# What Could Have Been... Again...



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Well, I'm back from my two week time out...  I guess a blurred out picture of Johnny Cash flipping the bird is a little over the top... :roll: sigh...

Anyway, GaryFish wanted me to repost this thread but in a different light so as to may be spark some talk and debate on the current archery debacle we've got going on in this state. I've always been an advocate for more liberal archery hunting and I have my reasons for thinking this way both selfish and reasonable. Below are a list of reasons in no particular order on why I'm a little upset with statewide archery going by the way of bureaucratic BS this year. I COULD have let the air out of any one of these deer during my LE elk hunt this year but I was not fortunate enough to have drawn a tag for the same area. Needless to say I was a little miffed when Mr 28 inch 185 main frame with 15 inches of trash showed up at my water hole THREE TIMES and all I could do was wave at him and snap his picture. I just sat there in disbelief and thought, *you have got to be kidding me!!!*
I know a lot of guys feel the same way I do about getting the shaft (pun intended) this year, but lets hear it! I wanna hear both sides of the argument. May be someone in charge will read this thread and take notice. or not...

How many of you guys could have killed this many bucks but didn't have a tag? 































































I only took pictures of these guys at night, but I know where they live...













































I still have a little salute to the Wildlife board and who or what was in charge of making this nonsensical and totally retarded rule, but the last time I saluted them I got in trouble when Gary found out what it meant. :mrgreen:

Here's my new forum moderator approved message in encrypted form... Look really close, it's hidden in there somewhere...


----------



## Lawdog (Sep 19, 2007)

OMG, those fingers look like sausage links

Nice bucks though.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Lawdog said:


> OMG, those fingers look like sausage links
> 
> Nice bucks though.


 -_O- Good one!


----------



## burge (Sep 11, 2007)

Holy cow. I would take any one of those deer given the chance. 
But I drew my fourth choice, Nebo. I wasn't about to take any time off of a wasatch elk hunt for a piddly nebo deer hunt. Oh well, the extended will be something to do next month.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I think it is a total crock, but I have a hard time feeling bad for you with your nice bull! On the positive side of things; it appears that you did spot old oneeye in there, and it looks like his one eye has turned golden.


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

I don't get it!? All I see are antlers and some dudes crome dome? LOL!!!!


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

The idiocy of this plan is that it forces people to feel like they have to kill a buck no matter what because they are not going to get another chance. I shot a piddly 2 point this year because I did not have the time to get back down to the unit I drew, which happens to be a four hour drive each way. I hunt there to spend time with family that I do not see as often as I would like. The deer hunt is a reunion and a tradition for us. 

This year it became a shoot-a-buck-on-the-opener-or-bust kind of hunt for me. In years past I could hunt closer to home on the second weekend so I did not feel pressured to shoot a buck. I could let bucks walk and hope to catch them in future years. Now I have to shoot any buck that gives me a chance. It's either that or put no venison in the freezer.

Young bucks will get slaughtered by archers from here on out. Mark my words.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Come on Tex, Statewide Archery, well it just "isn't fair"! I've heard it at all the RAC's and pretty sure I heard it at the WB meeting...so you know, we gotta bend and even up the field. And to be totally honest, I haven't heard ANY OTHER REASON for losing it...ANYWHERE. But, and it's a big but :mrgreen: Did the rifle hunters get a any better deal? :evil:


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

BirdDogger said:


> This year it became a shoot-a-buck-on-the-opener-or-bust kind of hunt for me. In years past I could hunt closer to home on the second weekend so I did not feel pressured to shoot a buck. I could let bucks walk and hope to catch them in future years. Now I have to shoot any buck that gives me a chance. It's either that or put no venison in the freezer.
> 
> Young bucks will get slaughtered by archers from here on out. Mark my words.


The irony of it all is that just two years ago they used this very logic to extend the hunt to 8 or 9 days, whatever it was, yet now they go back to the old system of no logic at all.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

BirdDogger said:


> The idiocy of this plan is that it forces people to feel like they have to kill a buck no matter what because they are not going to get another chance. I shot a piddly 2 point this year because I did not have the time to get back down to the unit I drew, which happens to be a four hour drive each way. I hunt there to spend time with family that I do not see as often as I would like. The deer hunt is a reunion and a tradition for us.
> 
> This year it became a shoot-a-buck-on-the-opener-or-bust kind of hunt for me. In years past I could hunt closer to home on the second weekend so I did not feel pressured to shoot a buck. I could let bucks walk and hope to catch them in future years. Now I have to shoot any buck that gives me a chance. It's either that or put no venison in the freezer.
> 
> *Young bucks will get slaughtered by archers from here on out.* Mark my words.


The vast majority of bucks killed on the rifle hunt are "young bucks"... Are you saying the archers will kill 'em all before the rifle hunt? Or between the archery and the rifle, there won't be any young bucks left? :shock:


----------



## 10000ft. (Oct 29, 2007)

Do the five fingers have any significance or just the horses azz?

Awesome bucks!


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

I sure wish I could find where they went to..... I am pretty sure my boy shot at the 3pt... He was all alone and some distance North of your treestand. Besides your elks gut pile there was 3 more in that same area.... 

Ohh ya did ya leave a Browning glove? Left hand.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Tex... I know ya love bein' a stick flipper... And I commend you for that... HOWEVER...

Regress a little bit in your hunting, and take the viewpoint of a lead flinger. Especially one (like myself) that didn't draw a tag at all. Rifle hunters have been takin' it in the arse for YEARS now... Watching the stick flingers get 4 months to hunt, sucks. Especially when 2 years ago, I got THREE EFFING DAYS. So while I say this sucks that you didn't have a chance to let the air out of one of those bucks, I really have a hard time finding any sympathy for archers anymore. 

Archers get a permit for a specific region for that first month... and after that, you all have free reign to hunt several ridiculously large units for the next 3 months. 
Muzzleloader & Rifle... Those guys get 9 days to hunt their units... No animal in those 9 days, they go home with tag soup... No extended area for them.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK said:


> I sure wish I could find where they went to..... I am pretty sure my boy shot at the 3pt... He was all alone and some distance North of your treestand. Besides your elks gut pile there was 3 more in that same area....
> 
> Ohh ya did ya leave a Browning glove? Left hand.


I can tell you where you screwed up...You should have never walked down from the top. You walked right through their beds. Rookie mistake. Come up from the bottom next time.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

I don't understand how people look at it as an entitlement issue. We all have the choice to hunt archery, ML or Rifle. If you want to hunt till December on the front then buy a archery tag. You have that choice.

I can see the logic in the micro units for rifle and even ML hunters. It makes zero sense to apply it to the archery hunt. The success numbers just don't add up. I am interested in hearing how many people feel like it affected their hunt (negative or positive). For me it had no affect whatsoever. Do to the fact we hunt in an area that the tags didn't sell out and we never venture to other parts of the state to hunt. Nonetheless, I don't understand why we would try to manage archery hunters like rifle hunters.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Enititlement? 

Listen to all of the effing archery guys whining because the statewide is gone... Get the eff over it... Times change... Eventually for EVERYONE.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

That is the attitude I speak of. WE ARE ALL HUNTERS! YOU HAVE A CHOICE! :roll: 

The fact is the numbers don't back up the limited hunting. period _(O)_


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> TAK said:
> 
> 
> > I sure wish I could find where they went to..... I am pretty sure my boy shot at the 3pt... He was all alone and some distance North of your treestand. Besides your elks gut pile there was 3 more in that same area....
> ...


We first went in from the bottom, then the top. Have I ever told you I hate Deer!


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)




----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

He hates them cuz they're h a r d!


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Who said the rifle hunters are taking it in the shorts? Not in this state... Now I would coin myself a rifle hunter. But have hunted every season at one time or another. Rifle hunters are king here and get ANYTHING they want. If I have my way I will have a rifle in hand in November!!!!


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

rifle hunter got the state wide hunt taken away from the bow hunters. so to me that means they got what they want. it easy to kill a deer at 500 yards with a rifle. it not so easy to put a sneek up on a deer with a bow. sorry I do both hunts and I would pick archer over rifle any day. not because it longer because it funner.Plus I would rather duck hunt in Oct,Nov,Dec and Jan.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> He hates them cuz they're h a r d!


Your right! But have you ever thought of this as Karma? You only seen them bucks because you did not have a tag! I think Karma came to rest right smack dab in the middle of ya!


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK said:


> TEX-O-BOB said:
> 
> 
> > He hates them cuz they're h a r d!
> ...


Deer hate wheelers...just saying. You probably stink of exhaust, and donuts.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Yancey, I feel your pain and I am totally sympathetic to your plight. I used to hunt with a gun too. Back when you could get two buck tags. After they made us choose our hunt it was an easy choice for me. I love to bowhunt. But, like Shane said, we al have a "choice" to make when choosing a weapon. If you want a sure thing kill go with a gun. If you want more of a challenge with less chance for a kill but more liberal seasons pick up a bow. That's my point. Archery hunting has so much less effect on the detriment of the herds that we can give more tags and have more liberal seasons without negatively effecting the herds. Every single state in the nation recognizes this fact and gives archery hunters more opportunity. Some states are almost exclusively archery hunting. It's just a better way to manage the herds while at the same time affording lots of folks the opportunity to get out with their family and friends over a much longer period of time. it's the QUALITY that most of us are after, not the quick kill. I cant for the life of me figure out why anyone would rather hunt with a gun, but that's just my mentality.

If we managed this whole state with archery only just think of the PIGS we'd have walking around EVERYWHERE! Take the Wasatch Front as a case study. Nobody has busted a cap up there for 15 years. Yet despite the incredible pressure it gets from ALL the archery hunters that unit continues to produce some of the states biggest deer. Could you imagine the Henries as an archery only unit? :shock: Good grief!


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Archers loosing state wide has nothing to do with success rate. It was a consequence of option 2. The selling point of option 2 was to control hunters to a particular area. All hunters. Nothing is stopping the DWR from issuing more archery tagges for a given unit to make up for success.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Oh wow...every once in a while Tex says something genius. It's rare, but it does happen. Utah, archery only. I love it!


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK said:


> TEX-O-BOB said:
> 
> 
> > He hates them cuz they're h a r d!
> ...


Karma! What the EFF did I do to deserve that kind of Karma? :evil: But, you're right, if I'd had a tag, I'd not seen ONE of those bucks! That's called Murphy's Law!


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

here's my fix:
If a hunter draws a General archery tag AND a LE or OIL tag, he then has the opportunity to switch the unit on his General archery tag to coincide with his LE or OIL.

I dont like statewide archery because the area I hunt used to get pounded by archers. This year, me and one other guy had the whole 2500 acres to ourselves.

However!!!! last year I was able to pack my bow while scouting for my fathers moose hunt. And that was benneficial.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Archers loosing state wide has nothing to do with success rate. It was a consequence of option 2. The selling point of option 2 was to control hunters to a particular area. All hunters. Nothing is stopping the DWR from issuing more archery tagges for a given unit to make up for success.


That is exactly the problem. It has nothing to do with success rate, and it should!


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Archers loosing state wide has nothing to do with success rate. It was a consequence of option 2. The selling point of option 2 was to control hunters to a particular area. All hunters. Nothing is stopping the DWR from issuing more archery tagges for a given unit to make up for success.


OK, so who's brainchild or should I say brainfart was option 2 in the first place? SFW, the wildlife board, mule deer foundation, who's to blame when it doesn't work? I need to know so I can send them my encrypted message...


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Archers loosing state wide has nothing to do with success rate. It was a consequence of option 2. The selling point of option 2 was to control hunters to a particular area. All hunters. Nothing is stopping the DWR from issuing more archery tagges for a given unit to make up for success.
> ...


That would be mostly the SFW... Only they could f up a GOOD dream! It does not effect the SFW forces one bit. Most them have limited entry tags in hand or hunt priviate!


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

It is a combination of all of them...however, if you want to blame someone, you really need to blame the WB. They are the ones with the last say. My problem with the WB is I don't feel they listen to all equally. I want SFW to give input, as well as the DWR, biologists, RACs (public), biologists. We have a problem when the WB isn't listening to all. Especially the Bio's.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

TAK said:


> That would be mostly the SFW... Only they could f up a GOOD dream! It does not effect the SFW forces one bit. Most them have limited entry tags in hand or hunt priviate!


It seems like what I've seen it was a pretty much even split between those hunters that wanted it and those that did not. Ultimately I think it boils down to those that want to hunt and those that wanted a limited entry type hunt every where in the state, with a 100% success every 5-10 years for big animals. People are so worried about hot spoting and bunch of other BS, that it now affects how permits are given out. The only thing we should be worring about is the health of our herd, period. But now all we have is a big game farm called the State of Utah.

Tex you want to know what is next? It will be smaller units.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

TEX, I Agree 1000%. The loss of State Wide Archery is a disaster, Who ever the Genius was that made this move Screwed Up.The unit I have hunted for 49 years with a Bow. breaks down like this. 1800 tags 250 Archery Tag. Cuz we all know the impact on the Deer Herds is a ton more than the Muzzy Hunters,, Rifle Hunters,, Road Kills,, Someone somewhere needs to pull their heads out. I will NEVER!! support the taking away of State Wide Archery,Be A Stickbow Shooter Wheel Bow Shooter. we all have to come together and fight this move.. If it looks like CRAP!! Smells like CRAP!! Well,, people in charge need to lick their fingers cuz it taste like CRAP!!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Archers loosing state wide has nothing to do with success rate. It was a consequence of option 2. The selling point of option 2 was to control hunters to a particular area. All hunters. Nothing is stopping the DWR from issuing more archery tagges for a given unit to make up for success.
> ...


In all fairness, MDF didn't push for option 2, nor did the division. I guess the deductive reasoning is fairly simple.........


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Right...the Wildlife Board!


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Right...the Wildlife Board!


WB/SFW.. = One in the same$$$! Did I put dollar signes in there? Shame, Shane, Shane, SHAME!


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> It is a combination of all of them...however, if you want to blame someone, you really need to blame the WB. *They are the ones with the last say. *


You do remember the big bill board check presented to them right! Sure you DON-t!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Tex hit on something I think is really interesting though. He pointed out that he switched to archery because he likes it more - it is more fun and a better experience. I think that over about the last two decades, there has been a complete shift in the perspective of hunting in Utah. I think we have really shifted from hunting as a means of food acquisition, to hunting as purely a recreational endeavor. It is all about the experience. And if that really is reflective of what hunters want, then that is a completely different approach to management.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK = idiot. The WB makes the decisions. If they are in bed with a group and make all decision based on that one group then we have a WB problem. Still the WB!


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Tex hit on something I think is really interesting though. He pointed out that he switched to archery because he likes it more - it is more fun and a better experience. I think that over about the last two decades, there has been a complete shift in the perspective of hunting in Utah. I think we have really shifted from hunting as a means of food acquisition, to hunting as purely a recreational endeavor. It is all about the experience. And if that really is reflective of what hunters want, then that is a completely different approach to management.


When has hunting (in our lifetime) EVER been about food acquisition? It has always been about recreation, delicious steaks are just a bonus. Otherwise we would buy our beef at a fraction of the price.

Hunting has changed, I will acknowledge that. What has changed is it's popularity. We have more hunters than ever with less resources...except for elk. We have plenty of elk.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

The culture of hunting in Utah is facing a clear transition because of the way it is governed, and the laws set up for that purpose. The laws and structure are set up to view hunting as an acquisition, but the modern culture, or newer generations view it as purely recreational. But we still have about two generations of hunters - the guys who still remember back how it was in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

The only thing that has changed is the hunters expectation. As the deer numbers go down hunters expect that if they pay and have to wait, that the deserve to harvest a animal. The cycle will continue until we are assigned a bucket to sit on, our field of view is a 100 yards, and an animal just happens to walk by. 

Hunting just like back East or Texas.....


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

It's not all about harvest, I my self could care less, if it's the thrill of the kill.. or taking a shot at 150 yards.or hitting a 1/2 dozen then ya need to check yourself. Got news for ya as Archers we will be Screwed for a long time...At age 67 I feel like I have been retired..The fact my Gransons can't run up after work and hunt Timp or AF Canyon. After hitting the hills of Southern Utah. Tag Empty. And they want younger hunters to get out. The young hunters just don't get it..Someone needs to admit they screwed up and change. 10 outa 12 people I've talked to feel bout the same as I do..


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

9 out of 10 dentist would agree.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> TAK = idiot. The WB makes the decisions. If they are in bed with a group and make all decision based on that one group then we have a WB problem. Still the WB!


Did I not put $$$$ in the last post?


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

The Devil's advocate (or should I say the angel's advocate because Tex is advocating one position) would say that is why they are microing all Hunters (seeing as we are all hunters as Bwhntr pointed out)-- so you couldn't have killed those bucks. They would say if you would have had a Statewide tag then you would have over-harvested the unit. 

All I know is the very same issue expressed about Archery hunters is felt by many rifle/ml hunters. Our family hunts one unit a long drive away and we elected to hunt another closer to home-- simply because my son would not have been able to hunt more than 2-3 days in the unit with family. Last year he hunted with the family and then hunted closer to home after school-- 3 different units within one Region. 

I wanted to keep it as it was, but it was changed. Now we have small units and to be honest with myself, I don't see how we can restrict one hunter so thoroughly and let the other hunter have all the liberties. Afterall, we are all hunters....

It all comes down to the Social issue. Not biological-- Social.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Anybody agree with hunting state wide all three seasons and if you kill you have a waiting period of 3 years before you are elgible to apply again?
If people really think they are getting screwed by the weapon they choose to hunt with this should appease many. After all I think even those died in the wool rifle hunters could probaly figure out how to shoot a muzzle loader.


----------



## Raptorman (Aug 18, 2009)

I am not sure either way, but I do have a question. Do any of the other states have state-wide archery? I think Colorado is one of the best states for mule deer right now, is their archery hunt statewide or do they have to pick a region?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

A Montana Deer A tag is statewide, either sex, either species, and good for archery and/or rifle. And while you are at it, you can buy up to 6 more antlerless tags, in many cases, over the counter. There is no set aside muzzy season in Montana, but you can use it on the rifle hunt. Which is six weeks long, and goes through the rut.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> TAK = idiot. The WB makes the decisions. If they are in bed with a group and make all decision based on that one group then we have a WB problem. Still the WB!


And by the way your a Bully!


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Some good points being made. With regards to 'who started the option 2 and loss of statewide archery' doesn't really matter I guess. Tree is right though, MDF surely didn't, but like Shane said, it all comes down to the Wildlife Board and how they react to external pressures from whomever. There are certainly some flaws in the system and that includes some of the individuals who definitely don't listen to everyone and base their judgements/votes on what/who they do listen to, and is a flaw. But it is what it is at this point in time.

Personally, I don't see a problem with statewide archery, nor do I see a problem with rifle hunting by region, both have NO effect on the health/growth of mule deer, purely social issues as previously mentioned. What I do see as a problem is we all-as hunters, regardless of weapon of choice-are left to squabble over the pieces the WB sees fit to throw us, knowing full well none of it has anything to do with our mule deer herds, and that is a shame.

We all know the herds are just holding their own or declining across the entire west not just Utah. Even the beloved/idolized Colorado has cut a ton of tags over the past few years and their herds are going down hill overall as well. That comparison is apples and oranges at best. A healthy/growing mule deer herd will accommodate ALL hunters and weapons of choice, including the 'predator issue' through fawn saturation as it has done in the past. 

Most of us want to hunt every year, and most of us would like to hunt where we want or at least close to home. Most of us want to continue the 'family and friends deer hunt tradition' but we are relegated to do otherwise as deemed by those in charge of our hunts. Get back to basics and find out why our herds are incapable of allowing this tradition to continue, then we can talk about who gets what. Yeah I know, in the mean time we have to squabble amongst ourselves and kick each other in the nutz to see who gets the prime cuts and that really does no one any good. Lets change the "focus" and see where we end up. Easier said than done, I know... :shock:


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

bwhntr's beloved SFW controls the Wildlife Board but he says the Wildlife Board is the problem. Makes sense to me.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

blackdog said:


> bwhntr's beloved SFW controls the Wildlife Board but he says the Wildlife Board is the problem. Makes sense to me.


Ultimately, it is the WB that makes the decisions. If SFW has the power to influence those decisions, it is still the members of the board that controls those decisions. I don't begrudge SFW for doing what they do, with the exception of HOW they do it, and the contrived way of doing so. In the end, those on the board are the ones who say yea or nay. Don't like it? Find a way to get rid of them and those of their ilk. Don't like SFW? Find a way to make them listen to you, one way or another. There is much that can be done, but it won't come from divided hunters, of that I am certain.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK said:


> bwhntr said:
> 
> 
> > TAK = idiot. The WB makes the decisions. If they are in bed with a group and make all decision based on that one group then we have a WB problem. Still the WB!
> ...


Lol...come on.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

blackdog said:


> bwhntr's beloved SFW controls the Wildlife Board but he says the Wildlife Board is the problem. Makes sense to me.


Stillhunterman hit it right on (mostly). I want SFW, to offer input. They have great things to offer, as do MANY MANY other organizations. What I don't want is the WB to only listen to ONE side. Look at all the sides, then make decisions. I guess that is the anti-socialist in me, I like the way a democracy works.,,,when it works. The WB is ulitmately who is responsible.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> And by the way your a Bully!


Lol...come on.[/quote]

Nope your just always mean to me and that is it I am fighting back!!!

So just reading all this and the comments of "Choice you made" Well hunting is just that a choice, you make yours with a bow and others the other way. I know don't understand Y a bow hunter should get longer than any other weapon. I guess if you want that changed your going to have to call Donny up and say hey... I want it this way, let me give you some money to purrrswad that board! Ohh better yet, this weekend turn around and tell him as he is pumping you full of the SFW crap!

And if you keep it up I will tell everyone you voted for Obama! :O•-:


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> When has hunting (in our lifetime) EVER been about food acquisition? It has always been about recreation, delicious steaks are just a bonus. Otherwise we would buy our beef at a fraction of the price.
> 
> Hunting has changed, I will acknowledge that. What has changed is it's popularity. We have more hunters than ever with less resources...except for elk. We have plenty of elk.


bwhntr,

With the exception of you said about elk, almost nothing in your statement is accurate. I'm 37 and remember the time when many people relied on the deer hunt as part of their food aquisition. During my father's time while it was also recreational, many people relied very heavily on the deer hunt to ensure they had enough meat to feed their families. This is one reason poaching and party hunting was less frowned upon at the time. It was not uncommon for folks to harvest multiple deer to get meat for the winter.

We do not have more hunters today than we have had historically. From the late 50's to the early 90's hunters afield regularly exceed 200,000...significantly more than the 90,000 +/- that are out hunting today. While it true the deer population have declined dramatically from the hay days of the 50's - 70's, today's population are much higher than what existed during the early 1900's and are on par with pre 1940 populations. I'm not justifying current numbers just making a observation.

Hunting has long had a recreational aspect to it. Garyfish is accurate, however, in stating that the culture of hunting has changed dramatically even over the past 10-15 years. The emphasis on "scoring" is a somewhat new phenomena. Hunters have always been impressed with large antlers, but historically most folks were just as happy to take home a yearling buck. If you saw a group of bucks and they all bolted except a yearling, the yearling got shot. Today, many of us would ignore the yearling and spend our time chasing the largest mature bucks that were in the group.

There is an entire industry surrounding the hunting community including clothing lines, optics, food, etc. No such industry outside of weaponry existed 30 years ago.

Expectations have changed dramatically as well. People want to hunt without interferance from other hunters. We wait 10+ years to draw a Book Cliffs tag that will provide the opportunity to see a lot of deer and high buck numbers, but will probably not produce a buck that will meet the expectation associated with a 10 year wait. Others will wait 20+ years for a Henries tag with the anticipation of killing a 200+ buck. Few would have expected 20 years ago that you couldn't buy a deer tag over the counter the night before the hunt started that would allow you to hunt any part of the state.

The point is, our hunting culture has changed and continues to change in very dramatic ways.



raptorman said:


> I am not sure either way, but I do have a question. Do any of the other states have state-wide archery? I think Colorado is one of the best states for mule deer right now, is their archery hunt statewide or do they have to pick a region?.


I believe Montana is the only state that allows statewide archery for deer, but with the exception of a few limited entry units, it is statewide for all weapon choices.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Dahlmer...I am 39 and have hunted my entire life, and grew up with my dad, grandfather etc hunting. I find your statement inaccurate. We did hunt for the meat, that is true. However, it isn't as you make it out to be. That was the most expensive meat we ate all year. If we were truely there for meat to feed our families we would eat beef and beef alone. We enjoyed the getting together as a family, the RECREATION of hunting, and the bonus was bringing meat home to enjoy.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TAK said:


> bwhntr said:
> 
> 
> > And by the way your a Bully!
> ...


Nope your just always mean to me and that is it I am fighting back!!!

So just reading all this and the comments of "Choice you made" Well hunting is just that a choice, you make yours with a bow and others the other way. I know don't understand Y a bow hunter should get longer than any other weapon. I guess if you want that changed your going to have to call Donny up and say hey... I want it this way, let me give you some money to purrrswad that board! Ohh better yet, this weekend turn around and tell him as he is pumping you full of the SFW crap!

And if you keep it up I will tell everyone you voted for Obama! :O•-:[/quote]
Talk about mean. I would never say that about you.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

You have to pick your unit for archery here in Colorado. One nice thing that they have done is on quite a few units you can hunt multiple units with your tag, so you are not just stuck in one. This also goes during the rifle hunts. But there are units where you can only hunt in that single unit.


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

Really, a $10 deer tag is the most expensive meat you ate all year? I agree that the recreational aspect has always existed. Maybe it didn't apply in your families situation...it never has in mine either, but I know of many families who survived off the venison they shot during the fall deer hunt.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> Really, a $10 deer tag is the most expensive meat you ate all year? I agree that the recreational aspect has always existed. Maybe it didn't apply in your families situation...it never has in mine either, but I know of many families who survived off the venison they shot during the fall deer hunt.


I wish all it cost was a ten dollar deer tag... When was the last time you spent ten bucks on a deer hunt, EVER? Gas, food, shells, gear, time off work, etc,etc...

I ran the numbers on the money I spent hunting elk this year and that 300 pounds of meat I got off my LE bull ran me about $23 a pound! Cheap meat? :shock: Riiiiight.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

I saw an add on ksl today where a guy was offering 25$ for your deer tag.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> I wish all it cost was a ten dollar deer tag... When was the last time you spent ten bucks on a deer hunt, EVER? Gas, food, shells, gear, time off work, etc,etc...


Last two or three years in a row for me for sure. I get 3 weeks paid vacation on top of 2 weeks sick leave plus upto 4 weeks "comp time". I dont even come close to using up all my time off each year. I hunt muzzleloader and am still on a 8 year old bottle of pyrodex and a 10 year old 100count box of bullets. I'm averaging 1 shot per year / kill lately. Hunt close to home, usually only burn a gallon or two of fuel in my ATV and motorcycle. Re-use vaccum pack bags from the year before.

So yea, maybe $10 in costs on top of the tag cost for me each year. Cheap, great tasting no hormone or drugged 100% all natural meat.

-DallanC


----------



## HighmtnFish (Jun 3, 2010)

Dahlmer said:


> Really, a $10 deer tag is the most expensive meat you ate all year? I agree that the recreational aspect has always existed. Maybe it didn't apply in your families situation...it never has in mine either, but I know of many families who survived off the venison they shot during the fall deer hunt.


I also know of quite a few families who survived off of venison they harvested in December and January. Hunting is becoming increasingly recreational, and if you are really hungry, you will harvest meat even if it is not legal. By the way, I'm not a bow hunter, I can't even pull back a bow because of an injured arm. However, I am in favor of a statewide archery hunt. At least increase the archery tag numbers. Archery hunters in general have a minimal impact on ther herds and the environment.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I think that one thing that hasn't been covered yet about archery hunting is that it used to be the fall back on tag. Hunters would put in for a rifle, or a muzzle loader tag and then a archery tag for either their second or third choice and would draw it every year. Now it is to the point that if you want to go archery hunting you need to put it down as your first choice. 

I also don't see why it isn't state wide but I can also see the other side where it needs to be unit specific. No matter which way they do it you are going to have hunters gripe about it.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> Really, a $10 deer tag is the most expensive meat you ate all year? I agree that the recreational aspect has always existed. Maybe it didn't apply in your families situation...it never has in mine either, but I know of many families who survived off the venison they shot during the fall deer hunt.


If there is familys that are that dependant on deer meat I really wonder if they are even getting the tags. I mean if I had to feed my family or starve, I am sure I would just do it tag or not.

My family depends on Elk meat! One reason is ground Elk, with zero fat added is the best to eat bottom line! Or a roast browned with greek seasoning and a garlic clove dug in..... This fat kid can eat!


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

DallanC said:


> TEX-O-BOB said:
> 
> 
> > I wish all it cost was a ten dollar deer tag... When was the last time you spent ten bucks on a deer hunt, EVER? Gas, food, shells, gear, time off work, etc,etc...
> ...


Ok, sure, you can hunt on a shoestring budget and get away with spending minimal money, but those folks are few and far between. You buy gas each time you go out, equipment and hunting supplies are never a one time purchase, and for "most" guys, we end up spending WAY more than what a half beef would cost cut and wrapped. I do see both sides of the debate, but for most of us, game meat is the most expensive meat we eat. But hey, it's worth it! :EAT:

Really, you re-use your vacuum bags? Icky! _/O


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> Really, a $10 deer tag is the most expensive meat you ate all year? I agree that the recreational aspect has always existed. Maybe it didn't apply in your families situation...it never has in mine either, but I know of many families who survived off the venison they shot during the fall deer hunt.


Wow, you hunt cheap! I can't kill a chukar for $10. I know my LE elk cost me right around $20/lbs. I am sure my deer hunts are closer to $25/lbs.

I guess we have nothing to talk about then.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Ok, sure, you can hunt on a shoestring budget and get away with spending minimal money, but those folks are few and far between.


It would be interesting to see a survey on this. I was thinking about it further last night and there are a alot of people in Utah who get the free Mitigation tags each year... so that even eliminates the tag cost from the equasion. Theoretically, someone could kill a deer or elk for the cost of a single bullet / arrow every year.

I dont think its a huge amount of people, but I do think its well more than you are thinking who do it on the cheap. I'd love to know how many mitigation tags are given out every year.



> Really, you re-use your vacuum bags? Icky! _/O


Yup, you eat off plates you washed in the dishwasher right? No different with bags. If you cut off the top 1" where the seal is, they are re-usable many times before they get to short to seal. They are really easy to clean out for re-use.

-DallanC


----------



## Donttreadonme (Sep 11, 2007)

dkhntrdstn said:


> it easy to kill a deer at 500 yards with a rifle.


Ha ha

I'll buy your gas and lunch if you can come up and hit my 500 yd target 2 out of 5 shots. Most guys can't hit a 10" plate at 300, let alone 500.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Nah even a novice can knock'em over at double that. How about this girl dropping an elk at 688 yards... with a .243? John has to help her get the safety off... help her get setup, tell her how to aim, and she dumps it with a single shot.

With quality equiptment, its definitely doable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Y0w1c-gf18

-DallanC


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> Yup, you eat off plates you washed in the dishwasher right? No different with bags. If you cut off the top 1" where the seal is, they are re-usable many times before they get to short to seal. They are really easy to clean out for re-use.


I hear ya Dallan, I've tried it time and time again. My problem with those stupid bags is getting them to seal again. Every time I've tried re-using them I end up chitcanning have of them because they wont hold a seal. So, I just gave up trying and only use new ones every time now. I do admire your frugalness.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> I hear ya Dallan, I've tried it time and time again. My problem with those stupid bags is getting them to seal again. Every time I've tried re-using them I end up chitcanning have of them because they wont hold a seal. So, I just gave up trying and only use new ones every time now. I do admire your frugalness.


What brand vaccum packer and bags do you use? Ours is an 15 year old foodsaver we've used a ton... its even been to alaska 3 or 4 times in luggage to vac pack fresh halibut / salmon in the hotel room :O•-: Lately we' buy some of those big rolls of bag material and just cut off longer lengths for bags. Each year when we get to doing deer I'd guess maybe 3-4 bags out of 2 dozen wont seal and get tossed. Re-using them is more of a wife thing than my preference... and happy wife= happy life so I just roll with it 8)

Also on the other tangent going on in this thread... with all the gains technology for all weapon types, I do admire the traditional bow hunters!

That pict of the nontypical that close is really cool. I once sat in a archery blind waiting for a spike elk when a big 7x7 came in and rolled around in the wallow in front of me for quite a while as I watched him from 40 yards knowing I couldnt shoot. Even though I wish I had a tag, it was really fun to be that close and watch him. Learned alot about elk behavior during that time.

-DallanC


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Wow, you hunt cheap! I can't kill a chukar for $10. I know my LE elk cost me right around $20/lbs. I am sure my deer hunts are closer to $25/lbs.
> 
> I guess we have nothing to talk about then.


Again, you said in our lifetime. Can you do it for $10 today? No, but as DallanC pointed out you can still do it pretty cheaply. 30 years ago guys didn't spend $5,000 on optics, $2,000 on boots and clothing systems, $1,000+ on rifle or bow setups, $6,000+ on 4 wheelers, and the list goes on. Guys hunted with what they had. The only extra money spent for an article of clothing was an orange vest or sweatshirt and a box of shells for an old 30/30 or army carbine. They probably didn't often travel more than an hour from home and returned at the end of the day. Hunting happened on weekends and after work on week days. So, the cost of their meat didn't extend too far beyond the price of a tag, shells and fuel.

I know guys that still do it pretty cheaply today. It certainly isn't cheap, but it doesn't have to cost $20/lbs either. It's not too difficult to have a successful deer hunt for less than $200. If you can get 80-120lbs of meat your looking at $2-$3/lbs.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> If you can get 80-120lbs of meat


That would be a *HUGE* deer!

I figure the amount of usable meat on a deer is about 1/3 the total body weight of the animal. So take a good size buck that weighs 200 pounds on the hoof. Divide that by three and you'd get 66 pound of meat. And that's IF you used EVERY SCRAP. Most the deer I've cut and wrapped over the years (hundreds) have yielded about 35-60 pounds of meat after all the de-boning and trimming is done.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

If you get 50lbs of usable meat on your deer you are doing great. Hey look, I don't care to argue about how cheap you hunt. I didn't even add in my horses, trailers, bino, gear, etc...I was just looking at time off, fuel, yearly expendables. I never even figure in the tag...that is the CHEAP part. This is really a silly argument and it will make zero difference to you or me when it is all said and done. I am pretty sure I blow through $100-$200 everytime I chase after chukar, and those are just cheap day hunts.

Again, for me (and most) hunting is recreation, the meat is a bonus.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

Chukar is the most expensive meat I eat. I can shoot deer, turkeys, pheasants, Huns, or sharpies within three miles or so from my house if I really want to. Those dang chukars cause me to drive miles and miles of Box Elder County. It's all about the revenge with them.


----------



## RuttCrazed (Sep 7, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> If you get 50lbs of usable meat on your deer you are doing great.


I thought you shot big deer? Are you only eating loins and backstraps? I am a bad butcher and get more than 50 lbs from average 8 pts (4x4 for you western folks).

Rut


----------

