SF155

Its another real brain child...favoring one group of hunters over another.

There is already archery only seasons established for every species of big-game in Wyoming.

Why do 10% of the tags need to be "reserved" and taken out of the draw to cater to archery hunters.

Hicks is off the deep end in his own stupidity...he's getting another phone call.

Think about this as a resident hunter...you start with a quota of say 100 permits in an area. We give up 25% to NR's...so now we're down to 75 in the draw that can go to residents.

Say landowners get their set aside(which has no limit, but lets say they get 10). Now were down to 65 tags...but then we have to take out another 10% for archery only.

Great, now those that want to rifle hunt are left with drawing 55 out of the original 100 tags. Throw a nice prefernce system in place, and if you're in the random, now you're down to being in the running for 4-5 tags.

Splendid...and they wonder why hunters are pi$$ed?

How about just leave things alone and quit introducing legislation.

Fuggin' morons.
 
My God what a year.Why can't they just leave things alone.I'm a non ressy and fine with how things are.They have to keep stirring the pot for some reason.
 
If they have to look that hard for things to legislate why don't they just call it good and go home?




Semper Fi
 
>Its another real brain child...favoring one
>group of hunters over another.
>
>
>There is already archery only seasons
>established for every species of
>big-game in Wyoming.
>
>Why do 10% of the tags
>need to be "reserved" and
>taken out of the draw
>to cater to archery hunters.
>
>
>Hicks is off the deep end
>in his own stupidity...he's getting
>another phone call.
>
>Think about this as a resident
>hunter...you start with a quota
>of say 100 permits in
>an area. We give up
>25% to NR's...so now we're
>down to 75 in the
>draw that can go to
>residents.
>
>Say landowners get their set aside(which
>has no limit, but lets
>say they get 10). Now
>were down to 65 tags...but
>then we have to take
>out another 10% for archery
>only.
>
>Great, now those that want to
>rifle hunt are left with
>drawing 55 out of the
>original 100 tags. Throw a
>nice prefernce system in place,
>and if you're in the
>random, now you're down to
>being in the running for
>4-5 tags.
>
>Splendid...and they wonder why hunters are
>pi$$ed?
>
>How about just leave things alone
>and quit introducing legislation.
>
>Fuggin' morons.




I got to tell ya, Between BuzzH and Cade (Hunt Forever West) I guy couldn't ask for better company....... Sure appreciate you boys and thanks for helping get the word out!!!!!
 
If I draw my tag I add on archery season for $30 and go hunt. Why do we need to look at a set amount for archery? Are they going tyo force WY residents to choose?

This is stupid. I get my tag, I want to hunt archery I get my archery lic and go for it. I do not need archery only tags.... WTH? When will this stop?
 
I don't know what to think on this one! I hate to admit it but I probably agree with elks96 on this one! It certainly is nice having the option to bowhunt plus still have the opportunity to hunt w/rifle (all but the type 9 tags).

I know Colo has always had the notion that they can offer more archery tags to harvest the same number of animals shot with rifle. Also, archery tags are generally easier to draw than rifle. Separate draws would definitely separate hardcore archery guys from rifle guys that go putz around with a bow!
 
Archery-only-type 9 units do not require an archery license. This is nothing more than an attempt to sell additional licenses.
 
Problem is though, it wont be adding licenses...it will be taking 10% from the existing quotas.
 
>Problem is though, it wont be
>adding licenses...it will be taking
>10% from the existing quotas.


Here's what I sent to my reps:

I hate to keep bugging you about this year?s legislation, but Senator Hicks just keeps churning out more bills. This particular bill has no merit whatsoever. A person who draws any type 1 license already has an ?archery only? season that generally runs for an entire month before the rifle season starts. This is another bill that further splits the piece of the pie on limited quota areas. The sheep and moose licenses are already so limited that taking 10% of the quota would lower the draw odds for both the preference and random draws. With the impending passage of the resident preference point bill, this bill would further muddy the water.

It would be prudent to wait a year to see what effect the license fee increases and resident pref. points have on the 2014 drawings. I'm asking you to please table this bill. Type 1 archery hunters already have the best of both worlds: they can hunt an entire month with their archery equipment, and take to the field with a rifle during the firearm season. Why create something that is not needed, and favors one type of hunter over another?

Thank you!

Best Regards,
Dave Walton
 
Im not totally against modernizing Wyomings hunts and tag allocation process a little, but the wording in that one is dumb, to say the least.

One criticism I have about Wyoming is a lack of creative management, another is the slowness in response to changes on the ground.

What happened to much of Wyomings deer resource over the last several decades is a good example, a decline in both the quality of animals and the quality of the hunt is noticeable in the areas I frequent.

Colorado saw a dramatic upswing in quality deer hunting and deer during the same time period that Wyoming has seen a decline, I believe a large part of that was because of some changes and some creative management.


.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-13 AT 07:23PM (MST)[p]jims,

You dont know what to think?

Oh, I think you do...bowhunters are being bashed?

Hows that, when this bill will take 10% of the available quota of all big-game tags and give them to archery hunters? Please explain your position to how thats fair, when legislation sets aside a pool of tags for a special interest.

Are the muzzleloader hunters entitled to another 10% of the quota?

How about handgun hunters...should we set aside another 10% for them?

How about another 10% for outfitters?

I can tell you whats next up at the legislature...and thats going to be a bill to reduce the number of Non-Resident permits, across the board, to NO MORE than 10%. Meaning your odds just dropped through the floor...and your preference points wont buy you jack chit.

Never a good idea to bite the hand that feeds you...savvy?

Nice post over on bowsite...

Jims said, "I saw a recent post on the MM website in regard to new Wyo archery draws in the legislature. Currently if you draw a type 1 tag you can hunt the archery seasons. It sounds like someone may be trying to pass a bill where all archery units would be on a draw. I'm not sure of your view on this matter but several guys are bashing archery guys! If you are interested here's the link
 
As a non-resident why do they need to change virtually anything in the most NR friendly state in the union? Both NR and R can hunt something virtually every year in WY....what is not to like?

Archery hunt for a few dollars on a rifle tag? Priceless.

I do it every year....
 
I would imagine if they are going to set aside 10% for archery hunters, they would increase the tag quotas since the archery success rate is so much lower than rifle. This way they sell more full price tags with the same amount of impact on the resource.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-13 AT 08:04PM (MST)[p]Don't imagine or assume anything when you're talking politics!

Jims---What the he** is the deal with that post you put up over on bowsite?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-13 AT 09:03PM (MST)[p]It is priceless to be able to hunt with a bow and then a rifle, but in these later days it can come at a cost.

In Colorado its nearly always muzzleloader only or archery only on the september high country deer hunts, and if not the rifle tags are very restricted in number.

In the Wyoming high country its 30/378 weatherbys, lots of nonresident hunters and unrestricted resident tags.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-13 AT 09:22PM (MST)[p]Midwest,

Huh?

How are you going to not impact the resource by giving out 10% more tags?

Thats math doesnt add up. With modern archery equipment (mechanical arrow launching devices) success rates are increasing all the time. Bowhunting has an impact on the resource. I'm tired of archery hunters claiming they dont impact the resource.

Care to explain how me killing this bull with my bow, likely the biggest bull that was in this unit, didnt impact the resource?

560.JPG


Also, read the bill...its going to RESERVE 10% of the all available tags...not add 10%.
 
Also it clearly says that 10% of the tag allotment. So 100 tags becomes 90 and 10... Again giving special group a percent will eventually does reduce the number for all. It will take tags and place them into special groups. While a person the group gains a little all others give up more...


Jim??? WTH? All the tags I have ever drawn in WY have allowed me to hunt archery for a small fee. WY simply has the best system ever on this. They determine the total number of tags they want to give for a unit. You draw that tag and you can add the archery. Don't kill in September go October with the rifle...

As far as impacting the game... This deer came out of a general unit that has almost no resident deer at all.
1315279774.jpg
 
Elks96, You may want to re-read my earlier post....I actually agreed with you on this one! You disagree with me even after I say I agree with you and like the fact that Wyo allows hunters to archery hunt and then rifle hunt with the same tag.

One thing I will point out is Wyo is one of the last states in the entire country that has archery plus rifle seasons with the same tag! CO, UT, NM, NV, KS, Iowa....and the list goes on have archery tags separate from rifle and other weapons.

Having separate archery tags/seasons generally mean additional tags available. Even this day w/modern archery equipment archery harvest is generally a bit lower than rifle. To back this up I just breezed through the 2011 type 9 vs type 1 elk harvest reports. Most type 9 archery success was 2 to 4 x lower than type 1 rifle and there were a number of type 9's with 0 success. I was a bit supprised that 4 of the 19 type 9 units had archery success similar to rifle..however, these were the excemption.

More season options usually mean more opportunity..more tags....less pressure...more income for states. Wyo already has multiple rifle antelope seasons in some units which more or less does this same thing.

"Change" seems to be a 4 letter word in Wyo so it may be a few years before this happens but with such high demand for tags, states struggling for funding, and so much pressure on game this may happen sooner than you think?

I enjoy archery plus rifle hunting on the same tag so will take full advantage of this while its available in Wyo. Yes Elks96 I like the archery/rifle seasons as they are...but will it last?
 
Easy, Buzz, I didn't say I supported the change. Just trying to rationalize. I doubt Game and Fish would propose any of these changes if making more money without increasing impact on the resource wasn't the main objective.

Nice bull. It took me 6 seasons to kill my first bull with a bow. Obviously, I don't have near the impact on the resource as you do.
 
I was referring to the "several guys are bashing archery guys." ETC. Not a single person here has said anything bad about the archery guys. In fact I believe almost every guy in the WY section has shown that they archery hunt.

On the other argument, well it is true that archery has lower success rates, but why do they have to separate it out? Why do they have to force hunters to do one or the other? What is wrong wit the current set up? Why can't a manager decide that in this unit we want to kill X number of elk. Given the total success rate regardless of weapon, is Y. There fore we can offer Z number of tag total. Assuming that some animals will be taken in archery and some will be taken in rifle?

Why won't it last? Nothing says we have to go to tags system like any other state. Why can't WY be a little different? They always have been and hopefully will be...

Also look at the bigger picture... This is how CO started down the path they are in... Start by giving tags to archery, then lets add some for muzzy, then lets add some PLO, then lets add in a bunch of tags for land owners/vouchers, now add in RFW tags, then add in governors tags, etc. One couldeasily reason that the largest factor that has effected the point creep in CO is the amount of "Special Interest" tags Colorado has given up to specific groups. In WY the real issue why should they change? What would this accomplish? It would start to further limit the number of tags for all hunters.
 
Lets just keep everything the same, after all nothing ever changes.
Rifles are same, bows and muzzle loaders too, animal and human populations are stable, the weather stays the same,

The big bucks are everywhere, you hardly ever see other hunters, there are long seasons, young people are exited.

The odds of drawing a tag never change, so why should we?
 
Wyoming is CURRENTLY the MOST archery-friendly State in the Union! They need to leave things alone.
Nobody on here was bashing archers. MOST of us hunt with a bow too and Wyo is the go-to State for generous seasons with a bow!
If I draw a moose tag this year you can bet I'll be there for weeks with my bow!

Buzz, do we email the same "people" who we emailed about HB124?

This is getting silly now!

Zeke
 
Zeke,

Yes, it will more than likely be heard by the same committee. I havent seen it posted yet, but will let you know.

I dont think theres any harm in sending them a message prior to it being assigned to them. It may send a message to the committee, as well as the Senator (Hicks), that they are being watched and we're all getting tired of dumb legislation being introduced.

Send those emails...

Midwest, Its not the G&F that is coming up with these ideas, this one was brought to the Senate by Bow Hunters of Wyoming...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 11:20AM (MST)[p]>Lets just keep everything the same,
>after all nothing ever changes.
>
>Rifles are same, bows and
>muzzle loaders too, animal and
>human populations are stable, the
>weather stays the same,
>
>The big bucks are everywhere, you
>hardly ever see other hunters,
> there are long seasons,
> young people are exited.
>
>
>The odds of drawing a tag
>never change, so why should
>we?

Give me a good reason that you need to allocate 10% of the tags to archery only Piper? Why does that need to occur? Seriously, this feels like changing just to change. On the flip side I never said that nothing should change, but all change comes with a cost. Every action has a consequence... Wyoming may need to change, but how that change may look can be different depending on what is the overall goal.

I hate to say it but OTC/General Tags for DEER in particular may have to go... Does that mean we need a points system? No, it just means that resident hunters will have to pick carefully where they apply for the fall.

Could WY look at limiting deer hunting more? Going to specific sub units for a while until numbers improve? Sure, but that process should take some serious thought and planning. Not just some guy in Carbon going off on his personal agenda.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 12:04PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 11:33?AM (MST)

elks96,

To add to your last points in your last post, and this isnt directed at you...but heres my take.

On the deer going to LQ statewide...when that happens, I can assure you that Resident hunters are going cut NR quotas from their current 20%+ to no more than 10%.

I can guarantee you, with no question, thats going to happen.

When resident opportunities are slashed, their only recourse is to keep a bigger chunk of the pie thats left.

When times are good Wyoming residents are more than happy to share the resource...but you start taking away opportunity for residents...they'll keep whats rightfully theirs.

Count on it.

I think its great that NonResidents weigh in on how chitty the Wyoming deer hunting is, and how we need to go LQ statewide.

Just be assured if it passes...theres a price to be paid...and that WILL come at the expense of thousands of NR deer tags.

Carry on bi tching about the Resident General Deer tags...
 
Buzz,

No where was i bitching and no I do not believe deer hunting in WY is that bad. Do i want to see the state going to LQ for all units. not a chance!!! Can I see it needing to happen? Yes, unless there is something else that can be done. No matter how you look at it, a unit can only have its season shortened so much before it is no longer a season.

So far that has been the management response I have seen in WY. We need fewer deer killed so lessen the number of days a person can hunt. Does it work? I am not sure... I know that the shorter my season gets the harder I scout!!! the harder I scout the more likely I am going to kill my buck.

Will WY be able to afford cutting NR tags in 1/2? I have no idea.

I am extremely concerned that it will not be long until things move to LQ. Not because I think the deer hunting sucks but because there are those who are going to want better hunting. I know it will come with a cost.

I am afraid it is going to sooner than later it will change. they have already taken an area and put it under LQ. When that happens it will increase pressure in other general areas. This effect will result in too much pressure in those areas and everyone will start crying about how bad the deer hunting sucks and they will ask for LQ there as well... I hope that a few good years and some very aggressive limitation placed on hunter by the DNR can bounce the deer population back to more acceptable numbers. If not I do not see how it will be avoided. One of my areas to hunt is down to like 4 day hunting season. Other have went from 9 to 7, etc. I do not dislike this, but at some point just cutting days in the field may not cut it.

Also the other issue I have is fighting the oil gas for hunting... I have killed 2 great buck in WY. Both in teh same hole in the same area. Now where my archery buck is laying dead earlier in this post is a gas pad and rig. Once the rig is gone there will be a road and workers. I never expect to see a buck like that again in that area.
 
Does it matter if WY can afford to cut NR tags in half?

If anyone thinks thats going to hold any water when several hundred Resident hunters hit the capital demanding that NR quotas be cut to not more than 10% because everything is LQ...they're wrong.

Residents opportunity will always trump opportunity of Non-Residents...and rightfully so.

Wyoming Resident hunters are very generous to NR's, but we're not required to be.

Really wasnt meant, like I stated, for YOU personally, just a follow up to make a point to your previous post.
 
ELKs....what's your take on antler restrictions? Would it let some bucks grow up or put too much pressure on the bigger bucks. I kind of cringe in the Bighorns up here when every camp has multiple forkies hanging in it.

Also, on your letters/emails to the Wyo legislators, it may give you a little more credibility if you didn't keep referring to the DNR, since we have no such agency by that name in Wyoming.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 03:54PM (MST)[p]Teepee,

Lots of data out there...I'm not saying one way or another if it "works".

I'll just say that number of points is not a way to manage a deer herd. Selecting harvesta via number of points definitely has an impact on genetic traits being passed on...or not passed on.

When you start trying to change management and adjust harvest based on arbitrary things like point numbers, spread, B&C score, etc...it tells me that biology isnt being used.

You need to manage on things you can quantify...like AGE, buck-to-doe ratios, age classes, etc. with over-all population and habitat being considered.

Baseline data is a must...without it, you have no idea if your management practices are working or not.

BTW, you never defined what your goal was???
 
elks96- I don't agree with any of these bills, but I don't agree with those that don't ever want to change anything either.

I sometimes get the feeling that you think the Colorado system is why your favorite hunting area is out of reach, I know how that feels because I have lost a bunch of areas.
Actually I would put more blame Eastmans, Garth Carter, and all the others that seek to profit off the public resource.
I also see what technology is doing to hunting, I don't like it, but its not an easy thing to address.

Unless you can force game populations to expand,(not likely) then its limit tags, shorten seasons, limit access, or limit the types of weapons, that's about it as far as countering the ever growing numbers of the always improving human predator.
Its that or you just leave it alone, and just let what happens happen.
 
With all the hunting legislation this year, wondering if SFW isn't involved. Smokescreen kept saying they were working on alternative funding sources. Preference points would certainly generate a lot of revenue. Transferable PP's would generate a lot more revenue and benefit the wealthy hunter. Anyone know if Hicks and Smokie are buds. Imagine they ain't beer drinking buds with Smokie coming from the promised land. However, I doubt Hicks and his cronies came up with all of this by themselves. There's some un-named special interest groups working in the background...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 09:20PM (MST)[p]I wouldn't worry about nonresident tags being cut to 10%, I don't know where buzz comes up with that stuff.

Antelope tags are already limited quota and I don't hear residents complaining about nonresidents.

Sheep tags are a rare item in comparison to deer tags, and I don't hear a mighty uproar about the law that gives a large amount of those tags to nonresidents, (25% I believe)
In fact if I remember right, next year the only sheep tag that's up for grabs in unit 24 is going to a nonresident.

It will be a long time before Wyoming will cut nonresident tags to 10%, don't let the fear of that keep anyone from supporting any changes to have more mature deer and better deer hunting.
 
I really do not like antler restrictions either. I lived through that issue here in Colorado and saw that it sucked. In one season a lone I saw 4 different larger 2 pointers shot and left. The other issue is it can really down grade genetic quality.

A good example would be Ferris mountain. I had that deer tag a while back and had a hell of a time finding a true 4 point. A butt Load of 3 pointers, but all the 4 were barely crab clawed. I brought this up to the biologist at the check station. He said it was once a point restricted unit.

Also I know many people who are perfectly happy with a fork horn. If they are happy who am I to tell em otherwise. Also every forky I see hanging means one less tag out looking for a buck I would like... If there was a point restriction on on deer it should be 3 point or better, not 4... In Colorado the 4 point rule works to get the spikes to branch antlerred, but that is it... There are way too many bulls shot in CO that are rag horn 4s. But that is how our system is managed, so that is what a person can expect.
 
Elks96, The point restriction deal is the 2nd thing we happen to agree on...wow! It definitely didn't work for deer in Colo. Similar to what Elks96 said, I found a number of forked-horns that were shot and left to rot. Also, as you pointed out there tend to be quite a few 3'x that start showing up...not good genetics!
 
Pretty sure if Wyoming went to archery only tags in LQ units,10% of the applicants would put in for those tags,leaving draw odds exactly the same as they are now.

Let's take deer area 102.Success typically runs around 80%.If they took 40 tags out of the 400 and put them in a separate draw for archery only,that's not going to make already terrible odds that much worse.I would also be willing to bet that 10% of applicants would put in for the archery tags rather than rifle.And no-archery success will not be 80%.Maybe half that.Seems to me that draw odds would remain pretty much the same,and success would drop a bit.Maybe G&F could give out another 25 tags for the unit,thus increasing revenue.

Just some thoughts.I doubt Hicks was thinking in this regard when he came up with this bill,and I am indifferent about it,because I don't think it will affect draw odds like everyone here is saying.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:54AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:53?AM (MST)

Do you think it would decrease draw odds for moose, sheep, bison, mountain goats for those wanting to rifle hunt if 10% of the tags went to archers? Additionally, to give archery hunters a season prior to the rifle hunts...are we going to allow them to start hunting sheep July 15?

Also, this bill isnt talking about adding any tags, just taking from existing pools.

Theres a motivation behind this bill...and Ron Nikiolek stated it pretty clearly..."This will increase the drawing odds for those hunters who want to limit themselves to archey only seasons".

Maybe next year I'll rally the Muzzlelaoder hunters and we can grab another 10% of the tags from the existing quota for Muzzleloader only.

The following year, maybe we I'll rally the handgun hunters...grab another 10% good for only handguns.

Chit, while I'm at it may as well let the outfitters take another 10%.

Year after that, Maybe just Laramie Wyoming residents should get 10% of the tags.

Then, we can chop up the seasons so there are no conflicts...July 15-August 15 could be archery, August 15-Sept. 15 handgun, Sept. 15-Oct 15 muzzleloader...then Oct. 15-Nov. 15 we can have rifle hunts. We cant have any "crossover" as we'll slight one group over another. Everyone has to have "equal" opportunity.

It will all be just peachy...and we'll have no impact on drawing odds, harvest, or hunting pressure.

Great...lets get it rolling...oh, thats right, we already are with SF155.

The fact that hunters cant look at the impacts down the road, that this kind of legislation can have...is really and truly amazing.

Archery hunters have a TON of opportunity now, they face the same draw odds as anyone else.

This is bad, precedent setting legislation that needs to be stopped.
 
The problem with it as I see it and where I agree with BuzzH is that once you start lookinf at seasons for particular weapon types you can end up going down the slippery slope. Next it will be a ML season or a primitive ML season, etc. Right now, in case others don't know it, Wyoming allows crossbows during the regular archery seasons. I would think that alone would increase the success rates if a bunch of people decided to hunt with those because it's supposed to be a lot easier to learn how to use them quickly and be very proficient compared to a compound.
 
Topgun,

You're absolutely right...and success rates have been increasing right along with Technology increasing.

Calling what we have now (mechanical arrow launching devices) a "bow" is akin to calling the dog pound an "animal shelter". People are killing animals at ranges in excess of 100 yards with their M.A.L.D.'s. hardly a "primitive" weapon any more.

I'll do all I can to drive a stake into the heart of this monster...
 
I know that the modern MLs now are easily taking game at 200+ yards and thats a far cry from the original theory of starting those "primitive" seasons becasue of a low kill rate, LOL!
 
8% of the tags will come from residents and there is no way on earth 8% of residents will drop out of a type 1 unit as long as they can buy a special archery license.
You would think the guy who wrote this Bill would have taken a few minutes to think things out.
 
Few things to add, Crossbows increase success because they do not have to be drawn. that very fact makes hunting with a crossbow way easier than a bow. Also a cross bow set up is just like a rifle. I have scope I aim and shoot. No pins, no releases, etc.

I really do not think many realize how awesome it is in WY! You get an equal chance at a LQ tag every year, you can add on archery every year, you get general tags that varied seasons/dates so many times you can hunt multiple weekends, what is not to like about WY....

OH wait everyone wants to whine when the guy next door drew a tag I tried getting for a 5 years... Does not seem like a good reason to go mess things up...
 
Wyoming is the only Western states that don't have seperate archery seasons for deer, elk, antelope.
Although I agree it is nice to be able to hunt deer with a bow and rifle their are some downfalls.
First, it leads to hunter overcrowding. Anyone who is hunted 102 knows that with the current amount of tags lots of areas in the unit are overcrowded on the first 5 and last 5 days of the rifle hunt. If I took 40 people out of fray it could make it a more enjoyable opportunity for those hunting the rifle hunt. Multiple pick your weapon seasons is how Colorado can run double the amount of hunters through there state and maintain a semi quality opportunity in lots of areas.
Second, you could issue more archery tags and kill the same amount of animals in a unit. (I know thats what not how the legislation is written) HA 102 has success rates that average 85 %. There is no way archery hunters would enjoy a 85% success rate so you could issue more permits and kill the same amount of deer.
I don't know that I agree that we need legislation. The G&F already has many elk areas with type 9 permits. They already have the ability to make type 9 permits available and take permits out of the rifle draw. I am in favor of reducing the amount of hunters in the field in any given time and I think archery only permits are a important part of this equation.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:24PM (MST)[p]elks96- There are a few things I don't like about Wyoming, The deer hunting has greatly deteriorated over the last several decades, and the odds of drawing pronghorn tags are generally getting worse and that means many unlucky residents will go years without hunting because there is no preference given to those that don't draw.
Kind of like you and your Colorado deer hunt problem

Letting everyone hunt deer with crossbows and then the long range weapons later on sounds great, but it has resulted in less than stellar quality experiences, and obviously fewer mature bucks is another side effect.
I would say its especially noticeable in the high country of SW Wyoming, but I have seen a decline in the central part of the state also.

This fall I drove 500 miles to Nevada for an unsuccessful 3 day archery deer hunt, next year it will probably be a Colorado high country muzzy hunt for deer.
I live in the middle of Region H in Wyoming, so why do I spend the money and time to hunt with primitive weapons in these other places?
The quality of the
hunting experience is why, and a lot of it has to do with more animals and far fewer people, to me there is more to hunting than just killing something.
 
You guys are hilarious! What don't you gripe, whine, and complain about?

How many of you use the best optics, scopes,bullets, rifles available....how many of you use rangefinders or have rangefinders inside your rifle scopes? How many of you have "modern" long range shooting rifles that shoot accurately past 400-600 yards...the list goes on and on! Modern technology isn't just for archery or muzzy guys..it's used on a daily basis for rifle hunting as well!

I would like to see where in the Wyo harvest reports archery success is any higher in 2012 than it was 10 years ago? If you claim archery success is higher...I guess you would need to claim the same thing for rifle success?

Do you guys ever quit whining
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 10:33PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 10:26?PM (MST)

jims,

Have you ever read a harvest report?

Try this...2008

http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/HR2011_ARCHERY0002554.pdf

Elk archery success statewide: 12.9% with total harvest of 1,332

Then this....2011:

http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/HR2008_ARCHERY0000928.pdf

Elk archery success statewide: 15.8% with total harvest of 1820

If you dont think archery success rates, as well as archery hunters, have both increased via technology in the last 10 years...you must have been playing Rip-van-winkle.

Look at the increase in harvest and success in the last FOUR years.

WOW!
 
They have reason to gripe. Taking 8% of the tags from type 1 without a means to reduce the applicants by close to or the same 8% will put their odds in the shiiter.

It's a vague piece of legislation that if passed, dumps the burden of tying up all the loose ends on the dept. Had some forethought gone into it, a Bill more palatable to the resident type 1 guys could have been drawn up and been a compromise between rifle and archery hunters where they all come out OK. This is currently about as divisive as you can get.
 
BuzzH, I wouldn't exactly say there is any statistical difference in archery success from 2008 to 2011! There was 12.9 to 16.7% success during this time period. As you stated there was 12.9% success in 2008. You didn't mention that the next year (2009) there was 16.7% success. In 2010 success dropped back down to 15% and then a whopping jump back up to 15.8% in 2012.

I don't exactly see a trend towards an increase in archery harvest success? Do you think weather and other factors impact archery harvest success from 1 year to the next by 2 to 3%?

I'm certainly glad you pointed out archery harvest success rates. Archery success from 2008 to 2011 was 12.9 to 16.7%. Rifle harvest success was 42 to 48% during this period. Rifle hunters had approximately 3x success of bowhunters during this time. According to these stats there could be 3x more archery hunters (tags) to harvest the same number of elk!
 
jims,

Please see the picture I posted in your post titled SF200...

Do yourself, and the rest of us a favor.

You arguing that harvest hasnt increased via archery in the last 10 years is laughable...at best.

When you find yourself in a hole...quit digging.
 
Let him keep digging BuzzH, LOL! Maybe it will cave in and bury him to shut his yapper. The numbers are right there to look at in the stats sheets and yet he continues to argue!!!
 
So you are saying there is significant difference between 12.0 and 15% harvest success? Not in the statistics classes I've taken! Needless to say 12 or 15% archery harvest is pretty poor! That means 1 in every 7 to 9 Wyo bowhunter is bringing home an elk.

The 4 year average archery harvest success is 15% for archery and 44% for rifle. Archery success is approximately 3 times lower than rifle. Bottom line is there could be 3 times more archery tags issued to harvest the same number of elk as rifle hunters.
 
jims,

Try starting at the start...think big-picture.

When archery hunting, and special archery only seasons, were established, success rates for all species were in the single digits.

The reason to allow archery hunting at all was based on the fact that success was so low...low enough that we could allow archers to hunt bull elk during the rut (when they're the most vulnerable).

Very few archery hunters, low success, and very primitive gear didnt have much of an impact. Not to mention that the level of committment to be effective with a bow took months, if not years to master. 20-40 yards was considered maximum range.

Flash forward to 2013...we now have mechanical arrow launching devices that are shooting in excess of 300 FPS, carbon arrows, expandable braodheads, laser rangefinders...the list goes on and on. I can take anyone who is able to pull a bow back, and have them shooting good enough to whack big-game out to 20-30 yards in a matter of hours...or less. With practice, 50-60...even further is no big whoop.

With that increase in technology, success rates, the number of archery hunters, and total impact to the herds has increased 3-4 fold in many cases.

There is NO reason for archery hunters to have a set-aside of tags...they can enter the draw like everyone else and then pay an additional $30 and get the benefit of hunting for another time period (14-30+ days) prior.

If they cant live with that...they can stick in their a$$.

They dont need their own pool of tags.

Theres also a lot of things you arent considering...one being that archery hunting puts additional pressure on elk, and in many cases (like unit 7), the pressure is so high from archery hunters, the elk are pushed onto private much earlier in the season.

This in turn increases harboring issues, decreasing rifle harvest (as archery runs right up to the rifle opener), and keeping elk wayyy over objective.

Its also fair to note, that a vast majority of the annual elk harvest by archery hunters is bulls. You dont control over-objective elk herds by killing bulls...you do it by harvesting cows.

You arent thinking big picture...and statistics arent painting an over-all picture of impacts.
 

Similar threads

Founder
Trophy Whitetail Hunts in Kansas and Indiana
Replies
0
Views
617
Founder
Founder
Founder
Montana Mule Deer, Whitetail, Antelope, Archery Elk
Replies
0
Views
595
Founder
Founder

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

B603C7DB-859F-4A52-AD84-ECA4A90E224E.jpeg
1704251163955.jpeg
996FF352-47D7-4528-BAC4-ED44B6CFC88D.jpeg
ScoutDeer.jpg
Mike Nielson 2023 Colorado Buck.jpg
20231024_092632.jpg
IMG_3700.jpeg
35F850DF-CA27-4BFC-AC4F-02B33291F705.jpeg
20231029_074518.jpg
Big Bull Elk for StraightSix
20171002_143215.NM (2).jpg
F12CF067-ED10-43AC-9E51-41A4CA783FF1.jpeg

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom