Utah Deer Change Proposals

>30,
>Simple math and sprinkle of actual
>conservation says we ought to
>cut tags.
>
>350,000 deer in the state of
>Utah. At an average
>of 20 buck per 100
>does that puts us at
>70,000 buck deer. We
>currently issue 90,0000 tags.
>That is 20,000 more tags
>than we have bucks.
>Mix in the fact that
>we all agree that technology
>is improving the success rates
>of those 90,000 hunters. To
>me it looks like we
>are being completely irresponsible as
>hunters. We are not
>even figuring in things that
>hunters can not control, weather,
>road kill, predation. Tags
>are the only thing that
>we have actual and complete
>control of. To not
>have that be one of
>the first options it again
>completely irresponsible. Yeah it
>sucks to not have a
>tag every year but loosing
>the resource in end is
>worse.
>
>Lee,
>We are all aware that you
>are in the camp of
>continual "takers" and in-spite
>of that some will work
>hard to preserve and strengthen
>the resource you are teaching
>your grandchildren to love. You
>see the ones making tough
>decisions to protect and strengthen
>our deer herds will continue
>to share with the "takers"
>just like they have always
>done.

Excellent post M73, thank you.
One thing I would like to add that is being left out though, is that the overage of 20,000 tags allocated is due to the success rates not being 100%. In order to hit the harvest objectives they are shooting for, they have to issue (sell) extra tags to get that job done.
 
Slam,
I get that, however when you look at the actual numbers the DWR provides how many units are actually over objective? Also how many of those bucks are on private land, unhuntable by vast majority of tag holders. Also did not factor in animals wounded and lost. When you factor everything it's a miracle we have the deer we have. One bad winter and we could lose it all in the blink of an eye.
 
>Slam,
>I get that, however when you
>look at the actual numbers
>the DWR provides how many
>units are actually over objective?
> Also how many of
>those bucks are on private
>land, unhuntable by vast majority
>of tag holders. Also
>did not factor in animals
>wounded and lost. When
>you factor everything it's a
>miracle we have the deer
>we have. One bad
>winter and we could lose
>it all in the blink
>of an eye.

You are spot on Sir, absolutely!!
 
>Slam,
>I get that, however when you
>look at the actual numbers
>the DWR provides how many
>units are actually over objective?
> Also how many of
>those bucks are on private
>land, unhuntable by vast majority
>of tag holders. Also
>did not factor in animals
>wounded and lost. When
>you factor everything it's a
>miracle we have the deer
>we have. One bad
>winter and we could lose
>it all in the blink
>of an eye.


Is that what your going to present to the wildlife board?
I hope not.
Here's the deal guys. I commend you for wanting to make a difference and I truly respect that.
But....
Since the Beaver unit has been in the forefront, I'll use it as an example.

According to the most recent numbers in the Big game annual report.
1) pg.36
deer herd population objective is set at 13,000.
between 2012-2016 the overall herd numbers were over objective by as much as 2,000. In fact, 4 out of 5 years was over objective.
2) pg.38 buck/doe ratios
Beaver unit is set at a target of 18-20/100.
2014: 19/100
2015: 22/100
2016: 25/100
Average 22/100
3) pg.42
Deer classifications:
2007 - 2016
10 yr. average of 43% of post season bucks were 3 point or better.
In 2016 it was 49%.

Now look at the unit management plan for the Beaver
This is a 5 year plan from 2015-2019.
As of 2015, according to this report, habit has been rated as good to fair at most sample lots and has shown a steady increase of better conditions as of 1997, with exception to low elevation burn areas.

These are the reasons why there has been an increase tag numbers the last few years.
It appears things are not as bad as some people made them out to be.
Now it's going to take one heck of a lot of work to prove these biologist wrong and to present your own science based finding.
Several studies and surveys will need to be taken and you only have one year to do it before a new 5 year plan with be set into action.
You've got a pretty steep uphill climb ahead of yourselves but I'll be cheering you guys on.
 
Ridge,
No that's not what i would present. That was merely a quick response for the Internet.

The DWR is very good at presenting numbers that coincidentally usually match or very closesly match the numbers they need.

It will be an unhill battle as it has always been for 50 years in Utah. But I can be done, I know that for a fact.
 
That was just a quick internet question I through out there for you too. Just messing with ya a little. I do wish you guys luck with your new adventure.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-18 AT 09:41PM (MST)[p]When we dropped from 250,000 tag holders to 90k how did we lose deer population if tag cuts lead to bigger herds?

I live near AI. It wasn't hunted forever. If non hunting equaled massive population expansion, there should be a gazillion deer out there, yet there isn't.


Lastly, of we are so concerned about the numbers of hunters, shouldn't we push for the dissolution of LE units, which would spread hunter numbers out.? Funny that when cuts get brought up its never CWMU or LE. Its some dude who gets a weekend a year.

In not willing to trade mine or your kids hunts in the future for a few inches of bone.


Muley.

You cannot stockpile deer. A bad winter will kill deer. If you have a lot of deer, winter will kill a lot of deer.

We saw it in the 80' s. Saw it in the 90' s. Wyoming and Idaho saw it few years ago. The same percentages of susceptible deer will die. Having more deer simply means more susceptible animals.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
hoss,
I feel like I'm acknowledging the MM equivalent of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez when responding back to you.

The answer to your 250,000 to 90,000 is this. First of all 100,000 of the 250,000 had already left the system because of the lack of deer. (Little acknowledged fact) But to continue, the numbers had fallen so far down that we were no longer at critical mass on the herds. Our herds were down to a point that they could not bounce back to a point that predators, highways, weather ect. all kept them low. We cut the tags too late and not far enough for level that we have dropped.

Inches of bone has nothing to do with it. Yes a health herd has more mature bucks in it naturally. And yes mature buck deer tend to have more antler inches than immature buck deer. But this is merely a dynamic of a healthy herd verses unhealthy herd that is managed closer to the edge of failure than truly managed for growth and strength.

Yet again you show no concern for the actual herd only your own selfish agenda while trying to pin that distinction on those that oppose you.....Thus the opening comment of this post. :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-18 AT 10:18PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-18 AT 10:11?PM (MST)

>hoss,
>I feel like I'm acknowledging the
>MM equivalent of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
>when responding back to you.
>
>
>The answer to your 250,000 to
>90,000 is this. First
>of all 100,000 of the
>250,000 had already left the
>system because of the lack
>of deer. (Little acknowledged fact)
> But to continue, the
>numbers had fallen so far
>down that we were no
>longer at critical mass on
>the herds. Our herds
>were down to a point
>that they could not bounce
>back to a point that
>predators, highways, weather ect. all
>kept them low. We
>cut the tags too late
>and not far enough for
>level that we have dropped.
>
>
>Inches of bone has nothing to
>do with it. Yes
>a health herd has more
>mature bucks in it naturally.
>And yes mature buck deer
>tend to have more antler
>inches than immature buck deer.
> But this is merely
>a dynamic of a healthy
>herd verses unhealthy herd that
>is managed closer to the
>edge of failure than truly
>managed for growth and strength.
>
>
>Yet again you show no concern
>for the actual herd only
>your own selfish agenda while
>trying to pin that distinction
>on those that oppose you.....Thus
>the opening comment of this
>post. :)

Yup. My selfish desire is to have hunting live on beyond this generation. Gawd forbid. So lets hear it. How many more hunters do you want to weed out? Then what when it doesn't work? More? Seems I've heard thus somewhere. Oh that's right, Don Peay sold the same crap in the 90' s. Funny how HIS crew wasn't the issue, only those greedy weekend slobs. If we just cut out those non serious guys, the serious guys could continue on.

We cut tags nearly 3 decades ago. When shall we expect to see the explosive growth curve?

Ya I know I'm dumb, just a taker, not the serious deer hunter you are. Still waiting on that explosion on AI. No pressure. No roads. Very little snow. Great genetics. When will that population jump from a few hundred to multi thousands? Or is those 2 hunters keeping that population under control?

If your so sure, then draw tags, rip them up. DWR gets funds, no deer is killed. Start a movement. Or do you just want someone else to give it up? If your a true believer, you don't need the DWR to set the limit, do it voluntarily.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
I stated the numbers and solutions i thought multiple times. Go do some research and you'll have your answer.

I have had a tag in my pocket for Utah every single year since I was 15, except last year. This year i killed the 3rd buck I've shot in 12 years. So I'm ahead of you on your suggestion.

You?re confused just like your clone in New York. You?re preserving the ability of your kids to have a deer tag in their pocket for years to come. You?re not doing anything to ensure that there is a resource to actually hunt. I'm 10000% positive that the state will continue to take your money and issue you a piece is paper as long as you're willing to shell out the shiny nickles to walk around on the hills with it in your pocket.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-18 AT 11:01PM (MST)[p]+1 Hoss well said. Furthermore, when will you guys be satisfied? When we're all sitting home? I noticed you avoided the questions I posed above about tag cuts benefiting hunters. That's because you can't find anywhere it has. Go ahead push for those cuts and grow that bone as you think it will. When and if they grow, News flash, you won't be hunting them because you'll be waiting for that tag. But guess who will be hunting them and licking their chops? We?re already waiting way too long for all the tags in this state. Give me a break!!!!! In my opinion, tag cuts should be an extreme last resort in extreme emergencies. And we're not in any emergency right now. Emergency for some is that I didn't see that head full of bone this year. All I saw were those Utah trophies all over. I've also hunted the Beaver unit a lot over the years and it's been the same ever since Peayday took over. Was down there muzzy elk hunting last week and weekend and saw deer all over the place, including a lot of bucks that survived the hunt. Also, saw a 180ish type deer that if he can survive the winter could be special next year. So go whine somewhere else!
 
30,
1.2 million mule deer down to 300K. At what point to call it an emergency? Whine? Again I see Bucks but that doesn't mean the heard is healthy or balanced.
You say when is enough, well i say the same thing back. Guys like you and hoss would pound the herd until it completely disappeared.
 
So many solutions that don't even involve tag cuts yet that it the ONLY thing that some key in on. No solutions just constant opposition.

Luckily atttutides like that rarely organized and willing to do more than post on the inter web.

Slam,
I remember when many on this site said Option 2 would never pass. Well ask them what unit they hunted this past fall. If they did I'll bet it was one of the 30 that Option 2 created. Now it's time to put that tool to work and try some new things on select units to see if we can come up with solutions that increase the health is the herd and more than likely the tag numbers. 30 and Hoss, i hope you're kids and your kids, kids draw tags down the road and enjoy a deer hunt rather than a camping trip.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-18 AT 11:53PM (MST)[p]Muley, No answer to the question of where have tag cuts benefited hunters in this state? You don't know me so don't be saying I'd be pounding them til their all gone. FYI I haven't killed a buck on the general in this state since 1996, so put your comments back in ur mouth. And I can do math and based on ur post above puts u at 27 years old and probably part of that dedicated poacher program. If I were you and Slam, I'd be figuring out how to get guys like me and Hoss on board. Because ur going to need everyone you can get to change things. You need the hunters of this state on board. And hunters are not going to support waiting longer for tags. Two guys with another 20 or so is pissin in the wind. You might as well just go join up with SFW because they'll support ur tag cut idea!
 
>So many solutions that don't even
>involve tag cuts yet that
>it the ONLY thing that
>some key in on.
>No solutions just constant opposition.
>
>
>Luckily atttutides like that rarely organized
>and willing to do more
>than post on the inter
>web.
>
>Slam,
>I remember when many on this
>site said Option 2 would
>never pass. Well ask
>them what unit they hunted
>this past fall. If
>they did I'll bet it
>was one of the 30
>that Option 2 created.
>Now it's time to put
>that tool to work and
>try some new things on
>select units to see if
>we can come up with
>solutions that increase the health
>is the herd and more
>than likely the tag numbers.
> 30 and Hoss, i
>hope you're kids and your
>kids, kids draw tags down
>the road and enjoy a
>deer hunt rather than a
>camping trip.


Muley. Where are you gonna put 1.2 million deer? Slc? Provo? Logan? St. George? Do you get out much?

If your concerned why are you killing deer? I know, when you pull the trigger its WAAAAYYYY different than someone else. The artist in Jackson believes Grizz shouldn't be hunted. He bought a tag and ate it. Why aren't you? Why is it everyone else's job?

You are correct. The vast majority of hunters aren't organized with the goal of cutting out other hunters. Its that $FW mentality that you flirt with which preaches that. But what you've never thought, you ain't rich enough, or connected enough. When you get rid of the average slobs, YOU are now in the crosshairs of those richer and more connected. To them, YOU are screwing their pursuit of inches.

The titanic is sinking, your fighting for the best deck chair. You can't sacrifice hunters, and think your going to have hunting. Your great at spinning numbers.

What's the average age of hunters? What percentage of kids from hunting families drop? What's the #1 reason for loss of hunters(hint, it ain't 180"bucks). On the track we are on your gonna lose plenty of hunters, you dont need to push them out the door.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
30,
Wow, that was some dectective work!!! Amazing! You nailed it across the board. And most of all, what you nail it that you don't really know me or anything about my background. I'll do just fine on this playground my friend, I've been playing on it before you even knew it existed. Oh I'm still laughing. The internet is good times!
 
Hoss,
I have ate many many tags. And honestly I'm willing to jump in on the good fight if someone like Slam is looking for soldiers, cause I like the fight. But as far as hunting, I hunt plenty all over the West every year. With my kids and the rest of my family. I stay in involved on Utah because it's my home. I spend 1000x the amount of time just looking and enjoying in Utah than i do pulling a trigger.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 02:27AM (MST)[p]There are a few new ideas. Slam has a few. The one you love has been failing for nearly 30 years, but lets double down.

That cancer $fw walked into a bad spot, sold a solution, and sucked up millions.

Not one deer got saved. In fact, DIRECTLY because we willingly cut off millions in tag sales and Pittman Robinson taxes, the state is like an addict when it comes to the big donor class. It has to sell more and more to cover what we have away under the guise of "saving mule deer".

We went from a political and economic powerhouse to an afterthought. And for what? A few inches. A handful of guides getting rich selling horn to even richer dudes, which are represented by a special interest group peddling "saving mule deer"

Its no grand conspiracy. It takes money to run the dwr. It takes a lot of money to hire and keep good people. The average Joe gets lost in the RAC and WB because he is a fraction of what he was economically, replaced by a few whales who get to call there shot.

Who won? You didn't. I didn't. Our kids didnt. OUR DEER sure as he'll didn't. But a small handful made millions. Now here we are nearly 30 years later, and we keep buying into failed ideas. Only this time its not THE DON peddling them. Its dudes who somehow bought into a fantasy that behind every sage brush there is a 30" buck. That regardless of drought, urban expansion, predation, cars, genetics, biology, ELK, if we cut 10,000 more guys out all that magically goes away.

I've hunted the exact same spot for 30 years. It has good years and bad, up and down, but cutting hunters hasn't changed one thing, other than make it so towns now court atv, bikers, etc because hunters don't create revenue.

Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

If we are lucky we are about 10 years away from losing the majority of hunters. We don't need to speed that up for a few more grip and grins.






From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
In one post you say we will never get our deer numbers back. In the next post you say we should never cut another tag. That is completely delusional and irresponsible on a conservation side.

Again you posted your hate for SFW, your desire to always have tag in your pocket above all else and yet post not solution what so ever. You state you only hunt the same place for the past 30 years. Yet believe you have your head wrapped around what would benefit other units?

Thank you for your input but I'd rather look for fixes. You are sadly just one of the obstacles that has to be contented with along the way.
 
30-
You haven't killed a buck on a general unit since 1996?
That tells me either you are a horrible shot (which I doubt) or you haven't had the opportunity.
If you are ranting about how good our states hunting is, please explain not notching a tag in 22 consecutive years??
And you saw a (singular)180" buck on the beaver last week? Do you know how many 180" bucks a person could see on the beaver in November just less than 10 years ago?
And please don't be one of those guys who thinks a 180" buck will be a 200" in "one more year".

I'm not wanting to be in a pissing match with my fellow hunters, we sound like Republicans and Democrats fighting over the same end goal....a healthy America and economy with opportunities for all.
We need to figure out how to find balance and unite.

Has anyone watched the link I posted in the general forum called "Project Mule Deer"? It CLEARLY explains the challenges we and our herds are facing today. We all need to take that type of REAL facts and build off of them, period.
 
>Hoss,
>In one post you say we
>will never get our deer
>numbers back. In the next
>post you say we should
>never cut another tag.
>That is completely delusional and
>irresponsible on a conservation side.
>
>
>Again you posted your hate for
>SFW, your desire to always
>have tag in your pocket
>above all else and yet
>post not solution what so
>ever. You state you
>only hunt the same place
>for the past 30 years.
> Yet believe you have
>your head wrapped around what
>would benefit other units?
>
>Thank you for your input but
>I'd rather look for fixes.
> You are sadly just
>one of the obstacles that
>has to be contented with
>along the way.

You can take shots at me all day. But you still haven't answered the question.

IF CUTTING TAGS FIXED THE PROBLEM, WHY DO WE HAVE THE PROBLEM AFTER LOSING 160,000 TAGS?

There are fixes.

Close shed season until winter is over.

Do away with trail cams during the any season.

Weight tag #in the direction of archery, the hunt with worst results.

Make muzzleloader laws similar to Colorado

There's a few while I'm sitting here drinking coffee.

I love your assumption that I've never been anywhere or seen anything because I hunt(in most cases camp) the same place for the rifle hunt. Yup your the only dude that ever goes anywhere or sees anything.

But. It always does surface, which is why I stayed on you. This ain't finding a fixes FOR YOU. Its about getting guys out of YOUR WAY.

Your all for cutting tags, JUST NOT YOUR TAG.

Good luck selling that.
I'm sure I'm the only obsticle you will encounter along the way.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
I immediately and directly answered your question. Did you not understand it? I thought I was very clear.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 08:12AM (MST)[p]Slam.

I've killed 2 deer in 12 years. What's that say about me?

This is where you lose guys.

If its about growing herds shouldn't not killing anything with horns be the goal?

What do you REALLY think is realistic? 100% success? 4x4 behind every rock?


Hunting is built upon the vast majority NOT being successful. In fact in truth isn't the 75-100% successful over a time period doing more harm than a guy who rarely pulls the trigger?



Muley never can answer what the end goal is. Your more measured.

So what is the end goal?

How many hunters get sacrificed to achieve it?


Simply "saving mule deer" isn't a plan, and it doesn't address at what cost.

I know where I frequent it would involve shutting a highway, stopping foothill expansion, eradication of predators, changes to crop production away from corn and alfalfa, and returning it to sagebrush. None of which are going to happen. So what's it going to cost?
That's not an unfair, or selfish question.

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>Hoss,
>I immediately and directly answered your
>question. Did you not
>understand it? I thought I
>was very clear.


Being married to an accountant has taught me one thing, THERE IS ALWAYS A NUMBER. So what is it. What's with all the cloak and dagger generality.

HOW MANY TAGS(GUYS) ARE YOU WANTING TO SACRIFICE?

HOW MANY DEER DOES THAT CREATE?(what does success look like)




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 08:39AM (MST)[p]Hoss,
Again I have answered you just don't think my goal is conducive to your agenda of everyone having a tag every year regardless of the status of the herd.

My goal is a healthier overall mule deer herd in the state of Utah. No reason to not carry double the amount we currently have. I also believe a truly healthier herd includes more mature bucks than we currently manage for. Pretty simple and many ways to get there. I am willing to look at all of the options, I have preached that for years, however I am not afraid to include the option of cutting tags if that is what is needed on certain units. The fact that stomp your feet and only get hung up on that is childish and telling of your overall attitude about the situation.

So stop saying I won't answer the questions, I have answered them all. You just aren't open minded enough to process the information. Just like SFW, and public land issues, you wear blinders and run straight into the wall continually. People like you are not problem solvers and fixers, you are just something that others have to deal with when working to make things better.
 
>Hoss,
>Again I have answered you just
>don't think my goal in
>conducive to your agenda of
>everyone having a tag every
>year regardless of the status
>of the herd.
>
>My goal is a healthier overall
>mule deer herd in the
>state of Utah. No
>reason to not carry double
>the amount we currently have.
> I also believe a
>truly healthier herd includes more
>mature bucks than we currently
>manage for. Pretty simple
>and many ways to get
>there. I am willing
>to look at all of
>the options, I have preached
>that for years, however I
>am not afraid to include
>the option of cutting tags
>if that is what is
>needed on certain units.
>The fact that stomp your
>feet and only get hung
>up on that is childish
>and telling of your overall
>attitude about the situation.
>
>So stop saying I won't answer
>the questions, I have answered
>them all. You just
>aren't open minded enough to
>process the information. Just
>like SFW, and public land
>issues, you wear blinders and
>run straight into the wall
>continually. People like you
>are not problem solvers and
>fixers, you are just something
>that others have to deal
>with when working to make
>things better.

"Better, more, healthier"

Those aren't answers those are words.


The wall with you specifically is you cannot spell out what you want, what it takes, what the cost is.

You can only say something is wrong. That's not an answer. Its barely anything.

My guess is Slam knows the answer.

MDF probably does.

We know what DWR answer is.

Your answer is ambiguity, and when you get called on that, resort to personal attacks.

You just want 'more, better," but have zero idea what that looks like. Or are too afraid to spell it out


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
The specific numbers would depend on each unit. Once those numbers were addressed then different management options could be explored and executed.

Of course it's personal attacks, I'm personally addressing you. And you personally wear blinders and personally either purposely or unknowingly choose to be narrow minded on any issue you post on this forum. That makes you personally part of the problem that adds to an issue i would like to fix. I'm glad that you take it personally, it is meant to be.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18
>AT 08:12?AM (MST)
>
>Slam.
>
>I've killed 2 deer in 12
>years. What's that say
>about me?
>
>This is where you lose guys.
>
>
>If its about growing herds shouldn't
>not killing anything with horns
>be the goal?
>
>What do you REALLY think is
>realistic? 100% success?
>4x4 behind every rock?
>
>
>Hunting is built upon the vast
>majority NOT being successful. In
>fact in truth isn't the
>75-100% successful over a time
>period doing more harm than
>a guy who rarely pulls
>the trigger?
>
>
>
>Muley never can answer what the
>end goal is. Your
>more measured.
>
>So what is the end goal?
>
>
>How many hunters get sacrificed to
>achieve it?
>
>
>Simply "saving mule deer" isn't a
>plan, and it doesn't address
>at what cost.
>
>I know where I frequent it
>would involve shutting a highway,
>stopping foothill expansion, eradication of
>predators, changes to crop production
>away from corn and alfalfa,
>and returning it to sagebrush.
> None of which are
>going to happen. So
>what's it going to cost?
>
>That's not an unfair, or selfish
>question.
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.

Nope, killing every year is not a goal, never meant it to sound that way. Some guys DO expect that because they may be meat hunters, I am not.
But in 22 year's, that spells a healthy herd?
I think not.
 
Generally I'm not either, we usually have elk in the freezer.

But, we can't just look past that there are guys who are and they have every bit the claim on the resource that bone hunters have. The concern of horn hunters is no more important than the meat hunters, or dudes who like gearing up and cruising the mtn.

To be honest. During the "golden era" most guys were meat hunters. Its the evolution of horn hunting that has lead to the screwed up system in place today. No one passes a big deer, but expecting them everywhere is unrealistic.


You can't come to the public and say "some of you need to not hunt soon can kill bigger deer", it will never happen again.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 09:55AM (MST)[p]>Hoss,
>The specific numbers would depend on
>each unit. Once those
>numbers were addressed then different
>management options could be explored
>and executed.
>
>Of course it's personal attacks, I'm
>personally addressing you. And
>you personally wear blinders and
>personally either purposely or unknowingly
>choose to be narrow minded
>on any issue you post
>on this forum. That
>makes you personally part of
>the problem that adds to
>an issue i would like
>to fix. I'm glad
>that you take it personally,
>it is meant to be.
>

There it is again.

"It depends", "I don't know".

I bid every week. If I walked in and told a customer "it will be a lot, ill finish sometime", I'd get laughed out of business.



You don't trust the DWR. So where are you getting your numbers from?

You being a malcontent isn't being serious. Bitching ain't a proposal. Your not superior because you complain more.

Come back when you can highlight a unit. Explain the current level, the level you feel it can hold, and SPECIFIC action that you feel needs to be taken to reach your desired goal. Then an actual conconversation or debate can happen.

Or do what you always do, #####, and tell everyone how dumb they are for not understanding your complaint. HINT: more, better, healthier ain't numbers, not a plan, not a proposal. Nor is "because said so"

Your like those ex wives dudes have. Never happy, but can never explain why.






From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 10:40AM (MST)[p]Hoss,
Do you really think that this is going to happen on the forums of MM? This is nothing more that a kick off discussion forum. All of the real numbers and decisions won't be made on chat forum.

In the end we will all see how it plays out. I know what I'll fight for and I'm sure you know what you'll fight for. I know the route I'll go to try and push my agenda and I'm sure you'll do like wise.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 10:45AM (MST)[p]>Hoss,
>Do you really think that this
>is going to happen on
>the forums of MM?
>This is nothing more that
>a kick off discussion forum.
> All of the real
>numbers and decisions won't be
>made on chat forum.

If your serious about getting sportsmen on board you put out a plan on MM, Facebook, IG, TV, radio, etc.

Its called building support.

I personally watched the "saving mule deer" speech from a lobbyist years ago. Blindly following along burned a ton of guys. You will never get support by never being specific.

You might find dudes agree and buy in, but "we need to pass the bill to find out what's in it" won't work.

Thing is. MDF I think has a finger on what they want, what it will cost, etc.

You don't. You have a complaint. That's great. The other 99% of deer hunters do to. Their complaint not matching yours doesn't mean they are dumb, lazy, selfish, or any of the other things you throw out.

But good luck. I'm sure everyone will jump on your "trust me" program.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 10:58AM (MST)[p]Yeah too bad I have no idea or experience with trying to move the needle or make changes with in the system. Or even had people to look to for guidance. It would sure come in handy.

I'm just a fighter. Slam has some ideas that are worth fighting for so I'll jump on board.
 
30,
?You haven't killed a buck on a general unit since 1996?
That tells me either you are a horrible shot (which I doubt) or you haven't had the opportunity.
If you are ranting about how good our states hunting is, please explain not notching a tag in 22 consecutive years??
Slam, boy this is going to be a long one. By the way Hoss has made some of the best comments I've seen on here in awhile. He gets it. He?s been through it just like I have. Here it goes. I was fortunate to have hunted the tale end of the glory years in this state. I grew up in Sevier Valley where my dad was from, and my moms family was from St George, so yes the beaver, Monroe, fish lake, pine valley were my backyard. I watched in the 70s my grandfathers, uncles, dad harvest truly magnificent bucks. They hunted hard and I learned from them. Then the 80s through early 90s came and I was able to harvest some magnificent bucks of my own. Then mid 90 came and the sky started falling. A man started a group supposedly to bring our deer herd back. Promised we wouldn't have to stand in line anymore among other things. I admit, I bought into it. Then I watched as things got taken away. No more late season black powder hunt (which was my favorite), tag reductions and more tag reductions and now draw. Joined the dedicated poacher program along with several organizations. Attended all the RAC?s and traveled to some to fight the cause. Thought I was going to really make a difference and help bring the herds back. Bought into the point system and built points for several western states. Have all these points now and what good are they? Even became a licensed guide for mule deer in another state to attempt to satisfy my need. That wasn?t for me and not what hunting is supposed to be. In the meantime raising a family which is more important than any hunt for me. In the last several years got back into hunting through my kids, nephews, and nieces. Watching them get their 1st deer, elk, chukar, pheasant, etc. has brought me more joy than any trophy on my wall. That's what it's all about in my opinion. I do have a passion for mule deer and the fire still burns but reduction of tags hurts hunters. Again, show me where it helped? I would be glad to join ur cause as long u show me where ur cause helps us and not hurts us anymore. I'd be willing to go fight the RACs right along with u for the right reasons. I am no biologist and don't claim to be but if I was over a unit like beaver I would try something like this. First, unlimited tags on all hunts. Pick ur weapon type one hunt only no dedicated hunter program. Archery hunt will be 15 days with 1st 2 days compound bows and the remaining 13 days recurve only. Muzzleloader Hunt will be 10 days with the 1st day for inlines/scopes and the remaining 9 days sidelocks with iron sites patched round ball. Rifle hunt will be 5 days with the 1st being rifles with scopes and the remaining 4 days iron sights only. Then Atvs allowed only on roads where trucks can go. All other 2 tracks closed. No game cameras, radios, drones, planes, etc. If something like this was tried, I would bet the deer and hunters would benefit. How many of u would hunt the Beaver with this kind of system? Seems to cover everyone including the technology buffs. Fire away.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 12:30PM (MST)[p]Muley, what's that suppose to mean? Ur comments explain a lot about u too!!! Where do you happen to be from?
 
30,
So tell me, now days how many deer can you count from Glenwood to Annabella along the Sawls Meadow road, how about up Thompson Basin. How many deer do you see out on the Durfees? How about in the winter out in Sage Flats above Sigurd? How many deer pile into the fields south of Glenwood? You say unlimited tags when the resource is already a tiny fraction of what it was in the 80s? I'm all for managing and restricting technology but you gotta build the herds back before you apply more hunting pressure.
 
Muley,
Your preaching sounds all to familiar. Ur ideology is the same that was presented to us 25 years ago and still hasn't worked. Another group like them is not needed so just go join them already. No worries here because ur tag reduction ploy will not fly. The udwr needs revenue to operate and they have all the biological data to back up current tag numbers so good luck to you.
 
>30,
>So tell me, now days
>how many deer can you
>count from Glenwood to Annabella
>along the Sawls Meadow road,
> how about up Thompson
>Basin. How many deer
>do you see out on
>the Durfees? How about
>in the winter out in
>Sage Flats above Sigurd?
>How many deer pile into
>the fields south of Glenwood?
> You say unlimited tags
>when the resource is already
>a tiny fraction of what
>it was in the 80s?
> I'm all for managing
>and restricting technology but you
>gotta build the herds back
>before you apply more hunting
>pressure.


30 just put out a mouth full of new ideas, new approaches. And, to prove your open mindedness you went right back to "I want less hunters".?

Seems if your that concerned ANYTHING that increases herd numbers would be an improvement?





From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
Are you seriously that illiterate? I agreed with 30 on his ideas, other than going unlimited tags. I didn't say cut the tags i said don't add more pressure! That is the 3rd or 4th time in this thread alone that you have completely accused me of the exact opposite of what I said.

30,
I remember many saying the state would never go to a draw, that Opt 2 would never pass, that statewide archery would never be gone, well here we sit. I'm not 27 and I'm not new to this game. I will support Slam and his ideas and others like him. Not because of inches or dollars or anything other than increasing our deer herds and balancing them to a healthy level.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 02:03PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 02:00?PM (MST)

Muley, the only one illiterate here is u. Go back and read your posts. Tag reduction is implied in almost all of them. Good luck with that. You?ll need a lot of it along with some pixy dust so no worries. Also, keep repeating yourself about option 2. Tags gone and will probably never get them back. What's that got to do with anything now? Other than did option 2 benefit hunters in this state? Did it help anything? No! Why don't you answer the questions that were asked above instead of sidestepping everything. You want people on board with you but sidestep the questions? That sounds familiar too.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 02:25PM (MST)[p]30,
You won't and shouldn't get them back until we grow more deer. I don't think cutting tags is the only answer. I think there are many answers that would actually allow us to increase tags, your list included. I'm just not afraid of the option like you and Hoss. I'm willing to do whatever needs to be done including that if it's needed and a viable solution. Opt 2 allows you to try many of the solutIons on specific units. That was the initial idea by those that pushed it through to begin with. I keep bringing it up because many said it would never pass, just like you and Hoss are screaming that these changes will never pass. But it did. You two are way to hung up on SFW to look at all options and what will help the herds. It's not what your agenda is. I believe Slams agenda is to do just that so I'm on board.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 03:55PM (MST)[p]Muley, so what your saying is ur willing to sit on the couch for 5+ years for general tags? We?re already waiting 3 years on some units. Oh, that's right ur a dedicated hunter you don't have to wait, right? The dedicated hunter program needs to go. I'll bet then you all would change ur tune. Everyone needs to pick their hunt. That would create a lot less pressure on them animals. Right? Time to sacrifice Right?
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 04:13PM (MST)[p]30,
You?re honestly missing by a huge margin. I'm 45 years old raised in...Sevier Valley. Family cabins at Fish Lake and on Monroe. No I'm not dedicated hunter. I don't like the program at all. You only need to sit out for 3 years currently because some units are so bad. If you improve all units across the state you would need only need to sit out 2 years and hunt the 3rd with current available tags and current applicants. Lots of options to increase opportunity if you are willing to be open minded.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18
>AT 04:13?PM (MST)
>
>30,
>You?re honestly missing by a huge
>margin. I'm 45 years
>old raised in...Sevier Valley.
>Family cabins at Fish Lake
>and on Monroe. No
>I'm not dedicated hunter.
>I don't like the program
>at all. You only
>need to sit out for
>3 years currently because some
>units are so bad.
>If you improve all units
>across the state you would
>need only need to sit
>out 2 years and hunt
>the 3rd with current available
>tags and current applicants.
>Lots of options to increase
>opportunity if you are willing
>to be open minded.

So you tell a 12 year old,to sit around until your 15, then you can hunt deer? We are the same age. You started at 14. Would you have sat around until 17? NO.
We lose more hunters.

You and I are 11 years younger than the average age hunter. We are losing our heritage, not from deer numbers, but because if wrong headed tag cuts and asinine point systems.

YOU DIDNT FACE THAT. Neither did I. Not sure but I'm guessing the Fish lake went LE around same time as Manti. Which means you weren't staring at 17 years to hunt elk in your backyard and 3 years to hunt deer.

And for what? Tag cuts DIDNT WORK. You keep "agreeing" but you do so followed by "BUT...." The but being reduction in hunters.

How are you planning on growing the sport/heritage if you set up such unbelievable conditions to entry.

And you live where access isn't much of an issue compared to the northern 3rd of the state.

30 is 100% correct. You try everything under the sun before you cut one more hunter out. You have it backwards.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 05:41PM (MST)[p]Hoss,
I was 15 when they changed the law. I hunted the year before in CO. If parents plan right their kids can always hunt coming out of the gate. Not to mention all the other tags available besides General season deer. Way more opportunities out there for a kid than when we grew up. That is a fact. A kid these days can hunt multiple states for multiple species every single year, way easier than his mom or Dad can. So save the ?it's for kids? ploy. It's way too overplayed these days.
 
Muley, ur really missing the point. Ur kids, my kids and others are the future of hunting at all period!!! Most kids I know now days would rather play video games and waste their life away in front of a computer screen. Now ur saying there is all this opportunity. Really? Yes opportunity for the rich. Average families are not taking there kids all over to hunt. Come on!! You are I if we were young bucks now would have a lot harder time getting interested in hunting because our Dads would have just quit. My Dad, who has since passed on, did after I was done with High School. He couldn't take all the bs taking place.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 06:56PM (MST)[p]Ok here's the deal.
Hunting big game in Utah used to be pretty simple, cut and dried.
We had three basic seasons for deer and elk, archery, rifle and muzzle loader. Weapons were pretty basic and we didn't have trail camera's and drones, nor did we have major outfitters pounding the hills on public land looking for game with ten's of thousands of dollars price tags pinned on their vitals.
And late season doe and cow tag's were pretty simple and set apart from antlered game hunts.
A few "General Season" areas even has APR's (antler point restrictions).

Years ago we cried for more opportunity, well we got it.
We got it through dropping the hunter age from 16, to 14 now to 12 (hunter recruitment, I get it).

We have mixed bag hunts where we can take elk on deer hunts, deer on elk hunts and cows and doe's on bull and buck hunts.
We have early youth hunts (I believe this has hurt people from reporting violations)

We can hunt all three seasons for 3 consecutive years if we are "dedicated" (2 deer limit)

Our weaponry is basically unlimited and extremely more effective.

There are roads and trails (access) everywhere, we even see two track roads or atv trails that aren't even on maps that were made illegally.

APR's were lifted to "any legal buck deer" (two of which went to emergency closure within 3 years of being completely decimated of bucks (I was there, I saw it, do not argue this point with me). They are LE now after recovery.

Our habitat and critical winter ranges continue to dwindle due to human population increases and wealthy people who need million dollar mansions up high on the benches.
Then we are required to do additional depredation hunts to save their flowers and gardens.

Shed antler prices exploded, therefore filling the winter ranges with antler scavengers pressuring big game during their most vulnerable stages of health.

What else am I missing?
 
And for the record, I DO get the reduction of tags will do little for saving any bucks, it basically just lowers the success rates.

Hypothetically, If a unit has 100 bucks they want harvested, they issue 200 tags knowing the success rates are not even remotely close to even 100% overall, depending on weapon season.
It simply provides "opportunity" for 200 hunters and helps the biologists reach their goals on the individual units.
The following year they adjust those tag allotments according to data collected through hunter surveys and game checking stations.
 
Antelope Island was also mentioned as a comparison to the reduced tag argument.

We all know there are only 2 tags issued on the Island.
Those two tags do absolutely nothing for management of numbers, it is Island revenue only.

In lieu of hunting, they do deer transplants (200 deer were taken off the island in 2016, not certain about 2017).

And anyone who has spent much time there knows it has an insane number of coyotes in which any biologist out there will tell you those dogs do a mighty fine job keeping the fawn recruitment completely in check.

AI is not a fair comparison for public land management.
 
Concerning the O.P.
I do believe that many of the 30 sub units could be broken down to smaller sub units to manage the problem areas within the current 30 sub units better.
So I'm on board with what the O.P. was getting at, I think.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18
>AT 05:41?PM (MST)
>
>Hoss,
>I was 15 when they changed
>the law. I hunted the
>year before in CO.
>If parents plan right their
>kids can always hunt coming
>out of the gate.
>Not to mention all the
>other tags available besides General
>season deer. Way more
>opportunities out there for a
>kid than when we grew
>up. That is a
>fact. A kid these
>days can hunt multiple states
>for multiple species every single
>year, way easier than his
>mom or Dad can.
>So save the ?it's for
>kids? ploy. It's way
>too overplayed these days.

And new hunters? The Joe Rogan types? The new wave of knowing where your food comes from.?

The expanding number of women?

Guess you have more claim to the resource than others, your more serious


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Slam.

Seems you covered it except the massive expansion of CWMU, and point creep.

So my question or point, seems there is a huge pile of things to tinker with before we enter cutting out more hunters.

Things like limiting tech, better/longer seasons for archery or traditional muzzy where the success is much less.

Of gladly give up the inline for a side hammer and restoring that Nov hunt.

Gladly give up 2 ways in exchange for cam laws like Montana.

I agree. I hunt Manti. Fairview and Mayfield shouldn't be same unit.

Doubt the dedicated tags will go, most guys scratch a check for hours.

I think point restrictions could be done.

At some point CWMU need to be addressed. Too few tags, too much public land.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>Slam.
>
>Seems you covered it except the
>massive expansion of CWMU, and
>point creep.
>
>So my question or point, seems
>there is a huge pile
>of things to tinker with
>before we enter cutting out
>more hunters.
>
>Things like limiting tech, better/longer seasons
>for archery or traditional muzzy
>where the success is much
>less.
>
>Of gladly give up the inline
>for a side hammer and
>restoring that Nov hunt.
>
>Gladly give up 2 ways in
>exchange for cam laws like
>Montana.
>
>I agree. I hunt Manti.
> Fairview and Mayfield shouldn't
>be same unit.
>
>Doubt the dedicated tags will go,
>most guys scratch a check
>for hours.
>
>I think point restrictions could be
>done.
>
>At some point CWMU need to
>be addressed. Too few
>tags, too much public land.
>

Hos, I'd gladly join you and sell my inline and 12x scope and go back to a Hawken in a heartbeat!

It might be tough asking PLO's to offer more public tags on their CWMU's when those high dollar non residents are buying the remaining tags up like icecream cones in July for the opportunities they get to take trophy bucks.

As far as Manti and Mayfield goes, wasatch west needs to split the American fork canyon portion out and put it on it's own for both deer and elk. Mount Timpanogas and the strawberry range aren't even in the same mountain range for crying out loud. I'm sure there are other examples as well.
 
>With all these comments can't wait
>for the RAC meeting on
>Nov 13, hope to see
>you all their.

RAC meeting's do no good if there is only a single voice, that's been said in this thread a dozen times as common knowledge.
We need something stronger like an alliance or a group with credibility to stand up for us, the little guys.
Hos, 30, M73.....somebody start a group so I can join!?
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 10:57PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18 AT 10:53?PM (MST)

Well the first thing we need is a good name. Maybe something like Hunters Alliance for Utah. Then we probably need to form some kind of LLC with the State. Then we need to elect officers that would represent us as a whole well. Then we need to sign as many up as possible and collect a very minimal fee for operating expenses only, like LLC fees, marketing for membership, and travel expenses to all the RACs and wildlife board meetings. We would shoot at first to sign up 1000 members but hope for 5000 plus and 10000 would be awesome. Any other ideas on name or how to get started? Obviously never done this before.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 03:05AM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18
>AT 10:57?PM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Nov-08-18
>AT 10:53?PM (MST)
>
>Well the first thing we need
>is a good name. Maybe
>something like Hunters Alliance for
>Utah. Then we probably need
>to form some kind of
>LLC with the State. Then
>we need to elect officers
>that would represent us as
>a whole well. Then we
>need to sign as many
>up as possible and collect
>a very minimal fee for
>operating expenses only, like LLC
>fees, marketing for membership, and
>travel expenses to all the
>RACs and wildlife board meetings.
>We would shoot at first
>to sign up 1000 members
>but hope for 5000 plus
>and 10000 would be awesome.
>Any other ideas on name
>or how to get started?
>Obviously never done this before.
>

Well, aren't you lucky! There's no need to start a new group that wants want you want, ie: smaller and more units, lots fewer tags, more regulations on hunters, units shut down, shorter seasons, antler restrictions, small membership fees that help pay the officers expenses, and a membership of several thousand. And it's already got a good name and it's already registered with the State of Utah and the IRS. And they already show up at EVERY RAC and Wildlife Board meeting and they always do or say whatever it takes to make things happen the way they think it should and they'd be more than happy to eliminate some of us that M73 calls "takers". Fortunately M73 (or his dad) could lead you right to them or you could just Google them directly at Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. Sign up quickly so you can help represent them at the Southern RAC on the 13th!
 
I'm not going to let M73 take the bullet for the "Takers" comment.
I am quite sure I used that term first in reference to sportsmen just like myself that just hunted without giving back something to help our wildlife.

I already got crucified for making that statement and I apologize.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 08:58AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 08:43?AM (MST)

30,
The point that you are missing is hunters left because the resource had gone from 1.2 million deer in Utah to under 300,000. The kids sitting in front of the computer or TV is the fault of the parents not conservationists trying to preserve the health of the mule deer herd. All 3 of my kids hunted Utah every single year once they were old enough. Never missed out on having a Utah deer tag in their pocket.Because i made sure they did, and I never paid a cent extra.

Here is a number for you to chew on about youth hunters. We added 4 years onto their youth opportunities. That a huge add. Now let's look at what their chances are to draw a mule deer tag in Utah. According to the DWR at the WB Meeting recently. Over 75% of youth hunters drew their first choice. This did not include the leftover tags purchased by youth or tags mentored to youth. With those numbers figured in the number of youth that actually applied to hunt mule deer in the state of Utah last year was over 90%. You gotta find a different crutch to lean on with me than ?it's for the kids? battle cry.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 10:25AM (MST)[p]Well Elk, how would u start a group? How are you going to round up thousands to have any form of clout? Are you going to say ?hey let's go meet and get coffee and then go down to the rac meeting and giver hell?? FYI a group needs some form of leadership and organization. Just because it's similiar to others in organization don't make them same in principle. I made a suggestion of how to get started and then I get ridiculed for it. All u have to do is look at the posts that I've made on here over the coarse of years to know that I want no part of SFW. I'm pretty much done here. We can talk about it on here (the internet)til the cows come home to no avail. Until we organize as hunters into a group with more numbers and clout than SFW we will get no where! If any of you want to actually get off the couch and leave ur computer screens. Pm me and we can meet and see if we can organize to get this thing going. Talk is cheap! Time to put up or shut up!!!!!!One more thing or suggestion is that we would need a good computer guy or gal to survey the membership on all the issues taken to the RACs, leadership would not be in control it would be the majority of the membership.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 11:15AM (MST)[p]Ridge,
I agree 100%. If you go back and look at the old records of the DWR biologist they have the state broke into 60 seperate deer herds or "units". When we originally pushed for unit management....back in the early 90s(the SFW shot it down hard). It was for the 60 units. When it came back around the a small group organized and created strategic support they backed off to 30 units because the DWR wanted to keep 5 regions. The 30 units was a compromise to at least get it in front of the RACs and WB.

I believe you can still find the old maps that show the DWR breakdown of 60 units.
 
I will address what Lee is saying. Lee tried to rally a group of internet screamers, they made a little noise but didnt get the immediate results that the screamers wanted. Lee on his own put in a huge amount of time and I am sure his own money to show up and try to represent at the RACs and WB meetings. Along with projects and other conservation based activities. When he finally after a couple of years asked for some dues or dollars to help off set the personal cost of trying to give a voice to a group he was crucified.

I would love to see a new group form and create a voice. I have said all along if you show me a group doing more than SFW I am all in. But that group better have teeth and be willing to fight. I know everyone will not always agree but if the end goal it the same there are many options out there. I will never draw a line and say no tag cuts ever. To me that is handcuffing yourself out of the gate. It is not my first choice and I would much rather we implement other effective strategies but to take it off of the table completely and blindly is irresponsible.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 12:03PM (MST)[p]>I'm not going to let M73
>take the bullet for the
>"Takers" comment.
>I am quite sure I used
>that term first in reference
>to sportsmen just like myself
>that just hunted without giving
>back something to help our
>wildlife.
>
>I already got crucified for making
>that statement and I apologize.
>

FWIW, I think it's very generous of you to admit that and as far as I'm concerned, your apology is accepted. Thanks!

BUT, that false definition of the term remains very divisive because EVERY legal hunter gives back something to help wildlife. It's called MONEY and in many cases that's all they are able to give because of time constraints, health, budget, abilities, priorities, etc. Hunting is a HOBBY that is on their list of priorities and just because it's not as high on their list as it is on others, that doesn't give anyone the right to judge their contribution as less important. Even Jesus recognized the widow's mite as an important and vital contribution, and by that assumed definition, I suspect most of the auction tag winners are "takers".

And for M73 and others to continue to use that term in an attempt to discredit and insult the majority of Utah hunters who provide 78% of the DWR's budget tells me much more about them them it does about those they target.

Pardon the rant, but did I take M73's post personally? Damn rights! He's been at it for years and he always addresses his remarks with my name. But this one was really bad timing. First off, he knows I've helped with projects in the past (Parowan Front Deer transplant, bitterbrush seed planting, lop and scatter, Mule Deer Committee meetings, RAC and WB meetings, hatchery trout fin clipping, providing the opportunity for blind hunters to actually pull the trigger, guiding hunters without personal compensation, directing them via emails to little known public places to hunt and who knows how many people on this internet I've educated on laws and procedures that they had questions about because I do my homework! Yet, because I and the family have had a rough time the last 14 months*, I'm now relisted back to the "takers group" and am not worthy of consideration or even acknowledgement when it comes to wildlife (particularly mule deer) management. While I gladly accept the decisions that are made to actually improve the biologically sound deer population and buck to doe ratio numbers, I will oppose any decisions that promote trophy hunting at the expense of opportunity on General Units. If my voice isn't enough, then so be it, but I'll take comfort in knowing I did what I could to help bring some sanity and sound biology to the discussion instead of insults, namecalling, innuendos, deceptive information, and outright lies.

And, yes, I'll be at the Southern RAC meeting and hopefully at the Wildlife Board meeting.


*4 deaths in the family including my dear wife of 52 years after a courageous 2 year battle with breast cancer and a 5 day old premature grandson (2 lbs 1 oz), a divorce, 2 major car breakdowns, a live-in son-in-law who's now battling MS and his wife, my daughter who delivered a sweet surviving premie girl 4 years ago and who just lost the baby boy and who is now pregnant for the 3rd time and is on a strict diet, schedule, and regime to prevent another early birth. Plus I'm dealing with heart rhythm issues and 2 bad valves and I'm on a prescribed exercise schedule 3 mornings per week to prepare for open heart surgery in January which, thankfully, we now don't think I need because of the exercise. Are our experiences typical of Utah outdoor families? Hopefully not as many, but it includes some issues many of them are facing. Hunting sometimes gets put on the back burner.
 
Muley, how many screamers are we talking about 20, 30, 50, etc.? In my opinion, the first mistake he made would be not getting enough members and clout before going to battle. You need 1000s not 100s to get enough clout. You are also going to have to get some kind of funds together to run the machine. Need some funds up front to market for membership. For example, booths at expos cost money. How many would pay 5 dollars or so per year to have a voice in how wildlife is managed in this state? Unless you can find someone that wants to take it all on and fund it themselves. Have a feeling those types are already members of SFW. It wouldn't matter what our personal views were on tag cuts because the majority would run the group and direction not the leadership. I'm willing to help get it started but need a few others to step in and hold my hand a little. Lol
 
>Muley, how many screamers are we
>talking about 20, 30, 50,
>etc.? In my opinion, the
>first mistake he made would
>be not getting enough members
>and clout before going to
>battle. You need 1000s not
>100s to get enough clout.
>You are also going to
>have to get some kind
>of funds together to run
>the machine. Need some funds
>up front to market for
>membership. For example, booths at
>expos cost money. How many
>would pay 5 dollars or
>so per year to have
>a voice in how wildlife
>is managed in this state?
>Unless you can find someone
>that wants to take it
>all on and fund it
>themselves. Have a feeling those
>types are already members of
>SFW. It wouldn't matter what
>our personal views were on
>tag cuts because the majority
>would run the group and
>direction not the leadership. I'm
>willing to help get it
>started but need a few
>others to step in and
>hold my hand a little.
>Lol
 
>Muley, how many screamers are we
>talking about 20, 30, 50,
>etc.? In my opinion, the
>first mistake he made would
>be not getting enough members
>and clout before going to
>battle. You need 1000s not
>100s to get enough clout.
>You are also going to
>have to get some kind
>of funds together to run
>the machine. Need some funds
>up front to market for
>membership. For example, booths at
>expos cost money. How many
>would pay 5 dollars or
>so per year to have
>a voice in how wildlife
>is managed in this state?
>Unless you can find someone
>that wants to take it
>all on and fund it
>themselves. Have a feeling those
>types are already members of
>SFW. It wouldn't matter what
>our personal views were on
>tag cuts because the majority
>would run the group and
>direction not the leadership. I'm
>willing to help get it
>started but need a few
>others to step in and
>hold my hand a little.
>Lol

Opps!, I clicked the wrong thing on post #66. I got a phone call and needed to answer it in the bedroom and I had a senior moment!

In any case, I'll give you the scoop of what actually happened with UWC later. For now I need to head out to Beryl for a few hours to check out the area I have a depredation antlerless elk tag for which I'll hunt tomorrow morning or Monday. I'll take my gun of course 'cause you never know!
 
Its pretty tough to fight with a group sucking in millions from us.

A state group so deeply entrenched and funded it could beat back a national group(RMEF)

Then top that off with another group that benefits from those tags as well(guides/outfitters) that are so tied in they can beat poaching (Jones, Lemon)

I mean Doyle said so himself in spring WB the guides in this state are so badazz, they should send them to Iraq, they could end that war.

Reality is, MONEY talks. I can't compete with Denny Austad. You can't compete with Heather Farrar or the Waldrips. Its not a conspiracy, its done in the open, but every change takes manpower at DWR, and that means money.

Good luck to Slam. I doubt highly MDF will ever oppose $fw, they profit off the expo as well, but if they can improve things without cutting tags, more power to them.

#knucklehead. #taker


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Give me some thoughts on an idea I have.

On our general season units that we already have to apply for, what if we had a choice on a certain class of buck and had to choose to harvest an A- "Trophy Buck" (4 points or more on either side).
Or B- Yearling Buck" (3 points or less on either side).

This would force people to pursue what they initially intend on harvesting (keeping trophy hunters from settling on a 2 point at the end of a hunt just to kill a deer)

It would also help weed out "management bucks" by allowing the yearling buck tag holders kill a mature deer as long as it has 3 points or less on either side.

Or....
Instead of choosing a tag as described above, we divide our units into areas that have antler point restrictions like Wyoming does.

Example- if I draw region W, I can hunt four areas within that region that has different regulations.
Areas with dense human populations or heavy agricultural lands, you can harvest "any deer" (thus eliminating the need for seperate "antlerless" hunts). And the other areas are managed more for quality.

Ok, fire away.....
 
Lee,
The term "taker" is not saying you don't put in time. Had zero to do with my comment. When I say "taker" I am describing someone that is stacking a lot of tags, you yourself are a proclaimed "taker". Too many "takers" on a stressed resource is an issue for me. As far as being personal, that been a long time coming. We do not see eye to eye what so ever on most issues, so am I'm sure its on a personal level when it comes to wildlife issues. Aside from wildlife issues I am very sorry for you loss and rough year. I know first hand what kind of battle that is and its horrible.
 
Why not just have a 5 day hunt and 3 points or better. Units that are in bad shape, split them so you can manage them better even if have to cut a few tags. We need more hunter to go to the RAC and Big Game Board meeting. This will help, it will be step in the direction.
 
Slam,
I like the A or B tag idea. But I think I would like to see 3point or 4point or better units instead. Or put a spread limit on the bucks. Talking with head of the Texas program he said the most effective antler restriction they have had was a 20" minimum spread. I know that is difficult but it could be do. The fines would just need to be big enough and enforced. This would just be a matter of being sure of your target.

I would like to see some units go straight primitive weapon. Archery hunts, or open sight sidelock muzzy. I think you could have early archery, Oct Muzzy and Nov archery. You could give a large number of tags on these units. These could be LE units or General Units. If we do not combine the two I would like to see this option be LE. My thoughts are that if you set of 3-5 units like this in the state as LE and issued 700 tags on then you would cycle through 2100-3500 LE applicants a year. Deer would have a change to mature with the primitive weapons and that would draw the applicants.

Those are just a couple of options.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-09-18 AT 06:06PM (MST)[p]I like these ideas.

And to reiterate, this thread isn't about just growing more buck's, it is about getting healthy deer numbers up to a neutral place where all hunting groups can have more opportunity.
Nor is it just about any particular unit, it's about Utah.

Of course there are still some good places within the state where hunters are still enjoying satisfying success, but there is no question that the state overall is most definitely in a slump from many factors.

When I can hike out in a spot that was once a fantastic hunting place and glass over thousands of acres of land during prime hours for 7 straight day's and on three of those outings not see even a single deer, there's a problem.
And to have it verified by numerous other hunters throughout the entire unit, there's undoubtedly an issue.
 
I have an idea. Stop talking and actually do something about it. You all talk about all these ideas, but what good is it. What a waste of time. FYI This thread is not going to grow anything or go anywhere without action. You guys hoping some scouts see your great ideas????? LOL Not one of ya willing to step up. Gutless. The big intimidating monster(SFW)has won. Let's just roll over. You guys instead of being on here need to go watch A Bugs Life with your kids. The ants are what we(the hunters of Utah)could be if enough of us had the guts to do something about it. Peace out and it's been fun. See ya, I'm going fishing.
 
?Let's?. That would imply that we are some how connected....we are not. You have literally zero understanding of how any of this really works. You think you know, but in reality you have no idea. Changes will be pushed and the fight will happen and more than likely you'll never have a clue until it's already decided.

Enjoy fishing! :)
 
30.....I have changed my mind about you.
I thought at first I was overthinking your arrogance but I am not.
You are definitely not a leader nor would your attitude towards others get any type of group anywhere with your "holy than thou" character.
You are the LAST person I would want as an advocate for us.
 
>30.....I have changed my mind about
>you.
>I thought at first I was
>overthinking your arrogance but I
>am not.
>You are definitely not a leader
>nor would your attitude towards
>others get any type of
>group anywhere with your "holy
>than thou" character.
>You are the LAST person I
>would want as an advocate
>for us.
 
>?Let's?. That would imply that we
>are some how connected....we are
>not. You have literally
>zero understanding of how any
>of this really works.
>You think you know,
>but in reality you have
>no idea. Changes will
>be pushed and the fight
>will happen and more than
>likely you'll never have a
>clue until it's already decided.
>
>
>Enjoy fishing! :)

You're entirely correct. Thus my post on Chaffetz. He is checking the boxes to set up his Governor run. $FW as always is very aware of how they get what they want, and its not in the RACS, its in the Governors mansion.

But in fairness Muley, that's why guys take such offense at the "taker" line you spew. Look who is "taking", its not joe blow hunting deer one weekend in October. THE DON has never made it a secret his distain for "average" dudes, and their control of wildlife(North American Model).

Every time I talk to $fw "higher ups", I ask them why haven't they cut ties with the guy. Simple answer, he's the rainmaker and 15th most powerful in Utah politics.

Someday you will wake up to see after all the "average" guys were weeded out, YOURE now the average guy being targeted.

So you are correct about what's going on, you're just either wilfully blind, or naive at who its aimed at.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>You're entirely correct. Thus my
>post on Chaffetz. He
>is checking the boxes to
>set up his Governor run.
> $FW as always is
>very aware of how they
>get what they want, and
>its not in the RACS,
>its in the Governors mansion.
>
>
>But in fairness Muley, that's why
>guys take such offense at
>the "taker" line you spew.
> Look who is "taking",
>its not joe blow hunting
>deer one weekend in October.
> THE DON has never
>made it a secret his
>distain for "average" dudes, and
>their control of wildlife(North American
>Model).
>
>Every time I talk to $fw
>"higher ups", I ask them
>why haven't they cut ties
>with the guy. Simple
>answer, he's the rainmaker and
>15th most powerful in Utah
>politics.
>
>Someday you will wake up to
>see after all the "average"
>guys were weeded out, YOURE
>now the average guy being
>targeted.
>
>So you are correct about what's
>going on, you're just either
>wilfully blind, or naive at
>who its aimed at.
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.

might be the best post i ever saw from hoss
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-18 AT 05:21PM (MST)[p]Hoss,
I don't think I'm either naive nor blind. I believe I have seen more for longer than you have. I believe you have seen a portion but not the 40 year big picture. The fact that you think it's only SFW tells me that on its own.

?Takers? that I spew. You quickly label all average Joe?s as the ?takers?. That is you putting them in that category not me. You say, ?YOU?RE now the average joe that is being targeted?. Are you sure of that or is that just the personal reality that you've come to this conclusion. Because in true reality you don't know me or where I fall. Just like you don't really know what most would fall into. You just like to claim the average Joe?s because you feel it validates your position.
 
I hope the real average Joe?s read these posts and realize a few things.

Slam came on asking for suggestions on what we could do to help our deer herds. Myself and a few others threw out suggestions. I said all along that Hoss is too hung up on SFW to focus on anything else. So where are we at now, nothing, i mean zero on helping the deer herd. We are being asked to do nothing because the SFW already has the power and so nothing can be done. I am saying that is untrue and that things can still be done to improve the overall health of our deer herds and still all that Hoss focuses on is SFW.
So average joes would you like to see changes made, changes that could include increased tags or would you rather focus on status quo and blaming everything on Don and the SFW? Which as far as i can tell will not grow more deer.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-18 AT 06:34PM (MST)[p]Muley this ain't our first squabel. So, lets point out that you play this game where you're not a member of $fw, yet you will drop in on any $fw topic and defend them.

$fw did not originate in your neighborhood. It did mine. The first big money pushes were amongst the contractors I worked with. I know the one of the WB members from $fw. I did 3 of of sons houses, went to school with his daughter in law.

I know EXACTLY where it started, how it started supposedly why it started.

So stop with some "hoss is hung up" narrative, on this one you sir are late to the party.

As for slam. He did come in looking to create a conversation, which always turns to the "taker" narrative, generally with you pushing it.

$fw pushed for prop 5, I was in it with them. Since then they have pushed for expanded LE, AI money tag complete with exclusive rights for the money tag, increases in expo tags, etc, etc, etc.

None of that has improved deer in this state a single bit. I used to read THE DON and his "essays" on SAVING THE MULE DEER. So, we followed what $fw pushed, including 150,000 less tags, and nearly 3 decades later its the same song and dance. HOWEVER notice its NOT less CWMU tags. Less expo tags, less banquet tags, less landowner vouchers, less $$$$$$$ interests, it the average dude who gets a weekend or 2 a year. That guy "is a taker". Its not Doyle Moss pulling 6 figure hunts. Its not WLH, poaching gov tag sheep. Its not anyone named Farrar or Au stad. To $fw and their defenders like Muley, it YOU. And when u point out the pile of BS that is, suddenly it gets personal. But YOU shouldn't take personal their constant desire to cut you out.

Slam I hope can figure a way to not screw joe blow in favor of huge $$$$, because the last guy who supposedly tried, now sits on trumps 'outdoors" council.

Its ok to be a little suspicious given past history. But I hope he is successful.

As for Muley, I'm sure he will keep playing both sides, unless he recently joined back up with $fw, in which case he quit trying to play both sides.

I'm not a taker because I want my kid to have a chance to hunt deer more than every 3 years. Your not one either for thinking hunting an elk should happen more than twice your lifetime. Your not a taker because you get 1 weeks vacation, money is tight and you can't chase tags all over creation.

The single biggest mistake we as deer hunters have made was abandoning our tradition. We gave up our camps, gave up our hunting spots, and sold out the next generation in some fictional belief that inches were worth it. We sat by and watched commercial interests take over the processes. We sat back and watched dudes buy tags every year, while we sat on probation, or unsuccessful letters for years on end. And if we dared question why after 30 years nothing got better, WE ARE TAKERS.

I hope slam figures it out.

As for the others who want to belittle the rest of the average crowd, suck it(its a family page).

Sorry about the rant



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
Again point proven. You went back to SFW and that's where you started. So again no you're not looking at the big picture.
You?re too tunnel visioned to even help yourself.
 
>Hoss,
>Again point proven. You went
>back to SFW and that's
>where you started. So
>again no you're not looking
>at the big picture.
>You?re too tunnel visioned to even
>help yourself.

"cut tags, cut tags" 30 years of it and I'm tunnel vision


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
2 voting members of the WB are SFW. The Don is on trumps council. Herbert, and Chaffetz tied into SFW. Should we just not see the elephant invtge room?

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
Focus on what you want. I'm gonna focus on trying to make some changes. I've seen the needle move in the past and it can move again. And I hope we can come up with some solutions without cutting tags. But believe me it we keep losing deer I won't ignore that option.
 
So how do we get heard?
We all know the RAC is just there to patronize us "little guys" and we also know we can't beat the "big voices".

First off, the "little guys" have to come together and agree on ideas and strategies as a group.
It seems most of us are still miles apart?
 
We have to be honest. Can't use "better", "more", etc.

Like I asked Muley and he either can't or won't answer what us the cost?

When we cut 150,000, we were all told how it would increase deer herds, increase quality, etc. Yet it didn't. Here we sit 30 years later and my guess is we can all agree giving up hunters, revenue, political power, WB control wasn't worth the cost.

A "profit and loss statement", basically putting all the good AND BAD on the table.

I personally believe we need to seperate out commercial interests. What's good for guides, outfitters, CWMU, isn't always good for the public.

Unfortunately we have been here before. We've been lied to. Been spun. Been sold out.

I think you start small.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>I personally believe we need to
>seperate out commercial interests.
>What's good for guides, outfitters,
>CWMU, isn't always good for
>the public.
>

This statement is gigantic!!
And here lies the biggest challenge.
 
Hoss,
If you don't think I know how to start small where it matters then you really are naive.

Also I have stated my thoughts and numbers multiple times. You don't acknowledge. But honestly the stupidity lies with me. In the end I know the route and it has nothing to do with you. In reality it doesn't have anything to do with internet bantering.

Slam,
If you really do want to make a push, let me know. I will let you know what has been done in the past to get changes made and who is currently willing to help give some guidance.
 
We'll chat Muley, I am definitely interested.

And for the record....I am not looking out for my own betterment of hunting. I get more hunting experiences in one season than most do in a lifetime (because I have been guiding private land hunts for over 20 years).
I want my kids and grand kids to enjoy hunting on their public lands.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-18 AT 11:19PM (MST)[p]>Hoss,
>If you don't think I know
>how to start small where
>it matters then you really
>are naive.
>
>Also I have stated my thoughts
>and numbers multiple times. You
>don't acknowledge. But honestly
>the stupidity lies with me.
> In the end I
>know the route and it
>has nothing to do with
>you. In reality it doesn't
>have anything to do with
>internet bantering.
>
>Slam,
>If you really do want to
>make a push, let me
>know. I will let
>you know what has been
>done in the past to
>get changes made and who
>is currently willing to help
>give some guidance.


You spend s lot of time in here blathering for a guy who is so anti blathering.


You have. You pointed out we went from 1.2 million deer to 350k. That cost us 150k hunters, control of WB, amongst other stuff. So we lost 800k deer, 150k hunters and their money, votes, clout. Sorry what did we gain? Should we look at results? Or is that wrong?


Slam.

Honest truth. The entire WB, RAC system needs to be scrapped. I've been to RACS, I watch WB meetings. Who speaks? Commercial intetests. Who gets their results, commercial interests. When WB members also have outfitting Buisnesses, and were members of a special interest group, we don't get fair play, we get what we have, a 2 tiered system.

But, I'm sure Gov Caffetz will be glad to clean up the backroom, not like anyone has their claws in him.


I'd start with the WB not being appointed by the Governor. Too much cronyism in that process. To easy for special interests to gain control.

Tag holders are stakeholders. Let them vote on members.

It does you, or MDF no good to build support, build consensus, make plans, only to have a lobbyist back room your progress. We all see its a rigged system, apathy follows.






From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-18
>AT 11:19?PM (MST)
>
>>Hoss,
>>If you don't think I know
>>how to start small where
>>it matters then you really
>>are naive.
>>
>>Also I have stated my thoughts
>>and numbers multiple times. You
>>don't acknowledge. But honestly
>>the stupidity lies with me.
>> In the end I
>>know the route and it
>>has nothing to do with
>>you. In reality it doesn't
>>have anything to do with
>>internet bantering.
>>
>>Slam,
>>If you really do want to
>>make a push, let me
>>know. I will let
>>you know what has been
>>done in the past to
>>get changes made and who
>>is currently willing to help
>>give some guidance.
>
>
>You spend s lot of time
>in here blathering for a
>guy who is so anti
>blathering.
>
>
>You have. You pointed out
>we went from 1.2 million
>deer to 350k. That
>cost us 150k hunters, control
>of WB, amongst other stuff.
> So we lost 800k
>deer, 150k hunters and their
>money, votes, clout. Sorry
>what did we gain?
>Should we look at results?
> Or is that wrong?
>
>
>
>Slam.
>
>Honest truth. The entire WB,
>RAC system needs to be
>scrapped. I've been to RACS,
>I watch WB meetings.
>Who speaks? Commercial intetests.
> Who gets their results,
>commercial interests. When WB members
>also have outfitting Buisnesses, and
>were members of a special
>interest group, we don't get
>fair play, we get what
>we have, a 2 tiered
>system.
>
>But, I'm sure Gov Caffetz will
>be glad to clean up
>the backroom, not like anyone
>has their claws in him.
>
>
>
>I'd start with the WB not
>being appointed by the Governor.
> Too much cronyism in
>that process. To easy for
>special interests to gain control.
>
>
>Tag holders are stakeholders. Let
>them vote on members.
>
>It does you, or MDF no
>good to build support, build
>consensus, make plans, only to
>have a lobbyist back room
>your progress. We all
>see its a rigged system,
>apathy follows.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.


Hoss you have been so full of chit on this entire thread that it is ridiculous. Never have we lost 150,000 big game hunters in this state. Just because tags were reduced doesn't correlate with losing that many hunters. There are still 90,000+ general deer tags sold every year. If the average is 2.5-3 points to draw a tag, then there are still 250,000 plus hunters vying for those tags.

If Utah still sold unlimited tags in this state, there wouldn't be anything left to hunt.
 
WHY DID WE LOSE 800,000. Deer(muleys number), at the same time we lost 150,000 tags?

I have yet to see Muley, and now you answer that.

If tag cuts equals improved herds, where is the proof.

And not that straw man, Obama answer of "there would be nothing left otherwise". Thats not science.

Cut it anyway you want.

The legislature sees it has 90k hunters in the state.

The DWR gets 90k tag fees

The media yearly does some version of 90k stories

I'm betting THE DON uses that number in comparison to $fw membership to make it look like a bigger percentage of Utahns are members.

But, deadi, ill ask you.

HOW MANY MORE TAGS DO YOU WANT CUT?

HOW MANY DEER WILL THAT ADD?

If you can't answer those 2 questions, then how can you push for tag cuts to supposedly help deer

BTW your math is more than sketchy considering dedicated hunters, dudes who draw every year, undeesubscribed units.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Hoss,
I answered the question right after you asked. Did you not read my response or did you just not understand it?
 
It's not about cutting tag's to fix the problems, we are fighting a much bigger beast with environmental issues on top of how efficient we have become with weaponry and all these special hunts stacked on top of hunts.

IMO....we need to go back to being "simple" without cutting tags.
Simple weapons, simple hunts.
I wasn't "special" when I turned old enough to hunt at 16, my hunt was just the same as everyone else's.

I am not into the politics of hunting, I am not one to spew out numbers like a lot of others do, guess I am "simple" in my own ways.
What I DO know is we CAN do things to help our hunting heritage, make it more healthy and help keep it alive and well for generations to come.

We have somehow lost our public lands and animals to money and politics......things my kids and your kids don't care about, and yet are being forced to work around.
 
>2 voting members of the WB
>are SFW. The Don
>is on trumps council.
>Herbert, and Chaffetz tied into
>SFW. Should we just
>not see the elephant invtge
>room?
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.

Actually, there are 3 known SFW members on the Wildlife Board; Bryon Bateman, Steve Dalton and Donnie Hunter. And I suspect Kevin Albrect is also a member, but I can't verify that one. I know he sides with them a lot per my observation on the Mule Deer Planning Committee.
 
>Hoss,
>Again point proven. You went
>back to SFW and that's
>where you started. So
>again no you're not looking
>at the big picture.
>You?re too tunnel visioned to even
>help yourself.

So, enlighten us! Instead of putting us down and/or trying to shut us up, lift us up so we can see the glorious vision you see and where we fit in.
 

Similar threads

R
Utah draw Question?
Replies
16
Views
1k
JakeH
JakeH
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
5k
Vanilla
Vanilla
tnvol
SE Utah general unit vs Colorado units
Replies
7
Views
872
littlebighorn
littlebighorn

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

1703775631240.png
59B37502-3B58-43AC-94E5-7C94B360300F.jpeg
20230927_101852.jpg
Screenshot_20201107-174848_Instagram.jpg
6D6B6159-45A2-4018-BCF9-5AC40A6B178C.jpeg
IMG_4167.JPG
23067C58-4049-46B0-82EF-A4303A231957.jpeg
Unreal!
MD 21.jpg
IMG_0597.jpeg
IMG_3710 (1)J.jpg
Md216.jpg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom