DWR moving in the right direction,thanks!

schoolhousegrizz

Very Active Member
Messages
2,570
I know some will disagree with me here, but I do believe that they are trying to do the best thing. They got rid of baiting, putting restrictions on trail cams, listened to public feedback about making the general elk tags draw only, and actually reversed the decision! Now they are talking about making the muzzle hunt go back to one power scopes. I think they were too slow to move on it but I am thankful they are moving on it now. Better late than never. I know it's a long ways off of Elks hell yeah but they are doing several things on that list. I want to say thank you to the Utah DWR. Let's thank them and let them know they're moving in the right direction. That is going to be much more powerful than just continuing to complain. Positive reinforcement and gratitude from the public will help them to keep moving that direction, and faster.
 
You're Not Wrong!

But It Will Take a Hell of alot More Than Just Weaponry Changes!

Let's See if The ReGress Happens as Fast as The ProGress Happened!



it is a move in the right direction. Trouble is they have been told for years the deer herd was declining. I am afraid any hunting weapon will be to much at this point, but I hope I am wrong and it makes a difference.
 
I know some will disagree with me here, but I do believe that they are trying to do the best thing. They got rid of baiting, putting restrictions on trail cams, listened to public feedback about making the general elk tags draw only, and actually reversed the decision! Now they are talking about making the muzzle hunt go back to one power scopes. I think they were too slow to move on it but I am thankful they are moving on it now. Better late than never. I know it's a long ways off of Elks hell yeah but they are doing several things on that list. I want to say thank you to the Utah DWR. Let's thank them and let them know they're moving in the right direction. That is going to be much more powerful than just continuing to complain. Positive reinforcement and gratitude from the public will help them to keep moving that direction, and faster.
I have seen the DNR post some videos on their website about proposed changes along with an option to provide feedback. It definitely seems like they are open to listening to the publics feedback to some degree.
I am curious however what you are trying to achieve by taking a step back from technological advances in equipment? What is the root cause? Are you hoping to have a better chance at seeing/harvesting an animal and you think taking these things away from other hunters will help? Have you had a bad experience with these types of equipment being used? Does it hurt your experience during the hunt? I don't use too many fancy tools like infrared scopes or 1000 yard muzzleloaders but I enjoy non-transmitting trail cameras. Checking them for me is almost as much fun as the hunt itself. I am just curious because I think its becomes messy when you allow some advancements over others and that is why this has become such a big debate. I have thought about this a lot lately and we have a lot of advantages over the animal. Some come up in the debate others do not. Examples: Trucks, binoculars, spotting scopes, rifle scopes, bows/muzzles/rifles, our cognitive brains (debatable depending on the hunter :) ), having opposable thumbs, gps, range finders, boots, warm clothes, the list goes on and on. If the goal of limiting technology is to enhance population size, trophy potential, etc than why not instead just lower the number of tags in each unit and require harvest reporting? It feels like the DNR sell tags like airlines sell plane tickets. They over sell them because they know there isn't going to be 100% harvest like airlines oversell knowing there are going to be no shows. If they planned on 100% harvest and sold tags accordingly then why does it matter how hunters hunt as long as it doesn't infringe on the other hunters ability to do the same thing? I think tag numbers, habitat, predation, etc have a lot larger impact on the herd/trophy potential then how hunter hunt. The sad reality of hunting is as time goes on and the world populates animal habitat/herds are decreasing and hunter demand(tags) are not. It sucks but seems like reality. Just my two cents.
 
How Many Animals Did You Wound With that F'N Pea Shooter Past 300 Yards?
I wounded them to death.
I shoot custom reloads with ultra high velocities
I can maintain 1/4-1/8 moa out to 925yards.
It’s all about controlling the variables and mathematical equations
 
Last edited:
I have seen the DNR post some videos on their website about proposed changes along with an option to provide feedback. It definitely seems like they are open to listening to the publics feedback to some degree.
I am curious however what you are trying to achieve by taking a step back from technological advances in equipment? What is the root cause? Are you hoping to have a better chance at seeing/harvesting an animal and you think taking these things away from other hunters will help? Have you had a bad experience with these types of equipment being used? Does it hurt your experience during the hunt? I don't use too many fancy tools like infrared scopes or 1000 yard muzzleloaders but I enjoy non-transmitting trail cameras. Checking them for me is almost as much fun as the hunt itself. I am just curious because I think its becomes messy when you allow some advancements over others and that is why this has become such a big debate. I have thought about this a lot lately and we have a lot of advantages over the animal. Some come up in the debate others do not. Examples: Trucks, binoculars, spotting scopes, rifle scopes, bows/muzzles/rifles, our cognitive brains (debatable depending on the hunter :) ), having opposable thumbs, gps, range finders, boots, warm clothes, the list goes on and on. If the goal of limiting technology is to enhance population size, trophy potential, etc than why not instead just lower the number of tags in each unit and require harvest reporting? It feels like the DNR sell tags like airlines sell plane tickets. They over sell them because they know there isn't going to be 100% harvest like airlines oversell knowing there are going to be no shows. If they planned on 100% harvest and sold tags accordingly then why does it matter how hunters hunt as long as it doesn't infringe on the other hunters ability to do the same thing? I think tag numbers, habitat, predation, etc have a lot larger impact on the herd/trophy potential then how hunter hunt. The sad reality of hunting is as time goes on and the world populates animal habitat/herds are decreasing and hunter demand(tags) are not. It sucks but seems like reality. Just my two cents.
We need to decrease the success rates. Us and our kids can't hunt as often if they keep cutting tags. If they limit technology (thus decrease harvest rates) they don't have to cut tags, and there is more opportunity to hunt.
 
I have seen the DNR post some videos on their website about proposed changes along with an option to provide feedback. It definitely seems like they are open to listening to the publics feedback to some degree.
I am curious however what you are trying to achieve by taking a step back from technological advances in equipment? What is the root cause? Are you hoping to have a better chance at seeing/harvesting an animal and you think taking these things away from other hunters will help? Have you had a bad experience with these types of equipment being used? Does it hurt your experience during the hunt? I don't use too many fancy tools like infrared scopes or 1000 yard muzzleloaders but I enjoy non-transmitting trail cameras. Checking them for me is almost as much fun as the hunt itself. I am just curious because I think its becomes messy when you allow some advancements over others and that is why this has become such a big debate. I have thought about this a lot lately and we have a lot of advantages over the animal. Some come up in the debate others do not. Examples: Trucks, binoculars, spotting scopes, rifle scopes, bows/muzzles/rifles, our cognitive brains (debatable depending on the hunter :) ), having opposable thumbs, gps, range finders, boots, warm clothes, the list goes on and on. If the goal of limiting technology is to enhance population size, trophy potential, etc than why not instead just lower the number of tags in each unit and require harvest reporting? It feels like the DNR sell tags like airlines sell plane tickets. They over sell them because they know there isn't going to be 100% harvest like airlines oversell knowing there are going to be no shows. If they planned on 100% harvest and sold tags accordingly then why does it matter how hunters hunt as long as it doesn't infringe on the other hunters ability to do the same thing? I think tag numbers, habitat, predation, etc have a lot larger impact on the herd/trophy potential then how hunter hunt. The sad reality of hunting is as time goes on and the world populates animal habitat/herds are decreasing and hunter demand(tags) are not. It sucks but seems like reality. Just my two cents.


The cam thing is aimed more at the corporate side, where they run thousands of cams, ad have financials to always push the envelop.

Personally, starting with getting rid of anything that allows the hunter to not actually be I the field, seems simple.

Arrival scouting, drones, and yes cams, make it not necessary for the hunter to be present.
 
The cam thing is aimed more at the corporate side, where they run thousands of cams, ad have financials to always push the envelop.

Personally, starting with getting rid of anything that allows the hunter to not actually be I the field, seems simple.

Arrival scouting, drones, and yes cams, make it not necessary for the hunter to be present.
I get what you are saying with the guides going overboard on them. I have seen examples of abuse in that regard. Why not just shut it down for them if that is where the bulk of the problem is coming from? The cams I have you have to physically go place and physically go check so its gets me into the field more than I normally would go and its like Christmas morning to see what is on the card when you look at them. So much fun. I placed some cams on a unit I didn't even have a tag for but hoped to draw one day just to see what caliber the animals they had there. It was a blast. Being able to live on the mtn and afford to take tons of time off work to physically scout would be great.
 
We need to decrease the success rates. Us and our kids can't hunt as often if they keep cutting tags. If they limit technology (thus decrease harvest rates) they don't have to cut tags, and there is more opportunity to hunt.
Yeah that's a valid point. Then it turns into a quality vs. quantity type thing where you may be able to go hunting all the time but your kids start to not like going anymore because they never see anything that excites them. I have hunted easy to get units like that where its like chasing ghosts and there is a hunter around every corner. Plus feeling like you are going to get shot is not fun during opening morning. Not very fun in my opinion. For me, I would rather have quality even if it takes awhile to get a tag. I have had more fun lately tagging along with friends and family on their exclusive hard to draw tags. Even though I wasn't going to personally shoot something I could still "hunt" in a way by helping them in the process like glassing, tracking, hauling out the meat, and all the fun at camp. Thats also why I am a fan of non-transmitting cameras because it allows me to enjoy time in the outdoors with wildlife without having to kill them. You don't need a tag for that. It is a complex topic that's for sure. I definitely don't have all the answers. I just feel like I need to shed light on the other side of the argument because rules and regs seem easier made than unmade. Hard to go backwards once something is taken off the table.
 
I get what you are saying with the guides going overboard on them. I have seen examples of abuse in that regard. Why not just shut it down for them if that is where the bulk of the problem is coming from? The cams I have you have to physically go place and physically go check so its gets me into the field more than I normally would go and its like Christmas morning to see what is on the card when you look at them. So much fun. I placed some cams on a unit I didn't even have a tag for but hoped to draw one day just to see what caliber the animals they had there. It was a blast. Being able to live on the mtn and afford to take tons of time off work to physically scout would be great.

So you can't physically go in the field, and physically go check without the cam? Or better yet, during the seasons especially?

Explain fair chase, if you know every day, at what time, where, when, etc, an animal is, 365?

I agree cams can be fun. So can thermals, bait, drones, planes, etc.

We saw the result this year on the Pauns when dudes couldn't use bait. Imagine if they only used boot leather.
 
Yeah that's a valid point. Then it turns into a quality vs. quantity type thing where you may be able to go hunting all the time but your kids start to not like going anymore because they never see anything that excites them. I have hunted easy to get units like that where its like chasing ghosts and there is a hunter around every corner. Plus feeling like you are going to get shot is not fun during opening morning. Not very fun in my opinion. For me, I would rather have quality even if it takes awhile to get a tag. I have had more fun lately tagging along with friends and family on their exclusive hard to draw tags. Even though I wasn't going to personally shoot something I could still "hunt" in a way by helping them in the process like glassing, tracking, hauling out the meat, and all the fun at camp. Thats also why I am a fan of non-transmitting cameras because it allows me to enjoy time in the outdoors with wildlife without having to kill them. You don't need a tag for that. It is a complex topic that's for sure. I definitely don't have all the answers. I just feel like I need to shed light on the other side of the argument because rules and regs seem easier made than unmade. Hard to go backwards once something is taken off the table.


If you don't address the issue, the boundaries are pushed.




How old are you?

I grow tired of dudes who drew tags(or bought it) hunted yearly, had the experience, now getting "older and wiser" and wanting "quality" even if it means going tagless for years.

I've yet to see ANY proposal that allows EVERY 12-17yr old OTC deer tags, leaving the rest for a draw for the older dudes.

So we demand, those kids, do something NONE of us would have. Which is to sit home, so grandpa can hunt deer for his 60th year.
 
So you can't physically go in the field, and physically go check without the cam? Or better yet, during the seasons especially?

Explain fair chase, if you know every day, at what time, where, when, etc, an animal is, 365?

I agree cams can be fun. So can thermals, bait, drones, planes, etc.

We saw the result this year on the Pauns when dudes couldn't use bait. Imagine if they only used boot leather.
I think that is essentially what is up for debate. What is considered fair chase and hunting opportunity vs. hunting quality. I guess what I am getting at is that people who feel non- transmitting trail cameras create an unfair advantage to the animal yet use all the other modern day advances in technology are hypocrites. I am not commenting on planes, thermals, and the other stuff. If you have a rifle with a scope on it, ride around in a SXS, use binoculars/spotting scopes, etc then you should be asking yourself what is fair chase. Unless you are out in the woods trying to kill something with your bare hands I think the question could be asked to any hunter. That is my main point is that all of this debate is easily mitigated when you simply sell the right amount of tags for a given area. IMO If you are worried about the herds then tags numbers, habitat, predation control matter more than how a hunter chooses to harvest and animal. I respect what you are saying and glad people are willing to have a sensible debate about it. I think as a hunting community its going to be hard to please everyone. Its good people are willing to try and hash it out and hear all view points.
 
If you don't address the issue, the boundaries are pushed.




How old are you?

I grow tired of dudes who drew tags(or bought it) hunted yearly, had the experience, now getting "older and wiser" and wanting "quality" even if it means going tagless for years.

I've yet to see ANY proposal that allows EVERY 12-17yr old OTC deer tags, leaving the rest for a draw for the older dudes.

So we demand, those kids, do something NONE of us would have. Which is to sit home, so grandpa can hunt deer for his 60th year.
I'm 32. I think your idea of letting the youth hunt more often isn't a bad idea. I think youth in many states get some pretty sweet opportunities and tags fee discounts. So I think people see that value in that.

The unfortunate reality is that the worlds population continues to increase. Housing development continues to increase. Habitat is shrinking. There is a certain level of ever increasing scarcity in hunting. Certain older hunters probably did enjoy a better hunting environment than other younger hunters face in the future. Hunting definitely didn't seem as competitive as it is now. I don't think there is any way to remedy that unless somehow the population growth heads rapidly in the opposite direction. It sucks. I would have loved to have hunted back in the good ol' days.
 
What would you do to restrict archers? Not many people can make a good “cold” shot on an animal past 80 yards. On the other hand I can hand my rifle to my wife and she can make a great shot at 800 yards. She’s only shot it maybe 3 times.

Night vision should be on everyone’s list to ban on all big game hunts. (That needs to happen immediately)

Trail cams, ehhh. You can thank the outfitters for screwing that up. They
also do a pretty good job of having an absurd amount of “spotters”. (Pathetic & unethical IMO).

1 power scopes or no scopes on muzzleloaders is a great idea.

Long range rifles have gotten out of control, but I don’t know how you control that. 9 power scopes? I don’t know??

I’m in support of anything that helps get more mature bucks on the landscape. If we were all restricted to hunt with spears, I’d be all for it.

I have, and use most of the equipment mentioned above, but I would drop all that fancy crap in a heartbeat if it would help the deer. They have a lot going against them. Any tools we have that takes the animals defense mechanism out of the equation should be dropped IMO.
 
I’m all for restrictions, if the data supported the recommendation. But the published data for muzzleloader success suggests that scopes hasn’t increased harvests significantly over all. Take the Nebo for example, in 2015, the last year 1x scopes were required, they offered 778 muzzleloader permits. 175 deer were killed, giving a 25.7% success rate. In 2020, they offered 748 permits. 170 harvests, 25.9% success. Many units follow this same trend. There are a few that jumped a little over the years, but none that are real significant. The data doesn’t support the rec. for muzzleloaders. And the public in general doesn’t want it, according to their most recent surveys.

Now rifles on the other hand… put restrictions on that and I bet you see the success rates fall enough to make an impact on buck carryover, over all.

But again, that still does nothing to grow the DEER population in utah. Bucks are only a 1/3 of the population numbers. From what I’m reading, people are wanting more mature deer on the landscape as a result of restrictions. That’s great, but it’s a selfish desire and does nothing biologically beneficial for the deer and population, which is what should be the priority… and that’s clearly not the case.
 
Last edited:
I have read several people on here talk about restrictions on "long range rifles". Honest question what is a long range rifle? If you ask me I guess my answer would be if you not using a 30-30 with iron sights? Yes, I am one of those "longe range guys" I have a 28 Nosler set up for a 1000 yards and I routinely practice that far. If you are want to limit the effective range of a hunter it's not the caliber of the rifle or power of the scope......it's a rangefinder. I will be the first to admit, with out my rangefinder my "long range rifle" is no more effective than a 270 with a 4 power scope.
 
I have read several people on here talk about restrictions on "long range rifles". Honest question what is a long range rifle? If you ask me I guess my answer would be if you not using a 30-30 with iron sights? Yes, I am one of those "longe range guys" I have a 28 Nosler set up for a 1000 yards and I routinely practice that far. If you are want to limit the effective range of a hunter it's not the caliber of the rifle or power of the scope......it's a rangefinder. I will be the first to admit, with out my rangefinder my "long range rifle" is no more effective than a 270 with a 4 power scope.
That’s the case with any weapon these days. Rifle, bow or muzzleloader. But then your debate of ethical kills comes into play, and a rangefinder definitely does help with killing game more quickly and humanely.

I wish they’d make all centerfire rifles go to open sights, no semi autos, no rifles that have a detachable magazine… even go to straight wall cartridges with lever or bolt guns only. Want to use a scope? Draw a LE or OIL tag. You could even allow them for antlerless hunts since those are population management hunts. General deer and elk hunts however, would have restrictions on the rifles.
 
The DWR should be setting the number of buck tags at about how many new bucks are born each year and expecting 90% plus success rates and stop worrying about limiting what kind of technology people are using. If they do choose to take away scopes on Muzzleloaders and range finders for rifle shooters, they better take away sights for bows as well. Probably better ban range finders for use for bows and muzzleloaders too. Where do we stop? If you want to grow the herd they should stop giving land owners doe tags to shoot all the does in their fields. Does spend much of their time on private fields feeding. Shoot them all every year and it’s no surprise that the population never grows and keeps decreasing everywhere. There should be ZERO doe hunts in any states right now. Raise the price of tags and pay the land owners for their losses so they aren’t wanting all the deer killed.
 
Like I Said!

It's Not:

Some Gave All!

It's Gonna Be:

All Gave Some!

The StickFlippers Blame The SmokePolers!

The SmokePolers Blame The LongRangers!

The LongRangers Blame the SmokePolers!

The SmokePolers Blame The StickFlippers!

The LongRangers Blame The StickFlippers!

The StickFlippers Blame The LongRangers!

It's Gonna Be HAWKENS Only!

It's Gonna Be RE-CURVES Only!

It's Gonna Open Sights & Lever Actions Only!

That Ought To Be Enough To Piss The Popes Off Around Here!
 
I think that is essentially what is up for debate. What is considered fair chase and hunting opportunity vs. hunting quality. I guess what I am getting at is that people who feel non- transmitting trail cameras create an unfair advantage to the animal yet use all the other modern day advances in technology are hypocrites. I am not commenting on planes, thermals, and the other stuff. If you have a rifle with a scope on it, ride around in a SXS, use binoculars/spotting scopes, etc then you should be asking yourself what is fair chase. Unless you are out in the woods trying to kill something with your bare hands I think the question could be asked to any hunter. That is my main point is that all of this debate is easily mitigated when you simply sell the right amount of tags for a given area. IMO If you are worried about the herds then tags numbers, habitat, predation control matter more than how a hunter chooses to harvest and animal. I respect what you are saying and glad people are willing to have a sensible debate about it. I think as a hunting community its going to be hard to please everyone. Its good people are willing to try and hash it out and hear all view points.


That a cop out.

The difference between a rifle and a trail cam? You have to be on the MTN, at the same time as a deer. And with night vision illegal, the deer gets all night to move. Neither are true with cams.

Further. Look at the the most famous guides in Utah.

DC is able to master the Boulder. From his home in Spanish Fork(I believe?) Now how does a guy pull that off? Hundreds of cams. He's watching elk 24/7, while watching football, eating dinner, at a PTA meeting.

And if you think that's impressive, how many do you think Doyle runs to be able to cover the state?

How many spotters does one have to pay to do the work a cam does?

How many "quality" animals might slip by, otherwise, if not for a string of surveillance cams marking their every movement?

A bare minimum as a guide to regulate hunting should be the hunters ACTUAL presence on the MTN. That doesn't seem like much to ask.
 
That a cop out.

The difference between a rifle and a trail cam? You have to be on the MTN, at the same time as a deer. And with night vision illegal, the deer gets all night to move. Neither are true with cams.

Further. Look at the the most famous guides in Utah.

DC is able to master the Boulder. From his home in Spanish Fork(I believe?) Now how does a guy pull that off? Hundreds of cams. He's watching elk 24/7, while watching football, eating dinner, at a PTA meeting.

And if you think that's impressive, how many do you think Doyle runs to be able to cover the state?

How many spotters does one have to pay to do the work a cam does?

How many "quality" animals might slip by, otherwise, if not for a string of surveillance cams marking their every movement?

A bare minimum as a guide to regulate hunting should be the hunters ACTUAL presence on the MTN. That doesn't seem like much to ask.
Sounds like most of your beef is with guides? Why not isolate them only in camera regulation vs. people like me that place a couple (not hundreds) that I have to physically go place and physically go check. Two types of cameras are sold. One that can transmit via cellular service and one that doesn't not. The majority of cameras out there are non cellular ones that require phyiscally placement/checking/retrieval.

"A bare minimum as a guide to regulate hunting should be the hunters ACTUAL presence on the MTN." - By your definition should online maps be outlawed? Google Earth and ONX have been a bigger game changer for me than trail cameras in terms of harvest success. They don't require I step foot on the mountain either. Do you want those outlawed as well? Where do we stop?

Additionally, how do you even go about regulating this stuff? You really want DNR officers creeping around the woods looking for trail cam stuck to trees? Or worse deputizing other hunters to tattle or destroy peoples personal property? That sounds like a disaster. How do you regulate online mapping tools if that's now off the table?

For these reasons I have landed on my opinion that if you sell the right amount of tags all this stuff shouldn't really matter. Those who like the tools can use them and those who don't won't. Win win.
 
That a cop out.

The difference between a rifle and a trail cam? You have to be on the MTN, at the same time as a deer. And with night vision illegal, the deer gets all night to move. Neither are true with cams.

Further. Look at the the most famous guides in Utah.

DC is able to master the Boulder. From his home in Spanish Fork(I believe?) Now how does a guy pull that off? Hundreds of cams. He's watching elk 24/7, while watching football, eating dinner, at a PTA meeting.

And if you think that's impressive, how many do you think Doyle runs to be able to cover the state?

How many spotters does one have to pay to do the work a cam does?

How many "quality" animals might slip by, otherwise, if not for a string of surveillance cams marking their every movement?

A bare minimum as a guide to regulate hunting should be the hunters ACTUAL presence on the MTN. That doesn't seem like much to ask.
Very well said!
 
All rifles are long range if that's what you use it for. A 3x9 scope can be used just as effectively at 800 yds as a 4x16. If you have adjustable turrets, magnifying is more of a convenience. Limiting magnification is petty and a fool's errand.

Banning rangefinders is another fool's errand. The simple fix is to zero a rifle at 350 yds. If the first shot is low, good chances are you can adjust quickly with holdover for a second shot. If over, you'll have a second follow up with minimal adjustment when they stop. And, you will see more wounded critters. Nature's rule, not mine.

Scopes on muzzleloader's isn't what's doing it. It's Huntin' Fool and Eastmen's Journal that's doing it...
 
Great post SHG... I agree, I like seeing them listen to the public rather than just wave their hands saying "make it so."

There is no denying that hunting technology, in all it's forms, has made all of us far more capable and efficient in finding and harvesting our quarry.
Better footwear allows more people to hike farther, more comfortably, than our predecessors.
Better packs allow more hunters to carry more stuff, more comfortably, and camp in more remote locations. Same with better sleeping bags, lighter tents, etc. etc...
Optics, more than anything else IMO, have made us far better at locating game animals, and made rifles deadlier at all distances than our predecessors.

This list could go on and on...

I feel for those who have to decide what level of lethality is acceptable and appropriate to manage our game animals. This is the reason I like seeing them listen to us. We are "boots on the ground" and collectively, we know how things are or are not working.

Now, they just have to figure out all of the dangers to our game animals that aren't because of hunting pressure. ??
 
I have read several people on here talk about restrictions on "long range rifles". Honest question what is a long range rifle? If you ask me I guess my answer would be if you not using a 30-30 with iron sights? Yes, I am one of those "longe range guys" I have a 28 Nosler set up for a 1000 yards and I routinely practice that far. If you are want to limit the effective range of a hunter it's not the caliber of the rifle or power of the scope......it's a rangefinder. I will be the first to admit, with out my rangefinder my "long range rifle" is no more effective than a 270 with a 4 power scope.
Not necessarily. If you know how, you can range using your scope recital. Not many people know how. But if they ban rangefinders, which they will never do, a lot of people will figure it out really quick.
 
Great thread and discussion - I am 100% for banning thermal and night vision devices for sure, but restricting other things starts to become a slippery slope, not to mention the challenges and issues with enforcement.

I would tend to agree with the sentiment that that if you sell the right amount of tags all this stuff shouldn't really matter IF the DWR could get the "right amount of tags" part right, AND if they were a lot more disciplined in gathering real harvest statistics based on mandatory reporting for all tags. I can't feel real warm and fuzzy there until the data and decisions are based on reality as much as possible.
 
Great thread and discussion - I am 100% for banning thermal and night vision devices for sure, but restricting other things starts to become a slippery slope, not to mention the challenges and issues with enforcement.

I would tend to agree with the sentiment that that if you sell the right amount of tags all this stuff shouldn't really matter IF the DWR could get the "right amount of tags" part right, AND if they were a lot more disciplined in gathering real harvest statistics based on mandatory reporting for all tags. I can't feel real warm and fuzzy there until the data and decisions are based on reality as much as possible.
100% agree with what you said. I would like to see more data driven decisions. I am fine with mandatory reporting as well and think it could really help in the tag allotment decisions.
 
Get 'er done

 
Not necessarily. If you know how, you can range using your scope recital. Not many people know how. But if they ban rangefinders, which they will never do, a lot of people will figure it out really quick.
They cannot ban "long range shooting", thats just absurd.
It's illegal for me to hunt with my very efficient 338 Lapua/Nightforce set up, or my Bergara 6.5 PRC while guys will still lob bullets from 30-06's and 270's across canyons till they get lucky and hit something in the a$$?
 
LOL PUNK!

But True!

The Good Thing Is:

SmokePolers & StickFlippers Will Be Lobbing as Well!
They cannot ban "long range shooting", thats just absurd.
It's illegal for me to hunt with my very efficient 338 Lapua/Nightforce set up, or my Bergara 6.5 PRC while guys will still lob bullets from 30-06's and 270's across canyons till they get lucky and hit something in the a$$?
 
Sounds like most of your beef is with guides? Why not isolate them only in camera regulation vs. people like me that place a couple (not hundreds) that I have to physically go place and physically go check. Two types of cameras are sold. One that can transmit via cellular service and one that doesn't not. The majority of cameras out there are non cellular ones that require phyiscally placement/checking/retrieval.

"A bare minimum as a guide to regulate hunting should be the hunters ACTUAL presence on the MTN." - By your definition should online maps be outlawed? Google Earth and ONX have been a bigger game changer for me than trail cameras in terms of harvest success. They don't require I step foot on the mountain either. Do you want those outlawed as well? Where do we stop?

Additionally, how do you even go about regulating this stuff? You really want DNR officers creeping around the woods looking for trail cam stuck to trees? Or worse deputizing other hunters to tattle or destroy peoples personal property? That sounds like a disaster. How do you regulate online mapping tools if that's now off the table?

For these reasons I have landed on my opinion that if you sell the right amount of tags all this stuff shouldn't really matter. Those who like the tools can use them and those who don't won't. Win win.


Yes. After opening day of archery season EVERY cam is considered LITTER. And as such, should be picked up by responsible sportsmen who don't like litter.


BULLSHIT!!!

I keep hearing about how animals aren't killed via cams, yet , somehow, there are pics of them.

I'm 47.

Believe it or not, there are things called paper maps,. I ACTUALLY hunted with a side hammer muzzy shooting lead slugs . And there really weren't many guides around.

It's BULLSHIT trying to push, ONX, does more than a trail cam. NO ONE believes that. There is a reason dudes are squealing about trail cam "seasons".

We ALL know what they are, what they do, and why they are popular. And it isn't for pics of shedded deer in April


You said so yourself. You can watch units you don't even hunt.
 
They cannot ban "long range shooting", thats just absurd.
It's illegal for me to hunt with my very efficient 338 Lapua/Nightforce set up, or my Bergara 6.5 PRC while guys will still lob bullets from 30-06's and 270's across canyons till they get lucky and hit something in the a$$?


No electronics, fair game.

There is skill in shooting. Computers, dopers, range compensation, ain't skill.

Good shooting, good scouting, good effort, all fair game.

We both know that ain't the majority of LR. Without electronics, most are useless
 
Hey Hossy?

You Gonna Require Them To Hike as Well?

Or Let Them Keep Destroying Mother Earth With Their F'N Quads?



No electronics, fair game.

There is skill in shooting. Computers, dopers, range compensation, ain't skill.

Good shooting, good scouting, good effort, all fair game.

We both know that ain't the majority of LR. Without electronics, most are useless
 
They cannot ban "long range shooting", thats just absurd.
It's illegal for me to hunt with my very efficient 338 Lapua/Nightforce set up, or my Bergara 6.5 PRC while guys will still lob bullets from 30-06's and 270's across canyons till they get lucky and hit something in the a$$?

You underestimate the .270. An ABLR at 150 grs isn't the same as a 150 gr CoreLok.
 
Yes Niller!

Break Your Whitworth Out & Fire Away!

No Turrets To Turn!

No RangeFinder To Use!

Just Guesstimate that Yardage Out Past 300 Yards & Let Us Know How That Works Out For You?
 
They cannot ban "long range shooting", thats just absurd.
It's illegal for me to hunt with my very efficient 338 Lapua/Nightforce set up, or my Bergara 6.5 PRC while guys will still lob bullets from 30-06's and 270's across canyons till they get lucky and hit something in the a$$?
With that logic wouldn't it be better to leave scopes on muzzleloaders then?
 
Hey Niller?

I Don't Have a Whitworth!

But I've Still Got My HAWKENS!

So Niller?

Let's Give You The Advantage with You Using Your Whitworth Next/2022 Season!

I Will Use My Old HAWKENS/Short Range SmokePole!

Let's Place a Wager Niller!

Say 50.00?

50.00 won't Buy You Much These Days So it'd Be Spilt Milk!

The Guy That Harvests The Biggest PISSCUTTER Takes the Cash!

I Don't Think Either One Of Losing 50.00 would Make us Hate Each other?

Or HELL Niller!

If You Don't Wanna Involve Money We Could Leave The Money out of it & Just Do it For Fun?

Remember Niller!

You'll Have The Full Advantage!

You Say I Don't Hunt!

You've Said I'm Anti-Hunting!

You'll Be Packing the 1,000+ Yard Gun Niller!

I'll Be Packing a Gun that's 80-100 Yard Max!

Let's Do Our Part Niller!

The Guy That Harvests The Biggest PISSCUTTER Will Be Crowned King of Absolutely F'N Nothing!

You In Niller?

You've Got All the Advantages!





You know you’ve got bessy all twisted up when he replies to himself 3 times.

Good night, ya’ll!
 
BULLSHIT!!!!!!!


WE HAVE LOST 100,000 TAGS TO "HUNTERS". None to "antis"


Sfw has cost dudes more tags than PETA ever dreamed
So you don't think outlawing trapping, hound hunting, bear baiting, banning spring bear hunts, banning all cougar hunting, introduction of wolves, over population of grizzlies as cost ANY TAGS ?? All things anti-hunters have done. They use hunters infighting against us. To help sell misinformation to the voting public and game departments.

I'm no fan of SFW.
 
So you don't think outlawing trapping, hound hunting, bear baiting, banning spring bear hunts, banning all cougar hunting, introduction of wolves, over population of grizzlies as cost ANY TAGS ?? All things anti-hunters have done. They use hunters infighting against us. To help sell misinformation to the voting public and game departments.

I'm no fan of SFW.

You believe there are 90k trappers, cat hunters in Utah?

We don't have grizzlies, have no wolf introduction, have expanded beat hunting, and have baiting seasons here.

So, you'd be wrong
 
Make all rifle deer hunts into LE, give most of the tags to archery and muzzy. No rangefinding sights on your bow, and no scopes on your muzzy. Boom, deer here magically fixed. Utah will be like Colorado in the 60's and 70's before you know it ?
 
Big difference between "prohibited" and annoying...

As opposed to you joining the fray to whine about it? Solid! Build a bridge and get over yourself roadrunner. You’ve had your moments here too, nobody is lecturing you to get a room.

Bessy, you see what you caused? Now roadrunner is telling us we can’t banter. And you know what questions I’m talking about old man! Bet is on the second you answer them. I’m betting we won’t have a bet. (See what I did there?)
 
No one has mentioned that the cause of all this advanced technology, baiting, trail camera's, long range everything, outfitters hiring 30 spotters, etc, etc is because we are losing "deer", not just bucks.
We are doing everything we can engineer in our brains to have a crack at that one 200" buck on a unit that takes 25 years to draw, or to cash a 25k check.
We are compounding our own problems and focusing the wrong issues.
 
Last edited:
Ya!

Blame it on Bessy!

I'm Almost Use To It!



As opposed to you joining the fray to whine about it? Solid! Build a bridge and get over yourself roadrunner. You’ve had your moments here too, nobody is lecturing you to get a room.

Bessy, you see what you caused? Now roadrunner is telling us we can’t banter. And you know what questions I’m talking about old man! Bet is on the second you answer them. I’m betting we won’t have a bet. (See what I did there?)
 
We are compounding our own problems and focusing the wrong issues.

I’ve said over and over and over again that if we want to see the deer HERD improve then we need to stop managing hunters all the time and start managing deer.

When we see issues everyone always wants to restrict or change when and how we hunt. That is because managing hunters is easy. It’s also lazy and completely ineffective in improving the health of the herd. What do they say is the definition of insanity, again?
 
No one has mentioned that the cause of all this advanced technology, baiting, trail camera's, long range everything, outfitters hiring 30 spotters, etc, etc is because we are losing "deer", not just bucks.
We are doing everything we can engineer in our brains to have a crack at that one 200" buck on a unit that takes 25 years to draw, or to cash a 25k check.
We are compounding our own problems and focusing the wrong issues.


Which came first the chicken or the egg.

I maintain that the 130,000 or so we lost to "save the mule deer", was the cousins, uncle's, grandparents, who didn't care about inches, or books, but cared about traditions, family, experience.

That left far too few of us left who realize the $1000 a pound meat from a deer, ain't about the deer, but the time on the MTN.

So now the priorities are so warped, they are gone.

Now we are to the point where guys foolishly believe, shutting down units, or cutting more tags, is good for deer, or hunting in general

$fw loves the idea, fewer hunters means less revenue for the division, the more desperate they are for special interest groups to fill the gap.

The guides, outfitters, and CWMU aren't worried, money talks.
And for what?

So a all handful of dudes have IG posts?

Slam keeps pounding on it. But, few listen, because they DONT CARE ABOUT DEER, they car about inches.

The guys who cared about deer hunting got weeded out, by the inches crew. Which is why they never mention does, just "quality".

PETA don't need to lift a finger. We keep killing ourselves off
 
I’ve said over and over and over again that if we want to see the deer HERD improve then we need to stop managing hunters all the time and start managing deer.

When we see issues everyone always wants to restrict or change when and how we hunt. That is because managing hunters is easy. It’s also lazy and completely ineffective in improving the health of the herd. What do they say is the definition of insanity, again?
Boom!
Even my friend Bess should agree with this.
 
Which came first the chicken or the egg.

I maintain that the 130,000 or so we lost to "save the mule deer", was the cousins, uncle's, grandparents, who didn't care about inches, or books, but cared about traditions, family, experience.

That left far too few of us left who realize the $1000 a pound meat from a deer, ain't about the deer, but the time on the MTN.

So now the priorities are so warped, they are gone.

Now we are to the point where guys foolishly believe, shutting down units, or cutting more tags, is good for deer, or hunting in general

$fw loves the idea, fewer hunters means less revenue for the division, the more desperate they are for special interest groups to fill the gap.

The guides, outfitters, and CWMU aren't worried, money talks.
And for what?

So a all handful of dudes have IG posts?

Slam keeps pounding on it. But, few listen, because they DONT CARE ABOUT DEER, they car about inches.

The guys who cared about deer hunting got weeded out, by the inches crew. Which is why they never mention does, just "quality".

PETA don't need to lift a finger. We keep killing ourselves off
This!!!!☝
 
I've been preaching "advanced technology" for a long time, but it's a whole seperate issue as to why we are losing "deer".
Our loss of bucks is a byproduct of losing "deer" and we gotta put that sh!t on the priority list!!
 
Last edited:
I’ve said over and over and over again that if we want to see the deer HERD improve then we need to stop managing hunters all the time and start managing deer.

When we see issues everyone always wants to restrict or change when and how we hunt. That is because managing hunters is easy. It’s also lazy and completely ineffective in improving the health of the herd. What do they say is the definition of insanity, again?
I was typing my own response but really couldn't have said it any better than this.
 
Boom!
Even my friend Bess should agree with this.

Nah. His HELL RIGHT was 99.7% hunter management, down to what material the handle on your knife would have to be. Hoss described ole Bessy pretty well above. He just doesn’t want to see anyone else get to hunt. He’s very much in the camp to restrict you and I because fixing the real issues are too hard. Let’s just make another change to how we hunt…that ought to do it!
 
Nah. His HELL RIGHT was 99.7% hunter management, down to what material the handle on your knife would have to be. Hoss described ole Bessy pretty well above. He just doesn’t want to see anyone else get to hunt. He’s very much in the camp to restrict you and I because fixing the real issues are too hard. Let’s just make another change to how we hunt…that ought to do it!
I totally respect the ole cat, we've been friends for several years and shared many a campfire on the Dutton, Paunsaugunt and even Colorado, hopefully many more to come, but these issues we all balk about are somehow lumped into one when they are two.
 
Once Again!

I Wasn't The One Whining about Weaponry!

Nearly Everybody Blames One Or Two Weapon Types!

Ya!

The 2 They Don't Use Or Hunt With!

As I've Said Many Times!

If You're Putting Restrictions on One Weapon Type!

You're gonna Put Restrictions On All 3 Types of Weapons!

Seems To Be a Bunch of Whine-Asses on Here Over SmokePoles!

We Are All Guilty Of some sort of Advancements/Technology & I Don't Care What Weapon You Hunt With!

It's Just One Item/Issue on the Big List anyway!

When You Comprehend The Other 50+ Reasons Why, Let Me know!

I've Never Said Just The 'BUCK' Herd Sucks!

I've Always Said the TARDville 'DEER' Herd Sucks!

Yes!

That Includes Does!

The Very Worst Deer Management There is,Is The Management Utah Uses,Buck to Doe Ratio's!

I've Said forever,A Healthy Deer Herd Will take care of itself on Number of Bucks Per Number of Does!

You Boys Really Think We've got a Healthy Deer Herd Right Now?

Better Open Your F'N Eyes!

Like I've Said For Years!

When The Deer Herd is Pounded Down To Nothing!

And When 2 Points/PISSCUTTERS are The Biggest That there is to Hunt & Harvest The Majority of TARDS Will Still Be Parading Them Little Bastards Around Town & Posting Their LOOK AT ME Pictures on Social Media Like They've Killed Some Kinda GAWD-DAMNED Trophy!
 
I totally respect the ole cat, we've been friends for several years and shared many a campfire on the Dutton, Paunsaugunt and even Colorado, hopefully many more to come, but these issues we all balk about are somehow lumped into one when they are two.

So you're saying he's a real person?

I'll be damned
 
I don't have too many complaints.

I’m with ridge in that there is not a lot to complain about and there are more than two points to hunt in Utah LE and general units. I had a great tag in Colorado this year and thought to myself several times on that hunt that I would take a Utah general tag over what I was experiencing in Colorado. If they leave everything the way it is now I will deal with it and make the best of it but if I was king for a day, I would put restrictions on technologies to keep the hunt a hunt and give the animals a fair chance to win the game from time to time. The reality in me seems to think this will likely never happen with regard to weapon technology restrictions. The cat is out of the bag and it seems that the majority would rather take all the advantages they are allowed over the animals they pursue. Guilt myself of this but I would have no problem going back to a 1x scope on a muzzleloader, back to fixed pins on my bow with no electronic sights and put a 6x or less scope on my rifle if they went that way. Not the end of the world for me. Some have mentioned that the change to allow magnified scopes on muzzleloader did not increase the harvest success rates but in my opinion it did change the hunting experience for what the hunt was prior to the change. To me, it feels a lot more like being on a rifle hunt. More shoots echoing through the canyons and less people attempt to stoke the animals. Everyone has there opinion but I don’t see total doom and gloom in Utah. I still look forward to having my Utah general deer tag in my pocket over most other tags I have drawn for each year. I may be crazy but my best bucks on my wall are from general tags and not the special draw tags so there is plenty of reasons for that excitement. We had four general tags this year between my dad, daughter, myself, and my hunting buddy and my dad and daughter killed once in a lifetime bucks in there on right and my hunting buddy and myself kill mature bucks that we were happy with. I got a bonus for Utah with a LE Archery elk tag and Colorado did end on a good note so it is hard to complain about 2021. I hope 2022 is a good one as well. Have fun.
 
Last edited:
He is very real and will give you his coat in a snowstorm.
He has been there for me on quite a few hunts, guiding and personal.
He's a damn good guy, I give you my word.
I'm sure he's a good guy and I wouldn't mind sharing a campfire sometime. I'm sure it would be a roadside one. My problem with Bess (Robert) is many of his expectations are unrealistic and things are not as bad as he keeps trying to convince people they are.
 
Which came first the chicken or the egg.

I maintain that the 130,000 or so we lost to "save the mule deer", was the cousins, uncle's, grandparents, who didn't care about inches, or books, but cared about traditions, family, experience.

That left far too few of us left who realize the $1000 a pound meat from a deer, ain't about the deer, but the time on the MTN.

So now the priorities are so warped, they are gone.

Now we are to the point where guys foolishly believe, shutting down units, or cutting more tags, is good for deer, or hunting in general

$fw loves the idea, fewer hunters means less revenue for the division, the more desperate they are for special interest groups to fill the gap.

The guides, outfitters, and CWMU aren't worried, money talks.
And for what?

So a all handful of dudes have IG posts?

Slam keeps pounding on it. But, few listen, because they DONT CARE ABOUT DEER, they car about inches.

The guys who cared about deer hunting got weeded out, by the inches crew. Which is why they never mention does, just "quality".

PETA don't need to lift a finger. We keep killing ourselves off
That's the point I was making. Thanks.
 
This thread started out with a thank you to the DWR. I will add my thanks for all the fun over the years and I feel they are trying to figure out a lot of hard things right now. Just today on the mountain as I was helping a friend get a cow elk out, the DWR was up in the area working in the cold and 18” of snow placing radio collars on moose to better understand their movements. There is a lot of stuff going on that a lot of us do not see nor give them credit for. Thank you to the DWR for your efforts.
 
Last edited:
My thanks goes to the DNR as a nonres with current application deadlines before tag quotas were set. Very few nonres tags are issued and it was impossible to know which units had at least 1 nonres bonus pt pool tag before the deadline. With the later deadline nonres can apply for a season and unit that we know will have nonres tags available in the bonus pool. For nonres with piles of pts it’s a definite hats off and thank you to the DNR!
 
It is a good thing for Non-residents especially to know the tag quotas, but I agree with hornkiller that it will likely decrease drawing odds because all the non-residents will put in for the units that have at least one bonus pool tag and cluster everyone together, but it is not like the odds of drawing were great in the first place :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
I’m all for restrictions, if the data supported the recommendation. But the published data for muzzleloader success suggests that scopes hasn’t increased harvests significantly over all. Take the Nebo for example, in 2015, the last year 1x scopes were required, they offered 778 muzzleloader permits. 175 deer were killed, giving a 25.7% success rate. In 2020, they offered 748 permits. 170 harvests, 25.9% success. Many units follow this same trend. There are a few that jumped a little over the years, but none that are real significant. The data doesn’t support the rec. for muzzleloaders. And the public in general doesn’t want it, according to their most recent surveys.

Now rifles on the other hand… put restrictions on that and I bet you see the success rates fall enough to make an impact on buck carryover, over all.

But again, that still does nothing to grow the DEER population in utah. Bucks are only a 1/3 of the population numbers. From what I’m reading, people are wanting more mature deer on the landscape as a result of restrictions. That’s great, but it’s a selfish desire and does nothing biologically beneficial for the deer and population, which is what should be the priority… and that’s clearly not the case.
At first glance, the numbers you use seem to support that powered scopes don't increase harvest rates. However, there are other factors that contribute to harvest rates. The greatest being- how many bucks are running around to be killed?

In 2015, the DWR estimated the deer population to be 14,900 on Nebo. With their estimated buck to doe ratio of 16 to 100, there were roughly 2055 bucks on the unit. 175 were killed, which is 8.5% of the total bucks.

In 2020, the DWR estimated the deer population to be 12,500 on Nebo. With their estimated buck to doe ratio of 12 to 100, there were roughly 1339 bucks on the unit. 170 were killed, which is 12.7% of the total bucks.

Basically, the number of bucks went down 35%, but the harvest ratio did not go down with that number... meaning hunters became more lethal. In fact, comparing 8.5% to 12.7%- they became almost 50% more lethal in killing bucks. If lethality of the hunter was even between 1x or no scope and powered scopes, we would statistically expect to see the harvest numbers go down at a commensurate rate (35%). If that were true, only 114 bucks would have been harvested in 2020.
 
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