Additions to the 2012 Deer Hunt Rule

[wileywapati]

CWMU Hunts will be of the same duration as the General Season Hunt in the Region / Unit. Hunts will end the same date as the General Season hunt ends for that species.

Landowners will be awarded one permit per section ( 640 acres )
of land owned and hunt in the time frame / duration as listed above. NON TRANSFERABLE EXCEPT TO IMMEDIATE FAMILY.

Guides will draw one unit for deer and one unit for elk PER YEAR. These permits will be allocated per unit by percentage of PUBLIC DRAW permits available at 1%. Once a guide draws his permit for the unit and species he's done. He can pack as many clients as he wishes in to the Region / Unit but once the season ends or his clients fill their tags the Guide is done in Utah for the year.

Limited Entry Deer Hunts will Follow General season dates in duration and timing.

Any depredation / mitigation hunts will be carried out by Division Personnel.










2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE

 

[grizzly]

I like it. Finally DWR isn't catering to the guys with the most $$$$.

CWMU's needed their wings clipped badly.

Grizzly

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-09-10 AT 07:03PM (MST)[p]WW - where did this come from? If that's true, I can think of 3 CWMU landowners that will pull out of the program and close their land to public hunting. No questions asked. These guys could care less about lost money for hunting. They don't hunt their own land anyway and they don't need the money. That will total approximately 120,000 acres of lost opportunity. I know there are a lot of people that don't like the CWMU program but it's been good for Utah's wildlife.

The guide thing I would agree and support. That has been a long time coming.


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[wileywapati]

Jim I have no problem with any CWMU or Guide or Landowner.

What I am passing along is some feedback from hunters that have called me in the last several days. Many General hunters were limited to three days, actually 1 1/2 when you figure in weather.
They want to know why they were limited and the CWMU down the road was not??

I've had the same feedback concerning elk and transferable
tags. Just passing along what I am hearing...

Personally I do have a problem if General Season Hunters are limited to three days when CWMU's are not.. But I don't have a woody towards anyone in particular. If we are going to lay down what is fair lets get r done.



2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE

 

[elkun]

good.... those cwmu s need cut way back. 10 PERCENT IS A JOKE. UNLESS YOU ARE THE OUTFITTER.......

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Let me ask you a question elkun. How do you feel about the loss of the expo tags out of the public draw? Go ahead and start putting all kinds of restrictions and taking away hunting days and the public will lose a lot more than 200 tags. By the way, I'm NOT the outfitter anymore.



It's always an adventure!!!

 

[Flint]

I don't understand why some hunters are so resentful against CWMUs. The program opens up PRIVATE land that would otherwise be unavailable.

Hunters can get information about any CWMU long before the application date. If they don't want to hunt one that restricts hunters days, then they can apply for a different one or hunt on public land.

 

[elkun]

a.w.bull,i dont think any tags should go to any body' but the gen' public. that means expo. banquets. ect.. when we first started with these tags ' we could raffle them' give them as a prize. ect. well it wasnt long.till all we could do was sell them to the highst bidder. the big winners.dwr' outfiters' sfw. rmef. mdf. the big lossers the gen. public. does the money help wildlife/? yes. but the gen public is really paying the bill.

 

[fishon]

Jim you mean like losing 13,000 permits, like losing statewide archery, like losing the ability to hunt more then 1 place?

Yes, I would say the public is tired of losing the opportunity to hunt. That is what option 2 did.

Closing off 120,000 acres to the public that they really don't get to hunt anyway is irrelevant.

Grow more deer and we all are happy.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.

 

[grizzly]

Private Landowners can handle their property how they wish, but the DWR holds the cards, not the landowners.

The CWMU program wasn't meant to open private land to the public, since most of those units could be hunted with permission and a general season tag (CWMU tags take years to draw).

The CWMU program was invented to give landowners ways to profit off public deer/elk herds.

We (DWR and the public) hold the trump card. Landowners need to play by the same rules as everybody else, they don't get to prostitute state property for personal gain.

If CWMU's don't like the new rules, they can keep their land for themselves, participate in Utah's Walk-in Access Program, or sell trespass rights for a profit. Buy the game management needs to be the same for everybody.

Why does Deseret Land Livestock get longer seasons than the landowner down the road hunting the same herds? It doesn't make sense from a biological standpoint. They own the land, not the animals.

Grizzly

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-10 AT 03:43PM (MST)[p]...

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

>Let me ask you a question
>elkun. How do you feel
>about the loss of the
>expo tags out of the
>public draw? Go ahead
>and start putting all kinds
>of restrictions and taking away
>hunting days and the public
>will lose a lot more
>than 200 tags. By the
>way, I'm NOT the
>outfitter anymore.
>
>
>
>It's always an adventure!!!

But yet you're in favor of option 2 which is cutting 13,000 people out of hunting.

 

[travishunter3006]

can someone explain a little more in detail the whole bit about outfitters?

they only get to guide in one region per species and thats it?

 

[spotit1st]

If thats the case for outfitters then you will see Mossback spliting his business into multiple branchs so he can gain more access to areas. I would like to know a little more about how this is going to work for them if there is only going to be a few guides in every region/unit then I see a lot of people starting their own guding business to dilute the oppurtunity from those who have ruled the roost I know I would consider doing so with my family if we get an entire region to ourselves and don't have competition from other outfitters, I mean who wouldn't want to take advantage of that!

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Come on Tony. This isn't an option #2 question but thanks for the jab I know you have to lobby when and where you can. We are talking about a CWMU question not option 2. But go ahead and cut those tags out of the equation. Take a wild guess at how many tags that public loses if the CWMU program is cut. Those tags you buy on a regular basis go bye bye. All those tags you used to pimp won't be around will they? Now, do you want to stay on subject or start another thread?


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

And I Quote:

"Grow more deer and we all are happy."

So do you think under current management/option 1 or 3 (Or 2 for all it matters!) that We'd be growing more Deer?

JFP!

I agree with what you said Tony but GOOD GAWD it ain't gonna fix itself!





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!

 

[BrowningRage]

I couldn't agree more Tony... I honestly hope that the deer herd improves with Option #2... If it doesn't, then it's nothing but opportunity reduction for the general public.

As far as CWMUs- The information provided makes me happy- CWMUs SHOULD NOT receive special treatment- My problem with them is that they are areas that contain public land- The public MUST HAVE ACCESS to public land... CWMUs were a compromise to this problem, allowing a couple gen public hunters limited access to the land. Compromising our wildlife for the benefit of the private andowner is not my idea of a good program... Down with CWMUs.


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

 

[wileywapati]

SPOT, the Guide deal would go like this. Every Unit / Hunt would have one Guide Permit. I a Unit had 100 total permits then another Guide Permit would be allowed. Wasatch LE Elk could support more than one guide permit. Henry's LE Deer would probably not.

So say pink t-shirt guide service knew there was a 500 inch bull on the Monroe they would have to apply for their "Guide Tag" for that unit. If there was under 100 total permits they would be competing for that one tag. If you and your family wanted to go in to the Guide business, get r done, this is the free market American Dream business model at it's best. Just know if you draw the elk permit for the Monroe thats the only unit you are guiding on that year for elk. Same scenario for all of the other big game species.

These Guide Permits would be tracked just like a public tag. If you obtain two permits you are breaking the law just like a general season hunter would if he had two buck deer permits in the same year. Penalties would be the same. Including loss of hunting privliges in the participating compact states. There would be no reason to have to work under a "large guide service" since most people that would be serious about getting in to the guiding profession would be funded well enough to cover insurance
and everything else that goes along with being a guide.








2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE

 

[hilltop]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the CWMU'S use public land in their units? if so then why would that completely take away those tags? because that would open up public property as long as it has access to it.

 

[goofyelk]

WW,,Were can this info be found?
I even spoke to a couple of DWR personal a couple hours
ago, they had heard nothing about these changes..
I cant even find it on the audio from the board meeting?

 

[ELKOHOLIC]

Goofy, This is all make believe pretend stuff.....

 

[goofyelk]

I should have known better,,,Thx EH.

Its funny though, the way things are changing, NOTHING would surprise me...

 

[stillhunterman]

>I should have known better,,,Thx EH.
>
>
>Its funny though, the way things
>are changing, NOTHING would surprise
>me...
>
>

I hear ya goofyelk... I have a feeling a lot more changes are going to be in the offing with regards as to how things are to be accomplished in the future here in Utah...and for the better IMO ;-)

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

CWMU units don't have public land. They are made up of private ranches. Some CWMU's are formed as a COOP between landowners to make up enough acreage for tag alotment. Others are huge parcels that one landowner has. The number of tags a CWMU gets is based on the number of acres. Then a certain percentage of those tags is given back to the public draw for the hunters who draw those tags to hunt private ground. The liberal seasons are based on the public tags. There are also "landowner permits" that are NOT part of the CWMU program. They are not as liberal and hunt the same seasons that you and I hunt. There are a lot of things that are involved with the CWMU program that the general public doesn't necessarily understand. I think there are a lot of misconceptions out there. Of course, there are the bad apples that spoil it for those that abide by the rules, just like anything else. It's actually a lot of time and effort to have a CWMU so if they start posing a lot of regulations you will see a lot of these landowners opt out. The only people that lose on this deal is the public. 100's of permits will be out of the elk and deer pool.

As far as the guide/outfitter thing goes, it's been a long time coming in Utah. This will keep every NON Licensed tom ##### and harry off the mountain. All those guys running illegal outfitting businesses will be out of their ear! Wyoming does something similar to this right now. Utah has needed to regulate the outfitting business for a long time.


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[hilltop]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-11-10 AT 11:57PM (MST)[p]CWMU's do use public land! maybe not all of them, but they do look it up on the DWR's web site and it breaks it all down for you.

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Post a link up will ya hilltop? I can't find the information you are referring to. Thanks.




It's always an adventure!!!

 

[PleaseDear]

http://wildlife.utah.gov/HAM/public/list_cwmus.php



There ya go Jim.

Click on the CWMU name and it breaks it all down for a guy.
Scroll down a ways and it has the private acres and the public acres if any......or many....


Anyways-------


I am a little confused about this whole thread.
Is this all fact and has been added to the 2012 plan or is it complaints from hunters that would like to see these idea's implemented????

Thanks

Robb

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

No. WW just posted things that people have talked to him about and some ideas others have thrown out. The DWR doesn't know anything about any of this.



It's always an adventure!!!

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Hilltop/PleaseDear - thanks for posting that stuff up. The CWMU's that I have had the opportunity to hunt and Outfit on have all been comprised of private land only. I was not aware of the public land issue being involved with CWMU's. Do you know if these public acres are landlocked? There are large parcels of public land that are landlocked in Colorado but they have to provide public access to them. I really like the CWMU program but I'm not sure how I feel about the public land issue.


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[Tree]

I did a breakdown of public vs. private land included in CWMU's several years back. One that I recall as being a big "wow" was Double Cone CWMU, it was almost 50/50 public vs. private.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned (Maybe I missed it) is that the more public land that exists within a CWMU, the more public tags are given out in the draw. Seems fair to me, other than access to public lands for recreation other than what the CWMU is designated for are often times restricted. Many of the public parcels in CWMUs are landlocked. I guess getting right of way to these parcels is a case by case scenario, but I think land swaps could be pushed through, making the public pieces available for public recreation.

I sure as hell wouldn't own a piece of property that was inaccessible. Oh wait, we all own these pieces........

 

[nebo12000]

The RACs haven't heard anything about Guide tags or one guide per unit. Maybe it will be brought to the RACs but I haven't heard anything yet.