Rac Results

fishon

fishon

Very Active Member
Messages
1,052
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 12:36PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 12:30?PM (MST)

Northern rac option 1, kick out 7,000 hunters for no biological reason
Central rac option 1, kick out 7,000 hunters for no biological reason
Southern rac option 2, kick out 13,000 hunters for no biological reason
Southeastern rac option 2, kick out 13,000 hunters for no biological reason
Northeastern rac option 2, kick out 13,000 hunters for no biological reason.

SFW, option 2, kick out 13,000 hunters for no biological reason
DWr option 1, kick out 7,000 hunters for no biological reason
MDf option 1, kick out 7,000 hunters for no biological reason.

SFW and MDF represented this support of kicking out hunters for no biological reason at every rac meeting.

Mule deer survey to 18,000 Utah deer hunters, 70% say the opportunity to hunt is more important then anything else. Translate that into the entire # of deer hunters and it mean out or 94,000 licensed deer hunters 65,800 want the opportunity to hunt more then anything else.

Lets see if the wildlife board listens to the VAST majority of the hunters or if they listen to the vocal few.



Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
None of these options address the key issue...which is the health and viability of mule deer in Utah.

Shouldn't that reign, and be of more importance than people's demand for opportunity?

Let's just continue to claim there are 300,000 (+/- 5,000 according to Bill Bates) deer in this state, and continue to just keep issuing 90,000 + tags. Incredibly brilliant management strategy!

Let's educate these "opportunists" that if they do not become part of the compromise... the opportunity they claim is so important may not be available to them in the future...simply due to a lack of deer because nothing was done about the declining deer population in this state.

Let's put the deer herd first...not hunter opportunity.

Let's think about the future, not just about what we can get tomorrow.

BowHuntr
 
BowHuntr, your argument is not biologically sound. The lower the buck to doe ratio the healthier the herd assuming all the does are being bred.

The limit to a healthy deer herd is not how many and how big the bucks are. It's exclusively based on carrying capacity of the winter range. The larger the percentage of bred does you have, given a certain carrying capacity, the "healthier" the herd.

If we want to grow our deer herd we need to harvest more bucks, increase predator control and improve winter range.

Cheers,
Pete
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 10:06AM (MST)[p]agreed we need more deer but not more bucks

countless studies show cutting buck tags does nothing for the deer herd and actually in some cases hurts a deer herd, So why are we doing it when we should be producing more fawns and making sure they survive.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
And that is why Nevada, Colorado and Arizona manage their units, because it does not work!!!

If we continue to let everyone hunt who wants to, we will soon not have to worry about it, at their wont be any deer.

The reason there is not a big deer herd is that the buck count is so far off. There is really not enough buck to even get around to all the does. Take a look at the herds of does with no buck in them.

I was so impressed to see even our young hunters were willing to cut hunting pressure in order to help the buck doe ration.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 10:22AM (MST)[p]You are 100% wrong and every study shows it. I have one that just came from Colorado that proves after 15+ years of cutting their buck tags they have actually hurt there overall deer herd health.

These are not my studies or numbers these are facts.

Wake up people, quit putting more bucks on the winter range that take valuable nutrients from yearling fawns and pregnant does




Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
My point was, that we cannot continue with the current mule deer management strategy, as it relates to mule deer populations in this state. The DWR can't continue to preach the same rhetoric every year as to why they think the current management strategy should stay in place.

There are debate over a lot of variables regarding mule deer.

Fawn recruitment is probably the most important variable that needs attention IMO.

The UDWR make the same claims every year.

1. We are not proposing changes because the majority want opportunity.
2. The habitat in Utah is at carrying capacity in regard to mule deer.
3. Our population estimates are not off by much.

Something has to change. More studies via management studies, habitat studies, research studies, upgraded deer inventories, enhanced data analyses etc... They need more accurate and more representative data about what is really happening on the ground.

BowHuntr
 
How can you even think the habitat is not good in these southern areas. We have all kinds of good habitat for these deer, but if no deer are out their to eat it, you are probably right it goes bad.

You keep going off stats, but all the hunters at all of the meetings do not think there is close to 300,000 deer or 15 bucks to 100 does.

I am sure there are many factors to loss of deer herd, but not enough bucks to go around is certainly one, and one we are willing to try and help. At least by going to units you can take closer look at what is going on and make some adjustments.

Again you cannot tell me that Nevada, with habitat worse than ours can have such a good hunt for their hunters.
 
And when we continue to kick hunters out of the sport we love for NO biological reason at a time when Hunting and Guns are under attack we are simply cutting our own throats.

And you that support the cuts are the ones doing the cutting

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
The Henry Mountains is a good or great deer hunt if we are talking about big bucks, but the actual deer herd and habitat is some of the poorest in the state.

Nevada limits is hunters so it makes more bucks which gives you that don't know the appearance of a great deer herd. In actuality Nevada is a poor state for mule deer herds.

Utah has more bucks then are needed to breed ALL the does several times over.

This is a issue where a handful of you want to trophy hunt at the expense of the masses. THAT IS A FACT.....

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
Tony,

I think you make some great points.

However...your claims are based off of the Division's population estimates and buck-to-does ratios. Meaning you must have some trust in the accuracy of these numbers.

I think a lot of people in this state do not have trust in these numbers, even former division biologists.

I think these numbers/estimates need A LOT of attention.

BowHuntr
 
Or in your case, people who want to hunt at whatever cost to our deer herd.

WE CAN NO LONGER DO THAT
 
I have had a general season deer tag every year since 1986 other then the 2 years I served a mission. That is 22 years. I have hunted all of those 22 years and have chose to only kill 2 bucks.

But I hunted and put money in to the economy and introduced my kids and friend in to hunting that put money in to the economy.

YOu will see that as we lose hunters we lose our voice and we will lose our chance to hunt.

My son is 16. This was his 3rd year of hunting in Utah and he has CHOSE to not kill a buck but he still hunted.

In 1993 there was 140,701 Buck hunters in Utah
In 1993 there was 24,793 Bucks killed in Utah

In 2003 there was 97,000 buck hunters in Utah
In 2003 there was 25,000 bucks shot in Utah

in 2009 there was 94,000 buck hunters in Utah
in 2009 there was 23,000 bucks shot in Utah

The only difference between these years in the number of hunters. The actual bucks killed stayed about the same. So we have 46,701 fewer hunters now then we did in 1993 and we still kill the same amount of bucks.

Explain how kicking hunters out of Utah saved any bucks?

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 10:57AM (MST)[p]c3,

I never made the claim that management needs to target the number of bigger bucks.

My claim was...we need change. And I beleive before that "change" occurs there needs to be a lot of questions answered about our mule deer herd here in Utah and the variables associated with it.

You might want to include with your "healthier" analysis...a more accurate number of buck-to-doe ratios, and the number of does bred 1st vs 2nd cycle vs none at all.

BowHuntr
 
Again that is according to stats, that most hunters no are not accurate.

I to have hunted every year but two and maybe killed 8 or 10 bucks in 30 years, but I hunt an area that is rich in habitat, no elk, prime water and cover and great genes. The point is the deer are gone, whether it be where the elk are or where they are not.

As I watched are young hunters stand up and even admit they would rather cut tags than see no deer just makes me know even more, these young people get out in the hills and look, they love to hunt just like you and I but we cannot continue down the same path. I will take Colorado, Nevada and Arizona poor deer herd over ours any day.
 
fishon,

How do you know there are plenty of bucks to breed ALL the does?
Have you gone out and witnessed this in all areas of the state of Utah?
Or, are you taking DWR's word for it?
Has there ever been a study to confirm the fact that ALL does are being bred.
If you have only killed 2 deer in the last however many years as you say,(and I think that's great that you choose not to kill) but have pumped money into the economy, why do you need a tag to do that. Just put on your orange vest, take your binoculars
and head to the hills without a gun, and enjoy.
I'm being a smartass yes, but your arguments about biology are not sound, unless you are a mule deer biologist?
 
One more time. I grew up in Kanab and watched the pauns go from extremely low deer numbers, to the best unit in the world by closing it to hunting for five years. The proof is in the pudding. Can't argue with the facts.
 
fishon I would like to read that report you mention from Colorado. Where could I get that info? What was the deer population in those years 1993,2003,2009? quest
 
The whole discussion of "tag numbers based on buck to doe ratio" has an emphesis on growing bigger bucks and has nothing to do with the health of our deer herds. It is exclusively based on trophy production or the perception of trophy production.

Anyone asking to limit buck tags to increase buck to doe ratio from 15:100 to 18:100 is asking for our deer herd to be substandard.

I won't argue that more accurate numbers can be usefull. I just don't think the sky is falling as many here are suggesting. Where I've hunted the last 25 years the deer populations are down, but only because of a significant decrease in available winter range. Anywhere the deer have ample winter range they are flourishing in spite of what is being portrayed here.

Cheers,
Pete
 
IMO its time we ran are deer herd as a buisness. When the DWR says that they basically have no control over deer population due to weather, "habitat loss", and other enviromental impacts but they can control buck-doe ratios. Then if we have 302,000 deer and are objective is 350,000 lets see if they can make up the 48,000 deer in bucks in the 3 regions that actually had a set of balls and told the DWR that they're #s and they're prefered management plan was crap, and see wich regions have a better mule deer herd. Lets see how many people apply for fishon's 8-10 buck per 100 doe units. Better yet everyone that wants 8-10 bucks per 100 need not apply for the units that have over 10 bucks per 100. HAVE FUN SELLING THOSE TAGS! You couldnt give those tags away. Think your kids are gonna have fun knowing that they can hunt forkys every year with a chance at maybe a 2 year old 4 point. Maybe, until they relize whats over in the next unit. Bucks are what people hunt not does and until we are at carrying capacity bucks are not starving the does into extinction. That has to be the worst argument yet.
P.S. anyone that thinks the henrys, pauns, the books, ect. has a worse deer herd now than when they closed them needs they're head examined!
 
c3,

The people that are aware of the bigger issue here, are not concerned with buck to doe ratios. They are concerned with the health and viability of the state's mule deer herd.

"Anywhere the deer have ample winter range they are flourishing in spite of what is being portrayed here."

That's a pretty bold statement to make c3. You must have ample knowledge of every deer herd in this state that no one else has to make a claim like that. I would love to hear more about it if you have the time.

Utah's deer herds and the word flourshing should not be used in the same sentence. I think you'll find that the majority of people will disagree with you on that statement.


BowHuntr
 
One last thing, the survey that the polled 18,000 deer hunters out of 94,000. REALLY, REALLY. They never polled me. Thats not even a 1/4 of the hunters and who knows how they picked the people to get polled. Man thats a weak and a flawed study if ive ever seen one. Thats a real stretch to project 18,000 into 94,000. STUPID!
 
Tony
I think you are right on. I support the option 2, but I am also a selfish trophy hunter and I admit it. If the DNR was to managed for what the majority of hunters want, they should go back to unlimited tags with no caps and get rid of doe tags. We kill the same number of deer every year no matter how much we seem give back (shorter seasons, less tags, region choice, more expensive tags, muzzy out of rut, etc.) I dont think it is possible to destroy a deer herd by just shooting bucks. Enough bucks will survive to get the does bred. Of course I dont think you will have very many mature big bucks like I want to see. The majority wants to hunt every year, even if it means no big bucks. The DNR is trying to make everyone happy and just seem to make everyone mad. I predict that not much is going to change in Utah.
 
>The Henry Mountains is a good
>or great deer hunt if
>we are talking about big
>bucks, but the actual deer
>herd and habitat is some
>of the poorest in the
>state.

If closing the Henry's for a couple years then limiting tags can change one of the poorest habitats in the state to arguably the best unit in the world, what could be done with the best habitats?
I don't want to see the whole state managed like the Henry's but the fact is, the Pauns, the Book Cliffs and the Henry's all went from near zero bucks to producing record class bucks in only a few years by decreasing the tags available to 0. Your argument that limiting tag numbers does nothing to limit harvest doesn't include these examples. There has to be a point at which limiting tag numbers decreases harvest. That's what I'd like to see, even if we have to cut tag numbers in half, or close some really bad areas for a few years.
I haven't bought a general season tag since 1999, and I don't plan on buying one again until something changes. Giving up hunting every year, which I've already done, is fine with me if the quality is there.
 
ktg

A -FREAKIN-MEN. THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDIN. IF WE QUIT KILLING THE DEER THEY WILL COME BACK. As far as I know it has worked 100% of the time Utah has tried it. Henries, Paunsagaunt, Bookcliffs, and Bumblebee are all examples of it working. How can anyone argue with what has been proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, to work.
Take a look at what works and replicate it.
HELLO!!!
 
>ktg
>
>A -FREAKIN-MEN. THE PROOF IS
>IN THE PUDDIN. IF
>WE QUIT KILLING THE DEER
>THEY WILL COME BACK. As
>far as I know it
>has worked 100% of the
>time Utah has tried it.
> Henries, Paunsagaunt, Bookcliffs, and
>Bumblebee are all examples of
>it working. How can
>anyone argue with what has
>been proven, beyond the shadow
>of a doubt, to work.
>
>Take a look at what works
>and replicate it.
>HELLO!!!


BUT yet all of these units are still below population objectives even with the limited number of tags. The vernon unit has never really recovered even with the closure. I remember when you would see large groups of deer, but you dont see this now like before. Remember when they issued 1,000 tags and deer were all over the place. It was easy to see 400 deer in one day.
 
Yes, because the DWR killed two many damn does. We need to quit killing the damn deer and they will come back.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 03:25PM (MST)[p]>>ktg
>>
>>A -FREAKIN-MEN. THE PROOF IS
>>IN THE PUDDIN. IF
>>WE QUIT KILLING THE DEER
>>THEY WILL COME BACK. As
>>far as I know it
>>has worked 100% of the
>>time Utah has tried it.
>> Henries, Paunsagaunt, Bookcliffs, and
>>Bumblebee are all examples of
>>it working. How can
>>anyone argue with what has
>>been proven, beyond the shadow
>>of a doubt, to work.
>>
>>Take a look at what works
>>and replicate it.
>>HELLO!!!
>
>
>BUT yet all of these units
>are still below population objectives
>even with the limited number
>of tags. The vernon unit
>has never really recovered even
>with the closure. I remember
>when you would see large
>groups of deer, but you
>dont see this now like
>before. Remember when they issued
>1,000 tags and deer were
>all over the place. It
>was easy to see 400
>deer in one day.

So our options are what? Have under-objective units more like those that were closed and now are limited, where finding a buck larger than a yearling can be done by a 2 year old, or have under-objective units like the general areas now, where if you find a yearling buck you should consider yourself lucky? I'll take the 1st option.
There may be general areas now where some will find a few bucks, but not the region I hunt. One of my boys shot a spike opening morning (he decided that after last year that he better shoot when he found something if he wanted anything). At noon we went through a check station at the bottom of the mountain. They said they had checked 12 bucks, one of them was a 4-point! They thought that was pretty good. That mountain is huge! I think that's pitiful.
Limiting tag numbers isn't THE solution, but it is one of a number of items that need to be addressed.
 
BTW how many does are killed in the Bookcliffs and the Vernon units. It seems like to me the place should be over-run with does so that we are forced to have a doe hunt.
 
If your only finding yearing bucks year after year then maybe you need to change your hunting tactics. I could show you a lot of bucks during the summer time on public land just from a spotting scope.
 
Like I said, I'm sure there are areas of the state where there are bucks. And finding bucks during the summer is a little different than during hunting season.
 
A different point of view outside of Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico. I live in western Nebraska. You can archery hunt for 3+ months. Rifle hunt during the rut. Muzzy season is the entire month of december which is the end of the rut. Unlimited archery and muzzy. Tons of rifle tags but there is a cap. You can harvest 2 bucks per year. Most tags are either sex. They harvest the living crap out of the deer in this state, bucks and does. Some places you have to harvest a doe to validate a buck tag. I am talking mule deer and whitey's. No difference between the species in this state (except for one little area).

Just by reading the above, you would think there are no deer in this state. Even with the large amount of deer harvested each year thru the ample opportunities allowed, the population is still over objective. And not just a little over objective. There are deer everywhere.

It is all about habitat and predation in my eyes!

I understand that our winters are not as harsh (last year was bad), most ground is private and blah, blah, blah but it still boils down to habitat and predation to me.

I do hunt but have never harvested a deer in NE. I like big deer and very very very few make it to a mature age. Most bucks don't make it past 2.5 years of age. This is the only downfall to having unlimited tags. But the heard is in great shape.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 03:56PM (MST)[p]That is why it's called hunting and not shooting. You shouldn't base your whole hunting trip if you get a deer or not. Have fun out there with your family, and if you get a deer than that is a bonus.
 
Farms I would venture you are right. Call me crazy but nebraska is full of farms right i.e. amazing habitat? You probably have a few less lions than we do although I hear your coyotes have a strong presence. And oh private ground. There are some major differences between these two states just like there are major differences between regions and problems facing deer in them. The track Utah currently is on will have utah Buck hunters on a good fall camp trip not a deer hunt. And if this state had unlimitied tags the utah crowd would be left to shooting rocks. Its about to that anyway.


Theres not a damn thing wrong with the habitat in the southern part of the state of UTAH, maybe the north, NOT THE SOUTH I.E. winter range. There are alot of untouched unbrowsed areas just very few deer in them.

It sounds like though a few on here think killin more deer is the way to increase the deer herd in Utah because the habitat that is left will not carry the herd. Not the case in the south boys. Plenty of great winter range unspoiled by homes. There have been huge burns, chainings, bull hog, dixie harrow operations and chaining area maintenance of old reseed chaining areas, but still very few deer. So habitat increased yet the deer still seem to be dissapearing ive watched the deer herd decline for the better part of a decade now in the south.
 
>ktg
>
>A -FREAKIN-MEN. THE PROOF IS
>IN THE PUDDIN. IF
>WE QUIT KILLING THE DEER
>THEY WILL COME BACK. As
>far as I know it
>has worked 100% of the
>time Utah has tried it.
> Henries, Paunsagaunt, Bookcliffs, and
>Bumblebee are all examples of
>it working. How can
>anyone argue with what has
>been proven, beyond the shadow
>of a doubt, to work.
>
>Take a look at what works
>and replicate it.
>HELLO!!!

So, you are stating that you'd like to see the whole state shut down and opened back up with a 97% tag reduction? Brilliant!


www.bowhuntersofutah.com
 
Hey Tony, this statement;

"Lets see if the wildlife board listens to the VAST majority of the hunters or if they listen to the vocal few."

The vast MAJORITY of the citizens spoke up 2 years and ago and voted in the current president we have now. You think that's what this country needed?

I asked close to 50 of my friends if they took the survey. Not one of them did. I didn't take the survey. In fact, I have never been surveyed.

By the way, please give the reference and location of these surveys you are refering to. I would really like to read these for myself. Too many peole spewing numbers with no references to back them up. Thanks.




It's always an adventure!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-10 AT 09:59PM (MST)[p]>Hey Tony, this statement;
>
>"Lets see if the wildlife board
>listens to the VAST majority
>of the hunters or if
>they listen to the vocal
>few."
>
>The vast MAJORITY of the citizens
>spoke up 2 years and
>ago and voted in the
>current president we have now.
> You think that's what
>this country needed?
>
>I asked close to 50 of
>my friends if they took
>the survey. Not one
>of them did. I
>didn't take the survey.
>In fact, I have never
>been surveyed.
>
>By the way, please give the
>reference and location of these
>surveys you are refering to.
> I would really like
>to read these for myself.
> Too many peole spewing
>numbers with no references to
>back them up. Thanks.
>
>

I've never been surveyed either. Even if references are provided for such a survey, I'm not going to believe anything provided by the DWR any more than I believe their deer count numbers.
 
I took the survey, not because I was asked but because I saw it on the DWR website and took it anyways. I thought the questions were manipulative and based on getting the outcome the division wanted.

So we've got a split vote 3/2 with the Racs. The Rac meetings are just a dog and pony show and have no validity, the wildlife board will vote what they want regardless of what the people desire. Just like Obama and his healthcare.

Just get used to the idea that the deer herd in this state will never live up to it's potential.
 
micro management is a step in the right direction. We are not doing that now. Hunters do not regulate themselves. example; They make the monroe a 5 day hunt last year, did everyone that hunts the monroe stay home and wait for the wed. opener? No they went to the pahvant, fishlake, dutton etc. Then what happened on wed. Alot of hunters that had not killed headed to the monroe to have another opening day. Extra pressure was put on these other units then dumped back on the monroe. You want a sub unit to recover, but not by putting more pressure on the surrounding units. Hunters have to be regulated. Hunting is not a god given right. It a management tool to help keep a herd healthy. If you have a herd that is over it's objective population you need to get rid of that surplus to keep the habitat in balance. This attitude that people have that they should get to hunt every year where ever they want is a very selfish attitude. lets start looking at the deer herd and whats best for them not only whats best for us. Micro management is a good way to control individual populations. You've got to be able to control where hunters are hunting. If a sub unit is hurting you can't dump those hunters on another sub unit. We got to do something to get our herds back. Then more opportunity will follow. But until them we all need to give a little. This is what I like about option 2 MICRO MANAGEMENT

a little bit of rambling-- but come on people this selfish attitude is getting old
 
huntnfool
correct me if I am wrong. But under option #1 if a subunit fall's below it's objective in a region it will be put into a recovery unit which in part will have limited amount of tags issued until the herd meets its objective again.
Currently utah's deer herd is being managed in 29 sub units within the five regions. If they cannot manage them correctly now what makes you think they can do it right under option #2. Without huge tag cuts the answer is they can't they don't have the resources the fact of the matter is the way they count herds write know is the same way they will be doing so under option #2 which is very inaccurate to say the least. All you are going to get out of option #2 is less opportunity and bunch more complaining when everyone has to wait 3 to 8 years or in some cases longer to draw a tag to hunt and the herds have not improved any.
 
under option 2 you can limit the maximum amount of hunters to a subunit, which you can't do now. As it is now people gang-rape an area if the herds are migrating or congregating in a small area. Especially in areas like the sands near Kanab when the weather is bad or Tobin wash/Utah hill. It can be an absolute slaughter under the right conditions. Option 2 can minimize the slaughter.

While I like the freedom to hunt a larger area, we do need to put the herds first. I hope option 2 passes.
 
Deadibob, great answer. Sounds like maybe your one of the few who hunts southern region and actually has some experiance.

sidehill, you answered your own question in that they already break the actual units into subunits when gathering data. Thats a big waste when after that you throw em all back together into the 5 regions. If you've already done the work why not just manage the way you gathered data.

Maybe lets give southern, southeastern, and northeastern what they want and give northern and central what they want then everybobys happy. I promise that i'll never apply for north and central if north and central rac supporters never apply for south, southeast, and northeast.

THERE ITS FIXED.
 
Whatever happens "happens" it doesn't really matter you could cut 50000 tags and let each of us hunt every 4 years you can cut the doe tags to zero you could have a moron idea of 3 point or better that sounds like something the people in the basin would think of, REALITY here folks in 3 years we could have a 30 to 100 ratio of bucks to does and in 1 day it could be ruined by mother nature its called winter kill and nobody can address it or figure out how to avoid it.

I like option 1 and hope that is what the people get, option 2 is a waste and won't help the Utah deer problem it will make it worse just like Wyoming. I hope everyone who wants option 2 signs there name to it if we get that option so we can hold you accountable.
 
The problem in Wyoming is that you can hunt until you kill on your unit pretty much. Hunt the bow hunt and then come back for the rifle if you don't kill.

Utah will have you hunt one season on one unit...like Colorado.

There are similarities in these two states.
 
under option 2 you can limit the maximum amount of hunters to a subunit, which you can't do now. As it is now people gang-rape an area if the herds are migrating or congregating in a small area. Especially in areas like the sands near Kanab when the weather is bad or Tobin wash/Utah hill. It can be an absolute slaughter under the right conditions. Option 2 can minimize the slaughter.
While I like the freedom to hunt a larger area, we do need to put the herds first. I hope option 2 passes.

Thanks deadIbob! Finally some common sense.

Slick
 
>The problem in Wyoming is that
>you can hunt until you
>kill on your unit pretty
>much. Hunt the bow
>hunt and then come back
>for the rifle if you
>don't kill.
>
>Utah will have you hunt one
>season on one unit...like Colorado.
>
>
>There are similarities in these two
>states.


You mean Similarities in Colorado, Wyoming? Yeah they both have deer. lol
 
If there are no bucks to breed then you can not grow a herd of deer. It might not be a biological reason, but it common since that this will not work. You have to kill less deer. Period. Bucks and does.
 
"Theres not a damn thing wrong with the habitat in the southern part of the state of UTAH, maybe the north, NOT THE SOUTH I.E. winter range. There are alot of untouched unbrowsed areas just very few deer in them."

Then why isn't there thousands of does/fawns/bucks if the habitat is so fantastic. Where are the deer going? There isn't that many doe hunts down there. So are the aliens capturing our deer?
 
If you call a few nasty winters aliens then there you go. But oh you know everything and and are so smart your totally right lets just keep whacking more deer, and well have more deer. Yeah thats a utopia I dont see bud. Under your arguments we may as well quit shooting coyotes and cougars too yeah that would totally get those deer numbers down. Then we would have som many more deer huh.

Also from another post you claim the Alton CWMU is winter range/poor habitat. HAHAHA!your way out of Whack most of those deer head further east to the nipple, south to the Kaibab, and strip to winter. Also those deer are shot from august through december and get slaughterd all over 89.

Do you have some clue what the aliens are now?
 
>I have had a general season
>deer tag every year since
>1986 other then the 2
>years I served a mission.
>That is 22 years. I
>have hunted all of those
>22 years and have chose
>to only kill 2 bucks.
>
>
>But I hunted and put money
>in to the economy and
>introduced my kids and friend
>in to hunting that put
>money in to the economy.
>
>
>YOu will see that as we
>lose hunters we lose our
>voice and we will lose
>our chance to hunt.
>
>My son is 16. This was
>his 3rd year of hunting
>in Utah and he has
>CHOSE to not kill a
>buck but he still hunted.
>
>
>In 1993 there was 140,701 Buck
>hunters in Utah
>In 1993 there was 24,793 Bucks
>killed in Utah
>
>In 2003 there was 97,000 buck
>hunters in Utah
>In 2003 there was 25,000 bucks
>shot in Utah
>
>in 2009 there was 94,000 buck
>hunters in Utah
>in 2009 there was 23,000 bucks
>shot in Utah
>
>The only difference between these years
>in the number of hunters.
>The actual bucks killed stayed
>about the same. So we
>have 46,701 fewer hunters now
>then we did in 1993
>and we still kill the
>same amount of bucks.
>
>Explain how kicking hunters out of
>Utah saved any bucks?
>
>Tony Abbott
>www.myfreehunts.com


These numbers dont have anything to do with maybe better optics, atv's, gang style hunting were 5 guys spot for the one with the tag (wich i love to help my buddies out whenever i can by spotting for them) long range shooting, ect?

If they had'nt limited the tags theyre would be far fewer bucks than we have now.
 

Similar threads

M
Helping Deer in Region G (and everywhere in WY)
Replies
10
Views
884
Stillwater165
Stillwater165
W
Elk 24-1 or 38-9 worth max points?
Replies
26
Views
2k
Chesterwyo
Chesterwyo
D
Beware of Guided Mule Deer Hunts in Huntsville UT
Replies
97
Views
5k
wstrntines
wstrntines

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_3255.jpeg
10326FE6-BC3E-4B2F-8C3A-3C15F9CC9EEA.jpeg
Puzzle.jpg
Unit 9 2005 060.jpg
2014-08-30 22.23.26.jpg
Deer.jpg
IMG_20200704_153421_246.jpg
359003FC-AEB3-4596-B5BE-46E50564867E.jpeg
9B0F0CD5-D58D-4412-B0C3-AEAA805B8E7A.jpeg
DSCN2599.JPG
8F44F801-995D-46EC-BC36-B91E50B87B36.jpeg
ABA7D332-3617-4D6A-990C-A07EE43E9FA7.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom