Conclusions from the "Opportunity" thread.

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
As expected there wasn't a whole lot of agreement on what "opportunity" actually is. Not only is there disagreement over the definition of opportunity there is an even wider range of what is good or bad or decreasing or increasing opportunity.

I did find it interesting that a couple of posters believe that a chance at getting a tag and actually getting a tag are the only things that influence the dynamics off "opportunity". I am guessing that means all the DWR needs to worry about from certain voters is that they don't run out of ink in the tag printing machines.

One person actually thinks opportunity is good if success rates get as low as %2. At %1 he will start to say herd numbers are effecting his opportunity. At least he draws the line somewhere. At %0 we have to start worrying about extinction.😅

One of the other conclusions I saw a couple of responders stating that even in high pressure areas some bucks still reach maturity so there are always mature bucks to hunt even in the worst units. This is actually incorrect. Its been close to 25 years ago but in this state we were doing age studies in two regions of Texas. We were trying to establish the average harvest age, among other things, for 2 of the highest pressured regions in the state. We couldn't get a single deer registered over the age of 18 months. NOT ONE. Out of thousands. It resulted in antler restrictions for dozens of counties. Now the average harvest age is 3.5 years in those counties and sometimes they actually kill bucks 6+ years old. So don't just assume you can always hunt mature bucks as long as you have a tag in poorly managed units.

Thanks for answering questions. We will keep studying the good and bad of big game management.
 

Bigfoot 1

Very Active Member
Messages
1,333
As expected there wasn't a whole lot of agreement on what "opportunity" actually is. Not only is there disagreement over the definition of opportunity there is an even wider range of what is good or bad or decreasing or increasing opportunity.

I did find it interesting that a couple of posters believe that a chance at getting a tag and actually getting a tag are the only things that influence the dynamics off "opportunity". I am guessing that means all the DWR needs to worry about from certain voters is that they don't run out of ink in the tag printing machines.

One person actually thinks opportunity is good if success rates get as low as %2. At %1 he will start to say herd numbers are effecting his opportunity. At least he draws the line somewhere. At %0 we have to start worrying about extinction.😅

One of the other conclusions I saw a couple of responders stating that even in high pressure areas some bucks still reach maturity so there are always mature bucks to hunt even in the worst units. This is actually incorrect. Its been close to 25 years ago but in this state we were doing age studies in two regions of Texas. We were trying to establish the average harvest age, among other things, for 2 of the highest pressured regions in the state. We couldn't get a single deer registered over the age of 18 months. NOT ONE. Out of thousands. It resulted in antler restrictions for dozens of counties. Now the average harvest age is 3.5 years in those counties and sometimes they actually kill bucks 6+ years old. So don't just assume you can always hunt mature bucks as long as you have a tag in poorly managed units.

Thanks for answering questions. We will keep studying the good and bad of big game management.
You ask for peoples opinions and when you get them you laugh at them and ridicule them. Interesting. The definition of opportunity remains the same as it always has. Look it up, Google is your friend.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Conveniently ignoring all of the problems with his own arguments. High pressure equals low success on mature bucks is one possible scenario, it's not the only one. Low pressure can also equate to low success. There are still plenty of OTC units in the west that receive low pressure because people won't get out and hunt. What's the difference in opportunity for a 20% success rate(on a mature deer) OTC hunt and a 20% draw rate on a hunt with 100% success on mature deer? Careful it's a trick....
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
I think yall are missing the point of these two threads by taking things personally.

WHY DO WE PRESSURE THE DWR TO MANAGE A RESOURCE FOR OPPORTUNITY WHEN NO TWO OF US CAN AGREE ON WHAT IS OPPORTUNITY?

And if we can't agree on opportunity then how the hell are we going to decide if opportunity is decreasing or increasing?
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Opportunity is the ratio of hunters(unequivocally higher by any metric) to quarry(subjective). DWR has a obligation to provide opportunity to as many people as possible, game is a public resource, and like it or not a lot of people simply want a freezer full of food. So if you don't like that go where others won't, pay for access to go where they can't, or keep putting in for long odds lottery hunts. But don't tell some guy he can't shoot a meat deer because you want a trophy 5 years from now. It's his resource too.
 

notdonhunting

Very Active Member
Messages
1,418
I did not participate in your opportunity post because every question was subjective to personal opinion.
That is the number one problem with culture today personal opinion is more important than what is right.
Your conclusion of "OPPORTUNITY" is a matter of your opinions and not even close to what was stated by most individuals throughout the thread.
I do belive mulepacker answers was the best and also represented the mindset of most of the answers.

"never base my expectations on the published success rates. I base my expectation on my preparedness. If I put in for the tag it is because I had a desire to hunt the unit come what may. That is opportunity."
2-6: my answer is yes with exception of number 5 which is a no."

"I have always been of the mindset the tag is my entry fee. After that it is up to me. if I am interested as long as there are tags I’ll anty up hoping my entry is granted. My opportunity is only defined by me.
I have actually held tags and not even hunted the unit/specie because IMO they didn’t need the pressure. These decisions have been made post tag purchase."

"I spent a good amount of time petitioning for new hunts with tags. Not because I thought they would result in kills. It was because I believed there was an under utilized opportunity."

This my take on the OPPORTUNITY post.
Opportunity was overwhelmingly defined as a chance to hunt by most of the individuals that answered the questions
Of course all of this is subjective.

What is not subjective is most of yours (tristate)
conclusion of OPPORTUNITY. Your problem is you keep looking at it as most are not agreeing with me.
No one stated 2% was good opportunity.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
7,694
Don't forget that HUGE variable in Tri wonderful story.

Texas is 2% public land.

It's not hard to "manage" for age class, when the deer sit behind a gate, or a 10' fence.

Little different when 60% of the land in the state, is public. Can't just lock the gate, or turn up the corn feeder.

Texas has no issues with winter kills,(generally) or snowpack and transition of deer up and down MTN ranges and the issues they face doing both.

Like Texas, there are ranches in Utah, where you can buy tags(CWMU) and those ranches have different age class and "success" rates.

As always, one needs only remember, when your thoughts on "hunting" are primarily limited to fences, feeders, gates, lodges, and outfitters, your views on ACTUAL western mule deer hunting, are pretty screwed.

Doubt it?

Ask which general deer unit Tri applied for this year. He won't answer.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Opportunity is the ratio of hunters(unequivocally higher by any metric) to quarry(subjective). DWR has a obligation to provide opportunity to as many people as possible, game is a public resource, and like it or not a lot of people simply want a freezer full of food. So if you don't like that go where others won't, pay for access to go where they can't, or keep putting in for long odds lottery hunts. But don't tell some guy he can't shoot a meat deer because you want a trophy 5 years from now. It's his resource too.


I'm not telling anyone they can't shoot a meat deer.

But you do admit, as others won't, that the number of "quarry" does have a direct mathematic relationship to "opportunity".
 

slamdunk

Moderator
Messages
8,326
A lot of people need to watch the Wildlife Board Workshop and listen..... really listen and pay attention to what issues are being faced across this state.

One huge takeaway I got was a lot of landowners are NOT friends of wildlife during winter and a lot of does are being killed for deperdation reasons.
They try to focus on the resident deer doing damage without taking out migration deer, but it's still a major problem.

On elk, Beaver unit is 1 to 1 bull to cow ratio and most of our LE elk units are "bull heavy".
Trying to find a balance on age class and opportunities is off balance.
Way too many bulls.

The collaring studies are going extremely well and showing us where big game need help.
High fences and crossings are being identified discussed heavily.

Tune in and see the bigger picture!
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
"never base my expectations on the published success rates. I base my expectation on my preparedness. If I put in for the tag it is because I had a desire to hunt the unit come what may. That is opportunity."

Okay then good or bad opportunity rests exclusively on the hunter by you and another person's beliefs and not the DWR.

"Your conclusion of "OPPORTUNITY" is a matter of your opinions and not even close to what was stated by most individuals throughout the thread."

So you believe everyone on that thread agreed on what "opportunity" is?????????

"What is not subjective is most of yours (tristate)
conclusion of OPPORTUNITY. Your problem is you keep looking at it as most are not agreeing with me.
No one stated 2% was good opportunity."

Actually I didn't post any of my own answers to the questions on the other thread so how can you come to the conclusion that most are not agreeing with me. I may not even have an answer to agree to.

And yes someone did state %2 was still a good opportunity. Go back and read post #24.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Don't forget that HUGE variable in Tri wonderful story.

Texas is 2% public land.

It's not hard to "manage" for age class, when the deer sit behind a gate, or a 10' fence.

Little different when 60% of the land in the state, is public. Can't just lock the gate, or turn up the corn feeder.

Texas has no issues with winter kills,(generally) or snowpack and transition of deer up and down MTN ranges and the issues they face doing both.

Like Texas, there are ranches in Utah, where you can buy tags(CWMU) and those ranches have different age class and "success" rates.

As always, one needs only remember, when your thoughts on "hunting" are primarily limited to fences, feeders, gates, lodges, and outfitters, your views on ACTUAL western mule deer hunting, are pretty screwed.

Doubt it?

Ask which general deer unit Tri applied for this year. He won't answer.

That entire post is irrelevant, EVEN IF IT WASN'T FULL OF LIES.

As for general unit this year, I bought the point.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I AM SAYING.😅
No it's not. You said this:

"And if we can't agree on opportunity then how the hell are we going to decide if opportunity is decreasing or increasing?"

Which implies that opportunity must be defined. Which is exactly the opposite of what I, and most responders, were saying.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
No it's not. You said this:

"And if we can't agree on opportunity then how the hell are we going to decide if opportunity is decreasing or increasing?"

Which implies that opportunity must be defined. Which is exactly the opposite of what I, and most responders, were saying.


I'm not implying that at all. In fact that is %100 in the wrong direction from my beliefs.

I am implying that the DWR is foolish, or diabolically brilliant, to manage for opportunity when no one can even agree on what that word means.
 

JB1975

Very Active Member
Messages
1,097
Irrelevant. I'm not searching for agreement. I'm proving that managing for a word that no one can define is stupid. Thanks for supporting my argument.
You just ask questions all day long and expect people to answer for you or research and answer for you. Nobody cares what you think.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
"Who’s asking for a consensus on opportunity?"

Me
Are you Ok man? You need a wellness check? Because I said this:

"Which implies that opportunity must be defined. Which is exactly the opposite of what I, and most responders, were saying."

To which you replied:

"I'm not implying that at all. In fact that is %100 in the wrong direction from my beliefs."

But then you made this reply:

"Who’s asking for a consensus on opportunity?"

Me


So which is it? Do you want opportunity defined or not?
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
You just ask questions all day long and expect people to answer for you or research and answer for you. Nobody cares what you think.
Where did that crazy come from?

I asked questions to get people's opinions. I can't get people's opinions from some other resource or assumption.

Quit trying to be offended.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Are you Ok man? You need a wellness check? Because I said this:

"Which implies that opportunity must be defined. Which is exactly the opposite of what I, and most responders, were saying."

To which you replied:

"I'm not implying that at all. In fact that is %100 in the wrong direction from my beliefs."

But then you made this reply:

"Who’s asking for a consensus on opportunity?"

Me


So which is it? Do you want opportunity defined or not?
You are the one that said opportunity MUST BE DEFINED. Not me. I didn't imply it.

As for "which is it", I DON'T CARE.

You aren't very good at making assumptions.
 

willfrye027

Member
Messages
91
As expected there wasn't a whole lot of agreement on what "opportunity" actually is. Not only is there disagreement over the definition of opportunity there is an even wider range of what is good or bad or decreasing or increasing opportunity.

I did find it interesting that a couple of posters believe that a chance at getting a tag and actually getting a tag are the only things that influence the dynamics off "opportunity". I am guessing that means all the DWR needs to worry about from certain voters is that they don't run out of ink in the tag printing machines.

One person actually thinks opportunity is good if success rates get as low as %2. At %1 he will start to say herd numbers are effecting his opportunity. At least he draws the line somewhere. At %0 we have to start worrying about extinction.😅

One of the other conclusions I saw a couple of responders stating that even in high pressure areas some bucks still reach maturity so there are always mature bucks to hunt even in the worst units. This is actually incorrect. Its been close to 25 years ago but in this state we were doing age studies in two regions of Texas. We were trying to establish the average harvest age, among other things, for 2 of the highest pressured regions in the state. We couldn't get a single deer registered over the age of 18 months. NOT ONE. Out of thousands. It resulted in antler restrictions for dozens of counties. Now the average harvest age is 3.5 years in those counties and sometimes they actually kill bucks 6+ years old. So don't just assume you can always hunt mature bucks as long as you have a tag in poorly managed units.

Thanks for answering questions. We will keep studying the good and bad of big game management.
Your comparing apples to oranges here. Texas whitetails don’t count.

Depending on the unit and terrain, there are places that can absolutely support a nearly unlimited amount of tags—“opportunity” if you will. If they sold 20,000 tags in my unit there will still be bucks dying of old age. Some places you cannot hunt them out if you have a reasonable season structure and don’t hunt the rut. The terrain dictates how much opportunity can be allowed. I will take my opportunity hunts every year, enjoying the outdoors and hunting big bucks (unsuccessfully for the most part, but still hunting them). Some day I will draw the “great” tag and have a fun hunt with less guys on the hill but I don’t want or need that in every unit across the west.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
"Who’s asking for a consensus on opportunity?"

Me

That was you. The internet is a bit/ch
DO you know how to read? Do you know what that word "must" and "defined" means? THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID. There is a big difference between getting a consensus and proclaiming something "must be defined". Its not even in the same ballpark.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
7,694
That entire post is irrelevant, EVEN IF IT WASN'T FULL OF LIES.

As for general unit this year, I bought the point.

Sure you did.

You bought a general point 🤣🤣

Always fun to see you make blanket accusations (full of lies) without addressing anything.

2% public land
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Tony posts notifications of public hearings weekly where this things get discussed. Every state has written management plans. Quit being an @sshole and look.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
7,694
You have to wonder, how or why Tri is so "concerned" with Utah general deer hunting.

Something he's never done, in a state he doesn't reside
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
colorado:

 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
IDMH,

you don't know how to read. I didn't say states don't have big game management plans.

YOU made this claim.

"Opportunity is defined by most DWRs as providing the most tags a herd can sustain. "

Nothing you posted gave that definition.

You are just hi-jacking a thread because your feelings are hurt.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
You have to wonder, how or why Tri is so "concerned" with Utah general deer hunting.

Something he's never done, in a state he doesn't reside
Maybe that's not everything I am concerned about and I am not as short sighted as you.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
From the Utah pdf:
• Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities, including hunting and viewing.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Target Winter Herd Size - Manage for a 5-year target population of 19,500 wintering deer (modeled number) during the five-year planning period unless range conditions become unsuitable, as evaluated by DWR. This is an increase from the 2015 plan, which was 16,000. The 10-year average population estimate is 15,900. Range Trend data coupled with annual browse monitoring will be used to assess habitat condition. If habitat damage by deer is occurring due to inadequate habitat, measures will be taken to reduce the population to sustainable levels. Change to the population objective is based on this population’s performance, improved range conditions, the amount of available habitat and the lack of range damage from deer. New estimates of actual population numbers have been taken into account and the new objective should reflect the numbers of deer that are currently on the unit.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Where did it say this?

"Opportunity is defined by most DWRs as providing the most tags a herd can sustain. "

Yep. doesn't say that.

keep trying to hijack.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
The goal is herd health. That has been defined for you. Hunting opportunity is secondarily defined as the excess population that can be harvested based on the desired herd demographics. Habit and range quality are very definable and well defined for you. Your refusal to read the management plan is irrelevant.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
"Hunting opportunity is secondarily defined as the excess population that can be harvested based on the desired herd demographics."


Really???? What is it primarily defined as?????? 😆

Dude you are pulling words out of your butt and you don't even know what they mean.
 

notdonhunting

Very Active Member
Messages
1,418
"Your conclusion of "OPPORTUNITY" is a matter of your opinions and not even close to what was stated by most individuals throughout the thread."

Tristate,
I went back and checked up on the answers, the guys that answered your questions clearly did mostly agreed.
Question 1 it is too subjective to define people answers.
Question 2 7 yes and 3 no
Question 3 12 yes and 1 no
Question 4 7 yes and 1 no
Question 5 1 yes and 7 no
Question 6 6 yes and 1 no
Some answers were not clear.
I did not considered questions 7 and 8 because you asked them after you saw how the the other questions was going.
Yes I would say most individuals on this site that answered your questions was in agreement with their answers.


"Okay then good or bad opportunity rests exclusively on the hunter by you and another person's beliefs and not the DWR"

I never stated anything about good or bad i just stated about opportunity.


"So you believe everyone on that thread agreed on what "opportunity" is?????????"

You never asked what opportunity is but yes by the way most answered their questions i would say majority agreed on opportunity.


"Actually I didn't post any of my own answers to the questions on the other thread so how can you come to the conclusion that most are not agreeing with me. I may not even have an answer to agree to."

Tristate this thread is basically telling everyone is wrong according to you because according to you the answers was not in agreement (which most are in agreement pointed out above). So yes I came to the conclusion the answers must not be in agreement with you, My prerogative.

And yes someone did state %2 was still a good opportunity. Go back and read post #24.
[/QUOTE]

Please drop your teenager semantics.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Population Size - Utilizing harvest data, postseason and mortality estimates, a computer model has been developed to estimate winter population size. The 2019 post-season model estimates the population at 19,700 deer. • Buck Age Structure - Monitor age class structure of the buck population through the use of checking stations, postseason classification, uniform harvest surveys and field bag checks. • Survival – Continue to monitor Adult and Fawn survival with GPS tracking collars. Use this data to learn more about migration routes, patterns and timing. • Harvest - The primary means of monitoring harvest will be through the statewide uniform harvest survey and the use of checking stations. Achieve the target population size by use of antlerless harvest using a variety of harvest methods and seasons. Recognize that buck harvest will be above or below what is expected due to climatic and productivity variables. Buck harvest strategies will be developed through the RAC and Wildlife Board process to achieve management objectives for buck: doe ratios
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Population Size - Utilizing harvest data, postseason and mortality estimates, a computer model has been developed to estimate winter population size. The 2019 post-season model estimates the population at 19,700 deer. • Buck Age Structure - Monitor age class structure of the buck population through the use of checking stations, postseason classification, uniform harvest surveys and field bag checks. • Survival – Continue to monitor Adult and Fawn survival with GPS tracking collars. Use this data to learn more about migration routes, patterns and timing. • Harvest - The primary means of monitoring harvest will be through the statewide uniform harvest survey and the use of checking stations. Achieve the target population size by use of antlerless harvest using a variety of harvest methods and seasons. Recognize that buck harvest will be above or below what is expected due to climatic and productivity variables. Buck harvest strategies will be developed through the RAC and Wildlife Board process to achieve management objectives for buck: doe ratios
Idmh,

You are just hi-jacking crap. You aren't even talking about your own statements anymore.

Go be a child elsewhere.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
"Your conclusion of "OPPORTUNITY" is a matter of your opinions and not even close to what was stated by most individuals throughout the thread."

Tristate,
I went back and checked up on the answers, the guys that answered your questions clearly did mostly agreed.
Question 1 it is too subjective to define people answers.
Question 2 7 yes and 3 no
Question 3 12 yes and 1 no
Question 4 7 yes and 1 no
Question 5 1 yes and 7 no
Question 6 6 yes and 1 no
Some answers were not clear.
I did not considered questions 7 and 8 because you asked them after you saw how the the other questions was going.
Yes I would say most individuals on this site that answered your questions was in agreement with their answers.


"Okay then good or bad opportunity rests exclusively on the hunter by you and another person's beliefs and not the DWR"

I never stated anything about good or bad i just stated about opportunity.


"So you believe everyone on that thread agreed on what "opportunity" is?????????"

You never asked what opportunity is but yes by the way most answered their questions i would say majority agreed on opportunity.


"Actually I didn't post any of my own answers to the questions on the other thread so how can you come to the conclusion that most are not agreeing with me. I may not even have an answer to agree to."

Tristate this thread is basically telling everyone is wrong according to you because according to you the answers was not in agreement (which most are in agreement pointed out above). So yes I came to the conclusion the answers must not be in agreement with you, My prerogative.

And yes someone did state %2 was still a good opportunity. Go back and read post #24.

Please drop your teenager semantics.
[/QUOTE]


Your definition of "opportunity" doesn't match the definition of what Idahomuleyhunter posted.

Not even close. And he says his definition is recognized by most DWRs. Even though he can't back up that claim.
 

JPickett

Very Active Member
Messages
1,997
Read a lot of “success rate” numbers kicked around in these discussions. Not sure what the success rate is of the units I hunt but mine is 100% on deer,elk and bear every year. That said, after reading these two silly threads I still can’t figure out if I’m getting a good opportunity or not???
 

Bigwiffy

Active Member
Messages
878
A lot of people need to watch the Wildlife Board Workshop and listen..... really listen and pay attention to what issues are being faced across this state.

One huge takeaway I got was a lot of landowners are NOT friends of wildlife during winter and a lot of does are being killed for deperdation reasons.
They try to focus on the resident deer doing damage without taking out migration deer, but it's still a major problem.

On elk, Beaver unit is 1 to 1 bull to cow ratio and most of our LE elk units are "bull heavy".
Trying to find a balance on age class and opportunities is off balance.
Way too many bulls.

The collaring studies are going extremely well and showing us where big game need help.
High fences and crossings are being identified discussed heavily.

Tune in and see the bigger picture!
I agree with you here Slam. Ranchers/Landowners are making a big negative impact on wildlife. Worse than what people realize, way worse. Not just in winter either.
 

MulePacker

Active Member
Messages
509
I believe one of the Parameters that lacked definition is location. For the most part I believe the respondents assumed we were talking of public land units. With public land the assumption would be public wildlife. If TRI is talking of either private land or private game or a mix there of opportunity is certainly defined differently. For me there is not an opportunity because I choose not to enter that arena.
So l believe one of the key components TRI does not consider is that DWR by law as the trustee for wildlife and the people can not offer tags if game doesn’t exist. Otherwise why wouldn’t they offer bison, sheep, moose tags on every unit etc. Management plans by specie go through a public vetting process for approval. Once the plan is established entry is defined then regulated by tag quotas.
This organizational plan is used all the time.
The fire Marshall dictates your ability to attend the RMEF banquet or local college football game. The Fire Marshall has very little affect in your experience other than you trust they regulated an acceptable environment. You paid an entry fee to experience the “opportunity”. No guarantee.

I choose to enter a rodeo for an opportunity to win the pot. I trust the stock contractor loads animals of similar traits so all entrants have a chance at the pot. I determine the outcome from my opportunity.

Now you may argue that DWR’s management is not meeting the plan, that becomes a different issue of which tags numbers may need manipulation. This may increase or decrease the number of participants but for those that get the tag I doubt the DWR is going to make or brake their opportunity.
Let’s say TRI and I both purchase the same tag does that mean our opportunity is the same? If opportunity is determined by the DWR it does. However, I am sure TRI has skills I don’ that creates better opportunity for him. ( if you don’t believe me just ask him)
Lastly can anybody explain why 90% of the animals are taken by 10% of the hunters if the DWR dictates opportunity.
Or is it ironic that 90% of you are wasting your time and money because you don’t have what it takes to be consistently successful. Regardless of the opportunity. (No personal offense intended)
 

slamdunk

Moderator
Messages
8,326
I agree with you here Slam. Ranchers/Landowners are making a big negative impact on wildlife. Worse than what people realize, way worse. Not just in winter either.
It's worse than I thought.

I had a post several months ago about a rancher near the Boulder unit who slaughtered approximately a hundred deer from his fields last year.
I can't even begin to wrap my brain around the impact a hundred deer taken off at once will do, and most of those had to be pregnant.
It's pretty gross Wiffy.
 

Bigwiffy

Active Member
Messages
878
It's worse than I thought.

I had a post several months ago about a rancher near the Boulder unit who slaughtered approximately a hundred deer from his fields last year.
I can't even begin to wrap my brain around the impact a hundred deer taken off at once will do, and most of those had to be pregnant.
It's pretty gross Wiffy.
Boulder is taking a beating. With hay prices where they are at I understand it, but it sucks.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Lastly can anybody explain why 90% of the animals are taken by 10% of the hunters if the DWR dictates opportunity.

Do you have evidence of this? It seems like an impossibility in western states. Unless you're counting license holders who don't hunt.
 

MountainSqwabler

Active Member
Messages
236
Screenshot_20220402-013216_Samsung Internet.jpg
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
I believe one of the Parameters that lacked definition is location. For the most part I believe the respondents assumed we were talking of public land units. With public land the assumption would be public wildlife. If TRI is talking of either private land or private game or a mix there of opportunity is certainly defined differently. For me there is not an opportunity because I choose not to enter that arena.
So l believe one of the key components TRI does not consider is that DWR by law as the trustee for wildlife and the people can not offer tags if game doesn’t exist. Otherwise why wouldn’t they offer bison, sheep, moose tags on every unit etc. Management plans by specie go through a public vetting process for approval. Once the plan is established entry is defined then regulated by tag quotas.
This organizational plan is used all the time.
The fire Marshall dictates your ability to attend the RMEF banquet or local college football game. The Fire Marshall has very little affect in your experience other than you trust they regulated an acceptable environment. You paid an entry fee to experience the “opportunity”. No guarantee.

I choose to enter a rodeo for an opportunity to win the pot. I trust the stock contractor loads animals of similar traits so all entrants have a chance at the pot. I determine the outcome from my opportunity.

Now you may argue that DWR’s management is not meeting the plan, that becomes a different issue of which tags numbers may need manipulation. This may increase or decrease the number of participants but for those that get the tag I doubt the DWR is going to make or brake their opportunity.
Let’s say TRI and I both purchase the same tag does that mean our opportunity is the same? If opportunity is determined by the DWR it does. However, I am sure TRI has skills I don’ that creates better opportunity for him. ( if you don’t believe me just ask him)
Lastly can anybody explain why 90% of the animals are taken by 10% of the hunters if the DWR dictates opportunity.
Or is it ironic that 90% of you are wasting your time and money because you don’t have what it takes to be consistently successful. Regardless of the opportunity. (No personal offense intended)


This is a great post. I can see how location can effect how people define "opportunity ".

The one place I disagree with you is your assumption that a DWR can't offer tags for game that doesn't exist. I think that can and does happen when they offer more tags than should or could be killed in a unit and using legislation to decrease success rates.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
This is a great post. I can see how location can effect how people define "opportunity ".

The one place I disagree with you is your assumption that a DWR can't offer tags for game that doesn't exist. I think that can and does happen when they offer more tags than should or could be killed in a unit and using legislation to decrease success rates.
So you'd have Montana get rid of it's unlimited sheep hunts? Since that's not opportunity. I'd say most guys who go think it is.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
So you'd have Montana get rid of it's unlimited sheep hunts? Since that's not opportunity. I'd say most guys who go think it is.


Yes. I would.

By the way I never said that isn't opportunity.

What do you do when the newest gadget that nobody thinks of comes out and it is absolutely lethal on rams. And before the sun sets on the first day 3 times as many rams as you hoped for are dead?

Then that happens another year because the officials don't even know what happened. And we know how fast the wheels of government turn once they do know what happened.

Quit betting on hunter failure. It rarely works.
 

idahomuleyhunter

Active Member
Messages
426
Idaho has quasi unlimited sheep hunts too. There aren't enough legal rams in the units to fill the tags. I think these are great opportunities. Interestingly enough I'll bet a half curl ram can breed a ewe. But I'm sure someone will come up with a gadget that teleports a hunter thru the Frank Church or the Absorokas.
 

MulePacker

Active Member
Messages
509
Should or could or percentage of tags filled is all subjective to your opinions. The management plan is in place to regulate those items and yearly harvest should dictate the following years tag allotment, along with herd assessment post season. If you believe these factors are skewed or mis represented then the management plan is where you need to spend effort in affecting change. IMO arguing opportunity on a website is only wasting time.
I’ve spent years fighting the system until I decided I was just going to determine my own “opportunity”. Why does Utah manage elk on age objective? Because it Insures opportunity is defined as trophy harvest rather than viable herd dynamics.
 
Last edited:

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
7,694
"IMO arguing opportunity on a website is only wasting time."

BINGO!

We have a winner here folks.


Utah's system is screwed up.

Yet, you "bought a point"

Seems like perhaps, you only give lip service.

If the system sucks, why "buy a point"?

Oh, that's right. That point, might equal an opportunity, when you cash it in.

Otherwise, you'd of just bought a tag on a CWMU.

As usual, if you hang around long enough, you expose yourself.

Buying a point, is buying an opportunity down the road
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Yup

Buying a general season point is buying an opportunity.

If you wanted high success rate, you'd buy a CWMU tag.


I didn't want a tag. And you are not using logic.

Puff puff pass. You got a little out of hand at the animal rights rally again.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
What's wrong with wanting a chance at a deer tag? I've never told anyone they shouldn't try.

You're kind of going crazy desperate.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
7,694
What's wrong with wanting a chance at a deer tag? I've never told anyone they shouldn't try.

You're kind of going crazy desperate.


Nothing. I'm an opportunist, remember.

You on the other hand, think there should only be as many tags as the DWR wants deer killed.

Your GS point buy, shows your full of crap.
 

JB1975

Very Active Member
Messages
1,097
Nothing. I'm an opportunist, remember.

You on the other hand, think there should only be as many tags as the DWR wants deer killed.

Your GS point buy, shows your full of crap.
He needs that point to give his football team a chance to look for a deer for him someday.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
7,460
Nothing. I'm an opportunist, remember.

You on the other hand, think there should only be as many tags as the DWR wants deer killed.

Your GS point buy, shows your full of crap.


Man you suck at making assumptions.

I mean you are really bad. Like watching Stevie wonder play pool.
 

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