# Would you support this GS Spike idea?



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

The other post I had got so off topic, it can't be brought back. So I would like to start this post about opinions and understanding of both sides. I'm not looking to kill all opportunity, and feel free to give me other ideas of what might could do better. 

Would you support separating the spike units in half, so 11 units in each half, and only hunting each half every other year? At the same time keeping tags, seasons, and regulations the same? We had far less spike units at one time and still gave out 10,000 tags. For 11 units we could still allow the current number of tags to be released but lay off each half, in order to give it a rest period year. This keeps the GS about the same, while allowing units to rest for a year.

Now good feedback from you will get good feedback from me. Let's not turn this thread into a argument.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

No, I wouldn't.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

No, I woudn't.


----------



## nocturnalenemy (Jun 26, 2011)

Nope.


----------



## COWAN (Oct 7, 2012)

No I wouldn't either. I believe the biggest issue with declining elk herds is the killing off of far too many cows. With out cows we will not have more elk! Sorry off topic but I believe this is fact and the biggest issue with elk, not killing spikes.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

No, but I also believe that the division should open up all the records on just how many elk there are on each and every unit. Cow hunts could be used to control the herds as they are supposed to be doing now. The big problem that I see right now on the spike hunts is that if you kill off 50% of the spikes in a unit you are doing away with a lot of the bulls that you will be killing off when they are getting older and end up with fewer LE tags for that unit.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Your idea is not going to help a thing. The problem is not with the spike bull, its that cows that are not allowed to calve. As most things without momma you don't have babies. A bull or a buck or even a rooster can service many ladies. But with no ladies it is pointless.

The problem, in my mind is that Utah has a desire to bring back the Mule Deer. It is pretty simple to see. WIth less Elk you have more room for Deer. I know that they can live under the same tree and there is millions of people that see elk and deer eating out of the same bush, but elk just run them out of home so to say! 

Give it 15 years and limited Elk and we all will be crying over no Elk and then we will be killin Does by the groves!


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

No. There is no biological reason to.


----------



## utaharcheryhunter (Jul 13, 2009)

I wouldn't.. imagine trying to regulate that.. It wouldn't fly.. Just my opinion..

But I would be for seperating the LE units in half.. But permanently.. A north and south.; east and west... 

And make it one elk tag per person per year.. either any bull, LE bull, cow, or spike.. One a year.. 
Just my thoughts...


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

NO! This accomplishes nothing and only adds an additional layer of complexity to fall hunt planning. You're barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Not a chance!

We should allow a few more trophy bull tags and cut the cow tags a bit. However, if we stop shooting the cows the elk population will grow rapidly and I do not believe that is what the DWR wants. Keep the elk herds at a controlled number and allow for the deer to rebound is what I believe the plan is. In some units it's working already. My unit has a lot more deer now than it has in the last 10 years.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

Nope, just another stupid thread by you know who....


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

30-06-hunter said:


> Nope, just another stupid thread by you know who....


Wow right here is a good helpfull post! Thank you for all you do!!!!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I'll agree with you cows are much more important and spike hunts aren't hurting overall elk population. However in the long run big bull tags because of all the spikes killed will be harder to draw. What's happening is although many aren't for inches the spike hunts will continue to drop the bull:cow ratio, resulting in less and less LE tags making them harder to draw. General season is fine this is a way to modify it and see more bulls get through and grow up . 

If you don't modify the current system and our herd quality slips to far you'll see outfitters, guides , public, and conservation groups pressure the division and state and you'll see GS elk hunting go away despite your opinions. So modifying it now rather than when it's too late is a good idea. If you can't see it coming, you haven't looked at where hunting is heading. Inches will win out , and if GSeasons aren't modified some you will lose them despite your opinions, because the pressure will come from high profit areas and they'll get what they want. You all know it, don't disagree simply to disagree with me.

As for 30-06, eventually you'll watch what I want happen mark my words. Whether you like my opinions or not GS is losing its ground and place . Those of you not willing to somewhat compromise GS areas will watch them slowly disappear.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

So what you are saying is that we should never under estimate the power of rich stupid people in large numbers?


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

What biological justification to you have for this odd idea? Didn't you pay attention to the bitching and moaning about #2 and splitting regions into management units? 

NOPE! Not for splitting them at all. I would be for following the Arizona template for seasons. They produce quality and are starting to show quantity. Someone there might be smarter than someone here. ***wink***


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Nope. As has been said, it's not spikes that affect overall numbers, it's the cows. If you want more elk, issue fewer cow tags. It's that simple.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I'll agree with you cows are much more important and spike hunts aren't hurting overall elk population. However in the long run big bull tags because of all the spikes killed will be harder to draw. What's happening is although many aren't for inches the spike hunts will continue to drop the bull:cow ratio, resulting in less and less LE tags making them harder to draw. General season is fine this is a way to modify it and see more bulls get through and grow up .
> 
> If you don't modify the current system and our herd quality slips to far you'll see outfitters, guides , public, and conservation groups pressure the division and state and you'll see GS elk hunting go away despite your opinions. So modifying it now rather than when it's too late is a good idea. If you can't see it coming, you haven't looked at where hunting is heading. Inches will win out , and if GSeasons aren't modified some you will lose them despite your opinions, because the pressure will come from high profit areas and they'll get what they want. You all know it, don't disagree simply to disagree with me.


Without really looking at the LE numbers I beleive that LE tags have increased each year on most all units, and under the current spike hunting practices. Sure I can see maybe a problem with all the cows being taken out now how it can effect but I tell ya UTAH wants DEER!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

TAK said:


> Without really looking at the LE numbers I beleive that LE tags have increased each year on most all units, and under the current spike hunting practices. Sure I can see maybe a problem with all the cows being taken out now how it can effect but I tell ya UTAH wants DEER!


Told ya!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Yep and option 2 happened despite your resistance didn't it? And if you don't give a little you'll start losing a lot. That's the justification if small changes aren't made now big changes will be made in the near future. A significant drop in quality will not last long in this state . So when it changes remember me. And TAK just this season LE tags dropped quite a bit on many units.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

okay chicken little


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Told ya!


NOT that I am part of UTAH! I would rather hunt Elk over Deer anyday.... But what us campfire quarterbacks don't seem to see is we are just in a CYCLE! (not the animals , US!)Years back it was all about getting the Elk herds built up, now they are lets knock'm down! Lets get us some Deer!!! "And, &" wait for it..... $$$$$$$$$! 
How is the 2015 Deer Program going to get funded?


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Yep and option 2 happened despite your resistance didn't it? And if you don't give a little you'll start losing a lot. That's the justification if small changes aren't made now big changes will be made in the near future. A significant drop in quality will not last long in this state . So when it changes remember me. And TAK just this season LE tags dropped quite a bit on many units.


Like I said I don't have the numbers, but my guess is on some of the Elite units they did go down or stayed the same. But for the majority I think they increased. I think they deciede that on the age of bulls (score) that they can produce....


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

You know I enjoy the forum and it's members , but muleskinner you don't believe inches and rich organizations won't influence more change? They already have , so sit blind if you want but quality is important here and in hunting now. Your opinion won't overpower there's.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that we can afford to have 100% of our spikes harvested in our general season spike units...Some of you may not agree, but believe it or not there are enough yearling bulls that branch above the ear to keep our head above water. Besides the real bulls doing the breeding have already gone through their right of passage and will be servicing the cows. 

I would never support opening units off and on when we have the resources and spike elk are definitely a resource that is expendable. I see plenty of spike elk on the winter ranges and if one year I don't, there will still be yearling bulls that will eventually breed the cows. 

Let's Keep On Hunting!!!!!!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

there are also a lot with money that support the other side, and the fact is they are the ones that have the most money. The general population of hunters, those that are for opportunity are not "trophy hunters" per se and we are the real monopoly. Always have been.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Then muleskinner how have half the things that have happened went through ? They have more influence I hope you can get off your high horse and realize it .


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Well technically all of the things that have happened went through, not half of them. Secondly I ride a mule. Third thing is.........once again you are making an assumption. To assume that I sit idly by and not support the causes that I believe in is ignorance on your part. You just need to realize that I don't necessarily share your same opinions. Nor do I have to.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Critter said:


> No, but I also believe that the division should open up all the records on just how many elk there are on each and every unit. Cow hunts could be used to control the herds as they are supposed to be doing now. The big problem that I see right now on the spike hunts is that if you kill off 50% of the spikes in a unit you are doing away with a lot of the bulls that you will be killing off when they are getting older and end up with fewer LE tags for that unit.


Uhh....I think the records are actually already open. All you have to do is go their website and you can usually find that stuff. Or, if you really want to, do a GRAMA request to get all the information you want. But, in terms of elk estimates and counts, you can get that info just through google.

Also, the DWR has already come out and said that spike tags will reduce the number of LE tags that can be given. In fact, when the DWR did their big elk survey a few years ago, question #20 said specifically that "Discontinuing all SPIKE BULL ELK hunts could potentially provide an additional 500 Limited Entry permits. This would reduce drawing odds from the current odds of 1 in 16 to 1 in 13.5." Although the number of spike elk tags have increased by a possible 2,500 tags since then, it still gives you an idea of what kind of effect it would have on LE hunting. Also, FWIW, The question eventually asks, "What is your opinion of general season SPIKE BULL ELK hunting in Utah?" The results? About 50% supported while only 25% opposed....for this reason alone, spike elk hunting should definitely NOT go away!

The rest of the survey: wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/info/2010-03-03.pdf‎


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Uhh....I think the records are actually already open. All you have to do is go their website and you can usually find that stuff. Or, if you really want to, do a GRAMA request to get all the information you want. But, in terms of elk estimates and counts, you can get that info just through google.
> 
> Also, the DWR has already come out and said that spike tags will reduce the number of LE tags that can be given. In fact, when the DWR did their big elk survey a few years ago, question #20 said specifically that "Discontinuing all SPIKE BULL ELK hunts could potentially provide an additional 500 Limited Entry permits. This would reduce drawing odds from the current odds of 1 in 16 to 1 in 13.5." Although the number of spike elk tags have increased by a possible 2,500 tags since then, it still gives you an idea of what kind of effect it would have on LE hunting. Also, FWIW, The question eventually asks, "What is your opinion of general season SPIKE BULL ELK hunting in Utah?" The results? About 50% supported while only 25% opposed....for this reason alone, spike elk hunting should definitely NOT go away!
> 
> The rest of the survey: wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/info/2010-03-03.pdf‎


I remember the thread talking about this... or close to it. I for one was very against it, I would rather hunt every year for a spike than wait the many years for a chance at shooting a mature bull. I think Pro and I argues about just this.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> there are also a lot with money that support the other side, and the fact is they are the ones that have the most money. The general population of hunters, those that are for opportunity are not "trophy hunters" per se and we are the real monopoly. Always have been.


What is this other side you talk of? We are shooting ourselves in the foot daily with the desires we all have. You know shooting the biggest! Sad thing is hunting has went way of politics & $$$$. You talk of our money as the biggest, well I am shamed to say not even close! I know I am guilty every $5 or $10 dollar try for a SFW tag each year and there is grundles of others that are with me.


----------



## hunting777 (May 3, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> feel free to give me other ideas of what might could do better.
> 
> .


Well Just a *thought and a thought only*. let's just turn the whole state into a spike only hunt. Then make more limited entry hunts off of the any bull units. This will break up the amount of people putting into each unit. It would allow a hunter to draw an any bull tag with less points, kind of spread it out possibly. Also it might possibly allow the current any bull units to repopulate. I have hunted the Uintas for years and hiked my tail off and only to see few elk. That is beautiful country for elk and yet hard to find due to numbers in my opinion. Yes I know I might not be in the right area. I have since then went back to hunting spikes. Yes I might not harvest one every year, but a least I see elk and a lot of them.

But If I have been reading from the others post correctly. The harvest rate would probably still stay the same 25% ish. This would definitely raiser the herd count and increase the mature bulls. Yes I understand it might take awhile but I can see happening. :-?


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

I am speaking of the general population that hunts that do not include the rich organizations. People continually bring up the east and/or Europe as an example that the sky is falling. An example where most hunting lands are private. I still believe that it is the general population that I speak of that brings the most money to the table. When opportunity to hunt declines it cost the DWR bundles in revenue and it is a revenue that will not be replaced by the "wealthy hunters" IMO. While I keep current with what is going on in the pursuit of inches it is still my belief that that it is the money that comes from Joe Hunter that is the key to funding, which includes the LE portions of the hunt. In pretty much all cases in areas that have a large amount of public land, once the balance is tweaked to to the point that it favors the wealthy hunter the state that was guilty in it's management pays the price with a lack of future revenue.

Probably didn't explain myself to well there.

As far the convention tags go. I don't buy them and won't. The odds suck to say the least and I have a better chance at getting a good tag through the draws here and in other states (in many cases their are some awesome general tags in other states). If the game is managed for opportunity there will always be big bucks/bulls. Harvesting them has never made me a better man or hunter but seeing them seems to make a big difference.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Let me just make this statement. I do believe in spike hunting and general season, but I also think there are small adjustments that could be made to get LE hunting at and back to a higher standard. My main concern is the cow slaughter the last decade. I would like less cow permits more than anything, and that's my stance. If the spike hunt remains the same it won't bother me , but it WILL make LE tags harder to draw and fill in the future. You can't shot all the spike and two point bucks and expect them to be there as 4 points 20 years later when you draw your tag. End such cow slaughter and I'll be perfectly happy with the spike hunt remaining the same as long as there are no noticeable signs it is hurting the health of utahs elk herd


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Me muleskinner in the end your going to keep hunting and buying tags in matter what the DWR and rich organizations do, so what do you think they care ? Your going to buy into the system even if they make some changes. In the end they loose no revenue and make whatever changes they want.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Me muleskinner in the end your going to keep hunting and buying tags in matter what the DWR and rich organizations do, so what do you think they care ? Your going to buy into the system even if they make some changes. In the end they loose no revenue and make whatever changes they want.


Dude... you are starting to sound like the conspiracy doom and gloom crowd. The ones that believe that the 1 per-centers have this plan to keep everyone else poor.

The truth is the state gets more money from Joe, Jim, Bob and Pedro buying tags than it gets from Daddy Warbucks. What Joe, Bob, Jim and Pedro need is to be organized and fight back. The problem we have here in Utah is that the guy that organized them in the past was actually working for the $$ crowd.

Bottom line is we need to voice up and then follow through with our wallets. If 15% of us keep them closed for a year they will suffer and they will listen. No rich guy will make up that kind of revenue loss.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

MadHunter said:


> Dude... you are starting to sound like the conspiracy doom and gloom crowd. The ones that believe that the 1 per-centers have this plan to keep everyone else poor.
> 
> The truth is the state gets more money from Joe, Jim, Bob and Pedro buying tags than it gets from Daddy Warbucks. What Joe, Bob, Jim and Pedro need is to be organized and fight back. The problem we have here in Utah is that the guy that organized them in the past was actually working for the $$ crowd.
> 
> Bottom line is we need to voice up and then follow through with our wallets. If 15% of us keep them closed for a year they will suffer and they will listen. No rich guy will make up that kind of revenue loss.


and that is what happens and has happened in every state where the overwhelming majority of the hunting is done on public land. Protect the public land first and foremost.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Here are the facts of the effects of spike permits on LE units every year:

Beaver unit: 

2005-06- The unit had 28 bulls/100 cows, and 17 mature bulls/100 cows
after spike hunt was implemented:
2010-11- The unit now has 13 bulls/ 100 cows, and only 8 mature bulls/100 cows

The Dutton unit:
2005-06- 39 bulls/100 cows & 18 mature bulls/100 cows
after spike hunt was implemented:
2010-11- 16 bulls/100 cows

The Monroe unit:
2005-06- 50 bulls/100 cows
after spike hunt was implemented:
2008-09- 31 bulls/100 cows and 16 mature bulls/100 cows

The Boulder unit:
2005-06- 42 bulls/100 cows & 31 mature bulls/100 cows
after spike hunt was implemented:
2008-09- 11 bulls/100 cows & 6 mature bulls/100 cows

Fishlake unit:
This unit has always been open for spike hunting look how much lower its statistics are:
2005-06 13 bulls/100 cows & 7 mature bulls/100 cows


So looking at these count numbers and statistics the spike hunt has had a signifigant effect on LE units. In fact to a point there bull/cow ratios are no better than a General Season deer units Buckoe ratios. So I'm putting in for 15-20 years now in order to hunt basically General Season odds and quality for elk? So everyone who was hiding behind Bull:cow ratios are still above 30 bulls: 100 cows or closer can look at these statistics and look at where we were to where we are now. Granted it is very nice to see the elk population in the state growing, but bull:cow ratios have dropped signifigantly.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

How long were you aboard the mother ship? And NO I wouldn't support it. There you go, 100%to 0.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

martymcfly73 said:


> How long were you aboard the mother ship? And NO I wouldn't support it. There you go, 100%to 0.


I wouldn't support it either! Still 100% to 0%.


----------



## reb8600 (Sep 8, 2007)

No. It will just add problems


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

#1 DEER you need to drop back and look at the way elk are managed in the state. Specifically objectives, You'll have your answer about the future of LE permits.

Groups that market wealth permits are responsible.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> So looking at these count numbers and statistics the spike hunt has had a signifigant effect on LE units. In fact to a point there bull/cow ratios are no better than a General Season deer units Buckoe ratios. So I'm putting in for 15-20 years now in order to hunt basically General Season odds and quality for elk? So everyone who was hiding behind Bull:cow ratios are still above 30 bulls: 100 cows or closer can look at these statistics and look at where we were to where we are now. Granted it is very nice to see the elk population in the state growing, but bull:cow ratios have dropped signifigantly.


You are missing several things here:
1) The Boulder and Beaver units have also always been open to spike hunting similar to Fish Lake. So, your spike theory doesn't hold water there.
2) Aerial counts of elk have always resulted in lower counts of bull elk because of the timing of those flights. Biologists will tell you this. The counts of elk and the counts of deer are done at different times--deer counts are typically done during the rut when bucks are much more easily accounted for. So, your population counts/classification counts will always result in lower bull counts...that is expected.
3) Bull elk LE tags are managed by the average age of harvested bulls. The monroe, for example, prior to 2010 had an age objective for harvested bulls of 5-6...because the unit's averages were above this, more LE bull tags were issued to bring the averages down and inline with objectives (This, in turn, would also lower bull/cow ratios). Then, in 2011 age objectives were again increased to 7-8 and fewer LE bull tags were issued. So, it is clear that the number and caliber of bulls on Monroe should have seen a decrease...but, now, as tag numbers are being cut, the quality of elk should go back up. [And, LE tag numbers will continue to decrease until they have met that age objective on the harvested bulls.

The same thing is seen across the board on many units...increased tags over the past few years has resulted in smaller quality bulls. But, those tags are being issued because the average age of harvested bull elk was not within the age objective. If the 3-year average age of harvested bull elk is lower than the objective tags will be cut to bring the quality back up. You messed up your numbers with your post on the other thread because they were NOT 3-year averages.

Honestly, 1-I, you should stop! Your posts, again, do you a disservice and show how little you really understand.


----------



## archerben (Sep 14, 2007)

> My main concern is the cow slaughter the last decade. I would like less cow permits more than anything, and that's my stance.


Despite this "cow slaughter", our statewide elk herd has grown by about 15,000 animals over the last decade. Due to population objectives, we can't just stop killing cows. If we do then the population objectives will be far surpassed and the DWR will be forced to start killing elk themselves in order to please the Forest Service, farmers, ranchers, etc., and to meet the mandated population objectives. Since these elk must die anyway, I would much rather see them taken by hunters than by contracters.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

archerben said:


> Despite this "cow slaughter", our statewide elk herd has grown by about 15,000 animals over the last decade. Due to population objectives, we can't just stop killing cows. If we do then the population objectives will be far surpassed and the DWR will be forced to start killing elk themselves in order to please the Forest Service, farmers, ranchers, etc., and to meet the mandated population objectives. Since these elk must die anyway, I would much rather see them taken by hunters than by contracters.


This is another reason that spike hunts are good....if you end the spike hunts, you will end up with a major dilemma--too many bulls. If these young bulls are not killed, the end result will be a population with a high bull/cow ratio. And, the only way to maintain the harvest age objectives and the population objectives within the mandated set ranges, the only choice the DWR would have is to issue cow elk tags. This is what happened before on some of these units....the number of bulls was rising, the number of cows was dropping, and herd production was slowed, and ultimately bull/cow ratios were at, nearing, and even higher than 1:1!

The fear surrounding these cow hunts is also unfounded in my opinion...people often refer to the "Fish Lake elk slaughter" about 10-13 years ago as evidence. But, in doing so, they fail to remember or even consider the fact that elk herds are pretty darn productive. IN fact, just a few years after the "slaughter" the unit was opened back up to cow hunts. And, now, the unit's herd objective has been raised to ultimately house more elk. So, despite the "slaughter", the herd has since completely rebounded and even surpassed the numbers from before the slaughter (and it only took the herd a few years...)!


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Actually....... While i don't like the idea, Mr 1 might have a point for future management. If the quality declines or LTD permits decline, then the spike hunt will become the "scape goat" and there will be demand to do away with it. The roller coaster of management change will continue.

I vote to keep the spike hunt. Will the lobbyists vote the same? 

One quick item-- If we stop shooting spikes and the unit has a 6 year old management objective then we need to carry those spikes for 6 years before they meet the objective. The unit can only hold a certain number of elk (population objective) so if we carry more bulls then we must shoot more cows. Would we rather shoot a spike or a cow? Which is more important to the herd-- a spike or a cow?

Ben and Wy2 beat me to the "post" button. Their posts are right on track.


----------



## wapiti67 (Oct 2, 2007)

no way!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Packout said:


> Actually....... While i don't like the idea, Mr 1 might have a point for future management. If the quality declines or LTD permits decline, then the spike hunt will become the "scape goat" and there will be demand to do away with it. The roller coaster of management change will continue.
> 
> I vote to keep the spike hunt. Will the lobbyists vote the same?
> 
> ...


I am in no way saying stop shooting spikes, it's a good management tool, but eventually your lobby groups if quantity and quality of bulls continues to drop, and no change is implemented so fingers aren't pointed at the spike hunt, we will loose it. And you can talk about hunter Bob, Jim, and Tim, all you want, but hunter Bob, Jim, and Tim will keep buying into the system even after changes are made. Lobbying parties know this, and there is big money in big bulls and bucks as well. So if they can have both they will.


----------



## mr.seven (Sep 18, 2007)

i to didnt like the idea of spike bull units when they started. even though i had only seen two three point bulls in years i hunted but usually was able to harvest a spike bull. one year after implementation i saw 5 branched bulls the next, 3 times that many and now if i dont see 30 to 40 branched bulls when i am down there its my fault for being lazy. and i am down there after the limited rifle and black powder when quite a few branched bulls have been taken. we still have the same success mabe a little better on the spike hunt so i have no technical data to post just 44 years of hunting them i have to say spike bull hunts work really well i enjoy seeing the branched bulls even though i have never drawen one but i will always be happy with my chance for a spike


----------



## COWAN (Oct 7, 2012)

Will a spike this year be a bigger bull next year? I question this because this year I shot a spike by two, so if he would have made it thru the hunts would he have been a rag horn of some sorts next year or just a spike again?


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

COWAN said:


> Will a spike this year be a bigger bull next year? I question this because this year I shot a spike by two, so if he would have made it thru the hunts would he have been a rag horn of some sorts next year or just a spike again?


Spikes can be spikes for 2 years. So some spikes are three year old bulls.


----------



## clean pass through (Nov 26, 2007)

Nope. All of the other points I was going to make have been brought up in one way or another. Except 1.

Three years ago I drew a Cow tag for Boulder. I saw 14 spikes during the deer hunt and 8 spikes on the late cow hunt. Dude you are really up in the night if you think the spikes are all being killed. Not a chance!

Doom and gloom that is all I get from your posts from pheasants to deer and elk. Yes there is problems with the way things are managed but that is in nearly every state.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Not a good idea #1DEER.


----------

