LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-10 AT 01:26PM (MST)[p]
Certainly from the stand point of most rifle hunters, most muzzy guys and even some bow hunters, UBA is selfish. At least it seems to look that way from what they want and what they say.
But if one looks into what they want, from deeper than the surface, it is anything but selfish. And here?s why I say that!
Our mule deer herds are struggling and things need to be done that will really help the herd. Of the all the weapon choices, archery by far, has the smallest percent of kill and impact on the herd, therefore they can be allowed to hunt longer and give more tags than the other forms of hunting. If this state could and would realize, if they made archery hunting more attractive, it would pull people from the other weapon types and thus lower the higher impact weapons, while at the same time, make the other hunts better for the people who choose to remain rifle or muzzle loading.
Let's say they kept the state wide bow hunt, gave archer?s a 30 day season, and unlimited tags, while cutting the rifle tags in half and limiting them to 5 or 7 day hunts and they did the same with muzzleloader season with the exception of giving them a 10 day hunt. Besides being totally unfair and absurd (at least from most of the rifle guys at this point) what effect do you think it would have on each of the hunting seasons?
First let's take the rifle season. It would mean much less crowding for those in the field and a better chance of success. It would also mean, that for those that really still wanted to hunt, that if they desired, they could still go archery hunting. That means they could hunt for 30 days instead of 5 and go state wide, rather than to be limited to just one small area. Or they could try for a muzzleloader permit and have twice as long to hunt as if they had chosen to rifle hunt.
It would also mean the Divison could still collect the same money with a smaller tag fee increase.
Now lets look a little closer at what this would do to those selfish bow hunters. Within a few years, it would more than double the number of hunters in the field, thus reducing the percent of kill, per hunter, by a great margin.
People will only migrate from the rifle hunt, to less impact hunts (archery and muzzleloader), in great numbers, if there is good reason to do so. State wide hunting, and longer seasons and knowing one can hunt each year, will force many hands, that otherwise would never happen.
I am a die hard bowhunter, but I can tell you from first hand experience, its not an easy hunt and the more people afield hurts one?s chances of success, significantly. But most bowhunter?s would be willing to accept this huge burden, in the hopes that it will help, not only Utah?s mule deer herd, but hunting in general.
And the real winners in this would be the mule deer and the guys who had the rifle tags, not the bow hunters, as they really would be bearing most of the burden.
So when viewed in depth, UBA and BOU positions, are not nearly as selfish or one sided, as they might seem on the surface.
The real selfish people in this fight are the ones who feel they have the right to hunt, each and every year, with any weapon they might choose and don't fully understand the complexity of our problem and won't look beyond their own self-centered motives.
Have a good one. BB