Southern RAC for the 2022 season

pushin_30

pushin_30

Very Active Member
Messages
1,089
So I heard one of the big items brought up on the southern RAC this past week was the issue with the new long range muzzleloaders and optics.
Looks like round 1 of 5 voted unanimously to do away with them and go back to the more Primitive style once again.
What’s your thoughts!
 
Im all for going back to more primitive. The person who made the motion brought up good points. I’d even like to see rifle hunts go to single power or open sights on some units and see if success decreases. Making people less successful is the only realistic way to help with point creep.
 
Going back to 1x scopes on Muzzleloaders is a stupid idea. It's not going to do anything to help the deer and elk population in Utah or fix point creep. The DWR cannot in good faith limit Muzzleloader technology while allowing Rifle and archery technology to go unchecked.
I know of several animals that have been killed by archers out past 100 yards. Rifle hunters can shoot out past a grand and no one cares.
If the DWR wants to make a statement on technology, they would not allow archers to use hand held releases and limit rifle hunters to 4x scopes.
 
somedaya200 said:
Im all for going back to more primitive. The person who made the motion brought up good points. I’d even like to see rifle hunts go to single power or open sights on some units and see if success decreases. Making people less successful is the only realistic way to help with point creep.
Click to expand...
I am missing something, how does less effective hunters do anything for point creep, people will still have the points?
 
I support making muzzleloader more primitive.

They are basically single shot rifles that can shoot 400+ yards.

I don't care what you say a bow is still a primitive weapon, the effective range for 95% of guys no matter how good the bow is will be under 100 yards.

The effective range of a open site muzzleloader is still well above that.
 
lostinOregon said:
I am missing something, how does less effective hunters do anything for point creep, people will still have the points?
Click to expand...
If hunters are less effective, the division can issue more tags to achieve the same harvest. That gets more people through the system each year with the same amount of bucks on the landscape.

For a made up example. If a unit traditionally has 1000 tags with 50% success, that means each year 500 bucks get killed. If tags stayed at 1,000 but successes was 30%, only 300 bucks would get killed. So to get the theoretical 500 bucks harvested they could issue 1,666 tags. That's another 600+ people whos points get used up and ran through the system every year.
 
I posted the response below in a similar tread but I’m all for restrictions on technologies to preserve opportunities to be in the field hunting big game. Lower success rate equals more opportunities given the limits of the resources available. See below for my thoughts on the limits placed on all weapon types to put the hunt back into the hunt and to give the animals a chance to win the game from time to time. FYI I’m not a old fart nor am I a flat brim young guy either. Just someone that likes to hunt in my life long home state of Utah. I have been saving my 1x scope hoping this day would come.

I sent in my comments based on the proposal. Interesting in the survey data that people support preserving opportunities by limiting technologies and returning to more primitive weapon types but when asked specifically about restricting their rifles, muzzleloaders, or bows they did not support any changes. It does not work like that. High harvest success rates leads to less opportunity. Lower the success rates by restrictions on weapon technologies and opportunity will remain the same or increase along with increasing the age structure of the game on the landscape. It is one or the other. For me I would rather be out hunting with a fixed pin bow, 1x scoped muzzleloader, or a fixed 6x scoped rifle rather than waiting for years to finally draw a general permit along with having and higher likelihood of hunting a few older aged animals that are no longer getting shot from 1400 yards. I agree with the recommendations they have in the presentation and it is a baby step in the right direction on limiting technologies. Everyone is different and the DWR will never be able to make everyone happy so these are just my thoughts for what it is worth. Abuse is typically the leading cause for regulation. Outfitters with truck loads of apples, running 100’s of trail cameras on every limited water source, night vision guides keeping track of their target bucks 24/7 prior to their clients arriving, long range rifles set up for their clients to pull the trigger on, finding loopholes to gain advantages for their clients, etc. Everyone is punished in new regulation due to a few people’s actions. That is the society we live in.
 
Last edited:
Elk hit it right,WTF long range rifles that will shoot out 2 miles ,bows that shoot far past 100 yards????.do any of you that are bitching about modern muzzleloaders even hunt with the damm things.GET A LIFE and quit bitching about everything.
 
bucks said:
Elk hit it right,WTF long range rifles that will shoot out 2 miles ,bows that shoot far past 100 yards????.do any of you that are bitching about modern muzzleloaders even hunt with the damm things.GET A LIFE and quit bitching about everything.
Click to expand...
Man sorry this hit a sore spot for you!
 
bucks said:
Elk hit it right,WTF long range rifles that will shoot out 2 miles ,bows that shoot far past 100 yards????.do any of you that are bitching about modern muzzleloaders even hunt with the damm things.GET A LIFE and quit bitching about everything.
Click to expand...
Let's see you go make a 100 yard shot with a bow and get it insidea 12 inch ring, one arrow get er done bud.

Now I will hand you my buddies muzzloader and I guarantee you could hit a 12" ring at 400.

Stop with the bows shooting 100 yards BS it's not practical for 99% of people.
 
somedaya200 said:
If hunters are less effective, the division can issue more tags to achieve the same harvest. That gets more people through the system each year with the same amount of bucks on the landscape.

For a made up example. If a unit traditionally has 1000 tags with 50% success, that means each year 500 bucks get killed. If tags stayed at 1,000 but successes was 30%, only 300 bucks would get killed. So to get the theoretical 500 bucks harvested they could issue 1,666 tags. That's another 600+ people whos points get used up and ran through the system every year.
Click to expand...
Is there really point creep on the general hunts for residents? If you take away the scopes or go back to one power on the premium hunts, folks will simply wait for the rifle hunt and cause more point creep.
 
lostinOregon said:
Is there really point creep on the general hunts for residents? If you take away the scopes or go back to one power on the premium hunts, folks will simply wait for the rifle hunt and cause more point creep.
Click to expand...
In a rac meeting a few months ago the division said some general season units will take 10+ years to draw soon. So yeah there is a problem. Each year the division gets an additional 10% new applications that are people that haven’t ever put in before. So even if it’s not huge now, in less than 10 years there will be twice the number of hunters trying to get licenses. That’s why I’d be in favor for some type of restrictions for all hunts, not just muzzleloader, but going back on just muzzleloaders would be a step in the right direction for now. It’s also not just general season deer either, but all hunts that could benefit from similar changes. That’s just my 2 cents though.
 
elkassassin said:
Take Them!

But Not Until You Take These With Them:

StickFlippers with Compound Bows Will Go Back To a Recurves!

Long Range Rifle Hunters Will Be Using Lever Actions With No Scopes!

Carry On
Click to expand...

I’d love to see some units in Utah try just that, as well as getting rid of all trail cam use year round. I think once everybody saw how much it’d change everybody would be asking for their “unit” to do the same. Guarantee there would be a change in the proportion of mature bucks in the population. People wouldn’t harvest as often, but there’d be a better chance to see a mature buck while also giving out more tags.
 
JakeH said:
I support making muzzleloader more primitive.

They are basically single shot rifles that can shoot 400+ yards.

I don't care what you say a bow is still a primitive weapon, the effective range for 95% of guys no matter how good the bow is will be under 100 yards.

The effective range of a open site muzzleloader is still well above that.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure that I remember one of the key members of the WB, saying something to the effect that a “muzzleloader is a muzzeloader even if you put a scope on it”, lol, minutes before they passed the rule change allowing scopes on muzzleloaders. I don’t think there is any doubt that hunters are taking advantage of advances in technology in all manners of hunting.
 
I guarantee there are more bucks killed or wounded by long rangers flinging arrows at 100 yards plus or rifle shooters cracking them off at 800 yards than there is with people shooting 400 yards with muzzleloaders.

3 years ago, on a late cow elk hunt I saw a truck pulled off the side of the road and a guy leaned across the toolbox in the back shooting at elk up on a side hill. I ranged the elk, and they were 1300 yards away.
 
gundog2 said:
I’m pretty sure that I remember one of the key members of the WB, saying something to the effect that a “muzzleloader is a muzzeloader even if you put a scope on it”, lol, minutes before they passed the rule change allowing scopes on muzzleloaders. I don’t think there is any doubt that hunters are taking advantage of advances in technology in all manners of hunting.
Click to expand...

It was the chair of the WB that made that comment. I was not happy about that comment with my understanding that the magnification of the scope was the limiting factor of what a muzzleloader was capable of. This was in the December 2015 WB meeting and you can listen to that ridiculous comment as they passed the rule. Mind you the Remington 700 muzzleloader was in production at this time. My friend built a custom 1000 yard muzzleloader soon after this rule change, Gunwerks got on board, CVA, etc. The muzzleloader hunt was fine before the rule change and I wish they would have left it alone. Now that people are shooting 500+ yards with a muzzleloader they will be thinking they need to have us dress in hunters orange, start the hunt on a Saturday, and treat us in every way as a rifle hunter. That is not a muzzleloader hunt to me, I still pride myself in how close I can get to a animal before pulling the trigger and not in bragging about how long my shot was. Hunting or shooting can be a forever debate in today’s weapon technologies but I prefer to have some challenge to the hunt outside of just pulling a trigger. Just my thoughts and I do share my thoughts during the public comment periods of the RAC/WB meetings not just on MM. There is a adverse to ever decision made and I think this one is clear that it was a move in the wrong direction. I am glad they are looking at correcting it.
 
There is a world of difference between open sights and a telescope. A scope is a clear advantage.

As someone who hunts in a state that requires a “more primitive “ ML, I’m perfectly happy and glad we have the restrictions we do. Well, that sabot thing is a little goofy.
 
I understand that opportunity is suffering. Someone mentioned it above, there is just too much demand for the supply. So give everyone rocks and tell them to hit the hills. The next thread will be about the severe Over crowding on their primitive stone hunt. . Overcrowding and Hunt Season length is already a topic of concern right ? If a person really wants to hunt every year, it can be done. There are plenty of hunts, States, tags around to get your fix. Its just a matter of effort, money and desire to figure out how to put one or several tags in your pocket every year. just my .02 though.
 
There are only a select few that take the time to learn how to shoot a muzzleloader at any extreme yardage the average Hunter doesn’t have the time or the dollars to invest in the type of muzzleloader or scope that it takes to pull off the shots.
That really goes for lots of centerfire rifle‘s most people don’t take the time to learn what is needed to shoot over 500 yards consistently and I’ve been shooting 100 yards with my bow since the 80s a old round cam PSE.
Habitat and vehicle mortality are what we should be worried about not guys and their toys half the guys I talk to can’t find a deer or elk if they did leave their truck
 
The separate muzzleloader hunt as originally set up as a primitive weapon hunt. There are still a few around this forum that would remember with the push was made to add the season. It was by the a lot of the guys in my avatar pic. As humans do we have taken advantage of the opportunity and manipulated it away from what was the original intent.

Without question the muzzy hunt should do back to a primitive weapon hunt, the way it was intended to start with. Yes technology needs to be addressed across the board. But I believe it should start with addressing the issues like muzzy hunt, something that was set up and given a special season to be a primitive weapon hunt should stay a primitive weapon hunt. The rifle hunt has ALWAYS been called and managed as an any weapon hunt. The archery has evolved at well but not as far from its origin at the muzzy hunt.
 
Muley_73 said:
The separate muzzleloader hunt as originally set up as a primitive weapon hunt. There are still a few around this forum that would remember with the push was made to add the season. It was by the a lot of the guys in my avatar pic. As humans do we have taken advantage of the opportunity and manipulated it away from what was the original intent.

Without question the muzzy hunt should do back to a primitive weapon hunt, the way it was intended to start with. Yes technology needs to be addressed across the board. But I believe it should start with addressing the issues like muzzy hunt, something that was set up and given a special season to be a primitive weapon hunt should stay a primitive weapon hunt. The rifle hunt has ALWAYS been called and managed as an any weapon hunt. The archery has evolved at well but not as far from its origin at the muzzy hunt.
Click to expand...

I'm all for putting the muzzleloader hunt back to what it was originally set up as. That includes November hunt dates for deer.

Also, I Disagree with you in that I think Archery equipment has evolved way more than muzzleloaders.
 
The purpose to limit technology it to help the deer herds. Utah deer herds are not in the shape to handle Nov hunts.

Having shot a lot of archery and a lot of the new high end muzzy I am going to stick to my comment that muzzy hunting as FAR surpassed archery in evolution and technology when it comes to effective range. 1980s compounds were shooting effectively 50-60 yards. Now some can push them out to 100-120 yards...so double. Muzzy in the 1980s were 100-150 yards. Now 600-800 yards...not doubled not even quadrupled, X8!!!. The muzzy today are more accurate out to 600-800 than most rifles in the 1980s.
 
Put This In The MM History Book:

There Will NEVER F'N EVER Be Enough Changes Made In TARDvilles PISS POOR Big Game Management To Bring The Deer Herd Back To What It Could be!

SAD!

But F'N True!
 
somedaya200 said:
Im all for going back to more primitive. The person who made the motion brought up good points. I’d even like to see rifle hunts go to single power or open sights on some units and see if success decreases. Making people less successful is the only realistic way to help with point creep.
Click to expand...
Agree!
 
elkantlers said:
Going back to 1x scopes on Muzzleloaders is a stupid idea. It's not going to do anything to help the deer and elk population in Utah or fix point creep. The DWR cannot in good faith limit Muzzleloader technology while allowing Rifle and archery technology to go unchecked.
I know of several animals that have been killed by archers out past 100 yards. Rifle hunters can shoot out past a grand and no one cares.
If the DWR wants to make a statement on technology, they would not allow archers to use hand held releases and limit rifle hunters to 4x scopes.
Click to expand...
Agree, but they have to start somewhere.
 
elkantlers said:
I guarantee there are more bucks killed or wounded by long rangers flinging arrows at 100 yards plus or rifle shooters cracking them off at 800 yards than there is with people shooting 400 yards with muzzleloaders.

3 years ago, on a late cow elk hunt I saw a truck pulled off the side of the road and a guy leaned across the toolbox in the back shooting at elk up on a side hill. I ranged the elk, and they were 1300 yards away.
Click to expand...
Sounds like we need to limit technology on all of them then.
 
In my opinion limiting technology would have no effect on improving animal quality or quantity. If you were to take away “long range” rifles, bows, etc, then people would just go back to doing what they did 15 years ago. They would try to guess how much they need to hold over and end up wounding multiple animals which walk of and die and are never found. Same thing happens today. I can’t believe how many stories I’ve heard around town and on hunting pod casts lately about people drawing limited entry tags, then wounding animals they can’t find, then assuming it must have lived and going on to shoot other animals until they get one on the ground. For some reason people think that because they had to wait 15-20 years for a tag, that means they are entitled to keep wounding animals until they get one they can find. In my opinion this is the most unethical behavior imaginable. You wound an animal you can’t find your hunt should be over. Regardless if you think it probably lived. I think a lot of extra animals are being killed and never found and it’s having some effect on the herds. As much as it sucks to lose opportunity, in my opinion is whatever changes they make to try to help out the herds they decide on will definitely need to include massive tag cuts for a few years to have any real effect. If us as hunters aren’t careful and stop being so greedy,(this includes assuming we are entitled to a tag every year), mule deer especially are going to end up getting managed like wolves are…in courts with decisions being made by emotions instead of by wildlife managers and states. This is all just my opinion.
 
I'll Agree With Just about All of What You Said except That 2nd to Last Sentence!

WildLife Managers Have Had Their Chance & Have Failed!



Nev638 said:
In my opinion limiting technology would have no effect on improving animal quality or quantity. If you were to take away “long range” rifles, bows, etc, then people would just go back to doing what they did 15 years ago. They would try to guess how much they need to hold over and end up wounding multiple animals which walk of and die and are never found. Same thing happens today. I can’t believe how many stories I’ve heard around town and on hunting pod casts lately about people drawing limited entry tags, then wounding animals they can’t find, then assuming it must have lived and going on to shoot other animals until they get one on the ground. For some reason people think that because they had to wait 15-20 years for a tag, that means they are entitled to keep wounding animals until they get one they can find. In my opinion this is the most unethical behavior imaginable. You wound an animal you can’t find your hunt should be over. Regardless if you think it probably lived. I think a lot of extra animals are being killed and never found and it’s having some effect on the herds. As much as it sucks to lose opportunity, in my opinion is whatever changes they make to try to help out the herds they decide on will definitely need to include massive tag cuts for a few years to have any real effect. If us as hunters aren’t careful and stop being so greedy,(this includes assuming we are entitled to a tag every year), mule deer especially are going to end up getting managed like wolves are…in courts with decisions being made by emotions instead of by wildlife managers and states. This is all just my opinion.
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
I'll Agree With Just about All of What You Said except That 2nd to Last Sentence!

WildLife Managers Have Had Their Chance & Have Failed!
Click to expand...
Yes you are probably right. It would be nice if they would actually do real herd counts and do mandatory harvest surveys for ALL hunts and manage off that data. I’m okay with technology helping people be more successful. They just need to adjust management to match. They need to stop the practice of anticipating low harvest rates so they can hand out tons of tags. I’m not saying everything needs to be managed for trophies, but they need to actually manage for healthy herd numbers. If they did that, then people could have hunts where they see lots of animals and still have a chance for a trophy if they want to work for it. The current practice of giving out 2000 tags on a unit that only has 1000 bucks and hoping for low success so that everything isn’t wiped out needs to end.
 
Until they admit what the population really is nothing will help a whole bunch. Cutting a few more tags in these units with no deer will not help, because no deer to start. Kill off the small bucks that did not have antlers last year is all that is happening. No mature bucks left.
 
southernutahhunter said:
Until they admit what the population really is nothing will help a whole bunch. Cutting a few more tags in these units with no deer will not help, because no deer to start. Kill off the small bucks that did not have antlers last year is all that is happening. No mature bucks left.
Click to expand...
Agreed! I hear everyone say that cutting tags hasn’t or doesn’t help. That’s because the tags have never been cut enough to make a difference. Some units need to be shutdown completely for few years. That doesn’t not mean shove the hunters to another unit. I get that this isn’t a popular view. But that is my view on the health of the herd above hunter opportunity. Utah has long ago killed the golden goose. If you don’t get drastic it will fade all the way away.
 
I do believe most hunters believe habitat improvement and Fencing off highways are needed.
So you want the DWR to cut tags drastically and from what I understand on other threads you all want Conservation tags eliminated.
How do you all propose we are going to fund the DWR budget and complete habitat improvements and highways being fenced.
Tough to get much done when you have no money.
 
notdonhunting said:
I do believe most hunters believe habitat improvement and Fencing off highways are needed.
So you want the DWR to cut tags drastically and from what I understand on other threads you all want Conservation tags eliminated.
How do you all propose we are going to fund the DWR budget and complete habitat improvements and highways being fenced.
Tough to get much done when you have no money.
Click to expand...
I've always said that Conservation Tags have a very important place. If they are handled properly. On top of that you could easily increase the cost of the tags across the state and actually generate more dollars than I currently being generated. Money is not an issue, its just another excuse to validate poor management.
 
There Should Never Be Any Units Shut Down!

If The Deer Herd Was Managed Properly There'd Be No Need For Closing Units!

Remember When We Went To Many Smaller Units To Help Manage the Deer/Herd Better?

How'd That Play Out For Everybody?

PISS POOR MANAGEMENT!!!
 
elkassassin said:
There Should Never Be Any Units Shut Down!

If The Deer Herd Was Managed Properly There'd Be No Need For Closing Units!

Remember When We Went To Many Smaller Units To Help Manage the Deer/Herd Better?

How'd That Play Out For Everybody?

PISS POOR MANAGEMENT!!!
Click to expand...
Bess,
The only reason that the small units didn't work is that they chose to not use the tool it provided them to manage. You can have a knife in your pocket but if you don't pull it out and use it when you need to cut some thing , it ain't real useful.

I disagree on never shutting down any units. Soley on the fact that history has shown we can not properly manage the resource. Blame it on any number of things you want. Hunters, weather, technology, predators, road kills, habitat...pick one! Bottom line we manage poorly regarding all of them. If you don't eliminate some the things you have control over you'll never get back on top of this. The most controllable thing when managing wildlife is hunters yet that is the last thing we want to do.
 
I have mixed feelings about cutting tags. There are a few things we can do to help the herd and cutting tags is one of them. I do know if we cut tags tremendously the buck quality will go up. If it's true they're giving out more tags than there are bucks that's flat out ridiculous. If cutting tags will help then so be it.That is poor management indeed.
 
Last edited:
I Totally Agree Muley_73!

But!

With Proper Management!

Which We've Never Had!

There'd Be No Reason For Closing Units!




Muley_73 said:
Bess,
The only reason that the small units didn't work is that they chose to not use the tool it provided them to manage. You can have a knife in your pocket but if you don't pull it out and use it when you need to cut some thing , it ain't real useful.

I disagree on never shutting down any units. Soley on the fact that history has shown we can not properly manage the resource. Blame it on any number of things you want. Hunters, weather, technology, predators, road kills, habitat...pick one! Bottom line we manage poorly regarding all of them. If you don't eliminate some the things you have control over you'll never get back on top of this. The most controllable thing when managing wildlife is hunters yet that is the last thing we want to do.
Click to expand...
 
How about you use the money from the conservation tags for the Utah Division of Wildlife instead of SFW, that might be a start on how to fund. If tag sales are tied to the budget for wildlife agencies the wildlife will always lose. Cost of living increases and inflation will rise at a rate faster than the amount of tags they can sell. That's why you see more hunts every year trying to keep up with inflation. It is a dead-end strategy.

Rich
 
If I remember right to raise the cost of hunting permits more than a set percent (I can not remember the percent) of the current permit price the the Utah legislation must make that price raise, and good luck with that.
I might be wrong.
 
I do belive there has been some improvements on some of the units.
I posted on another thread of the does, fawns and bucks I saw from just a short evening drive on winter range on the south end of the Manti unit and it is a good improvement from past years.
I know of more than a few mature bucks taken this past season from the south end of the Manti with one being over 200.
There has been some habitat improvements on the south end of the Manti and they have taken a significant amount of elk off of the south end of the Manti and I do belive it has helped.
I know the Fish Lake deer numbers has continued to decrease but I believe the elk numbers has been going up.
i don't know much about the rest of the state but you will find it hard to find any units in the state that have more hunting pressure and two units that are more similar than each other, talking about terrain, habitat, elk and deer numbers than the Manti and the Fish Lake and they seem to be going in opposite directions.
We have been cutting tags since the mid 1990s and we have continued to lose deer numbers.
 
Cutting buck tags isn't going to do sh!t in the long run, bucks don't make more deer, unless you are truly shooting out the whole buck population (I do not think that is happening).

You want to help the herd you need to figure out why the population keeps dropping, It defiantly isn't because of the number of bucks being killed by hunters. They have cut tags by more then half of what they was in the 70's. There are lots of things contributing to the declining population I don't think they are being over hunted, now if you want to talk age structure then you could argue they are issuing to many tags, but then you are looking at not hunting at all for several years at a time. I used to be in that camp, but not so much anymore, at least not as drastic as some are.

Hell if bess had his way we would be managing everything like Antelope Island.
 
JakeH said:
Hell if bess had his way we would be managing everything like Antelope Island.
Click to expand...
If Bess had his way he’d be the only one in the state that got to hunt at all! Of course it’d be a statewide tag aug 1- jan 31 every year :ROFLMAO: then he would still complain about something…I’ve come to realize bess likes to complain more than hunt and it’s not even close ??
 
I Guess You PUNKS Are Too Young To Know What This State Once Was!

You Don't Wanna Give Anything Up Because You Wanna Pound a MOTL Buck Every F'N Year!

Just Keep Pounding Your PISSCUTTERS So You Can Post Them On Social media with the 'LOOK AT ME' ATTITUDE!

Anything Wrong With Them ALCATRAZ Bucks JakeH?:D
 
JakeH said:
I guess if you're OK with only looking at them they are great, cause your never gonna hunt one bess.


Yes so tightly managed you will only hunt them once in your lifetime if your lucky.
Click to expand...
Or back before $3 and enabling outfitters made the ends of the earth accessible to everyone.
 
No matter what the reason is and there are many the deer population is in terrible shape. Mature bucks are becoming a thing of the past, The buck hunt now is a hunt for 2 year olds and younger. I guess that this will be the new normal. I feel bad for the younger generation.
 
As long as there is even a tiny voice out there saying, don't cut or just let us hunt, the state will use that to continue to manage poorly and throw their hands in the air while blaming all the things I listed above. Hunters were once the greatest champion of conservation and rebuilding herds. Not the case any more. 40 plus years I've come from a family that has fought to have better managed mule deer in Utah and its honestly a waste of time. Not because of anti hunters or trophy hunters or outfitters or guides, or human population increase or habitat lose or weather or predators. Its from hunters that want their opportunity above all else and a management system that is more than happy to take the easy route and give them that.
 
And those opportunities start in August and run through January. Wildlife constantly feeling pressure. Then the reason is drought that causes deer to go into winter in poor health. Maybe we need add being chased for 5 straight months for the sake of opportunity as a reason these deer are going into winters in poor health.
 
Muley_73 said:
As long as there is even a tiny voice out there saying, don't cut or just let us hunt, the state will use that to continue to manage poorly and throw their hands in the air while blaming all the things I listed above. Hunters were once the greatest champion of conservation and rebuilding herds. Not the case any more. 40 plus years I've come from a family that has fought to have better managed mule deer in Utah and its honestly a waste of time. Not because of anti hunters or trophy hunters or outfitters or guides, or human population increase or habitat lose or weather or predators. Its from hunters that want their opportunity above all else and a management system that is more than happy to take the easy route and give them that.
Click to expand...

What would the number of permits be acceptable? (Ball Park Figure)
If you can not give a number, then how would you suggest to come up with a number?
 
It would depend on the unit. That was the entire push for the smaller units. Actual management for each unit and an actual plan for each unit. I even give opportunity to try different solutions. Even keep some units with high tag numbers and see how it effects the overall herd compared to another unit. It takes actual management and working for a solution rather than the blanket method. Answer me this, if a private group ran a unit would they figure out a way to have more deer on the unit?
 
As someone who bought a high dollar muzzy last year, they can change the rules again. I will play by them. Some hunters will always find a way to optimize there equipment within the rules. You better take away high velocity powder and inline's if you want to make any type of difference though. I will also be a proponent to take away all the archery technology we have seen in the last 50 years also. If you believe in one you better believe in the other. Your not changing my mind either.......
 
I am like Muley the purpose of small units was to better manage. Why not try some suggestions on these units to see what may work. Not all units look the same. Some probably need to be closed. Others you could try suggestions given and then see what units do better by the changes made.
 
ELKOHOLIC said:
As someone who bought a high dollar muzzy last year, they can change the rules again. I will play by them. Some hunters will always find a way to optimize there equipment within the rules. You better take away high velocity powder and inline's if you want to make any type of difference though. I will also be a proponent to take away all the archery technology we have seen in the last 50 years also. If you believe in one you better believe in the other. Your not changing my mind either.......
Click to expand...
I don't disagree at all on this.
 
elkassassin said:
I Guess You PUNKS Are Too Young To Know What This State Once Was!

You Don't Wanna Give Anything Up Because You Wanna Pound a MOTL Buck Every F'N Year!

Just Keep Pounding Your PISSCUTTERS So You Can Post Them On Social media with the 'LOOK AT ME' ATTITUDE!

Anything Wrong With Them ALCATRAZ Bucks JakeH?:D
Click to expand...
If your packing a camera you have to kill something. THis has got to stop.
 
Tge DWR have been adjusting numbers according to the unit's needs. I gave an example of two unit's that are all but the same only freeway divides them the Manti and the Fish Lake unit's and the Manti deer numbers seem to be trending up or at least staying the same
and the Fish Lake is diffintly trending down. The Manti unit permit numbers have stayed comparatively the same (slight fluctuations) and the Fish Lake permit numbers have been significantly cut over the last 3 or 4 years. I was up on the Fish Lake unit this past rifle hunting in an area that normally has a large amount of hunters hunting and we only saw one group of hunters of around 6 guys and ladies and they was in UTVS.
So yes I think the DWR is trying to adjust according to unit's needs

You still did not answer how do the DWR decide how to adjust the numbers of permits according to unit's.
Do they adjusting according to game biologist or hunters complaints, how do they come up with a number, most on this site don't believe the DWR numbers so again how do we determine permit numbers.
Muley_73 said:
It would depend on the unit. That was the entire push for the smaller units. Actual management for each unit and an actual plan for each unit. I even give opportunity to try different solutions. Even keep some units with high tag numbers and see how it effects the overall herd compared to another unit. It takes actual management and working for a solution rather than the blanket method. Answer me this, if a private group ran a unit would they figure out a way to have more deer on the unit?
Click to expand...
 
It starts with effective and accurate counts. It’s intresting to bring in the Biologist factor. Many cases show that the division either manipulates or flat ignores the recommendations of thier own biologists. If they get push back they are moved to new postions.
 
Yes and they get numbers by taking a sample and plugging it into some formula. It does not even come close to being accurate. Also we are not saying it is all about cutting tags. There are other suggestions that can be implemented on some units to see if they might work.
 
southernutahhunter said:
Did not play out well at all. Should not have to shut down units but sad reality is that it is needed in order to save the herd
Click to expand...
Which units do you think need to be shut down? I spent a fair amount of time on both Pine Valley and Zion this year and didn’t either of those would benefit from a shut down. I personally think the drought that is plaguing the west is the biggest current problem hindering our deer herds.
 
If you look at most units they are not anywhere near historical numbers. The objective numbers amazingly are always very close to the Divisions "model" count. According to historical numbers the state had a minimum of 800,000 plus deer. If you use the Divisions actual calculation model that number is closer to 1.2 million. Now current numbers are arguably hovering around 300,000. So current tag allocation is actually higher than in the past based on total hunters vs total number of deer. You can literally go put the time in and use the Divisions numbers (fawn counts, harvest success, buck to doe counts) and calculate that many units issue more tags than there are bucks on the unit.
You say Manti is good...good compared to when the state had 1 million deer or good compared to I saw few more deer this year than I did the last couple. You can go look at literally any traditional winter grounds and where there were 1000s in the even the 80s there are zero to 50. Then you get a little blimp and see 100 in that area and guys jump on and say there are a TON of deer in the area and its all good!!! Its been so bad for so long most don't ever realize how bad it really is.
 
southernutahhunter said:
They did kill doe on these units for years. Like Muley said this did not happen over night or last season. This is years of steadily going downhill.
Click to expand...
I don't think Utah has had a serious Doe hunt for 20 years or more. Yes they used to kill doe's but they haven't for a long damn time and the herds are still declining.

I used to be firmly in the "we need to cut tags camp" but the more I look at the whole picture something else is going on, and not just in Utah. Probably the biggest factor is human expansion but honestly that's not all of it.
Look at the Book Cliffs very limited buck hunting extremely limited Doe hunting (if any) and little to no human expansion (other then oil field). Yet that herd is probably in as bad a shape as it has ever been in. Definitely is the worst in the 20 years I have been in the unit.
 
Jake,
Without question there is more going on other than just tag numbers. But like I said its the one thing we can control the most. I think human expansion is also a factor but not just building or habitat lose because many areas are still pretty untouched. The human expansion I see is the constant pressure and human presence. More humans out 4 wheeling, camping, scouting and hunting other species. I spent some time with a top biologist on a piece of private he managed for years. He talked of the importance of having areas of the ranch that were safe zones for the deer. Not only did they not hunt those areas they just completely stayed clear of those areas. In a unit that had suffered massive loses in the herd numbers his property was loaded and producing giant bucks and massive fawn birth and survival, it was the exact opposite of the rest of the unit. He claimed the human pressure or lack there of was the biggest factor. Ironically he didn't do any special predator control and the property was right along a long stretch of highway that had a high number of road kills, not to mention it sat in arguably the roughest winter area in the state.
 
Muley_73 said:
Jake,
Without question there is more going on other than just tag numbers. But like I said its the one thing we can control the most. I think human expansion is also a factor but not just building or habitat lose because many areas are still pretty untouched. The human expansion I see is the constant pressure and human presence. More humans out 4 wheeling, camping, scouting and hunting other species. I spent some time with a top biologist on a piece of private he managed for years. He talked of the importance of having areas of the ranch that were safe zones for the deer. Not only did they not hunt those areas they just completely stayed clear of those areas. In a unit that had suffered massive loses in the herd numbers his property was loaded and producing giant bucks and massive fawn birth and survival, it was the exact opposite of the rest of the unit. He claimed the human pressure or lack there of was the biggest factor. Ironically he didn't do any special predator control and the property was right along a long stretch of highway that had a high number of road kills, not to mention it sat in arguably the roughest winter area in the state.
Click to expand...
Interesting, info.

I am still not convinced cutting more tags is going to make a meaningful difference, we have already cut a ton of tags, and like I said we are not killing meaningful amounts of doe's in this state, and that is what builds the herds back. Something isn't making sense.

Hunting is already regulated to the nuts, if all those other uses are having as big an effect as you claim then I don't know what we could do to turn things around.
 
Well, since about 1/2 the deer in Utah seem to be fat, happy and content living within the city limits, and their urban populations are growing out of control while constantly dodging cars, being chased by dogs, having old ladies throwing rocks at them to keep them out of their gardens, and kids firing anything that will fit in a slingshot at them, maybe ramping up human pressure in the mountains would get our populations turned around?
 
Again the the voices I mentioned to start with keep howling....like I said wasted time as long as the Division has fools to please.
 
Muley_73 said:
Again the the voices I mentioned to start with keep howling....like I said wasted time as long as the Division has fools to please.
Click to expand...
I might be teasing a little bit. You seem to truly care Muley_73. There’s no doubt that many mule deer populations throughout the west are struggling. This is not a problem unique to Utah. I also don’t think it’s as horrible as others. I hunt a few states for muleys each fall, exclusively on easy to draw, 0-1 point units. The goal is to always kill a big mature buck ie. 5+years old, mass, long points etc. I’m probably successful 75% of the time. This year I killed a 180+ buck on one of the horrible general units mentioned in this thread. I also saw several other respectable bucks and know of a couple of other great bucks that were taken on the same unit. These are all reasons why it makes me tired to hear all the talk about how we need to shut units down. As mentioned above, killing bucks has almost no effect on overall deer populations. I would love to hear some well thought out practical realistic solutions. What I typically hear is: biologist are lazy idiots, SFW has ruined our hunting, we need to shut down hunting immediately, the fish and game only cares about money, we need to implement antler point restrictions, we need to limit technology etc. Maybe I’m the only one who thinks so, but I think most wildlife biologists do a great job, conservation groups do fantastic things for our wildlife, and the fish and game does a admirable job of balancing opportunity vs quality. I think too many hunters today want killing big animals to be easy. It’s not supposed to be easy. That’s what makes it special when you are successful.
 
Maybe these deer doe and fawn do not survive the winter because they are chased from Aug 1st through January. So her is and idea for you. Let’s shorten all hunt seasons so that these deer have a chance to put on some fat to survive the winter months.
 
For those that say cutting tags isn't going to help. Killing every damn buck that is out there is going to help? Doesn't make any sense to me. Drought is a big factor and saving some bucks will help in the long run.

Rich
 
hunt30 said:
I might be teasing a little bit. You seem to truly care Muley_73. There’s no doubt that many mule deer populations throughout the west are struggling. This is not a problem unique to Utah. I also don’t think it’s as horrible as others. I hunt a few states for muleys each fall, exclusively on easy to draw, 0-1 point units. The goal is to always kill a big mature buck ie. 5+years old, mass, long points etc. I’m probably successful 75% of the time. This year I killed a 180+ buck on one of the horrible general units mentioned in this thread. I also saw several other respectable bucks and know of a couple of other great bucks that were taken on the same unit. These are all reasons why it makes me tired to hear all the talk about how we need to shut units down. As mentioned above, killing bucks has almost no effect on overall deer populations. I would love to hear some well thought out practical realistic solutions. What I typically hear is: biologist are lazy idiots, SFW has ruined our hunting, we need to shut down hunting immediately, the fish and game only cares about money, we need to implement antler point restrictions, we need to limit technology etc. Maybe I’m the only one who thinks so, but I think most wildlife biologists do a great job, conservation groups do fantastic things for our wildlife, and the fish and game does a admirable job of balancing opportunity vs quality. I think too many hunters today want killing big animals to be easy. It’s not supposed to be easy. That’s what makes it special when you are successful.
Click to expand...
I don't have an issue finding mature to chase. If you put in the time and effort you can usually find a handful of mature bucks on most units. That honestly has very little to do with my major concern. 1.2 million deer to 300,000 or less is the concern. If you get more deer you can have more bucks of all sizes. But having a tag is a bigger concern to most, more than the dwindling herds across the west. Its low key anti conservation on a lot of levels. I've defended the conservation groups, biologist, and many that have put in a lifetimes worth wor, however the mind set of and management the Division at its core has been flawed for decades. Whether that directly hurts the mule deer herds I guess you could debate...but it certainly has not helped it.
 
I guess I’m not following, muley. There are about 1/3 the tags now vs those sold during the glory years and the animal population is still declining. But somehow it’s the fault of hunters?
 
Last edited:
hunt30 said:
Which units do you think need to be shut down? I spent a fair amount of time on both Pine Valley and Zion this year and didn’t either of those would benefit from a shut down. I personally think the drought that is plaguing the west is the biggest current problem hindering our deer herds.
Click to expand...
Zion has been hurting long before this drought. It was starting to get good when we had the 5 day hunt going.
 
elkantlers said:
Going back to 1x scopes on Muzzleloaders is a stupid idea. It's not going to do anything to help the deer and elk population in Utah or fix point creep. The DWR cannot in good faith limit Muzzleloader technology while allowing Rifle and archery technology to go unchecked.
I know of several animals that have been killed by archers out past 100 yards. Rifle hunters can shoot out past a grand and no one cares.
If the DWR wants to make a statement on technology, they would not allow archers to use hand held releases and limit rifle hunters to 4x scopes.
Click to expand...


They actually can, and should. Easy place to start. I'd support Idaho regs 100%.
 
Buc
lostinOregon said:
For those that say cutting tags isn't going to help. Killing every damn buck that is out there is going to help? Doesn't make any sense to me. Drought is a big factor and saving some bucks will help in the long run.

Rich
Click to expand...
Bucks aren't biologically necessary. In fact, they are detrimental in that they compete for winter range.

They basically are sperm delivery vessels.
 
Muley_73 said:
I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...
Ok, so tell us muley, where did all the deer go? You blame opportunity but there are 1/3 the Utah tags issued vs the ‘80s.
Are you going to ignore habitat, road kill, technology, drought, hard winters, too much pressure, long seasons and a whole list of other things that have occurred in the last 30 years just to point fingers at other hunters? BTW, I’ve probably taken less deer than you in the past 20 years but I’m not going to criticize any hunter for filling his tag.
 
Muley_73 said:
I don't have an issue finding mature to chase. If you put in the time and effort you can usually find a handful of mature bucks on most units. That honestly has very little to do with my major concern. 1.2 million deer to 300,000 or less is the concern. If you get more deer you can have more bucks of all sizes. But having a tag is a bigger concern to most, more than the dwindling herds across the west. Its low key anti conservation on a lot of levels. I've defended the conservation groups, biologist, and many that have put in a lifetimes worth wor, however the mind set of and management the Division at its core has been flawed for decades. Whether that directly hurts the mule deer herds I guess you could debate...but it certainly has not helped it.
Click to expand...


At some point we're gonna need that data to back 1.2 million. The early explorers weren't seeing that level of deer.

The "golden" age of mule deer happened during a time when there were 2x as many tags as today, and lots of non tags feeding families

It came during a time of no elk, MASSIVE poisoning, on the heels of a World War. It wasn't "managed" into happening. It wasn't a goal. It was a byproduct, an accident. And in reality, was most likely exceeding the carrying capacity to start with.

Like it or not, mule deer are evolutionarily weak. Their requirements for survival are narrow. They are fragile. There is a reason the whitetail is exploding, elk are exploding, yet mulies aren't. And it has nearly nothing to do with how many bucks get shot. The herds will follow the climate they live in. With old and dying sage, invasive species, and old, dead forests, the mule deer will struggle, they aren't adapting.

There is a reason AI deer, where there are 2bucks killed, and zero cats or bears(there are coyotes), aren't over running the island. They are limited by their habitat.

Having said all that, we still haven't lost 1.2 million mule deer. Only you and your dad believe that. Science is only as good as the data
 
Last edited:
The single biggest hurt put on Utah deer, was I-15. Look at it's path, it cut off deer from migrating off the MTN, onto the desert and flat lands.

And does so the entire length of the state.

I-80, and 70 furthered the separation.

Follow the timeline of where and when the freeway was built here, and watch the corresponding decrease in deer following it
 
So in the 1980s when the Pauns got to the point of no deer for all the reasons mentioned above what did they do? With the Beaver, Dutton, Monroe, Pavant, West Desert and many more units doing the same thing as the Pauns what should happen? I thought turning the state into smaller units was so they could be better managed. Does anyone see these units I mentioned above turning around and increasing since they went to smaller units? So I agree just cutting tags at this point is not going to help much. The bucks are gone and the doe are gone. So what is the big plan to start the return of the deer herd in these units?
 
Shadow said:
Ok, so tell us muley, where did all the deer go? You blame opportunity but there are 1/3 the Utah tags issued vs the ‘80s.
Are you going to ignore habitat, road kill, technology, drought, hard winters, too much pressure, long seasons and a whole list of other things that have occurred in the last 30 years just to point fingers at other hunters? BTW, I’ve probably taken less deer than you in the past 20 years but I’m not going to criticize any hunter for filling his tag.
Click to expand...
Shadow,
If you actually read what I wrote I included pretty much your entire list. What I stated was hunters are the easiest to actually manage. As for shooting deer in Utah. I’ve killed a total of 4 bucks on the past 15 years. 2 of those being on LE unit in 2018 and 2019. I have 10 general points. Maybe you are a worse hunter than me but that would be difficult. I have zero problem with hunters filling a valid tag. However that’s my point. Issueing more tags than there are actual bucks on a unit is irresponsible management.
 
Shadow said:
Ok, so tell us muley, where did all the deer go? You blame opportunity but there are 1/3 the Utah tags issued vs the ‘80s.
Are you going to ignore habitat, road kill, technology, drought, hard winters, too much pressure, long seasons and a whole list of other things that have occurred in the last 30 years just to point fingers at other hunters? BTW, I’ve probably taken less deer than you in the past 20 years but I’m not going to criticize any hunter for filling his tag.
Click to expand...
And your math is off on 1/3 of the tags. Utah’s been around 90,0000 tags and the peak which was the early 80s was 225,00 range. Again 225,000 tags for 1.2 million deer vs 90,0000 tags for 300,000 deer.

Hoss,
I know you’ve seen it posted by me and others in the past but you chose to ignore it. 1.2 million comes from using the Divisions model for current calculations. Ignoring what the old number was makes it easier to justify the alarming low number now. It’s no different than schools and the government changing history in schools now to support the current agenda.
 
I did actually read what you wrote, Muley.
Scroll back up to post 57 and you too can actually read what you wrote.
Pay special attention to those last two paragraphs of YOUR own post.
 
Muley_73 said:
And your math is off on 1/3 of the tags. Utah’s been around 90,0000 tags and the peak which was the early 80s was 225,00 range. Again 225,000 tags for 1.2 million deer vs 90,0000 tags for 300,000 deer.

Hoss,
I know you’ve seen it posted by me and others in the past but you chose to ignore it. 1.2 million comes from using the Divisions model for current calculations. Ignoring what the old number was makes it easier to justify the alarming low number now. It’s no different than schools and the government changing history in schools now to support the current agenda.
Click to expand...


Fun how on one hand, you question the DWR calculations, then on the other, try to use it.

Again, can't have it both ways.

All I can do is site fact. We lost, 135,000 hunters, according to your numbers, 2/3 plus of registered hunters, and since that day, there was no increase in deer numbers. In fact, as we sit today, we are at 90's levels.

If slashing hunter numbers by 2/3 showed an explosion in deer numbers, then it would be hard to argue.

The very simple reality is the "golden age" was an outlier. Trying to pretend it being the standard, is silly.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing, and expecting different results.

We slashed hunters. List the revenue. Lost the voters. List the heritage.

And got nothing.

That's just the facts
 
Shadow said:
I did actually read what you wrote, Muley.
Scroll back up to post 57 and you too can actually read what you wrote.
Pay special attention to those last two paragraphs of YOUR own post.
Click to expand...

Miley and lumpy have a fantasy that Utah once houses MILLIONS of deer.

Based not on surveys, actual accounts, but on fuzzy math.
 

Similar threads

J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 2
Replies
7
Views
442
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 1
Replies
0
Views
308
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

2D65BE3C-BDB0-4456-9670-63D1BFC8178B.jpeg
55B49DAE-46C6-4265-A216-13BDA292BBC7.jpeg
4C0A14C5-B436-4644-BA71-491DE4075E09.jpeg
Sweet Muley
fullsizeoutput_2de3.jpeg
IMG_4393.jpeg
C257688D-404A-444C-B880-A93D351447FE.png
C4999B76-D228-4D12-8A1D-50AB99E2569B.jpeg
3598EFFA-EEB5-4EF5-AA72-AA449832AC7D.jpeg
Wolf Success
F162A291-9D0D-4EDB-9A9D-5E6132ACF5BA.jpeg
20210727_112245.jpg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom