# 5 day Archery Hunt?



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

I have been hearing rumors that the wildlife board is proposing a 5 day archery hunt? Does anyone know if this is true or what is going on? I sure hope it isn't, it doesn't make any sense biologically or numbers wise.


----------



## TopofUtahArcher (Sep 9, 2009)

If they did that they'd have to have a 5 hour rifle hunt and a 2 day smokepole hunt to keep success ratios similar to historical data.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

The proposed 2011 archery dates are Aug. 20 thru Sept. 13


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

jahan said:


> I sure hope it isn't, it doesn't make any sense biologically or numbers wise.


That's about par for the course.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> The proposed 2011 archery dates are Aug. 20 thru Sept. 13


Yes, but this is for after 2011.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

jahan said:


> I have been hearing rumors that the wildlife board is proposing a 5 day archery hunt? Does anyone know if this is true or what is going on? I sure hope it isn't, it doesn't make any sense biologically or numbers wise.


I haven't heard that and I doubt seriously that will be the case.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Unfortunately this is true... BOU has been will continue to work to hopefully head this off. Also unfortunately once the Board gets a wild hare like this it's extremely hard to bring back around. The sky ain't completly falling but any of you that would care to e mail the board and voice your opinion on the matter would sure be helping the cause


----------



## goforbroke (Jan 4, 2009)

Probably be 5 days in August and give those rifle hunters 3 weeks in the prime of the rut. Does the board have ideas or is SFW giving ideas trying to squeeze out a few more rifle tags?


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

WTH?


----------



## Guest (Oct 13, 2010)

i heard about this, and i think they proposed a 5 day archery elk hunt for certain units. like the 15th of sept. to the 20th of sept. everyone shot that idea down, so you dont have to worry about that this year.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

the five day archery deer hunt is not a rumor! the SFW/Wildlife board have it in for the archery guys. They think having a 3 day rifle hunt is only fair to have a 5 day archery hunt. 

Hey they want to make if fair give us the fair share of the tags. 33% 33% 33%


----------



## north slope (Sep 8, 2007)

Ban Utah if your an archer!!! Go to Idaho or Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, somewhere where we get some respect!! :evil:


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Are we talking deer or elk? Either way its a crappy idea and will really piss me off if it happens.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


----------



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

I'm with northslope, boycott Utah! 

I can go to GA and buy an $80 deer license that gives me 2 bucks, 10 does, and a four month season. Or, try Montana, guaranteed archery antelope, and the chance at 4 deer tags, an elk, and a bear, about every other year in their draw and antlerless opportunities. Or, how about Nebraska. They have both mule and whitetail deer, the tags are over the counter and you can buy 1 buck tag and as many doe tags as you want! Their season in short though, only 3 months... These are just three examples of better hunting opportunities to be found in other states. And for all you guys screaming poverty, it aint that expensive when you do it right. I dare say you spend just as much money hunting this state. Especially if you travel down south every time you hunt. And for all you other guys with bitchy fusspot wives or crappy smothering jobs, your just plain screwed...

Ever since special interest and politics took over in this state our big game hunting opportunities have gone right down the crapper. And it AINT gonna get any better.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


It doesn't make any sense to limit either the rifle from 9 days to 3 days or limit archery, especially with such low success rates. In fact, the DWR should be using archery more to create more opportunity. I get tired of the mindset of if I can't play then neither should anyone else theory. I disagree with your last statement, I know a lot of rifle guys that don't have a problem with the dates of the archery hunts, because they actually take the time to understand why the dates are what they are rather than making snap judgments. I am against any decisions that don't make sense biologically and this doesn't.


----------



## Elk Addict (Sep 17, 2007)

north slope said:


> Ban Utah if your an archer!!! Go to Idaho or Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, somewhere where we get some respect!! :evil:


I agree totally with North Slope and will be hunting Idaho and Montana from here on out. Special interest groups have become pimps for Utah's wildlife and are in the business of selling our elk and deer to the highest bidder. When it's all about horn porn and LE hunting then I will just have to spend my money in states that give an archer a fair chance during the prime of the rut. Just my two cents...


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched *my rifle hunt *go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


the best decision I ever made was switching from rifle to archery.
don't you get bored shooting a rifle???
I could've killed a bull within the first 2 hours of the general hunt this last Saturday...it's like fish in a barrel with a rifle
-8/- >>O


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

5 DAY ARCHERY HUNT Would be a JOKE.. I'll listen to what Goofy Elk says the man knows his Sh--!!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


And with 4 months, archers kill about *2400* buck deer, statewide.

In 9 days, the average of the last 3 years harvest for any weapon and muzzle loader general season buck deer is around *26,000*., statewide.

Better drink a few more natties before you do the math.......

Ridiculous.


----------



## pkred (Jul 9, 2009)

Does anyone think this may be a ploy to distract folks from the issue of the micro units. Look over here at this horrible solution. Kind of makes the units not look so bad?

The old days ended when Utah's population exploded if the tags weren't capped some time nobody would be hunting dear because the fed's would have them on the endangered list. It's a mathematical reality.

I think Buckmaster said it best. Even draw 1/3 per. If you wanted to rifle hunt you would have a lot of competition but I bet the primitive weapons would be over the counter and never sell out. Why? Because it aint easy!


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

I'll be the first to say that limiting the number of days, instead of the number of permits is an effing joke. I've spoken my mind MANY times on that one. As for the number of deer killed per weapon...I know that the rifle and muzzleloader hunts kill far more deer...And I don't drink Natty...I'm a Jager man. 
But seriously...The post started as someone whining cuz they're considering cutting the archery hunt length...Welcome to the rifle hunters world. We get ONE effing area to hunt....Archery gets their primary choice area, then a couple of "Extended Area" hunts...BOO F*CKING HOO! I'm not against the length of the archery dates, as I realize it is MUCH more challenging...but it's a weapon of choice, right? We aren't assigned the weapon we take the field with...So if you don't like something, change whatever is in your control to change.
Do I get tired of shooting my rifle...Sometimes...but it usually only takes one or two shots...so I don't have a chance to get tired of shooting...and one thing I know I don't get tired of is having meat in my freezer...instead of tag soup. 

As was stated elsewhere....the DWR has severely mis-managed many of the herds in this state...resulting in closures, decreased tags, decreased days available to hunt...etc. But if we want to continue to hunt in Utah, we are going to have to deal with the incompetence that is our wildlife board. I play within the rules I'm given, and b**ch about it to myself, and my close friends...but realize I can't do squat about it. My one little voice isn't enough.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Do I get tired of shooting my rifle...Sometimes...but it usually only takes one or two shots...so I don't have a chance to get tired of shooting...*and one thing I know I don't get tired of is having meat in my freezer...instead of tag soup*.


why do so many people always revert back to saying this??? It's not about having meat in the freezer...it's for recreation. If it was about meat in the freezer you would get a second job and get to know the butcher at Smith's better. Meat in the freezer is a very nice benefit...don't get me wrong! But it's not what gets our hearts racing when we start talking about hunting.
If you aren't a resident of Texas where you can wack a truckload of deer and hogs in one day, and hunting is your sole means of putting food on the table then I think you missed a couple classes of economics in high school...


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

[quote="stablebuck"
why do so many people always revert back to saying this??? It's not about having meat in the freezer...it's for recreation. If it was about meat in the freezer you would get a second job and get to know the butcher at Smith's better. Meat in the freezer is a very nice benefit...don't get me wrong! But it's not what gets our hearts racing when we start talking about hunting.
If you aren't a resident of Texas where you can wack a truckload of deer and hogs in one day, and hunting is your sole means of putting food on the table then I think you missed a couple classes of economics in high school...[/quote]

Stablebuck...this isn't intended solely for you...it's a broad, BROAD statement...so please, don't take it personally....

If it's not about meat in the freezer, and it's all about recreation...then why in the F*** are you hunting? If it's all about recreation, quite b*tchin' about the season being short, or cancelled, or whatever the current gripe is, and just go camping. Hunting to me and my family has always been about the meat. It's not the sole means of feeding myself, but it sure is a great addition!


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

duckhunter1096 said:


> But seriously...The post started as someone whining cuz they're considering cutting the archery hunt length...Welcome to the rifle hunters world. Hello is anyone there...... If we wanted to hunt with rifles we would, If you wanted to hunt with archery you would. We have chosen to hunt archery for many reasons and now one of the many is being endangered. Do you really want all the rifle hunters that jumped to the archery seen in the last 5 years to come back to rifle hunting now that one of the benefits of the archery is gone? My prediction is that if this goes through it will affect the rifle hunters heavily. I feel that many will jump back to rifle hunting since the seasons for both will be short and you will be lucky to draw a rifle tag once every 7 yrs.
> 
> We get ONE effing area to hunt....Archery gets their primary choice area, then a couple of "Extended Area" hunts...BOO F*CKING HOO! I'm not against the length of the archery dates, as I realize it is MUCH more challenging...but it's a weapon of choice, right? We aren't assigned the weapon we take the field with...So if you don't like something, change whatever is in your control to change. You follow this statement with the one below and you don't find that contradictory?
> 
> I play within the rules I'm given, and b**ch about it to myself, and my close friends...but realize I can't do squat about it. My one little voice isn't enough.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> If it's not about meat in the freezer, and it's all about recreation...then why in the F*** are you hunting? If it's all about recreation, quite b*tchin' about the season being short, or cancelled, or whatever the current gripe is, and just go camping. Hunting to me and my family has always been about the meat. It's not the sole means of feeding myself, but it sure is a great addition!


I'm not complaining...if I have to go out of state every year to hunt then I would. It took me a grand total of 2 years rifle hunting in Utah til I figured out it would be more fun to use a bow, hunt more often, and see less yahoos when I'm out in the field...plus it's just plain, flat-out awesome to be closer to the animals! How many years have you been rifle hunting and instead of adapting in an effort to make hunting more enjoyable you'd rather just complain. How many RACs have you gone to? How many times have you contacted WB members or your state representative?
Take a vested interest...let your voice be heard through an organization that you trust or look at different methods for improving your hunt experience...or BOTH!


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> And with 4 months, archers kill about *2400* buck deer, statewide.
> 
> In 9 days, the average of the last 3 years harvest for any weapon and muzzle loader general season buck deer is around *26,000*., statewide.
> 
> ...


Much more important numbers:

Rifle = 33.9%
Muzzy = 28.3%
Archery = 24.1%

General season 3 year average success rate.

I think it would be fair to do 1/3 permits for each type of weapon and archers/muzzy to get their days based on the percent difference on success applied to days available to hunt rifle. Example 3 days rifle would equal Muzzy = 4 days, Archery = 4 days.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > And with 4 months, archers kill about *2400* buck deer, statewide.
> ...


So how does this make any sense? :? Archery hunters kill 91% less deer than rifle hunters do and that is with them hunting for 4 months, so using your numbers, my guess is Archery hunters success rate would drop below 10%. Muzzy would drop also while Rifle would go up.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > And with 4 months, archers kill about *2400* buck deer, statewide.
> ...


I added some dissonantly left out numbers for your "example". :roll: 

You are statistically 14-15 times less likely to harvest a buck with a bow every time you go out. Wouldn't it make sense to have the season 14-15 times longer? Just following your logic.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

if you do 33% tag allocation to each of the 3 weapon types then that is going to bring your success rates down across the board...which would actually raise the rifle success rate and lower the archery success rate which would put us back to where we are at right now when it comes to season length...


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

o-|| I.T.Y.S. It's only going to get worse from here. Get used to it.

(I TOLD YOU SO)

What is going to happen to success when half or more of those days are stormy weather?

SUCKS! HUH!


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Treehugnhuntr said:
> ...


I guess if we are going to use your logic we would have to include a factor for passing on animals because the hunt is longer.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

jahan said:


> So how does this make any sense? :? Archery hunters kill 91% less deer than rifle hunters do and that is with them hunting for 4 months, so using your numbers, my guess is Archery hunters success rate would drop below 10%. Muzzy would drop also while Rifle would go up.


First of all, archery hunters hunt 8.7 days per hunter versus 3.7 days per rifle hunter.
Second, I'm still trying to figure your 91%.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

When they limit the number of days you can hunt, shouldn't the price of the tag go down? I'd get ready for the price to go up though.

I'm sure their thinking is they can give out more tags, (or not!) and try to keep people happy (who cares!), but make the success rate lower. Plus our resources in the field won't be as strained either. A win, win. More money less cost.

Get ready for things to get worse, before they get better.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > Huntoholic said:
> ...


A dead deer is a dead deer, no matter how you slice it.

If the bow hunt was 4 days, there would be very few people who would choose to hunt with a bow, flooding the any weapon hunt with 14000 more applicants. Is that what you are pushing for?

Ma, worse for who? Certainly not the dwindling deer population........


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Just wondering if people on the Internet are on drugs!!!!!!!!

The proposed archery dates for the next 5 years is Aug. 20 thru Sept 13th.


----------



## Bears Butt (Sep 12, 2007)

Thank you Goofy.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Just wondering if people on the Internet are on drugs!!!!!!!!
> 
> The proposed archery dates for the next 5 years is Aug. 20 thru Sept 13th.


Dude it is being talked about by the WB, those dates you have mentioned can be changed. Nobody has said they are changed.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> jahan said:
> 
> 
> > So how does this make any sense? :? Archery hunters kill 91% less deer than rifle hunters do and that is with them hunting for 4 months, so using your numbers, my guess is Archery hunters success rate would drop below 10%. Muzzy would drop also while Rifle would go up.
> ...


Sorry maybe not the best number to use, but 2400/26000 is .09 or 9%. 100%-9%=91% That is how I cam up with 91%. I guess you could say archery hunters kill 9% of the deer rifle hunters do.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

jahan said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > Just wondering if people on the Internet are on drugs!!!!!!!!
> ...


Dude,,I spoke to a board member on the phone TODAY!!!
Your full of chit!


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> jahan said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="goofy elk":5itz4xs1]Just wondering if people on the Internet are on drugs!!!!!!!!
> ...


Dude,,I spoke to a board member on the phone TODAY!!!
Your full of chit![/quote:5itz4xs1]

I hope you are right. So you are saying all of these people from BOU and other organizations are just making stuff up?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Hers how I took it,,,,
There was some "joking" things said about the shortened rifle deer hunt
and the 28 day archery hunt was not affected at the board meeting....

But as of now,,,I've seen the 2011 dates,,And there what I"ve posted.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Mr. Goofy let me assure you that the 5 day bow is not a "joke".

Will it happen??? I don't think so in this round of RACs / WB meetings but it is getting some serious steam and discussion.

It's not going to hurt a thing to be vigilant. Like I said the sky ain't falling but lets stay on this.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Mr Wiley,,,,,,,Correct me if I'm wrong,,,but,
I believe we are setting hunt dates up for the next 5 years?
Right or wrong?


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Mr Goofy you are absolutely correct... That being said tell me one five year plan that has not been amended within 13 months??? Hell the Mule Deer Committee plan is on the amendment block for the micro managed units that the Committee specifically told The Board they were opposed to. What you are seeing from Anis is his rough draft. This is his plan without any input from anybody or any Special Interest Group. People haven't even started with his dates yet through our public input process.

My info comes from a pretty reliable cat that is not quick to being excitable or blowing things out of proportion. If this person tells me it's on the table I'll tend to believe him. It's all about fairness in the Boards eyes at this point.

My question is I'd like to know who in the hell told ANY HUNTER in this state that they couldn't apply for an archery tag??? Last I looked if you didn't want to hunt for three days then you have the option of picking up a bow and hunting in a longer season...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I firmly believe that the 28 day archery hunt will stand for the next 5 years....
Just my opinion.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

I sure hope my Brotha!!!


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> A dead deer is a dead deer, no matter how you slice it.
> 
> If the bow hunt was 4 days, there would be very few people who would choose to hunt with a bow, flooding the any weapon hunt with 14000 more applicants. Is that what you are pushing for?
> 
> Ma, worse for who? Certainly not the dwindling deer population........


And 9% difference in success is squat.

All I can say is if there had been a 4 day archery hunt available this year I would have bought it. Sure beats not hunting.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Ma, worse for who? Certainly not the dwindling deer population........

I am in no way for change, but if it means less days in the field, or less tags, it is only fair to treat the bow hunters the same way they have treated the rifle hunters. Percentages or not. If they think less days in the field is the way to go, or less tags, or limited entry for deer, and smaller hunt areas, or closing some areas all together. Thats what they have to do, but don't just punish the rifle hunters because they kill more deer. Rifle, bow, muzzle loader, or bowie knife. Like you say a dead deer is still a dead deer. Just don't punish the rifle hunter because he is a more efficient killer than a bow hunter.

What weapon is chosen is still a choice. I would like to give the bowie knife a try. 

With less days I think people will be less likely to pass on smaller animals and take the first animal they see rather than waiting for their trophy animal.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

horsesma said:


> With less days I think people will be less likely to pass on smaller animals and take the first animal they see rather than waiting for their trophy animal.


This sums up why shorter season dates is NOT the solution to ANYTHING positive!


----------



## Riverlution (Sep 23, 2008)

What happened to the fix date proposal that was going around last year?


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

The archery dates are up for consideration. All one has to do is listen to the transcript of the September Wildlife Board Workshop. I doubt it will be as short as 5 days, but it could be 2 weeks. Just from what I have gathered.

Some think shortened dates do not work. I lean otherwise. It didn't work in Colorado because they had unlimited tags. Utah has limited permits. If a guy really shoots the first buck he sees then that is great! He just took pressure off the older age class deer, the ones who are more efficient breeding the doe population. The data from the Nebo, the Southern and even the SE Region shows that during the shortened hunts they saw BOTH an increase in success and an increase in Buck to Doe ratios. To ignore the shortened seasons as a contributing factor is fairly short sighted-- in my opinion.


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

I'd like to see the state try a 5-day ski season


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

redleg said:


> I'd like to see the state try a 5-day ski season


That's the benefit of being privately owned. If the skiing in utah was run by the state....it would be a different beast.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

It puzzles me that rifle hunters would continue gripping about the archery hunts, ie: the length, the areas available, the extended hunts, the overlapping of the deer and elk hunts, and the timing. Not only is it divisive among hunters, it is counterproductive. If rifle hunters want to take away some of the "advantages" given to archers, then fewer people will get into bowhunting and more will get into rifle hunting, thus making it more difficult to get rifle permits. And if rifle hunters get to take away some of the "advantages" given to archers, then it's only fair that archers get to take away some of the "advantages" of rifle hunting. How about no shots further than 50 yards, and no scopes, and all shots must be freehand with no rests, and no prone shots allowed, and no bullets faster than 250 feet per second, and all shots must be standing broadside or quartering away, and only single shot rifles allowed, and the brush in front, above, below and behind you must be clear for at least 3 feet. That's just for starters. We'll let you keep the other 10 or 12 "advantages" for now. Just don't push it.

If the archery deer hunt becomes a 5 day hunt and the any weapon deer hunt remains a 5 day hunt (or goes to a 3 day hunt), then I'll tell you what I'll do (and urge all other archers to do). I'll apply for the any weapon hunts and hunt with my bow if I draw that tag. If I don't draw that tag, I'll probably be able to buy an archery tag over the counter/internet because so many people have now chosen any weapon hunts. Either way, I get to hunt 5 days with my bow! (And my point is made!)

It's true that we all have a choice of weapons, but it's also true that all of our choices, including which weapon we hunt with, are made because of some of the "advantages". Remove those "advantages" and our choices and behavior, will undoubtedly be different. Too many times people think that they can remove incentives without changing the behavior. In other words, I'm gonna quit pumping the hand pump if the well runs dry! Wouldn't you?

Put things into perspective. We have enough trouble fighting the anti's, the DWR, the loss of habitat, the WB, etc. without fighting each other.

FWIW: I use both weapons for hunting. (Haven't tried Muzzys yet!)


----------



## IDHunter (Dec 17, 2007)

horsesma said:


> I am in no way for change, but if it means less days in the field, or less tags, it is only fair to treat the bow hunters the same way they have treated the rifle hunters.


Did I miss something? I didn't realize that bow hunters collectively got together and shortened the rifle hunts. I learn something everyday on this forum.

You got to love it when hunters claim to want what's best for the deer and then complain about "fairness." What if what's best for the deer is not fair? Which would you still support it?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

IDHunter said:


> horsesma said:
> 
> 
> > I am in no way for change, but if it means less days in the field, or less tags, it is only fair to treat the bow hunters the same way they have treated the rifle hunters.
> ...


+1


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

IDHunter said:


> You got to love it when hunters claim to want what's best for the deer and then complain about "fairness." What if what's best for the deer is not fair? Which would you still support it?


Well maybe if some of the decisions in the past or items talked about for the future where based on sound biology instead of greed, then the bitter pill would be a little easier to swallow.

As long as we have 60% of the hunters removed from the field of deer hunting and pretty much no change to the decline of deer in 15 years. As long as we think that taking 14000 archers and restricting them to a location other then the southern unit is some how going to change the crowding on labor day weekend. As long as we think that limiting the rifle hunt to 3 to 5 days, complain that they shoot the first thing that walks out and also think some how it will have this huge effect on the deer numbers is nothing more then stupid. Nothing more then bandaids.

While I understand that you cannot make everybody happy all the time and things do change, but things can be done better then they currently are. And it can be done with fairness in mind and still be a boost to the deer herds. But we will hold to the old wives tale that rifle hunters are the plague of the hunting world and the archery is the salvation. When in fact we should be the best stewards of our resources, have respect for each others ways, find that balance that helps the most and fight those that really should be fought.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

In case you didn't notice, I'm not for change. ( I know the deer numbers are down.) Bow hunters have had the benefit of many changes in their favor for a number of years, and the first time the mere mention of something bad happening to their hunting they get their panties in a bunch. Like I said before, Get used to it! You can talk numbers and percentages all you want. We are all hunters in one form shape or another and it sucks when you have to adjust year after year to new rules, regs., and limited hunting days. Just for your info, I'm not against bow hunters in any way!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

horsesma said:


> Bow hunters have had the benefit of many changes in their favor for a number of years, and the first time the mere mention of something bad happening to their hunting they get their panties in a bunch.


Are you serious? Utah is one of the least bow friendly states in the country. Please list a few of the 'many' changes in the archers favor that have occurred in the last number of years.

Here is my position, even though I personally am an archer, I do *NOT* want archery friendly policies. What I want is policies that help promote: 1)Herd health 2)Increased hunter recruitment/retention 3)Diversity of hunter choices. If season lengths accomplish all/any of the above mentioned things I am for it. Based on the data I have seen, and the feedback of numerous biologists I don't see how a shorter archery season will accomplish any of them. In fact, I see it doing NOTHING to promote herd health, it will lower hunter recruitment/retention, and it decreases hunter choice.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


I will have to agree with 1096, I hunt with all three weapons as the mood strikes me, but what goes around comes around, everyone is gonna have to suffer the pain that the quest for inches is inflicting on the sport.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Bowdacious said:


> redleg said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to see the state try a 5-day ski season
> ...


 -_O- That would be the mother of all clusters!!!!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.


Have you ever bow hunted?? Consider it is way harder to hunt with a bow and it doesn't make any sence to limit it to 5 days!! I could have shot prolly 20 elk so far with a rifle, but with the bow I'm still without shooting at 1!! You obviously don't have a clue!!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> I'm with northslope, boycott Utah!
> 
> I can go to GA and buy an $80 deer license that gives me 2 bucks, 10 does, and a four month season. Or, try Montana, guaranteed archery antelope, and the chance at 4 deer tags, an elk, and a bear, about every other year in their draw and antlerless opportunities. Or, how about Nebraska. They have both mule and whitetail deer, the tags are over the counter and you can buy 1 buck tag and as many doe tags as you want! Their season in short though, only 3 months... These are just three examples of better hunting opportunities to be found in other states. And for all you guys screaming poverty, it aint that expensive when you do it right. I dare say you spend just as much money hunting this state. Especially if you travel down south every time you hunt. And for all you other guys with bitchy fusspot wives or crappy smothering jobs, your just plain screwed...
> 
> Ever since special interest and politics took over in this state our big game hunting opportunities have gone right down the crapper. And it AINT gonna get any better.


How about Wyoming Tex? I'm considering going out of state next year for big game.


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> I firmly believe that the 28 day archery hunt will stand for the next 5 years....
> Just my opinion.


I agree, a five day bow hunt is total insanity. If they did this they would lose so much money and I really don't think it will every happen.

Personaly I think the shortened rifle hunt is a good thing. I have the rifle tag and so I will also suffer but the fact is I'm not seeing the deer numbers I saw when I moved here just a few years ago. I don't know what happened but the deer need to bounce back. I'll be out trapping and killing predators this winter to do my part in the areas I'm going to hunt.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Pro: Lets see extended, date changes, more tags.......... The problem is they made bow hunting a popular choice. So now bow hunting is overcrowded also! 

I'm not here for a pissing contest. None of this is going to fix a thing. The wildlife board needs to have a solution for making hunters happy, but at the same time grow and make our herds more healthy. It's not going to happen! They are going to just have to limit the tags and piss off all hunters in general, or make it so the success rate goes down. Hence the talk of shorter days. Just like the rifle hunters got. They will probably give out more tags though, to the bow hunters, because of the lowered success rate. (So they can still have their revenue.)

You know as well as I do there is no one good solution, but I know you have all the answers. They should just listen to you.

In the end you know if they lower the days, people will still buy all the available tags.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

hoghunter011583 said:


> duckhunter1096 said:
> 
> 
> > Might as well limit the bow guys as well as the rifle guys...Hell...You bow guys get what, 4 months to hunt the wasatch...what's the big effing deal? I've watched my rifle hunt go from 9 days, to 5 days, to 3 days this year...and next year...it'll probably be gone. I've had to adjust...maybe you stick flingers should as well. Does it suck, you bet your balls it does. But you aren't going to get any sympathy from this guy...or the rest of the rifle hunters in the state.
> ...


I haven't. And I'll tell ya why...Cuz it's too effing hard. I will be the first to admit it. If you read my second post, I go in to further explanation to my opinion.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

horsesma said:


> Pro: Lets see extended, date changes, more tags.......... The problem is they made bow hunting a popular choice. So now bow hunting is overcrowded also! The extended was the only option short of doing what they are talking of doing in Bountiful, so this wasn't instilled to appease archers. Date changes, they haven't changed (we are talking DEER) the season dates/length in over a decade. More tags, they issue FEWER archer deer tags today than they did back when I started hunting in the mid-80's, so I am not sure what you are referring to. Your assertion that bow hunting is overcrowded is not only false, it isn't even close to being true. Tell me, how can the archery deer hunt be overcrowded when they issue 15,000 tags, while at the same time issuing 20,000-30,000 rifle tags per Region isn't overcrowded? This is nonsensical at best!
> 
> I'm not here for a **** contest. None of this is going to fix a thing. The wildlife board needs to have a solution for making hunters happy, but at the same time grow and make our herds more healthy. It's not going to happen! They are going to just have to limit the tags and **** off all hunters in general, or make it so the success rate goes down. Hence the talk of shorter days. Just like the rifle hunters got. They will probably give out more tags though, to the bow hunters, because of the lowered success rate. (So they can still have their revenue.) The primary purpose, at least as stated, of the Wildlife Board is to manage the GAME first, the demands of the hunters well after. Reducing season lengths for rifle/muzzy hunts have more often than not INCREASED buck harvest, so it is inane to shorten them more. Also, this is still based on the flawed logic of focusing on the bucks in the herd instead of addressing the health of the herd.
> 
> ...


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Packout said:


> The data from the Nebo, the Southern and even the SE Region shows that during the shortened hunts they saw BOTH an increase in success and an increase in Buck to Doe ratios.


HUH?!?! Over what time period? On the surface that doesn't make any sense. Can you elaborate on that a bit?

The only logical explanation for that would include something that had nothing to do with a shortened hunt (i.e. higher fawn recruitment due to habitat improvment projects, or does and fawns having a higher mortality rate due to strong winters) and therefore is only being used to further an agenda and not a fair representation of cause and effect. That's only telling part of the story anyway. What has happened to overall herd health tells the whole story. You can't have 20% of the does die due to winter kill and then suddenly trumpet buck to doe ratios are improving.


----------



## 10000ft. (Oct 29, 2007)

*LE hunting* = more abundant mature animals (high buck bull ratios).

*LE hunting* = $$$ Special Interest groups, $$$ politics $$$ and money $$$.

*LE hunting* = Limiting hunters annual general season opportunity. :shock:

Do these tag and days a field reduction proposals really surprise you!

I'm glad to see you archers starting to get worried about your precious hunt now that you can see this is a slippery slope these people are on and they aren't going to stop after rifle hunters.

If hunters of all kinds don't wake up and get off their high horses and quite categorizing each other as trophy hunter vs. meat hunters or bow hunters vs. rifle hunter and band together to stop these people who want to continue to take away many of our current general season hunting opportunities in the name of "inches" and money, there will not be a new generation of hunters to perpetuate the current system of game management.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

It is an "over time" result. If the 5 day hunt saves some bucks, then those bucks live through the next year. This number is compounded over time, thus there are more bucks in the future to breed and for hunters to hunt. 

I am not looking at doe numbers dropping (which probably occurred after the last winter). You are right that buck to doe ratios do not tell the health of the herd. Fawn survival rates in April are much more important than fawn to doe ratios taken in November. If we have 100 fawns in the November and only 20 in April then that should equal something. 

I do not believe that the whole increase is because of shortened hunts. I do not think they are the end all answer. Just an ingredient which played out on most of those areas in which it has been implemented. 

Also, I do not agree with the 5 day archery hunt. I was simply stating what I had heard.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Packout said:


> It is an "over time" result. If the 5 day hunt saves some bucks, then those bucks live through the next year. This number is compounded over time, thus there are more bucks in the future to breed and for hunters to hunt.
> 
> I am not looking at doe numbers dropping (which probably occurred after the last winter). You are right that buck to doe ratios do not tell the health of the herd. Fawn survival rates in April are much more important than fawn to doe ratios taken in November. If we have 100 fawns in the November and only 20 in April then that should equal something.
> 
> ...


I was just referring to the comment that the results showed BETTER success rates and a HIGHER buck to doe ratio. That just doesn't make sense on the surface. If the success rates were higher then less bucks make it out of the hunting season and would lower buck to doe ratios. There would have to be some other force that is offsetting that and then some to actually show an increase in ratios compared to the longer hunt period. I just don't see how a shorter hunt period would cause an increase in success rates AND an increase in buck to doe ratios.


----------

