# Wasatch Bull



## Sbaker49 (Oct 9, 2017)

So I already know I'm gonna get **** from people for this. But been having a hard time seeing many elk at all hunting around strawberry and currant creek. Is there anyone willing to offer up some spot to check. Not looking for a giant just a good one. 

I could offer someone a wilderness pack trip for blacktails back home in return. 

Thanks


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

How big of a spike are you looking for? 

Not too many giant spikes out there.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Somebody didn't read the guidebook.-O,-
I wonder how often this happens in those units?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I had the family up at Strawberry this weekend. We weren't hunting....just spent the night at Daniel's Summit Lodge. We drove around to Renegade Saturday evening. There were hunters everywhere. But we did see some elk -- up on the ridge between Horse Creek and Strawberry Bay (up the ridge from Haw's Point).

Not sure why hunters weren't seeing them....


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

Critter said:


> How big of a spike are you looking for?
> 
> Not too many giant spikes out there.


I think the wasatch has the limited entry any bull hunt that runs during the general spike hunt. Maybe that tag was drawn?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## Sbaker49 (Oct 9, 2017)

No I read the guide book... it's a new tag this year that runs same time as the spike hunt.


----------



## Xbow123 (Mar 7, 2017)

I had the same tag. I took this bull this weekend. We didn?t see a ton of elk. This was the only bull I seen. Some buddies seen 3 others and a few spikes. I would check out trout creek area. Send me a message and I can try to help.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

Xbow123 said:


> I had the same tag. I took this bull this weekend. We didn?t see a ton of elk. This was the only bull I seen. Some buddies seen 3 others and a few spikes. I would check out trout creek area. Send me a message and I can try to help.


Congrats!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I guess I didn't read the guidebook.-O,- Good luck with your hunt.


----------



## 3rd times a charm (Aug 27, 2017)

I am out of the country until Friday or saturday. If you still haven't had any luck let me know. I could get you on a good bull.


----------



## jhatch4 (May 14, 2016)

PM sent.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

It's getting to the point that you are going to have to say what tag you have when you post with all these new hunts running at the same time as other general hunts are running. 

Find a deep dark canyon that has water in the bottom of it and glass it for a whole day. If it has aspens in it all the better. 

I know of a couple of areas but without looking at the map or knowing the boundaries for the tag you drew I would probably put you into another unit.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Drastic changes still needed on this unit.

I will be surprised if there are not major LE tag cuts over the next few years.

The Wasatch can't support the number of elk permits it has on it now.


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Drastic changes still needed on this unit.
> 
> I will be surprised if there are not major LE tag cuts over the next few years.
> 
> The Wasatch can't support the number of elk permits it has on it now.


I agree, I took a new hunter out on the Wasatch for the spike rifle hunt. Hadn't been there in a few years other than a moose hunt and was shocked at the lack of elk and elk sign (yes we got miles off the roads). They used to be thick in there. I talked to a DNR officer at a check point Sunday evening and he said they had only seen five spikes harvested out of the currant creek area. I shouldn't be surprised given the massacre that used to happen up there but I was indeed surprised. Seems to me not only do they need to lower the LE tags, but they need to continue to hold off on the cow tags and maybe do something about limiting spike harvest? Not sure how you would regulate the spike harvest given the current OTC rifle system other than just closing it down on the wasatch, but something seems like it needs to be done


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

KRH said:


> I agree, I took a new hunter out on the Wasatch for the spike rifle hunt. Hadn't been there in a few years other than a moose hunt and was shocked at the lack of elk and elk sign (yes we got miles off the roads). They used to be thick in there. I talked to a DNR officer at a check point Sunday evening and he said they had only seen five spikes harvested out of the currant creek area. I shouldn't be surprised given the massacre that used to happen up there but I was indeed surprised. Seems to me not only do they need to lower the LE tags, but they need to continue to hold off on the cow tags and maybe do something about limiting spike harvest? Not sure how you would regulate the spike harvest given the current OTC rifle system other than just closing it down on the wasatch, but something seems like it needs to be done


Not saying I am for or against it, just telling you a "how".

They started spike regulations on the Monroe by removing the rifle hunt. So that would be my guess on where something like that would begin.

After my time this year on the Henry's, and looking at the history of such a unit... Let's remember LE units don't come about by strong DWR management. They already were good/great areas, and the DWR makes guesses on how to manage them. I think they make strides to show they are "managing" anything, but some of these actually make things worse.

You will see the same on this years general unit. All that "work" they did to increase our deer count disappeared with one real Utah winter.

I am starting to sound like you crazy old timers on here.....


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

RandomElk16 said:


> Not saying I am for or against it, just telling you a "how".
> 
> They started spike regulations on the Monroe by removing the rifle hunt. So that would be my guess on where something like that would begin.
> 
> ...


This is not a rhetorical question: how did/has that worked on the Monroe? Seems like it could be an idea.

I'm not an expert by any means so I don't feel qualified on the "how", I'm just saying it seems like something needs to be done, although point taken on DWR not being the creator of great hunting grounds.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

KRH said:


> This is not a rhetorical question: how did/has that worked on the Monroe? Seems like it could be an idea.
> 
> I'm not an expert by any means so I don't feel qualified on the "how", I'm just saying it seems like something needs to be done, although point taken on DWR not being the creator of great hunting grounds.


It's fairly new and I am sure most data will be anecdotal.

Even this change wasn't a wildlife board proposal. It was pissed off residents that made this happen.

Changes like these take a long time. When they broke the state into 30 units for deer everyone year one and two spoke about how many deer they were seeing, blah blah.... It takes a long time for a change like this to have an effect. Years.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

RandomElk16 said:


> After my time this year on the Henry's, and looking at the history of such a unit... Let's remember LE units don't come about by strong DWR management. They already were good/great areas, and the DWR makes guesses on how to manage them. I think they make strides to show they are "managing" anything, but some of these actually make things worse.
> 
> You will see the same on this years general unit. All that "work" they did to increase our deer count disappeared with one real Utah winter.
> 
> I am starting to sound like you crazy old timers on here.....


You also have to remember that the DOW came close to ruining the Henry Mountains for deer when they opened it up to any buck on a general season tag. It was doing alright when it was 4 pt or better then they dropped it to 3 pt or better and then opened it up and the slaughter was on until they closed it completely before making it a LE hunt.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

I can't even begin to explain how pissed and disapointed most of the Wasatch elk hunters I came across have been. .

Here is an advisory FOR THOSE OF YOU GOING INTO THE 2018 DRAW WITH BUILT UP POINTS THE WASATCH IS NOT WHAT YOU REMEMBER EVEN 3 YEARS AGO ESPECIALLY NOT 5-10.

I really hope the dwr learns from their mistakes


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Critter said:


> You also have to remember that the DOW came close to ruining the Henry Mountains for deer when they opened it up to any buck on a general season tag. It was doing alright when it was 4 pt or better then they dropped it to 3 pt or better and then opened it up and the slaughter was on until they closed it completely before making it a LE hunt.


Except that it wasn't buck hunting that ruined the unit...it was natural things like drought and poor summer habitat. All buck hunting did was decrease the number and size of the bucks available. The herd crashed because of other causes. Many of which the DWR has worked tirelessly at fixing (including a lot of predator reduction work) But....whatever.

The thing about the spike hunting regulation on Monroe is that it was pretty much spearheaded by a powerful local--Jake Albrecht, who also happens to be on the Wildlife Board. It is really much less about the number of bulls on Monroe or the number of elk. Comparing the Monroe to the Wasatch is like apples and oranges--two totally different beasts. Much of the problem on the Wasatch--at least as I understand it--is that many or most of the elk quickly migrate to private lands to seek refuge during hunts and are unavailable to hunters. Then, when they are counted from the air by the DWR and found to be way above population objectives, the DWR offers more tags and the few elk remaining on public land are quickly slaughtered. The trick on the Wasatch is reducing the overall number of elk--especially those that migrate to private land. The elk are there...just not where the public can get at them.

On the Monroe, perception is that the quality of bulls is down and powerful locals--like Jake Albrecht--have pushed to make Monroe the "PREMIER" elk hunting unit in the state and even across the country. Spike hunting has been made a scapegoat for the quality of bulls over recent years.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Cttter,
Dont forget the Bookcliffs and Oak City,
Same thing as the Henry's deer.

And I like the idea of no rifle spike hunting on the Wasatch for a few years. 
That would help.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> And I like the idea of no rifle spike hunting on the Wasatch for a few years.
> That would help.


And you would need to reduce the number of spike tags available for sale to keep from just shifting all that pressure to different units.

No easy answers and will certainly not lead to more happy hunters.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

middlefork said:


> And you would need to reduce the number of spike tags available for sale to keep from just shifting all that pressure to different units.
> 
> No easy answers and will certainly not lead to more happy hunters.


The other problem is that if the herd is still over objective (what were the last counts like?), eliminating a hunt will not be popular among a lot of hunters and especially a lot of private landowners. The trick on the Wasatch is reducing the herd size when the elk leave public land.

The other trick is that the unit objective calls for an average age of harvested bulls to be at 5.5...the last count I saw shows the average age of harvested bulls at 6.6 (2015). The unit objective calls for more bull tags...changing the plan midstream will not be easy.

I think there is a huge disconnect with what many hunters expect and what the plan calls for....many hunters that frequent the unit expect a crack at a "big" bull. But, the plan calls for smaller bulls (5.5 as an average age) than some of the "premier" units that have higher age objectives for harvested bulls. This, to me, is the classic case of wanting the best of both worlds--tags in hand and monster bulls. One has to give--either age objectives of harvested bulls needs to be raised to ensure more "big" bulls or people have to recognize that there will be fewer bulls and certainly fewer "big" bulls available during hunts.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Wrong on herd objectives WtoU

They were changed, incressed.
The Wasatch elk herd is now under objective numbers on all 3 sub units.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Wrong on herd objectives WtoU
> 
> They were changed, incressed.
> The Wasatch elk herd is now under objective numbets on all 3 sub units.


That's why I asked about the last counts? What were they? Herd objectives increased when? My numbers were from 2016. Herd objectives from 2016 remain unchanged as far as I know...herd counts or population estimates are what I was missing. The last aerial counts I saw were from way back in 2013. Those certainly have changed...what were the most recent?

Regardless, the way to increase the herd isn't by reducing spike harvest or bull harvest...it is to decrease cow harvest which, in turn, will increase herd productivity and recruitment and ultimately bull numbers. Bull tags should be increased, though, as long as harvested bulls are above the objective of 5.5.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

The age objective and how the plan is implemented is really the problematic part of the equation here, as W2U has pointed out. Age class of harvested bulls is far above the objective for a few years now, which continues to cause tags numbers to go up. 

I'd be fine with them increasing the age objective to keep the tag numbers in check, even if age objective is a crappy way to manage wildlife, IMO. 

I am hopeful for the Wasatch. While it's clear things have changed drastically on the unit the last 4-5 years, I do not believe all is lost. It has the potential to be a great unit, just like it has been for a long time. With the reduction in the cow tags that has already happened, I'm hopeful things will bounce back in the future. The DWR is listening, some changes have already happened. It's not an easy black and white conclusion to fix the issues present. But again, I'm hopeful.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Except that it wasn't buck hunting that ruined the unit...it was natural things like drought and poor summer habitat. All buck hunting did was decrease the number and size of the bucks available. The herd crashed because of other causes. Many of which the DWR has worked tirelessly at fixing (including a lot of predator reduction work) But....whatever.


When did the environment "change" and stop supporting deer (it supports them just fine now) as it once did?

Curious your thoughts on now having an unhinged management hunt with 2-3 year old deer being killed.

Another thing that is disturbing as I have spent more time on premium/LE hunts... "injury" doesn't mean done hunting. No one wants to leave these with tag soup so not recovering an animal doesn't seem to stop hunters. This is anecdotal of course, but I have heard more than enough instances. First day buck on the hunt this year had a broadhead in him, which should have been fatal but the deer are more like elk and can take a freaking punch. Yes the hunter was correct in assuming he was alive, but I am not sure what this was based on. He shot a deer, and kept hunting. I see that happens a lot on these units.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> First day buck on the hunt this year had a broadhead in him, which should have been fatal but the deer are more like elk and can take a freaking punch. Yes the hunter was correct in assuming he was alive, but I am not sure what this was based on. He shot a deer, and kept hunting. I see that happens a lot on these units.


How do you know the hunter that put the broad head in that buck kept hunting? Just curious how you were able to come to that conclusion.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

I hunted the Wasatch archery this year...you guys saw the bull my wife took. I was shocked at the number of elk we saw. Now granted we only hunted a 25 square mile area but there were so many bulls bugling we were running in circles all day long chasing them. Heard the same thing from other hunters about the North side of highway 40 such as Trout Creek, etc.

I think many of you are completely misinterpreting what you are seeing. You think the lack of elk there in the later hunts means there aren't many elk on that unit. WRONG! Those elk have learned over time where to go when pressured. I saw them from June to September. There was a pile of elk on the Wasatch. They are bailing to private ground or other areas where hunters aren't looking for them.

One morning I woke up and literally saw 150-200 elk feeding in a canyon across from camp. Ran into another gentlemen that said he is friends with the Phillips boys and they were showing him pics of numerous 370+ bulls from this past summer and he said he was shocked because he thought there was no elk left on the Wasatch. 

The Wasatch is an "opportunity" unit by design. It was never meant to crank out 380" bulls on a large scale. The hunter harvest on bulls is there and preforming ABOVE objective. The cow hunts have all but been completely removed.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Vanilla said:


> How do you know the hunter that put the broad head in that buck kept hunting? Just curious how you were able to come to that conclusion.


Because he was guided, and tagged out on another deer.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> When did the environment "change" and stop supporting deer (it supports them just fine now) as it once did?
> 
> Curious your thoughts on now having an unhinged management hunt with 2-3 year old deer being killed.
> 
> Another thing that is disturbing as I have spent more time on premium/LE hunts... "injury" doesn't mean done hunting. No one wants to leave these with tag soup so not recovering an animal doesn't seem to stop hunters. This is anecdotal of course, but I have heard more than enough instances. First day buck on the hunt this year had a broadhead in him, which should have been fatal but the deer are more like elk and can take a freaking punch. Yes the hunter was correct in assuming he was alive, but I am not sure what this was based on. He shot a deer, and kept hunting. I see that happens a lot on these units.


The habitat on the Henry's (as well as virtually all habitats across the state) are always changing. Documented deer crashes on the Henry's have been due to a number of factors but include the habitat changes revolving around pinyon juniper encroachment, introduction of nonnative plant species and conifer encroachment. Range trend studies on the Henry's show that "While in generally good condition, major concerns include conifer encroachment into aspen stands, an abundance of introduced aggressive perennial grasses, and noxious weeds. All of which have an impact on the quality and quantity of forb species important to mule deer." Also, "It is recommended that work to reduce pinyon-juniper encroachment should continue in these communities. Moreover, care should be taken in selecting treatment methods that will not increase annual grass loads."

With that being said, the habitat has almost always--if not always--been able to support mule deer. But, wide swings in the population have been seen. NONE of them can be attributed to over hunting.

As far as management hunts go, I like them. The Henry's has a lot of bucks on the unit--the management objective is what? 55 bucks for every 100 does? The last I checked the number was around 65 bucks/100 does. To me, that is a scary place to be...when mule deer are at or near carrying capacity and are then hit with critical weather patterns that stress the deer, the deer that are generally lost are does and fawns. The Henry's buck/doe ratios put it in a position where a few really hot dry summers could really put the deer population in bad shape. The buck/doe ratio needs to be reduced. So, how do you do it? More buck tags need to be given...management tags can help this.

So, I don't really care if the deer being killed on the Henry's are 1,2,3, or 10 year old bucks. I think bucks need to be killed and more tags should be issued.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

bullsnot said:


> The Wasatch is an "opportunity" unit by design. It was never meant to crank out 380" bulls on a large scale. The hunter harvest on bulls is there and preforming ABOVE objective. The cow hunts have all but been completely removed.


Makes sense. I looked at harvest data, never realized that the Wasatch issued so many more tags than other units! Opportunity to get a tag, and hunt an area with elk.

I guess as long as the age objectives are met. Still am unsure about the amount of cow tags they have.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Another thing that is disturbing as I have spent more time on premium/LE hunts... "injury" doesn't mean done hunting. No one wants to leave these with tag soup so not recovering an animal doesn't seem to stop hunters. This is anecdotal of course, but I have heard more than enough instances. First day buck on the hunt this year had a broadhead in him, which should have been fatal but the deer are more like elk and can take a freaking punch. Yes the hunter was correct in assuming he was alive, but I am not sure what this was based on. He shot a deer, and kept hunting. I see that happens a lot on these units.


This is an ethical question. Your ethic seems to say that if you wound an animal you should stop hunting. Others have a different set of ethics. Nothing in the law disallows such an action. Personally, I don't have a problem to continue hunting when an animal is wounded and not recovered. Others do. In terms of LE or premium type hunts we are talking about wounding excess animals. Animals that are not needed to breed available does. Especially in LE and premium hunts, I would expect that most hunters are doing what they can to assure themselves of a good clean kill. When things don't go as planned, I have little qualms against the guy who chooses to continue his hunt.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

https://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/annual_reports/15_bg_report.pdf

From the 2015 annual big game report. Speaking specifically on the Wasatch West. This is pretty representative of the average performance of the Wasatch:

Archery success rate: 30.9% State average: 32.1%
Early Rifle success rate: 76.8% State Average: 76.4%
Late Rifle success rate: 82.4% State Average: 76.4%
Muzzleloader success rate: 66.7% State Average: 71.4%
Multi-Season success rate: 91.3% State Average: 84.3%

Population Objective in 2015: 2600 
Population counts from 2011-2015: 3400-3600 every year
(I'll look up and update the objective and population estimates from 2016)

Average age objective: 5.5 - 6.0
Age Objective performance from 2006 - 2015: Low 6.3, High 7.4, 3 year average is 6.8

There is literally no indication in these numbers, presented to the RAC's and WB every year, that there are any problems on the Wasatch with hunters harvesting bulls. The 2016 numbers were pretty much in line with these numbers. Yes the population objectives were raised but that was only a surrender to the fact that we couldn't lower the populations.

Yes, some folks on some of the later hunts complain that the elk aren't there but hunters are still harvesting bulls above the age objectives and at statewide success rates. There is no indication that there is a real problem on the Wasatch.

What more do you want?


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

RandomElk16 said:


> Still am unsure about the amount of cow tags they have.


Very few cow tags the last 2 years. They've all but been eliminated on public land. We are trying to pressure them on private ground so they will move back to public ground a bit more.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> So, I don't really care if the deer being killed on the Henry's are 1,2,3, or 10 year old bucks. I think bucks need to be killed and more tags should be issued.


So does killing young deer that are future trophy's make sense, or does issuing more any buck tags and managing it as a high quality 4 point unit rather than a handful of monsters-that-make-guides-money unit make sense? It is weird to be on a unit and see more bucks than you do doe... They don't define the management tags as an opportunity to keep B : D steady.. they look at it as culling the heard. So while what you are saying makes sense, that isn't what they are managing to.

From what you are saying I still ask, are they managing for wildlife or for money?

Same issue arises on antelope. One tag selling for 300K at the cost of overpopulation and an insane amount of inbred deer. It's weird to see a deer hit a tree branch and have their antler break because it's so brittle.

I think these units see the opposite of the Wasatch elk. Tons of tags issued, lots of opportunity. Here it seems the "Management tags" (spike, cow) actually need to be reduced while keeping the regular tags the same. This is more of a question then a suggestion. I am not an expert on any of these. Just trying to figure out inconsistent management and what the motive behind it all is. Is wildlife at the top of the priority list?


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

RandomElk16 said:


> Just trying to figure out inconsistent management and what the motive behind it all is. Is wildlife at the top of the priority list?


You are certainly asking the right questions!

Some units are managed for the absolute top quality. Henry Mt deer for example. There are by far more bucks that will die of old age on that mountain than will ever be killed by hunters. But very few hunters will ever get the opportunity to ever hunt it. I'll let you decide what for yourself what the motivation is for those types of units.

Then there are units managed for more opportunity. The goal is the get as many people as possible out hunting while still maintaining the resource. General hunts and OTC elk hunts are a perfect example of this. The Wasatch elk hunts lie somewhere in the middle. Providing lots of opportunity but with some modest trophy quality opportunities as well. Different species, different objectives, equals completely different strategies. Also different motivations from those that influence the those strategies.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Bullsnot,
There is a muzzy cow hunt on the Wasatch next month (Nov ).
400 antlerless permits on public ground.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> So does killing young deer that are future trophy's make sense, or does issuing more any buck tags and managing it as a high quality 4 point unit rather than a handful of monsters-that-make-guides-money unit make sense? It is weird to be on a unit and see more bucks than you do doe... They don't define the management tags as an opportunity to keep B : D steady.. they look at it as culling the heard. So while what you are saying makes sense, that isn't what they are managing to.
> 
> From what you are saying I still ask, are they managing for wildlife or for money?
> 
> ...


1)The management tags are given in order "Continue to provide a management buck hunt to allow additional hunting opportunity with a minimum of 10 permits. If the 3-year average buck-doe ratio exceeds 55 bucks per 100 does, management buck permits will be increased to bring the population towards objective." IN other words, management tags are a way to offer more hunting opportunity while keeping the average of harvested bucks within objective. It seems like you are misunderstanding their purpose.

2) I think you should read the management plans for deer, elk, and antelope from the DWR's website. I think they would shed a lot of light on the "whys" and "why nots."


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Also,
Using 3 year averages, and herd objective estamates rather than fly counts put some units on a Rollercoaster ride.

The Wasatch is a good example were highs and lows accor.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Bullsnot,
> There is a muzzy cow hunt on the Wasatch next month (Nov ).
> 400 antlerless permits on public ground.


Right, that's why I said all but eliminated. With a 17% success rate those muzzy hunters will kill about 68 cows. There are still a few tags issued across all weapon types but compared to the 4000+ tags that were issued a few years ago this a drop in the bucket.

In fact in 2015 there were 6,817 antlerless elk hunters across all the Wasatch sub-units. This can be verified in the 2015 annual report.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

wyoming2utah said:


> Except that it wasn't buck hunting that ruined the unit...it was natural things like drought and poor summer habitat. All buck hunting did was decrease the number and size of the bucks available. The herd crashed because of other causes. Many of which the DWR has worked tirelessly at fixing (including a lot of predator reduction work) But....whatever.
> 
> The thing about the spike hunting regulation on Monroe is that it was pretty much spearheaded by a powerful local--Jake Albrecht, who also happens to be on the Wildlife Board. It is really much less about the number of bulls on Monroe or the number of elk. Comparing the Monroe to the Wasatch is like apples and oranges--two totally different beasts. Much of the problem on the Wasatch--at least as I understand it--is that many or most of the elk quickly migrate to private lands to seek refuge during hunts and are unavailable to hunters. Then, when they are counted from the air by the DWR and found to be way above population objectives, the DWR offers more tags and the few elk remaining on public land are quickly slaughtered. The trick on the Wasatch is reducing the overall number of elk--especially those that migrate to private land. The elk are there...just not where the public can get at them.
> 
> On the Monroe, perception is that the quality of bulls is down and powerful locals--like Jake Albrecht--have pushed to make Monroe the "PREMIER" elk hunting unit in the state and even across the country. Spike hunting has been made a scapegoat for the quality of bulls over recent years.


I wasn't hunting the Henry Mountains when they opened it up to any buck but I was hunting the Book Cliffs. Before they opened it up there were quite a few hunters hunting the Books. Then when they opened it up to any buck it looked like the whole population of the Wasatch Front had moved down there to hunt. Every where you went there were ATV's with people on them hunting and a lot of them were carrying bucks back to camp in the afternoon. I would venture to guess that the first year that they opened it up that the success rate was better than 75% with most of the bucks being small 2 and 3 pts. The following year we saw a lot fewer bucks but the people were still there. Caravans of ATV's 10+ to a group all shooting the first buck that they saw. The third year after they opened it up you were lucky to even see a 3pt down in the deep canyons.

I'm not saying that natural events didn't cause some of it but I watched what hunter numbers did to that unit in a very short time.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

They should just make the Wasatch Unit an Any Bull general season unit now. They've destroyed the "quality" of Bulls and heard size so bad now that it will recover IMO.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

taxidermist said:


> They should just make the Wasatch Unit an Any Bull general season unit now. They've destroyed the "quality" of Bulls and heard size so bad now that it will recover IMO.


I just don't understand this perspective when we are still killing bulls over age objectives at average statewide success rates. Please read my post on the previous page and elaborate.

Really, I'm serious. Please elaborate on what this complaint really means. I am seriously not understanding it. Is this an inches issue?


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Also,
> Using 3 year averages, and herd objective estamates rather than fly counts put some units on a Rollercoaster ride.
> 
> The Wasatch is a good example were highs and lows accor.


Ok..but hunters success is still there above age objective.

I'm sincerely trying to understand the complaints on the Wasatch. When the spring recommendations are slid in front of the RAC's and WB the numbers do not support the complaints.

We listened to hunter complaints and dramatically reduced the cow tags. But the bull hunter harvest never really dropped off in either success rates or in the age of bulls being killed. I really don't get the issue here.

This seems like a "perceived" issue but I am sincerely open to feedback here.


----------



## Raptorman (Aug 18, 2009)

If you think the Wasatch is the same as an Any Bull gen unit, you need to spend more time in the Uintas on the gen season hunt.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Critter said:


> I wasn't hunting the Henry Mountains when they opened it up to any buck but I was hunting the Book Cliffs. Before they opened it up there were quite a few hunters hunting the Books. Then when they opened it up to any buck it looked like the whole population of the Wasatch Front had moved down there to hunt. Every where you went there were ATV's with people on them hunting and a lot of them were carrying bucks back to camp in the afternoon. I would venture to guess that the first year that they opened it up that the success rate was better than 75% with most of the bucks being small 2 and 3 pts. The following year we saw a lot fewer bucks but the people were still there. Caravans of ATV's 10+ to a group all shooting the first buck that they saw. The third year after they opened it up you were lucky to even see a 3pt down in the deep canyons.
> 
> I'm not saying that natural events didn't cause some of it but I watched what hunter numbers did to that unit in a very short time.


Critter, I don't doubt that the unit was hunted much harder and that the number of bucks killed went way up. That makes total sense. But, killing bucks will rarely, if ever, decimate a population as a whole. What is likely to have happened is that the number and quality of bucks dropped to the level of most general season units. But, that is what it should have done. Killing all those bucks did NOT affect the number of does and fawns and ultimately the recruitment of new deer.

You seem to be equating a drop in buck quality to the entire population.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The does were taken care of by the weather, that is after the hunters took care of most of the bucks.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> 1)The management tags are given in order "Continue to provide a management buck hunt to allow additional hunting opportunity with a minimum of 10 permits. If the 3-year average buck-doe ratio exceeds 55 bucks per 100 does, management buck permits will be increased to bring the population towards objective." IN other words, management tags are a way to offer more hunting opportunity while keeping the average of harvested bucks within objective. It seems like you are misunderstanding their purpose.
> 
> 2) I think you should read the management plans for deer, elk, and antelope from the DWR's website. I think they would shed a lot of light on the "whys" and "why nots."


I have read them.

"The harvest of mature
bucks with three or fewer points will accomplish both goals. It will help the
Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) reduce buck-to-doe ratios while
preserving trophy-class animals."

"Why is an orientation course needed?
The DWR is trying to help hunters harvest only mature management
bucks so that younger bucks are not removed from the population before
they realize their full antler-growth potential. Younger, one- and two-yearold
bucks sometimes only have 2-3 points, but they have the potential for
more antler points as they mature. On the other hand, bucks that are three
years and older - and have 3 points or less - are unlikely to have
additional points in the future since they have already realized their growth
potential. "

You said you don't care age. They want to manage the buck to doe, but that is with the true motive behind it: Monster Muleys. The "How" doesn't always explain the true "Why". I can slap a different reasoning on anything. From the wildlife meetings, and talking with these guys, I have felt the reasoning was to cull herds, like on private ranches. They are testing the waters on how big of a B : D they can have, while still putting tons of money into MB, WLH, and auction tags...

With pictures "This legal and mature buck deer is the type we would like you to harvest. " They even have volunteer guides on the Pauns to take out mature deer. I am not completely knocking this, but lets not get it twisted that "the best interest of the wildlife" is what is behind this. You can't tell me on one unit that the best way to support a heard is 15 : 100 BD, then justify something close to 60 : 100. I get that they manage for opportunity, trophy, etc depending on area. I just am getting more and more into how and when and why we play judge and jury. What will be best for the future generations.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Bullsnot,
The numbers are behind the game.

Id bet this years numbers on the Wasatch elk show a significant drop off with hunter satisfaction, average age harvested, and hunter success.

Theres no doubt bullsnot,
You were in one of the few sweet spots left on that unit archery hunting. 
But most of thep units has fallen way off.

I like the idea of breaking it down to the 3 sub units. I feel it can be better managed that way.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I knew we'd get to watch this rerun at some point this fall! 


Who's gonna get the rose this time around?!


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Well, I've always been in opposition with Goofy on this issue. After two hunts on the Wasatch this year, I must concede that things are going down hill for sure. We still got into plenty of bulls and took decent elk but we also found that there are huge areas where there are absolutely no elk at all. Cow numbers are seemingly much lower in most places by my observation. 

So there you go Goofy, I agree with you.-----SS


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well Shooter,^^^^^^^
I was hoping to win you over on this issue at some point....


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Hmmmm counting private property elk during the winter and using the numbers to allot the general tags didn't work who seen this coming


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Me.....^^^^^^^^^


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> From the wildlife meetings, and talking with these guys, I have felt the reasoning was to cull herds, like on private ranches. They are testing the waters on how big of a B : D they can have, while still putting tons of money into MB, WLH, and auction tags....


I'm not buying this at all....from what I have seen is the DWR suggest giving more tags and hunting groups like SFW come back and fight it because more tags will mean smaller deer. To try an appease the SFW/MDF crowd that wants the giant bucks, the DWR came back with an idea to harvest more bucks without hurting the number of giant bucks available. One thing that has been mentioned over and over with these management tags by the DWR is that it is virtually impossible to "cull" or eliminate the undesirable genetics from open range deer herds on such large scale areas because, among other things, the does hold the genetics just like the bucks.

I don't believe for a second that the DWR is worried about inches or creating a herd with the best genetics in the country. The whole idea is creating a premium limited entry hunt that offers trophy potential. Personally, I will probably never agree with the idea of managing for such limited opportunity. But, I think the DWR is doing its best at maintaining a healthy population of mule deer on the Henry's at the same time it is managing for trophy deer. If you look at the sheer amount of habitat work and predator control alone, you can see why that population is growing.

Also, I don't think the DWR has ever maintained that the "best" way to manage a mule deer population is to maintain any number of bucks or buck/doe ratio. What they have said is that it only takes a handful--5/100--of bucks to breed all does. So, maintaining a population below 5 bucks per 100 does can be scary. And, on the flip side, I have seen several western states--Colorado and Nevada--specifically express concern that buck/doe ratios can also jeopardize deer during extreme weather patterns. But, I have never seen them put it at a number. On multiple occasions I have emailed biologists from Utah, Colorado, and Nevada asking them to give me the "ideal" buck/doe ratio...every time, their answer is the same--"What are you trying to manage for? Quality bucks? Or opportunity?" In other words, I think the DWR gets worried when buck/doe ratios are too low, and they worry when ratios get too high. Some general season units have teetered below the comfort level on the low end and the Henry's has been a bit high. BUT, in all cases tag allocations rise or fall when ratios are too low or too high. So, I do believe the DWR is trying to manage deer herds across the state based on what is best for the deer....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

hazmat said:


> Hmmmm counting private property elk during the winter and using the numbers to allot the general tags didn't work who seen this coming


Hmmm...counting elk at any time will result in counting elk in different places than where they will be during the hunt.

So, should they just not count elk? And, should tags NOT be issued because elk migrate to private lands during hunts? Regardless of where those elk are, the DWR is legally obligated to try and manage herds to objectives.

I can tell you that in other places where a lot of private land exists and problems persist because of these elk sanctuaries, the solution is to create open-bull units. I am not sure any of you want that solution.


----------



## robiland (Jan 20, 2008)

taxidermist said:


> They should just make the Wasatch Unit an Any Bull general season unit now. They've destroyed the "quality" of Bulls and heard size so bad now that it will recover IMO.


I have to disagree. This year I helped a few friends on the archery hunt. Ended up killing a great 320 bull. We saw and chased a few giant bulls, one that was killed that went 393. There are big bulls there. There are alot of small bulls there. DO NOT MAKE IT AN OTC!!!! ITs a great unit for opportunity.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> I'm not buying this at all....from what I have seen is the DWR suggest giving more tags and hunting groups like SFW come back and fight it because more tags will mean smaller deer. To try an appease the SFW/MDF crowd that wants the giant bucks, the DWR came back with an idea to harvest more bucks without hurting the number of giant bucks available.


So the DWR lets private interest groups dictate management? One's that heavily profit from the state? You gonna tell me that they "want" this and that but SFW forces them? Who did they GIVE the expo too after receiving a better offer from a far less corrupt group in RMEF? Killing tomorrows trophy is not a lot different then killing todays. Taking out young brute's isn't the case.

You argue about B : D, every unit in the state has a B : D object. That is all general season is managed too. You can't honestly say you don't believe the DWR doesn't care about inches, then drive out to antelope island or the Henry mountains and not see that is the case. 9 tags per season hardly does diddly. They barely extended the management tags. It is absolutely managed for inches. Or we can say "mature deer", but we know what that means.

Not even about genetics, they are trying to harvest old deer that aren't "trophy's". That isn't managing to inches either?

Again, I am not saying which strategy is the best. I just said two things I believe are hard to argue: Management in Utah is inconsistent. Also, it has other agenda's outside of the best interest of wildlife.

You can believe what you want. Go to one of the auctions and tell me that they don't care about it.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

The horse is about to leave the barn on the whole B/D ratio thing on general units. The DWR is coming out with new LE late season Buck hunts on General season units. 

How soon after that comes out will they want to start skewing the BD Ratio from the current General season ratios to something higher like on the other pure LEs? The 90,000'ish deer tags we get now might suddenly drop to 75,000 as Generals become the new LEs. 

Its not that this is something coming, its more that it is nearly here.


-DallanC


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> So the DWR lets private interest groups dictate management? One's that heavily profit from the state? You gonna tell me that they "want" this and that but SFW forces them? Who did they GIVE the expo too after receiving a better offer from a far less corrupt group in RMEF? Killing tomorrows trophy is not a lot different then killing todays. Taking out young brute's isn't the case.
> 
> You argue about B : D, every unit in the state has a B : D object. That is all general season is managed too. You can't honestly say you don't believe the DWR doesn't care about inches, then drive out to antelope island or the Henry mountains and not see that is the case. 9 tags per season hardly does diddly. They barely extended the management tags. It is absolutely managed for inches. Or we can say "mature deer", but we know what that means.
> 
> ...


Sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree. To make things clear, the DWR does not set tag numbers. The Wildlife Board does. The DWR can only make suggestions and then must do what the Wildlife Board dictates. Go back and look at how many times the DWR recommends X number of tags for a hunt and Y number of tags is given. Then, look at how many times Y is less than X.

Also, to make it clear...I wasn't happy about SFW getting the auction either. And, I would definitely like more tags to be given out and more opportunity be available to hunt. But, like it or not, a big part of our hunting contingent want "trophy" hunts. The DWR is managing deer for several different type of management options--LE, Premium LE, and general season. All three provide different types of opportunity for different types of hunters. None of them---by objectives--are bad for deer.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

DallanC said:


> The horse is about to leave the barn on the whole B/D ratio thing on general units. The DWR is coming out with new LE late season Buck hunts on General season units.
> 
> How soon after that comes out will they want to start skewing the BD Ratio from the current General season ratios to something higher like on the other pure LEs? The 90,000'ish deer tags we get now might suddenly drop to 75,000 as Generals become the new LEs.
> 
> ...


You are probably right...but, why are they doing this? I can tell you one reason is that the "trophy" crowd is much more vocal than the "opportunity" crowd. And, because of it, the DWR based on the system--RACS and the WB--are forced to comply.


----------



## gdog (Sep 13, 2007)

I was sitting on a side hill yesterday, which boarders a large piece of private ground. Hadn't seen an elk in a few days of hunting on the Wasatch, but hearing bugling like crazy. Sheep herder and his dog run up through private picking up stray sheep and bounced a huge herd of elk out. One after another...lost count...ran down canyon across from me...toward public ground. As soon as they hit public ground...bang...bang..bang...down went a few spikes...back onto private ground they went. The number of elk hiding on the private ground is unreal and no reason for them to leave. This private property does not allow any big game hunting.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

wyoming2utah said:


> You are probably right...but, why are they doing this? I can tell you one reason is that the "trophy" crowd is much more vocal than the "opportunity" crowd. And, because of it, the DWR based on the system--RACS and the WB--are forced to comply.


And just so that hunters know that didn't listen to the last wildlife board meeting the hunt that is proposed is a muzzle loader hunt.

Or as I like to now call them a single shot "rifle" hunt. Less the smokeless powder.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Maybe the Mods could split this thread from the OP's so his nice bull doesn't get lost in the BS.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

gdog said:


> I was sitting on a side hill yesterday, which boarders a large piece of private ground. Hadn't seen an elk in a few days of hunting on the Wasatch, but hearing bugling like crazy. Sheep herder and his dog run up through private picking up stray sheep and bounced a huge herd of elk out. One after another...lost count...ran down canyon across from me...toward public ground. As soon as they hit public ground...bang...bang..bang...down went a few spikes...back onto private ground they went. The number of elk hiding on the private ground is unreal and no reason for them to leave. This private property does not allow any big game hunting.


Sounds like wolf creek ranch. Tons of elk in there that never get seen by a hunter. But come winter time they are in the farmers fields and being counted by the dwr.


----------



## Xbow123 (Mar 7, 2017)

After spending a considerable amount of time up there checking cameras and during my hunt here?s my take. The overall herd sizes are down. Hopefully the reduction in cow tags helps. The bulls were harder to find once the hunts started and based on what I seen from my cameras turned nocturnal. I focused in on one area though and that area held at least 10-15 mature bulls within a few miles of each other. The biggest thing I noticed this past weekend was those that told me they weren?t seeing elk were those hunting close to the roads on side by sides. The elk are still there. Definitely not as many, but the wasatch overall is still a great opportunity hunt and is still far better than any general season any bull unit for whoever suggested that. It?s definitely not a easy task though to get to those bigger elk though.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

bullsnot said:


> I just don't understand this perspective when we are still killing bulls over age objectives at average statewide success rates. Please read my post on the previous page and elaborate.
> 
> Really, I'm serious. Please elaborate on what this complaint really means. I am seriously not understanding it. Is this an inches issue?


I've hunted this area for over 40 years. Hunted LE hunts on it too. When the largest number of cows a "mature" Bull Elk is pushing is five, something is screwed up. Maybe it was the "harvest objective" Cow permits they sold over the counter for five years?

In 1981 there were Elk all over the Rays Valley. Now, **** lucky to find one. If you do see any, there tongues are hanging to the ground, and can hardly move from being ran off the top of the waters.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree. To make things clear, the DWR does not set tag numbers. The Wildlife Board does. The DWR can only make suggestions and then must do what the Wildlife Board dictates. Go back and look at how many times the DWR recommends X number of tags for a hunt and Y number of tags is given. Then, look at how many times Y is less than X.
> 
> Also, to make it clear...I wasn't happy about SFW getting the auction either. And, I would definitely like more tags to be given out and more opportunity be available to hunt. But, like it or not, a big part of our hunting contingent want "trophy" hunts. The DWR is managing deer for several different type of management options--LE, Premium LE, and general season. All three provide different types of opportunity for different types of hunters. None of them---by objectives--are bad for deer.


I apologize in using the two interchangeably. Like I said, I was focused on those 2 points.

As you said yourself, all managed differently but none "bad"... well, they aren't all equivalent was my point. Not even talking GS to LE, but LE to LE. Inconsistent, flying by the edge of their seat. I am sorry, I know they put effort some places, but when some stuff comes out I can't help but think they are purely guessing what they are doing. Shoot, the ML scope change is another point. Wait till you see the success rates continue to climb over the next few years. Guys out here with Gunwerks shooting 500 yards. That wasn't the everyday hunter asking for that...

This boiled down this year. Spent more time on LE, and concerns raised. Then spent time on GS and saw what one real Utah winter did after all that touting how great of a job the board was doing. Really, they aren't putting money into the right place. I would understand if there wasn't money. But then I see how well the auction, SFW and guides are doing and I see there is plenty of money.. just goes to the wrong place and the wrong management.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

gdog said:


> I was sitting on a side hill yesterday, which boarders a large piece of private ground. Hadn't seen an elk in a few days of hunting on the Wasatch, but hearing bugling like crazy. Sheep herder and his dog run up through private picking up stray sheep and bounced a huge herd of elk out. One after another...lost count...ran down canyon across from me...toward public ground. As soon as they hit public ground...bang...bang..bang...down went a few spikes...back onto private ground they went. The number of elk hiding on the private ground is unreal and no reason for them to leave. This private property does not allow any big game hunting.


So the answer is not private land only tags, but trespassing sheep herders?

That is a much easier solution than I anticipated! :grin:


----------



## gdog (Sep 13, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> So the answer is not private land only tags, but trespassing sheep herders?
> 
> That is a much easier solution than I anticipated! :grin:


....only costs a 12 pack too!


----------



## Sbaker49 (Oct 9, 2017)

Thanks to those who sent me some spots to check out. Once the spike hunters thinned out we started seeing a few more elk. Much less than I've seen one otc hunts in Colorado an Idaho. Ended up tagging a bull Friday morning right where we hunted the first morning.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Congrats


----------

