Utah Elk Committee Final Recommendations

Dahlmer

Dahlmer

Active Member
Messages
247
An email from Don Peay. Curious what everyone's opinion is.

Last night in a 12 to 3 vote, the elk committee for Utah voted to move forward.

The elk plan will have lots of great new efforts to focus on habitat restoration, providing diversity of hunting opportunity, etc. If should also allow Utah to move to 80,000 elk, up from 65,000 as long as mule deer nor livestock operations are not impacted. After investing over $65 MILLION in habitat projects on nearly 1 million acres, an increase in herds: keep quality, increase opportunity.


After 6 or so meetings and tons of analysis, looking at a broad based survey, etc the elk committee voted on this recommendation. Here is what most hunters want to know:


7.5 ? 8 year old average age harvest bull units:

San Juan
Boulder
Beaver
Pavant
Monroe
Roadless Book Cliffs

6.5 ? 7 year old average age harvest bull units

Road area Book Cliffs
SW Desert
Diamond Mtn
Central Mtns, Nebo

Fish Lake - NOTE,

the Fish Lake unit will be at this level, if the local elk committee agrees to bump elk herd to pre ? blue Light special numbers of 6,500 elk. If not, unit goes to 5.7 to 6.3. The CWMU owners on the units want the higher age class, and they have asked SFW and Farm Bureau to work with other landowners in the area to find win/win solution to increase from the current 4,800 elk and move to 6,500 elk, prior to Blue Light special hunt that dramatically lowered this herd population.

5.7 to 6.3 Average Age Harvest Units

Panguitch Lake
Dutton
Wasatch
Manti
Lasal
Oquirhh Stansuby
Box Elder
Nin Mile Anthro

NOTE: The west portion of the Wasatch unit From Park City to Strawberry to Soldier Summitt and down to Spanish Fork Canyon to I 15 north to SLC and then to Park City (about 2,600 elk) will be managed where the majority of the permits will be ARCHERY tags ? 65%, MZ 15%, and Early rifle 20%. This will be a five year experiment to see if the LARGE bulls on the Wasatch that used to winter along the face of the Wasatch foothills can be returned, while still maintaining opportunity


4-5 year old units

Cache
Three Corners
Box Elder ? grouse creek
Paunsagunt
Fillmore Oak Creek
Deep Creeek
Nin Mile Range Creek


Finally, based on the survey and in an attempt to reduce pressure on the BEST bulls each year with rifles during the peak of the RUT, Rifle Rut tags will be reduced from 75% of the rifle tags to not more than 60%.

This is a very good plan in my opinion.

We spent countless hours looking at data, survey, talking to people


The DWR guys had some GREAT data to go by and were very cooperative and informative. Thanks to Anis, Justin and Kent. Anita as well.

The Committee Vote was 12 to 3.

The 3 descending votes wanted to see the age classes a little lower and have more opportunity but they were close to being completely on board.


Now for my commentary and opinion if anyone cares


I HOPE that more opportunity will come by the creation of SUSTAINABLE wealth ? increasing the ELK HERD POPULATIONS. With these age class goals to keep our quality standards high, and there will be about 2,200 limited permits a year is what the model predicted. 2,200 is a lot more than the 760 tags just ten years ago, less than the 2,800 in 2009.

As Elk populations grow, then there can be an increase the number of permits, thus allowing for more opportunity and keeping quality high.

To simply lower the age class objective and give out more tags is a short term solution, kind of like the US Government, just print money, then wonder why our economy crashes.

The elk survey questions clearly showed the elk hunters of Utah did not want the short term fix, they wanted the model that sustains long term wealth creation.

Now, if Congress would just let us take over the US economy, we could fix that to, using the right principles of wealth creation and sustainment, not simply squandering our nation?s wealth for short term gains, then being mad when we do ! I know this project would be a little bit more complicated, but I think my good friend Dr. Israelsen, a Harvard and MIT trained economist who teaches Econ at Utah State, would agree the principles of Sustainable wealth creation are universal. Thanks to Dr. I. for all his great comments over the years.

The political whims of short term gain ? giving out loans that should not have been given ( or simply printing more elk tags) - allowing predators to suck the wealth out of the system ($140 a barrel Oil, or large packs of wolves) leads to the destruction of wealth or elk herds.
 
This part is very informative;


'7.5 ? 8 year old average age harvest bull units:

San Juan
Boulder
Beaver
Pavant
Monroe
Roadless Book Cliffs

6.5 ? 7 year old average age harvest bull units

Road area Book Cliffs
SW Desert
Diamond Mtn
Central Mtns, Nebo

Fish Lake - NOTE,

the Fish Lake unit will be at this level, if the local elk committee agrees to bump elk herd to pre ? blue Light special numbers of 6,500 elk. If not, unit goes to 5.7 to 6.3. The CWMU owners on the units want the higher age class, and they have asked SFW and Farm Bureau to work with other landowners in the area to find win/win solution to increase from the current 4,800 elk and move to 6,500 elk, prior to Blue Light special hunt that dramatically lowered this herd population.

5.7 to 6.3 Average Age Harvest Units

Panguitch Lake
Dutton
Wasatch
Manti
Lasal
Oquirhh Stansuby
Box Elder
Nin Mile Anthro

NOTE: The west portion of the Wasatch unit From Park City to Strawberry to Soldier Summitt and down to Spanish Fork Canyon to I 15 north to SLC and then to Park City (about 2,600 elk) will be managed where the majority of the permits will be ARCHERY tags ? 65%, MZ 15%, and Early rifle 20%. This will be a five year experiment to see if the LARGE bulls on the Wasatch that used to winter along the face of the Wasatch foothills can be returned, while still maintaining opportunity


4-5 year old units

Cache
Three Corners
Box Elder ? grouse creek
Paunsagunt
Fillmore Oak Creek
Deep Creeek
Nin Mile Range Creek


Finally, based on the survey and in an attempt to reduce pressure on the BEST bulls each year with rifles during the peak of the RUT, Rifle Rut tags will be reduced from 75% of the rifle tags to not more than 60%


Reads real good.

Robb
 
The elk herd is doing just fine in the places I hunt. I would like to see some focus on the deer herd.


Rub some dirt on it, ya sissy!
 
First off, Can anyone explain why they are trying to manage on age class? This will never work, it never has and is not sound management. They increased the age class on a lot of the units. None of the bioligists think this is a good idea.
You need to manage for a good bull to cow ratio. The rest will take care of its self.

I'd also like to see with these decreases in tag numbers if the SFW and the rest of the hand out kings are going to take less tags next year for their drawings? Dont think so.

But dont worry, the Wildlife Board will do whatever they are told to do regardless of what is wanted by the general public or supported by in the RAC meetings. All of the RAC's can be unamious in their support of something, or rejection of something and with a call from the "Man" they will all bow down. They are the puppets of the SFW and always will be.

This is crap!!!!!


respect my authorita
 
Adam, I guess you have not noticed
the number of Book bulls has decreased
the last two years because of more
tags given.

Now put yourself in the shoes of
someone who has been applying for
20 plus years waiting for the chance
to hunt record book bulls, or older
age class bulls, and when you finally
draw the tag the best you can expect is
a 5-6 year old bull.

There are units set up for opertunity,
apply for all of those you like, I had
my OIL elk tag two years ago when a guy
still had a good chance at a above average
animal, I did not harvest one, but I enjoyed
every minute of the 14 days I spent on the
hunt because there were monster bulls in the
area.

My opinion, which alot may disagree, is that
90% of the wildlife biologist just have a piece of
paper that gives them that name!
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 01:39PM (MST)[p]Adam It drives me crazy when people spew out things in opposition to something without giving a solution or two.

Tell me, what would be your solution to defining and measuring quality?

We bounced several around but were met with opposition due to cost, man power, and other things.

Todd Black
BTO
 
Does that mean that the state should continue to reduce the tag numbers till everyone is guaranteed a 370-400 inch bull from their truck window? The numbers just arent there. All elk dont grow into the "super bulls". Its not the states problem to make sure that everyone gets their 400 in bull. If they want they should make a few units for the guys to go after the super bulls but make the rest of the state huntable. What the numbers say is that by increasing the age classes on the majority of units for the next few years the numbers will have to go down. There is no might about it they have to. Which will mean fewer tags.
Now take into the fact that by 6 years most bulls are already mature. They can and gain more but they are mature. If you have an area with 5-6 year old 340-350 bulls guys will shot them which will screw the age class. If 5 or 6 out of 10 tags shoot these bulls which they usually do then.
Also most bulls will never get any bigger than that. THey dont just get bigger the older they get its all genetics.
To reach these age classes they have had to throw the herd composition way out of wack. The bull to cow ratio was to the point that it hurt the herds. Most hated the management tags but what are you going to say in five or 10 years when the numbers suck again. Oh well there are a ton of older bulls that no one wants to shoot because they dont have the genetics to make the mightf 400. THey can die of old age.
It is the states responsibility to manage the herds for the everyone. The way things are going tags wont even be a once in a life time. My kids wont live long enought to kill a bull in the state. It wont be a once in a life time tag. Look at the applications vs the numbers of tags. Reducing tag numbers to gain 400 in monsters isnt the answer.



respect my authorita
 
To put it in perspective: The age objective was raised on 93% of Utah's Limited Entry Elk Herd, yes 93%. This will mean a 17% reduction in tag numbers AFTER units are at age objective. Those voting against the increase did want some high-age, special units, but they did not want to increase the ages on 93% of Utah's Limited Entry Elk Herd.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 01:52PM (MST)[p]Todd, I know you bounced things around and as for my spew.....you went hard to the left. We dont owe everyone a 400 in bull or even a 370 bull. We do owe them oppertunity or atleast the possibility of oppertunity. Why raise the age classes?
As for my proposition......
Manage a couple of units for huge bulls, and the rest for oppertunity. About 90% of the state is tied up in the LE units and you just raised the bar on what you want.
Please tell me what the long term plan is. You arent going to be increasing the health of these units it will put the cow to bull ratios back out of wack which will screw things back up.

Manage the rest of the units to a good bull to cow ratio and let people hunt.

As for me spewing, you are a guide. You make your living by having hunts exclusive and expensive. You make your money of the guys who are willing to pay to have you take them. Less tags that guys pay more for kind of looks better for you doesnt it?

respect my authorita
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Todd where is the hunter survey report found?? What type of info on the survey was used on this new proposal?
 
OK Adam then define opportunity. And while you are at it, define huge bulls. Thanks

We don't owe anyone anything when it comes to hunting, its a privilege not a right.

Mike--what happens when and if we reach our population objective of 80,000 animals, will there be more bull permits then? More opportunity?



Todd Black
BTO
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

I would have liked to see a 5 or 6 units kept as true trophy units. Then an increase on most of the rest of the units to help easy the bonus point butt plug. The whole age class thing is a bad idea increasing it is worse. Bull to cow ratios are out of wack and it is only going to get worse.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 02:22PM (MST)[p]OK Adam then define opportunity for me and while you're are at it, define huge bulls, a good bull to cow ratio, and I almost forgot what 2 hunts are you going to set aside for 'huge' bulls. Thanks (hope you see my point;)

We don't owe anyone anything when it comes to hunting, its a privilege not a right.



Mike--what happens when and if we reach our population objective of 80,000 animals, will there be more bull permits then? More opportunity?

Deerlove--it was emailed to me dont' know where its at on line.

Todd Black
BTO
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

What the hell did it say? Seems pretty simple, they put a pic of bull and asked would you SHOOT it???
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 02:35PM (MST)[p]Seems like the plan right now is to decrease hunter oppertunity and tags.
Getting things to 80,000 but with out of wack bull to cow ratios doesnt seem like that will work very well either.

I dont care which unit but why swing so hard to age class. Age class doesnt equal bug bulls. It helps, but most bulls dont have it in them to get to that size. After a certain period of time that doesnt matter. As for oppertunity it means " A favorable or advantageous circumstance or combination of circumstances". Which would mean favorable to everyone NOT A TAG REDUCTION. I understand that you want to have 350+ bulls on all of these units. But the way you are doing it now punishes everyone. You are saying that if you a) dont want all bulls at 350+ you dont matter, or b)if you cant pay to hunt these bulls you dont matter. You increased the age groups on everything. I'm trying to see how this benefits the largest ammount of people. Seems like its getting very narrow.
If you dont like our rules go find another sandbox instead of how can we work togather.


respect my authorita
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Todd- Not really. Increased elk numbers does not automatically equate to more limited entry permits. You missed some meetings and don't have the full story. For example, a deal was made to move the Fish Lake up one age class year if the Local Committee will increase the herd objective from 4,800 to 6,500. So that means we gain more elk, yet the higher age objective off-sets any permit increases. Essentially you have more elk, older elk, but the same opportunity. That 1,700 animal increase is over 10% of the increase desired, but with no increase in opportunity.

Also, can we really increase elk on every unit? On most? On some? All on LTD or some on AnyBull? The deer on the San Juan are struggling, in part, with competition from elk. How many more elk should we put on areas where the deer herds are struggling?

Of course there is no easy answer or fix. But I believe it is a mistake to increase the age objective on 93% of Utah's Limited Entry Elk Herd. I wanted to see an increase for a few units, not 93% of the limited entry herd.

I would ask you go look at the Age Data from the Monroe unit. For years it was managed for 7-8 year old bulls. It rarely met that objective. Then the age objective was lowered to 5-6 and that unit has exceeded 7+ EVERY year since. 7-8 year old objectives work to produce a select cream-of-the-crop bull. They do not work to maintain healthy elk herds.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 02:49PM (MST)[p]No Todd. See my post above as to why. How many more "deals" will be done to increase herds??
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

All I have to say is a don't like it. There is no reason for me to put my hard earned money towards elk habitat or anything else that benefits elk when i keep seeing my privelge to hunt them on limited entry units get pushed back towards more years of waiting to draw. All it is is a money game. When we have 80,000 elk and 400 class bulls getting taken on the majority of the units they will come up with the idea that now we need 100,000 elk and we need to reduce tags so we can have more 400+ bulls in units or some stupid idea along those lines. There is a lot more that goes into a trophy than score and age and if they polled a large majority of hunters in utah they would find that out but instead 15 people decide for all of us.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Mike--

Sorry I disagree if (and granted that is a stretch based on your points and many others) the whole point of increasing the population was to provide more bulls and cows to whack. Even at a 20% harvest rate (which i know we don't do and its likely 25%) and a 25/100 bull to cow ration that is 750 total more bulls.

Todd Black
BTO
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Todd- Did you even read my post above?

I understand there would be more cows to harvest, more spikes. I am not addressing that point. You stated/eluded that by increasing the herds we would see more Limited Entry Bull Permits, correct? I gave you a specific example (FL) of how increasing the elk herd would not increase limited entry bull permits. That is 11% of the desired herd increase with 0 increase in limited entry permits.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 03:19PM (MST)[p]Did you read mine, i agreed with you. But still if you do the math based on my figures there's more bulls to kill, it would be sill not to think there wouldn't be. Why did we want to increase them if it wasn't for more opportunity?

Also for the record, I do think that those 'little deals' that are made on a local level with local input are critical to any adaptive plan--it should be. State plans should only give guidance to local plans IMO.

Todd Black
BTO
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

The math is simple:

Raise the age objectives across the board = less tags

After the numbers have increased, lower the age objectives to what they were before and give out the same amount of tags as before, making it look like an increase, when in the end all it is is a reckoning = more tags? Maybe to a 3 toothed 67 IQer.

Packout, I agree 100%. This whole thing stinks of the ##### on a politicians shoes and it's being sold as something it's not.

All I keep hearing is the Black and white version, when grey is all that exists. Only in Utah.........
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

a few of you are saying that this is going to really screw up bull to cow ratios. can someone explain??? in my opinion with this new plan they will also increase cow tags as herd numbers grow and this last year as you all know they increased the number of available spike tags so im not seeing how this will screw up the ratios.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

NUMBERS

Under the old ultra conservative we were using elk at 46 per 1000 for LE Bulls.

Under the new plan we'll use elk at 39 per 1000
now that don't seem like much difference UNTILL you take the Fishlake out of this which is 9% of the total elk population in the state so the new number will actually be under 36 per 1000.

Thats a full percentage point drop.

The bad part is that we've set these age classes so high that in a few short years these targets will be very hard if not impossible to hit. So on the 8 year old target units you'll have elk all over and because they don't hit the age class target the permits will be cut.

So what is the net increase going to be IF we add 15,000 more elk??? anybody anybody 540 permits. THAT WILL BE UNSUSTAINABLE because of the targets set.

The first year this plan goes in to effect we will lose 352 permits.

Carry on
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 06:22PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-10 AT 06:18?PM (MST)

I think we should keep all the 'Conflict of Inter$t' types off these Elk and Deer committes.

I do not think that someone with an agenda should represent the vast majority of public hunters---ressy's or non-ressy's.

I do not feel that any Con Org. should be present/represented on ANY of these committees as they gain $$$ and political influence from these decisions.

I certainly do not want to sound disrespectful to any person nor any Con org. but this state has no DWR nor Wildlife Board that is not influenced by Con Org'$.

After going thru all of these numbers and very honest-posts--comments.....we all realize that it is the normal $moke and Mirror$.

I am very thankful to all of those that have spent many, many hours of their private time on these committees.

Robb
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

the big question for me are the CWMU's going to take a hit on there tag #s??? they sure did not take a hit this year with the deer, we get cut back to 3 or 5 days and they keep there full season....
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

SO WHAT DOES EVERYONE WANT?

MORE TAGS AND SMALLER BULLS OR LESS TAGS AND BETTER
BULLS? SEEMS SIMPLE
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

I like the plan, looks good, Glad to see that there will be some big bulls when I draw a tag, Even if the board lowered the ages your opportunity doesnt increase much, I would much rather wait the extra 2 years to kill a great bull. All the poeple complaining about the plan, I want to know if you are putting in for the best tags out there, or are you already putting in for a less sought after tag. I am betting that most of you put in for san juan, pahvant, beaver, boulder, the better units.
Lets hear it, if you hate the plan then have enough guts to let us know what tag you put in for, so we can see if you are and opportunist, or a trophy hunter.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Tree--

You're a funny guy!

That's always the big question for you Tree isn't it. You don't care about quality just if the CWMUs take a 'hit'. Rest assured they are under the same management plan as all the other LE units. If they drop below the average age set for the unit they are in, they take a hit. My question to you is, if they are averaging higher should they get more tags?

Todd Black
BTO
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

COON you are 100 percent correct!!! Like BB said what is a big bull to you may not be a big bull to me. Is it up to you or any Roy Don or Bill to decide what is a trophy for Gordy???

Is it up to me to decide what is ample opportunity for the guys that want to wait 30 years to shoot a 400 inch bull???

I considered all of this and thought a good compromise had been reached. Well apparently during the last hour and a half of the last meeting the fiddle got played and the fat lady sang. Someone I respect has always told me a man's word is good untill it ain't!!

Lesson learned and I promise there won't be any fool me twice bullsh!t!!!
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

New plan, we manage for 1,000,000 elk (this makes sure we don't have any room for deer left in the state). Then we will give only 5 bull tags each year, they will be good for a rifle hunt the whole month of September and hunters will be guaranteed a 400"+ bull. The public will have a chance at 1 of the tags, 2 will be auctioned off by SFW, one will be given to cattle ranchers for "allowing" elk to exist on public lands, and the last tag goes into the lotto at the expo.

How does that sound? Pretty exaggerated I know, but that is what UT elk management feels like to me.

Dax
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

DAX


I DONT THINK ITS THAT BAD YET
IF WE MANAGE FOR 1,000,000 I THINK THERE SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 EXPO TAGS!!
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Plan sounds good, but I say this isn't enough! Cut the rifle tags by more, and increase the archery tags. I'd rather wait an extra 10 years to hunt a unit where I don't see any other utards and have a shot at a 380+, than draw every 5 years and be crowded w/ utards and be guaranteed a 330 bull, that's what Colorado is for!

If you want more "opportunity", start shooting a bow. Success rates are lower, but you'll get your "opportunity"!

Increasing the age objective + cutting tags = A new record book!
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

The problem is "managing" to a harvest age objective. An elk is born with a very specific set of genetics. Regardless of what we do we cannot change genetics. Saying older elk get bigger is the same as saying I will get taller the older I get. Up until age 16 that may be correct but beyond that???? Most bulls, no matter how old they get will never hit the magic 400 mark. Genetically it wont happen.

The other problem with age class "management" is the skewed data that comes from "Average Joe" hunters who, heaven forbid, see the biggest elk they have ever seen and shoot it and it turns out to be a measly 5 year old 340 bull. It takes 3 9 year old bulls to counter act the one 5 year old bull.

Utah is not using, nor has it ever used sound management methods. Utah has decided that rationing the resource, and then giving away 200 conservation permits to special interest groups is "sound" management.

How much do certain guides, outfitters and conservation groups stand to profit from decreased tag numbers.

Supply and demand, supply and demand. Follow the money.
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

I like the plan. I want more elk, more elk equals more harvest. Under this plan you have options, antlerless, spikes, adolescent bulls, middle aged bulls, and mature bulls. Who of use deserves all we want and to hell with what others want? If you can't find an elk hunt that fits your saddle in this plan you may need to do a little self-eval. For the life of me I can't figure out why they can't come up with a plan half this good for mule deer. Who every you are that developed the elk plan, I thank you for your time and effort. I hope the Wildlife Board approves it as proposed. Good on you!

DC
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

My question is how can Utah elk herd be expanded by almost 20% (from 65,000 to 80,000 animals) without IMPACTING the deer or cattle operations? Sounds like Obama type thinking to me. Given the current state of habitat and without some massive projects to improve the habitat, something has to give. It is a finite resource, therefore, I have a hard time believing that more elk will also equal more or stable deer herds and stable cattle grazing permits (we'll never see more grazing permits). It simply doesn't make sense and only appears to me that Utah is willing to concede its deer herd and other resource users for more and bigger elk.
 
That's great more wildlife is always a bonus. Why is it always the Elk? The deer heards are on a steady decrease. By raising the numbers of animals what does it do to the the other animals that live in the same range. When is the public going to have a say in what happens to our wildlife? SFW HAS STARTED TO TAKE CONTROL. Do the hunters of Utah, the tax payers of Utah have a say in any of this? Look at the bear and mountian lion hunts for example. These predators are on the hit list to be killed off. For what? It has been proven by our own biologists that the effect of these animals are the least of our worries. Manage all the wildlife not just one animal at a time!!!!!
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

Didn't the DWR send out 1000's of questioners ASKING what hunters in the general public wanted? We ALL know SFW and the guides are loving this, there price tag on these bulls just went way up!!!
 
RE: 12 pages of same topic

>The problem is "managing" to a
>HARVEST AGE objective. An
>elk is born with a
>very specific set of genetics.
> Regardless of what we
>do we cannot change genetics.
> Saying older elk get
>bigger is the same as
>saying I will get taller
>the older I get.
>Up until age 16 that
>may be correct but beyond
>that???? Most bulls, no
>matter how old they get
>will never hit the magic
>400 mark. Genetically it
>wont happen.
>
>The other problem with age class
>"management" is the skewed data
>that comes from "Average Joe"
>hunters who, heaven forbid, see
>the biggest elk they have
>ever seen and shoot it
>and it turns out to
>be a measly 5 year
>old 340 bull. It
>takes 3 9 year old
>bulls to counter act the
>one 5 year old bull.
>
>

This post really identifies the issue. Harvest data doesn't accurately reflect the true age structure of the herd. I have no problem managing for mature bulls, with a certain percentage being of such and such age. Using the harvest data average skews the data significantly. With the example quoted, (which is all to real), a very happy young hunter taking a 4-5 year old bull can really skew the average. And this results in fewer tags being issued the following year, regardless of the actual age structure or health of the herd. A simple solution would be to manage so that the age strucutre was reflected in the oldest 70% (or something close) of the harvested animals. If 7 out of every 10 animals even in the premiun units were age 7-8, we would have plenty of great bulls to hunt, and much expanded opportunity. This idea is so simple, and practical, it will never stand a chance.

Bill
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-05-10 AT 04:48PM (MST)[p]Does anyone know if they are going to change the elk season dates in utah in the near future?
 
Bman9900,
I believe that the deer issue is finally getting some attention, i.e. shorter rifle season. Still needs a lot more done, and I think there's better steps to take besides killing all the elk off, just to make room for deer. Colorado is a prime example, another 50,000 elk wouldn't have an effect on things IF Utard was ran in a similar way as CO.

infinitecircles,
As for the age argument, I get that an 8 year old bull may never reach or even come close to the 400 mark, but odds are he's got a better chance than a 3-4 yr old bull that gets whacked before he has a time to mature. Just like you don't see any kids that a 7 feet tall when they're 8, but they may hit a huge growth spurt when they turn 15 and grow an extra 2 feet, point being, you DO get taller the older you get, until you have matured. No one really knows what a bull can do when they're young, but giving them a chance to grow older is the ONLY way to have a chance at producing a larger bull. If the gene pool does not allow for any large bulls, then a management hunt needs to be instated, or further steps need to be taken to resolve the "gene" issue.

+1 for the age objective.
 
I also disagree with the less opportunity higher quality management strategy. SFW should stand for Sportsmen For Wealthyhunters, as they've never done a damn thing for Fish and they certainly don't do much for the majority of hunters, unless of course you are:

A CWMU operator or guide
A hunter who hunts a CWMU
A hunter who buys auction tags
A hunter lucky enough to draw an expo tag

The post about Conservation (tounge in cheek- as conservation means conserving a half dozen 400 class bulls per year and terrible drawing odds) groups having a say in this is like having lobbyists as part of house and senate committees.............
 
First of all, conservation tags are to raise money for habitat. My question is, what do you think the age objection should be? There are opportunity units and quality units in the plan.
 
What do I think the age objection should be?

I'm not sure what an age objection is, but as far as age objective, I agree with others that this is not the way to manage a herd and the bull/cow ratio thing similar to the deer buck/doe ratio would be a more accurate way of managing the critters.

Some of those units have so few tags that a few of the bulls killed can really sway the average age, thus you base the management of the entire herd on the age of a small percentage of that herd that are killed.

This would be like a business trying to base projections and future growth etc on the health of say their top 5 clients and their situation instead of looking at all the other factors both internal and external that might effect the market and potential customers. Just seems like tunnel vision IMO.
 
FATHER

LET ME GUESS YOU HAVE 17 POINTS AND CANT DRAW A OAK CREEK TAG

AND YOU HATE SFW COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY AND YOU WILL HAVE

MORE MONEY THAN DON PEAY!! IF YOU WANT TO SHOOT A 280 BULL BUY A TAG IN COLORADO!!
 
COONDOG-

I HAVE ZERO ELK POINTS,

AND I THINK IT IS FRIGGIN AWESOME

WHEN PEOPLE TYPE

WITH ALL CAPS!

ESPECIALLY WHEN WHAT THEY TYPE MAKES

ZERO SENSE.


The Oak Creek is a good example. I'm far from the expert on this but I would venture to guess the current status of that unit has a lot to do with a high number of tags in recent years aimed at meeting an age class objective, that is now met and there are no elk to hunt. We'll see fewer tags and eventually it will return to have some decent bulls but the higher harvest age will call for more tags and repeat the cycle. I say manage the units for a certain number of elk and bull/cow ratio and let age and scores take care of themselves.

My point on all of this is that if you want to hunt that currently poor unit, it will take you 7 or 8 points (rifle). I'm more concerened with the fact that my son would have to wait for 7 years to hunt that.

I'm perfectly fine hunting and killing a 280-300 bull, I just shouldn't have to wait 7-12 years (with waiting periods) to do so. & I certainly shouldn't have to hunt another state to do that.

I'm fine with a couple units for trophy class but would like to see more units in the lower teirs for more opportunity to have a better chance of keeping the youth interested rather than hope they stay interested as we wait a long time to draw.....
 
FATHER


I'M PRETTY SURE THAT ANYONE WHO WANTS TO HUNT ELK IN UTAH CAN GET A TAG (ANYBULL-SPIKE-COW )DO YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO EVER HAVE A CHANCE AT A GREAT BULL OR JUST SHOOT A SPIKE ? TO ME THEIR IS NO DIFFERNCE BETWEEN A SPIKE AND RAG HORN BULL !! CALL ME STUPID IF YOU MUST BUT I COULD CARE LESS!!!
 
+5 coondog

Got no problem with meat or bone. More meat or more bone, it's your choice. With a healthy growing elk herd there are enough options for everyone. What can be wrong with that management effort?

If we can redesign deer management we could offer the same options for mule deer. The best part of deer is you can feed 4 or 5 deer on the same acreage as you can one elk. I wonder if I live long enough to see this kind of plan for deer? Any bets.

DC
 
2lumpy,

Not sure how old you are, but I wouldn't bet on you seeing some quick, dramatic change for the deer. They like to take a plan and watch it for 5 years before they realize it was never going to work in the first place, and then put the next 5 year plan in and have it turn out the same way.

Father,

You and your son want more "opportunity"? SHOOT A BOW and/or start putting in for out of state hunts, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!! Every unit should be a trophy caliber unit with the realistic chance of harvesting a book bull. I for one would much rather shoot or have the chance at one 380'' bull as opposed to being guaranteed 10 300'' bulls. Any bull units are in place for a reason.
 
This just isnt the same W/O bobcatbess,KTC and PRO! Nice to see (not really) WW is still keeping up the good fight!
 
So why dont we have twice the conservation tags because you say they are the money raisers? Why arent they all conservation tags.
Under the new pllan they are all quality units. The raised the age objectives in 93% of the units. Seems like things have swung way over to the quality side. There are NO OPPERTUNITY UNITS. Unless youo have the money to buy conservation tags. Their oppertunity is better than ever.

respect my authorita
 
I love the guys who say its our plan or nothing. "you can go somewhere else and hunt if you dont like our plan". What a joke. Lets manage everything for trophy and scew you if you dont like it. If you dont want a 380 bull you should be satisfied with spikes or a cow because you dont matter.
Glad you are so supportive of everyone elses oppinion. Look at the posts. You guys arent the majority of hunters. The majority of hunters just want a good hunt. A lot of them want a shot at a mature bull whether it meets up with your standards or not.
We owe you your once in a lifetime shot at a 380 bull from your truck window even if realistically that might mean that some folks never will get a chance to hunt for mature bulls at all. Its all about you and your shot at your trophy. Yep no one else matters. Those of us who dont have your oppinion of what a good hunt is can kiss off.


respect my authorita
 
The elk in Utah are doing great in my opinion. Not everyone needs a 380 to 400 class bull to be happy/content with their lives. 8 out of 10 guys, you show them a 320 class bull and they will call it 380 because most have never seen a 380 bull in real life.

Take strawberry for example. Severe drop in deer numbers with no room to recoup, every side canyon in Daniels is full of elk. On a cow hunt 2 weekends ago we had to sort through 38 bulls before we saw the first cow.

Utah needs to let the elk be and concentrate on the deer. Plain and simple.

Its sad that a few people decide for everyone. Not everyone has the expectations for a 400 bull most are happy between 300 and 350.

Get the deer numbers back before messing with the elk. We don't have the money or man power to do both so focus on the one that's in trouble.


NO GUTS, NO STORY!!


4b1db2ac644136c4.jpg
 
Not sure how long you've been watching elk management in Utah adam but in the last 35 years that I've watched it. What I think I've seen has been a steady increase of elk and opportunity in Utah. So much so thousands of surplus females have been removed, so much so that we have enough elk to quarrel over how to harvest them. The rise in elk numbers and elk hunting in Utah and the Western US has been an opportunity success like few others.

I don't know you or your history and I don't wish to get personal but I see elk as a near perfect example of increased opportunity, clearly something else is what you see and your reasons for seeing it that way are your business.

I was wondering if you really mean "respect my authorita" which by urban dictionary means "b!tch, shut the f--- up and do what i say". Is that where your really coming from or just your way of expressing a little humor in your posts.

DC
 
There are 6 units in the 7.5 to 8.0 age objective. 4 units in the 6.5 to 7.0 age objective. 13 units in the 5.7 to 6.3 age objective and 6 units in the 4.5 to 5.0 age objective.
There is opportunity and quality in this plan, and if you want it to go to more opportunity like a 4.5 to 5.0 age objective in more of the units you will be taking bulls like the ones that are being taken on the Fillmore Oak Creek unit. This unit is at a 4.5 age objective. That's not what I call quality. There is opportunity in this plan and when you get that opportunity there will be some quality as well.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-10 AT 12:55PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-10 AT 12:53?PM (MST)

Respect my autiorita is the famous Cartman's line from South Park. He is my favorite character and I think it is funny.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/150368


I am a Utah native and I've been hunting here my whole life. I live to hunt and spend as much time as I am able to doing so. I am in no way a purist and will shoot with my rifle, ml, and bow. I trap in the winter just to get out a little more often. I usually hunt archery because of the extra oppertunities that it gives me to do so.

When I was younger I put in every year for the Heaston. I spent a ton of time on the Manti and my family shot some ok bulls there when it was open bull.
The spike hunt wasnt all that fun because every one would surround the herds in the big canyons and slaughter the spikes. I remember the years when 13-17 spikes killed in ONE small basin wasnt unusual for an opening morning shoot.

I've been hunting in the open bull units since then. I have had some great years. If you put in some time and research you can have outstanding hunts.
This year on the archery elk I called in several bulls. Some I had a shot at and some I passed. These were rag horn bulls to 300 inch or so bulls. It was a fun hunt.

I know that some say that there is oppertunity for everyone. The elk herd has been growing and has done so with the current management plan. My problem is that someone said "they arent big enough lets make'em bigger". They RAISED the age objectives in the vast majority of units. How is this oppertunity? Its like my employer telling me, here I'll increase your wage to $10 per hour so you are making more money but I'm going to charge you 9 dollars for parking. If you dont like it there is a postage sized public parking place a couple of miles down he road but there are only 3 stalls.

As to the age class management, if you look at the way its proposed other than the Gee look it means we will have bigger bulls it doesnt work. None of the current units meet these objectives and I'd bet that they wont any time soon. Which means that over the next few years we will continue to drop tag numbers. The Biologists have said for years YOU CANT MANAGE FOR AGE CLASS and get the results that you want. But the NON PARTISAN members of the elk group say that they know better

I just think that there are much better ways to manage than age class. It doenst work. Whats next? will they begin to think that we should manage by BC score (which some on the committee suggested).

It just seems like we are trying to manage something in a way that wont work. It will produce some bigger bulls for a few lucky people and every year for those who pay. But I think its the bell toll for public hunting of these big bulls. Its already pretty much a once in a lifetime hunt. But with the numbers of people hunters in the hopper and the reducing of tag numbers to produce super bulls it will soon be a never have oppertunity.


As to the conservation tag issue are they going to take the same cuts that public hunters are going to have or will they maintain their numbers? Just wondering.



respect my authorita
 
"""FATHER

I'M PRETTY SURE THAT ANYONE WHO WANTS TO HUNT ELK IN UTAH CAN GET A TAG (ANYBULL-SPIKE-COW )DO YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO EVER HAVE A CHANCE AT A GREAT BULL OR JUST SHOOT A SPIKE ? TO ME THEIR IS NO DIFFERNCE BETWEEN A SPIKE AND RAG HORN BULL !! CALL ME STUPID IF YOU MUST BUT I COULD CARE LESS!!! """""

COONDOG- IN ALL CAPS- YOUR QUOTE OF "CALL ME STUPID IF YOU MUST BUT I COULD CARE LESS"

is truly a bright spot in my day. If you 'could' care less, that means that you do care and there are other things that you care less about.

Maybe you meant to say you 'couldn't care less' or maybe you could care less, I don't know.

One thing I do know is that I think people like you who believe that the size of the critter and what it scores is all that matters are almost as damaging to the sport as the ANTI's.

I value the time spent in the hills with friends and fam about 10 million times more than what a bulls/bucks score might be and having my 2 days of fame with my picture of my monster bull on monster muleys with a half dozen comments of, great bull, nice job, etc. What a joke. This is the equivilant of packing around a picture of the hottest girl you ever tapped and showing it off all the time. Who cares!

I think the score craze is taking hunting in the wrong direction and away from what really matters, which is enjoying time away from life and with people you like. I also know, as I've seen it first hand, that people will harvest an animal and act like it was a dissapointment since it doesn't 'measure' up to the stuff you see on TV and online. I also firmly believe that some/many smaller animals are left to rot by people seeking a bigger trophy but couldn't hold back on the trigger a few minutes earlier....

These are my concerns- if you're a dedicated guy you can still kill a 350+ bull right now on the Nebo, so don't tell me you can't get good bulls with plenty of opportunity.
 
I like the plan....sure it will need some fine tuning in spots I understand. I've waited a long time for my elk hunt and I want quality. A big bull for me is 350 to 380. When I draw I want to kill one in that range.

If you want opportunity I say open your eyes. There is plenty of opportunity to hunt in Utah.
 
if its all aobut the hunt with family, go hunt the open bull units..that argument hold 0 water..go hunt for hell sakes
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-10 AT 12:32PM (MST)[p]Todd

This is what the elk comity should have come up with to please everyone if most of the elk comity wasn't influenced by their own political views.

People throw around the opportunity word way too much. guys don't want to kill spikes and cows anymore then they want to kill spike deer and doe deer. Also raising the elk numbers will absolutely have an effect on our deer herds and you know this being a great deer guide.

if Utah made us use our points for cows, spikes, or big bulls you will see without a doubt what people really want to hunt! Make us have to choose!

why would anyone manage a deer ranch or elk ranch and randomly kill all their bucks and bulls in the first year before they even show their potential. It doesn't work on their farms so it wont work and doesn't work in real life.

managing for healthy bull to cow ratios and then letting them grow a few years is the only way you will truly see what potential the elk or deer will have.

it doesn't take a genius to see that letting a 99% success rate weapon with the most tags in a rut hunt will kill the cream off the top of any unit. If it didn't we should allow them to hunt this way on the Henry mountains. It however makes your job easier doesn't it.

What this state needs in an enema! we need a stool softener! We need a tea party! We need to flush the SFW's, corrupt wildlife board, big government thinking mentality down the drain. When is taxing the people ever good! I don't like taxes any more then I like seeing SFW and the rest of these hunting groups keep taking my tags and saying "the more tags they take the better my hunting will be just trust me!"

If you guys are so set on this age objective and really don't care if you only get to hunt once in your life then get rid of the spike hunts and allow archery to control the bull to cow ratios and let rifle tags control the quality. you will have big bulls to hunt and you will only be able to hunt it once or twice in your life!

This is how Arizona runs their state! They make you use your points for cows and bulls and pick your weapon. If you want more opportunity you will have to choose a lesser weapon. If you want a guarantee kill pick a rifle with harder draw odds. This is the only truly fair way I can see to run a Le unit! If you want more quality you can always raise the bull to cow ratio and kill the cows to maintain the heard population objective. OR if you want more opportunity to rifle hunters you can give our more tags to them and cut the archery tags but this will defiantly effect the top end quality of the unit. I think managing every le unit in this state like the Henry mountains is sad and cuts the public's opportunity way to much.

The rich guy can always go hunt a ranch if it were up to me!


4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
+10 REDDOG!

You can hunt all fall, EVERY FALL, with family and friends and never have to worry about the score of an animal on those units! No need to ruin our L.E. units for "opportunity" to hunt it every 5 years.

You want more "opportunity"? Start shooting a bow and apply for out of state tags as well, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!
 
SO.... It all comes down to opportunity vs quality.
In the previous plan we had a great BALANCE!! of both. plenty of units where guy's or gal's could apply for 25 years for their shot at that type of bull.

This new plan takes any semblance of BALANCE!!! and pretty much crams it up the 5 hole ( sorry hockey term ) of those that would be happy to take our chances on a lower age class but much easier to draw unit.

I was under the impression for several months that a rough framework had been built that would increase a little for both sides, if not I would have been a thorn in the side and been on this from the start. Well what do ya know during the last 60 minutes of the last meeting some got greedy and decided that the new BALANCE would be raised age classifications on over 90% of the states total elk population.

Does this seem like a win win??? The thing I can't get you inch obsessed freaks to see is that this actually makes it worse on all of you more than it does the guys that were applying for the mid range units. It's about a 15% reduction across the board. Why??
Does the Sanjuan not have big enough bulls??? How about Pahvant?? SW Desert?? Well the age class on these units is so unattainable in the long run that all you inch freaks are going to see is REDUCTIONS on these units because it will be impossible to maintain or hit age class thats set. Yep there will be truckloads of monsters on these units but you will continue to see less and less tags issued.

Unfortunately you don't get it, won't get it untill it bites you in the ass!!!

Where the hell is KTC and THE CAT???
 
If feed back is what the committee was after I guess we've given it to them, we're stating to repeat ourselves. Opinions are valuable, no doubt. It's got to be healthy to hear from those with passionate beliefs, regardless of what they might be.

I was sent this image today from a National Geographic contest. It could say allot of different things to different folks. I'll keep mine to myself. Pretty cool imo.

DC

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos/1214unknown.jpeg
 
Hey antlerglazed and REDDOG, Maybe you can ask for some help removing your feet from your mouths. I am in fact an archery hunter and have in fact hunted out of state the past two years for elk. this has increased my odds, but the point is I shouldn't have to hunt out of state to do that.

Another point about hunting out of state- I'm far from wealthy and I know there's a lot more people that cannot afford to do what I've done than can afford to do it.

How bout we have somebody smarter than me figure out how many more permits you would have to give to archery to make it so that all weapons kill the same number of elk on a unit.

I.e. if unit XX's 'harvest objective' was 28 bulls, how bout you give enough tags based on the success ratios historically to allow each hunt (Arch, AW early, AW late, Muzz) to kill 7 bulls. This would result in more opportunity for primitive weapons.

If I had to guess I would say that this would result in about 7 or 8 any weapon peak rut tags and a lot more in the other hunts.

Just an idea.
 
Yes the true way to manage these Elk units would be with Archery tags BUT the Rifle hunters will not let this happen this is the way that Arizona keeps there quality and gives there opportunity .It come down to one thing it is weapons choice!You can give a lot more Archery tags and take less big bulls. Archers are at 36% and Muzzle is at 70% now the Rifle 85% state wide. More of the Rifle tags need to go to the late hunt they would still kill a high precent but not the biggest bulls on the unit.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-10 AT 06:59PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-10
>AT 12:32?PM (MST)
>
>Todd
>
>This is what the elk comity
>should have come up with
>to please everyone if most
>of the elk comity wasn't
>influenced by their own political
>views.
>
>People throw around the opportunity word
>way too much. guys don't
>want to kill spikes and
>cows anymore then they want
>to kill spike deer and
>doe deer. Also raising the
>elk numbers will absolutely have
>an effect on our deer
>herds and you know this
>being a great deer guide.
>
>
>if Utah made us use our
>points for cows, spikes, or
>big bulls you will see
>without a doubt what people
>really want to hunt! Make
>us have to choose!
>
>why would anyone manage a deer
>ranch or elk ranch and
>randomly kill all their bucks
>and bulls in the first
>year before they even show
>their potential. It doesn't work
>on their farms so it
>wont work and doesn't work
>in real life.
>
>managing for healthy bull to cow
>ratios and then letting them
>grow a few years is
>the only way you will
>truly see what potential the
>elk or deer will have.
>
>
>it doesn't take a genius to
>see that letting a 99%
>success rate weapon with the
>most tags in a rut
>hunt will kill the cream
>off the top of any
>unit. If it didn't we
>should allow them to hunt
>this way on the Henry
>mountains. It however makes your
>job easier doesn't it.
>
>What this state needs in an
>enema! we need a stool
>softener! We need a tea
>party! We need to flush
>the SFW's, corrupt wildlife board,
>big government thinking mentality down
>the drain. When is taxing
>the people ever good! I
>don't like taxes any more
>then I like seeing SFW
>and the rest of these
>hunting groups keep taking my
>tags and saying "the more
>tags they take the better
>my hunting will be just
>trust me!"
>
>If you guys are so set
>on this age objective and
>really don't care if you
>only get to hunt once
>in your life then get
>rid of the spike hunts
>and allow archery to control
>the bull to cow ratios
>and let rifle tags control
>the quality. you will have
>big bulls to hunt and
>you will only be able
>to hunt it once or
>twice in your life!
>
>This is how Arizona runs their
>state! They make you use
>your points for cows and
>bulls and pick your weapon.
>If you want more opportunity
>you will have to choose
>a lesser weapon. If you
>want a guarantee kill pick
>a rifle with harder draw
>odds. This is the only
>truly fair way I can
>see to run a Le
>unit! If you want more
>quality you can always raise
>the bull to cow ratio
>and kill the cows to
>maintain the heard population objective.
>OR if you want more
>opportunity to rifle hunters you
>can give our more tags
>to them and cut the
>archery tags but this will
>defiantly effect the top end
>quality of the unit. I
>think managing every le unit
>in this state like the
>Henry mountains is sad and
>cuts the public's opportunity way
>to much.
>
>The rich guy can always go
>hunt a ranch if it
>were up to me!
>
>
>
4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

>Archery is a year round commitment!!
>

still waiting on Todd's answer!
 
Todd
I just sent you an email that shows the facts you guys on the elk comity missed. If this info would have been looked at there is no way you guys could have made the same decision you did.

if anyone else wants to see the facts you can pm me with your email and ill try and send it you you!


4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
By the way Todd I still respect you as a guide and love your videos.

If I did draw a San Juan tag you would be first on my list!

4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
Still none of those that are complaining about the plan will tell any of us what unit they put in for and what weapon. Its funny how they complain they want more opportunity but they want more opportunity on the better units in the better season. I am going to draw a tag this year with 6 points, tell how that isn't opportunity. I am not going after a san juan, pahvant, boulder, etc. early rifle tag, I know that will take me 15 years or better. If you want an early rifle tag then yes expect to wait your turn, if you want opportunity hunt late season or archery.
Thanks elk committee for the great job you guys have done.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-10 AT 08:59AM (MST)[p]I'll be up front and say: I don't agree with almost anything SFW does anymore. Its a money game and that is that. BUT all of you guys that want opportunity. Put in for Archery Diamond, or Archery Anthro. Takes 2-3 yrs to draw one of these limited entry archery permits. Ya see I think the public has already voted on what they want. That is why it takes 15-20 yrs to draw one of these premium units. The people put in for the very top units no matter what they say on here. I would dare bet that most of these guys wanting opportunity still continue to put in for the top units in the state. Rather it be deer or elk. I think we are too greedy is our problem. I am perfectly satisfied with one TROPHY ELK tag in my life, after that I will hunt open bull or lesser units. There are archery open bull, rifle open bull, muzzleloader open bull, and spike hunts, and cow hunts everywhere and at all different times of the year. Big bulls take years to grow. Without doing a genetic study....managing for age is the best we can do. I guess if you asked me which units should be managed for trophy quality I would have to say: Manage the units that have already produced trophy quality. The genetics seem to be there, and although there have been trophy bulls killed on almost all LE units. Some have consistantly produced larger bulls.
 
I dont disagree that you should have some trophy units. But they have made ALL of them trophy units. They increased the age class on almost all of them. How is that oppertunity?


respect my authorita
 
A large part of the problem which many have addressed already is some of those making the decisions are biased by their position. The guides/outfitters/landowners will profit the most if the tags are very limited due to the trophy quality not necessarily being tied to the amount of "tags" hunters that hire them will obtain through the draw/auction etc. If they each got a set amount of tags they would also probably want more opportunity just like most of the people who are looking long term. I am not condemning them it is just simple economics. I dont live or hunt in Utah although I have tried to draw a tag and have hunted elk in many states and helped on many draw hunts with others who have drawn. If blanding boy had an alotment of 5 tags in the past and now his allotment was down to 3 tags I think he would rather take his chances getting 5 good bulls for his clients even if lowering the tag numbers increased the amount of trophy bulls. The increase in trophy bulls would be directly proportionate to his own decrease in opportunity. I understand that the system does not work this way I am just trying to make those who make a living off the quality of the herds see it from the perspective of those who are giving up the tags. Not trying to pick on Blanding boy in any way just trying to make a point. Under the current system if their is tag reduction chances are the outfitters will guide just as many if not more hunters with increased quality. If the units will only produce 300 to 330 bulls with the occasional 350 far fewer residents will hire guides when they draw that once in a lifetime tag and wealthy non residents will not be very interested either. Utah in general has made a lot money from the huge bulls produced. The money is cooling down due to a reduction in quality so you will see tags being reduced until the money flow picks back up. This will not help most draw tags but this is what will make the most money for the auctions, landowner tags, guides, etc who seem to control the decisions. What is best for most people is not best for them so there really is no solution that will not greatly hurt either group. Unfortunately there is no scenario under the current system where increasing quality lessens the opportunity for outfitters etc or they would be more in line with the average hunter who would rather draw 3 times in lifetime and take his chances on getting a good bull than never have the opportunity.
 
PlUS 1 Our decision makers (elk committee) are the ones profiting from less tags #'s. There price just went way up on these welfare tags. All in the name of conservation right?
 
Yeah its all a conspiracy, everyone on the board is probably going to be rich from this. This is funny stuff. Maybe if the dang Deer Committee would have been put togother as good as the elk committee then we would see better deer, the deer committee did nothing for the deer, IMO. We have to live with what the deer committee came up with, I am glad the wildlife board stepped in and put 5 day deer hunt to help the deer. Anyway that is all a different subject.
Atleast the Elk committee is proactive about the deer and looking for increases. The deer committee did nothing, again IMO.
 
Sweet maybe they could make deer a once in a lifetime hunt too. Shoot, that would be awesome.

respect my authorita
 
I see some significant problems with this plan.
1. As said by others. DON'T MANAGE ALL LE ELK by age objectives ONLY. You need to look at bull to cow ratios, genetics, etc.

This will create less opportunity, as mentioned many 9-10 yr old bulls will never be more than 320 class bulls.

2. If the most 60% rifle tags are rut hunts and 40% late hunt tags, those late hunts will shoot younger bulls on ave, reducing tag numbers, increasing bull to cow ratios, which is a problem for some units.

3. IMO, We need to manage for quality 8-10 units that have a good chance of seeing 350-380 plus bulls. (still success rates around 50%)All hunts.

8-10 more units that hunters will have a good chance of seeing 320-360 class bulls. Have success ratios be around 50%-60% with rifle, muzzle loader hunts, and 25-30% archery hunts.

The remaining 6-8 units manage for 270-320 type bulls with 50-70% success ratio for rifle and muzzle loader seasons, 25-30% archery.

This would still provide great quality bulls, a lot more opportunity, our kids may have a chance to draw LE elk hunts once or twice in their lives.

The elk management plan from the committee is still broken in my opinion. I know a lot of work was put into it. It still could be improved.

I'm only interested in hunting 350 plus bulls. HOWEVER, the MAJORITY of the public would be happy with a 300-320 bull, THIS IS A FACT. THE MAJORITY OF HUNTERS HAVE NEVER KILLED A 300-320 BULL. MOST JUST WANT A GOOD CHANCE TO KILL A 6 POINT BULL.

Questions? Does the elk committees age structure meet what the majority of hunters want? What does the data say? Will your kids and grandkids realistic have a chance to hunt trophy elk in Utah,under the elk committees recommendations? A few things to think about.

Greg
 
I agree with Wilywapati, Adamsoa,Packout, infinite Circles, and others. Changes still need to be made.

The main difference that I see from the latest elk plan, compared to elk management 3 years ago. (When we had too many bulls per cow ratio, for healthy herds in some units.) Have 60% of rifle rut hunts instead of 75% rifle rut hunts. Am I missing something?
 
The biggest problem with uping the tag numbers from a quality stand point is, the biggest majority of those that draw will go after the biggest bulls on the unit, and won't shot the first 320 bull they see. Those bulls that won't grow to be 360 plus will still end up dying of old age! Quality always gets hammered the hardest, I don't believe these guys when they say they'll shot the first 320 bull they see on a San Juan LE permit!
 
There are a good number of people that will shoot the first decent bull they see on any Le unit. I know a guy that waited 15 years to draw then shot a rag on the first day.
 
I do know it happens. It's just that when you give alot of opportunity with a rut rifle hunt the quality always suffers! Eventually once you get the top end shot off the quality bulls with the most potential will start getting killed younger and younger! Most archers would gladly take care of those bulls between 310 and 350, so lets run the archery hunt until the 30th of Sept.
 
It's not rocket science guys. Keep 7-10 units premium for those who say they want inches over any other factor. Keep them managed to harvest age averages, and keep the tag allotments per weapon type the same, and keep the season dates the same. Manage the middle units by doing at least one of the following: 1]Move the rifle hunt to the second week of October. 2]Give a higher percentage of tag allotments to primitive weapons. Manage the lesser units with they changed season dates, the changed tag allotment for weapons, AND manage to bull:cow ratios instead of harvest age objectives. Doing so would allow those who want inches and are willing to wait 15-20 years with extremely high success rates to do so, those who want an opportunity at a mature bull that has fairly high success rates to do so, and those that want a better hunt than the any-bull areas but could care less about the score of the bull to do so.

Raising the age objectives may sound good to the inch crowd, but it doesn't ensure the bulls will be bigger. It does, however, ensure that fewer hunters will be able to hunt and that the age objectives will never be met leading to future reductions in permits.
 
>FATHER
>
>LET ME GUESS YOU HAVE 17
>POINTS AND CANT DRAW A
>OAK CREEK TAG
>
>AND YOU HATE SFW COME UP
>WITH A BETTER WAY AND
>YOU WILL HAVE
>
>MORE MONEY THAN DON PEAY!! IF
>YOU WANT TO SHOOT A
>280 BULL BUY A TAG
>IN COLORADO!!


FATHER

SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS! MY COMPUTER IS BROKE.

just kidden

DON'T SEE ANYTHING TO COMPLEX IN MY POST
WHAT PART MAKES NO SENSE?

I'M SURE YOUR KIDS DON'T CARE HOW BIG A ELK THEY KILL.
BUT GUYS WITH 16 POINTS ARE NOT LOOKING FOR A 280 INCH BULL!!

SCORE DOESN'T REALLY MATTER TO ME BUT YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO HUNT 280-300 INCH BULLS EVERY FEW YEARS NO MATTTER WHAT THE MANANGEMENT PLAN IS TO FEW ELK FOR TO MANY PEOPLE!! IF YOU NEED A TAG IN YOUR POCKET TO SPEND TIME IN THE HILLS THEN YOU BETTER FIND FRIENDS WITH ALOT OF POINTS OR BUY A SPIKE TAG EVERY YEAR!!
 
Hoytme,
Another better and more reasonable option. We are making it much harder than it needs to be. NV, AZ, and NM all have great quality and provide much more opportunity. Can't we learn from others and try a few more things than currently planned?
 
Nice to see the special interest groups who DIRECTLY benefit from conservation tags got their way. The survey and most of the public wanted more opportunity, and here we sit on this see saw plan of "raise the objective, no lower the objective".


I find it interesting that when the Monroe unit was lowered to a younger age objective that older bulls were harvested than prior to the lowering of the objective. Managing the resource based on special interest groups will always be a losing proposition. It is a sad day for the public elk hunter in Utah.
 
Ive got the data that shows a two year average of age of the bulls killed on these units. the elk comity raised the age objective on 93% of the units. they want to cut tags on all of those units. The only problem I have is according to their own damn data they still have to issue more tags!!! There are a few units like nebo that need to have tags cut but the rest still need more tags issued to meet the age objective they have set right now!!

This is the reason the Don wanted to manage these units by B&C score!!


4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
Still wondering why those that are complaining still wont tell us all what hunt they put in for....come one guys what unit are you putting in for.....san juan, Pahvant, boulder, Beaver, which is it...
 

Similar threads

C
Wasatch thoughts
2
Replies
193
Views
5k
elkassassin
elkassassin
elkassassin
THERE'S TALK OF A LL COMMITTEE???
2
Replies
133
Views
5k
elkassassin
elkassassin
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
5k
Vanilla
Vanilla

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

First High Country Scouting Trip 2018
Wyoming Mule Deer Hunting Succes
Rob's Elk05m.JPG
C0D58CC2-8D29-4B70-85FC-A3D5B87431B4.jpeg
FB_IMG_1639847058966.jpg
thumbnail_image0.jpg
IMG-0753 (1).jpg
BFFBA543-6926-4DAB-8C5B-4E035BE8BA58.jpeg
thumbnail_image2.jpg
47F4A15B-CB11-472A-A117-9223EA40CC6F.jpeg
buck1.jpg
20230918_194034.jpg
Back
Top Bottom