# Whats the problem with Northern Region deer?



## nolaut (Jul 7, 2009)

Whats wrong with hunting the northern deer hunt, I was thinking of putting in that area but decided to hunt closer to home. The whitetail population up their is growing so I hear.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

"The Problem" is that there are only a handful of areas in the northern region that aren't controlled by private land. Combine that with hard winters, lower survival rates, and that most of the traditional wintering areas are now developed suburban housing areas, and you have a tough hunt. 

There's a lot of guys, crammed into the logan, monte cristo and standrod/yost areas, and not a lot of bucks to be had. Most of the bucks move onto private property before opening day, and the hills are absolutely crawling with little orange dots on every hillside. If you are going out to try to get a big buck, it's manageable, but you're going to earn it. If you're going for the social aspect of hunting, don't worry, you'll have plenty of people to talk to.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Between the CHMU, CWMU, THE FU. And all the money these poor starving land owners are raking in. Livestock Companies. Private Property. Let's see if we can stick 300lbs of poop into a 10 lb sack . Public lands up north are in some serious trouble, increase in hunters goin north and a decrease in public land,Privand tags. private Interest groups grabbing land , message from the DWR and Special intrest groups and land owners.. YOU TELL EM WERE COMIN AND HELLS COMIN WITH US>>>>


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

The last two statements are right on the money.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

> by WasatchOutdoors on Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:53 pm
> 
> "The Problem" is that there are only a handful of areas in the northern region that aren't controlled by private land.


Just for clarification, are you saying there are areas where private lands are 'surrounded' by private lands, thus controlling access? If this is the case, are there no easements or accesses required to allow hunters/campers, etc. into these public lands? If not, that really really sucks...


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Just saying. if you got some really. really deep pockets, You can get into these areas and have a real good chance to harvest some great buck ands bulls. Money talks and the public will walk and walk and walk,It's a **** shame there is some great country up that way.. I miss hunting Chalk Creek bad! The day the American screw job Sportsman Club took it over. and now it's the old FUCHMU, FUCWMU. No need to say anymore.


----------



## rockymountainelk (Jan 18, 2009)

Well i can agree with a lot that has been said. But it all comes down to this if everyone would spend as much time scouting and hiking as they do B**ching then you would all have much more success no matter where you are hunting. I have yet to not tag out on a northern hunt. There are plenty of animals to be had. You just cant drive around on the wheeler all day and expect to get one. Get off your @ss and hunt and I bet you can find an animal worth taking no matter where you are hunting.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

rockymountainelk said:


> Well i can agree with a lot that has been said. But it all comes down to this if everyone would spend as much time scouting and hiking as they do B**ching then you would all have much more success no matter where you are hunting. I have yet to not tag out on a northern hunt. There are plenty of animals to be had. You just cant drive around on the wheeler all day and expect to get one. Get off your @ss and hunt and I bet you can find an animal worth taking no matter where you are hunting.


+1

I hunted it in 2007 as a 2nd choice hunt and saw three of the biggest bucks I've seen in a long time. One of them was right off the road but another guy started shooting at it first. For every 10 does, I was seeing 4 or 5 bucks.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Mr Rockymountainelk. Thank you so much for you understanding. Been hunting with a bow in Utah for 48 years. and your the first punk A-- kid to tell me to get off MY A-- and my wheeler Thank you for listening to my opinoin without being a jerk. I thought this was about the Northern Unit cwmu chmu private properity, If it makes you feel like a real man to slam people you know nothing about. Then roll with it. Have a great day.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

oldfudd, My +1 was not directed towards you but complainers in general that won't look at different options. It look like you have a beef with landowners closing property you once hunted. It has happened to me too and it sucks but I moved on. It's their property and they have the right. There's still over 1,000,000 acres of public land to hunt in the Northern region.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Ridgetop It's a bummer to listen to these land owners yap and yap about how tough things are. The place I use to hunt in Chalk Creek is owned by a guy who as oil wells on his property. Sells elk tags for a bunch of cash. deer tags for a bunch of cash and forget about buyin a tag for Bullwinkle, Being 65 years old I know I"ll never see the place again. without the old second mortage. NOT. I guess I'am envoius. The have and the have nots. But land owners stop with the OLD Just about can't make ends meet. Horse Pucky! also Ridgetop the reply was not ment for you. if it felt like that I'am sorry.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

oldfudd, how come you never asked the landowner if you could lease hunting rights to the property for x amount of acres for y number of months for the year? It sounds like you've known the landowner for a while...and I mean...if the landowner isn't that nice of a guy then why would you want to hunt on that tract of land anyways?


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

How can a middle income person compete with the Thatchers, The Peays. and old Cal? It's about big dollars . Just can do it. simple enough. When some people pay certin people 35 grand to hunt above Kennecott. How do you compete with that going on up on Chalk Creek. All the way over to Whittney Res.?


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

well that's when you find somewhere else to hunt or buy your own tract of land...that's public land hunting for you! If you really want to hunt something that will be yours for your entire hunting career without shelling out the dinero then you'll have to find a wilderness area and make it your new hunting grounds...


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

I' found a spot in Southern Utah years ago,I'll tell you how long ago. Land owner tag for Chalk Creek was 20 dollars, All I"ve been trying to do is let the person who ask the question what is wrong with the Northern Unit? I think I pretty much covered what I feel is the biggest problem. Have a good one.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

You all had a great bunch of posts! I think the real answer was provided in the first reply, statistically speaking the northern region has been by far the most affected by lower numbers from what I recall. Urban sprawl into wintering areas, winter die off due to less wintering grounds and long winters, private land...certainly all contribute. 
That being said, the fellar criticizing the complainers also makes sense. I recall a few of the pics in the rifle thread that were from the Northern. For the overall success and therefore the average hunter, not many would argue against Northern being the worst region. However, for those willing to put in a lot of time there certainly are some nice bucks to be found, let me know where that is, since I was successful in drawing my 3rd choice for northern region. :mrgreen:

One other factor that I just recalled as was hinted at previous, it is also the one region that many complain about for the CWMU's that include some public land. While this has happened, it is to a pretty small degree, but I don't agree with any public land being placed in a CWMU period.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Actually, my original response was in no way intended to be interpreted as complaining. It was to point out that in the 3 main areas in the northern region available, there isn't a whole lot of room. And to the giuys who keep preaching about getting off the 4 wheeler, please, stop saying that. Can you imagine if all the road hunters got out and started hiking how badly that would ruin the few remaining pockets for the few guys willing to work for it? Heck I'd probably never get another buck again. The only reason I get a deer anymore is that the spot I find them, you'd have to be half crazy to be willing to pack one back out.

But I do think its a shame that there are good sized chunks of national forest and public land that are behind locked gates with no access available to the public.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

oldfudd said:


> Ridgetop It's a bummer to listen to these land owners yap and yap about how tough things are.* The place I use to hunt in Chalk Creek is owned by a guy* who as oil wells on his property. Sells elk tags for a bunch of cash. deer tags for a bunch of cash and forget about buyin a tag for Bullwinkle, Being 65 years old I know I"ll never see the place again. without the old second mortage. NOT. I guess I'am envoius. The have and the have nots. But land owners stop with the OLD Just about can't make ends meet. Horse Pucky! also Ridgetop the reply was not ment for you. if it felt like that I'am sorry.


EVerything you wrote after this statement just confused me.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Huge29 said:


> You all had a great bunch of posts! I think the real answer was provided in the first reply, statistically speaking the northern region has been by far the most affected by lower numbers from what I recall. Urban sprawl into wintering areas, winter die off due to less wintering grounds and long winters, private land...certainly all contribute.
> That being said, the fellar criticizing the complainers also makes sense. I recall a few of the pics in the rifle thread that were from the Northern. For the overall success and therefore the average hunter, not many would argue against Northern being the worst region. However, for those willing to put in a lot of time there certainly are some nice bucks to be found, let me know where that is, since I was successful in drawing my 3rd choice for northern region. :mrgreen:
> 
> One other factor that I just recalled as was hinted at previous, it is also the one region that many complain about for the CWMU's that include some public land. While this has happened, it is to a pretty small degree, but I don't agree with any public land being placed in a CWMU period.


Additional public tags are allocated in direct proportion to public land consumed by a CWMU.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

"There's still over 1,000,000 acres of land to hunt on"

Most of us like to hunt deer in places where there are deer present. Most of the public land in Northern Utah is the West Desert. That stuff is pretty much worthless for deer hunting. If it had good numbers of deer on it, someone would have made it a CWMU by now.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> "There's still over 1,000,000 acres of land to hunt on"
> 
> Most of us like to hunt deer in places where there are deer present. Most of the public land in Northern Utah is the West Desert. That stuff is pretty much worthless for deer hunting. If it had good numbers of deer on it, someone would have made it a CWMU by now.


That's the most true statement on this thread. The Northern Region is a freaking joke for public access. It's a crying shame. Pathetic. Miserable. Beyond criminal. A violation of morality. 
I grew up hunting Southern Utah and I know what a gem it is. Those here who are saying to get off the wheeler and walk a little farther are off their rocker. Do you seriously want 15,000 people in orange showing up in your wilderness area? Really???


----------



## katorade (Sep 23, 2007)

It is sad... Where ever I go I don't say wow public land, it's who's land is that. By the way what is public land? :roll:


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Back to the topic. I think one of the biggest problems compared to the other regions is camping spots for groups with big trailers. Those spots are a lot more limited. For those that live along the Wasatch front and just want to drive up in the morning, there are plenty of places to hunt.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

[quoteI think one of the biggest problems compared to the other regions is camping spots for groups with big trailers][/quote]That actually is a pretty true statement.

The area I often hunt, if you aren't up there now a week and a half early, you're not going to get anything over about 16' parked anywhere. I actually have a second trailer that's a 12 footer for that exact reason. (my 1965 aristocrat....she's a beaut) I've done the tent thing up there for years, but after waking up with a foot of fresh snow on the ground more years than not, it's nice to be able to come back to somewhere warm once in a while.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

> The area I often hunt, if you aren't up there now a week and a half early, you're not going to get anything over about 16' parked anywhere. I actually have a second trailer that's a 12 footer for that exact reason. (my 1965 aristocrat....she's a beaut) I've done the tent thing up there for years, but after waking up with a foot of fresh snow on the ground more years than not, it's nice to be able to come back to somewhere warm once in a while.


That little aristocrat is a little jewel!  I hear ya about coming back to someplace warm, sure makes for a more enjoyable hunt WasatchOutdoors!

I grew up hunting the northern, a great deal of it above Kamas from Shingle Creek to Lily Lake. Would camp at Soapstone or ShadyDell and not have too many others around. I hear now its like a small city up there during the rifle hunt, but dang! There is a lot of country up there and a guy should be able to find a few places away from the crowds...unless that area too now has lots of private property. I just need to keep on looking until I find a new area that will fill my needs! I really am looking forward to the Northern hunt this year, even though the odds are against me tagging what I am looking for... :mrgreen:


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

There are plenty of deer in the northern region. You have to know where to look. I can road hunt and kill a buck on the rifle hunt every year. Just pay attention to what is going on around you.
Now having said that, the private property and bull**** cwmu is completely out of control in the northern region. As soon as someone sees a buck on public land someone else buys it and locks it up. Have any of you actually looked at a public/private aerial map of northern utah? I think most of you would cry. I have seen 20 bucks in a single day on Curtis Creek on the bow hunt. You might see 4 or 5 in 3 days during the muzzle hunt and your lucky to see bone on the rifle hunt.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

> Have any of you actually looked at a public/private aerial map of northern utah? I think most of you would cry.


Where could I get one of those maps you are talking about lunkerhunter2? Would be very curious to see!


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

stillhunterman said:


> > Have any of you actually looked at a public/private aerial map of northern utah? I think most of you would cry.
> 
> 
> Where could I get one of those maps you are talking about lunkerhunter2? Would be very curious to see!


It takes a hell of a lot of work to do. I do not have it in my possession but i can tell you it is bad. I might not be able to get it again but i will try.


----------



## muleydeermaniac (Jan 17, 2008)

I have one of those maps of the morgan area. I got it from the city offices, it covers most of the area I hunt. That way I know which pieces of land I can get on. It also states who owns the land.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

I'll start looking through various city and county venues and see what I can come up with as well....thanks for the info guys.


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

That state has some pretty good online gis maps that shows ownership (blm,state,NF,WMA)


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

[attachment=0:15j1oc0h]Northern Map.JPG[/attachment:15j1oc0h]

I would have posted a bigger map, but the picture requirements on this site are a joke :roll:

Anyway, this is the current land status of Northern Utah. It may look like there is tons of land, but you need to know what you are looking at. The dark green is not NF, the light green is NF. All the light yellow stuff is BLM (A lot of the East BLM is inside DLL). The Light Blue is state trust land, some of it is public, some not, and some are WMAs. The rest is goverment land and if it's not marked (overlayed) it's private.

Nobody said there were no deer in the Northern Region. There are plenty of deer, just not enough bucks to support the huge amount of public hunters we have. Most bucks you do see are small bucks and usually don't make it past three years. If they do make it past three years, they become the smartest bucks in the state and very hard to hunt. For some people, shooting 2-points every year is great and they have nothing to complain about. There are several places you can go and see a 2-point in Northern Utah. My beef is the managent for mature deer hunting. I would like to see mature bucks while hunting and with the current managment it's not going to happen. I have seen quite a few deer in the 3-4 year age class, but I can honestly say I have only seen a few bucks that are wall worthy in Northern Utah. I have also picked up a lot of sheds in Northern Utah and I have never once picked up a antler off a buck that would score over 140. They arer here, but they are sneaky and they don't last long. There are too many hunters for the amount of public land we have. Yes, getting off your 4x4 will help, but the Northern Region still needs a good management plan or things are going to get even worse.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Don't read my post wrong, there are "Big Bucks" in Northern Utah. They are just far and few and hard to find.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Here's another map that might open your eyes. 
Our beloved CWMU land (Well, just a few of them) :lol:
[attachment=0:3pkg7px2]CWMUs.JPG[/attachment:3pkg7px2]


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Thanks for posting up those maps HJB. That's freaking insane! When I got tired of bumping into hunters on every ridge in Calif, I headed towards the Wilderness areas and was able to take some nice Blacktails, but dang it was tough on foot. 10 to 15 miles round trip, but I was pretty lonely :mrgreen: . 

How hard do the wilderness areas get hit up here in the North? Like maybe the High Uinta area? Seems like some big country where a fella could wear out some boot leather. Also seems to be a lot of trail heads as well. Sheesh, this region is a bit dis-heartening at first glance. I figure I have one, maybe two more tough hunts left in these old bones, looks like this may be one of those years... :wink:


----------



## muleydeermaniac (Jan 17, 2008)

I hunt a lot of wilderness areas, especially for elk, I don't see many people at all. And the people I do see are either fishing or just out hiking. But if you get away from some of the main trails you won't see another person. My brother and I went in six miles off of Henry's Fork and never saw another person in five days. Oh and he shot a nice 5x6. This was two years ago, and we are going back this year!


----------



## Guns and Flies (Nov 7, 2007)

Sad there is so much private land, wish there were more opportunity for average joe.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

> How hard do the wilderness areas get hit up here in the North? Like maybe the High Uinta area?


The lower portions of it, near the trailheads and the first half mile up in get hit HARD on opening weekend. I can honestly say though, every time I've hiked a mile or more up, I see a couple guys throughout the day on horseback (who think I must be insane to be back that far on foot) and thats about it. I've also had good experiences using topo maps and finding funnels where the animals get squeezed together by the army on opening morning, basically i just let them drive the animals to me. Just make sure you leave a couple hours earlier than everyone else so you have time to get in place.

The one thing I will tell you though is that on elk, for every mile back in, you have about 8-10 miles of packing when you get one down (mile there and back, 4 to 5 trips). The last trip sucks. On deer, it's not so bad. I can get all the meat and antlers usually in one trip as long as I completely bone it out.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Thanks for the info Wasatch, much appreciated. Was about the same out in Cali in the Wilderness areas. Seems like the ONE mile marker designates a brick wall to lots of hunters :mrgreen: . I'm way passed haulin' out elk, but I can manage a big ol' muley in one or two trips so I should be good to go. I also know what you mean about being in place and letting the other hunters push to you, it often works out very well if, as you say, you can find the right funnel area. Best of luck to you this fall!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

What's the problem with Northern Region deer? Nuttin', honey!! Do your homework and you'll find places like I do. My favorite is 100 yards off a well traveled paved road, 1/2 hour from downtown Salt Lake on public land. I've seen 3 hunters in 5 years and I usually see 5 to 10 nice bucks opening day and several bucks the days after. I hear shooting, yelling, talking and cars all around me, but the deer, elk, and moose get used to it and and simply avoid the heavy human traffic by moving past me into private property. The problem ain't the deer!!!


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

So lets see all these monsters you have taken the last 5 years.

The problem is "Lack of Public Land". Sure there are spots up here where you can find bucks and seclusion, but It sure would be nice if hunters could spread out a little more. We are restricted to the Wasatch Front, Cache National Forest, Raft River Mtns, and the Uintas. Unless you know the area and have hunted it for many years, you will see pumpkins all day long. Most of us have just learned to use the other hunters to our advantage or hope to see a buck running for it's life. The muzzy and archery hunts are about all I can take anymore, the rifle hunt is just too much for me.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Sorry to mislead you, but no one said anything about "monsters" (my best there, so far, is a 150" extremely symmetrical 4 point, which, to me is "good".) And, since I live in Enoch (Cedar City) and am actually a bowhunter, and hunt down here, I don't always get up to that spot on opening day of rifle season now except when my daughters hunt (2 times in the last 4 years) and they like to take the first buck they can in order to "get it over with". However, I am trying to get a bull moose tag in that unit (now,11 points) and enjoy scouting for a Pope & Young animal and waterholes. And, in 2008 I got a cow moose there.

This year I didn't apply for an archery deer tag, but will buy a Northern Region tag and will hunt there again. We'll see how I do.

In the meanwhile, add to your list of places to hunt:
-Goose Creek Mtns, west side.
-Grouse Creek Mtns, east and west.
-Hansel Mtns, south end.
-Matlin Mtns.
-Pilot Range.
-Curlew Valley, several scattered spots, about 30 sq mi. total,
-Grassy Mtns.
-Lakeside Mtns.
-Stansbury Island.
-Area north of Monte Cristo all the way up to Idaho (about 150 sq mi. total.)
-Crawford Mtns. (Archery only)
-Newfoundland Mtns? (If you can get there!) (Not sure about this one.)
-In addition, there are isolated spots and Walk-in-access spots all over the Bear River Valley and Cache Valley.

It's true that you have to know the area, and that's why I suggested you do your homework. But anyone who wants to hunt the Northern Region in near solitude can do it.

BTW, my hidey hole isn't listed, thank you.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

elkfromabove said:


> In the meanwhile, add to your list of places to hunt:
> -Goose Creek Mtns, west side.
> -Grouse Creek Mtns, east and west.
> -Hansel Mtns, south end.
> ...


The *Raft River *Mtns covers most of these:
Goose Creek
Grouse Creek
Pilot Range
Curlew Valley
Matlin Mtns

The *Cache NF *covers these:
Lakeside mtns
Monte Cristo

The *West Desert *covers these:
Stansbury
Grassy Mtns

The *Crawfords are a LE *unit and pretty much worthless during archery season as it is a migratory range.

The Hansel Mtns are private

So I guess I did pretty much cover it, huh?

Yes, there are WIA properties and WMA properties too. I have been to all of them and most are pretty crappy for deer hunting (WIAs). Infact, most of the WIA properties are just open fields in the middle of nowhere.

All I'm saying is that the Northern Region has crappy access and not much public land. It would be nice if there was more to explore. Yes, there are bucks up here and some big bucks too, but there's some major room for improvement when it comes to the managment.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

elkfromabove said:


> Sorry to mislead you, but no one said anything about "monsters" (my best there, so far, is a 150" extremely symmetrical 4 point, which, to me is "good".)


So what exactly is a "Nice" buck? You said you see 5-10 nice bucks every opening day and then you see even more bucks in the days after. Then you said a "Good" buck is a 150 class, so what is a "Nice" buck? 170 class?

So you see 5-10 170-180 class bucks running around next to a road in Northern Utah every opening morning for the last 5 years? And your spot is 1/2 hour from Downtown SLC but it's not on the Wasatch Front (Yes, that was on my list)?

No disrespect, I'm just trying understand your story.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

HJB said:


> So lets see all these monsters you have taken the last 5 years.
> 
> The problem is "Lack of Public Land". Sure there are spots up here where you can find bucks and seclusion, but It sure would be nice if hunters could spread out a little more. We are restricted to the Wasatch Front, Cache National Forest, Raft River Mtns, and the Uintas. Unless you know the area and have hunted it for many years, you will see pumpkins all day long. Most of us have just learned to use the other hunters to our advantage or hope to see a buck running for it's life. The muzzy and archery hunts are about all I can take anymore, the rifle hunt is just too much for me.


Apparently, your definition of the areas you have access to are much broader than mine. It's a matter of semantics, I guess. So under your definition my "hidey hole" was mentioned because it's in the Wasatch Range, though not on the "Front". And the area I mentioned that's north of Monte Cristo is all BLM & State Trust Lands, with quite a bit of WIA private property and not "National Forest". And the "Raft River Mtns" are the mountains running east and west north of Park Valley and Rosette and do not include the others you mentioned. And the Lakeside Mtns I mentioned are west of the Great Salt Lake and east of the Grassy Mtns in the West Desert, which BTW you overlooked.
In any case, there's still a lot of area to hunt.

It's certainly true that some of it is less desirable deer habitat than others, and the average hunter isn't going to be there, but trophy hunters can find big deer by going wherever they have to.

It'll be interesting to see how hunters deal with the micro-managing of deer by unit instead of region, which is sure to come. Maybe the crowding will stop, but at what cost?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

HJB said:


> elkfromabove said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry to mislead you, but no one said anything about "monsters" (my best there, so far, is a 150" extremely symmetrical 4 point, which, to me is "good".)
> ...


Sorry about the mix up of words, but you're reading into my story more than is there. If there is ever an average hunter, I guess I'm as close to one as anybody. "Nice" and "good" mean the same thing to me, a mature buck, and not necessarily a trophy 4 point. I've seen some bucks which would go 160 or 170 
but have never shot one, either because I didn't have a tag, it wasn't deer season, and/or my daughter didn't have a shot.

And I simply said I have only seen 3 hunters in 5 years, not that I have been there opening day for the last 5 years. I saw one hunter during my cow moose hunt in 2008 who later came back with a buddy and a horse to haul out his cow moose which was down in a ways. FWIW, I took a cow moose the next day about 100 yards from the road. And I saw two archery hunters last year who thought they were busted for being in a restricted area when I came down the trail looking for a place to hang a treestand over a waterhole I saw on the map. (They were a half a mile from the road and the waterhole is actually about a mile from the road.) They were relieved when I told them they were on public ground and that I wasn't a property owner or a CO. However, they were gone when I came back a few hours later.

I'm not saying this is the greatest deer hunting place in the state. All I'm saying is that there a many more animals than hunters there, and that there are lots of other places like it in the Northern Region and it's a lot more fun finding them than going where everyone else goes.

And FWIW, I think you'll enjoy archery and/or muzzy hunting more anyway. I know I do.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Thanks for the clarification, sorry if I had it wrong. 
I do agree with you that there are still good spots in the Northern Region to hunt deer. I know of a few good spots, but there seems to always be a lack of nice bucks. When I say nice, I mean 140+ bucks. It doesn't take much for a deer to become a 140 class deer. Infact, all it takes is time. The Northern region rifle hunt and the current managment doesn't give the bucks enough time to grow up. The areas I mentioned (And yes, they were meant to be a general reference of the area), are usually packed full of hunters every year. Most of the bucks over 3 know exactly what's going on they won't move unless stepped on. Unfortunatley, places get hit so hard that bucks are literally stepped on and have nowhere to go. These bucks rarley live past 3 or 4 years old. I have seen way too many 2-points getting on does during the rutt, when that happens there's a problem. 
I hunt Archery now, and muzzy every once in a while. I have enjoyed my experience with archery, and I have seen plenty of deer on the front during the rutt and some good bucks during the general season as well. I just wish my backyard wasn't covered in CWMUs. If we could spread out a little, there would be a lot more deer and they would be a little less stressed and live a little longer. 

I think "Micro Managment" is the key to managment up here. I hope it comes soon.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

So, what is the deal with the ticks of the deer in the NW part of the state? Is this just a legend? I have heard two reports from people once I told them of a spot I am thinking of hunting.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Good question Huge29... heard the same thing when I hunted out that way last year, but didn't get any up close and personal validation o said rumors...if ya know what I mean. :?


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Seems like everytime I go NW(Yost, Raft Rivers,Grouse Creek mtns) I see hundreds of does. You can literally sees does around every corner. 500 does is not uncommon to see in a hunting trip out there. There seems to always be spikes and 2-points hanging in camps, but you rarely see 4-points. Like I said before, all the pressure is stunting the growth. Nobody passes on 2-points out there. I bet 90% of the bucks taken out there are 1-2 years old. Just think if we shut down that part of the state for 3-4 years or made it a LE, the bucks would grow and we would have an excellent unit. There is very little winter kill out there and the pops are huge. It just has a crappy buck/doe ratio out there. Once again "Managment" is the key.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

The 4 points are there...they just know how to avoid the hunting pressure...and of course deer in sagebrush communities are gonna find different uses for cover than deer in aspen/conifer communities...


----------



## captain (Nov 18, 2007)

Huge29 said:


> So, what is the deal with the ticks of the deer in the NW part of the state? Is this just a legend? I have heard two reports from people once I told them of a spot I am thinking of hunting.


I have hunted the North Western part of the state my whole life, and can tell you the rumors are true. After you have a deer on the ground those ticks start surfacing from every crack and crevice. They will have 10-20 of them just around their eyes. It is a little unnerving.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

stablebuck said:


> The 4 points are there...they just know how to avoid the hunting pressure...and of course deer in sagebrush communities are gonna find different uses for cover than deer in aspen/conifer communities...


The "Cover" is the problem. The stay in a patch of pines or quakies that sits in the middle of a sage brush basin. Once they get pushed out of there, they face a firing squad of hunters. I once watched a big buck get pushed out of a patch and shot at 30-40 times. He survived and made it to the next patch. Guess what happened? The 20 hunters surrounded that patch and got him out again. He had another 20 shots fired at him and got hit in the leg before he made it to the next patch. The hunters pushed it again and just about stepped on him. He got up and made his last little prance out of the patch and got dumped. He was the biggest buck I have seen up there, A typical 6x6 about 27 wide. 
My point is that with 20 hunters surrounding the only cover a buck has, he doesn't have a chance in hell of surviving. 5000 acres of pines and deadfall is a different story.


----------



## rockymountainelk (Jan 18, 2009)

HJB said:


> stablebuck said:
> 
> 
> > The 4 points are there...they just know how to avoid the hunting pressure...and of course deer in sagebrush communities are gonna find different uses for cover than deer in aspen/conifer communities...
> ...


He must have some chance in hell if he was the biggest buck you have seen :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

I'm sure he suvived by laying down as hunters walked 10 feet passed him in years past. Unfortunately, there is so much pressure up there now that the "10 foot hidey hole" gets covered everyday of the hunt. There's only so much a buck can take before he busts out of is bed. And once he jumps his bed in that area, he is DEAD. 
Way too many people during the rifle hunt. Tags need to be reduced, and that's the bottom line.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB and the rest that want micro management. Im going to use the same argument they use against me on the elk. if you want to hunt 140+ bucks put in for a LE unit. 

It just hits a nerve when I hear people saying they cant find 140+ bucks on general units. this is like saying they cant find 300" bulls on general open bull units and they want to make everything LE/micromanagment.

What the heck do the people in Utah think Micromanagment is? IT IS LE!!!!! take a good long look at what you want HJB you are saying you want more 140" bucks well look at the bookcliffs this is a Unit that has just that. Now look at how many people can hunt that. what 300 a year. Now look at how much area that is and how only allowing this many hunters will severly cut opportunity out. 

I say if you want more 140+ bucks get out of your pick up and work for it they are there on general land I see them every year on the winter range. If you cant find them on your rifle hide-e hole then pick up a bow and hunt the front and quit complaining about the lack of success of not seeing 140+ bucks.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

One thing I like about the idea of smaller units. Is knowing a more specific number of hunter in the field on each mountain. We all know with no hunter quota ( to a point) for each mountain. Hunting pressure can change a lot from year to year on the same mountain or canyon. I heard Anis say, the DWR likes to let the hunters regulate themselves. When the hunting gets bad enough, they will move onto better areas. I don't like that type of management.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

ridgetop 

spreading 90,000 hunters out through out the general season deer areas is not going to do anything.

the only way you are going to see 140" bucks under every tree like the bookcliffs is cutting the crap out of the rifle tags. :evil: 

once you let the sfw boys get a hold of your tags they will turn into a Life time tag just like any of the other Le units in utah are. look at the bookcliffs rifle what is it 8 to 10 years to garantee you a rifle tag then throw in your waiting period and you are now garanteed hunting every 20 years if you are the last to draw a tag in your pool. sure sucks to be that guy all for a 140+ buck


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> ridgetop
> 
> spreading 90,000 hunters out through out the general season deer areas is not going to do anything.
> 
> ...


I disagree but time will tell. Although there will be waiting periods on most units. There will be a chance to hunt somewhere each year or maybe every other year.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> I say if you want more 140+ bucks get out of your pick up and work for it they are there on general land I see them every year on the winter range. If you cant find them on your rifle hide-e hole then pick up a bow and hunt the front and quit complaining about the lack of success of not seeing 140+ bucks.


SWBUCKMASTER,
I get out of my truck plenty. I bow hunt the front every year like you do and I have seen some good bucks on the front, but it is not like the "Book Cliffs" in any way shape or form. The Northern region gets bad winters, tons of pressure, terrible managment, and "Never ending" development. The front has some great bucks and that archery hunt is by far my favorite hunt of the year. Some areas are better than others, and the Wasatch and Ogden are quite different. The Ogden Extended hs a lot less deer and I see 2-points pimping does every year. This is not a good sign. I'm also afraid that your little precious WF hunt is going to suck in 10 years when houses and cabins are scattered all over you secret basins. But nothing seems to matter to you. All you talk about is how archery is the best thing in the world and in the cure for everything. As long as the Wasatch Front produces bucks for you, you wont complain.
There are other areas of the Northern Region to be discussed, and we need a better managment plan. Yes, micro management is the key and until we build a plan we will sink deeper into this hole. We get more hunters every year, the land we hunt is decreasing by development, and the deer herds are suffering. This all means that the hunting will go down hill. Talk to your grandpa and ask him how the hunting was back in the '70s. We had great numbers and tons of public land at that time. But after some terrible winters, loss of public land, and bad managment, this is what we are left with.


----------



## Size Matters (Dec 22, 2007)

HJB is right alot of the northern area has been going down hill since the 70's and will continue to do so unless they change the way the manage the area. 8)


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

My personal opinion is that numbers are returning to their natural state, which doesn't bode well for hunters who are used to deer numbers that have been altered by big quantities of non-indigenous livestock.

Overgrazing brought about an unnatural cycle of booming mule deer populations and now that we have corrected a lot of these practices, deer numbers are going back to what they were before we shot and poisoned every bear, coyote, cat and wolf in sight.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> My personal opinion is that numbers are returning to their natural state, which doesn't bode well for hunters who are used to deer numbers that have been altered by big quantities of non-indigenous livestock.
> 
> Overgrazing brought about an unnatural cycle of booming mule deer populations and now that we have corrected a lot of these practices, deer numbers are going back to what they were *before we shot and poisoned every bear, coyote, cat and wolf in sight.*




I still do this


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Are the DWR's current mule deer management practices carried out on a state wide basis, or are they concentrating on the various regions seperately? Where can someone find out what these management policies are, other than the main Deer Management Plan?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Impressive and intelligent, the outdoor and hunting community would be better off without your kind L2F&H.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Impressive and intelligent, the outdoor and hunting community would be better off without your kind L2F&H.


Whats the matter Tree somebody wizz in your cherios this morning? I was being sarcastic!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I may have been having a moment and I did not take it as sarcasm. Point taken. :arrow:


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

you didn't put a sarcastic emoticon behind your statement. The just kidding defense isn't a great way to conduct business...gets me in trouble with the girlfriend all the time... :| 
On another note...it is kind of an ignorant thing to joke about and it's the reason why I can't bring a hunting magazine in to work without someone drawing a can of Skoal and a tall boy Milwaukee's Best next to the hunter on the cover of the magazine. Contrary to popular belief by HUNTERS and non-hunters...it is possible to have a little class and be a hunter at the same time.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

stablebuck said:


> Contrary to popular belief by HUNTERS and non-hunters...it is possible to have a little class and be a hunter at the same time.


Of course it's possible! All we gotta do is get everyone to change to Kodiak tobacco and Coors beer. Don't y'all know it's the brand that makes the man? :mrgreen:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB said:


> SWBUCKMASTER,
> I get out of my truck plenty. I bow hunt the front every year like you do and I have seen some good bucks on the front, but it is not like the "Book Cliffs" in any way shape or form.


I know the front is way better, that is why I wont spend my 10 archery deer points on the bookcliffs! The front you can hunt every year and you can only hunt the bookcliffs archery what every 10-12 if you count the waiting period? this is proof if you restrict the tags you will see more big bucks. The bookcliffs does not have more bucks because it is called a micromanged/LE hunt it is this way because they restrict the tags. Now if you implement this scenario across the state of Utah you could only give out 10,000 tags. Just look at the size of the bookcliffs,the quality of the deer and the amount of tags they give out. micro managment/le is not the answer to still allowing you to hunt every year and still hunt big bucks. It is a scenario to allow you to hunt every 8 to 10 years and see 4 points from your truck that are so stupid anyone can drive up to them and pop em with a bow or rifle.



HJB said:


> The Northern region gets bad winters, tons of pressure, terrible managment, and "Never ending" development. The front has some great bucks and that archery hunt is by far my favorite hunt of the year. Some areas are better than others, and the Wasatch and Ogden are quite different. The Ogden Extended hs a lot less deer and I see 2-points pimping does every year.


 Is this because the rifle hunters decimate the bucks? Or is this because the ogden bow hunters are better then the salt lake city hunters by either wounding or tagging more bucks? Why are there no bucks up there and there are loads in other places on the front?



HJB said:


> This is not a good sign. I'm also afraid that your little precious WF hunt is going to suck in 10 years when houses and cabins are scattered all over you secret basins. But nothing seems to matter to you. All you talk about is how archery is the best thing in the world and in the cure for everything. As long as the Wasatch Front produces bucks for you, you wont complain.


I talk archery because it is the only way you are going to have over the counter opportunity to hunt every year and still have big buck quality. I want to hunt every year! If I had to put down my compound and pick up a home made bow or knife just to hunt every year I would. The front is PROOF you don't need sfw money, winter range, short seasons, ect. If I could hunt every year with a rifle and kill the bucks I kill with a bow i would. I am just as lazy as the next guy. I get sick and tired of hiking 30 pluss days scouting, hiking, and hunting the front. If I could just take a rifle up there and get it done in one day I would, it would be way better off with my family life at home but we both know that type of rifle mentality is a pipe dream.



HJB said:


> There are other areas of the Northern Region to be discussed, and we need a better managment plan. Yes, micro management is the key and until we build a plan we will sink deeper into this hole. We get more hunters every year, the land we hunt is decreasing by development, and the deer herds are suffering. This all means that the hunting will go down hill. Talk to your grandpa and ask him how the hunting was back in the '70s. We had great numbers and tons of public land at that time. But after some terrible winters, loss of public land, and bad managment, this is what we are left with.


I wont disagree with you HJB that the hunting in Utah was better in the 70's then it is now But if you try and convince me that the hunting in the 90's was better then it is now then I would disagree with you. Hunting in Utah is getting better every year either that or I am just that much better of a hunter then I was in the 90's when I couldn't even find a spike.


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> now that we have corrected a lot of these practices, deer numbers are going back to what they were before we shot and poisoned every bear, coyote, cat and wolf in sight.


See. Everyone admits bears, coyotes, cats and wolves are detrimental to deer herds.


----------



## Size Matters (Dec 22, 2007)

That is very well said Red leg for someone to say predators have no affect on the deer herd is just plan dumb with all the fawns they kill it amazes me when someone says its not predators that are causing the decrease in numbers.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> I talk archery because it is the only way you are going to have over the counter opportunity to hunt every year and still have big buck quality. I want to hunt every year! If I had to put down my compound and pick up a home made bow or knife just to hunt every year I would. The front is PROOF you don't need sfw money, winter range, short seasons, ect. If I could hunt every year with a rifle and kill the bucks I kill with a bow i would. I am just as lazy as the next guy. I get sick and tired of hiking 30 pluss days scouting, hiking, and hunting the front.* If I could just take a rifle up there and get it done in one day I would, it would be way better off with my family life at home but we both know that type of rifle mentality is a pipe dream. *
> I wont disagree with you HJB that the hunting in Utah was better in the 70's then it is now But if you try and convince me that the hunting in the 90's was better then it is now then I would disagree with you. Hunting in Utah is getting better every year either that or I am just that much better of a hunter then I was in the 90's when I couldn't even find a spike.


The only reason the Extended hunt is such a great hunt is because it's held in the middle of the stinkin Rutt!!!!! If the WF was soooo special and there were bucks running everywhere, the rifle hunters would go up there and havest deer every year. It's tough terrain and the bucks are smart. The only advantage is that those bucks have to mate, if they didn't you wouldn't ever see half of them. Do you think you might see some big bucks on the book cliffs if you could hunt them in November? Heck, anywhere you go you can see huge bucks coming out of thier hiding places to get some doe booty. I know of a WMA up here that gets hit harder than most places in the region. 100s of people hunt this place for deer and most the time you wont even hear a shot or even see more than 10-20 deer. Come November when the cow elk hunt starts, guess what you see???? BIG BUCKS!!!! 
Archery is great and I think it's a good managment tool as well (in certain circumstances). But you can't leave the rifle hunters in the dark. Everyone has thier passion for a certain weapon and bowhunting isn't for everyone. A good management plan needs to include everyone and there are ways we can do that besides eliminating all rifles and muzzleloaders.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

> Archery is great and I think it's a good management tool as well (in certain circumstances). But you can't leave the rifle hunters in the dark. Everyone has their passion for a certain weapon and bowhunting isn't for everyone. A good management plan needs to include everyone and there are ways we can do that besides eliminating all rifles and muzzleloaders.


+1

The northern here in utah reminds me of the B zones in cali. It's the bottom of the bucket where hunters end up when all the other tags are gone. Not much is done management wise and it's slowly being eroded by private property, over hunting, piss poor biology, politics, predators, habitat loss/encroachment, blah, blah, blah. Even when it becomes LE (read: micro unit management), there HAS to be some semblance of an effort by the DWR/WB to manage the deer herd and NOT the hunters...


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

The reason there are so many tags for Northern is when the set up the region the private land owners were worried that they would lose all revenue from tresspass fees and guiding hunters. Split the tags 24,000 for PRIVATE LANDS ONLY and the other 2,000 for public lands only. Then you would do away with the over crowding on the public lands :roll: 

I don't see all this loss of public lands on the Northern Region myself. Please enlighten me. What I have seen is the posting of private land become more prevelant as more people wish to have a hunt uninterupeted by other people.

I laugh when people complain of over crowding now, they did not hunt in the 70's :shock:
Carry on!


----------



## Guns and Flies (Nov 7, 2007)

middlefork said:


> The reason there are so many tags for Northern is when the set up the region the private land owners were worried that they would lose all revenue from tresspass fees and guiding hunters. Split the tags 24,000 for PRIVATE LANDS ONLY and the other 2,000 for public lands only. Then you would do away with the over crowding on the public lands :roll:
> 
> I don't see all this loss of public lands on the Northern Region myself. Please enlighten me. What I have seen is the posting of private land become more prevelant as more people wish to have a hunt uninterupeted by other people.
> 
> ...


We'll from what I've heard the thing about the 70's is you could get onto some private land pretty cheap.


----------



## Mr. O (May 13, 2010)

Maybe they ought to think about setting antler pt restrictions if its that bad. if there truly are that many forkeys and spikes maybe a 3 pt antler restriction woulld help. the deer would probably be allowed to age and learn how not to get killed as easy. meaning yes a lot of 3 pts will get killed in future years but alot may be smart enough by then to avoid being killed as easy. who wouldnt rather shoot a 3 pt than a spike or forky ? while alsocreating a older class of deer. I've never hunted it but often have pondered it when the statewide archery becomes a every other year type hunt, which look s like it is on its way! Maybe the northern region would be a good area to test out the 3 pt restrictions ,whixh maybe the rest of the state could follow if it became successful. Doesnt sound like there is much to lose for anyone other than the meat hunters the first couple years!The first couple years might suck but after that might be a lot funner..?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB said:


> "The only reason the Extended hunt is such a great hunt is because it's held in the middle of the stinkin Rutt!!!!! If the WF was soooo special and there were bucks running everywhere, the rifle hunters would go up there and havest deer every year. It's tough terrain and the bucks are smart. The only advantage is that those bucks have to mate, if they didn't you wouldn't ever see half of them. Do you think you might see some big bucks on the book cliffs if you could hunt them in November? Heck, anywhere you go you can see huge bucks coming out of thier hiding places to get some doe booty."
> 
> Hunting in the rut has nothing to do with how good the quality is on the front. The front is good because it has a 35-40 buck to do ratio. It also has a average age of 4 years old. now ask your self why is this?
> 
> ...


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> The front is good because it has a 35-40 buck to do ratio. It also has a average age of 4 years old. now ask yourself why is this?


First I need to ask myself where you are getting this info??? 35-40 Buck to Doe Ratio??? I don't think so buddy. The DWR does the buck to doe ratios by managment units. Last I heard the ratios were around 15-18 bucks per 100 does in the Morgan/South/Rich and Summit areas. They sure as heck are no where near 35-40 that I have seen. 
Can you please post a link to this info? The Extended Archery are covers multiple management units and I have never seen a ratio count done on just the "Extended unit".


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB said:


> swbuckmaster said:
> 
> 
> > The front is good because it has a 35-40 buck to do ratio. It also has a average age of 4 years old. now ask yourself why is this?
> ...


the Morgan/South/Rich are areas are rifle areas! They are shot out areas because rifle guys are to effective at killing deer! You are getting warmer though now why don't you do your own research and move to the archery only areas, and yes my data is correct. :shock:


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Ok Here you go. As of September 2009:
http://wildlife.utah.gov/news/09-10/more_deer.php

Ogden and Cache Units are at a disgusting 10 bucks per 100 does.
Morgan South Rich and East Canyon units are at 25 bucks per 100 does

I think the East Canyon unit covers most the Extended archery area. The wasatch managment unit covers the rest and it's in the Central part of the state which is at about 19 bucks per 100 does.

So the Morgan and East canyon units are actually producing the most bucks in "general" areas in the state right now. Why is that? Because it's 90% CWMU land.

The state doesn't even manage our LE units at that high of a buck to doe ratio. Currently they want the LEs at 25-35 Bucks per 100 does. The general units are managed for a 15/100 ratio. So I'm still not sure you know what your talking about. It would be much easier if you could post a link.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

middlefork said:


> I laugh when people complain of over crowding now, they did not hunt in the 70's :shock:
> Carry on!


 :idea:

Something to complain about........


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB said:


> Ok Here you go. As of September 2009:
> http://wildlife.utah.gov/news/09-10/more_deer.php
> 
> Ogden and Cache Units are at a disgusting 10 bucks per 100 does. Why is this? answer two many rifle tags!!
> ...


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

what HJB three year average on the Wasatch Mountains Salt Lake 37.0/100

Its got to be BS right?? according to your data no unit in this state is above 25-35 bucks let alone a general over the counter tag


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

I say BS on the 37/100 crap. I have searched in and out and everything I find says the managment plan for the "Wasatch Mountains -Salt Lake- #17 1a" is 15-20 bucks per 100 does. Every Archery preview for the last 3 years has stated the the average buck to doe ratio in the central region is 15-18 bucks per 100 does. Until you can get some REAL info, and quit "Copy and Pasting" other crap, I call BS. 

This post has gone on too long. I have stated my argument that the Northern Region needs better management. I have stated FACTS and current numbers on units and from personal experience hunting the Northern Region could be much better. My hope is that soon the DWR will implement a new plan that will reduce tags and benefit the herds up here. That's pretty much all I have to say. 

Unless of course SW can post some FACTS.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

The numbers that SWB has posted are actually all correct. I saw this on the division page not too long ago. Before they got hacked. I thought it was not right either but after looking at the previous years numbers it pretty much confirmed it.

The only number that is wrong is the Wasatch Mountains - SLC @ 37.0 It's actually 36.99 because I just saw a dead buck that got hit by a car of the side of the 215 by mill creek. -O|o-


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

HJB,
Brother if you are going to open your mouth try not to put your foot in it. "you asked for facts!!!!! You cant handle the facts!!!
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggam ... report.pdf
Try this link out and look on page 49 where it clearly states that the Wasatch Front has 37 bucks per 100 Doe's.

I have spent a lot of time on the Northern Unit as well. I know that you can still find good bucks if you look. Has it been better? Definately yes. I dont think its realistic to think you will bring it back to what it was without huge cuts in tag numbers. These cuts that will make hunting a once or twice in a lifetime deal. Why do this just so that guys can have an easy shot at a 4 point right off of the road.

You stated that you wanted facts but you based your conclusion on facts and your personal experince. You've shown that you didnt do your homework on the facts. I'm guessing your personal experience might be a little off too.


----------



## Broadside_Shot (Feb 22, 2010)

Adamsoa you are right on. I would be very surprised if HJB will accept this anyways. He just wants to rant and rave on speculations and conjure up his own theories.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> the east canyon unit does not cover most of the archery only area in fact east canyon is not even in the archery only area. the central region does cover the archery only area and your link does not tell you the buck to doe ratios of that area.


FWIW: East Canyon - Boundary begins at Echo Junction and I-80, southwest along I-80 to I-15, north on I-15 to its junction with I-84, east on I-84 to Echo Junction. So it does indeed include much of the Wasatch Front Archery Area and the figures you're fighting over do apply. Carry on!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> swbuckmaster said:
> 
> 
> > the east canyon unit does not cover most of the archery only area in fact east canyon is not even in the archery only area. the central region does cover the archery only area and your link does not tell you the buck to doe ratios of that area.
> ...


im not sure what fwiw means but that description is part of the wasatch front but it is not the archery only area. you can rifle hunt that area. that area has a buck to doe ratio of 20-25 per 100.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB the facts are correct so now we can continue the discussion 

Why is this area better than 85% of the Le areas for quality and buck to doe ratios? There are over 10,000 archery permits that can legally hunt this area. That is a lot of hunting opportunity for such a small area don't you think!!

If you get on google earth and draw a boundary around the green part of the Henry mountains you will come up with a distance of about 61 miles+/-. The front boundary from I-80 to corner canyon is about 55 miles. One unit will only allow you to have 35 hunters for about 30 days and the other will allow you to have over 10,000 hunters and hunt it for 4 months. They both almost have the same buck to doe ratio!!!! They both crank out 200" bucks!!! 

Just going out and saying we need to micro manage is not going to do anything to the buck to doe ratios because your crappy area dosent have any more people in it then the crappy areas we hunt with rifles. 90,000 rifle tags is to many if you want quality right? you agree!! yes you do because that is what you are whining about now! 

Now let 90,000 archery tags state wide and no rifle tags and you would have Henry quality state wide just like the front!!! The front is absolute proof it works!!! However we both know that is a pipe dream and wont happen so we need to meat some where in the middle right?

This is where I come up with 33,000 archery tags 33,000 muzzy tags and 33,000 rifle tags for a total of 100,000 deer tags. The difference is you have moved hunters to shorter range weapons more bucks will survive so you will see better quality and the same 100,000 hunters can still hunt only now you will see a bit better quality running around.

So HJB how many rifle tags are you going to cut if you get your way with micro management/LE out of the 90,000 tags so you can hunt 4 points??? I have given you the stats on the bookcliffs area already. Ill give them again so you don't have to look them up and copy and past. They have about a 25 buck to doe ratio with 3.5 year average age and people are having to wait 8 to 10 years to hunt it with their rifle if they are the last in their point pool to drawl. Now throw in the waiting period and then another 8-10 and you should get the point. If you don't get the point here it is: That is 20+ years between tags just to hunt dink 16-22" bucks out the truck window. Also the bookcliffs only gives out 533 total tags. Do yourself a favor and look up the boundary of this unit see how much area it covers and do a bit of simple math and you can see if they manage the rest of the state just like this we are screwed!!! you can kiss hunting good by!!! Careful what you wish for!!!!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)




----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

HJB said:


> I say BS on the 37/100 crap. I have searched in and out and everything I find says the managment plan for the "Wasatch Mountains -Salt Lake- #17 1a" is 15-20 bucks per 100 does. Every Archery preview for the last 3 years has stated the the average buck to doe ratio in the central region is 15-18 bucks per 100 does. Until you can get some REAL info, and quit "Copy and Pasting" other crap, I call BS.
> 
> This post has gone on too long. I have stated my argument that the Northern Region needs better management. I have stated FACTS and current numbers on units and from personal experience hunting the Northern Region could be much better. My hope is that soon the DWR will implement a new plan that will reduce tags and benefit the herds up here. That's pretty much all I have to say.
> 
> Unless of course SW can post some FACTS.


well HJB the facts are posted what say you


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> im not sure what fwiw means but that description is part of the wasatch front but it is not the archery only area. you can rifle hunt that area. that area has a buck to doe ratio of 20-25 per 100.


FWIW= For what it's worth. Again, carry on with this confusing no win discussion, folks! I'll just watch from now on.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

Logan Canyon has one of the highest buck to doe ratios in the state: of the ten deer left, four are bucks! The buck to doe ratio is a lame and overused statistic. Animals per mile is what counts.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

BirdDogger said:


> Logan Canyon has one of the highest buck to doe ratios in the state: of the ten deer left, four are bucks! The buck to doe ratio is a lame and overused statistic. Animals per mile is what counts.


Birddogger 
I don't know to much about Logan canyon but if you are correct with the low deer numbers. Ill take your word for it! This is not the problem of over hunting unless the hunters are killing does!! If an area has low deer numbers not buck numbers it is a biological signal something has gone haywire. 
symptoms could include:

high predator numbers
highway or road kills
winter kill
high elk numbers, ect.

killing bucks or legal hunting will only effect the buck to doe numbers. so if the area still has a high buck to do ratio then nature should correct itself if the symptoms have been corrected. So going out and cutting tags and hunting opportunity with any weapon is point less. Bucks that breed bucks don't produce off spring.

animals per mile can also be used incorrectly. 1000 animals per mile could mean 999 does and one buck. if you don't say what the buck to doe ratio is you will not know the health of the herd. you will not know if it is being over hunted.

by the way my post count is 666 :twisted:


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

> by swbuckmaster on Sun May 16, 2010 10:13 am
> 
> BirdDogger wrote:
> Logan Canyon has one of the highest buck to doe ratios in the state: of the ten deer left, four are bucks! The buck to doe ratio is a lame and overused statistic. Animals per mile is what counts.
> ...


No they don't but I'm sure they are happy and much lighter on thier hoofs.... :shock: :mrgreen:


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Like I said before, this post is going nowhere. Yes, the facts have been posted. Congrats you are right and you are the best hunter ever SWbuckmaster. Archery is the key to all our problems and we should crown you king of archery and deer managment. 
Honestly, what do you want me to say? I have given my opinions and I think the Northern Region needs a better plan. I don't have much experience at all in the "Wastatch -Salt lake area-. My experience is with Cache Valley and Ogden areas and they could use some better managment and I stand by that. 

That's it


----------



## wildliferyan (Jul 31, 2010)

I have hunted up farmington for deer most of my life. Great place to hunt morning and night. but is way to thick and there is not enough pressure pushing the game during the day. Without scouting it is very tough.


----------



## sureman123 (Oct 24, 2011)

YEAH.. Thats the biggest problem with northern utah is the "private" hunts are taking over.. my family is originally from park valley and have hunted out there for generations.. we are very very familiar with what is private and what is public land.. as of late the public land and access has been choked off by the CMHU's or whatever their called.. "private hunting clubs for deep pockets"

I have since given up hunting the area after 40 years.. the orange paint over the forest service access signs, public access roads being padlocked and CMHU's that incorporate more public land than private have ruined this area completely.. 

are there any good bucks out there? well yes there is.. if your willing to hunt a 30" buck is pretty easy in a lot of areas... problem is access.. 

there needs to be some stiff fines for landowner abuse to access roads.. and us hunters really should ban together and make an end to the CHMU's.. they are destroying our access and opportunity.. just ask yourself, when did a landowner give you access for asking in utah for less than 5K...but less than a few short years ago I could knock on the door and offer to let down fences and get access to almost anything.


----------



## captain (Nov 18, 2007)

I have hunted the Northern Region for many years and can tell you that if a guy had the time and put in the effort he could shoot a good four point every year in the Northern Unit. However, I believe the argument is that the deer numbers are way down from what they have been in the past. I hunt in the Cache area on a regular basis and can tell you that the herd there is is really bad shape. While we can find good bucks every year the actual numbers of deer that we see on a daily basis is a mear fraction of what we were seeing in the past, and it seems to be getting worse every year.

In one of the Norther RAC meetings it came out that the DWR was doing much of their deer population estimates for the state on CWMUs. When the question was asked if they every surveyed the public land they would not respond with a straight answer. It made it sound like the DWR was using the large populations present on CWMUs (which the average joe can't hunt) to say that the deer herds are doing just fine in Northern Utah. I think that if they ignored the CWMUs and did their deer counts based exclusivley on Public property their numbers would tell a grim story. That is what bugs me when the DWR comes out and says, "We aren't concerned, there are plenty of deer in Northern Utah".


----------

