What's going on in Unit 10 with the elk management?

[DonMartin]

Today, I finally got to sit down and look over the '09 elk regulations. I hadn't seen them before due to being in the field on hunts, and though I requested a copy of the proposals be sent to me for review,I never got them.

When I looked at the '09 Unit 10 regs for antlerless elk today I just about threw up.

Let's take a trip back in time.

In '07 there were 600 antlerless elk tags for both the early and late hunts. Hunt success was in the 30-40% range I think.

In '08 there were 600 antlerless tags for both the early and late hunts. I bet the success wasn't much better, maybe 40%.

Now in '09 they raised the early cow tags to 900 tags while the late hunt went up to 700 tags!

What's the justification for the increase?

As many of you know, I have done a heck of a lot guiding in this unit for many years for not only elk, but antelope, deer and sheep. I spend between 60-90 days a years out there scouting or hunting in most years.

During the past two years my guys and I have seen a DECREASE in the number of elk out there!

I've told G&F this info, but to no avail.

Putting 900 cow hunters in that unit, even as big as it is, is going to be a nightmare!

And you know when you shoot a cow in October, she is already bred, and probably has last year's calf next to her, so many times you're really killing three elk. I know some of the calves left motherless will be "adopted" by others in the herd, but many stumble around aimlessly until predators get them. Same goes for the Nov/Dec hunt, except the calves are bigger and have a better chance of survival.

On the late elk hunt this year I saw exactly two cows in two days! Fortunately my hunter got one that had been crippled by another hunter three days prior.. My other hunter and his guide saw one herd of about 17 and he got one. Theses guys didn't come into camp until Saturday night, two days after the season had opened.

Many other hunters we spoke to had not had any luck.

On the early cow hunt this year we saw a lot of elk (over 200), but that number is down from what we've seen in year's before.

I heard that the bull hunt in Unit 10 this year for the most part and with few exceptions was a bust, (we were in Unit 6A) so why the increase in those tags?

The early rifle bull tags are increasing from 25 to 50 this year while the general bull tags went up from 450 to 500.

I am going to check with the Region III Game Specialist on Monday and get some answers on the rationale behind all of this.

I'll let you know what I find out.

My question is this? Is anybody else out there seeing a huge increase in elk numbers that would justify these outrageous permit numbers?

Thanks,

Don Martin
Arizona Wildlife Outfitters

"I'm an Arizona resident first, a sportsman second, and a businessman third Mr. Commissioner. That's my priorities in this matter."

 

[mesquitehunter]

It's all about the money now!!! If you have 900 hunters or 700 hunters the same amount of elk will be killed. The hunters kill odds go down but the Department makes more money. The department can really care less about the quality of the hunt. Even if they end up with a double die off they ended with double profit. Thats my opinion any ways. They're just pulling the wool over our eye's with this "HUNTER RECRUITMENT" crap.

 

[fugitive]

Not sure about all that. For my archery unit they cut the cow tags by half, then doubled the bull tags. Still trying to figure that one out.

If quizzes are quizzical, what are tests?

 

[mesquitehunter]

Fujitive that is one ugly chick, that is funny. I also liked the last one you had.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

>>And you know when you shoot a cow in October, she is already bred, and probably has last year's calf next to her, so many times you're really killing three elk. I know some of the calves left motherless will be "adopted" by others in the herd, but many stumble around aimlessly until predators get them. Same goes for the Nov/Dec hunt, except the calves are bigger and have a better chance of survival.<<

Most calves will be weaned by Oct., thus stand as much chance at survival with or without the cow. Plus, if the calf isn't weaned, it's unlikely the cow will come into estrus to get bred again. A suckling calf stimulates release of prolactin, a hormone that prevents the release of hormones governing the estrus cycle.

Also, whether the cow has already been bred or not is somewhat irrelevent since it will be one less calf born regardless of when the cow gets killed. IOW, kill it in Sept. Oct. or March, and there's no calf. The only difference is having the cow pregnant or not at the time of its death.


TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[DonMartin]

Tony:

I'm going to have to respectively disagree with your assessment of the survivability of the calves left from the cows that are killed in October.

And while I'm not a biologist, I have been out hunting elk in Arizona and Unit 10 since 1972, so I've seen a lot of this.

No doubt some of the calves--especially the ones that were dropped early- will have a decent chance to make it. But those late season calves are doomed--I've seen them wandering around looking for another elk after they are orphaned and they are absolutely clueless.

One of the G&F biologists I'm friends with told me that up to 50& of the early calves will not survive--and they know it and its part of the management scheme.

Now in December its a different story. Calves for the most part are big enough and have learned enough to survive on their on.

My point here is that G&F knows what happens when you shoot cows: that's how they manage the population. Take the breeders (i.e cows)out of the equation and that's how you manage elk.

So I'll go back to my original point, do you have any information or knowledge as to why the antlerless elk tags are being increased so dramatically in Unit 10 this year?

If their surveys are showing a huge increase in population then that is one thing. But as someone who has been out there in Unit 10 since 1972, I don't see it.

Don Martin

 

[OutdoorWriter]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-03-09 AT 02:55PM (MST)[p]>>No doubt some of the calves--especially the ones that were dropped early- will have a decent chance to make it. But those late season calves are doomed--I've seen them wandering around looking for another elk after they are orphaned and they are absolutely clueless.<<

Don,

Wandering around clueless is no indication the calf didn't survive. Only a dead calf can verify that assumption. Of course if you've been finding a bunch of dead calves in Unit 10 since 1972, then that assumption could be valid.

>>One of the G&F biologists I'm friends with told me that up to 50& of the early calves will not survive--and they know it and its part of the management scheme.<<

Sure, that's a fact with both deer and elk. Between predation and other factors, a large number of calves or fawns will die before they ever get past their first winter. Being orphans rarely enters the equation. Weather, habitat condition and predation are factors for the number to rise or fall from one year to the next.

>>My point here is that G&F knows what happens when you shoot cows: that's how they manage the population. Take the breeders (i.e cows)out of the equation and that's how you manage elk.<<

Right, shooting the females is an old concept that has been a method of managing big game populations for a few years now. ;-)

BUT...killing cows or does is done to keep more youngins from being born, not to kill the youngins that have already been produced by making them orphans. Afterall, some of those already born are money-producing bulls and bucks for the money-hungry game department, no?? Anyway, that's why it doesn't matter when the cows are killed -- already bred or unbred, they produce no more calves. And of course, they also factor in the natural mortality of both adults and offspring mentioned above.

And no, I don't have any info about the large increase in cow permits, but I'll see what I can find out early next week and let you know. Just speculatng here, but I'm guessing the post hunt surveys indicated there are a lot more cows than you have observed from the ground or they want to lower the success rates.


TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[OutdoorWriter]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-03-09 AT 02:53PM (MST)[p]Don,

I just looked at the past harvest stats for those two unit 10 cow hunts. Here's some speculation on my part.

In 2006, there were 800 permits for each hunt. The success rates were 22% (169 cows)and 24% (178 cows), a rate G&F generally feels is within the norm for such a hunt.

In 2007, they lowered the permits to 600 for each hunt, and the success rates shot up to 28% (160 cows) and 31% (174 cows).

If you look at the years just prior to 2006, the success rates were also quite high. Thus the reason they went to 800 permits in 2006.

Soooo....to again bring the success rate down -- AND get more hunters in the field --, they once more increased permit numbers. They no doubt think the TOTAL harvest over the two hunts will remain consistent as it has over the last several years.


TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[quest]

Hey Don,
Just side-stepping this subject a tad...did you happen to notice any good bucks up there in unit 10?

Fugitive...that is one uuugly woman lol

Tony...so how did your coues hunt go this year?

By the way...my wife got her first coues deer. I'm still waiting for her to write her story!

Quest

 

[BuzzH]

Don,

You said, "I heard that the bull hunt in Unit 10 this year for the most part and with few exceptions was a bust, (we were in Unit 6A) so why the increase in those tags?"

Really?

From what I saw in unit 10 I wouldnt say it was a "bust". Its not an easy unit to hunt, no question. But I saw quite a few hunters with some pretty good bulls.

It seems to me that the AZ elk hunters expect to run into a good bull with no effort. Just because a few people dont find a bull off the road, doesnt mean the hunt was a bust.

I think you guys in AZ are spoiled...I'd give a left one to have a hunt every year like I had in 10 this year on the late hunt. You dont even know how good you have it.

Raising the tag numbers from 450 to 500 wont make that much difference IMO.

 

[sremim]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-07-09 AT 09:46AM (MST)[p]I've hunted 10 for the past 13 years on both archery and late rifle hunts and hunt with a guy whose been there before the elk even showed up, and this is the worst he has ever seen it. I agree 100% with what Don is saying. Why raise the tag #'s so much?
I have never had such a hard time finding elk. And no, it wasn't from the road.















"I'll keep my guns, freedom, and money.
You can keep the "change"!"

 

[BuzzH]

I guess not being an AZ resident and having years of experience in 10 I didnt know the difference.

I agree that its not an easy area to find elk in, tougher than I thought it would be for sure. But, not nearly as difficult as the areas I hunt in MT or WY. In particular finding 6 points.

I saw bulls every day I hunted, the most elk I saw in a single day was on the opener of the late hunt...32 elk, 5 of them bulls.

Its a big area with thick cover and the elk just dont stand around in the open. I think the key to hunting this unit is spending time before the season to narrow down where the elk are and arent. I only had 3 days prior to the hunt, and admittedly some VERY good advice from a couple friends, but I still narrowed it down pretty quickly. With the size of the unit, I just dont see how 50 more tags will make that much difference. But, again, I dont hunt there every year and I would have no problem agreeing with the residents...to a point.

Another thing I noticed was MANY hunters heading home after the first weekend with NO elk, long faces, and 5 more days to hunt. Kind of tough to say the hunt wasnt any good when you only hunt a couple days of a 7 day hunt. I also didnt see many people scouting prior to the season either...which again...is pretty important to being successful on this hunt.

Took this one the evening of the 4th day...Dec. 1. Maybe I was just too stupid to realize it was such a bust this year??? Maybe I just got lucky???

 

[Gator]

The unit I hunted was the same way alot of guys didn't see any bulls but e saw enough to keep us happy.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".

 

[huntandfish]

Don,
As a 3rd generation native,I have seen the decline of elk numbers in a lot of the hunt units the last few years.There are two reasons.Drought being one and the main reason is the increased tags of cows.Last year and this year so far has been great moisture,but I am afraid with the make money at all costs attitude of the Game and fish it will not help that much.Starting last year with four rifle coues hunts in a row,I have decided that the State wants to sell as much tag's as they can with the lowest kill% that they think that they can get away with.Yes we still have very big animals in Arizona,but our best day's are behind us.

 

[jasn]

I suggest writing the unit manager and asking him directly. I did it this year in another area I hunt, but the question involved buck and bull tags. He was very clear in the reasoning and decision making process, and explained everything.

He basically said that his suggested or proposed tag allocation was ignored by the board, and increased. Also, the unit's management philosophy and goals had been changed, and it was not longer under "alternate" management which basically means lowering the buck or bull to doe/cow ratio. In addition, much more game was observed during their plane surveys than in previous years. I was surprised, but I heard it all straight from the most reliable source.

 

[sremim]

Thats probably one contibuting problem. When I called to talk to the game warden for the unit I was told there wasn't one. 10 is a vacant unit. After Pender retired there was a lady that took over but she has since moved to a different unit. I wonder if this has anyting to do with it?














"I'll keep my guns, freedom, and money.
You can keep the "change"!"

 

[need4x4]

Early rifle tags going from 25 to 50 will have an effect on the quality.

Looking back, what has that season (10 early rifle) had for tags?

 

[ClarkW]

IMO, they have been on their way of damaging that unit for some time now. Mostly for deer, but it has become known as a hot spot for elk and G&F see the dollar signs, therefore will add every tag they can knowing nothing, not even poor management, will stop the people from applying for the "famed" unit 10. Just another poor decision on AZ wildlife management in norhtern AZ.

 

[AZ402]

I'm not sure why they needed all the extra elk tags in there myself. It may not show for a few years but it will eventually. Especially if we have a drought year or two like 1996 or 2002.

The deer herd in 10 is a whole different issue. It's been a debacle for a long time in there.

 

[DonMartin]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-08-09 AT 00:11AM (MST)[p]BuzzH:

Hey first of all, awesome bull! Whoever gave you some tips on where to go and how to do it in Unit 10 obviously knew what they were talking about.

I see from the country you were definitely in some of the "jungles" where the elk live but most guys won't go.

As I said, I wasn't there for the bull hunt--we were hunting elk in Unit 6A-- but this is what I heard from a number of guys who were there and I also checked the sign in-sign out books up on the north end of the unit during the late cow hunt.

Our last six hunters up there on the general bull hunt have taken five bulls and the one who didn't passed on a number of them, they just weren't big enough.

By the way, during the early cow hunt I guided on we saw over 200 elk in three days and both our hunters tagged out, on the late cow hunt I personally saw just two elk, both cows and my hunter from Kansas killed one of those. Our other hunter also killed a cow out of a herd of 17 on the first day they were in the field.

We've been 100% on cows there for the past three years.

Other than a "slaughter" we saw at a tank up north on the second day of the hunt where at least six and maybe more cows were taken out of a herd that ran across the road in front of a bunch of guys, very few folks we spoke to were taking elk.

Anyway, Since I made the first post I have spoke to several at G&F and sure didn't like what I heard.

Its all part of the management plan they have.

Since the longtime wildlife manager (Tim Pender) who worked this unit for 32 years has retired, the recommendations were written by another WM who has a lot of experience, but not a lot of history in this unit.

That being said, and knowing that not too many years ago they had 1,600 cow tags (800 on each hunt)and the hunt success was basically the same as it is now, this plan merely is an opportunity for G&F to offer more tags--and get more people in the field--but according to them, this will not adversely affect the total population and the bull/cow ratio will be about the same after the hunts.

Hmm, doubling the early bull tags from 25 to 50 with an almost 100% success on mostly larger bulls, will not affect the quality of the bulls? Sorry, I don't buy it.

Hey it takes many years for bulls to reach the proportions like the one BuzzH got, and I'm somewhat skeptical of the notion that killing a large number of mature bulls on an early hunt isn't going to be an issue.

Remember Unit 10 is suppose to managed as an "Alternative Management" unit which means higher bull/cow ratios and the objective is to harvest of older age class animals--in other words this is suppose to be a quality over quantity management area.

Sorry, but I've been hunting on the Boquillas since 1972 and guiding there since 1987 I've seen that unit go through some ups and downs.

I'm just sorry to see one of the best elk units in the state reduced to its knees under this type of "more opportunity" ans less quality management practice.

I, like a lot of you, didn't get involved in the process early enough and talk with G&F about all of this at the public meetings they held.

Its way too late now to complain, but believe me I have told a few of the folks in Region III my views.

Of course all of this may become a mute point. I speak to the ranch hands every chance I get and I'm hearing more and more about "trespass fees". Will it come to pass? I believe it will, I just don't know when.

When it does, it will be a "Pay to Play" area, and I fear many at that point won't be able to recreate there, even though the ranch is about 1/3 state lands.

But anyway, enough soap box rhetoric. Now that I've got this off my chest I just hope that the wet winter up there means that wildlife will have a great spring and the antler growth and health of the herds is good in '09.

Who knows, I figure I'm about due to see my name on one of those Unit 10 early rifle bull tags and I'll go shoot a great big 300 point bull (wink-wink)..and when that happens I'm gonna hunt cows from then on.

Good luck guys!

Don Martin
AWO

 

[BuzzH]

Don,

Thanks for the information...much more clear.

I also tend to agree with you on the early tags being increased and the potential to really sock it to the mature bulls. I was thinking more about the 50 additional late tags, which in the scheme of 450 already, wouldnt make that much difference, IMO.

I feel if they HAVE to increase opportunity, it should be on a late hunt rather than an early rut rifle tag. I would bet that of the 25 early tags...all 25 are filled. The 50 additional late tags???? I bet if 10 are filled (from what I saw of the effort being applied by many) I'd be surprised.

I hope that whatever increases are made that it isnt too much for the animals to take.

I've always felt that management wise IN ANY STATE, being more conservative with tag numbers is better than being too liberal with them.

All that being said, you guys have one hell of a good thing going down there with elk.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

>>That being said, and knowing that not too many years ago they had 1,600 cow tags (800 on each hunt)and the hunt success was basically the same as it is now, this plan merely is an opportunity for G&F to offer more tags--and get more people in the field--but according to them, this will not adversely affect the total population and the bull/cow ratio will be about the same after the hunts.<<

Well, you just saved me a phone call. It appears my earlier speculation was pretty close. ;-)



TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[OutdoorWriter]

>>I feel if they HAVE to increase opportunity, it should be on a late hunt rather than an early rut rifle tag. I would bet that of the 25 early tags...all 25 are filled. The 50 additional late tags???? I bet if 10 are filled (from what I saw of the effort being applied by many) I'd be surprised.
<<

Since 2003 the early hunt, including the years where there were either 25 or 50 permits, has had anywhere from a 75% to an 88% success rate.

Over the same time span, the late hunt has been anywhere from 33% to 46%. Of course, with more than 325 to 450 permits for these, the harvest is larger than the early hunts. Evern at the low end in success rate (33%) and permit numbers (325), more than 100 bulls get tagged.


TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[BuzzH]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-08-09 AT 05:26PM (MST)[p]Yeah, but the statistics are pretty much meaningless in Dons arguement.

How many bulls over 8 years old are killed in the early hunt compared to the late?

I'm guessing a majority of the bulls killed in the early hunt are older and a majority killed in the late hunt are younger.

Its pretty easy to over-hunt the older age class animals by increasing the early rifle rut hunts when they're the most vulnerable.

Those same bulls in late November are a whole lot different critter to find and hunt...and theres no question about that.

I still say if increasing opportunity is the goal, with doing less damage to the older age class (trophy) animals...increase the late tags and keep early tags at a very low number.

The more I read Dons reply the more sense it makes. I believe he is 100% correct that there is a very good chance of over-harvesting the older age class animals by doubling early rifle hunt permits.

Don, if you need some letters written to the commission or area manager, let me know and I'll send off some comments.

Maybe too late for this year...but maybe something could be done before the following years quotas are set.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

>>Remember Unit 10 is suppose to managed as an "Alternative Management" unit which means higher bull/cow ratios and the objective is to harvest of older age class animals--in other words this is suppose to be a quality over quantity management area.<<

Buzz,

The above is one of Don's comments. Thus, the increase of the tags during the rut hunt accomplishes that goal.




TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[Gator]

so does this mean it a good year to put in for unit 10 with the more tags being allowed, It seems the unit will go downhill quick after that many more bulls are taken.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".

 

[BuzzH]

Outdoorwriter,

I think you're missing the point of Dons post.

He said, "Hey it takes many years for bulls to reach the proportions like the one BuzzH got, and I'm somewhat skeptical of the notion that killing a large number of mature bulls on an early hunt isn't going to be an issue."

I believe what he is trying to say is that doubling the number of early tags is going to cause a DECLINE in older bulls. I tend to agree.

Because the area IS supposed to be managed for older trophy sized animals...you DONT over-harvest the mature bulls by doubling the number of permits.

I also find it pretty drastic to increase the early rifle rut tags by 25...why not just 5 more and then see what you have. Also, what data is there to justify killing an additional 25 mature bulls? What is AZ's definition of a "mature bull". Anything other than a spike? Any bull over 5 years old? Any bull over 8 years old?

I still think if your motive is to increase opportunity and provide more $$$ to the AZG&F its better achieved and easier on the older age class animals to increase tag numbers in the late season when those animals are much less vulnerable.

Your explanation makes no sense...we're managing it for older age class animals...so we'll issue 25 more tags to make sure that we get ALL the mature bulls???

That type of management practice (increasing early rut tags) will create less trophy potential in the future.

 

[jasn]

Buzz, I think OW is trying to say that the unit is managed to harvest older age class bulls, so by increasing tags in the early hunt the ratio of larger bulls is achieved.

This works well with a never ending supply, or a very large population. However, Don's argument says that this is not the case in his opinion, and the population cannot and is not maintaining with the current harvest.

The real problem here IMO is short term goals by the G&F. They don't seem to be looking 10 years down the road. By satisfying demand now and increasing tags to offer "opportunity" - more hunters in the field, we will only be hurting the population or the age structure for the future and have less future opporunity. OW will argue the population size will not be affected, but then I think the age structure and class of animals will definitely suffer.

I think the G&F's general idea will work in a couple select units where rag horns are known to be the class of animal for harvesting, that way others can steer away from these units if they want. But the G&F is trying to implement this "opportunity" thing across the board and its way overboard if you ask me.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

Buzz,

No, I didn't "miss" the point; I just don't agree with it. ;-)

First off, there's a differences in managing a unit in regards to age class, mature bulls or as Don commented, for "quality.

The game department doesn't use B&C scores to determine what a mature bull is or how that score relates to a given bull/cow ratio in a unit. Most likely, they consider any bull that has reached a respectable 5x5 or 6x6 as a mature bull, regardless of its age in years. And I beleive this is what they are doing in 10.

For every older bull that gets tagged, there are several younger ones that will be a year older the next season to take the place of the dead one.

BTW, this isn't the first time there have been 50 permits on the early hunt. There were that many in both 2004 & 2005. Evidently, G&F now thinks the number of mature bulls -- not B&C bulls -- can again support 50 permits without detrimental results to the OVERALL bull/cow ratio. Likewise for the 1,600 permits for the antlerless seasons.


TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[OutdoorWriter]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-09 AT 09:32AM (MST)[p]>Buzz, I think OW is trying
>to say that the unit
>is managed to harvest older
>age class bulls, so by
>increasing tags in the early
>hunt the ratio of larger
>bulls is achieved.
>
>This works well with a never
>ending supply, or a very
>large population. However, Don's
>argument says that this is
>not the case in his
>opinion, and the population cannot
>and is not maintaining with
>the current harvest.

Yes, the first part is exactly what I meant.

>OW will argue the population size will not be affected, but >then I think the age structure and class of animals will >definitely suffer.

Of course, the only thing that affects the POPULATION, is the total harvest for all the hunts, not the age or B&C score of the bulls that get killed. The total bull kill only affects the bull/cow ratio if the recruitment of bull calves is lower than the bull harvest.

The main population control, as we discussed earlier, is the number of cows taken in the unit. As long as that number doesn't exceed the total recruitment of calves, the population will remain stable.

Also, see my reply to Buzz about age class.

TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[BuzzH]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-09 AT 11:05PM (MST)[p]I guess where I disagree is in the "mature" bull category. It sounds to me like the AZG&F definition of a mature bull is anything other than a spike.

I would have never guessed that they didnt use B&C score as a definition of "quality"...who'd a thunk it? I also dont give a rats a$$ what a bull scores...but I do know when I'm looking at a mature animal, and I sure wouldnt call a "respectable 5x5 or 6x6" a quality or mature bull.

It takes a minimum of 7-8 years to produce what I think most hunters with a couple firing brain cells in their head, would call a "quality" or a "mature" bull. Sorry if I disagree that a 260 inch 6x6 thats 3.5 years old is a "mature" bull...or a first year 2.5 year old "respectable" 5x5.

Thats one of the biggest problems with G&F agencies across the West...theres too much ambiguity in their definitions...or even a lack of clear definition to start with. Kind of tough to manage for a certain type or class of animal when you dont even know what you want.

Sounds to me like they dont really care what the "quality" is...as long as the bull/cow ratios are at desirable levels. Over-all bull/cow ratios dont mean squat to quality...and thats a fact.

One last thing...in game management there is too much "I think" and not enough "I know" going on.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-11-09 AT 11:56AM (MST)[p]A mature and a quality bull are not necessarily the same critter. Regardless of antler size, a bull, which can live to 15 years old or more, is MATURE between 5.5 to 7 years old. In contrast, antler size determines "quality." Genetics, nutrition and yes, even age, are the factors that affect quality.

And obviously, the hunter is the one who decides whether the quality of a particluar bull fits his criteria of that. As the adage goes, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. Most would say a trophy bull will be from the middle to near the top of the quality range, and a record book-bull will be at the top.


Now, a point to ponder:

Several comments have been made about the increase of the early bull tags being all about increasing opportunity and sellng more tags -- i.e. more money for the greedy game department.

That doesn't make much sense, at least to me. If those were the reasons, they would have added more pemits to the late hunt, as you mentioned. Why? Because with the MUCH lower success rate that's about a 1/3 of the early hunt, they could have tripled the additional permits, thus tripling both the opportunities and the revenue while maintaining the same total harvest.

TONY MANDILE

How To Hunt Coues Deer

 

[BuzzH]

Another point to ponder:

If someone doesnt think that the various game agencies absolutely increase quotas for reasons other than maintaining population objectives or goals...they're an idiot.

Happens all the time...and too frequently.

The thing is this, the average hunter wont likely gripe about increases in tags. WHY? Because in places like AZ where permits are hard to come by, any tag increase just means that there is a better chance for them to draw and be able to hunt. Most couldnt care less what the bull/cow ratio is, or what the increase in tags will do to the quality, number, or age structure to the herd. As long as they get their elk,deer,etc.

Combine that with a G&F agency that really is in a financial crunch, a G&F commission made up of real-estate agents, landowners, outfitters, etc. and there is likely to be some mismanagement.

I think that from the sounds of Dons post...this unit may be in for some changes in the quality of the animals it now has.

What you think a mature bull is has nothing to do with how the herd is being managed by the AZG&F and what their definition of "mature" is. When I recently sent in my AZ harvest card...all they asked for was the number of points on the left and right antler of the elk I shot. Didnt ask for a tooth for age.

I still contend that if your managing for "quality" like the AZG&F is saying they're doing in this and other units...it means you have to severely limit harvest of the oldest age class of bulls when they're the most vulnerable. The elk have to get to at least 7.5 years old preferably between 8-10 years old before they're shot. Most all bulls that are afforded the opportunity to live to 8+ years old will be a quality bull for the vast majority of hunters.

The question is: Can unit 10 take the proposed increases and still provide older age class bulls to meet the definition of a "quality over quanitity" animal that the AZG&f is claiming they're managing for.

IMO, outdoorwriter has not proven that at all. You've given a bunch of BS statistics based on bull/cow ratios and harvest statistics based on no clear definitions of what the AZG&F considers "quality" bulls. No mention of age class, antler size, genetic traits...NOTHING.

What you've asked me to do is believe that "they think" it will be OK to increase tag numbers and still maintain quality. I'm more in line with Dons logic on this one. Intuitively it seems strange to offer 550 rifle bull permits and maintain maximum quality on bulls in any unit. In particular when the people commenting on these increases have hunted there and guided there for many years and have many hours experience on the ground.

Sorry, but I have no faith in any agency doing the right thing when that agency is at the political whims and mercy of the public, hunters, a governor appointed commission, outfitters, landowners, etc. etc. etc.

 

[AZBuckSnort]

The "definition" pasted below is from the 2008-2009 AZ Hunting Regulations booklet. Perhaps it can provide a base point for what the Dept considers a trophy/mature elk, at least for purposes of civil restitution in cases involving illegal take.

" B. The following definitions of wildlife shall apply:

3. Big game are wild turkey, deer, elk, pronghorn
(antelope), bighorn sheep, bison (buffalo), peccary
(javelina), bear and mountain lion.

4. ?Trophy? means:

(c) A bull elk with at least six points on one antler,
including the eye guard point and the brow tine
point.

 

[redrabbit]

Don,

I thought I heard about ten years ago that G&F wanted to reduce the number of elk in unit 10. Did you recall hearing the same?

Also, did not the commission want the statewide number of elk reduced a handful of years ago, and recently have given the direction to increase the number?

Doug~RR