# Regulating Hunters



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

Now that its the off season and everyone maybe has taken a step back and settled down, I thought I would share with you a day in a controlled hunt WMA.

Step one, you either get a reservation from the WMA or a DWR division office or show up the morning of the hunt day and put your name on a reserve list.

Step two, the morning of the hunt day you arrive 2 hours early to draw a bingo ball for picking blinds for the day. Low ball gets first pick of blinds. Your reservation is for either a man made pond, hay field, or what they call a bull rush check (small man made pond ranging from 1/2 acre to maybe 1 1/2 acres in size.

Step three, after picking your blind you then have until LGS to get to it and set up your decoy's.

Example





Step four, hope you get a blind the birds have been feeding in the day before.

Step five, you can move blinds at noon if a blind opens up but you have to go back to the check station and sign up again on the reserve list.

Step six, back into the blind you had or move to your new blind before 2 pm to finish our your day.

Few more facts, you can only hold one reservation at a time. You can not make reservations on holiday's or weekends. You can have a max of 4 people hunt from a blind. If your draw a ball and buddy shows up he can not hunt with you until after noon. You cannot hunt your check, pond, or field from anywhere but the blind. So if the birds are landing on the very north side of your blind 150 yards away from you....all you can do it watch.

So how dose this sound to you boys? I think something like this would be great for Farmington, OB or Bear River don't you-O,-

Oh ya hunting is only allowed on the first two days of the season then only on even day's the rest of the season.

Man I think the entire Utah waterfowl regulation book is easier to memorize then the rules for hunting this place:shock:


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

That sounds like a lot of bull$hit to me. The good thing about the WMA's around the GSL is there is plenty of water and plenty of places to spread people out. I think I would have to quit all together, or hunt out of state if I had to play by those rules. I can see why this happens if that is the only place with water and there are hundreds of hunters wanting to participate. In Utah we have plenty of water and options for waterfowlers. I hope we NEVER see blind draws in this state.;-)


----------



## toasty (May 15, 2008)

Fowlmouth said:


> That sounds like a lot of bull$hit to me. The good thing about the WMA's around the GSL is there is plenty of water and plenty of places to spread people out. I think I would have to quit all together, or hunt out of state if I had to play by those rules. I can see why this happens if that is the only place with water and there are hundreds of hunters wanting to participate. In Utah we have plenty of water and options for waterfowlers. I hope we NEVER see blind draws in this state.;-)


Amen. If you want restrictions, buy into a hunting club and knock yourself out. Public land should be managed to maximize hunter opportunity for all. Hopefully this type of hunting never comes to public lands in Utah.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

toasty said:


> Amen. If you want restrictions, buy into a hunting club and knock yourself out. Public land should be managed to maximize hunter opportunity for all. Hopefully this type of hunting never comes to public lands in Utah.


 If it does come to Utah it will be because of the private groups (you know the one's that raise money and give it to the DWR) push for it. If your group wants to raise money and hand it over to the DWR then do it, but you shouldn't expect to have any say in how things are managed or how the money is spent. If you don't like it, keep your money and take your group hunting out of state.


----------



## utahbigbull (May 9, 2012)

I would absolutely HATE it!! But the one plus I would see is that it would thin the herd as a result.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

man that just plan out suck balls right there. That **** better stay out of Utah. If it come here i will hunt other state. screw that crap.


----------



## Stimmy (Sep 10, 2007)

If this ever happens in Utah, that will be the day I never buy another license in this state. Lord help us....I can't imagine going thru that bull$%%& to hunt. we really have it good here...


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

I would quit waterfowl hunting if I had to deal with all that BS. I hunt where the birds want to be, not some stupid permanent blind.


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> If it does come to Utah it will be because of the private groups (you know the one's that raise money and give it to the DWR) push for it. If your group wants to raise money and hand it over to the DWR then do it, but you shouldn't expect to have any say in how things are managed or how the money is spent. If you don't like it, keep your money and take your group hunting out of state.


Which private groups would want this to happen?


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

Believe me guys you never want this to come to Utah. 

I live 5 minutes from the WMA and have been fortunate to have figured it out and up to this season I have done fairly well considering. 

What kills me is watching guys drive here every other day (1 1/2 hour drive) to hunt it. They come in blind having no idea of where the birds are working and what they are doing. They shoot 1 or 2 birds for the group and then do it again the next weekend. I guess when it's all they know (and for some have) that's what they do. 

Count your blessings guys, I know I do every trip I take back home to hunt.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

well with the population boom in the next 10-20 years, I can't imagine what the marshes will look like. Duck hunting has become quite popular with other critters being on the decline.


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

If humans keep reproducing, the writing is already on the wall in very large bold letters.
Human population stabilization/reduction is the only way to keep things the way they are now.
Fact of life boys.


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

Ill take it!! Its probably way better hunting then just going where you want when you want. Kind of like this day. It was slow and we didnt see any birds....









your welcome to come back any time!!! perhaps next late season ill come your way for a chance at a nice cinny!! they are my Eleanor!


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

Don't make me take you up on that man! 

You know you've got an open invitation any time you want you want to cone down!


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

utahbigbull said:


> I would absolutely HATE it!! But the one plus I would see is that it would thin the herd as a result.


I hate to tell ya but it's not the case. There are so many new guys every year. Some don't last some do but when it's all they have Its good enough for them.

Really makes you feel for some of them.


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

utahbigbull said:


> I would absolutely HATE it!! But the one plus I would see is that it would thin the herd as a result.


i think that is wishful thinking. All it would mean is you would stand in a line wondering why so many people haven't given up the sport. But they would be thinking like you, "why are their still so many hunters who haven't quit?"


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

It's really easy to forget how good we really have it here-for all the complaining about crowds and inconsiderate hunters I very rarely have to deal with either. One of the benefits of having free access is to be able to take the time to learn areas, find out where the most popular areas are, and avoid them like the plague. :mrgreen: I'm not ready to have the state make those decisions for me.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

As many of you know, the Bear River Refuge (Federal) has been buying up duck clubs over the last few years. They immediately close them to hunting and access. After the UWA complained, they said they are working on a plan to open one of the old clubs (Fin and Feather) to limited access. By limited access, they are proposing to make it a youth area that you would have to make reservations in advance. You would also have to be escorted by a federal employee to hunt in a designated area for the special high-quality youth hunting experience. This, to me, is the foot in the door to making the refuge an area where special draws are considered the best way to maintain a "quality experience". It's a steaming pant-load of crap, and I will continue to fight against it.
R


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

hamernhonkers said:


> Now that its the off season and everyone maybe has taken a step back and settled down, I thought I would share with you a day in a controlled hunt WMA.
> 
> Step one, you either get a reservation from the WMA or a DWR division office or show up the morning of the hunt day and put your name on a reserve list.
> 
> ...


I think it sounds pretty great. It will make for a more enjoyable hunting experience with more decoy friendly birds.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I think it sounds pretty great. It will make for a more enjoyable hunting experience with more decoy friendly birds.


 Then move to California or Nevada. Oh, let us know how it works out for you.;-)


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Fowlmouth said:


> Then move to California or Nevada. Oh, let us know how it works out for you.;-)


It works pretty well in Colorado - well better than the state parks that require your dog to be on a 6' foot leash at all times. Which is not my preferred method of retrieving birds.

Also, the Humboldt river in Carlin, Nevada provides decent jump shooting.

If you look at the benefits of it, like less hunting pressure, less sky busters, less people hunting over your decoys - then it is a winning situation.

Odds are they would create more habitat for this type of hunting. (Which means more birds)

Birds will be less stacked in the rest area, because of pressure - which will give you more of an opportunity to fill limits.

I see it as more of a winning situation, than a losing situation.

Also, there will still be places where you can scout and go for the birds. There is a lot of walk in access North of Denver (even though the most popular spots are on reservation).

I also think reservations would give a better opportunity to father and son hunts with limited means. People that can only get out a few times a year.

It would be a lot more rewarding to youth to not have to shoot at birds that have been conditioned to fly at B52 Altitude.

So in summary.

Less Sky Busters

Less Duck Pressure

More Potential Habitat for Ducks

More Quality Duck Hunts

Quality Father and Son Opportunities

A Quality Hunt for those with limited means.


----------



## Stimmy (Sep 10, 2007)

Completly disagree. how would they create more habitat? Quality father and son hunts? assuming you draw. sky busters will never go away.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Stimmy said:


> Completly disagree. how would they create more habitat? Quality father and son hunts? assuming you draw. sky busters will never go away.


In California it's a draw, because of the enormous population.

In Colorado it's more of a dinner reservation and it results in good hunting.

I see it as more of a dinner reservation, unless the population in Utah explodes into California proportions.

As for quality father and son hunts - You and your boy alone on a pond all by yourself - it doesn't get much more quality.

If an area is only hunted on even or odd days - the effect of sky busting will go down.

Look at it as Limited Entry Duck Hunting.

There will still be places where you can hunt during the season, but in other areas there will only be limited to the reservations.

Utah's habitat isn't conducive to reservation hunting right now. In that most are big ponds with dikes around them. These ponds would be too big for hunting.

They would have to be modified or more lakes would have to built - either way I look at it as building more habitat.

Also, if you are late - you don't hunt. So, there is no more of the guys showing up at shooting time and placing the decoys next too you.

If it is done right, then it will make for a more rewarding experience.

And like I said - There will be limited entry hunting areas and general season hunting areas.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Like I said in a previous post, It's nice we have such huge WMA's that people can get away from crowds if they choose to do so. There are so many places to go on our WMA's if a person would get off the dike, get out of there boat or walk further than 100 yards from the parking areas. I disagree too.

"MuscleWhitefish"

So in summary.

Less Sky Busters There were only a handful of guys hunting Urban geese on the WMA I hunted, and guess what? Yep, they skybusted everything. It won't matter if there are 2 people or 200 it will happen.

Less Duck Pressure I agree with this somewhat, but pressure of any kind will send birds to areas that are a safe zone.

More Potential Habitat for Ducks Not exactly sure what you mean by this. Have you seen our WMA's? They look better now than they have in over 30 years, since the flood. We have a phragmites problem, but I don't know how we will ever get rid of that crap.

More Quality Duck Hunts I guess it's all in how you define quality. For me it's the opportunity to go whenever I choose. It's being out there with friends/family or sometimes with just the dog. I have quality hunts more times than not. I shoot a few birds and my dog gets to retrieve them. Are there more people out on the weekends? Yes for sure. Are there spots that never see a hunter all season? Yes there are. 

Quality Father and Son Opportunities I'm really confused about this one. You can take your kids all season long and experience waterfowling together. Some of the best quality time with my daughters has taken place in the marsh. I don't need my opportunities and days limited to have quality time with them. 

A Quality Hunt for those with limited means. The only people that should have an excuse for limited means is someone with a physical disability. I think there could be better blind locations constructed for these folks that have impairments. Other folks have the "means" to get away from the crowd, they usually lack the motivation to do so. There are so many good spots a person can hunt when they get off the dikes and discover the marsh.


----------



## HeberHunter (Nov 13, 2014)

I don't mean to be a stick in any of your sides but when I read this post I actually thought it might be kind of nice. After reading all of your posts I can now see why you wouldn't want it here in Utah. With the bureacracy comes all of the bloat and rules with it. What I wouldn't mind is if the DWR could put one or two of these places together for the youth and beginning hunters like myself. I have hunted in Utah my whole life. I have fished in Utah my whole life. But, I am limited to those that I know and that I grew up with. Everyone that I know and have grown up with hunts Deer, Elk, and the predators. We fish the lakes and that's it. I've never gone fly fishing, hunted duck, geese, (or any waterfowl for that matter), chukar, grouse, (or any upland game for that matter). Trying to get into waterfowling seems like a monumental task. I read all of the posts here in the waterfowl section and it sounds like a blast. But then I read all of the newbie posts in here to and it is mostly, "Look to the skies and where you see the geese and ducks flying go there and shoot em' " For a novice like me that loves to hunt and fish but has never gone there is a huge learning curve. To have a place like this I feel like I could actually have a shot at getting into waterfowling. Initially I'd probably have to go with someone that has a dog to retrieve or do one of the corn field areas but at least I would have a shot at getting a taste of it. So, I don't think that this is 100% a bad idea. For youth and 100% beginners such as myself it could be a great tool. Then once the youth and newbies like myself get better and more experienced we'd likely move away from such properties and get or own dogs, blinds, etc. It seems like a good way to get the beginners involved. As for making all of the WMA strict and rigid like this, I say no way. But to get the DWR or one of the local sportsmens chapter to promote a beginner area that is similar to this, I'd be all in. Also, if something for beginners like this exists in Utah point me in the right direction. I'd love to try out waterfowling but the learning curve in Utah is pretty steap for me.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

WOW...
How can you have a quality hunt if you show up at the marsh and they tell you to turn around and go home???

The special access for certain generation thing is getting kind of old. I agree that it is important to get kids back involved but they gotta show a bit of motivation. I can't tell ya how many miles I put on an old Roger DeCoster bike as a kid looking for hunting and fishing spots. How many miles I walked rivers to find hunting and fishing spots. Put down the Xbox controller and get pedaling / walking. Along with this scenario,if you feel as a hunter that a quality hunt means that you have to tell another hunter to stay home you aren't doing it right. Get off your rear end and LOOK. It's kind of amazing what you'll find if ya happen to maybe just try an out of the way place for a few hours. 

Before the bullets start flying my direction concerning my comments about kids and hunters that want their definition of a "Quality Hunt" handed to them with little to absolutely NO work. You don't know me and what I do or don't do for friends, their kids or kids of people I've never met until we hit the launch in predawn darkness.

no limited entry plague in the Utah Waterfowl World.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I think that if some bureaucrat at the DNR determines that an area will be deemed a restricted area for the purposes of providing a "quality hunt" for a few lucky people...then that means the rest of us are unlucky. It also means that the area is not truly open to hunting. Telling people that they cant hunt in an area because it is reserved for others is not cool. 
R


----------



## richard rouleau (Apr 12, 2008)

Well I hunted on refuge in California and Nevada let you know in California you have pay to hunt the refuges and you still got the sky buster at shot at every thing


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

I'll tell ya this much, if you think that people will hold back on their shooting after having to go through everything they have to, to get a blind.......your wrong. I think it's worse because of it. Let's face it, people feel entitled to shoot birds and birds working or not get shot at. 

Next it's amazing how quick birds learn where it's safe and where it's not. Assign people to a specific spot and the birds quickly learn that spot. They also learn not to fly on hunt days very fast or only fly out to feed after shooting hours.

You really don't want this guys! 

Fight it with everything you got and don't let emotions get in your way. Its a long season and opportunities will always exist for those will to work for them and adapt to what's happening around them.


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

What is your definition of "Quality"?

Because i look at the word quality as a very subjective word. Right now I feel that most hunts I go on out in the public marsh are a very good quality by my standard. Is joe public always perfect? nope its public hunting. But to have that "Quality" experience determined by a blind draw is a very frightening idea. Bad, Bad idea here at this point!!!! I see some areas putting a cap on the number of boats, or people in them. But a blind draw... Forget that!!!


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Fowlmouth said:


> Like I said in a previous post, It's nice we have such huge WMA's that people can get away from crowds if they choose to do so. There are so many places to go on our WMA's if a person would get off the dike, get out of there boat or walk further than 100 yards from the parking areas. I disagree too.
> 
> "MuscleWhitefish"
> 
> ...


I agree, the best way to hunt is to get deep into the marsh. This would allow opportunity to those who can't or don't know how to hunt to get out and experience what quality duck hunting is like.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

HeberHunter said:


> I don't mean to be a stick in any of your sides but when I read this post I actually thought it might be kind of nice. After reading all of your posts I can now see why you wouldn't want it here in Utah. With the bureacracy comes all of the bloat and rules with it. What I wouldn't mind is if the DWR could put one or two of these places together for the youth and beginning hunters like myself. I have hunted in Utah my whole life. I have fished in Utah my whole life. But, I am limited to those that I know and that I grew up with. Everyone that I know and have grown up with hunts Deer, Elk, and the predators. We fish the lakes and that's it. I've never gone fly fishing, hunted duck, geese, (or any waterfowl for that matter), chukar, grouse, (or any upland game for that matter). Trying to get into waterfowling seems like a monumental task. I read all of the posts here in the waterfowl section and it sounds like a blast. But then I read all of the newbie posts in here to and it is mostly, "Look to the skies and where you see the geese and ducks flying go there and shoot em' " For a novice like me that loves to hunt and fish but has never gone there is a huge learning curve. To have a place like this I feel like I could actually have a shot at getting into waterfowling. Initially I'd probably have to go with someone that has a dog to retrieve or do one of the corn field areas but at least I would have a shot at getting a taste of it. So, I don't think that this is 100% a bad idea. For youth and 100% beginners such as myself it could be a great tool. Then once the youth and newbies like myself get better and more experienced we'd likely move away from such properties and get or own dogs, blinds, etc. It seems like a good way to get the beginners involved. As for making all of the WMA strict and rigid like this, I say no way. But to get the DWR or one of the local sportsmens chapter to promote a beginner area that is similar to this, I'd be all in. Also, if something for beginners like this exists in Utah point me in the right direction. I'd love to try out waterfowling but the learning curve in Utah is pretty steap for me.


I can see where you are coming from and it would be an advantage to create areas that can help people like you get started


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

wileywapati said:


> WOW...
> How can you have a quality hunt if you show up at the marsh and they tell you to turn around and go home???
> 
> The special access for certain generation thing is getting kind of old. I agree that it is important to get kids back involved but they gotta show a bit of motivation. I can't tell ya how many miles I put on an old Roger DeCoster bike as a kid looking for hunting and fishing spots. How many miles I walked rivers to find hunting and fishing spots. Put down the Xbox controller and get pedaling / walking. Along with this scenario,if you feel as a hunter that a quality hunt means that you have to tell another hunter to stay home you aren't doing it right. Get off your rear end and LOOK. It's kind of amazing what you'll find if ya happen to maybe just try an out of the way place for a few hours.
> ...


I disagree. The advantage of creating the limited entry would be to promote the hunting - so it can be passed on to the next generation. The limited entry would be a beginners type of hunting - like lakes with stocker rainbows. It would also make it that much more rewarding to those who get out into the public land and can beats the odds and limit out.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

rjefre said:


> I think that if some bureaucrat at the DNR determines that an area will be deemed a restricted area for the purposes of providing a "quality hunt" for a few lucky people...then that means the rest of us are unlucky. It also means that the area is not truly open to hunting. Telling people that they cant hunt in an area because it is reserved for others is not cool.
> R


I think you are missing the point. There will still be public land open to everyone. It is no different than big game hunting. General season areas and limited entry areas. Give people plenty of opportunity close to the metropolitan areas and creating a world class reservation area is a win-win for everyone.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

richard rouleau said:


> Well I hunted on refuge in California and Nevada let you know in California you have pay to hunt the refuges and you still got the sky buster at shot at every thing


Which is why I think if Utah decides to go to this system, they should model it after Colorado and not California.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

hamernhonkers said:


> I'll tell ya this much, if you think that people will hold back on their shooting after having to go through everything they have to, to get a blind.......your wrong. I think it's worse because of it. Let's face it, people feel entitled to shoot birds and birds working or not get shot at.
> 
> Next it's amazing how quick birds learn where it's safe and where it's not. Assign people to a specific spot and the birds quickly learn that spot. They also learn not to fly on hunt days very fast or only fly out to feed after shooting hours.
> 
> ...


I can see what you mean. Which is why only certain areas should be set up for this type of hunting. The proximity of blinds would be another concern in going to this system, but if it is set up correctly. It will succeed.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

king eider said:


> What is your definition of "Quality"?
> 
> Because i look at the word quality as a very subjective word. Right now I feel that most hunts I go on out in the public marsh are a very good quality by my standard. Is joe public always perfect? nope its public hunting. But to have that "Quality" experience determined by a blind draw is a very frightening idea. Bad, Bad idea here at this point!!!! I see some areas putting a cap on the number of boats, or people in them. But a blind draw... Forget that!!!


It wouldn't be a blind draw. It would be set up on a reservation. The blind draw is the California system and they pay a premium for water and have a crap ton of people.

Quality would mean birds working the decoys with the intent to land, rather than the intent to escape the marsh.

I guess what I would like to see is areas set up away from the public zones like locomotive, promontory, north of cutler, south of UL, and out towards Tooele. Set up with many ponds filled with food and optimal habitat that would be an oasis for birds. That hunters on a limited entry (Tues, Thurs, Sat) could hunt an individual pond by reservation. You can still take your boat out into the public marshes, but these areas would be designed for easy access and great hunting with limited pressured birds.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I can see the signs going up now saying "NO ENTRY- LIMITED ENTRY ZONE FOR BEGINNERS ONLY". Maybe there will be special zones for kids, for women, for people with red hair, for minorities, for special financial donors, for athletic supporters, or for anyone that wants to call themselves special in some way. Dividing waterfowlers up into "specialty" groups with *special areas and rules* only seeks to widen the gap of unity. Our public lands are an extremely valuable gem to us, if folks want to divide up into special groups--well that's what private lands are for. I can see special rules to protect the wetland, or the habitat... these would be for conservation measures, but certainly not to enhance one person's chances of having a "quality experience" while pursuing/harvesting a publically owned resource (waterfowl) on publically owned lands.
R


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

rjefre said:


> I can see the signs going up now saying "NO ENTRY- LIMITED ENTRY ZONE FOR BEGINNERS ONLY". Maybe there will be special zones for kids, for women, for people with red hair, for minorities, for special financial donors, for athletic supporters, or for anyone that wants to call themselves special in some way. Dividing waterfowlers up into "specialty" groups with *special areas and rules* only seeks to widen the gap of unity. Our public lands are an extremely valuable gem to us, if folks want to divide up into special groups--well that's what private lands are for. I can see special rules to protect the wetland, or the habitat... these would be for conservation measures, but certainly not to enhance one person's chances of having a "quality experience" while pursuing/harvesting a publically owned resource (waterfowl) on publically owned lands.
> R


Haha I am not sure if you meant it to be sarcastic, but I laughed.

It would be a limited entry, which means anyone - but it would help all of those you mentioned aboce.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Yes, I meant for there to be a healthy does of sarcasm in that post. But I was serious about wishing that waterfowlers could stand together for the resource and try not to get too divided up. 
R


----------



## chuck harsin (May 1, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> It wouldn't be a blind draw. It would be set up on a reservation. The blind draw is the California system and they pay a premium for water and have a crap ton of people.
> 
> Quality would mean birds working the decoys with the intent to land, rather than the intent to escape the marsh.
> 
> I guess what I would like to see is areas set up away from the public zones like locomotive, promontory, north of cutler, south of UL, and out towards Tooele. Set up with many ponds filled with food and optimal habitat that would be an oasis for birds. That hunters on a limited entry (Tues, Thurs, Sat) could hunt an individual pond by reservation. You can still take your boat out into the public marshes, but these areas would be designed for easy access and great hunting with limited pressured birds.


Wouldn't it make more sense to take the obscene amount of time and money it would devour to accomplish this program and put it into fighting Phrag and reclaiming the thousands and thousands of acres we are losing? The problem with over crowding in the marshes has nothing to do with more people, check the recruitment stats. The problem is our marshes are basically half the size they were even 20 yrs ago. MY .02


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

and with these warm weather patterns, it's shrinking even more.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

chuck harsin said:


> Wouldn't it make more sense to take the obscene amount of time and money it would devour to accomplish this program and put it into fighting Phrag and reclaiming the thousands and thousands of acres we are losing? The problem with over crowding in the marshes has nothing to do with more people, check the recruitment stats. The problem is our marshes are basically half the size they were even 20 yrs ago. MY .02


Solid point.

I can see you perspective on this and it would make more sense to follow that route first.

The issue I was trying to address was all the negative attitudes to reservation hunting and how Utah could incorporate a system that would benefit everyone.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> The issue I was trying to address was all the negative attitudes to reservation hunting and how Utah could incorporate a system that would benefit everyone.


you can't hunt Indian ground, check the guidebook.


----------



## stuckduck (Jan 31, 2008)

To me its all about opportunity... Quality is what you make it... The harder you work the better quality or experience is. To many people want to go out do very little to gain that experience and expect the best results possible... If you have the habitat the Birds will be there. people or not. that's where the time and money needs to be!!! IMO


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

IMO, the fact that reserving blinds is being thrown out as a way to "benefit everyone" is kind of a farce. Who is the "everyone" that would benefit? Right now, we have plenty of marsh, that literally EVERYONE with a license and stamp can hunt whenever they want, and for the most part with a little work can have a great day of hunting. I much prefer to have my choice of days to hunt when my schedule allows, or when a storm front blows in, as opposed to waking up to hopefully, maybe, but probably not get a chance to hunt where I want. This year I hunted almost exclusively on Saturdays and wasn't bothered by the crowds. I still managed to kill quite a few birds too.....


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

How about we take some mudmotor areas and then convert them to motorless areas. That will provide a more quality experience. I think we have reached a happy median with that idea! Surprised no one has brought that up before.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

R I think 99.999% of the states waterfowl hunters are united against any type of access limits. 

You don't want to see other hunters lease some ground and knock yourself out. Wanna hunt certain days buy in to a club. 

Once we come to the point of telling another hunter to stay home for your own selfish benefit, on ground subsidized by other hunters for the betterment of the resource, it would probably be a good time to take a good long look in the mirror. 

BTW. The LE system for Utah's big game hunting is an absolute corrupt farce.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

less sky busters, this will never happen. I think it would bump it up even more.

Odds are they would create more habitat for this type of hunting. (Which means more birds) You mean we would lose more habitat for less birds.

Birds will be less stacked in the rest area, because of pressure - which will give you more of an opportunity to fill limits. No you mean it will give them more rest areas and them not to leave.

I see it as more of a winning situation, than a losing situation. I see no winning in this at all. I just see losing.

Also, there will still be places where you can scout and go for the birds. There is a lot of walk in access North of Denver (even though the most popular spots are on reservation).

I also think reservations would give a better opportunity to father and son hunts with limited means. People that can only get out a few times a year. no it wont because the kid and dad will not get to hunt more. they will lsoe days.

It would be a lot more rewarding to youth to not have to shoot at birds that have been conditioned to fly at B52 Altitude. No because every one will sky bust at any ducks that would come close because the ducks are not decoying to that spot. they want the spot 100 yards south of you and you cant go after them.

So in summary.

Less Sky Busters- nope not true 

Less Duck Pressure not true 

More Potential Habitat for Ducks  less 

More Quality Duck Hunts not really 

Quality Father and Son Opportunities nope less and then the kid will just want to play his xbox

A Quality Hunt for those with limited means.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

utahgolf said:


> How about we take some mudmotor areas and then convert them to motorless areas. That will provide a more quality experience. I think we have reached a happy median with that idea! Surprised no one has brought that up before.


 There are areas now that are virtually impossible to get a MM boat, but yet a canoe or other small paddle type boat could easily access them, and yet you never see one in these areas. I am actually looking at getting a Otter Stealth just for this reason. I have some spots that will be incredible to hunt, and a small paddle boat is the only way to get there. You could close areas to MM's but I doubt many paddlers would take advantage of it. It would turn the area into more of a rest area than anything.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

So, to Recap so we can agree to disagree and this thread can die, because we will probably never agree on this subject.

I will use the pro as my opinion and the con as the general opinion of others.

*Sky Busting*

Pro: I believe there would be less sky busters, because in a limited entry area you will not be pressed too because the ducks are less wary, because of pressure.

Con: People will sky bust no matter the circumstance.

*Less Duck Pressure*

Pro: Limited entry areas would allow for areas that are not hunted as much, that ducks can use as a refuge from the War Zones on the WMA's.

Con: Just move away from people.

*More Habitat For Ducks*

Pros: We currently do not have a WMA set-up for this type of hunting, So I believe they would have to be made. Less productive locations could be made into productive limited entry duck hunting areas.

Con: Phrags

*More Quality Duck Hunts*

Pro: You can reserve a pond and be the only one on the pond that day. Not having hunters stumble in at shooting time, hunting over your decoys, hunters setting up a war zone on the dikes, and setting up within' shooting distance of your spread. It would also allow for disabled hunters, youth hunters, beginner hunters, and father & son hunters to have an experience free of the hunters mentioned above. While still allowing the opportunity to chase ducks throughout the whole season on the WMA's.

Con: Just move farther, scout, and get away from people.

Really as I can see the only real con is dealing with the Phrags. Everything else is just everyone's perception on the way they think it will be run versus the way it should be run. I would say use Colorado as a model. Have public non reservation areas and public reservation areas. It would be a good model to follow. The California model is a lottery draw, because of the population. Their model should be avoided. As I see it the Limited Entry Duck Hunting would be a great thing, but like I said we are only going to agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> So, to Recap so we can agree to disagree and this thread can die, because we will probably never agree on this subject.
> 
> I will use the pro as my opinion and the con as the general opinion of others.
> 
> ...


Join a duck club. Problem solved. There are already reservation areas(not public). The truth is that any type of reservation or limited entry system on the marsh takes away from the true meaning of *public* access, as these areas would no longer be accessible to anyone at anytime.

Like I said, I have great shoots on public land on Saturdays of all days(when you are making it sound like everyone is shoulder to shoulder). I enjoy being able to go hunt ducks on a whim. Read any state's forums on duck hunting chat or other sites and you will see that sky busters exist even on the reservation areas. And there, you can't just move to a spot farther away from them.....

I would wager that if Utah were to implement something like this, it would end up being closer to the California type system as well due to the best duck hunting being in close proximity to the major population center of the state too. However, neither you nor I can definitively say what would happen. You can't say you favor it and hope it ends up like Colorado. This road is an unnecessary one to go down, and the only way to really ensure that the greatest duck hunting remains accessible is not to start unnecessarily restricting hunters.

Also, there are already WMAs with established disabled blinds for reservation, are there not?

I'd rather be hunting and have someone set up too close to my spread, than not be hunting at all.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

It is always interesting to hear a variety of opinions. Folks may differ on specific topics, but hopefully, we all can pull together on the real troubling issues like GSL habitat loss and Wasatch Front water diversions impacting our marshes. *These two things alone *will destroy the future of waterfowling as we know it if we don't pull together to fight for our Utah marshes.
R


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> There are areas now that are virtually impossible to get a MM boat, but yet a canoe or other small paddle type boat could easily access them, and yet you never see one in these areas. I am actually looking at getting a Otter Stealth just for this reason. I have some spots that will be incredible to hunt, and a small paddle boat is the only way to get there. You could close areas to MM's but I doubt many paddlers would take advantage of it. It would turn the area into more of a rest area than anything.


I was being sarcastic ;-) I thought paddler might chime in when/if he saw it :grin:


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

utahgolf said:


> I was being sarcastic ;-) I thought paddler might chime in when/if he saw it :grin:


 I sensed that in your original post. You know a paddle boat really isn't a bad way to go though. There are a lot of areas that never get hunted because of limited access. Now if I can find a deal on a marsh rat, stealth or a 12' canoe I will be set.


----------

