SFW Mis-fires again

fishon

fishon

Very Active Member
Messages
1,052
SFW just doesn't get it. A group that has maybe 5,000 members in the state of Utah shouldn't be trying to set policy for the rest of the people.

The SFW deer proposal is full of holes, not very well thought out and very misleading.

Lets starts from the top.

1. The DWR survey that went out holds very little credibility. That vast majority of people I have talked to never saw the survey. Now these are license holding people me included. I never saw or heard of the survey until the comment period was closed. How can any survey be legitimate if most hunters never got to participate in it?
2. The survey was very misleading at best. I would like to see it sent to every deer hunter in the state.
3. SFW proposes to form a 5 year deer management plan off of 1 year of applications. They want to simply take who puts in for hunt A or B the first year and make that concrete as to how people want to hunt. Then they want you to be locked in to the same hunt you choose for 5 years. I am not a biologist but I know that forming a 5 year plan off of 1 year of info is a really bad idea.
4. Then SFW wants to renew the plan for 5 more after that.
5. SFW wants to take away hunting opportunity for people that live in Beaver, Fillmore, Richfield, Wayne county, Logan and many other places by making all of those places Limited Entry. Then they want to compensate it by turning the worst LE deer unit in the state (thousand lakes) into a General area. And maybe throw the Average guy a bone with the Vernon unit.
6. SFW then wants to take away your bonus points a award all preference points, thus becoming like Colorado. Many people would not even have a chance at drawing a tag because tags would go to those with the most preference points.
Then SFW want to increase your LE deer tag by 5 times..
7. Then SFW wants to give preference to those that put in the first 5 years to have a better chance of drawing because they believe everyone will want to ?jump on the bandwagon.
8. Then SFW wants to let 2 people hunt on 1 tag with letting a youth under 16 shoot an animal if the parent didn't want to.
9. Then SFW wants to let the LE guys hunt during different seasons like the rut and stuff because it is so limited because harvest will be controlled.
10. SFW then says that general season tags you will draw 4 out of 5 years and LE you will draw 1 out of 5 years. They also say it will not be crowded on the LE because there is not to many hunters.
11. Look at the Utah elk situation, I would guess most people think it is crowded because every hunter takes 5-10 people with them and every guide has 20 spotters. The deer hunt would end up just the same way.
12. Also LE would not draw every 5 years. The numbers would be like the elk drawing odds. A premium elk tag is a once in a lifetime tag and the lesser elk units are once in 15-20 years.
13. SFW saying you would draw a tag every 5 years is the biggest misleading thing about their proposal.

The most troubling thing about the SFW proposal is this, and I quote right from Don Peay?s on email

?The youth can hunt all three weapons in type A hunts. They can go hunting with dad on a trophy unit and see what real hunting is like and they just might get to blast a pretty big buck on Dad?s tag, and if they are like my son, they will go from just killing deer, to wanting a BIG one in short order?.

Is this not the worst thing to tell kids. SFW is telling them that REAL hunting is only for trophy animals, and that hunting isn't about the hunt it is about killing a BIG one.

Then Don closes his email by saying, and I quote ?In the meantime DWR and SFW will do all we can to fix habitat, keep predators under control, fence highways, solve depredation?.

Last time I checked there is a lot more people and groups working on the above issues then just SFW and DWR.

Don, once again you miss the point. Your proposal is about trophy hunting for a few and is more about killing deer then managing deer.

If this proposal goes through then our deer hunt will be just like our elk hunt A TRAVESTY.

Elk hunting in Utah is not a success it is a failure. The Henry Mountains is not a success it is a failure. Few people get to enjoy what is there unless they are lucky enough to draw or RICH enough to BUY.

I sure hope the DWR doesn't support this proposal. I think tey are smarter then that.

ALso be prepared to go to the RACS on this one, unless you don't care.

Tony Abbott
[email protected]
801-885-1274
 
Tony,
Nice to hear from you on the subject. You miss the point of the proposal. The more LE tags that are available the more tags that SFW can auction off to the highest bidder. The more tags that the average guy loses. SFW wins average guy loses. Seems like the trend of things to me.
 
Tony, while I have respect for you and what you have done for wildlife in Utah, you are guilty of a little hyperbole here. This proposal will be hashed out in the deer committee. IF this makes it through the committee it will look much different than the original draft, you of all people should know that. I do agree with being bothered by the comment of "a real hunt", other than that I like MOST of the draft. With some fine tuning I think it will be solid. Time will tell. Calling Don out on here doesn't seem that wise/professional either, I would think an e-mail/phone call from you to him would be more appropriate. Both of you have done GREAT things for Utah's wildlife, no need for a war on the internet.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
I agree Fish-on. They need go back to the drawing board and re-focus on what is healthy for the deer herd.Less hunter management and more deer management.

I also don't think you are out of line for posting this. It's good for people to share thier concerns with each other. If you were hammering on Don personally it might be different, but you are only commenting on a deer plan that is already in the public domain.
 
I couldn't agree more with either of the previous comments. Its all about money. Its all about the Trophy. They have figured out perfectly a way to cut tags available to your average Joe (Like me) and sell or auction off less tags for a lot more money...
The quote from Dan's e-mail made me sick. I can't believe he actually said that the limited entry is a taste of real hunting. Is he admitting then that the rest of the state is not real hunting, and possibly there should be no restrictions or fees to alledgedly "hunt" there??? Talk about making the average guy feel like a completely disposable resource... Who's interests is he supposed to be looking out for?
Makes me feel like I don't matter, like the hunting traditions my family has passed down for 80 years or so may fall by the wayside because I can't dedicate thousands of dollars a year to one deer tag... Brings a tear to my eye... Who is there thats supposed to be looking out for guys like me???
 
Guys, always I am glad to hear from people. If this sounded like me bashing or calling Don That is not, a was not the intent. I stated my stance and opinion like many others on the other post. I believe that is what this is for.

I understand the process and I have seen it work and fail over the years. The deer working group is only part of the equation.The DWR, The racs, the wildlife board and the public are also part of that equation.

I took countless phone calls on the radio last night and not one of them likes the said proposal, also very few of them saw the questioner.

I simply am bringing up questions and concerns that need to be addressed.

This is not personal this is a way of life for me and many of you. Screwing with the plan so it will only benefit the rich and a lucky few is not the answers. The proposal basically seperates hunters onto two sides. QUality or opportunity. This is not different then our country with Republicans and Democrats. This is how our elk managment is as well.

This will be devicive and controversial which is the last thing Utah Sportsmen need right now.

I would like to see a plan or idea that unites hunters for a change rather then segrigating them.

Just my thoughts

Tony Abbott
 
So if I never change to a Type B hunt, the implication is that I won't have a shot at a trophy deer, or "real hunting" as it was put? Is that right?
And just to clarify... A Limited Entry Unit like the Book Cliffs where a tag that I would draw 1 time in maybe 10 years cost me $180, will now cost 5 times the general deer tag($40) at $200 and that is a fee that I would pay 1 year in 5, plus forfeiting the other 4 years of hunting??? Seriously??? Thats a great money making scheme...
Its unfortunate that the proposal is obviously saying that 1 year possibly harvesting a "trophy" is perferable to 5 years of just hunting, without a possible trophy.
I don't know exactly how to feel... I know it would be nice to have some premium units, but don't we already? How many mature "trophy" bucks should any single person harvest I don't harvest a deer every year, and my goal is generally to harvest a larger deer than the year before. Hunting with a bow has made this extremly difficult and I doubt I will harvest a deer one year in 5, but the opportunity to do so is whats most exciting... Anticipation for the opener is the greatest feeling in the world to me. It is my Christmas, has been since I was 14 years old. Who here would sacrifice 4 Christmases just so that on the 5th Christmas you got better presents??? And by the way, it costs you the same...
 
Just a purely hypothetical question...

If I were in charge of and/or involved with an organization that was in a position to push wildlife management in a direction that would benefit my side business of catering to high end trophy hunters...would this proposal be of any benefit to my organization and side business?

Hmmmmm?????
 
>Elk hunting in Utah is not a success it is a failure. The >Henry Mountains is not a success it is a failure. Few people >get to enjoy what is there unless they are lucky enough to >draw or RICH enough to BUY.

Tony, well put.However, even though I don't agree with SFW proposal 100%, it's a start. It's something!

So what do hunters want? I know I don't want the whole state managed like the henry's, however, I'm not happy with our current management plan.Some changes need to be made.

Some great ideas have been brought to the table on these forms.I hope some kind of positive action results from it.

Mike
 
I don't particularly like the proposal, but atleast there is finally some effort to improve deer quality in some areas. Atleast they're thinking about it!!!!
The fact is, some people want better quality and others want to hunt every year. It's tough to satisfy everyone.

I personally would like to see minor changes.....8-10k tags cut, road closures, season dates adjusted for lower success rate, more primitive weapon hunts, etc. to increase the age class in areas.

I am glad that SFW is looking into what can be done to make all parties happy. I haven't seen anything from MDF...???
Tony, you still get paid by MDF don't you....where is their proposal? Do they have one? Do they get involved with management suggestions at all?

I really don't think ripping on SFW is going to do any good. They made a proposal. If you don't like it, just say so and make your own suggestions so that they can take it all in. I'm sure Don and a few of the others are reading.

PS - I really don't think their proposal is only about making more money. I'm no longer in the loop, but I'm VERY confident that the board, Don, Troy, John, and Ryan care very much about Utah deer and the members they represent.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Ding, Ding, Ding!!

Buzz has hit the nail on the head!!

I am so sick of Don and SFW strongarming everyone in Utah to manage things in such a way that only benefit their agenda and business interests. I hope more Utahns wake up to the reality that the average joe is getting screwed and will continue to get screwed as long as SFW and Don maintain the control they have on the RACs and the Wildlife Board. The sheer # of conservation tags alone in Utah should raise a red flag, but everyone just buys into the propoganda that these tags DO SO MUCH for Utah wildlife. I will not argue that these tags do provide needed money, but I fully believe we can get the same revenue through other approaches without taking so much opportunity away from the average guy(through raffle tags, habitat license fee, etc).

I am begging all Utahns to carefully consider the direction we are headed right now. If you want your kids to enjoy hunting as you have, we need to start standing up to this crap and recognize what the "REAL" motives of these groups are.
 
Its not just as simple as, "If you don't like it, just say so".

I've seen SFW continue to push their agenda despite over-whelming disagreement by sportsmen.

Wyoming and a majority of its resident hunters did not want outfitter sponsored licenses or transferable landowner licenses.

SFWWY made a run at getting both passed despite what the resident hunters (majority) wanted. Thankfully a couple of other conservation organizations got involved and stopped it.

The attitude that SFW has taken on multiple issues is, "let us do whats best for you". If you question and/or offer a differing opinion a bunch of SFW kool-aid drinkers immediately attack.

The fact is that SFW is NOT looking out for the interest of the average guy...thats been more than apparent for a long, long, long time.

I would use extreme caution in endorsing anything that SFW thinks is a good idea. There is ample evidence that the motives of the organization and its leadership are from being as pure as the driven snow...
 
Why not try to make the whole state better rather than letting areas suffer. there are good places in northern utah that could grow some good deer if they would focus on them. this is just my two cents. thanks jason
 
I had to get a login for this won for sure, just can't sit back and watch on this thread!!!

I think that SFW is definately not afraid to throw there money out to help with conservation, habitat, etc,....... BUT.....

I personally have been to many SFW banquets and have had lots of fun. In doing so, I did not realize for a couple years what they had for hidden agenda's. BUZZ is spot on as well as TONY!!!
This organization has the sole purpose of making hunting in UTAH or the WEST for that matter a rich mans game, anyone can sugar coat or justify it however they want. If this is such a straight up clean "ONLY FOR THE SPORTSMAN" type of organization, oh ya NON-profit organization, then why can't we get a sneak peak at their financial reports. Even less than that, let's see where they are spending the 100 million dollar federal grant money. They will be receiving for seven or ten years for habitat restoration/conservation that started before the WESTERN CONSERVATION EXPO.

My point being is that they might be able to come up with money when it is needed to help, but I hope they would have it!!!

If I were given 100 some odd tags a year to auction off to the highest bidder I would have more money to help as well!!!!

Every RAC meeting I have attended the agendas are posted discussed and that is it, the DWR is easily swayed by these organizations and the general public is over shadowed. Just because they say it was a public meeting then legally that applies to change policies or regulations. How about leaving the organizations out of the PUBLIC MEETINGS, maybe then they would hear the voice of the sportsman/hunters!!!!!

Brian,
Also, in my opinion there is no difference calling out the MDF as you are saying TONY is calling out SFW!!
 
I'm 100% with Tony on this one.....Don & the SFW have have done and continue to do many great things for wildlife, but the proposal is not what most of us want to see.


Justin Richins
R&K Hunting Company Inc.
www.thehuntingcompany.com
 
As I stated on the other post, there are good and bad points to this proposal.

One thing I have a hard time understanding, this "proposal" allows many people to continue to hunt almost every year, albeit maybe not in the same old honeyholes - it does not take away their opportunity.

If the DWR were to move to 25 or so units, and make each unit one that you would have to apply for, do people not understand that would GREATLY limit your chances of drawing a tag in your desired area? I think this proposal is far better and less of a drastic change than suddenly saying you have to choose a mountain range and apply and if you draw great and if you don't tough chit. You don't think there would be 12,000 people applying for the 3,000 Beaver tags each year? People need to THINK a bit before they just spout off and talk. Whether you agree wholly or not with this plan, at least a few people have put a BRAIN on the situation.
 
Just an idea how about for 1 year the f&g take those 100 or so tags put them on the internet 1 at a time for the $10 app fee throughout the spring and early summer $25 for the nonresidents average it out say you had 7-15000 people apply for each tag that makes each tag worth $70-$150000 each plus the tag fees in which all of that money wouild go to habitat, wildlife restoration and policing efforts for a total of around 7-15 million dollars and not have to pay people in these groups their $100,000 a year and for their hunting trips but let our sportsmens dollars work for all of the sportsmen not just a select few and this way the average joe gets a chance at all of the tags the dwr puts out. remember it is our dollars and our state we all pay taxes
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-30-08 AT 05:03PM (MST)[p]I like the SFW a whole lot more as a political organization than as game management one. Sportsmen unite under the political goal of preserving hunting and fishing rights, but when you start trying to micro manage wildlife, as the SFW continues to do, you become a divisive force among hunters pitting bow hunters against rifle hunters, meat hunters against trophy hunters, deer hunters against lion hunters and on down the list. Pretty soon none of us are getting along. I'm sure you remember some of our discussions along these lines Tony and I've shared my concerns with Don on this as well.

That being said I took part in the survey but was frustrated because I felt it was steering me toward a predetermined goal of limited entry hunts......and that is not where I want the state to go. I personally like things the way they are now where you can still hunt pretty much every year. I'm past the point in my hunting life where I have to fill my tag to have a successfull hunt. In fact, I wouldn't really care if I never killed another one. But I still want to hunt every year in the areas I've always hunted and I never felt I could convey that forcefully enough through the survey.

There are still trophy bucks out there to be had if you are willing to put in the effort to get them, and there are enough smaller bucks to satisfy the meat hunters. Right now there is opportunity for all of us, and I don't want to see that taken away.

I wouldn't object to a few tweaks, but I'm against the type of major overhaul the SFW is proposing.
 
If you think that tag B will be available every 5 years your head is in the sand Look at what the LE tags for elk have turned into...pretty much once in a lifetime. Its sad the hunting has come to this... Ive enjoyed mule deer hunting all my life..I have shot real nice bucks but havnt haverested every year but have hunted every year since I was 16..Look whats happening to our tradition of hunting... these purposals only take away from us. I used to love to elk hunt in this great state but have been foced to hunt other states. I drew an LE elk in 2004 and doubt I will every do that again and my sons will never draw a LE elk in Utah unless they get reeeeeal lucky. Its sad!
 
Put it in writing that a guy can get a trophy tag every 5 years and I believe you would have alot of backers, BUT if you can keep the promise please don't make it. with the numbers right now being what they are I can't see that, If the elk pool is 12 points how can you draw a trophy tag every 5 years, Deer is 10 points how can you draw every 5 years, I know it a numbers game I just don't see how the numbers are working.
 
I am not a fan of the SFW proposal at all. I agree that at least they are trying to do something, and they should be applauded for that, but this is not the direction I think we should be going. I agree that some changes are needed, but in my humble opinion, minor changes such as Founder and others have stated ....."8-10k tags cut, road closures, season dates adjusted for lower success rate, more primitive weapon hunts, etc. to increase the age class in areas".... will have a very positive impact in a relatively short time. I believe we can decrease general rifle tags, and move most of these tags to archery and muzzy tags; thereby keeping opportunity UP while lowering harvests.

I cant see a downside, assuming that some changes to the management plan like those stated above are implemented, in giving hunters two different tag pools when applying for deer tags: A LE deer tag (with a waiting period after a successful draw),AND a regional rifle, OR muzzy, OR archery tag. If you dont draw a difficult to get LE tag, you will go into the drawing for the regional tag of YOUR CHOICE. Of course,archery tags will be the easiest to draw, then muzzy then rifle. With bonus points for unsuccessful applicants.
With a plan similar to this, EVERYONE has an opportunity to draw a "trophy tag" (I hate that term), AND/OR a chance at a regional tag if not successful in the LE draw. I am a bowhunter at heart, but we need to do away with the OTC archery tags, and make all hunters choose their weapon.
I am a HUGE fan of the DH program, and think that the DH program can fit nicely into ANY management plan by merely adjusting the numbers of DH participants by region; and possibly going to a draw to get into the program (by region) if the participation desire continues to climb.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, But I dont think things are as bad as people say.
I see GREAT deer EVERY year on general season hunts. I can honestly say that I have had an OPPORTUNITY at a "trophy class" buck just about every year in the past 10-15 or so years. My success rate on those opportunities is quite low, but the important thing is that I see these deer every year! Part of the thrill of hunting is knowing that that BIG BOY could be over the next ridge...I shudder at the idea of having to decide if I want to be an "A" or "B" hunter...I think we can be both.

------------------------------------------------------
By the way,
I live in UT.
There are a lot of UTARDS that live here.
I have also seen quite a few WYOMORONS, NEVADUHNS, COLORADORKS, ID-IOTS and AIRHEADZONANS in my travels.
 
You Wyoming hunters paying attention? This ought to be a wake up call for some of you. It's obvious they've suckered a lot of Utards. They're in bed with the Wyoming guides and outfitters association which has a totally different agenda than that of the average Joe hunter. It's just a matter of time before we're fighting the same fight we're seeing now. You guys need to let your elected reps, Governor Freudenthal and the WY G&F know SFW doesn't represent your views on hunting and conservation.
 
I only represent MDF on 1 topic and that is Utah Conservation permits. If you would like their stance on that I am glad to give it. If you want it on something else please contact Miles Moretti or Eric Tycksen at 801-747-3344.

As for stating my opinion I did just that. I never bashed anyone. I stated what I thought based on my knowledge of the system and how certain people work, and my assesment of their proposal.

Yes I am entitled to alittle insider trading secrets from my previous life and therfore have a pretty good idea of agendas and ways people go about getting them passed.

On anohter note this post appears to be right along with what I said. the VAST MAJORITY don't like the plan.

Brian FYI. I have and will continue to give my opinion and suggestions on Utahs wildlife. I just give them without trying to ram them down evryones throat.

A change needs to happen but it shouldn't be anything close to the SFW proposal.

Tony
 
"A change needs to happen but it shouldn't be anything close to the SFW proposal."

Ok Tony, lets hear your ideas. And don't use the "I only represent MDF on 1 topic and that is Utah Conservation permits"

You come on here and start a thread; lets here your opinion. You obviously state it about SFW.
 
Triple_BB......
Why are you so anti SFW? I'm also a member of WYOGA
and they do not have an agenda to screw the Wyoming public! but they do have and agenda to protect there living.




Justin Richins
R&K Hunting Company Inc.
www.thehuntingcompany.com
 
Nice to hear from ya Tony--hope all is well.

I didn't read your first post as an attack against any person more so a challenge to the lop-sided proposal.

I can't understand why it is so complicated with all the juggling around of A and B and kid shoots dads deer and.....

Simple would be ONE Plan and add the new LE buck units Pahvant-Beaver ect....

Combine the points--Bonus not Preference so anyone can have a chance to draw....

A deer hunter fills out his/her 5 choices and submits....from a 'formally known as LE buck unit' like Henries....down to 5th choice archery deer.....or something like that...any combination of weapon choice and unit in those 5 choices....

Make all 5 choices count towards using your points if drawn...

No 5 times increase in fee $$$....

'Revenue-Neutral'...that was cute!

Leftover tags would be on a draw basis--no points used--- but a pinch higher 'application fee'....

Robb
 
Why don't we just leave things alone! In my opinion hunter numbers are not the issue, we have already slashed hunter numbers to the point that many of us are fed up with it all, The bigger issue is habbitat and winter range, more and more people moving into the state, chewing up precious winter grounds, We all need to just face it that our deer numbers are the way they are for a reason. If you start playing with the system to cator to just "trophy" hunters, that is as one sided approach and will fail, Just like Fishon Said, the Henry's are a joke to me, only a select few will ever hunt it, and big money tags will always be hunting it. If I had the money I would probably hunt it to. But the fact is the resource belongs to each of us. I have a "real" problem with private groups that are not elected to represent us that have such an influence on a public resource, Wyoming had the fortitude to back them down, yet our officials are snagged hook, line and sinker. I for one do not want our mule deer treated like our elk are, but then again who am I. Its time to take up painting!!!
 
Just when you think you've heard it all...

"I'm also a member of WYOGA
and they do not have an agenda to screw the Wyoming public! but they do have and agenda to protect there living."

Oh, really?

Why then is the WYOGA along with WYSFW pushing so hard to get transferable landowner tags and guaranteed outfitter licenses in Wyoming?

How does that benefit the Wyoming public? Who has the most to gain from that agenda?

Also, how does the wilderness guide law benefit anybody but the outfitters in WY?

How about the thousands and thousands of acres of exclusive use leases on private lands (by outfitters) for hunting...how is that beneficial to Wyoming Hunters?

Look, theres more than a couple people in Wyoming that attend meetings, read meeting minutes, and know what "agendas" are running around....and who is supporting the agenda.

I've seen it countless times...in several states...the various outfitter boards are not...let me emphasize...ARE NOT looking out for anything or anyone other than their bottom line. If they could get away with it, they'd pass a law requiring every hunter to hunt with a paid guide or outfitter...they'd do it in a heart-beat...and thats a fact.

I understand the need to look out for your business...but dont blow smoke up everyones a$$ telling them that the WYOGA, MTOGA, etc. are looking out for the average resident hunter. Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
Tony - Your opinion is always welcome here. I agree that the proposal isn't what I would want to see either. I'm just glad there is some thought and effort going into Utah Mule Deer.

2 years ago when I was still on the SFW board, UDWR did not want to even talk about changing mule deer management in this state. They were happy with the current situation. I'm glad SFW is trying to get something going. Their proposal might suck, but I do think they're reading all this and will make changes to improve it....???

I would like to know if MDF has a suggestion? Just a member wondering. We know SFW's idea (which will probably be changed) and we know the UDWR idea (make money).

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Bingo!!!!!

I have killed 4-point or better bucks in four of the last 6 seasons!! So, I know first hand that if you put out the effort each and every hunter "could" be successful. My region of choice would be central, but since it is getting to be higher demand than southern and harder to draw, I have no problem hunting which ever region I can get a tag for. So yes two of the 4 bucks stated above were in northern!!

Also on a side note I finally drew my covetted central and now have found some "dandy" bucks in the northeastern region this year.....GO FIGURE!!!

I would rather see small temporary changes to see if they work first, than to all of the sudden throw a massive overhaul in on something that really probably only needs a tune-up!!!!
 
Cabinfever: concerning your other angle. If it is a choice between today's management and SFW's proposal, I will take today's management. Here's why.

I have seen a big change in the number of mature bucks since the cap to 97,000 hunters, even a bigger change when Southern Utah went to a five day hunt. There hasn't been a year when I haven't had an opportunity on a mature muley. The area I've concentrated on since last year is way above objective for buck/doe ratios. The number of yearling bucks I'm seeing this year tells me the future looks even better. This years fawn recruitment is the best I recall ever seeing. It seems like every doe has twins and I've seen a couple of does with triplets.

I think things are already headed in a positive direction, maybe not as fast as some would like. I would like to see some changes made and I do believe the reason we need micromanagement is because some areas do get inundated with hunters year after year and at times it can become a slaughter, if conditions are right such as weather and migration patterns.

I think we could have great trophy hunting without even drastically limiting tags. Limit rifle tags and increase muzzy and archery tags. That alone will make a huge improvement of bucks making it through another year. It's a fact the large majority of hunting harvest happens with the rifle hunt.
 
huntinco,
Why are you so pro SFW? It seems most outfitters/guides are pro-SFW. If I were a guide, I would be pro-SFW for sure. Their agenda would stand to profit me the most. Pimping wildlife to the highest bidder, which of course brings higher premiums/profits to the guides that help these auction hunters.
 
So this combining points, how many nonresidents put in for general hunts as well as limited entry or is that even possible? I have concerns about this who do we as nonresident need to talk to to voice our concerns ??


Get your hunt on!!
tixs,lodging,for you
cruises,trips for her!
songdogtravel.com
 
First of all I believe that the Elk situation in Utah has been a success. Some of you may not remember when you had to draw to hunt, then it changed to once every 5 years you could purchase, then every 3 years, then you could buy a tag every year. Certainly things need to be looked at and changed as opinions attitudes etc. evolve. The same is true with our deer management. I personally believe that a system of micro-management of deer units time has come. At present, I would like to see hunters be able to continue to hunt entire regions, but with some restrictions.

Each of the management units within the region must stand on its own merits without the data from the rest of the region being considered in the overall big picture.

If a management unit is not at mangement objectives- either in population or buck-doe ratios, a mandatory trigger mechanism should be put in place which would require the closing of the unit, restricting number of licenses, increased predator control or shortening the season length to 2 days.
Examples--If the unit is only 80% of objective for population then the unit should be closed for 2 years.
If a unit is less than 18 bucks/ 100 does then the unit would only have 100 tags issued ( number of tags would depend on size of unit and severity of the under objective data) this would last for a minimum of 2 years. The type and severity of restrictions would be on a sliding scale. If the unit went below 12 bucks/100 does the it would be mandatory for the unit to be closed.Once it gets to 14 bucks/100 does then limited tags would be issued. Once the unit gets to objective, general hunting would automatically be in place. The tags ( when restrictions are in place) would be issued in a draw process and would be good for only that unit.
Currently the DWR has the authority to close any hunting area if they see fit. The problem as I see it, is that they usaually are very reluctant to restrict hunting in known problem areas and take more of a wait and see attitude. I think we can agree that it sometimes seems that only very severe declines and almost no recovery of deer moves the DWR to take action. It we implemented trigger mechansims that would require action on a unit by unit basis (every two years) things won't have to get severe before action is taken.

I believe that very little opportunity would be lost ( except for being able to hunt your favorite spot every year if it falls below objective). This is not just about trophy hunting, it is about maintaining and enhancing the herds themselves. The mature bucks will surely be there, but the number of mature bucks will stay more consistent year in and year out.

I am not comfortable with the SFW's A-B proposal. I believe that a youth hunter would be much more excited about hunting if they knew that when they went out hunting there was a good chances of seeing several bucks, not just 10 does with some fawns. Make sure you let the RAC members know what you want or tell a memeber of the Mule Deer committee your proposals.
 
I agree with what others have said, I don't really like the plan that SFW has put out. Why do we need to make great changes anyway? The last four or five years I think the deer hunting has slowley improved and I am seeing more and more deer every year. I would like to see some smaller changes if needed, close some access to ATV's in some areas, more archery and Ml tags and less rifle tags to increase oppertunity and decrease harvest, move some season dates around to better control the harvest (didn't the law get changed about the start of the rifle hunt?).

Call me an oppertunist but I don't want to loose my chance to hunt every year, I don't mind not killing a deer every year but I still want the chance. I remember going to a Wild Life Board Meeting several years ago when the whole limited entry elk idea was talked about, i remeber several paople saying how hunters could draw a limited entry elk tag ever 5-7 years. Look what it has turned into, I don't want to see that for deer.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-08 AT 02:48PM (MST)[p]>Triple_BB......
>Why are you so anti SFW?
>I'm also a member of
>WYOGA
>and they do not have an
>agenda to screw the Wyoming
>public! but they do have
>and agenda to protect there
>living.
>
Hunt, did you catch Buzz's reply on post 31. He nailed it. You state they're out to protect their living. Not quite right. For years Wyoming outfitters have operated in Wyoming under the pretense that they're owed a living. Not to mention all the screwing. How many lawsuits have been filed and laws have been created in the last 30 years in an effort to get more licenses, create BS wilderness laws and the like. When the president of the WYGOA starts preaching how great an organization SFW WY is at the same time they're pushing for license set asides it ain't to hard to figure out who is sleeping with who. Yer an outfitter, we'd expect you to align with those who want to help line yer pockets. Misinformed Wyoming hunters need to be informed and realize that if they're giving money to SFW WY, they're aligning with groups who are out "to protect there living" versus looking out for the best interests of the average Joe hunter. If you only have X dollars to donate, there are better groups to give to in this state. The Wyoming Wildlife Federation is one group at the top of the list. Making any sense yet???
 
ElkhunterUT. Just for the record I'm not a member of the SFW. Just wondering why every time the name is mentioned Triple_BB bashes them.


Justin Richins
R&K Hunting Company Inc.
www.thehuntingcompany.com
 
>ElkhunterUT. Just for the record I'm
>not a member of the
>SFW. Just wondering why
>every time the name is
>mentioned Triple_BB bashes them.
>

No more wondering, my reply is noted above...
 
Robb,

YOur idea more follows the Colorado model, and SFW has thought about that as well. BAsed on the DWR survey data, if the state managed the deer like the hunters indicate they want, it looks as if 20% of the state would be managed like "Henry Mts.", 20% like the Book Cliffs, 40% like the general season, and 20% unlimited hunting.

Then, Robb, if i understand your proposal, hunters could put in for up to five units - any one they want. However, like Colorado, once you draw, you are at the end of the line. Some units you can draw with no points or one point every year, others take 5 some take 8. choose you poison. Is that your idea ?



AS far as the survey Taliban, the DWR did their very best to get hunters from a random, evenly distributed survey. You only need 1,000 questions asked and you can predict the outcome of a presidential election, with 2,500 deer hunter responses, the DWR has ample data. They didn't ask you, they didn't ask me, that is quite OK, cause their data is probably pretty representative of the overall deer hunter population - or at least those who cared enough to answer the survey. Many did NOT respond to the survey from my understanding, in spite of repeated attempts.

The DWR data didn't try to sway people one way or another. It asked a bunch of questions, that give a complex picture of what hunters want, and what they might be willing to trade to get something better.

here are some facts from the Survey - granted there is a ton of information i have not included.

72% said they were willing for Some additional restrictions to increase size of bucks and nunber of bucks

70% said the would prefer a Big buck

28% said they would rather hunt a Big buck every ten years instead of a small buck every year.

31% said they would rather hunt a Big buck every 5 years instead of a medium buck every year.

52% said they would rather hunt a Big buck every five years instead of a small buck every year.


As mentioned, there is a whole bunch of other data that people will look through and try and make some sense and a proposal. And then, once the BEST proposal to make the most and different segments of the hunting public happy is made, there will be a concrete proposal, and everyone will get their day at the RAC and Board to vote Up or DOWN.

I guess i will be convinced thah the Henry Mts. is a failure when MDF quits selling the Statewide Deer tag and the Henry Conservation tag, and since Ryan Hatch has said the same thing, when MDF and Muley Crazy quite putting magazine covers and copious stories about Henry Mtn. bucks i will really believe that statement. Same thing with Christensen Arms using the 42 inch Henry buck in adds for their rifle.

Same thing about MDF selling Utah's broken elk tag system, If you and MDF demand that all of Utah goes to general season bull elk hunting, i am a believer. Till then, crticism of the Henry Mts. deer herd and Utah elk management plan sounds a bit hollow if not hypcritical criticism.

If your argument is true that people just want to hunt elk, and size doesn't matter, there are 16,000 spike elk tags each year, 14,000 or so general season tags, and 10,000 plus or minus cow elk tags. Close to 40,000 people get to hunt elk every year, and they ought to be just happy, and not complain that only 2,500 hunters get a trophy tag. 5% of utah's elk tags go to trophy hunting, and 95% go to general hunting. Now, if you are true in your convinction thaht size doesn't matter, you shouldn't really care if you shoot a cow, or a spike, or a rag horn.



don
 
Don,

Its always about the money isnt it?

The way YOU value wildlife is the dollar amount a tag will fetch or how many rifles some @ssclown can sell...or how many magazines some other @ssclown can sell.

Thats not how most of the people I know that hunt, value wildlife and hunting.

Your value system is FUBAR.
 
I wrote Don about SFW's proposal. I think there is a better way, just not sure how other than Founder has some good ideas.

I also have to chuckle about the complaining. Tony, I know you do a lot, but dude, you preach opportunity then sell the statewide tags, Henry tags, and elk tags in LE's and say the conservation tags are about right? Would it be fair to say your income is at least partially funded by these tags? How is that about opportunity when you personally get a stack of tags to sell? The way you talk I would have thought you would just hand them back. You say Utah is an elk slaughter? Did you just go on one of those near 100% caribou hunts, during migration, with an evil rifle tag? Should have taken a bow buddy, then you could pound your chest like a real man?;-) Seems the quality tags are only something to complain about when we personally do not have one in hand?

I hear about youth and family over and over. I can understand the concern, but I would bet if asked to pick one tag for the next 5 years, 99% would say Henry Mountains or another top LE unit with no regards to hunting with the family. Right now we can apply for Henry deer, not draw, complain about it, then go waste a meat buck. Maybe this needs to change? The majority apperantly likes quality, but they have to have a general season 2 point tag as well?

Most seem to bittch about the elk and how they are hunted and when they are hunted, but they all apply. People want to hunt every year (and I do not blame them a bit) but there are tons of tags just not the quality ones (if you read this thread then those quality ones do not matter anyway). To fill our freezer this year my 14 year old daughter will shoot a cow elk. I did not get a tag because one tag is enough and I have no desire to shoot a cow. I do get to go elk hunting with my daughter though. Seeing her excited to shoot an elk will be enough fun for this cowboy.

SWB,

You say this sucks also (I am not a fan of it either), but you apply for a Henry tag? Why not just get a archery tag and hunt the biggest bucks in the state on the Front? I think you truly like bowhunting, but most bowhunt because of draw odds and nothing more. I think most would choose a rifle tag if a tag was guaranteed?

Don,

Before anything drastic happens, I will always believe in road closures to a certain extent. However, something must be done, something that the majority can agree on that will make an impact. When I took a statistics class in college, I believe a sample consists of 30 or more respondants? This is an accurate survey. I got the survey and completed it. This is part of the problem, if 10k surveys were sent and 25% responded, that says a lot about Utah sportsmen right there. No way will anyone ever collect all 97k. Maybe those 25% care about deer more than a week before the third Saturday in October?

Thanks for the efforts Don. I hope you have had a chance to read my emails? Most want change, but how change is reached is important to every hunter in Utah, at least to 25% of them it is. I like what Founder posted personally.
 
Atta Boy Ty,

I was waiting for you to weigh in! I think you make some great points.

My question is, Can we not boost buck to doe ratios to improve quality without cutting a guy's chance to hunt down to 4 times in 20 years? Must it be limited draw OR 2 points and spikes? There has got to be a better way.

What are the quality units going to be like? The Books or the Henry's? If it is the Henry's, I will wait 5 years for it once. If it is like the Books, I will not sit out 4 years to kill a 24 inch 3x4. Which of the 2 above scenarios is most likely to produce enough tags to support 30% of 97,000 hunters? Certainly not the Henry's quality.

I vote for a more controlled management style of some kind where we can grow our buck to doe ratio's to allow for a crop of bigger bucks to survive.

I do not have all the answers, But I do have a lot of questions and opinions!!

Have a great day!

Chad
 
KTC,

got your emails, thanks. got several others like yours with similar concern.

One possible solution would be to go more with the Colorado system - pure preference points.

Will look at a bunch more data, talk with lots of folks, and take another cut at the apple.

If i recall, you were pretty passionate about making Utah's deer hunting quality better, right ?

what is your solution ?

Hope all is well.
 
Don,

I may have some ideas, but I doubt it is a solution? :)

I think it may be a better route to choose your unit instead of applying, not drawing, then going general season. Pick your medicine and go or wait?

ATV's need some restrictions and seasonal road closures is another must.

More habitat work and underpasses.

Manageable unit sizes, whether one or 30. The best size to manage and count deer.

Some tag cuts. Adjust up and down as necessary on a yearly basis.

Raise buck to doe ratios to 20-25 per 100.

With the law change add another hunt for 1 archery, 1 muzz, and 2 rifle hunts to help spread pressure. Maybe even some tags being shifted to muzz and archery from rifle? No more statewide archery.

I would like to see better quality. I do not think every where needs Henry quality, but to have more mature deer in the mix would be great. Certainly Utah produces some great deer from time to time, but a few more would be nice. I guess I figure Utah has about 50k bucks yet 97k tags? Seems out of balance. I am willing to sacrifice something to get there. It seems 97k is the number of hunters and that has to be the number everyone works with, not the 50k number that should be worked with? That is the hard part.

Just some thoughts I have. Maybe they are right and probably wrong. Something has to give however. I appreciate your's, and anyone else's, efforts to get things done to benefit the deer herd. Sounds like some good people are working hard on this issue. Sorry I got raggy, let me think about the concerns I have and see if I can find some solutions to that? I am willing to do my part for sure.
 
If you think this SFW proposal is going to help get youth a tag its not true the program now doesnt work so im for change I guess all of us average guys need to unite and stand up before its to late my boy from the age of 14 to 18 he hunted twice and was able to do all three hunts but if you are going to use the youth as a ploy is not right solid deer management is what we need lets here what the bilogist have to say on the units the rac meetings that i have been to its sfw throwing there weight around and kudos to them so average guys lets try to take back
do you think sfw is going to help us not eveen close it will be a battle but if we want change we need to fight for it for your kids and there kids generations and ourselves thanks
 
ktc

I am very much in favor of your thoughts. I LIKE IT. The only thing I would add is having all hunters report on deer taken etc. To better manage we must have the real data.
Don Please look at ktc-s thoughts these seem to be right on with most of the people I hunt with.

Rock 5150
 
WOw

I was called Tailban and then someone lumped MDF in with my opinion. Funny but childish.

The DWR survey does not represent the majority of utah hunters. And the survey was mis-leading. When question like "do you want to hunt a trophy 24" buck every 5 years or a 2 point every year is ask", that is mis-leading.

Look at the poll of MM on all of these topics and the over whelming results are not the SFW plan or anything close to it.

Right now on General season we hunt trophy bucks not just 2 points, and the key is we hunt.

The math being thrown around is the same math used for 10+ years and it is always mis-leading and in correct.

There is no chance that a guy can hunt the henry MTNs or the Book cliffs every 5 years under the current plan. There is also no way with the SFW plan.

As for MDf selling the Statewide tag and the Henry's tag goes, that is the model that is created and that is what MDf does. And by the looks of it MDF does it better then any group ever has. Just because a tag sell for $90,000 or $182,500 doesn't mean it makes everything a huge success. I know these tags as well as anyone and even if the state doubled the tags on the Henry MTNS the tags would still sell for a ton.

Other then a few permit adjustments the Utah conservation permit numbers should stay about the same. The envelope has been pushed far enough and it is time to give more to the public.

Also land owner tags need to be re-addressed and allocated by weapon type, just like the CP. Also they should have to hunt on the land that was used to get the permit.

And last is the Utah elk plan needs to be changed drastically. We need many more archery tags and move the majority of the rifle tags out of the rut. This will let people actually enjoy what people brag about rather then just dream about it.


Now let me make it clear that outside of the MDF Utah conservation permits go I do not represent MDF at all. Any questions, concerns,complaints, compliments and JABS on mdf need to be directed to the people in charge.

I want people to stop trying to turn this state into trophy hunting only. Also I would like an answer as to why someone would say the TROPHY HUNTING IS THE ONLY REAL HUNTING. There has never been a more un-educated, assinine comment in the history of wildlife.

People miss the point.

Lets really do something good for a change instead of all the smoke and mirrors.

Tony
 
Don/KTC,

Your replies are how issues get resolved; proper dialog and
input. I am happy an organization has stepped up (SFW) and
is showing that it CARES about wildlife.

Although we may not agree with the entire proposal, I think that most, if not all, agree changes/sacrifices need to be made
to our deer herds.

I am looking forward to seeing some changes made.....
 
Thanks rock! At least someone likes my idea.;-)

Easy Tony. You do a lot for us all without a doubt. I am not sure who wrote that survey, and maybe it was not the best, but it's results are as good as the survey. I know for a fact that 30 is the number needed to get an accurate sample in a survey unless my professor lied Tony. 30 out of 97k hunters is accurate believe it or not, you may want to read for yourself?.

What I cannot understand, is why people get mad the elk are too big in Utah, the deer are too small, people want big bucks, but they need a family reunion while hunting? Seems there is a huge disparity between what we read, what we see, and what we do? I am not sure why that happens?

We all want to kill that 230 monster, but most likely never will, even with a Henry tag. I have no gripe with someone shooting a spike or two point. None at all. I also do not think it is unreasonable to have a 200+ goal either. That goal may never be hit by the majority. I agree a very few exist, but if we could add a few more to the mix would that be great? I think so. The problem we have is 50k bucks or so and 97k tags. If even 30-40 percent just want any buck that can put the hurt on anything surviving. Isn't there a number of tags to bucks the DWR could consistently allocate to ensure plenty of meat bucks and a few big bucks where the trophy hunter could kill a big buck once every decade or so? I see no problem with hunting for meat, the outing, the experience, or the inches? To me a healthy herd would hold all of the above? No, a 200" buck will never be available every year! People have a misconception of the elk that 380 bulls are on every ridge. Not true, but you can kill one with lots of scouting and dedicating an entire season to it while knowing what you are looking for. We never did it in 3 tries, close, but no 380. Utah elk was nothing like I read about here.

Tony, tell me that monster 'bou you killed was not a rush? Nothing wrong with killing a book animal? I know lots of people who love deer meat and they shoot the first buck they see. That is awesome as well, to see a guy happy no matter the horn size. I agree Tony, any hunting that makes the individual happy and excited is real hunting.

Anyway, no matter who's idea is used or combination of ideas, I hope the deer herd gets better and all hunters get what they hope for. I think the key is make the deer herd first priority. I also agree there are a few big deer taken in Utah annually, but not many, it could improve.

Thanks for your efforts as well Tony.
 
if the state was broken up into smaller units would it help some areas to be 3 pt or better?doare any states currently doing this?does it help?i think this could turn some areas into a mid trophy area(not the best but better than general).just something i wanted to ask i have no personal experience with 3 pt or better units.i also would like to suggest a computer based mandatory harvest reporting.after the computer program was made there should be very little cost to gather the data.just a couple of thoughts /questions here.just trying to cover every angle so that this gats done right.thank you very much to all those that care.i feel like such a small piece in this puzzle.
 
Ty,

I see your point about the survey being valid. I did not know such a small percentage of a population could be predicted by such a small number. I guess my biggest beef with it is of the 12 or so buddies I talked to they have all said that it was bogus because it only allowed for very structured guided answers. It was either baby 2 points almost every year, or giant bucks every 5-10 years. Some questions asked if you wanted to hunt small bucks or big bucks. Crud, even meat hunters dream of killing giant bucks. I personally don't think the questions allowed for a great opportunity to truly state your feelings on the subject. I can live with it though if we choose to use it.

I think along your lines, we can boost the buck to doe ratios which in turn will produce more bucks that will make it through the season. This alone will grow a few bigger bucks than we have now. Then we have small bucks and big bucks (that need to be hunted hard to get) and the majority get to hunt frequently.

I think the comment on the elk herds to me is a statement that we do not want to have our deer herd turn into a OIL opportunity as well. If we continue to severely limit hunting oportunity for bulls of any size, we must not make the deer the same way. Can we have it both ways? I do not know. I personally feel like with a few tweaks in the deer management, we could have decent bucks and giant elk. For me that would be a success. For others, I do not know.


SLCMuley,

There are plenty on here that would say 3 point or better does not work. I am one who has seen the Book cliffs, and Fishlake when they were 3 point or better and I will tell you it DID work. I saw it up until the year they pulled that restriction and slaughtered the bucks. The bucks were everywhere prior to the slaughter. Those herds have never been the same (until they closed the Books). I would routinely see 2-3 herds of bucks numbering as many as 20-30 bucks a day during archery season. Those herds would contain a great cross section of aged bucks. From 2 points to 26"+ 4 pt or bigger bucks. If only I could shoot then like I shoot now! Many are against it, I saw none of the negatives mentioned in there arguements against it. Pure and simple, it worked. Hopefully they will discuss it for our future management.

Have a great day.

Chad
 
I dont buy this:

"30 out of 97k hunters is accurate believe it or not, you may want to read for yourself?."

I dont think any kind of survey with that small of a sample will catch what hunters want management wise.

I dont care what some statistics professor says...I've taken several college level statistics courses...including applied statistics for resource management...to know that stats can be manipulated for desired results.

Also, if the stats were that accurate...why the disagreement amoung a "random" group of hunters on this site alone? If the survey were accurate, wouldnt everyone be on the same page?

I'll tell you why, hunters as a whole are a bunch of independent thinkers who (mostly) have their own ideas about management, and what hunting is all about. Unless hunters have taken a nice long pull of kool-aid off the SFW jug...they pretty much have their own ideas about things related to hunting.

I dont believe some dumb random survey with leading questions is going to capture what individual hunters want in regards to hunting, etc. I dont care what some statistics professor taught you, me, or someone else.

Thats more than apparent by the two threads on this very board...not much agreeing going on.
 
If 30 is the number then the SFW proposal fails according to MM. 95% of those who commented say the proposal is bad and not what they want, and 95% said they liked my idea with a few tweeks.

I know if you asked 30 Utahns who they were going to vote for, for the President it would be a landslide in favor of a republican. The same survey in New York would be a very different result.


Surveys have and will always be mis-leading, and statistics have and always will be twisted into the favor of those with the most money or loudest voice.

I know my radio show last week (which has 12,000-15,000 listeners) does not like the SFW proposal at all. In fact of the 20-25 callers that called in only 1 liked what SFW said. Explain that to me? I guess I should run for President.

It is how things are worded and who is polled that makes the results.

If Utah is seriously thinking of drastic changes to our deer managment then it better start with looking at our flawed elk managnment.

Brian, pleae put a poll on MM concerning the SFW proposal and and my proposal. Lets see what the MM members think of those two ideas and then lets take it to the DWR and show them "our" results.

The problem we have here is to often people or groups are willing to take credit for everything that is a success and then take no blame for all that is bad.

Also the problem is that there is a skewed perception that a small group represents the vast majority and that a small group or few individuals have done more then anyone else.

The facts are many many people and groups do great things for Utah but just don't stand up and beat their chest when it is good and then run and hide when it is bad.

KTC, shooting a boomer Caribou in NWT where the tags are endless and the animals are plentuful and the residents not on want my business but beg for it, has no correlation to hunting deer in Utah. Most people won't hunt Canada because of the expense or travel while right now 97,000 get to hunt Utah. If I don't get your point please explain.

What I have done for Utah is nothing in my book, other then try to get people involved in the process. One thing for sure is I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, which is why I am so concerned over the mis-leading poll and information being given out.

I am also concerned when statements like "trophy hunting is the only real hunting" are coming out of peoples mouth that do have an influence in this state, and are a part of a very outspoken wildlife group however small they may be.

Was that SFW apeking or was that the individual speaking? We will never get the answer because the individual speaks for group and they don't want to throw their boy under the bus for such an foolish comment.

I guess the saying goes in the UFC "LET'S GET IT ON" is the appropriate statement now.

Our hunting heritage is at stake and I do not want a small few with skewed stats and polls and a loud voice to take that away from me. I hbelieve the vast majority feels the same.

And last question for someone, tell me 1 place in this world that Trophy Elk and Trophy deer co-exist on the same unit, I do not believe it is possible.

If you want to make a difference then lets give opportunity when the ability to give it is there (like our elk herds) and at the same time lets fix what we all want fixed which is our deer problems. I am tired of the smoke and mirrors and the bandage approach that a few are trying to force feed us.

It is old and tiring.

Tony
 
First off, the results of a survey are only as good as the survey. I just took it, I did not analyze the biased nature if any.

30 is the number, but that is only what the book and prof said, I hate stats and was anxious to file it all away. If someone wants to challenge that theory have fun.

If you sample for president 30 Utards, then you have one-shitty sample Tony. Same with NY. How about 30 people nationwide in diffent voting areas? I am glad you are not Dan Jones.

I think you are misreading the results Tony? Just about every post on these 3 or 4 threads WANT BIGGER AND BETTER DEER! How we get there is this debate, not whether or not people want bigger deer. How about a survey of all 97K deer hunters (which is a waste of time and money) to see HOW they would improve it?

Did you read my last post Tony? Go read it again and tell me what I think about hunting and real hunting. I am not going to re-type it out.

As soon as the "players" involved quit worrying who is right and wrong then maybe something productive will happen? LETS GET IT ON is a pretty lame fight song Tony.
 
"Easy Tony. You do a lot for us all without a doubt. I am not sure who wrote that survey, and maybe it was not the best, but it's results are as good as the survey. I know for a fact that 30 is the number needed to get an accurate sample in a survey unless my professor lied Tony. 30 out of 97k hunters is accurate believe it or not, you may want to read for yourself?."

"I dont buy this:
"30 out of 97k hunters is accurate believe it or not, you may want to read for yourself?."

I dont think any kind of survey with that small of a sample will catch what hunters want management wise.

I dont care what some statistics professor says...I've taken several college level statistics courses...including applied statistics for resource management...to know that stats can be manipulated for desired results."

Isn't that exactly what I said Buzz?

To be fair, I thought the survey was slanted as well. However, it does not change the desire for most to have bigger and better deer. I still say it is how we get there is what is being hotly debated.
 
I am with "TALIBAN TONY" on this deal.

I am not what would be considered a "REAL HUNTER" under the
SFW draft. I am not OK with waiting five years to shoot a
"trophy". I am not OK with closing down more area's in the state
so that new public land game farms can be created.

I know that most that are a part of this committee have one concern... MULE DEER!!! Not how can I grow more trophy heads for "REAL HUNTERS" or what setion of the 28 new units would make for a new "conservation tag unit"

Fake hunters unite Join "TALIBAN TONY" for the sake of mule deer and fake hunters everywhere
 
Ty,

I think you are right. We ALL would like to see bigger deer. We just don't agree on how to get there. From the majority of the posts, I think people would settle for a rise in quality if they did not have to settle for hunting 4 out of 20 years. My guess is most would pick what we have now over a 16 year hunting drought.

It is time for us all to rise to the occasion, quit bickering and find a better way. Write up your own plan and send it to each of the groups you are a member of. Make your voice known. If it is left up to a survey and 12 guy's, who knows what we will get. The system only works if the public speaks up and demands change.

I believe the individuals on the MD committee will do the very best they can with what info they get. I also thank them for their time and service. Have a great day!

Chad
 
If there are really 50% of the hunters surveyed that would rather wait 5 years to kill a big "Trophy" buck, why don't they practice some self control and let the two point go this year, and next year, and the 2 years after that. Then they could have their hunt every year, and still kill a big deer in the end.

I know this sounds crazy, but us hunters need to start controlling ourselves and quit killing bucks we really don't want to kill just to say we killed one.

We could keep tag numbers the same in this state and still let everyone go hunting if we could lay off the trigger and let the deer grow up.

Game management is no longer a science, it is political, and the problem with that is that we can never achieve anything but a compromise.

Hunters unite, and start policing yourselves. If you want more deer and larger bucks, QUIT KILLING THE SMALL ONES!

You don't even have to pass a law to start letting them go. Just make up your mind and talk your hunting buddies into it as well.

I have nothing against a person killing small bucks until they start whining about not getting a big one. Then I have a problem.

Travis
 
deerbedead, i agree with you 100%!!! You don't know how many people I hear say that they want to shoot a BIG buck, and don't want to eat their tag either. So they go out and hunt a few days, then shoot a yearling forked horn, and then complain there are no BIG bucks around. I know not everyone is a trophy hunter, and thats fine, its just those guys that want the big one and kill small ones every year, and then whine. We really do need to control and police ourselves and pass up smaller bucks and wait for them to grow up.
 
Ktc Says
?SWB,
You say this sucks also (I am not a fan of it either), but you apply for a Henry tag? Why not just get a archery tag and hunt the biggest bucks in the state on the Front? I think you truly like bowhunting, but most bowhunt because of draw odds and nothing more. I think most would choose a rifle tag if a tag was guaranteed??

KTC you are correct I apply for the henneries because of the quality. I won't put in for a bookcliffs type hunt because the front has just as good quality if not better. I enjoy the front because of the opportunity to hunt every year with an over the counter tag. It is a win win for me. But if I could have a rifle tag up there every year and have the same type of deer running around I would hang my bow up in a heart beat.

I also choose to start hunting with archery equipment because of the draw odds and the ability to hunt every year. I will never be able to rifle hunt the henneries with the amount of points I have but there is a slim chance I can with an archery tag ?Hopefully in less than 11 more years?. To tell you the truth I would rather hunt with a rifle like you said anytime especially if I have a chance at bigger bucks. But I have had to stoop down to archery equipment just so I can hunt every year and improve my chances at a once in a lifetime elk or muledeer hunt to maybe twice or more in a lifetime. I believe if they increased archery tags there would be a lot more people opting out for the chance to hunt. Especially if the odds were good enough they could do it several times instead of once. I also know the hard facts that most of these guys will come home without tagging a deer/elk. That is why I think it is a valuable tool in opportunity management.

This one is for Don
I believe even though I think Dons proposal isn't one I would support I applaud him for doing something to better his cause or everyone else?s cause. I do support SFW and what they have done especially habitat. They are a great organization and do great things.

This year I might not be hunting the front because a friend of mine located a 10x10 30 wide 230? buck on public land elsewhere in the state. Thanks to possible SFW habitat improvement. This is one more reason for me to oppose pick your region I think the deer herds in Utah are doing a lot better than people are saying. The biologist numbers also suggest this. We found a couple of deer near the 30? mark up by strawberry. Wow who would have thought there would be deer that big up their.

The deer are on a comeback. Habitat and fences will do more than anything in my opinion for the general season.

LE units for elk are on a downward trend in Utah IMHO especially if the division gets their way with state wide spike hunts. This will cement the fact you will only get to hunt a LE unit in Utah maybe once in your life.

KTC how do you feel about possible spike hunts on the Dutton?
Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-03-08 AT 08:55PM (MST)[p]I am no fan of spike hunts. They are like 2 point deer, they have meat, but that is it. I no longer hunt spikes. If I want elk meat a cow tag is a better choice. So, no I do not like spike hunts on Dutton or elsewhere. They served their purpose well. I do like that awesome quality as well, what is the happy meduim? Do not know?

Don has a rough proposal, I too appreciate that, but I think with lots of opinions and options, something good can happen for bow, muzz, rifle, meat, and trophy guys. People say Don has an agenda. He does and he listens to me I am pretty confident of that. So let him know what you think......

I still think some big improvements can be made to the deer. It may require some sacrifice by all, but not a ton? How about a 50% rifle, 25% bow and 25% muzz and split the rifle into two hunts(40/30/30 maybe w/o reductions?)? First one 5 days second one 7 days? With road closures, ATV restrictions and small tag reductions to hit a 23 per 100 does?

I just enjoy, later in life, lower pressure and bigger horns. I have nothing against a guy who likes meat and not horns also. Nothing wrong with either, but the herd should be able to handle it and provide both.

swb,

Nice story in SFW's Voice Magazine.

I have a couple of thoughts/questions;

1. Most do not like the survey. Who drew that up? Was it the DWR? They are the ones who sent me mine.

I agree with Don. If 10k surveys were handed out and a whopping 25% answered, that is sad. Utards should be real happy with that result.

2. Most do not like the SFW draft, but the survey said 70% wanted bigger bucks? Aside from the SFW proposal, isn't that the wish of at least 70% here? Bigger deer, but do not know how or the best route to get there?

3. If 97k tags are handed out for approx. 50k bucks, that is almost 50% more tags than bucks, what number would bring buck to does up another 5 or so? What percentage of bow, muzz, and rifle tags at 97k to bring the number up? To me this question is critical to get higher buck to doe and bigger deer. Either reduce tags or take more out of rifle into bow and muzz? Maybe some muzz restrictions? (Do away with 1x scopes!) Either make it 3x9 or eliminate them altogether! Is there a biologist that can figure this out? I have no clue.

4. Please split the rifle into two hunts. Even a hunt with no deer killed is more fun without billions of people.
 
Get rid of dedicated hunter program and make every hunter participate in the
Habitat improvement plans.

If a hunter wants a chance to hunt all three seasons make that a special draw.

Get with UDOT and when they are planning future roads have them add in more deer and elk underpasses as well as fences for deer/elk vehicle collisions. There are around 25,000 deer killed by vehicles in Utah and these are the ones counted in the right of way it doesn't count the ones that make it outside the right of way. This not only cost the hunter but cost our insurance companies an ineradicably amount of money.

Trail restrictions for 4-wheelers or possible seasonal closures.

Raise price of tags $5 bit it can only be used for predator control. It can't go into the general fund.

Cut rifle tags and move rifle tag hunts to September when the leaves are still on the trees. This would allow more bucks to survive the hunt. Also create two or three separate 5 day rifle hunts in September to allow you're self to hunt with a little more breathing room.

Increase muzzle loader tags, remove scopes and move these hunts to where the rifle hunt is now.

Increase archery tags. Make it illegal to shoot does unless herd is at caring capacity. This can still work with a state wide hunt because you could have areas outlined where does would be allowed to be taken.

Create smaller units but leave it state wide archery. If people want to still have opportunity to hunt state wide than allowing them to have archery tag is the least effective way to kill an animal.
The bonus point system for deer needs to be eliminated and turned into preference point system. People that have been putting in for the longest time need to be rewarded.

Piggybacking with points needs to be eliminated unless you have equal points.

You also need to purchase the tag before you apply for the drawing processes starts. This does two things. First it allows the division to sit on the money for awhile and earn interest on the tag money. Second it makes it harder for point abusers to put in family members that don't hunt.

Last but not least I am not in favor of the 30% tags going to kids in the LE drawing pool. They have age on their side and they will draw a tag some day. I even have kids and I still don't agree with it.
This is why! I guess I am old school I don't believe you give your kids everything under the sun I believe they should have to work for it. I think giving them a tag on the henneries, or any other LE hunt when they are young only ruins them in the long run. Why should you hunt your guts out on a general tag after you already have the biggest deer in the woods? I never had a chance at a big buck when I was a kid but I still have a desire to hunt.

I believe if you want them to become hunters give them a tag and spend time with them in the woods. So give them a general deer tag every year for what every weapon they prefer and I think this is a better tool for hunter recruitment.

Thanks for reading


Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
I think it would be best to see what the survey stats say once we all have the chance to view them and to see what they actually state.

I know when I took it-survey- that I felt it did not represent the answer I wanted to place/choose on many questions.

All I am seeing is that our deer hunts will be just as screwy as our elk hunts are now from the SFW proposal.

Wait in line for years...for what? Like it is now to draw an LE buck tag?

Road closures affect alot more folks than just hunters success.
Alot of people do recreation riding car/truck/quad/motor bike ect....so road closed for hunters but not recreationalists? Why waste the time.....or punish/restrict recreationalist during hunt dates?

I have to lean towards Tony's proposal/idea.

It tweeks what we already have, does not seperate hunters from hunters and his idea's for the elk hunts are alot like the I-400 that has some definate merit for alot of hunting opportunity.

Very good reading and idea's to all that have made an effort to post.

Robb
 
The survey was really bad! Would you like to hunt bigger bucks??? everybody would answer that one yes! The SFW purposal is a bad Idea we will loose the chance to hunt. thats not what the majority want. Yes maybee SOME changes need to happen but right now the deer herd is doing better and there are big bucks shot every year for those who hunt hard. We allready have le Units lets not do to the Deer hunt what was done to the elk hunt. I dont believe once every 5 years on 30% of the state is going to happen...it all guessing and big speculation. The numbers dont add up!
 
Since I left MDF back in February of this year, I have stayed pretty low-key and out of the light. I have regularly read the posts on MM and have learn alow from the many members out there. This post has brought me back out.

While Tony (Fishon) may be surprised to hear this, I agree with his comments and concerns with this proposal. I have disagreed with him on some items in the past, but he has it right this time.

I was one of the "chosen" ones that filled out the survey. I found it to be a bit confusing in the wording and had to re-read many questions three or four tiems to understand what they were asking. I also felt it was limiting in its questions and directed toward a certain direction.

As for conservation groups and dominating the process, this is a double-edge sword. As long as one group dominates (monopolizes)the process, then nothing good comes from the results or actions of that process. On the other side, if other groups do not have individuals at the executive level that will stand up and actual say something or more importantly, do something other than take your money, than that is equally wrong as well.

Tony, does not speak for MDF. Miles Moretti (CEO) and Eric Tycksen (COO) do. Unfortunately you never hear from either of them on anything. Mike Laughter (MDF Regional Director) is the only individual, in the state of Utah for MDF, (other than the actual local chapters) that actually does anything. He puts his money and hard work where his mouth is. He is vocal when he needs to be and quiet when that is the best course of action. I personal watch him for three years, put in 50+ hours each week of the year working on the ground for Mule Deer.

This past winter, while others were talking/bragging about all they were doing for Utah Mule Deer, Mike was actually do it.

Sorry, I got on my soap-box for a minute and off-track.

In my occupation (Medical Device/Pharm.) I deal with statistics, surveys and studies every day. The one thing they teach you, when dealing with statistics is that 100% acceptance is only 80% effective. The other things they teach you is that a survey/study is only as good as the questions asked and the population studied. If the questions are skewed, the answers will be too. If the population is skewed, the answer will be too. I do not have any knowledge of where the survey was set too, so I do not know if it was skewed or corrupted, but as one who took the survey, the questions seemed skewed towards the proposal SFW is speaking of. I have to think then that the responses will be skewed in that manner as well.

The one thing I feel we can all agree on is that the Mule Deer population in Utah is in dire need and all of us, in some manner, need to be a part of the solution.

Everyone's opinion of what is a successful hunting experience is different. For some it is just getting out with family and friends, others it is putting meat in the freezer, and others it is taking that "monster" animal. These are only three ideas and there are probably as many out there as there are hunters.

The key to all of this is to promote and work towards a healthy Mule Deer population. This includes (my opinion):

1. High buck to doe ratios spread throughout the state and not just in select areas.
2. Great habitat for both summer and winter ranges, with the winter range being the most important.
3. Access to a healthy population of Mule Deer for the General Public and Hunters alike. (Harvesting as a management tool)

Notice, I didn't say "monster Mule Deer". We need health over size right now. But remember, with a healthy deer population, comes bigger and healthier deer for those you want that and more deer for hunting and viewing for those who want that.

I am not an expert in what makes a healthy deer population. I know it takes a multitude of things such as range land, weather, low fawn mortality.... I do feel though that we need to work towards a healthy population and not according to the "monster" deer mentality. We will never get to this point, until we work together as an overall party of friends and concerned citizens and not as members of one group or another.

Just my thoughts.

Daren T.
 
swbuckmaster has some good ideas, we dont need to reinvent the wheel. We still need hunters buying tags, what we dont need is trophy hunters taking over the state. Issue more muzz and archery tags, try to close or inforce atv abuse. Keep the deer of the roads and get dedicated hunters doing something that will directly help the herds.
 
I went through everyone's posts and tried to put togther a general document as to what we are all saying. Please review and let me know what you think.

Dedicated Hunters
Split into groups
Mule Deer DH
Hours for a Mule Deer DH should be directly related to Mule Deer.
Elk DH
Hours for an Elk DH should be directly related to Elk.
Other Big Game DH
Hours for an Other Big Game DH should be directly related to Big Game other than Mule Deer & Elk.

More units
Split the regions in to smaller units based upon:
Those units at/exceeding the regions approved Buck/Doe ratio or objective
Those units between 99 & 80% of the regions approved Buck/Doe ratio or objective.
Those units between 79% & (a certain percentage) of the regions approved Buck/Doe ratio or objective.
No hunting in units below a certain percentage of the approved objective
Permits in these units above would be directed toward the best approach for the unit. (Example: more doe than buck permits, 3 point and better?)
Set up a first, second and third season for some units to decrease pressure, but maintain quality.
Individual unit restrictions (antler point limitations / season length / weapon type) would be established before the draw period so you can chose what you wish to do. Preference Points would be used.
Left over tags would go on a second draw and preference points would be used on it as well.
Left-over tags from the second draw would be first-come first-serve basis.

Muzzleloader / Archery Tags
Split the hunts into 2 or 3 rifle hunts and stagger the dates and regions.
Cut rifle permits and add to the muzzleloader/archery hunts specifically on a region by region basis.


Conservation Groups/Tags
Take all the conservation tags and put them on a bidding website (run by the UDWR) for everyone to see and make a bid upon. People who wish to still go to a certain Conservation Organizations local banquet can, but it puts the public?s tags out for all the public to bid on. Those individuals who usually bid on them still can and will and it will allow more advertisement for the tags because they would be at one location and not at a multitude of local banquets throughout the state.
Money from these tags will be split in the following manner;
Only used for the species the tag was allocated for:
Deer Tag ? Deer Project
Elk Tag ? Elk Project
Turkey Tag ? Turkey Project
5% for administrative (running the website)
95% for actual ?on the ground? habitat work.
No General Fund allocation.

CWMU?s
Split the tags on a 50/50 basis. It may be their land, but they are the public?s animals.
Allocate them according to weapon type.

Permits/Costs
Eliminate Bonus Points and go to a straight Preference Point system.
Open the 5 choices to any permit (not just the LE system of today)
Raise permit fees by $15 dollars. Keep in a specific fund and not the general fund.
$3 towards predator control
$7 towards habitat improvement
Chaining
Control burns
Nursery plant growing
Reseeding
$5 towards educational programs specific related to Mule Deer
University studies
Hunter Education

Youth Hunters/Tags
Keep the Youth Bull permit.
Eliminate the percentage of tags open to just Youth.
Allow youth to hunt for either longer seasons or more seasons (rifle, muzzleloader & archery).
 
Darin, you are spot on with your thoughts. I like the ideas you have. Thanks for chiming in on this one.
Can someone please give me facts of why a 3 point or better isnt better for most of the general units? I realize there are many other issues to hash out but I can not figure out why soo many people dislike the 3point or better plan. I find it hard to believe that for a place like the southeastern not to benefit significantly from this. The problem on the southeastern is that the bucks just never get a chance to get past the age of 2 or 3.
 
Rammu, Utards shoot first and count point later. I like the idea but it wont work. How about no adults poping spikes or two pts unless there with a youth hunter???
 
Looks like it has finally happened. The Utah sportsman are tired of being pushed around by SFW. Tony, I just want to say thanks for taking a stand. I don't really think I need to expand to much on the corruption that we all see in SFW. The sad thing is that they took a good idea in the SFW and totally ruined it.

Unfortunatly it is going to keep happening unless we stand up for our hunting rights.
 
"Trophy Hunting" "Real Hunting" "Party Hunting" Wow what ever happened to "Deer Hunting"?
Unfortunately mule deer in all states are struggling. Out of one side of the mouth comes the only fix is habitat out of the other side is we need to manage hunters in order to fix the herd. The sad part coming down the center is let's pimp Utah's wildlife to finance the solution. I have been as firm as an SFW supporter as there is I have also am one of their most vocal critics. However, If anyone gives on opportunity it is one more rung on the ladder to the Kings Deer. IMO this is the only area Utah is leading when it comes to wildlife management and Don Peay and SFW are the reason. The SFW train needs to switch tracks or be mothballed.

I believe that in today's world it is slap in the face of wildlife managers and sportsman everywhere to assert that some form of party hunting be allowed. Maybe our kids should be able to drink a little whiskey as long as dad is along. If you want to provide youth opportunity (which we must) then completely take away the adult competition in the field and make them trainers, mentors and supervisors.

2006 my 14 year old daughter had an elk tag. Best experience of my life. All I had to do was coach her on the art of hunting. When it came time to shoot we watched and worked a herd of elk for 1.5 hours got her in a perfect situation to shoot and then enjoyed the heat of the rut for 20 minutes before taking a 70 yd rifle shot on a trophy bull elk. That is what mentoring is about and DON if you don't understand it then you and your kids have been slighted. It is not about sharing a tag, it is about sharing an experience.

To the jest of my post. I am happy the way it is I don't need a 30" buck behind every bush I don't need a 350" bull behind every bush. What I do need is a season and a permit. I will take my chances my skills against natures. By the way I average a little better than a trophy every 5 years so for me you definetly would be taking away.

I feel sorry for those that think they need to stock the apple barrel, pay an exhorbitant fee in order to dunk in and get the golden apple. Your missing out on one of natures greatest treats a plain old apple picked of a tree in the back yard.


I guess for my mentors filling the freezer was a little more important than hanging a set of horns higher on the barn. I always thought they were real hunters, glad someone corrected my blurred vision.

For 15 years the battle cry has been we are fixing the problem. Well in the past 15 years opportunity has diminished and prices have rose. Just what problem are we creating while fixing the problem?
 
In this months magazines put out by MDF and SFW, the pages are full of habitat restoration projects completed by the respective groups. Maybe some of us aren't 100% happy with everything that is going on, but they are putting millions of dollars on the ground where it will help all wildlife. Remember, we are all in this together.

Utah has managed herds for elk the last decade, and we have become one of the top elk states in the country. Remember when the first 400 pt. bull was taken, now they aren't all that uncommon. It is a success story. I am convinced by the thousands of people crammed in Logan Canyon during elk season, that there is opportunity to enjoy the hunt by all. That is also a success story.

It is now time to focus more on deer. We need to focus in three ares: habitat salvation, predator control, and inter-species competition. When there is a limited amount of high-quality land available for raising young, the larger ungulates simply force the deer into the jaws of coyotes. A USU study found over 80% of fawn mortality was at the mouths of coyotes. Coyotes and habitat loss are killing our deer herds, SFW is at least trying to save them. Furthermore, Tony was right when he said you can't have "premium" elk and deer herds existing in the same units concurrently.

A reasonable alternative, in deer units, seems to be a 4 point or larger restiction on some units. Maybe I'm cold-hearted, but I don't enjoy driving down Franklin Basin (Logan Canyon) and seeing rows of 2-pt bucks hanging from trees in campsites, then hearing people complaining about the lack of large bucks. What if the North Cache was kept the way it is, while the South Cache was 4 point or larger. Then the hunter can pick his/her poison.

One more thing. We complain about the thought of not hunting for 4 out of 5 years. Due to the current process, I haven't hunted bucks in Utah since 2000, the only time I've drawn a LE Deer Tag. If I draw in 2009, it will be probably 20 years before I hunt again. And if I started putting in for elk next year, and gave up on deer. I would hunt the San Juan in approximately 2073. We all sacrifice.

THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN. WHO'S GOING TO FIX IT?

Grizzly
 
what happened to the other post? i posted a question for d peay asking him why sfw doesnt put out their own survey one that doesnt seem to steer hunters. cant wait to listen in on 1320 tonight dont forget guys 7 pm should be interesting.
 
Rammu,

I am with you on the points restrictions. I mentioned it before in an earlier post. You will never convince me that the 3 point or better rule did not help the bucks. It has never been the same since they lifted that rule. I am not saying it is the only way, just to not rule it out. To say it won't work because Utahn's shoot 1st and count later may be true to some extent, but certainly not a reason to shoot down a possible link in the management plan. Remember when it went spike only for elk? Lot's of Utahn's shot 1st and counted later, it has now turned out to be a pretty succesful idea.

Mulepacker,

Once again you hit the nail on the head. I appreciated your comments and insight. You are IMO spot on.
 
Everyone says "utards shoot first and count points later"
I guarantee you that there are a few of such said persons that do this, but think of how many hunters do take the time to ensure that it does have 3 points. And then think of how many of them deer escaped because of the extra few seconds them hunters were taking to ensure there were indeed 3 points.
Secondly, I am pretty sure that on opening day (atleast where im from and hunt) that there would be dozens of less 2 pointers killed off because they are still used to standing next to the road. Hell atleast let some gn shots ring off and give them little one a bit a time to head for the trees, thus giving them more a chance to never be shot at.
 

Similar threads

liecabucks
Seeking Wyo points partner.
2
Replies
155
Views
7k
TKMulePacker
TKMulePacker
V
Looking for a great mule deer unit in Colorado for youth (my son) with 5 points (last year as a youth)
Replies
4
Views
1k
VWiddi1
V
Simpleton
Points are Points
Replies
42
Views
3k
ElmerFudd
E

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_2948.JPG
1977 Wyoming.jpg
IMG_9231.jpeg
IMG_8830.jpeg
20210730_221754.jpg
IMG_0103.jpeg
B27C8281-E54F-43BF-93C5-17B0935965FE.jpeg
A20A788A-0203-485E-BB1E-1F86931E70A3.png
Screenshot_2015-08-24-14-33-23.png
C0D94E78-E196-4122-98F7-8EDA369A8477.jpeg
IMG_4335.JPG
Sweet Velvet Trophy
Back
Top Bottom