IDFG Elk Depredation Kill

R

ramrod8541

Member
Messages
36
Through a reliable anonymous source I heard the IDFG killed roughly 30 elk within the last few days for depredation purposes. This supposedly occurred in the Magic Valley Region. Anybody have any word on this other than hearsay? Like I said I just heard this and don't have any more information on it and I was hoping someone else had heard of something.
 
I heard the same thing, it was in unit 45. What I am curious about is if it was on public ground or private. If private then the land owner should be billed for the service or let hunters in to do the harvesting.


Chuck in Boise
 
I totally agree. Another interesting thing is that it was done under the rug and nobody knew about it. Only reason I found out about it was that I know someone who processed them. Pretty dirty in my opinion either way.
 
Yes, as a matter of fact, they are OUR elk! And it's our tax dollars and revenue generated through our license dollars etc that paid for this slaughter with no benefit toward sportsmen. Where's all the animal rights activists calling out this outrage???
 
This goes back on the ranchers, if in fact it was done on a private ranch, that want reimbursement for the crop damage that the elk or deer do but yet they won't allow any hunters to come in and harvest the animals. This is just another way to get around the system. It's unfortunate that the IDFG says 'how high' when the ranchers say 'jump.' This is the reason the Access Yes programs were created, yet some of the ranchers aren't holding up to their end of it. The access yes program is a great program in my opinion. I'm not saying that every rancher should allow hunters on their property but if the are in fact having issues with elk or deer and still are not allowing hunters then they shouldn't be allowed any compensation for the damages that are incurred.
 
Processing 30 elk is quite a task. He must still be busy cutting and wrapping. Usually these things are hear say and rumors. I always hear about a rancher I know and how many elk they kill a year but if you knew the truth it is all started by people who are jealous of landowners. The fish and game dont go kill 30 elk on a whim from a rancher.
 
>Processing 30 elk is quite a
>task. He must still be
>busy cutting and wrapping. Usually
>these things are hear say
>and rumors. I always hear
>about a rancher I know
>and how many elk they
>kill a year but if
>you knew the truth it
>is all started by people
>who are jealous of landowners.
>The fish and game dont
>go kill 30 elk on
>a whim from a rancher.
>


Thank you for enlightening me on how much of a task it is to process an elk. Like I said it was from a reliable source who in fact works for the butcher where they were taken and they processed the meat and gave it to the soup kitchens. I could give a rats ass if people are jealous of landowners, I'm not. That isn't the issue here. The issue is IDFG killed 30 elk under the noses of the public and didn't say a thing about. You as a hunter should be upset if this did in fact happen, which I am most certain it did.
 
>Processing 30 elk is quite a
>task. He must still be
>busy cutting and wrapping. Usually
>these things are hear say
>and rumors. I always hear
>about a rancher I know
>and how many elk they
>kill a year but if
>you knew the truth it
>is all started by people
>who are jealous of landowners.
>The fish and game dont
>go kill 30 elk on
>a whim from a rancher.
>


Thank you for enlightening me on how much of a task it is to process an elk. Like I said it was from a reliable source who in fact works for the butcher where they were taken and they processed the meat and gave it to the soup kitchens. I could give a rats ass if people are jealous of landowners, I'm not. That isn't the issue here. The issue is IDFG killed 30 elk under the noses of the public and didn't say a thing about. You as a hunter should be upset if this did in fact happen, which I am most certain it did.
 
Why does it bother you so much? That it happened or that it happened without anyone knowing? Or that you didn't get invited to shoot an elk?

You complained earlier in the thread that hunters should be allowed to come Hunt if the ranchers complain. That basically says your ok with it as long as hunters get benefit? Am I reading that right? Here?s the problem with that let's say you own property that u farm for a living you think that the government should tell you. YOU HAVE TO let some Tom, #####, and Harry come on your land to fix an issue that is hurting your ability to turn a profit? Sorry but I would never want to live where the government dictates who I let on my land? You think that's a good idea to let any jack*** with an elk tag come Stomping through your property? Shooting around your house, barn, and being around any farm equipment that could potentially be damaged? I bet if it were your property that you depended on to make a Living you'd think very differently. You may be an outstanding citizen but you cannot assume anyone else who is allowed onto the property would be as respectful to another mans property as you might
Be. Or let's say someone gets hurt while on the property now that rancher can be liable for that individual.

You?re looking at this from just a hunting standpoint there's a lot bigger picture than just that.
 
>Why does it bother you so
>much? That it happened or
>that it happened without anyone
>knowing? Or that you didn't
>get invited to shoot an
>elk?
>
>You complained earlier in the thread
>that hunters should be allowed
>to come Hunt if the
>ranchers complain. That basically says
>your ok with it as
>long as hunters get benefit?
>Am I reading that right?
>Here?s the problem with that
>let's say you own property
>that u farm for a
>living you think that the
>government should tell you. YOU
>HAVE TO let some Tom,
>#####, and Harry come on
>your land to fix an
>issue that is hurting your
>ability to turn a profit?
>Sorry but I would never
>want to live where the
>government dictates who I let
>on my land? You think
>that's a good idea to
>let any jack*** with an
>elk tag come Stomping through
>your property? Shooting around your
>house, barn, and being around
>any farm equipment that could
>potentially be damaged? I bet
>if it were your property
>that you depended on to
>make a Living you'd think
>very differently. You may be
>an outstanding citizen but you
>cannot assume anyone else who
>is allowed onto the property
>would be as respectful to
>another mans property as you
>might
>Be. Or let's say someone gets
>hurt while on the property
>now that rancher can be
>liable for that individual.
>
>You?re looking at this from just
>a hunting standpoint there's a
>lot bigger picture than just
>that.

Honestly, what does it matter to you that it bothers me? It should bother you to if in fact it happened as it sounds. Also, I never said any hunter should be allowed to go onto somebody else's property and hunt. That it was the Access Yes program is designed for. What I did say was that the rancher shouldn't be allowed to receive compensation for those damaged crops if they do not allow hunters. Big difference. I understand this is a slippery slope either way you look at it but quite frankly why should the ranchers profit at the expense of the hunters? Have a look and see for yourself how much IDFG pays out to ranchers and farmers because of these issues. My big argument isn't the fact that IDFG killed 30 elk, it's the fact that every day farmers and ranchers are having more of an influence on IDFG then the sportsmen ever will.
 
>>Why does it bother you so
>>much? That it happened or
>>that it happened without anyone
>>knowing? Or that you didn't
>>get invited to shoot an
>>elk?
>>
>>You complained earlier in the thread
>>that hunters should be allowed
>>to come Hunt if the
>>ranchers complain. That basically says
>>your ok with it as
>>long as hunters get benefit?
>>Am I reading that right?
>>Here?s the problem with that
>>let's say you own property
>>that u farm for a
>>living you think that the
>>government should tell you. YOU
>>HAVE TO let some Tom,
>>#####, and Harry come on
>>your land to fix an
>>issue that is hurting your
>>ability to turn a profit?
>>Sorry but I would never
>>want to live where the
>>government dictates who I let
>>on my land? You think
>>that's a good idea to
>>let any jack*** with an
>>elk tag come Stomping through
>>your property? Shooting around your
>>house, barn, and being around
>>any farm equipment that could
>>potentially be damaged? I bet
>>if it were your property
>>that you depended on to
>>make a Living you'd think
>>very differently. You may be
>>an outstanding citizen but you
>>cannot assume anyone else who
>>is allowed onto the property
>>would be as respectful to
>>another mans property as you
>>might
>>Be. Or let's say someone gets
>>hurt while on the property
>>now that rancher can be
>>liable for that individual.
>>
>>You?re looking at this from just
>>a hunting standpoint there's a
>>lot bigger picture than just
>>that.
>
>Honestly, what does it matter to
>you that it bothers me?
> It should bother you
>to if in fact it
>happened as it sounds. Also,
>I never said any hunter
>should be allowed to go
>onto somebody else's property and
>hunt. That it was
>the Access Yes program is
>designed for. What I
>did say was that the
>rancher shouldn't be allowed to
>receive compensation for those damaged
>crops if they do not
>allow hunters. Big difference.
> I understand this is
>a slippery slope either way
>you look at it but
>quite frankly why should the
>ranchers profit at the expense
>of the hunters? Have
>a look and see for
>yourself how much IDFG pays
>out to ranchers and farmers
>because of these issues.
>My big argument isn't the
>fact that IDFG killed 30
>elk, it's the fact that
>every day farmers and ranchers
>are having more of an
>influence on IDFG then the
>sportsmen ever will.

It doesn't matter to me why it bothers you. However you're the one that brought this up and I'm Simply pointing out the holes in your argument. We obviously disagree which is fine so I'm telling you an alternate point of view.

Yea I agree that it sucks that 30 elk were taken out of the population that will not have a chance to repopulate and therefor give us all a better opportunity to harvest I'm with you there.

However the solution isn't as simple as let hunters do the job or the rancher doesn't get paid. If you put yourself in a ranchers shoes you'd feel the same way. And you say that ranchers have more impact than hunters think of
This way hunting is a hobby for most of us unless your a guide or outfitter. These ranchers are having there incomes effected that's the difference.
 
>>>Why does it bother you so
>>>much? That it happened or
>>>that it happened without anyone
>>>knowing? Or that you didn't
>>>get invited to shoot an
>>>elk?
>>>
>>>You complained earlier in the thread
>>>that hunters should be allowed
>>>to come Hunt if the
>>>ranchers complain. That basically says
>>>your ok with it as
>>>long as hunters get benefit?
>>>Am I reading that right?
>>>Here?s the problem with that
>>>let's say you own property
>>>that u farm for a
>>>living you think that the
>>>government should tell you. YOU
>>>HAVE TO let some Tom,
>>>#####, and Harry come on
>>>your land to fix an
>>>issue that is hurting your
>>>ability to turn a profit?
>>>Sorry but I would never
>>>want to live where the
>>>government dictates who I let
>>>on my land? You think
>>>that's a good idea to
>>>let any jack*** with an
>>>elk tag come Stomping through
>>>your property? Shooting around your
>>>house, barn, and being around
>>>any farm equipment that could
>>>potentially be damaged? I bet
>>>if it were your property
>>>that you depended on to
>>>make a Living you'd think
>>>very differently. You may be
>>>an outstanding citizen but you
>>>cannot assume anyone else who
>>>is allowed onto the property
>>>would be as respectful to
>>>another mans property as you
>>>might
>>>Be. Or let's say someone gets
>>>hurt while on the property
>>>now that rancher can be
>>>liable for that individual.
>>>
>>>You?re looking at this from just
>>>a hunting standpoint there's a
>>>lot bigger picture than just
>>>that.
>>
>>Honestly, what does it matter to
>>you that it bothers me?
>> It should bother you
>>to if in fact it
>>happened as it sounds. Also,
>>I never said any hunter
>>should be allowed to go
>>onto somebody else's property and
>>hunt. That it was
>>the Access Yes program is
>>designed for. What I
>>did say was that the
>>rancher shouldn't be allowed to
>>receive compensation for those damaged
>>crops if they do not
>>allow hunters. Big difference.
>> I understand this is
>>a slippery slope either way
>>you look at it but
>>quite frankly why should the
>>ranchers profit at the expense
>>of the hunters? Have
>>a look and see for
>>yourself how much IDFG pays
>>out to ranchers and farmers
>>because of these issues.
>>My big argument isn't the
>>fact that IDFG killed 30
>>elk, it's the fact that
>>every day farmers and ranchers
>>are having more of an
>>influence on IDFG then the
>>sportsmen ever will.
>
>It doesn't matter to me why
>it bothers you. However you're
>the one that brought this
>up and I'm Simply pointing
>out the holes in your
>argument. We obviously disagree which
>is fine so I'm telling
>you an alternate point of
>view.
>
>Yea I agree that it sucks
>that 30 elk were taken
>out of the population that
>will not have a chance
>to repopulate and therefor give
>us all a better opportunity
>to harvest I'm with you
>there.
>
>However the solution isn't as simple
>as let hunters do the
>job or the rancher doesn't
>get paid. If you put
>yourself in a ranchers shoes
>you'd feel the same way.
>And you say that ranchers
>have more impact than hunters
>think of
>This way hunting is a hobby
>for most of us unless
>your a guide or outfitter.
>These ranchers are having there
>incomes effected that's the difference.
>


If the ranchers income depends on a few elk getting onto their property then maybe they should take necessary steps in trying to deter these animals from getting on there in the first place like with higher fences or with proper land barriers. I'm pretty certain the ranchers use these animals for more as a supplemental income than anything. In fact I'm sure you know that these poor ranchers that you are referring to are selling depredation tags to the highest bidder in a lot of cases. So don't give me that BS about the animals affecting their income. I'm all for a man trying to make a living whether it's ranching, farming or whatever. Where it's an issue is where it affects more people then just themselves but yet they turn a blind eye and expect handouts from IDFG if they start to have issues with certain animals.
 
Depredation tags? That is another interested thing we can discuss. Depredation tags and landowner tags are not handed out by the thousands like everyone seems to think that they are. Also most ranchers are not making money "selling" these tags. Most ranchers dont care because they are too busy ranching to worry about hunting.
 
Not one dime to landowners. Not one tag to compensate them for a natural occurrence. It's their problem and theirs alone.

Also keep your dirty cattle off public land.
Also prosecute the ##### out of landowners illegally posting or blatantly lying to keep hunters off public land.












the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
>Depredation tags? That is another interested
>thing we can discuss. Depredation
>tags and landowner tags are
>not handed out by the
>thousands like everyone seems to
>think that they are. Also
>most ranchers are not making
>money "selling" these tags. Most
>ranchers dont care because they
>are too busy ranching to
>worry about hunting.


Look man it doesn't matter if it's 1000's of tags or 5, if they're selling these tags at all(which they do) then they're basically profiting off of the State of Idaho's resources and that's wrong. Case in point there is a particular rancher in Oakley, Idaho who was rumored to be selling his landowner tags for 5 figures. It does happen and will continue to happen unless rules are applied to them as well.
 
I guarantee elk and deer were here before any farm or ranch. They built their farm or ranch in wildlife habitat, planted a wildlife attractant, and now expect the government and everybody else to pay when they can't keep the animals off their own land?? Talk about a welfare program and entitlement issues..

What if a guy were to open a convenience store in a bad part of Chicago. He repeatedly gets his store broken into and robbed because of this crappy location choice for his shop. Should he then be able to get a check for the government for his losses? Should he get security paid for by the government because of the robberies? Everybody would say heck no. It's the guys own fault for choosing the worst place to open shop.

Why isn't it the exact same in farming and ranching? They chose to make a living this way and they should be responsible for keeping the animals off their own land.

Ranchers and farmers are a part of the biggest welfare program in the west.

We didn't even get into the welfare program that is public land grazing. Or government bail out money. Man, I sure would love to have a career where if I failed everybody else would bail me out.
 
wow....just wow....


497fc2397b939f19.jpg
 
> Another interesting
>thing is that it was
>done under the rug and
>nobody knew about it.
>Only reason I found out
>about it was that I
>know someone who processed them.
> Pretty dirty in my
>opinion either way.


Wow I didn't realize you were such an important fella! Maybe you'd feel a little better if IDGF gave you a call first and ask your permission! I'm not sure, but I'm guessing the reason they didn't do that is because these elk have jack shiot to do with you! Having they been living on your place and eating your food? Didn?t think so.

There are times and places where there are too many elk, and it can be a real problem for ranchers. You should try having a couple in your back yard for awhile and then see how you feel.

And that Chicago analogy....WoW! I hope you were drunk when you wrote that!
 
Good stuff kids. Keep it coming! Kindergarten can be a rough environment, you need to learn how to defend yourselves....
 
>> Another interesting
>>thing is that it was
>>done under the rug and
>>nobody knew about it.
>>Only reason I found out
>>about it was that I
>>know someone who processed them.
>> Pretty dirty in my
>>opinion either way.
>
>
>Wow I didn't realize you were
>such an important fella! Maybe
>you'd feel a little better
>if IDGF gave you a
>call first and ask your
>permission! I'm not sure, but
>I'm guessing the reason they
>didn't do that is because
>these elk have jack shiot
>to do with you! Having
>they been living on your
>place and eating your food?
>Didn?t think so.
>
>There are times and places where
>there are too many elk,
>and it can be a
>real problem for ranchers. You
>should try having a couple
>in your back yard for
>awhile and then see how
>you feel.
>
>And that Chicago analogy....WoW! I hope
>you were drunk when you
>wrote that!

Look ##### not once did I say that I need to be notified, however, I did say that the public needs to be informed either before or after the fact simply because they are technically the property of the State of Idaho. But I'm sure that doesn't matter to a know it all like you. Maybe the ranchers should've thought twice about where they started their ranches and not put them in the middle of a damn migration corridor. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm fairly certain the elk and deer were here before we showed up. I totally understand that at times there are some issues that arise that we as hunters cannot control. I get it. Smoking 30 elk with no explanation should be a concern to all of us though.

Your ignorance towards this subject is just asinine. You can take it or leave it for all I care. I never asked for your opinion as I was just making a statement on a subject that has become quite volatile, so piss of back to Japan, Mr. Hokkaido and let people who actually bring something to the conversation talk.
 
>Good stuff kids. Keep it coming!
>Kindergarten can be a rough
>environment, you need to learn
>how to defend yourselves....


Thanks buddy. Good thing we have you mature folk showing us how it's done. Quite the constructive comment.
 
I know the Oakley rancher that you are speaking of. We have a ranch across the way from him and run cows together. Actually we are distant relatives by marriage. Needless to say he is not selling any tags for 1000's of dollars. As a matter of fact most of their ground is blm and forest service leases and they own very little in that area. Just thought you might like to hear from someone who actually knows and doesn't just listen to ego induced rumors that are founded on jealousy.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-19 AT 00:37AM (MST)[p]Boy Dilrod, you are quite the detective! Yep you got me, I'm in Japan. Must?ve been hard for you to find that in my profile.

I work for the State Department and am stationed here for now. I think running your fingers on that keyboard of yours like you are isn't exactly an intelligent move, but I have a feeling intelligence isn't one of your strong suits!

But like others have said, your a childish, jealous little f***wit whose feelings are hurt. It's been interesting watching how easy you've been triggered... but at the end of the day, you and your feelings aren't worth the sweat off my ballsack.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-19 AT 05:40AM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-19
>AT 00:37?AM (MST)
>
>Boy Dilrod, you are quite the
>detective! Yep you got me,
>I'm in Japan. Must?ve been
>hard for you to find
>that in my profile.
>
>I work for the State Department
>and am stationed here for
>now. I think running your
>fingers on that keyboard of
>yours like you are isn't
>exactly an intelligent move, but
>I have a feeling intelligence
>isn't one of your strong
>suits!
>
>But like others have said, your
>a childish, jealous little f***wit
>whose feelings are hurt. It's
>been interesting watching how easy
>you've been triggered... but at
>the end of the day,
>you and your feelings aren't
>worth the sweat off my
>ballsack.

Wow, you're quite the ignorant tool. No surprise that you work for the State dept. That's pretty much a job requirement. Do us all a favor and stay in Japan.
 
It's amazing none of the IDFG guys have piped up, Corn Mcdonald head biologist for Magic Valley said several times at the Feb. meeting he was going to use kill permits to take care of Elk that bother farmers. In fact he made it quite clear that the only law he needed to follow was to protect the private land owner. He did forget that sportsman pay his salary not farmers, maybe he should take time to listen to guys that spend a lot of time in the woods. Opportunity hunting really? You and the Meateater.
 
>I know the Oakley rancher that
>you are speaking of. We
>have a ranch across the
>way from him and run
>cows together. Actually we are
>distant relatives by marriage. Needless
>to say he is not
>selling any tags for 1000's
>of dollars. As a matter
>of fact most of their
>ground is blm and forest
>service leases and they own
>very little in that area.
>Just thought you might like
>to hear from someone who
>actually knows and doesn't just
>listen to ego induced rumors
>that are founded on jealousy.
>

Thank you for letting me know the story. I appreciate it and I am sorry for the misinformation. It had been rumored for years that that was happening but if you say it wasn't than I have no reason not to believe you. Thanks again.
 
It's really messed up how Idaho bends over backwards for landowners. They live near public land and should be responsible for dealing with the state?s animals they are negatively impacting.

The issue is more with the legislature which is filled with farmers than fish and game personnel applying laws slanted towards landowners.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-19
>AT 05:40?AM (MST)
>
>>LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-19
>>AT 00:37?AM (MST)
>>
>>Boy Dilrod, you are quite the
>>detective! Yep you got me,
>>I'm in Japan. Must?ve been
>>hard for you to find
>>that in my profile.
>>
>>I work for the State Department
>>and am stationed here for
>>now. I think running your
>>fingers on that keyboard of
>>yours like you are isn't
>>exactly an intelligent move, but
>>I have a feeling intelligence
>>isn't one of your strong
>>suits!
>>
>>But like others have said, your
>>a childish, jealous little f***wit
>>whose feelings are hurt. It's
>>been interesting watching how easy
>>you've been triggered... but at
>>the end of the day,
>>you and your feelings aren't
>>worth the sweat off my
>>ballsack.
>
>Wow, you're quite the ignorant tool.
> No surprise that you
>work for the State dept.
> That's pretty much a
>job requirement. Do us
>all a favor and stay
>in Japan.


Yeah what's hilarious is that I do security for these twats and have been for over 10 years in other countries and you hit the nail on the head. This is exactly how 99% of DOS is. I just wonder if he was sad when Hillary CLinton lost like all the other Staties were in Kabul in 2016.
 
>> Another interesting
>>thing is that it was
>>done under the rug and
>>nobody knew about it.
>>Only reason I found out
>>about it was that I
>>know someone who processed them.
>> Pretty dirty in my
>>opinion either way.
>
>
>Wow I didn't realize you were
>such an important fella! Maybe
>you'd feel a little better
>if IDGF gave you a
>call first and ask your
>permission! I'm not sure, but
>I'm guessing the reason they
>didn't do that is because
>these elk have jack shiot
>to do with you! Having
>they been living on your
>place and eating your food?
>Didn?t think so.
>
>There are times and places where
>there are too many elk,
>and it can be a
>real problem for ranchers. You
>should try having a couple
>in your back yard for
>awhile and then see how
>you feel.
>
>And that Chicago analogy....WoW! I hope
>you were drunk when you
>wrote that!


You're right. I should have included the fact that the shop owner would have to actually be selling the crack that is attracting all the thieves to his place in the first place. You clearly have come to a discussion you know nothing about. Move along buddy.
 
>>I know the Oakley rancher that
>>you are speaking of. We
>>have a ranch across the
>>way from him and run
>>cows together. Actually we are
>>distant relatives by marriage. Needless
>>to say he is not
>>selling any tags for 1000's
>>of dollars. As a matter
>>of fact most of their
>>ground is blm and forest
>>service leases and they own
>>very little in that area.
>>Just thought you might like
>>to hear from someone who
>>actually knows and doesn't just
>>listen to ego induced rumors
>>that are founded on jealousy.
>>
>
>Thank you for letting me know
>the story. I appreciate
>it and I am sorry
>for the misinformation. It
>had been rumored for years
>that that was happening but
>if you say it wasn't
>than I have no reason
>not to believe you.
>Thanks again.

i personally know 4 differnt ranchers that do and have sold trespass rights to their ranches, for the price you also get a mule deer or elk tag since their transferable,
i also know a few of the guys that have bought the tresspass rights, and the deer or elk tag was put on an animal that was taken on public land, not on the private land, so it does happen and often,

again, anyone that doesnt permit hunters on some basis on their land to help alleviate problem animals, and can show proof of such, should not be allowed to receive a monetary benefit, there are many methods of dealing with problem animals, besides just getting a check, the check doesnt remove the animals, it just makes it easier to allow the animals to stay on the property
 
How do these ranchers always have numerous land owner tags? I believe that the land owner tag system is still a draw of some kind and in order to be eligible for more than one tag you must have lots of land. If it is a draw you would not be guaranteed a tag every year. Maybe I am mistaken.
 
There are a TON of assumptions made by responders to the post.

Do you all really think F&G makes all these decisions strictly in a vacuum?

Do you think they do not report to higher authorities that impact these types of decision?

When you say it's Sportsman who pay their salaries, do you mean you actually sign their check?

If you want to accomplish something other than complaining online, them maybe you should consider who does impact their decision making, control their funding and actions and then do something to impact those individual/groups.

I agree with many of your points and feel that many at F&G would agree as well, but it's just not practical or politically acceptable some times. Some times we are just greedy sportsmen as well and don't consider the concerns of the landowner, even the ones who would like to use us, but probably have just been burned once to often by Joe Public.
 
All I know is my hunting buddy has a friend who lives down in unit 45 and has video of IDFG killing cow elk. I have not seen the video.



Chuck in Boise
 
I think you all have valid points coming from different perspectives. As far as I am concerned, I believe the truth is in the middle of those arguments, as I do about most debates. That said, it is sad to know that some kid or elder person can't fill his/her first or last cow tag on that property. I also am disappointed that these debates always digress into name-calling.
 

Similar threads

J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

20160107_094000.jpg
2B437F90-627B-484B-9416-24A0519A576D.jpeg
4AAF9277-627E-4974-93C0-3F03EC2E21EA.jpeg
Nice Alberta Buck
IMG_1040.jpeg
C04C774D-4FC8-4252-9858-C03B23735552.jpeg
64654E5A-2C0F-4C42-9CE6-FE7177ED95F2.jpeg
IMG_0524.jpeg
IMG_3995.jpeg
Sweet Muley
IMG_0540.jpeg
2875F234-6E7D-4C13-B2DE-12250A017A07.jpeg

Idaho Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Bearpaw Outfitters

Idaho Deer & Elk Allocation Tags, Plus Bear, Bison, Lion, Moose, Turkey and Montana Prairie Dogs.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, whitetail, bear, lion and wolf hunts and spend hundreds of hours scouting.

Jokers Wild Outdoors

Trophy elk, whitetail, mule deer, antelope, bear and moose hunts. 35k acres of private land.

Back
Top Bottom