit, the DWR and the houndsman association asked for the quota number to be cut in half on the zions unit. The RAC voted against this and left it the same as last year.

I think you have more people against the draw, houndsmen and non houndsmen alike than you realize.

I hope we can learn from the states around us and our past history, lets put all units harvest objective, leave quota numbers low, open all units on the same day, close all units on the same day.
LeRoy

 

[redfrog]

Killroy you make a good point. One thing I want to point out and I know there are both good and bad things about it. Is some of these other States they want you to kill males only and try to leave the females by shutting down a unit sooner if femals are taken. I just think its something to look at. Like I said there are good and bad points to that so I don't want to say it should be that way.

The other thing is AGAIN We as sportsmen and houndsmen should have a voice in a RAC meeting. And have a voice to change things or keep them the way they are. I know there are other groups with there names on the proposal. But it comes down to one group and for some reason they get what they want Not what the sportsmen and houndsmen want. I still can't understand why some off the groups names on the proposal are there. They were some of the last ones I would have ever thought to see on something like this.

 

[HoundDawgJr]

I can't speak for every part of the state but around here very very few hound guys are in favor of quota units. They want a chance at a nice big tom, and you just don't get that with Quota units, I don't care how you want to spin it.

The numbers don't lie, and any taxidermist around here will tell you they rarely take in big toms anymore. It's so bad in fact that "big tom" has been totally redefined and what used to be considered a young tom is now a "big tom"...

I personally am not really sure how I feel about the whole split season thing, etc... I haven't really studied the data enough but the quota units here get heavy pressure so I just avoid them when I can.

A couple of people have mentioned on this thread how sportsmen, cattlemen, sheep men, etc are all crying the blues, or will cry the blues... Here is my take on that.

Sheep men will cry and whine until the last predator of any kind is dead, even domestic dogs. As long as there is one fox or coyote or lion left alive, they will still be complaining there are too many. You will never have few enough lions to keep the average deer hunter happy. This site is proof of that.

Utah has killed lions at a record rate the past decade and you still hear whining and crying on this site about weekly. So nothing you do will change that. You can kill every lion on this planet and guys will still be seeing coyote tracks and complaining, "I saw a lion track right by a herd of deer, they kill 2 a week so that means they are killing 456,000 deer in Utah, no wonder I never see anything driving up and down AF Canyon." You can kill every last one and the complaining will still never stop.

Cattlemen? That's pushing it. I sat in a RAC meeting about lions and I knew the guy on the board representing the Cattlemen, he was on their Association board. After the meeting he told me, "To be honest, lions are a non issue for the Cattlemen's. I hear all these people complain about how many there are. We have no problem with lions, we don't see lions out in the hills, they aren't bothering us. I think these guys are up in the night."

That guy was on their board and told me they could care less about lions, they are a "non issue" to them. So painting a picture the cow guys will be screaming in the streets is a real stretch. I know a bunch of them and they could care less. Their complaints are generally with the Gov. or to be honest most of them I know complain about Hunters more than they do lions.

And for the life of me I can't figure out how you can talk about how bad the state of bear management is in Utah. The old timers in these parts never got to run bears. I have a land owner friend here on the Wasatch and 20 years ago he said it was a real big deal for them to see a bear track on his property. Pretty exciting stuff for them. We catch bears all the time in there now and have killed some lunkers.

You can actually draw a bear tag in Utah now on many many units and have a good chance at harvesting a nice bear. Not too many years ago anywhere outside the Book Cliffs, Moab or San Juan finding a bear was a needle in a haystack deal. The state of bear hunting in Utah is pretty sweet right now!! You can go kill a bear in any number of different spots in Utah.

I'll say again what I've said before... all this business with bears and lions is going to be a drop in the bucket when Wolves get here in force. They'll make you people forget you ever cared about a black bear or a lion.

As for the whole "Quota vs Draw" argument... not really sure about all of that, I can see benefits to each and problems with each. At the end of the day not sure it will effect me cuz I can't catch a damn lion anyway.

I should stick to worrying about something I have more of a vested interest in... Utah Liquor Laws!! ;-) ;-)