Mentor Program Change?

elkfromabove · Sep 11, 2016

Besides the Paunsaugunt cactus deer study, this last Wildlife Board meeting also contained a proposal for the DWR to contact Utah legislators for a possible change in the Mentor Program. Since the change requires a change in the State Code, this is just a preliminary measure, but what the DWR wants is to change it so ANY youth could go with ANY adult. Right now, the youth has to have a parent or grandparent as a mentor or the youth has to have a life-threatening condition to have it otherwise. This change, if passed, would eliminate those restrictions and ANY adult could become a mentor to ANY youth and visa versa.

Good idea? Why? Bad idea? Why?

treedagain · Sep 11, 2016

I have used the current policy. I would not want to extend to ANY adult. I could see it abused by some rich guy buying a OIL or premuim tag. For his kid. The cirrent rules are a great deal for all that are currently included....

Muley_73 · Sep 11, 2016

What????? Some rich guy buying a tag for his kid?? The rich guy can buy a tag and put his kids name on it currently. I don't like the idea because I beleive it would get abuse also. But by all income levels. Good hellll people on this site have a wire in their assss over people that happen to have money.

Vanilla · Sep 12, 2016

I would be against this. I was for the mentor program, and I still do support it because I think it allows parents/grandparents a chance to pass the heritage on in a hunting world that is getting harder and harder to draw a tag.

I understand that not all kids that want to hunt have parents or grandparents to take them. But there are still opportunities. This proposal goes too far.

treedagain · Sep 12, 2016

What??? Another way around the draw??? Yep currently a guy can buy his kid a tag. Conservation...cwmu....landowner..lets add another way....so lets put a price tag on the ones the general actually have a chance to draw. Yep all income levels could abuse it....i would be another loop hole to to get around the system.

Hawkeye · Sep 12, 2016

I am a big fan of a taking kids hunting but I think that we often get carried away with this point. I grew up tagging along with my dad. When I turned 14, I started hunting myself with general tags on general units. I did not need a premium LE or OIL tag to enjoy the hunt. I was thrilled to shoot a small 2x2 with my first deer tag. It was about the experience. We have already created tons of opportunities for youth. If a kid wants to hunt, they certainly can do it for multiple species every year. It does not have to be a Henry Mountain deer tag or a San Juan elk tag.

There is no reason to continue to open the door on the transfer of tags. That is a very slippery slope that will only lead to further point creep and the potential for abuse. There are thousands of sportsmen waiting in line to finally draw a LE or OIL tag. Our youth can take advantage of the many youth opportunities already available and then wait for their LE or OIL opportunity like everyone else. Rather than adding to the problem, let's look for ways to minmize point creep and move folks through the system. This change would incentivize folks to apply in the names of their non-hunting friends and family members and further clog up the system. Bad idea.

-Hawkeye-

Vanilla · Sep 12, 2016

Hawkeye: "I was thrilled to shoot a small 2x2 with my first deer tag. It was about the experience."

20+ years later--I still am, and it still is!

RutnBuck13 · Sep 12, 2016

So how will this work with dedicated hunter? Dad can get a tag go do the service work while the kid plays playstation?

swbuckmaster · Sep 12, 2016

I'm not for this proposal but both my kids are hunting Le units this year due to mentor program. I personally think it increases point creep.

Why is this site the worst out for browsing with
a phone or posting with a phone?

elkfromabove · Sep 12, 2016

>Hawkeye: "I was thrilled to shoot
>a small 2x2 with my
>first deer tag. It was
>about the experience."
>
>20+ years later--I still am, and
>it still is!

Yes! But I would go even further with antlerless hunts. I didn't draw a buck or bull tag this year, but I did draw a Panguitch Lake cow elk tag and a Zion doe deer tag and my daughter was given a doe deer depredation tag from a friend/neighbor and I bought an OTC archery elk tag with the idea of trying to fill my other tags during the archery season via the additional opportunity. (I still have 5 days to do that.) Have I had a ball so far? You bet! Do I get "buck fever" even with a doe or cow? You bet! Do I still work at it? Ditto! It doesn't require inches to keep me going.

Muley_73 · Sep 12, 2016

Aaaaa....no all those tags always sell anyway treedagain. This issue has nothing to do with income. Stop trying to always make it that and you may get somewhere. You're honestly stretching so hard to make it an issue that your valid point that it is a bad idea gets lost. Its a bad idea and I do not support it. But it has nothing to do with the wealth or poor.

nevada_trapper · Sep 12, 2016

I think it's awesome. There is a kid I currently take here in Nevada every year. His dad is a loser alcoholic who's not in the boy's life at all anymore, and his mom is way to busy trying to keep food on the table. The only other family member is his grandma and grandpa who would not be able to take him. I've been wanting to take him hunting in Utah, but because of the current regs I can't. I think it's great for situations like this where and young man or women doesn't have a father figure to go with. I hope they get it passed soon

Vanilla · Sep 13, 2016

"I've been wanting to take him hunting in Utah, but because of the current regs I can't."

What in the current regs prevents you from bringing him to Utah to hunt? I'm not aware of any rule or law that says you can't take him hunting here.

Hawkeye · Sep 13, 2016

There are plenty of youth tags still available. Buy one and take the young man hunting. There is no reason to open the door even further to allow the transfer of tags, especially LE and OIL tags.

-Hawkeye-

nevada_trapper · Sep 13, 2016

I must have miss read the regs. I was thinking that to take any youth hunting you have to be a parent or legal guardian. That is very good news. Thanks for the info

treedagain · Sep 13, 2016

>Aaaaa....no all those tags always sell
>anyway treedagain. This issue
>has nothing to do with
>income. Stop trying to
>always make it that and
>you may get somewhere.
>You're honestly stretching so hard
>to make it an issue
>that your valid point that
>it is a bad idea
>gets lost. Its a
>bad idea and I do
>not support it. But
>it has nothing to do
>with the wealth or poor.

It is everything about money when somebody draws a premium tag....like a sheep and sells it for
$50,000 or more. Utah has put a price tag on every biggame animal. I am sorry that I take offense to that....i used the mentor program last year for my grandson and think it is a great idea. You dont think people will put in for tags with the idea of selling it?

A bad idea is still a bad idea.

How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait

Zeke · Sep 13, 2016

>I am a big fan of
>a taking kids hunting but
>I think that we often
>get carried away with this
>point. I grew up tagging
>along with my dad. When
>I turned 14, I started
>hunting myself with general tags
>on general units. I did
>not need a premium LE
>or OIL tag to enjoy
>the hunt. I was thrilled
>to shoot a small 2x2
>with my first deer tag.
> It was about the
>experience. We have already
>created tons of opportunities for
>youth. If a kid wants
>to hunt, they certainly can
>do it for multiple species
>every year. It does not
>have to be a Henry
>Mountain deer tag or a
>San Juan elk tag.
>
>There is no reason to continue
>to open the door on
>the transfer of tags. That
>is a very slippery slope
>that will only lead to
>further point creep and the
>potential for abuse. There are
>thousands of sportsmen waiting in
>line to finally draw a
>LE or OIL tag. Our
>youth can take advantage of
>the many youth opportunities already
>available and then wait for
>their LE or OIL opportunity
>like everyone else. Rather than
>adding to the problem, let's
>look for ways to minmize
>point creep and move folks
>through the system. This change
>would incentivize folks to apply
>in the names of their
>non-hunting friends and family members
>and further clog up the
>system. Bad idea.
>
>-Hawkeye-

Hawkeye has this one right on the money.
Enough said,
Zeke

Muley_73 · Sep 13, 2016

Treed,
Yes is it a bad idea across the board. Tell me who is more at fault...the poor man that values the money he can get from a tag he has drawn more than the oppurtunity to chase a LE or OIL aninal. Or the wealthy man that buys the available tag from the poor man?

BrowningRage · Sep 14, 2016

This would allow for a lot more abuse than the current family stipulation allows...

I love the mentor program currently, not because a kid might get to harvest an LE animal, but because it promotes family hunting, a tradition that could go by the wayside. Having an additional incentive to be hunting with a family member is the real positive of the mentor program- and any animal killed is just a cherry on top...

Though I understand and even like the idea of some non-family members taking youth hunting, they could still do that without the need for the youth to kill an animal...

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24

cannonball · Sep 15, 2016

Hawkeye has this one right, but it should not stop here. Don't forget to contact the DWR, WLB, and your state legislature representative to voice your opinion.

elkfromabove · Sep 15, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-15-16 AT 12:00PM (MST)[p]Hawkeye gets it, as usual! And Cannonball's advice is the way to make the difference!

treedagain · Sep 15, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-15-16 AT 12:31PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Sep-15-16 AT 12:29?PM (MST)

Kind of a toss up between them. They both benifit from it...i can see and understand both sides...a guy draws a sheep tag and gets offered big money that is a short term life changer...no brainer for someone who really dont care to hunt. Even for a diehard hunter it might be a option to give his family a bump in there quality of life....the obvious benifit for the buyer is they have potential access to every premium or otherwise tag out there...To me it is just another layer to have to go thru to get a tag. I feel people would put in for tags for family members that don't hunt.
Currently we have CWMU, CONSERVATION, LANDOWNER TAGS that are taken out of the mix all or most .sold for profit. And personaly do not want more that are sold.

I can see both sides.could benefit from it but the rest of us will pay the price if people treat it like a momey maker by putting every family member in and change the odds

Hawkeye · Sep 16, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-16-16 AT 08:32AM (MST)[p]And also contact SFW. Birdman spoke on SFW's behalf at the Wildlife Board Meeting in support of this change in law. See meeting recording at 5:45 (http://wildlife.utah.gov/wildlife-news/1900-watch-the-wildlife-board-meeting-september-1.html). There are already tons of opportunities for any youth that wants to hunt. Take advantage of existing opportunities.

-Hawkeye-

elkfromabove · Sep 18, 2016

>LAST EDITED ON Sep-16-16
>AT 08:32?AM (MST)
>
>And also contact SFW. Birdman
>spoke on SFW's behalf at
>the Wildlife Board Meeting in
>support of this change in
>law. See meeting recording
>at 5:45 (http://wildlife.utah.gov/wildlife-news/1900-watch-the-wildlife-board-meeting-september-1.html). There
>are already tons of opportunities
>for any youth that wants
>to hunt. Take advantage
>of existing opportunities.
>
>-Hawkeye-

Yes! I forgot about Birdman.

Zeke · Sep 19, 2016

It's the promoting the proverbial can-o-worms with this "mentor" change proposal.

Any system can be abused but do we really need to encourage it? I think NOT.

There's plenty of hunting for kids without tapping into this.

Zeke

Hawkeye · Sep 19, 2016

Zeke-

Glad to see I am on the same page as some of my long-time mm friends like you and cannonball. Perhaps you can share your opinion with some of your buddies at SFW. You probably have a better shot at changing their minds than some of the rest of us.

The good news is if there is a legislative change in the statute, the DWR should bring this issue back to the public to discuss a proposed change in the administrative rule. So we should have another oprpotunity to comment on this issue . . . assuming the DWR actually goes through the steps to modify its rule before acting. Sounds logical, right?

-Hawkeye-