limit the weapon

[broadfork]

I know I'm going to get lit up for this, but I was thinking long and hard about this. I like to bowhunt I like to rifle hunt. I don't like muzzleloader because I have missed too many times. I think that the fish and game made the wrong choice on limiting opportunity.

I propose that since there are die hard rifle guys, that don't want to be told to go bow or don't go. We need to limit the range of the weapon by going back to iron sites. We need to get rid of slider sites for bows, fixed pin only, and increase muzzleloader tags, and keep them 1 power magnification.

I love to rifle hunt, I killed my best buck in Idaho this year with my .270 scoped rifle. my heart is that of a bowhunter, and I killed a dandy mulie in Utah with a slider site this year. It makes me sad to think that Utah thinks limiting opportunity will increase our deer. IT WON'T! I love to hunt with a bow here because it lets me hunt deer, and good deer every year.

People we can hunt every year if you limit the weapons capability. The rifle will still kill without the scope. the bow will still shoot out to 60-70 yards without a slider, and if you are a better shot then me you can kill just fine out to 150 with a muzzle gun.

If a guy wants a good deer, hunt harder then the next guy, if you want to hunt as a family tradition, with a gun. Do it, but limit the gun. It seems so simple to me as far as managing hunters. The habitat, and predators are another topic.

Just my thoughts, let me know what you think.
no reason to cut tags, if you go to more primitive weapon.

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

While you're limiting rifles to iron sights let's ban the Compounds and you True Blue StickFlippers can show us how it's done with a Fred Bear Recurve!

God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!

I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!

 

[broadfork]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-10 AT 04:47PM (MST)[p]You know maybe we should have a recurve season, I have a fred bear kodiak, and I can shoot it. My point was not to pit bow hunter and rifle hunter against each other. Bobcat you sure seem hell bent to do just that. The point was to limit the range of the weapons we are using right now. I know that a rifle can shoot out to 200 yards just fine without a scope. It boils down to practice. I can shoot my bow very effectively out to 120. a good muzzle shot can shoot just fine out to 200. I don't have to shoot that far with my bow to kill a deer. A bow by it's nature is limited in range. Even still I said limit the range further without alienating people

I think that the rifle guys that wont like this are the ones that can,t stalk an animal to save their life. Bobcat I know damn well you want to hunt every year, we all do. I also know that you are the kind of hunter that will gladly give up a year or two of hunting for the greater good. I respect that. What people can't seem to understand is we can have our cake and eat it to. I'm willing to limit the range of my preferred weapon to be able to hunt every year. why cant everyone else?

Bobcat you are always talking about wounding game. bowhunters do it. rifle guys do it, muzzy guys do it. I would think you would want a more accurate weapon like a compound bow shooting our deer then a novice with a recurve. I never said go to a musket or a 1840's lever action. shoot that bad ass 300 win mag deer killer. just take off the scope.

we can all hunt every year. dwr still makes money familys still hunt, and less deer die. no brainer.

 

[travishunter3006]

i'd still hunt if i had to use a recurve. it would be really cool. But in the original post, it was said that limiting opportunity will do nothing for the deer herd... are you serious? If we didn't hunt deer for a year, that definitly would mean more deer, which would mean MORE DEER. how does that not work?

We dont need to ban slider sights either. some dont even give you the range out past 70 or 80 yards. plus, this will get back into the everlasting dead horse debate of how far is too far and nobody knows except he that practices, etc. etc....

we dont need to kill less deer. we need to make more deer.

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

broadfork!

Ya I do kinda like to Hunt every year!

I also like to think/know there's a chance of finding something decent rather than knowing for a fact it ain't gonna happen!

You're wrong broadfork,I Hunt with a Bow too,in fact I hunt with all 3 Weapons,but the second somebody says anything about limiting a rifle,I'll pipe back with limiting the Bow,"AN EYE FOR AN EYE"!Then Feathers get RUFFLED imediately!
I'm just sayin..............Technology on all Weapons have advanced..............if We are limiting one Weapon We are gonna limit all Weapons!

No,I don't like to see Wounded animals Limp off & die,I help people every year try & recover animals,it'll happen to the best of anybody sometime in a guys/gals Hunting Career,but the accuracy thing you Preach applies to all 3 Weapons,problem is,the further the Weapon will accurately shoot the further the TARD will try making STUPID shots,don't know how you'll ever prevent that?

I seen a TARD/Archery hunter try a 175 yard shot on a Bull Elk in an LE Unit this year,was that Ethical?Hell no!Yes Rifle & Muzz Hunters do the exact same Stupid SSHIT with their weapons too!

To be truthful with You I have 'just about' as much fun just being with friends that have decent Tags & being part of their hunts!

Think about this broad:2011 will probably be real similar to 2010 as far as management & hunts,there will be a few unlucky people that don't draw a deer tag in 2011,if I am one of those,I'll be helping somebody somewhere having damn near as much fun!

I know what you're saying & I'm not jumping just StickFlippers,just sayin,If some weapons holders have to give a little I think we should all give equally!



God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!

I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!

 

[broadfork]

travishunter3006

I hope your not serious about the whole state not hunting for a year to have more deer. Thats the most retarded way of thinking. If you limit the range of the most effective weapon, you limit the amount of BUCKS killed. And since the die hard rifle guys would cry foul about having to give up there scope, limit the range of the bow as well. I don't want that, but I also don't want to get to the point where I only get to hunt every few years.

Bucks would be more plentiful in a year because the success rate would fall. If hunters are the ones saying we need to stop hunting for a whole year, then they are not thinking it through. I have read numerous posts about bow hunting being the answer. It is only because you have to get close to kill. Not everyone wants to bow hunt. So just make the rest of the hunters get closer to the game.

I agree with you we need to make more deer, but you contradict yourself. "If we didn't hunt deer for a year, that definitely would mean more deer." "We don't need to kill less deer. we need to make more deer." What? We can still hunt. I must be the only one that sees it this way

 

[sticknastring3]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-10 AT 05:58PM (MST)[p]If we are limiting bows and rifles then I say we have to limit them muzzleloaders too. Modern muzzle loaders have come a very long ways in recent years as well. Make them have to shoot ball ammo only, or just ban inline muzzies all together. If you say lets ban compounds, fine I will hunt with a recurve. I would rather hunt with a recurve that join the TARD's in the pumpkin patch. Heck I would hunt with my ol' school muzzy that shoots round balls and uses #10 percussion caps before I would join the TARD pumpkin patch.

I say we just ban rifle hunting all together. I know way too many dimwits that are out in the mountains every year with a rifle. I also know way too many guys that rifle hunt every year and they shoot small yearling bucks, every flippin' year. Way too many yearling deer get slaughtered on the rifle hunt in Utah. Almost everyone that I talk to that rifle hunts is flinging lead at the first legal buck they see.

 

[tailchasers]

Limits to weapons is something states will and do have to concider. Colorado has a fairly stict set of rules for muzzy and I believe it works and provides great opportunity. I see the day were man's technolgy will inevitiably make it necessary. I would welcome such restrictions as the rewards would be gratifying.

 

[zrider2]

OK its settled, Archery guys have to use a bow they made in their back yard with tree limbs, and broadheads made from rocks.

Muzzy guys get an old hand made Hawken cap and ball, with some sort of iron sight.

Rifle guys are stuck with an old .45 LC carbine with open sights too.

For some reason rifle guys forget what a range advantage they have. They think that Archers should be relegated to traditional equipment, but they dont wanna give up their modern cartridges and tactical scopes. Yep things have come a long way, and I think that season lengths currently reflect success rates of the weapons. Regardless if everyone thinks its fair or not. Thats how it is.

Athens Archery Field Staff
Wicked1 Bowstring Staff

 

[broadfork]

I guess i'm not the only one that sees it the way I do. Thank goodness I was starting to think i was up in the night. Bowhunters can not effectively reach the distance that modern rifles can. Even with the latest and greatest bows, and accessarys. That is why the wasatch has 32 to 100 b2d ratio.

Like I said I love to hunt with a rifle. I just would rather hunt with a bow and have more opportunity. The wildlife board just took alot of that away, and they didn't have to.

The deer herd needs help. We all agree. Like I said we can all still hunt whatever weapon we want if we limit the range, and have to actualy hunt. Less deer will die, Bucks will grow older, smarter, bigger. thats also what we want. More mature deer, means does are breed at the right time. Fawn survival goes up. More deer.

Hunters are the deer herds best friend. If we give up hunting, we lose value of the animals. Just like in africa hunter dollars pay for animal survival. If it got to the point where it took years to get a tag, why would we hunt here. lots of opportunity in other states. money leaves Utah. those that can't afford to go out of state lose interest all together. New hunter recruitment goes to hell. we all lose.

I'm just trying to think outside the box. Nobody wants to go to these extremes, even me. But I think that loosing hunter opportunity is the worst thing we can do. I would much rather hunt with a lesser weapon, een a recurve then not hunt at all.

 

[rydub01]

im with ya even tho im in a wheelchair. even tho it would be to my advantage to keep using long distant rifles i hunt with a crossbow to put the sport back in hunting. just cuz you can see it doesn't mean you should be able to kill it. take off the powered scopes and hit the shooting range. get off your wheelers and out of your trucks and use a little strategy to get your game.

 

[longshooter338]

Hold on guys i half to un hitch my team and grease the hubs on my buckboard first, wafj!!!!!!!!!!

 

[slickrock]

OPTION #6.......

100,000 tags any weapon.

Draw only 7 days. Season date 3rd wednsday in Oct.

Eliminate LE units. State wide tag.

95,000 resident and 5,000 non-resident tags.

Resident draw $100.00 non-refundable. Non-resident $1000.00 non-refundable.

Wildlife management? Think about it!

Slick

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

I can hear the Archery Hunters crying you a river slick!

So we're gonna all hunt together?

Out of Staters are gonna Love you too!

So we're gonna throw all 100,000 in one pile in the same week?

God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!

I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!

 

[slickrock]

That's the plan B-Plop! In 5 years Utardia would have the premium muley herd in the world. The DWR would be rolling in dough & everybody gets a little piece of the pie.... 'cept the big money guys of course. LOL!

Slick

 

[Aaron84]

Hey we should just do away with all modern weapons and only be allowed to hunt with a spear. Now that will help the deer herd out.

 

[zrider2]

>Hey we should just do away
>with all modern weapons and
>only be allowed to hunt
>with a spear. Now that
>will help the deer herd
>out.
Yep, I'm with ya! Best solution I've heard yet. Funny stuff right here LOL!

Athens Archery Field Staff
Wicked1 Bowstring Staff

 

[broadfork]

Wow what a sarcastic bunch of guys on here.

I would like to see some solutions here guys. Everyone bitches and moans about the deer. The wildlife board goes overboard I.M.O. Screw the archers, cut the tags. Anis said that NONE of the options would increase the herd.

I bet if everyone was honest about it. Guys would rather be out atleast trying to get a buck, rather then hoping they draw a tag in a few years. I know that bowhunting is not for everyone. I get that. So why don't we go to a less effective means.

The cream will rise to the top. If you think you are a great hunter then challenge yourself. I would hunt with a recurve over not getting a tag any day. I love to hunt. I live to hunt. If i don't get a buck, then the buck won. Good for him, but i will love the challenge of it. Thats why i choose to bowhunt here anyway.

if nothing else they need to have more muzzle tags. Still a rifle, but its a lot tougher, and you don't hunt in a pumpkin patch. It cant have more then 1 magnification. It is exactly what i am saying here.

I hate the fact that I have to wait years and years to hunt a big bull elk. I don't want our deer herd to be managed the same way, and thats what it looks like it's going to be

 

[zrider2]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-10 AT 09:55PM (MST)[p]I'm with ya here, I'll do whatever to be able to keep hunting. Problem is you'll be accused of being a "whiny Bowhunter". Most rifle guys wont put down their choice of weapon, and that is definately their choice. I think that their should be more Archery tags available just because of the lower success rate.

Maybe rifle guys will have to ultimately decide if they love their weapon more than they love hunting. It truly is sad to see things like they are. I remember back when you could hunt all 3 seasons. A guy should be able to hunt every year, with what weapon he chooses, and have a decent chance at a buck. Thats just not in the cards right now. It sucks, but we need to do whats best for the deer, whether that be cutting tags, or moving more towards archery. Right now we cant have our bucks and kill em all too.

Athens Archery Field Staff
Wicked1 Bowstring Staff

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Something to consider here; you want to see some serious lobbying going on, just put a proposal like that on the table. Every optics company in the world will be screaming. Hunting is too big of an industry to start limiting modern technology. Companies spend millions of dollars in R&D and believe it or not these companies contribute to the wildlife you and I are hunting. Not saying that's the way it should be, but standing in the way of modern technological advances is risky business.


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[desertpointbrian]

sounds like more wounded animals that are not retrieved to me

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

Ya!

Let's tell the manufacturers we don't want their high dollar trash anymore,for GAWDS Sake it destroyed the Mule Deer Herd in TARDville!

If you think by taking my 1X scope off my Smokepole is gonna help,go ahead & take that POS,I can see better with my eyes than I can through that damn thing!

Just so you know:A 1X Scope is actually a de-magnification to the average Human eye!

But it all sounds good!

I'm sure if it happened(which it won't!) they'd soon have a new Fred Bear Recurve Bow on the market that would shoot/kill at 200+ yards & everybody would buy one!

God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!

I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!

 

[broadfork]

Seems to me that if people new they had to learn how to hunt to kill there would be less wounded animals. It is difficult to get within effective range of a mule deer. Most guys i know can shoot a bow great, but they struggle to get within 20-30 yards. Myself included.

people used to hunt with open sites a few decads ago, still deer got shot. guys kill every year with open sites on their muzzle gun hunt. People would just need to adapt to the fact they cant just lob lead, arrows as soon as they see the deer. You might have to cross that canyon, stratagize, actually hunt.

The point is I want to hunt. I will hunt, if I can't get a utah bow tag I will go to Id, Wy whatever. I know that not everyone can do that. I also know that if we don't change the way we think then we can just figure we wont be able to hunt. I guess we can alwys just get a camera and take pictures. Oh wait you have to get close to do that too.

 

[travishunter3006]

broadfork,

interesting that you yourself said that if there were more bucks then the does would get bred properly. so if we didn't hunt, that would mean that more bucks survived to breed the does and in the areas that have low buck to doe ratios there would be mre bucks breeding more does which would mean more fawns which woul mean more deer. you said that i contradict myself, but in your post 9 you just agreed with everything that i said. thanks. guess you do finally agree with me

 

[broadfork]

Yes travishunter3006 I agree.

The best thing to do is stop hunting all together. Not enough bucks. Not enough deer. What a dumb idea I had. I think that we should not try and adapt, we should just give up.

I'm sure the Wildlife board, DWR, and SFW will make everything all better.

Utah, the land of lost opportunity

 

[redfrog]

I don't think it's all a matter of limiting every weapon. I think it's more of we need to push limited weapons. We have 100,000 deer tags in the state and only 10,000 go to bow hunters. The weapon with the lowest success has the fewest amount of tags. The other 90,000 tags are in one pool, Rifle/muzzy. They need to designate a larger portion of tags to limited weapons rather than limiting opportunity. More than half of the allotment of tags should be for weapons with limited range limiting the ability of the hunter rather than limiting the hunter be able to hunt.

 

[BrowningRage]

"Utah thinks limiting opportunity will increase our deer. IT WON'T!"...

If you restrict hunting to more "primitive" weapons- you ARE LIMITING OPPORTUNITY. Duh... limiting a hunter's range of opportunity is limiting opportunity.

While your initial argument is flawed (as pointed out above)- I agree that advanced weaponry definitely CAN have an impact on harvested animals... but only harvested does will really dwindle the population... What you are talking about is limiting opportunity on bucks... You're talking about Buckoe ratios... Another good way to raise buck:doe ratios is to kill a lot of does... It's Counter-intuitive...

I agree that we need to use more primitive weapons- but your argument that it is any different than cutting tags doesn't make sense to me. Both are a limitation on bucks harvested- nothing more...


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

 

[desertdeer]

i think redfrog is right on. if we want to increase oppurtunity and decrease the bucks killed we should give more muzz and archery tags and take away some rifle tags. i hunt with any weapon i can draw for and i know that success is best with a rifle. lets get more people hunting and less people killing that way they dont have to give up hunting and the bucks will live. i love to hunt every year and i would rather hunt with a muzz or bow than not hunt even though i know my success may be limited

 

[soutahhunter]

I agree with travishunter, there are not enough bucks to even get around to the does, many of them not being bred which means no fawns like he said. If we quit killing off all of the bucks, just maybe a few more fawns will be born and maybe the deer herd will rebound. Do not believe them when they tell you we have 15 or more bucks to 100 does, I will bet it is under 10 in almost all areas.

 

[broadfork]

"If you restrict hunting to more primitive weapons-you Are Limiting Opportunity. Duh... Limiting a hunters range of opportunity is limiting Opportunity."

BrowningRage you are right it does limit the opportunity of killing, NOT hunting. That is my whole point.

I said already I don't think this is the best solution, I know that. My point is I would rather be out hunting with a tag in my pocket. Even if that means my odds of success go down substantially.

I think personally we need to do exactly what Redfrog said, more tags to archers, and muzzleloaders. To me that makes the most sense, but I have read so many posts on here from guys that think that is unfair.

I think that just hanging it up till we draw a tag in a few years is not going to solve the problem. Just my very humble opinion

 

[elkhuntn247]

thats all fine an dandy and i would do that if i had to. but think about ethics here. compounds are going to do much more damage and put the deer down. cause you know some guys would be out there slingin arrows at 50 and 60 yards with a recurve. then with a rifle you know guys will be doing the same with iron sights.

we want healthy deer not wounded deer just my 2 cents

 

[travishunter3006]

REMOVE 1000 Cougars, DOUBLE the amount of DEER TAGS SOLD! We could DOUBLE the amount of bucks harvested.

like I said before, Reducing the number of hunters is not the right plan of action. 3000 cougars at 30 deer a week per cat = 90,000 dead deer a year. (we all know that this number is higher) killing 1000 cats = 30,000 less dear deer. we only kill 20k+ bucks a year. i bet those cats eat both bucks and does.... killing some of them would allow us more opportunity at HUNTING and KILLING.

 

[azhoss]

whats wrong with the way it is?
as soon as hunters start saying we need to limit weapons and ban trail cameras and etc... the anti hunters win! there are solutions im sure, but banning ANYTHING is just helping the ANTI"S out. just think about it

 

[prn]

You guys just don't get it. The majority here believe that if they can't hunt, then you shouldn't either. It doesn't have anything to do with what could help the deer or future hunter recruitment. You could produce the most convincing evidence in the world of the benefits of increased short range weapon hunts, but they won't see it. All they notice is that "someone may get more meat in their stew than I will."

 

[BrowningRage]

Thanks for the clarification broadfork- you are right about Opportunity to HUNT vs. Opportunity to KILL...


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

 

[Dikndirt]

Some states have already started to limit weaponry and accessories. MT has outlawed trail cams during season and radios . Colorado tried to outlaw in-line muzzys...that failed but you cant use sabots, scopes or pellets there. Idaho limits bows to 65% let off or less. I think as technology advances more restrictions will have to be put in place or hunting opportunity will continue to diminish. I am all in favor of making it harder to harvest. It may be the only way to save our opportunity to hunt in the long run.

 

[Gator]

Missed the popcorn now I will have to sit thru the second half hungry.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".

 

[stillhunterman]

If someone wants to limit the efficiency of their weapon as a personal choise, go for it. But if you are advocating that method of hunting as a way of managing the health of the deer herd well...I don't buy it. I don't see hunters as the "culprits" in the declining mule deer numbers in Utah or any other western state. Frankly, hunters just might be the last and best hope for the future of muleys.