S
Gorilla
Active Member
- Messages
- 175
I love the idea. I am going to have to read the proposed bill. I hope they will have a tag or two available for the public to draw as well as sell the permits to highest bidder.
I don't understand why anybody would not support this. The animals are a natural resource. Why would you not want to benefit from this resource?
Option A:
There are virtually no predators on the island, so the animals live until their teeth are worn down and they can't eat. This means it is a long drawn out starvation death and a resource is squandered.
Option B:
Harvest the natural resources as an additional revenue stream to better manage the Island.
I don't understand why anybody would not support this. The animals are a natural resource. Why would you not want to benefit from this resource?
Option A:
There are virtually no predators on the island, so the animals live until their teeth are worn down and they can't eat. This means it is a long drawn out starvation death and a resource is squandered.
Option B:
Harvest the natural resources as an additional revenue stream to better manage the Island.
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
I sure hope it doesn't pass. I think it is a bad idea.
I have nothing against a couple folks hunting out there, but I do have a problem with it being about the money. It stinks to me. Always has. Never has it been suggested just to offer a couple draw tags, it's always about making money.
This is an issue that has come up a few times and always been crushed. It will not go away. They might loose again this year, but it'll continue to be an issue. Those who are behind this could win my support by making the tags DRAW ONLY....archery and muzzleloader.
I will not support it just to make money. Money just isn't always that important.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I have nothing against a couple folks hunting out there, but I do have a problem with it being about the money. It stinks to me. Always has. Never has it been suggested just to offer a couple draw tags, it's always about making money.
This is an issue that has come up a few times and always been crushed. It will not go away. They might loose again this year, but it'll continue to be an issue. Those who are behind this could win my support by making the tags DRAW ONLY....archery and muzzleloader.
I will not support it just to make money. Money just isn't always that important.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I
ICHABOD
Guest
+1 Founder
------------------------------------------------------
"Yeah, I'll shoot him"
------------------------------------------------------
"Yeah, I'll shoot him"
elkhuntn247
Active Member
- Messages
- 689
Im strongly in favor. weather its for the money of the people. The government does need the money with this economy. the animals out there should be managed just like any other herds around here.
W
wacmaster
Guest
>I sure hope it doesn't pass.
>I think it is a
>bad idea.
>
>I have nothing against a couple
>folks hunting out there, but
>I do have a problem
>with it being about the
>money. It stinks to me.
>Always has. Never has it
>been suggested just to offer
>a couple draw tags, it's
>always about making money.
>
>This is an issue that has
>come up a few times
>and always been crushed. It
>will not go away. They
>might loose again this year,
>but it'll continue to be
>an issue. Those who are
>behind this could win my
>support by making the tags
>DRAW ONLY....archery and muzzleloader.
>
>I will not support it just
>to make money. Money just
>isn't always that important.
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com
+1 draw only give the little guy's a chance.
>I think it is a
>bad idea.
>
>I have nothing against a couple
>folks hunting out there, but
>I do have a problem
>with it being about the
>money. It stinks to me.
>Always has. Never has it
>been suggested just to offer
>a couple draw tags, it's
>always about making money.
>
>This is an issue that has
>come up a few times
>and always been crushed. It
>will not go away. They
>might loose again this year,
>but it'll continue to be
>an issue. Those who are
>behind this could win my
>support by making the tags
>DRAW ONLY....archery and muzzleloader.
>
>I will not support it just
>to make money. Money just
>isn't always that important.
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com
+1 draw only give the little guy's a chance.
Ticks N Tines
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,652
LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 07:03AM (MST)[p]>Option A:
>There are virtually no predators on
>the island, so the animals
>live until their teeth are
>worn down and they can't
>eat. This means it
>is a long drawn out
>starvation death and a resource
>is squandered.
There are tons of coyotes out there that eat plenty of antleope and deer during the calving season. Not saying they totally control the pops, but they do thier part as a predator. So don't say that there are no predators. I can go out there and see 20 coyotes on any given day.
>There are virtually no predators on
>the island, so the animals
>live until their teeth are
>worn down and they can't
>eat. This means it
>is a long drawn out
>starvation death and a resource
>is squandered.
There are tons of coyotes out there that eat plenty of antleope and deer during the calving season. Not saying they totally control the pops, but they do thier part as a predator. So don't say that there are no predators. I can go out there and see 20 coyotes on any given day.
+1 HJB. I'm not sure Gorilla knows what he's talking about. The deer to coyote ratio is 2:1 on the island and they more than easily keep that herd in check. There has been ZERO growth in the deer numbers in the last 20 years. ZERO. The only reason the antelope has a large herd there now is because they put 75 head a few years ago. You drive out there in AUG and try to find a loper fawn.
Yelum
Yelum
MuddyBoots
Active Member
- Messages
- 185
Founder has hit it right on the nose. Only if there is absolutely zero tags pimped out would I support it. The island will become a State operated exclusive hunting club. I'd rather see it managed for kids, disabled, veterans, anything but just pure greed.
I
isayNUNYA
Guest
Two tags for each species means one auction tag and one draw tag. The state finally figured out their own law and thats why it will pass this time. Before they wanted only one tag for auction. I dont care either way what they do there. It will be funny to see all these MM anti hunters putting in the draw for antelope island deer and sheep when it opens however.
3
30plus
Guest
I will support it if they also allow a coyote draw maybe half a day and as many as you can shoot i'd pay $25 just to apply for that.
MulePacker
Active Member
- Messages
- 513
Does anyone know if animals harvested on the island meet the criteria of fair chase?
I am of the opinion if an Island hunt does not meet the criteria then a state supported hunt would be detrimental to all aspects of America's wildlife management and conservation model. Does Utah want to go down that road many already question with our conservation tags, cwmu tags convention tags that we are pushing the limit.
There is irony about the outcry of sportsman against SITLA when they want to lock up or charge for trust land access and hunting. But yet the same vocal groups see no problem with securing permits to be used to generate money for their purpose. I agree with another post where there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy. I also fear the precedent that could be set for other land agencies wanting the same treatment, soon they would cry for more on a precentage of land basis. Think long and hard about the long term consequences, not just the fact that someone will kill the next state record and pay a lot of money for it.
I also would hope that if a hunt was to occur then the hunter would be held to the same regulations as other recreationist in travel management on the island. This alone would make the hunt less appealing. I wonder what would happen if the hunter was flanked by an organiztion simply on tour of the island and a wounded animal is incurred. I believe there could be so many wrong situations that the risk is hardly worth it.
I am of the opinion if an Island hunt does not meet the criteria then a state supported hunt would be detrimental to all aspects of America's wildlife management and conservation model. Does Utah want to go down that road many already question with our conservation tags, cwmu tags convention tags that we are pushing the limit.
There is irony about the outcry of sportsman against SITLA when they want to lock up or charge for trust land access and hunting. But yet the same vocal groups see no problem with securing permits to be used to generate money for their purpose. I agree with another post where there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy. I also fear the precedent that could be set for other land agencies wanting the same treatment, soon they would cry for more on a precentage of land basis. Think long and hard about the long term consequences, not just the fact that someone will kill the next state record and pay a lot of money for it.
I also would hope that if a hunt was to occur then the hunter would be held to the same regulations as other recreationist in travel management on the island. This alone would make the hunt less appealing. I wonder what would happen if the hunter was flanked by an organiztion simply on tour of the island and a wounded animal is incurred. I believe there could be so many wrong situations that the risk is hardly worth it.
Daxter
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,426
LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 09:29AM (MST)[p]I have to chip in my $0.02 on this one. As far as hunting deer is concerned, I can't see a biological basis for that proposed hunt. The coyotes and environmental factors seem to be keeping deer populations in check. The "need" for a deer hunt is social/political/economic. The proposed bighorn hunts on the other hand would be a very good thing from a biological standpoint.
If Antelope Island serves as a nursery herd for bighorns, we want to keep that herd healthy, and as productive as possible. If more lambs hit the ground each year that equals more sheep that can be transplanted and more sheep herds that can be bolstered or started. We want there to be lots of ewes getting bred every year and having lambs. When the state transplants sheep they move primarily females and young rams. It makes sense to take females and young animals because the females will have babies helping the new herd, and young animals will live longer. Most importantly, young rams are less likely to wander and come into contact with domestics and contract diseases. Transplanting older rams is asking for trouble. They almost always wander long distances, and this really increases the likelihood for disease contraction.
Right now we are loosing the Goslin Mtn. sheep herd to disease. This year would have been the first ram hunt on that unit, but because of disease those sheep are practically gone. I just hope that it doesn't spread to Bare Top and Sheep Creek. Even when things are done right, bighorns are highly susceptible to disease. If things aren't done right, like transplanting older age rams, it is almost a guarantee that the transplant will fail.
To keep the Antelope Island herd productive, we want to have enough mature rams to ensure the breeding of the ewes, but we don't want a surplus of rams out there. If we can't successfully move older rams when we have transplants, then soon the proportion of males in the population gets bigger and bigger, and the population gets less and less productive.
I see removing a few older age class rams from the island each year with hunters as something that will help the Antelope Island herd better accomplish it's objective of being a nursery herd. It will increase productivity in the herd, and will help wildlife managers that don't have any other options for dealing with a surplus of mature rams.
This is just my take on the biological side of things, I am not going to touch any of the other issues that would certainly arise if there were a hunt on a state park island. It is definitely a very complicated issue, I agree with that, but I just wanted to make the point that harvesting some mature rams could provide a biological benefit.
Just my personal opinion.
Dax
If Antelope Island serves as a nursery herd for bighorns, we want to keep that herd healthy, and as productive as possible. If more lambs hit the ground each year that equals more sheep that can be transplanted and more sheep herds that can be bolstered or started. We want there to be lots of ewes getting bred every year and having lambs. When the state transplants sheep they move primarily females and young rams. It makes sense to take females and young animals because the females will have babies helping the new herd, and young animals will live longer. Most importantly, young rams are less likely to wander and come into contact with domestics and contract diseases. Transplanting older rams is asking for trouble. They almost always wander long distances, and this really increases the likelihood for disease contraction.
Right now we are loosing the Goslin Mtn. sheep herd to disease. This year would have been the first ram hunt on that unit, but because of disease those sheep are practically gone. I just hope that it doesn't spread to Bare Top and Sheep Creek. Even when things are done right, bighorns are highly susceptible to disease. If things aren't done right, like transplanting older age rams, it is almost a guarantee that the transplant will fail.
To keep the Antelope Island herd productive, we want to have enough mature rams to ensure the breeding of the ewes, but we don't want a surplus of rams out there. If we can't successfully move older rams when we have transplants, then soon the proportion of males in the population gets bigger and bigger, and the population gets less and less productive.
I see removing a few older age class rams from the island each year with hunters as something that will help the Antelope Island herd better accomplish it's objective of being a nursery herd. It will increase productivity in the herd, and will help wildlife managers that don't have any other options for dealing with a surplus of mature rams.
This is just my take on the biological side of things, I am not going to touch any of the other issues that would certainly arise if there were a hunt on a state park island. It is definitely a very complicated issue, I agree with that, but I just wanted to make the point that harvesting some mature rams could provide a biological benefit.
Just my personal opinion.
Dax
T
ttj
Guest
+1 on the sheep analysis.
One other thing that needs to be taken into consideration is the political fight that getting deer and sheep hunting approved on the island entails. It is obvious from the previous stance taken by the Parks department that they do not support deer and sheep hunting. Period. Today's economic environment which is placing budget cuts on virtually all government agencies, and the economic winfall associated with one or two auction tags, is the leverage that is currently forcing the Parks to consider approving the deer and sheep hunts.
Without the financial benefit of the auction tags, hunting deer and sheep on the island will never happen because is is not a political fight that can be won. I don't really care if someone wants to spend six figures on a deer or sheep tag as long as I get an opportunity to draw a tag as well. Most likely I will never draw that tag, but someone will, and that individual will have a great hunt!
One other thing that needs to be taken into consideration is the political fight that getting deer and sheep hunting approved on the island entails. It is obvious from the previous stance taken by the Parks department that they do not support deer and sheep hunting. Period. Today's economic environment which is placing budget cuts on virtually all government agencies, and the economic winfall associated with one or two auction tags, is the leverage that is currently forcing the Parks to consider approving the deer and sheep hunts.
Without the financial benefit of the auction tags, hunting deer and sheep on the island will never happen because is is not a political fight that can be won. I don't really care if someone wants to spend six figures on a deer or sheep tag as long as I get an opportunity to draw a tag as well. Most likely I will never draw that tag, but someone will, and that individual will have a great hunt!
Hey guys lets not forget that money is what allows us to build and grow our wildlife herds. Are we forgetting about all the new opportunities that are being created. New sheep herds are being started every year. Book Cliffs will have a buffalo hunt in the future. The list goes on and on. I am by no means a high dollar hunter and I personally wouldn't be that interested in hunting on antelope island but I am smart enough to realize that all of these new hunting opportunities that are popping up are not FREE. The habitat projects alone cost millions of dollars and it has to come from some where. If wealthy sportsman are willing to pay big $$$ to hunt a sheep or a deer I am all for it. That money will ultimately result in more opportunities for more people.
That being said I think the ONLY fair way to make this work is to match every private high dollar tag with a public limited draw tag. If they match tag for tag I am all for it.
It also sounds like there is a coyote problem on the island and if a coyote kills one sheep it is to many. They are such a scarce resource we should not let that happen. They need to do some predator control and protect the sheep out there. Especially if the island is being used as a "nursery"
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
That being said I think the ONLY fair way to make this work is to match every private high dollar tag with a public limited draw tag. If they match tag for tag I am all for it.
It also sounds like there is a coyote problem on the island and if a coyote kills one sheep it is to many. They are such a scarce resource we should not let that happen. They need to do some predator control and protect the sheep out there. Especially if the island is being used as a "nursery"
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
I
isayNUNYA
Guest
>
>That being said I think the
>ONLY fair way to make
>this work is to match
>every private high dollar tag
>with a public limited draw
>tag. If they match tag
>for tag I am all
>for it.
>
That is already the law and in place. i.e Gov. tag and sportsman permit.
It is obvious thats why they are talking 2 tags for each species on the island. One will go into the draw and one will be up for auction.
And thanks Quivers! Nice to see someone who knows and sees what is being done with the money and appreciates it! Even if they dont always agree with everything.
>That being said I think the
>ONLY fair way to make
>this work is to match
>every private high dollar tag
>with a public limited draw
>tag. If they match tag
>for tag I am all
>for it.
>
That is already the law and in place. i.e Gov. tag and sportsman permit.
It is obvious thats why they are talking 2 tags for each species on the island. One will go into the draw and one will be up for auction.
And thanks Quivers! Nice to see someone who knows and sees what is being done with the money and appreciates it! Even if they dont always agree with everything.
Here we go round?????
It has been interesting reading this post along with a few others related to this issue. Some I disagree with whole heartedly and others I understand and agree with.
I am 100% infavor of hunting on Antelope Island. To me there is no reason not too. I dont buy into the claim that it will hinder or destroy peoples oportunity to view wildlife. There is no difference between watchable and huntable wildlife. They are the same thing! Infact most wildlife is there for everyones enjoyment hunter and non-hunter alike because of the dollars raised by hunters.
Take for instance the Henrys for deer the Monroe for elk and Green River for sheep. Hundreds of people go to these places just to see the animals, hunting has no effect on a persons ability to view these awesome critters. A friend and myself spent two days on the Henry's and counted well over 200 bucks it was unbelievable. One buck was 240 inches all seen from a main road.
The Island will be no different the pressure will be so minimal it will have zero effect. Hunting has exsisted on the from the beging and should have never been taken away.
We are missing a perfect opportunity to educate people that hunting is okay and it can coe-exsist with watchable wildlife. There is no better place to teach our school children the role that hunters plan in conservation and in protecting and enhancing this resource.
Now let me qualify my stances on being in favor of hunting the Island. It is not with out limatations. I would not support hunting on the Island unless there were tags available for the public to draw. I would not care if it was a 100% hunting by draw. That would be great.
But lets be realistic. The only reason this has resurfaced is beacause of the financial short falls of the park and bugets being cut.
They need to generate revenue. I am fine with that as long as those moneys are used to enhance the Islands resource's. Meaning habitat project,public accessability and growning the herds.
The sheep tag would realisticly sell for $30,000 on the low end and $80,000 on the high end. The deer on the other hand could generate well over $200,000 dollars.
That being said if the park is willing to allow hunting with out the selling of a tag I would be all for it.
I dont know why these animals would not be considered for B&C. There are two causeways that animals escape from regularly and on drought years several leave by walking across the mud flats. That is why you are starting to see some big deer show up in the marshes below Layton, West Point and Kaysville. They are Island deer.
Dax brought up some great points. The sheep are a no brainer. The deer on the other hand may need a little more consideration, but if we could use the money's to grow this heard and insure its future why not?
The Island has been a pasoninate topic for me. I have fond memory's of hunting out there with my father as a young boy and believe our children should have the same opportunity.
Troy Justensen
It has been interesting reading this post along with a few others related to this issue. Some I disagree with whole heartedly and others I understand and agree with.
I am 100% infavor of hunting on Antelope Island. To me there is no reason not too. I dont buy into the claim that it will hinder or destroy peoples oportunity to view wildlife. There is no difference between watchable and huntable wildlife. They are the same thing! Infact most wildlife is there for everyones enjoyment hunter and non-hunter alike because of the dollars raised by hunters.
Take for instance the Henrys for deer the Monroe for elk and Green River for sheep. Hundreds of people go to these places just to see the animals, hunting has no effect on a persons ability to view these awesome critters. A friend and myself spent two days on the Henry's and counted well over 200 bucks it was unbelievable. One buck was 240 inches all seen from a main road.
The Island will be no different the pressure will be so minimal it will have zero effect. Hunting has exsisted on the from the beging and should have never been taken away.
We are missing a perfect opportunity to educate people that hunting is okay and it can coe-exsist with watchable wildlife. There is no better place to teach our school children the role that hunters plan in conservation and in protecting and enhancing this resource.
Now let me qualify my stances on being in favor of hunting the Island. It is not with out limatations. I would not support hunting on the Island unless there were tags available for the public to draw. I would not care if it was a 100% hunting by draw. That would be great.
But lets be realistic. The only reason this has resurfaced is beacause of the financial short falls of the park and bugets being cut.
They need to generate revenue. I am fine with that as long as those moneys are used to enhance the Islands resource's. Meaning habitat project,public accessability and growning the herds.
The sheep tag would realisticly sell for $30,000 on the low end and $80,000 on the high end. The deer on the other hand could generate well over $200,000 dollars.
That being said if the park is willing to allow hunting with out the selling of a tag I would be all for it.
I dont know why these animals would not be considered for B&C. There are two causeways that animals escape from regularly and on drought years several leave by walking across the mud flats. That is why you are starting to see some big deer show up in the marshes below Layton, West Point and Kaysville. They are Island deer.
Dax brought up some great points. The sheep are a no brainer. The deer on the other hand may need a little more consideration, but if we could use the money's to grow this heard and insure its future why not?
The Island has been a pasoninate topic for me. I have fond memory's of hunting out there with my father as a young boy and believe our children should have the same opportunity.
Troy Justensen
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
I agree with you Troy. I'm OK with hunting out there, but I'm just exhausted with the fact that it's always about selling a tag.
What's wrong with just once, not having an auction tag when trying to push this thing? Why can't those pushing this suggest TWO deer and TWO sheep tags, DRAW ONLY. Sure, maybe they don't raise $250k a year, but 4 great tags like that could easily raise $60k - $80k+ per year and that would DOUBLE the average guys chance of hunting the Island.
Troy - You talk about educating people that hunting is okay and it can coe-exsist with watchable wildlife. I guess as a sportsmen, I don't want the general public to think that "hunting" is about a guy paying $200k for a tag and then having a dozen guys coomb an island that has 50 trees on it looking for the biggest buck for him to go kill.
Killing a big buck on that island could be a challenge, IF one did it on their own. BUT guys spending $200k for a deer tag don't do it on their own. They hire many guides to do it, and that is not what the general pubic needs to think "hunting" is.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
What's wrong with just once, not having an auction tag when trying to push this thing? Why can't those pushing this suggest TWO deer and TWO sheep tags, DRAW ONLY. Sure, maybe they don't raise $250k a year, but 4 great tags like that could easily raise $60k - $80k+ per year and that would DOUBLE the average guys chance of hunting the Island.
Troy - You talk about educating people that hunting is okay and it can coe-exsist with watchable wildlife. I guess as a sportsmen, I don't want the general public to think that "hunting" is about a guy paying $200k for a tag and then having a dozen guys coomb an island that has 50 trees on it looking for the biggest buck for him to go kill.
Killing a big buck on that island could be a challenge, IF one did it on their own. BUT guys spending $200k for a deer tag don't do it on their own. They hire many guides to do it, and that is not what the general pubic needs to think "hunting" is.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I
isayNUNYA
Guest
>I agree with you Troy. I'm
>OK with hunting out there,
>but I'm just exhausted with
>the fact that it's always
>about selling a tag.
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com
Brian, I'm sure we will get to see another picture of you and a Colorado buck taken this year with a pimped out landowner tag.
>OK with hunting out there,
>but I'm just exhausted with
>the fact that it's always
>about selling a tag.
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com
Brian, I'm sure we will get to see another picture of you and a Colorado buck taken this year with a pimped out landowner tag.
S
SuperSlam
Guest
+1 I'll be the first one applying.
MNHunter
Active Member
- Messages
- 938
LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 02:20PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 02:19?PM (MST)
>
> Brian, I'm sure we will
>get to see another picture
>of you and a Colorado
>buck taken this year with
>a pimped out landowner tag.
>
At least it won't be with a posse large enough to field a baseball team complete with matching uniforms.
"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
>
> Brian, I'm sure we will
>get to see another picture
>of you and a Colorado
>buck taken this year with
>a pimped out landowner tag.
>
At least it won't be with a posse large enough to field a baseball team complete with matching uniforms.
"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
T
ttj
Guest
+1 Troy.
TJ
TJ
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
> Brian, I'm sure we will
>get to see another picture
>of you and a Colorado
>buck taken this year with
>a pimped out landowner tag.
I hope so. You sending me a tag? Make it a good one. 61 4th if you could.
I can promise you though, I won't need a dozen guides and a finders fee to do it. That's not what it's about to me.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
>get to see another picture
>of you and a Colorado
>buck taken this year with
>a pimped out landowner tag.
I hope so. You sending me a tag? Make it a good one. 61 4th if you could.
I can promise you though, I won't need a dozen guides and a finders fee to do it. That's not what it's about to me.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
Igottabigone
Active Member
- Messages
- 203
I saw a two point out there once.
Igottabigone
Active Member
- Messages
- 203
I saw a two point out there once.
I
isayNUNYA
Guest
Brian posse hunting isnt the issue here. It was "tag pimping" as some of you put it. Hunting with one or several guides is legal and a personal choice. We can both agree that you and I dont hunt that way for our selves, not the point. Again tag pimping was the original topic here and it seems to me everyone is ok with tag pimping as long as that pimped out tag is in their pocket. Dosen't matter if you paid 750 or 150,000 its Still a pimped out, up for the highest offer bought and sold tag. Its comical that you log on to your website and up pops Alan Pennington and a dozen other tag pimper's. Selling land owner tags to people who cannot hunt the land they are issued to. Like I said Its ok as long as that tag is in your pocket or you get a little kick back from advertising them. Also looks like you do a little advertising for and take sponsorships from several different guides in Ut and surrounding states that use the "dozen guides and finder fee" method you dispise.
I an also say with certainty if any of you hit a 300 mil lottery tomorrow you would be buying a 100k henry mountain tag at auction!
So where do you really stand?
I an also say with certainty if any of you hit a 300 mil lottery tomorrow you would be buying a 100k henry mountain tag at auction!
So where do you really stand?
Why is the idea of wealthy guys "buying" hunts rub so many people the wrong way? To each his own. I would never hunt that way. I enjoy the challenge of hunting which is why I choose to bowhunt but I realize that these dollars raised are bringing the average joe a lot more opportunity. I believe that a lot of the money for these tags is essentially donated to wildlife by the wealthy sportsman. They just look at the tag as a bonus. If they believe in the cause they donate the money or bid on the auction. The tag itself is often just a bonus. A good example is up at the new Full Curl banquet. Right in the middle of it the Mr. Mauer went up and wrote a check for $100,000. Not to buy a tag just to donate to the cause. These are sportsman that are blessed with lots of money and decide to give some of it to the wildlife we all love. Why is that rubbing people the wrong way? Because they get a premium tag for it? The money they donate will create more opportunity for the average guy then it could ever take away. Sure most of us would not hunt with a "proffessional posse" and most of us prefer DIY hunts but if these successful men are willing to help our cause with big $$$$ then why would we stand in their way. If they enjoy guided hunts so be it. We all have our own little posse of hunting buddies that help us out and many of us would buy tags if we had the money to do so.
We have to look at this big picture and put jealousy aside. These guys are not taking away opportunity. THEY ARE CREATING IT!!!!
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
We have to look at this big picture and put jealousy aside. These guys are not taking away opportunity. THEY ARE CREATING IT!!!!
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
Well, I have always supported SOME conservation, auction, and expo tags. But, like other people, I think there are enough already. That's my opinion.
The line has to be drawn somewhere for all of us, so I guess this is where I have drawn mine. When does it stop? The state of Utah will always need (want) money. This year it's an Antelope Island deer and sheep tag someone wants to sale, a couple years from now when they need more money (and they will), it'll be more conservation tags, then more expo tags, then more statewide auction tags, then more Antelope Island tags. When does it end?
I suppose for some there is no time in-which they no longer except the selling of opportunity to a handful of rich dudes. I want you think about when is enough, enough for you? Right now I believe 5% of tags are conservation tags and 50% of statewide tags are taken from everyone and offered to those with (in most cases) a lot of money. When is enough, enough for you?
10% conservation tags - 90% public
20% conservation tags - 80% public
50% conservation tags - 50% public
Someone will always "need" or "want" the money and I can promise you, there will ALWAYS be someone trying to figure out how to take more tags and convert them into dollars for one thing or another.
Our schools in Utah really need more money...oversized classrooms, etc. It's on the news all the time. Would you guys support a state legislator who recommends taking 5% or 10% more of our public tags and converting them to auction tags and sold to pay for school stuff? When does it end?
I DO support some conservation tags, also support some expo tags, and some Colorado landowner tags, but there is a point that enough is enough.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
The line has to be drawn somewhere for all of us, so I guess this is where I have drawn mine. When does it stop? The state of Utah will always need (want) money. This year it's an Antelope Island deer and sheep tag someone wants to sale, a couple years from now when they need more money (and they will), it'll be more conservation tags, then more expo tags, then more statewide auction tags, then more Antelope Island tags. When does it end?
I suppose for some there is no time in-which they no longer except the selling of opportunity to a handful of rich dudes. I want you think about when is enough, enough for you? Right now I believe 5% of tags are conservation tags and 50% of statewide tags are taken from everyone and offered to those with (in most cases) a lot of money. When is enough, enough for you?
10% conservation tags - 90% public
20% conservation tags - 80% public
50% conservation tags - 50% public
Someone will always "need" or "want" the money and I can promise you, there will ALWAYS be someone trying to figure out how to take more tags and convert them into dollars for one thing or another.
Our schools in Utah really need more money...oversized classrooms, etc. It's on the news all the time. Would you guys support a state legislator who recommends taking 5% or 10% more of our public tags and converting them to auction tags and sold to pay for school stuff? When does it end?
I DO support some conservation tags, also support some expo tags, and some Colorado landowner tags, but there is a point that enough is enough.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
D
Deadheads
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 08:52PM (MST)[p]+1 Troy, The reality is if we ever want the opportinity to hunt on the Island the time has never been better for the chance of changing the law, and if the avenue of getting it done is an auction tag then I'm all for it!! That will also mean WE get the chance to draw a tag too. Don't understand why some treat the thought of hunting on the Island as taboo, whats the difference of hunting there or any other new unit?...Zion,Stansburys,Henrys,New Foundlands, the lists goes on and on.
Greg
Greg
D
dkpeay
Guest
Brian,
20 years ago, there was less than 1,000 limited and OIL tags in utah.
Today, there is close to 5,000. without question, the conservaiton groups, the Conservation tags, teh EXPO tags have all been key parts to do all the work to INCREASE TAGS 500% and QUALITY TO.
SFW asked for 5% of teh tags for auction. AS teh herds have grown, so has the number of tags.
SFW is committed to KEEPING THE 5% deal, forever.
SFW asked for 200 Convention tags, which is a number we will keep forever.
So, take 500 tags of the table, there are STILL 4,500. THAT is lot MORE than 1,000, and frankly many people in teh KNOW would testify under oath, without SFW and MDF and RMEF and Utah FNAWS, there would probably only BE 500 really good tags today, and Utah would not have rebuilt herds of elk and deer and sheep, and moose and goats and bison.
Brian, i agree.
THE DEAL is 5% acution tags.
200 Convention tags.
With those, they in total raise around $3.5 Million. WE work to get another $10 million MATCHING FUNDS.
so with the $13,5 MILLION or so, that is real money, that is why there is REAL progress.
the most intriguing thing to me is these other states who have no money, who have NO VOICE are loosing there herds, up to 60% reduction in numbers and herds. AND THEY BLAST UTAH because we do something a little creative with 10% of the tags - actually less than 10% - and we increase herds and tags 500%
you asked a question, you got the answer, i look forward to your response.
20 years ago, there was less than 1,000 limited and OIL tags in utah.
Today, there is close to 5,000. without question, the conservaiton groups, the Conservation tags, teh EXPO tags have all been key parts to do all the work to INCREASE TAGS 500% and QUALITY TO.
SFW asked for 5% of teh tags for auction. AS teh herds have grown, so has the number of tags.
SFW is committed to KEEPING THE 5% deal, forever.
SFW asked for 200 Convention tags, which is a number we will keep forever.
So, take 500 tags of the table, there are STILL 4,500. THAT is lot MORE than 1,000, and frankly many people in teh KNOW would testify under oath, without SFW and MDF and RMEF and Utah FNAWS, there would probably only BE 500 really good tags today, and Utah would not have rebuilt herds of elk and deer and sheep, and moose and goats and bison.
Brian, i agree.
THE DEAL is 5% acution tags.
200 Convention tags.
With those, they in total raise around $3.5 Million. WE work to get another $10 million MATCHING FUNDS.
so with the $13,5 MILLION or so, that is real money, that is why there is REAL progress.
the most intriguing thing to me is these other states who have no money, who have NO VOICE are loosing there herds, up to 60% reduction in numbers and herds. AND THEY BLAST UTAH because we do something a little creative with 10% of the tags - actually less than 10% - and we increase herds and tags 500%
you asked a question, you got the answer, i look forward to your response.
D
deerbedead
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Feb-24-10 AT 09:44PM (MST)[p]I'm for the hunt on the island as well. It does several things that benefit all of us hunters.
It lets us use a resource that is virtually dormant.
It will bring revenue in a time we really need it.
It will also help us to draw more limited entry tags. This is the part I really like. There will be several hundred, or even thousand people with their bonus points that will switch to the Island hunt and it will take some pressure off the other limited units so we can draw more easily.
If it were up to me I'd make the island hunt a 4 four tag hunt.
1 tag for auction (to generate a big $ amount)
1 tag for nonresidents (to rake in money from thousands of non res)
1 tag for max point residents
1 tag for non max point residents
I think something like this would maximize the earning potential so that it would be profitable, yet sustainable.
Yes I would bust the coyotes too. They have no use in my management plan, especially on an island.
If the island couldn't handle 4 tags each year, I'd cut them back starting with the non res tag first.
I'm very happy with SFW and the way they are helping out wildlife in Utah. The part I don't understand is why you sportsmen that are against SFW can't see that they are taking a small donated amount of money, and with our collective numbers, and political influence they are generating a massive amount of money from other sources to put toward our wildlife.
I also like the way they involve members in decisions. I remember very well last fall after the 9 day rifle hunt was over we had a banquet and Don P. stood at the front and asked us if we were in favor or against going back to the 5 day hunt in our area. Almost every person in the room stood up to support the 5 day hunt. In my opinion that is what I call representation of the people. If you want to be part of a group that actually asks and acts on member ideas, then you might want to check out SFW. I can find 10 good things to 1 bad thing when it comes to SFW 's track record and actual results.
If they can help grow the numbers of wildlife in this state, and they are taking 5% of the tags, it would be in all our best interest to support them and help them grow the overall big game populations. Can't we see that if the big game populations are greater that we all draw out quicker, and more frequently? Why would we fight against a group that is building more units, bigger herds, and securing more dollars to spend on wildlife and habitat than has ever been secured in this state before?
It's not a rich man's sport. It's everybody's sport from rich to poor, and we need every person we can get to support our wildlife if we want to build herds and create opportunity so we can all participate more often.
Well, this is longer than I intended it to be, but it's how I feel.
DeerBeDead
It lets us use a resource that is virtually dormant.
It will bring revenue in a time we really need it.
It will also help us to draw more limited entry tags. This is the part I really like. There will be several hundred, or even thousand people with their bonus points that will switch to the Island hunt and it will take some pressure off the other limited units so we can draw more easily.
If it were up to me I'd make the island hunt a 4 four tag hunt.
1 tag for auction (to generate a big $ amount)
1 tag for nonresidents (to rake in money from thousands of non res)
1 tag for max point residents
1 tag for non max point residents
I think something like this would maximize the earning potential so that it would be profitable, yet sustainable.
Yes I would bust the coyotes too. They have no use in my management plan, especially on an island.
If the island couldn't handle 4 tags each year, I'd cut them back starting with the non res tag first.
I'm very happy with SFW and the way they are helping out wildlife in Utah. The part I don't understand is why you sportsmen that are against SFW can't see that they are taking a small donated amount of money, and with our collective numbers, and political influence they are generating a massive amount of money from other sources to put toward our wildlife.
I also like the way they involve members in decisions. I remember very well last fall after the 9 day rifle hunt was over we had a banquet and Don P. stood at the front and asked us if we were in favor or against going back to the 5 day hunt in our area. Almost every person in the room stood up to support the 5 day hunt. In my opinion that is what I call representation of the people. If you want to be part of a group that actually asks and acts on member ideas, then you might want to check out SFW. I can find 10 good things to 1 bad thing when it comes to SFW 's track record and actual results.
If they can help grow the numbers of wildlife in this state, and they are taking 5% of the tags, it would be in all our best interest to support them and help them grow the overall big game populations. Can't we see that if the big game populations are greater that we all draw out quicker, and more frequently? Why would we fight against a group that is building more units, bigger herds, and securing more dollars to spend on wildlife and habitat than has ever been secured in this state before?
It's not a rich man's sport. It's everybody's sport from rich to poor, and we need every person we can get to support our wildlife if we want to build herds and create opportunity so we can all participate more often.
Well, this is longer than I intended it to be, but it's how I feel.
DeerBeDead
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
Fair enough Don!! I am very happy to hear that there has been a line drawn by SFW. 5% conservation tags and 200 expo tags. I personally can accept that. I think they do a lot of good, just as SFW has.
I guess with that out of the way, my only other question would be; Can you tell us how to stop the NEW Antelope Island auction tags from happening? I don't know if they can be called "conservation tags" or what, but in my pea-brain, they're just more auction tags.
I actually really expected you to have a horse in this race, but you said you didn't give a damn in that other thread. I guess I'm asking you then, as the most power wildlife lobbyist I know, what can be done to stop this bill in its current form?
Sounds like SFW is happy with the number of tags they get. We can only hope the UDWR is happy with the current number, and I think the vast majority of sportsmen may not be happy with the current number of auction tags, but certainly don't want more. SO, let's end this silly Antelope Island auction tag stuff. If WE (Utah Sportsmen) want to hunt deer and sheep on Antelope Island, then let's push for DRAW ONLY tags. The rich guys will still have a chance.
I firmly believe you can steer this bill in any direction Don and firmly believe that you should care about it, as I think a good number of SFW members care.
If I start a thread and can get SFW members to voice their opinion as to whether they want 2 public draw tags or 1 draw tag and 1 auction tag for each species, would you represent the majority on this and go to work for us?
Look forward to your response.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I guess with that out of the way, my only other question would be; Can you tell us how to stop the NEW Antelope Island auction tags from happening? I don't know if they can be called "conservation tags" or what, but in my pea-brain, they're just more auction tags.
I actually really expected you to have a horse in this race, but you said you didn't give a damn in that other thread. I guess I'm asking you then, as the most power wildlife lobbyist I know, what can be done to stop this bill in its current form?
Sounds like SFW is happy with the number of tags they get. We can only hope the UDWR is happy with the current number, and I think the vast majority of sportsmen may not be happy with the current number of auction tags, but certainly don't want more. SO, let's end this silly Antelope Island auction tag stuff. If WE (Utah Sportsmen) want to hunt deer and sheep on Antelope Island, then let's push for DRAW ONLY tags. The rich guys will still have a chance.
I firmly believe you can steer this bill in any direction Don and firmly believe that you should care about it, as I think a good number of SFW members care.
If I start a thread and can get SFW members to voice their opinion as to whether they want 2 public draw tags or 1 draw tag and 1 auction tag for each species, would you represent the majority on this and go to work for us?
Look forward to your response.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I heard a story one time about tithing that I think relates. Sorry to those who are not LDS just hang in there with me. The story goes like this... a guy makes 30K a year and pays $3000 a year in tithing. (10% of his money) he prays everyday that he can make more money to have a better lifestyle and more money for his family. Over the years the Lord blesses him and he makes more and more money. Each time he makes more money he has to pay more tithing. At some point he makes so much money he realizes that he paid $100,000 in tithing and he is upset and wishes to himself that he could go back to only paying $3000. Obviously he failed to realize that even though he paid $97,000 more dollars in tithing he had been blessed with $970,000 more dollars to pay it with.
Point is this these auctions, tags, banquets, conventions, etc are what have given this state the abundant wildlife opportunities we have. We were all "praying" to have more sheep and more buffalo, and more goats, and more elk and now we have them. We went from 1000 OIL to 5000 OIL. We also know major improvements have been made in deer and elk. But now we are getting greedy and want to bite all the hands that have fed us this good fortune. 5% of 1000 is 50 leaving 950 for everyone. 5% of 5000 is 250 leaving 4750 tags for everyone. Would you rather that we had 100% of those original 1000 tags going to the average joe or the newly created 4750 tags for them. This should be a no brainer. Simple math. Not bashing anyone but just think about it. If we can get more money to help a sheep program on the island it just creates more sheep for everyone
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
Point is this these auctions, tags, banquets, conventions, etc are what have given this state the abundant wildlife opportunities we have. We were all "praying" to have more sheep and more buffalo, and more goats, and more elk and now we have them. We went from 1000 OIL to 5000 OIL. We also know major improvements have been made in deer and elk. But now we are getting greedy and want to bite all the hands that have fed us this good fortune. 5% of 1000 is 50 leaving 950 for everyone. 5% of 5000 is 250 leaving 4750 tags for everyone. Would you rather that we had 100% of those original 1000 tags going to the average joe or the newly created 4750 tags for them. This should be a no brainer. Simple math. Not bashing anyone but just think about it. If we can get more money to help a sheep program on the island it just creates more sheep for everyone
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
S
SuperSlam
Guest
BRIAN- Just my 2 cents you want to push a 2 tag draw only? The Committee won't go for that they have fought this thing for 10 years and the only reason this thing is back on the table is because of the money that could be raised by auction.
If we were real smart we would all join together and fight to ride the coat tail of this proposal and get a tag in the general draw or something. Maybe a raffle tag? It's like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that jam in "PORK" and push these bills through. Why can't we sportsmen have a little "PORK" and get a draw tag or two out of it?
What if the park says "no" to the posse that these outfitters have sometimes? What if it is just allowed that one hunter and one guide?
I would rather them take money from auction tags on AI and use it in the budget than take wildlife Division funds out of the general state fund to use for the same thing. If they cut Division funds then what do you think will happen? This way they can get money and keep Division funds for wildlife.
Finally I as a member of these "Orgs" wouldn't want to stop it.
If we were real smart we would all join together and fight to ride the coat tail of this proposal and get a tag in the general draw or something. Maybe a raffle tag? It's like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that jam in "PORK" and push these bills through. Why can't we sportsmen have a little "PORK" and get a draw tag or two out of it?
What if the park says "no" to the posse that these outfitters have sometimes? What if it is just allowed that one hunter and one guide?
I would rather them take money from auction tags on AI and use it in the budget than take wildlife Division funds out of the general state fund to use for the same thing. If they cut Division funds then what do you think will happen? This way they can get money and keep Division funds for wildlife.
Finally I as a member of these "Orgs" wouldn't want to stop it.
H
hoytme
Guest
Someone has gotten greedy, but I don't think it is the average hunter, but rather the conservation groups. Comparing it to tithing is ironic, since LDS faithful pay their tithes to the Lord almighty, and it seems several on here think that the Lord and DP are one and the same.
As for the percentage of LE/OIL tags that are GIVEN to the conservation groups; There should be a cap per species/unit that limits the number of tags GIVEN to the conservation groups. When is enough tags enough?
I am also confused as to the personal attacks and calling some of those who have a different viewpoint "socialists", as DP did, or whiners as others have. How arrogant is it to expect, check that, demand, all sportsmen stay in the bread line and never speak up or try and get more than a few stale crumbs.
I read an article in the "Sportsmen's Voice" in the Winter 2009 edition that was well written. The author is Karen Gordon, out of Alaska. She mostly talks about how economics have a major impact in hunting and wildlife management. She talks about how Federal agencies mostly ration instead of manage for abundance. I am in agreement with her, but confused how SFW, who put out this magazine, can justify advocating rationing instead of managing for abundance right here in Utah? Someone is an earlier post said if we put the tags back into the pool it wouldn't make much difference in any one person drawing a permit that year, and I agree if that were all there is to the equation. But it's not, we ration (limit) the number of permits issued in large part to generate more funds from the conservation tags. If we instead managed our herds more for abundance instead of rationing to keep 'money tags' in high demand, we could issue a far greater amount of permits, have better balanced elk/deer herds, and still have high quality animals to hunt.
Having 60% of the permits issued to the most effective weapon during the two times mature bulls are most vulnerable forces rationing. Basing the number of permits on the average age of bulls harvested forces even more rationing. Then, to keep raising the harvest age objectives forces even more rationing. Where does it end? Are age objectives of 10+ years in the near future? Can't sportsmen see that age is only one of several factors that determine 'world class' antlers? Hunting bull elk and having success rates in excess of 85% during the rut, year-in and year-out will affect 'quality' as much, or more, as age objectives do. You want bigger bulls on a unit, move the rifle hunt out of BOTH September and November, and give a higher percentage of the permits to less effective weapons. The average harvest age on the high end units for the last three years is 7.8 years old. That means the 'average' bull killed on these units is at his peak antler growth age already. How will increasing the age objective result in bigger bulls than now? Answer, it WILL NOT.
As for the percentage of LE/OIL tags that are GIVEN to the conservation groups; There should be a cap per species/unit that limits the number of tags GIVEN to the conservation groups. When is enough tags enough?
I am also confused as to the personal attacks and calling some of those who have a different viewpoint "socialists", as DP did, or whiners as others have. How arrogant is it to expect, check that, demand, all sportsmen stay in the bread line and never speak up or try and get more than a few stale crumbs.
I read an article in the "Sportsmen's Voice" in the Winter 2009 edition that was well written. The author is Karen Gordon, out of Alaska. She mostly talks about how economics have a major impact in hunting and wildlife management. She talks about how Federal agencies mostly ration instead of manage for abundance. I am in agreement with her, but confused how SFW, who put out this magazine, can justify advocating rationing instead of managing for abundance right here in Utah? Someone is an earlier post said if we put the tags back into the pool it wouldn't make much difference in any one person drawing a permit that year, and I agree if that were all there is to the equation. But it's not, we ration (limit) the number of permits issued in large part to generate more funds from the conservation tags. If we instead managed our herds more for abundance instead of rationing to keep 'money tags' in high demand, we could issue a far greater amount of permits, have better balanced elk/deer herds, and still have high quality animals to hunt.
Having 60% of the permits issued to the most effective weapon during the two times mature bulls are most vulnerable forces rationing. Basing the number of permits on the average age of bulls harvested forces even more rationing. Then, to keep raising the harvest age objectives forces even more rationing. Where does it end? Are age objectives of 10+ years in the near future? Can't sportsmen see that age is only one of several factors that determine 'world class' antlers? Hunting bull elk and having success rates in excess of 85% during the rut, year-in and year-out will affect 'quality' as much, or more, as age objectives do. You want bigger bulls on a unit, move the rifle hunt out of BOTH September and November, and give a higher percentage of the permits to less effective weapons. The average harvest age on the high end units for the last three years is 7.8 years old. That means the 'average' bull killed on these units is at his peak antler growth age already. How will increasing the age objective result in bigger bulls than now? Answer, it WILL NOT.
No offense but you still are not getting it. I do not in anyway worship DP or SFW but I am smart enough to realize the good they have done. I have never personally met Don or any big names from SFW but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the results they have produced. Open your eyes and look at the last 10 years.
As far as elk I am all about giving more tags to less effective weapons and limiting rifle hunts in the rut but I don't see what that has to do with this post. That is a completely different topic. A percentage cap is necessary but not a number cap on conservation tags. If we set the cap at 5 when we only had 1000 OIL then we would likely still only have 1000-1500 OIL tags. As we build and grow the herds (as the programs for conservation tags are working) we increase the number of tags on a percentage basis. If it is 5% great but as the program picks up speed and we see improvement why would we ever want to stop the progress being made?
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
As far as elk I am all about giving more tags to less effective weapons and limiting rifle hunts in the rut but I don't see what that has to do with this post. That is a completely different topic. A percentage cap is necessary but not a number cap on conservation tags. If we set the cap at 5 when we only had 1000 OIL then we would likely still only have 1000-1500 OIL tags. As we build and grow the herds (as the programs for conservation tags are working) we increase the number of tags on a percentage basis. If it is 5% great but as the program picks up speed and we see improvement why would we ever want to stop the progress being made?
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
One last point. There are already buffalo hunts on the island so why do people think hunting will tarnish the "image" of this state park. There have been hunts going on there for a long time. The people against hunting on the island are to late. Whats the difference between hunting sheep versus buffalo. Or deer versus buffalo? These buffalo hunts have not "RUINED" this "shining jewel of Davis county" so why would deer and sheep hunting hurt it? especially with the money that could be used to actually improve the park!!!
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,482
Jason - For me personally, I'm OK with hunting deer and sheep on the island, of course with strict rules. I'm not OK with the state selling these tags to pay bills that are unrelated to wildlife. You have been arguing FOR conservation tags. These are not conservation tags. The tags they want to sell are supposedly going to fund Antelope Island. Everyone in this state owns Antelope Island, and everyone should pay for it. Raise our taxes by 50 cents per year to raise the 250k and give us sportsmen all 4 tags. That's my opinion.
I honestly beleive that by opening this can of worms where state legislators can sell OUR hunting opportunities to pay state bills, is a BAD, BAD, BAD thing. This will not be the end. If this passes, more requests will come in the future. 2 years from now it'll be a rep. somewhere wanting a Book Cliffs tag to auction to pay for county snowplows, then this, then that. Just a bad idea.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I honestly beleive that by opening this can of worms where state legislators can sell OUR hunting opportunities to pay state bills, is a BAD, BAD, BAD thing. This will not be the end. If this passes, more requests will come in the future. 2 years from now it'll be a rep. somewhere wanting a Book Cliffs tag to auction to pay for county snowplows, then this, then that. Just a bad idea.
Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
I may be wrong on this and if I am feel free to correct me. It is my understanding that the revenue generated from the sell of these prmits will go to the State Parks not the DWR.
I am also led to believe that the Island is loosing money every year and is looking for a way to generate some possitive income.Bottom line just relying on tourist and sighting is not cutting the mustard.
I heard of an idea yesterday that makes the most sense of anything I have heard. Turn the Island into a Wildlife Management Area.
Leave the North End as Park (Like it use to be) and turn the south end into a Wildlife Management Area controlled by the DWR.
This opens up a huge amount of oportunity for all sportsman and outdoor enthusist ie limited chuckar,waterfowl hunting etc.
Back in the mid 70's there were 6 to 8 deer taken a year off the Island the population estimate was around 6 or 7 hundred. The only difference now is Coyotes are being allowed to hunt deer and we are not. Larry mentioned in his post that it is a 2 to 1 ratio and he never see's any antelope fawns. Any one want to venture out and take a wild guess as why. With no fawn survival and recrutment are we just going to continue to transplant animals out there for people to view when the adults die off? I dont know about you but I would rather have hunters benifit from this resource rather than feed a bunch of dogs.
Lets start managing and using the resource. If it means allowing a couple of permits to be auctioned off so be it. I know one thing if hunting is allowed back on the Island it will insure there will be more wildlife for everyone to enjoy. Hunters have always been willing to put thier money were thier mouth is and foot the bill!
Troy Justensen
I am also led to believe that the Island is loosing money every year and is looking for a way to generate some possitive income.Bottom line just relying on tourist and sighting is not cutting the mustard.
I heard of an idea yesterday that makes the most sense of anything I have heard. Turn the Island into a Wildlife Management Area.
Leave the North End as Park (Like it use to be) and turn the south end into a Wildlife Management Area controlled by the DWR.
This opens up a huge amount of oportunity for all sportsman and outdoor enthusist ie limited chuckar,waterfowl hunting etc.
Back in the mid 70's there were 6 to 8 deer taken a year off the Island the population estimate was around 6 or 7 hundred. The only difference now is Coyotes are being allowed to hunt deer and we are not. Larry mentioned in his post that it is a 2 to 1 ratio and he never see's any antelope fawns. Any one want to venture out and take a wild guess as why. With no fawn survival and recrutment are we just going to continue to transplant animals out there for people to view when the adults die off? I dont know about you but I would rather have hunters benifit from this resource rather than feed a bunch of dogs.
Lets start managing and using the resource. If it means allowing a couple of permits to be auctioned off so be it. I know one thing if hunting is allowed back on the Island it will insure there will be more wildlife for everyone to enjoy. Hunters have always been willing to put thier money were thier mouth is and foot the bill!
Troy Justensen
bowhunt
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,192
I am all for IT!
We should also open up all other State Parks, and try to get our National Parks open.
I have a Desert Sheep tag this year, and would LOVE to hunt Zions Park. I would pay extra. That would really help the park.
I would love to bid on a Buffalo Tag for Yellowstone, I hear the Park is running in the Red.
I would also like to see the "Rest Ponds" on all of our waterfowl reserves be opened up to those that make a significant donation to the reserve. The roads suck out there, this could really help
We should also open up all other State Parks, and try to get our National Parks open.
I have a Desert Sheep tag this year, and would LOVE to hunt Zions Park. I would pay extra. That would really help the park.
I would love to bid on a Buffalo Tag for Yellowstone, I hear the Park is running in the Red.
I would also like to see the "Rest Ponds" on all of our waterfowl reserves be opened up to those that make a significant donation to the reserve. The roads suck out there, this could really help
Troy, thanks for participating on this subject. Even though we disagree on a few topics, I personally enjoy your imput and knowledge. One thing I do agree on, is that predator management is key to the problem with the deer herds. I know hunting the deer out there is a want, not a need. but until they take measures to get the deer herd numbers up, I don't like the idea of hunting them. Selling the tags will not solve the Parks budget problems. I may be wrong, but I believe the last two years, the island has been in the black.
Yelum
Yelum
The article and news report do not give specifics on where the money will be spent but I am assuming if they use it to improve habitat and the park in general that can only help a sheep and deer program out there. If a large percentage of that money is used to move the sheep and deer populations forward and to help this sheep "nursery" then how could it be a bad thing. If it opens doors for new hunting opportunities how can that be a bad thing. I just get tired of people feeling like the wealthy hunter is taking away opportunities from the average joe when looking at the numbers that just is not true. As far as other organizations like schools wanting to hop in on this and getting a piece of money from our wildlife I just think it is far fetched. I don't see anything like that ever being passed because they don't relate to each other in anyway. It could be proposed but it would never go anywhere. IMO
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
Jason Yates
Basin Archery Shop
http://www.basinarcheryshop.com
5% OFF to all MonsterMuleys.com Members!!!
Discount code = monstermuleys
