Lion Question

W

wimpy

Member
Messages
43
I'm curious to see how the MonsterMuley members think the best way to manage the lions are---draws or harvest objective?

Utah is gradually working back so that all units are total draws or split season. All the states bordering Utah are using harvest objective. I feel that the draws limit the number of hunters able to buy licenses and hunt, and that it is a poor way to manage lions.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting
Blanding, Utah
 
I like our harvest objective quota system and being able to buy tags over the counter.

But I can see though where some areas near cities or heavily guided areas, can get a lot of pressure. In my country, winter snow fall plays into the harvest. In open winters with no snow, our lion harvest takes dive. I also love lion hunters that take the smaller females and toms. I care more about keeping the lions in check and helping out the deer than the B&C lions, just my opinion. Don't flame me for having one :)



----------------------------------------
Measure wealth by the things you have,, for which you would not take money.
 
Call them varmints, and shoot as many as you want.

I don't like them and I don't think they serve any purpose whatsoever.......other than eating up the dead coyotes I leave laying about.

You couldn't kill them all regardless, so I'm not worried about the "balance of nature" BS.

You asked, that's my opinion. Please do not attempt to confuse me with the facts.

"When God created mountain lions, they were necessary. Now they are not, so God created the 220 Swift."......Nickman, chapter 1, verse 3.
 
Whether you are for harvest objective or against it, you need to write to the RAC members or attend a RAC meeting this week. There's a ten-year plan that is pushing all units to go to draws. I believe that the draw system has too many variables: hunters drawing tags that have no means to get lions or no desire to fill the tag and limiting hunters from getting a tag that really want to harvest a lion. In the long run, they are taking hunters' ability away for managing lions. I'm afraid we are working toward California's laws, where the hunters have lost the ability to help manage lions. Is that what we want to happen?
RAC members: http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac_members.php
RAC dates: http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/pdf/09_rac_schedule.pdf

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting
 
I would like to see a harvest objective system where you can buy a tag every year and keep it with you on the deer or elk hunt (no dogs). I also have several bonus points and would like to have the chance to pursue a trophy tom with dogs in the winter when the snow flies.

What about something like they do in Idaho where you can use your deer tag to shoot a lion if you see one out in the wild during your hunt in that area.

As a side note, I saw my first lion last night and was in total awe as I sat and watched it from the comfort of my vehicle at 100 yards.

CS

"Helping turn good tags, into great ones." - www.vipoptics.com
 
>I would like to see a
>harvest objective system where you
>can buy a tag every
>year and keep it with
>you on the deer or
>elk hunt (no dogs).
>I also have several bonus
>points and would like to
>have the chance to pursue
>a trophy tom with dogs
>in the winter when the
>snow flies.
>
>What about something like they do
>in Idaho where you can
>use your deer tag to
>shoot a lion if you
>see one out in the
>wild during your hunt in
>that area.
>
>As a side note, I saw
>my first lion last night
>and was in total awe
>as I sat and watched
>it from the comfort of
>my vehicle at 100 yards.
>
>
>CS
>
>"Helping turn good tags, into great
>ones." - www.vipoptics.com
and you didn't shoot it?





on topic,it has to be a harvest objective, type of managment. on a draw system, there will ALWAYS be SOME anti-hunter who will gladly throw in their $20 to draw a tag, tear it up, and save a mt.lions life. that has nothing to do with management!


it should be a general tag, which raises more money, and a quota. after a set amount of lions have been killed, season is over.


then we should all go to the SSS rule-- Shoot, Shovel,Shut up!
 
I support the harvest objective but on a draw system don't they look at the success % and set the tag limits accordingly? So even if there are people out there that have no clue what they are doing won't they just end up giving out more tags to make up for it? Don't get me wrong. I really like how we do it with bear where the season opens and stays open until the objective is met and then closes the next Wednesday.
 
Here in AZ they used to have a bounty on them. I think it should be that way again until the population is dropped a little. We have way to many cats here.
 
Hey Lloyd,

I thought you were going to call me on the phone to chat about this a week ago or so? :)

I still haven't heard for sure what they are proposing or have cooking. But I think the DWR likes the Quota system and I doubt they are going away from it.

Give me a holler one night and tell me what you know or what you are hearing!!

I am still laughing at this comment: "I don't like them and I don't think they serve any purpose whatsoever.......other than eating up the dead coyotes I leave laying about."

Lions scavenging on dead coyotes... now that's funny!!

I won't even comment here because sometimes idiocy just speaks for itself. :) :)

Give me a call Lloyd and tell me what's going on. Are they looking to put the San Juan back to a draw unit?

All I know is the only purpose a lion serves is to eat up all the dead magpies I leave laying around. LOL!!
 
In az now there is a closed season,june,july and aug.There is a plan on the works to put a female objective number on units,then only toms can be killed?
 
I believe Colorado has an excellent system. Four and a half month long season. (I personnaly don't like year long seasons because too many females with young are killed). Tags are over the counter so the state is generating maximum amount of $$. Hunting opportunity is maxed out because you can hunt a maximum number of days each year. Each unit has a quota so the management objectives can be set and most filled each year. When the quota is filled, the unit closes but you can still hunt next door in the next unit that is still open.
Female harvest was too high in some units a few years ago so CO. went to a voluntary system asking hunters in certain units to not shoot as many females. There is a mandatory 'test' that you have to take with a lot of photos/questions about how to identify females. The system appears to have worked because our female harvest has since been declining the past few years. Personally, I can't see many faults with the system CO. has.
 
FullCry, Thanks for your input. That's what I have been trying to show Utah's RAC members, that every state around us uses harvest objective, and that it seems to work the best. But they are not listening to anybody's opinion except their own.
 
Loyd, its not to wise to call and ask for support and jump on the net and talk trash. If you want to talk to Byron, Man up and call him. You told me on the phone that you hated lions and hunted them to kill them. This is about your outfitting not lion managment. Most every Hound dogger I know thinks quota sucks. I agree with them. quota has its place but not every unit. And the new cougar plan was put together by a committee, not SFW board members. SFW had one seat at the table. Get you facts straight. John Bair
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-01-09 AT 11:19AM (MST)[p]"If you want to talk to Byron, Man up and call him."

I have called and talked to Byron.

"You told me on the phone that you hated lions and hunted them to kill them."

John, do not twist my words around. I told you on the phone that most houndsmen in San Juan County had hounds for one reason. I have never said that was my intention. I have pushed for the lions for several years and am still pushing for lions. I make my living hunting lions during the winter. I think you guys are leaving the sportsmen totally out of this. When there is a plan made, and a representative of the sportsmen does not push in the goals to have hunter opportunity, there is something wrong. When he pushes for the hunters to be left out during the best part of the season; when it does not benefit one single hunter, there is something wrong with that. (So you tell me, how you as a sportsman, can answer these question to the people you represent.)

"Most every Hound dogger I know thinks quota sucks."

Then you better start checking in other states, where the quota system is working far superior than anything we've even done. We sit in the RAC meeting and hear about learning from other states for turkeys. What is wrong with learning from other states for lions?

"SFW had one seat at the table."

That is true. But how does somebody who respresents the sportsmen, support a plan like this. We were told in the RAC meetings that this plan was endorsed by all members. So like I asked in the other thread: Tell me how putting San Juan on a split season would benefit one -- just one -- of your fellow hunters.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting
 
Lloyd, I don't hunt Utah but have heard that your DNR manages lions much differently then CO. The two states look at lions much differently. I've heard Utah looks at lions as hurting your precious deer herds. Here in CO. they are not looked down upon as a menace but as a valuable resource and managed as such. With any type of drawing, the state is loosing license dollars, not to mention the amount of days enjoyed be houndsmen in the field, since only a fraction are able to hunt. I keep hearing how Utahs lion population seems to be suffering with the current system. Unless they are trying to supress the population, then I guess they are achieving their objective.
Can anyone tell my why you wouldn't want to go to a season structure like CO.? I just don't see any benifits to Utahs system.
 
I read the other thread that Lloyd posted. So I have another question/statment. Lets lay out the differences from a quota system and a draw system. Feel free to post your ideas because I'm sure I'll miss some points.

Lets say you have a unit that you want 10 lions taken out of each year. Either system, you can (will) get 10 lions killed each year.

With the drawing system, you will have to make an estimated guess on how many tags you can issue so that you meet your objective of 10 lions. Lets say that number is 20 hunters based on a 50% success. (maybe I'm way off here, I don't now what number Utah uses). So you have sold 20 tags, and only those guys get to hunt. One year you kill 8 lions, the next 12. Either way, you've meet your objective. If you over harvest one year, the quota is lowered the next to make up the over harvest the prior year and vice versa.

With a quota system, you sell unlimited tags. Generate more $$ for the state, maximize the number of hunters enjoying the resource and never over harvest your resource.
So with a set limit of 10 lions, you meet your objective every year. (actually here in CO. we only meet our quota limit in about half of our units.) They do close early but with so many other units open, you still get to hunt every day of the season.
I can't see how either one of these systems can grow larger lions then the other one since you never over harvest.
What is the argument that the RAC is using for a drawing?
 
Dean, the argument for the quota vs. the draw is that the houndsmen feel that with the quota, the lions are overharvested. Instead of lowering the numbers on the quota, they figure they can put out X amount of draw tags, and a good majority of them will not get filled.

The argument for the split season is really a good point. When the harvest objective started, there were a lot of units that were filling in between two days and three or four weeks. If you wanted to fill a lion, you had to get in and get it done, and fill with whatever you could catch first. If the split season was only used on the units that closed within three weeks, it could be a very valuable tool. Now their goal is to go to split season or draw for all the units.

My way of looking at this is the harvest objective is far better than the draw if you set the numbers properly. It gives every hunter the same opportunity. The split season, when used in units that typically stay open past March, has no benefit to a hunter at all. All it does is limit the ability for residents and especially non-residents to purchase licenses and hunt during the best time of year. This also costs the DWR tens of thousands of dollars and the local businesses revenue for no benefit at all to the hunters.

Thanks,
Lloyd Nielson
 
The season is not limited to those that have a kill tag. anyone can buy a persuit permit and hunt on any of the units, november to june. Draw permits allow for a hunter to be much more selective on the cat they take as they are not pressed to compete with other hunters for the last lion on the quota. Ive hunted both and MUCH prefer a draw tag. When we dont have a draw tag we take lots of pics and still chase cats every week. The units are not closed to pursuit.
 
Very interesting 10r! I don't think anyone mentioned that you could still pursue cats during the season with a pursuit tag. I would have to agree with that since I think too many small lions are being shot with outfitters just to fill thier clients tags. This sounds like a much better way to stop that nonsense.
OK, back to you Lloyd, why is this not acceptible? Because you can't get enough tags for your clients? I don't hunt in any areas where I have much competition and so I don't have problems with units filling up and closing. And we don't have any type of pursuit season here in CO. so for Utahs areas that are being hunted hard, I think I like this permit system...WITH a pursuit season.
 
FullCryHounds, you need to look at the san juan region in Utah, Huge area, probably biggest area, it has a harvest objective of 20 lions, they have not reached that objective but one time since starting, the race to kill the lions is not there, most of the houndsmen down here are pretty selective, there has been more females killed this year, i know one of the houndsmen filled his tag with a female because she was killing his dog so he killed her and tagged out, he was not happy because he wanted a big tom and has held out, passing up small toms and females. I hunt with a different houndsmen and he is the same way, he has not filled his tag in years and wont unless he has a big tom, he encourages all his hunters not to kill little lions, but it is up to the hunter to shoot.
The condition on the san juan very year by year, the lions are here and lots of them, but weather condition very, we dont get a lot of snow, some years we do, and some years nothing, so if your not a local houndsman to just come down and chase lions you must have a lot of time on your hands because you may spend a month down here and not see any snow in the winter and to cut a track on frozen dirt is pretty hard. You have to be here and ready to go when it snows. To go to a draw unit on the san juan isn't he greatest option in my opinion because of the weather facters, if you have 10 tags on draw and 5 of the 10 tag holders are from wasatch front, most likely they will not make it down when we have fresh snow, most likely wont fill there tags, I live here locally and work 5 days out of the week, I couldn't even make it out when we had good conditions, still have a tag in my pocket. So to limit hunters on a huge unit with our verying weather is not the best option for san juan. Most likely we wont fill the harvest objective once again.
 
>Whether you are for harvest objective
>or against it, you need
>to write to the RAC
>members or attend a RAC
>meeting this week. There's
>a ten-year plan that is
>pushing all units to go
>to draws. I believe
>that the draw system has
>too many variables: hunters drawing
>tags that have no means
>to get lions or no
>desire to fill the tag
>and limiting hunters from getting
>a tag that really want
>to harvest a lion.
>In the long run, they
>are taking hunters' ability away
>for managing lions. I'm afraid
>we are working toward California's
>laws, where the hunters have
>lost the ability to help
>manage lions. Is that
>what we want to happen?
>
>RAC members: http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac_members.php
>RAC dates: http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/pdf/09_rac_schedule.pdf
>
>Lloyd Nielson
>Sunrise Outfitting


Loyd,
Thanks for your comments!
Maybe we should get rid of the draw on all big game animals like deer, elk and moose because the draw system has too many variables: hunters drawing tags that have no means to get the species or no desire to fill the tag and limiting hunters from getting a tag that really want to harvest. In the long run, they are taking hunters' ability away for managing big game. This way we could all have a spike, two point, cow, doe, and a 70 pound cat on the wall!

Never mind I'm not a Biologist but that sounds really STUPID!!!!

Roy
 
Dean: Let's go back a few years ago when the whole state of Utah was a draw, and the RAC meeting was filled with sportsmen, land owners, cattlemen, etc,. saying that this was not working, we need the lions thinned down. So then, most of the state went to the quota with too high of numbers, so when the lion population was hurt, the houndsmen blamed it on the Quota. Therefore, they pushed to go back to limited entry.

My view is that the Quota is the best system, you just have to get the numbers right. I think that the sportsmen can be your greatest ally or your worst enemy, so why take the chance of isolating them by limiting hunting opportunity when you don't need to. The other thing is the revenue and economics that are lost.

I will say that the spit season, when used for what it was designed for, would be a great tool.

I think that in the Strategies: line B needs to say: Use either Harvest objective or split hunts strategies on units managed under this management system.
The split hunt will be used in the Units that close in the first four weeks of the season. This system will be used throughout the next three-year cycle. After that, the units that don't average 50% of the harvest in the draw part then they go back to harvest objective for the next three year block.

I will say that I like way that the plan moves the tag numbers up and down by watching the females harvested. This will protect the lions? numbers and us outfitters can either work ourselves out of tags or into more, depending on whether we harvest males or females.

Lloyd Nielson
Sunrise Outfitting
 
Quotas might work down south, but when the Nothern regions were on quota it was a joke.It was incredible how may guys were running.By 4 am every road and cut had been run at least once if not more.If you wernt running by 2am you were passing guys going both ways.And every one killed the first cat they treed cause you knew the season would close quick.Bottom line is QUOTAS BENIFIT OUTFITTERS pure and simple.I know how it works because ive done my own share of guiding in the past.
If you want to go and just be able to run, buy a pursut permit.
 

Similar threads

V
Looking for a great mule deer unit in Colorado for youth (my son) with 5 points (last year as a youth)
Replies
4
Views
1k
VWiddi1
V
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
223
Views
7k
Robiland
Robiland
Founder
Montana Mule Deer, Whitetail, Antelope, Archery Elk
Replies
0
Views
679
Founder
Founder

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

20191102_083307.jpg
20201015_122755.jpg
IMG_0804.jpeg
2018 Buck.JPG
IMG-2877.jpg
C095B65D-0F0F-47AE-BE2E-202366EB8D44.jpeg
FB_IMG_1634426795504.jpg
F5CCF9FF-71B3-454E-B7BC-DF20D3BC8423.jpeg
IMG_5428.MOV
Mule2022.jpg
10D8D57A-7239-42B5-9EE3-9042E9C0B779.jpeg
37 Point Monster Muley
Back
Top Bottom