# SPIKE HUNT STATEWIDE!!!!!!



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

Just in Spike hunt is now statewide!!!!!!!!!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

:evil: :evil:


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

we could boycott the spike tags but im afraid were not that unified , saddest part is the
wildlife board just plain disrecarded all the public input and did what ever the f--k they wanted to do


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

There go's are future mature bull's.


----------



## utah450 (Oct 22, 2007)

shocker


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

mack1950 said:


> we could boycott the spike tags but im afraid were not that unified , saddest part is the
> wildlife board just plain disrecarded all the public input and did what ever the f--k they wanted to do


+1 :evil: :evil: :evil:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

we could contact the news media, and expose these sob's


----------



## muleymadness (Jan 23, 2008)

dumb agreed, to bad.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

Why is this so bad? I'm a fence sitter but if someone can explain I will jump off the fence grab my pitch fork and kill the beast.


----------



## utfireman (Sep 7, 2007)

Now you are killing all of the new recruitment and elk from the old group. Might as well consider the Pahvant, Dutton, and San Juan our new Wasatch, Nebo and Manti unit's. 

The big problem is not one person stood up and wanted the statewide spike hunt. It was a personal issue that started with Keele Johnson. He has been working on this issue for two years now. He has told people that he can do what he want's since he has all the power. This attitude should not be allowed by board member's.

The wildlife board is suppose to base their vote off of what is said at the RAC's. This is not happening. All of the issue's at the beginging of the meeting that the board voted on, were exactly opposite of what the majority of the public and RAC's wanted.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Managing the whole state the same is biological suicide, each unit should be managed different, it would benefit the elk, hunters, opportunity and so on. Those units listed above are more of a premium unit but like said above they will now no longer be any different from any of the others. Sad sad day for the state, hunters, elk, deer, small town buisinesses, every one will be effected by this.


----------



## sagebrush (Sep 8, 2007)

well i like this idea myself, now i can get a spike tag and hunt state wide just as the archery hunters do. sure some of you do not agree with this, and I do not agree with the archery hunters being able to hunt state wide either.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

sagebrush said:


> well i like this idea myself, now i can get a spike tag and hunt state wide just as the archery hunters do. sure some of you do not agree with this, and I do not agree with the archery hunters being able to hunt state wide either.


Ok, I respect your opinion, but back it up. Here is the reason why I don't like Statewide Spike hunting, IMO they are already don't give out enough LE tags. Now you start giving out spike tags and they are going to have to give out less LE tags and hurting quality. They had a hard time selling out spike tags before. Now it is going to be even harder to draw for these tags. I am not a trophy hunter by any means, but I would like an opportunity in the future, probably very distant future, to shoot a nice bull. This hurts me in two ways: it will hurt the quality of bulls and make it harder for me to draw. I guess my biggest beef of all is the wildlife board is acting like a dictatorship. They do what they want without any repercussions. They went against what all the professionals and people wanted.

Oh and statewide archery has no affect on rifle hunters so I don't know why you would be against it. :?


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

This means fewer 3 point and 4 point bulls shot. and more 6 point and even 7 point bulls shot.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

redleg said:


> This means fewer 3 point and 4 point bulls shot. and more 6 point and even 7 point bulls shot.


Please explain. :?


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2008)

Nothing personal PRO, but aint no way in HE!! I will be coming to Utah after 3 years of spike hunting has had time to set in. I know it will take four to five years for the big bulls to be killed off but why chance it. Screw that, you utards, I mean UIDIOTS, really jacked up a good thing. Heck, I have no problem at all killing 340 bulls every year right here in NM DIY. Why do I want to spend $20k on a tag another $5k on a stupid expo experience and another butt load on guide fees when I can get bulls just as good right here in NM where we over hunt elk the same as UIDIOTS are about to. Welcome the glorious age of "I wonder what a 400 bull looks like", cuz it's comin. If I hadn't already put so much money toward this trip I would start my protest this year. I know, I don't even live in your state, but I live to see 400 bulls and they are very very rare, and morons running your dow have just raped the state of Utah.

Let me re-iterate

UIDIOTS!


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Once a bull makes it past the first (spike) year, he is allowed to grow. some are born 2 points and never get shot until someone has a limited entry tag.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

redleg said:


> Once a bull makes it past the first (spike) year, he is allowed to grow. some are born 2 points and never get shot until someone has a limited entry tag.


How is that any different than now?


----------



## Greenhead 2 (Sep 13, 2007)

Sagebrush, managing from jealousy is just about as good as the WB reasoning for their decision neither makes sense when it comes to real beneficial management. Issuesing more LE permits to balance the herds and leaving the spikes alone to keep renewing the herd and LE opportunity clearly makes more sense to rifle and archery hunters.


----------



## Red-Grouse (Sep 22, 2007)

Ok I really have no opinion on this issue than I think we could afford to kill a few more elk. I hear people gripe all the time about not having enough oppertunity does this not increase hunting opportunities?



utfireman said:


> Now you are killing* all *of the new recruitment and elk from the old group. Might as well consider the Pahvant, Dutton, and San Juan our new Wasatch, Nebo and Manti unit's.


Do you have anything but an emotional argument to back this statement up??

I do believe that the success rates are fairly low on spike hunts any way, so if you are even removing half of your spike population (which I really doubt would happen) you still have the other 50% to be recruited into the "big bull" population.......


----------



## jakalope (Dec 5, 2008)

THERE ARE LE UNITS IN UTAH (BEAVER & BOULDER) THAT HAVE HAD SPIKE HUNTS AS WELL AS LE HUNTS GOING ON IN THE SAME UNIT. THESE UNITS HAVE NOT SUFFERED A BIT. THEY ARE STILL CONSTINANTLY KILLING 400 BULLS OFF OF THESE UNITS AS WELL AS MANY SPKIES. IT ISN'T GOING TO EFFECT THE HERDS ALL IT WILL DO IS BRING THE BULL TO COW RATIO BACK TO A BETTER MANAGEABLE STATE. ALL I HAVE HERD OVER THE YEARS IS PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT BULL TO COW RATIOS SAYING TO MANY BULLS NOW THE DWR IS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT AND YOUR ALL STILL NOT HAPPY. THE MAJORITY OF SPIKE HUNTERS WILL BE OUT RIDING THE ROADS DRINKING BEER. THEY WONT HAVE THAT MUCH OF AN EFFECT ON THE HERDS!!


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Thack said:


> Ok I really have no opinion on this issue than I think we could afford to kill a few more elk. I hear people gripe all the time about not having enough oppertunity does this not increase hunting opportunities?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I believe there is many solution to creating more opportunity without losing so much quality. I think there needs to be a balance between the two. I think they could have easily achieved more opportunity by not being so stingy with the LE tags. I do think quality will suffer in those units that will now have spike tags. I have been putting in for a unit that has spike tags and it has good quality, but nothing like the other units. I just don't see what this accomplishes. I think the DWR and State of Utah is going to see a financial hit from this decision and getting rid of statewide archery.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Stop shouting, it's hurting my eyes :shock:


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Statewide spikes!! -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- 

Great job WB and great job RACs!


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

I was wondering when you were going to chime in W2U.... I'm sittin on the fence on this one.... I'll definitely be getting a spike tag this year...


----------



## sagebrush (Sep 8, 2007)

i look at like this more opportunity, hunting statewide they way it should be. at least some of the bulls will be thinned out, because some of the trophy hunters can not seem to lower their standards and shoot a 300 class bull. this is one way to get the bull to cow ratio down.


----------



## orvy (Oct 30, 2008)

Hasn't the Wasatch been a spike only unit, except for LE for years? I don't see that it is or has been struggling to produce good bulls. Maybe with more opportunity other places it will take some of the heat off of places like the Wasatch unit. I dont think the success rate for spike hunters is going to be at 100%, maybe at best 50% so half of the spikes make it to next year, with less bulls making it the biggest and strongest have less competition for breeding therefor the best genes are passed on. It beats the "management bull" idea all to hell I think.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

orvy said:


> Hasn't the Wasatch been a spike only unit, except for LE for years? I don't see that it is or has been struggling to produce good bulls. Maybe with more opportunity other places it will take some of the heat off of places like the Wasatch unit. I dont think the success rate for spike hunters is going to be at 100%, maybe at best 50% so half of the spikes make it to next year, with less bulls making it the biggest and strongest have less competition for breeding therefor the best genes are passed on. It beats the "management bull" idea all to hell I think.


All depends on how you look at it I guess. It does beat managment bull all to hell, but would you rather shoot a spike or a mature? Issuing more LE tags does the same thing.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> It beats the "management bull" idea all to hell I think.


The management tags are also a good way to take some bulls out. A lot of people would be freaking excited with a 5x5, 5x6. Therefore the management tags would give people more of a chance to harvest a branch antlered bulls. You can also control the number of bulls taken off a unit.

When you issue 17,000 Statewide spike tags then you have no control over how many spikes are killed on each unit.



> with less bulls making it the biggest and strongest have less competition for breeding therefor the best genes are passed on.


In your opinion what is a bull that has good genes? If you saw a 330 bull breeding some cows would you say he has bad genes or maybe hes a young bull who hasn't reached his potential yet? Cows also pass on their genes.


----------



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

I agree with you SAGEBRUSH 100%. There is to many people complaining about the DWR not issuing more tags and the bull/cow ratio out of wack. When a lot of people wont even raise there weapon unless it is a certain inch. Well if all those inch hunters would of harvested an animal the bull/cow ratio wouldn't be out of wack!!!!!!! And all this mess may not be taking place!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I agree with you SAGEBRUSH 100%. There is to many people complaining about the DWR not issuing more tags and the bull/cow ratio out of wack. When a lot of people wont even raise there weapon unless it is a certain inch. Well if all those inch hunters would of harvested an animal the bull/cow ratio wouldn't be out of wack!!!!!!! And all this mess may not be taking place!


The statewide success rate is like 87% so bulls are being killed, but the DWR isn't issuing enough tags so that is why the bull/cow ratio is out of whack. It's not because of trophy hunters.


----------



## orvy (Oct 30, 2008)

True, you got to wonder what they were thinking. I didn't look at it look at it like that. In these times of economic crisis we know they could use the extra $$ that would be generated by selling more LE tags. The question is how many extra tags could they sell? And how many trophy type bulls per unit could be taken off of each unit. With spike hunting the mature trophy types are not decimated, i think a good example although it has to do with deer is the Book Cliffs, lots of scraps out there, the biggest and best get totally killed off and all that is left to breed the does is the scraps.


----------



## orvy (Oct 30, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> In your opinion what is a bull that has good genes? If you saw a 330 bull breeding some cows would you say he has bad genes or maybe hes a young bull who hasn't reached his potential yet? Cows also pass on their genes.


I think each unit has different things to consider when discussing genes. Would you shoot a 330 bull on the Monroe or Pahvant? There is a dominant gene and recessive gene for all characteristics, right? You have a lot better chance of a good bull matching up with a good cow than a bad bull matching up with a good cow. At least with a good bull you know one of the two has good genes. I'm not trying to be a professor or anything but it has a lot to do with odds. With a young bull you just can't tell, its a chance you take when you pull the trigger.As far as the management bull goes, maybe I'm wrong but if a tag holder, lets say a max point guy, shoots a mgmt bull doesn't he get his points back? If so it totally screws everyone else's chance at ever drawing.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> As far as the management bull goes, maybe I'm wrong but if a tag holder, lets say a max point guy, shoots a mgmt bull doesn't he get his points back? If so it totally screws everyone else's chance at ever drawing.


Thats right, he doesnt get to keep his points and that is the way it should be. The max point holder wasn't forced to put in for a management hunt and he knows ahead of time that he will lose his points if he draws.



> I think each unit has different things to consider when discussing genes. Would you shoot a 330 bull on the Monroe or Pahvant?


It depends on the type of hunter you are. Some hunters have killed 330 bulls on these units. The Elk genes are the same for every unit in the state. Anybull units can produce 400 class bulls if the bulls were allowed to grow that big.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

orvy said:


> True, you got to wonder what they were thinking. I didn't look at it look at it like that. In these times of economic crisis we know they could use the extra $$ that would be generated by selling more LE tags. The question is how many extra tags could they sell? And how many trophy type bulls per unit could be taken off of each unit. With spike hunting the mature trophy types are not decimated, i think a good example although it has to do with deer is the Book Cliffs, lots of scraps out there, the biggest and best get totally killed off and all that is left to breed the does is the scraps.


Aunice himself said we could double it and quality would not even be hurt by an inch. Doubling it would be a good start but I would like to see it quadrupled, or maybe even more than that with more tags being given out to primitave weapons. (lower sucess rates=more tags could be given.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

I400 is boiling in my blood. Dam it all to hell this is crap, the system is broke. All of it, WB, LE, RAC, you name it it sucks.


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

HOGAN said:


> I400 is boiling in my blood. Dam it all to hell this is crap, the system is broke. All of it, WB, LE, RAC, you name it it sucks.


Makes me wonder if you could have gotten I 400 to pass.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

HOGAN said:


> I400 is boiling in my blood. Dam it all to hell this is crap, the system is broke. All of it, WB, LE, RAC, you name it it sucks.


Finally Joey you make a post that makes sense! I tried like hell to get the statewide spike issue referred to the elk committee, and I failed. But, I have NOT quit or given up. When we do get it to the elk committee you can be assured I 400 WILL be a factor!

W2U talks about how the process worked as it is designed to work. That is BS in so many ways. There is no direction or purpose for what is being passed off as game management. Let's look at the management tags, like them or hate them, they have done away with them based off of ONE year of data. How can you make a conclusion of scientific merit based on ONE years data? You can NOT! Now that plan had been scraped in favor of statewide spike tags. Since they only increased the number to 12,500 (a number Hatch pulled out his backside as a 'compromise') while introducing approx. another 30,000 elk into the mix with only 1500 new tags, what will the net result be for ANY/ALL LE units? Is there anyway to predict the outcome? If so, how? How many will jump from the Wasatch to the Book Cliffs, from the Nebo to the Pahvant, from the Fish Lake to the Monroe, from the Boulder to the Dutton, from the Beaver to the SW Desert, from the LaSals to the San Juan? Will this cause the bull:cow ratios to get out of whack on the 'old' spike units? What will happen if several thousand hunters hit the Monroe that has a herd of 700 elk on it? The Manti/Fish Lake/Wasatch units have by far the three largest elk herds in Utah so they can absorb a ton of spike hunters will minimal effect on the elk herd dynamics. How many yearling's will survive? Is there any way to predict/prevent over-harvest year to year under the new 'plan'? When the bull:cow ratio is brought in line, will they reduce mature tags or spike tags? These are just a few of the questions that should have been answered BEFORE implementing the half assed joke of a management plan. This goes AGAINST the current Elk Management Plan DIRECTS the Wildlife Board to follow for elk. Ironically, the EMP was approved by the Wildlife Board, how is now ignoring it completely.


----------



## orvy (Oct 30, 2008)

Don't take this the wrong way but, there are lots of people to consider in these decisions, from the "weekend warrior" to the "hey lets put in for a tag this year guy" to the very dedicated "trophy hunter". Its hard for anyone to like any decision that doesn't affect them in a positive manner. As a sportsman I agree with what has been said numerous times as of late,"we must stick together" everyone has different views and ideas but I think the one thing that we all have in common is the love for the outdoors, wildlife and the opportunity to enjoy both. I've seen some very good ideas come up on the forum but a lot of them never got any further than that. What is done is done, as far as this year goes, but maybe we should cooperate with each other and get some petitions going on some of these ideas and submit them to our governor with a message that we are tired of not being listened to. The true sportsman spends a lot of money on tags and buys a lot of gear with tax that contributes to the general fund, if we threaten to take it elsewhere, maybe they will listen but, we have to be prepared to follow up on our threats. How many are willing to sit it out a year? or two? If we do sit it out will it make enough of an impact or will the voids be filled with opportunists? Tough call.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

So will archery tags still be either sex on all of the units? Seems like that may throw things a little out of whack, if people start slamming more cows on those units too...


----------



## utfireman (Sep 7, 2007)

If the herd goes below a certain number then no to either sex tag's.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Statewide spikes!! -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/-
> 
> Great job WB and great job RACs!


One more time 
-*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -()/>- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -*|*- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/-

More room for more hunters


----------



## sagebrush (Sep 8, 2007)

I really have to hand it to the arm chair biologist we have here, it seems they know more about managing, and what is good for the elk than the DWR, and the Wildlife Board. All we see from these arm chair biologist is we want more tags, more tags. the draw isn't fair we want more tags more tags dammit! sheeeez some you are something else.

what a bunch of whiners.


----------



## for fun (Sep 13, 2007)

Well those of you with alot of point better get your tags. In three or four years it will be even harder to shot a high scoring bull. Not imposible but much harder. This is going to kill the smaller LE units.


----------



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

since it's in the DWR needs to put a certain number of tags on each unit so one or more don't get slaughtered. Then I don't think it would be such a big deal. until that happens lets all pray for are great herds.


----------



## Mezmarley (Nov 25, 2007)

So let me see if this is correct...

I can archery elk hunt for spikes on ANY unit within the state of Utah next fall?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Mezmarley said:


> So let me see if this is correct...
> 
> I can archery elk hunt for spikes on ANY unit within the state of Utah next fall?


Except Diamond Mountain.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Mezmarley said:


> So let me see if this is correct...
> 
> I can archery elk hunt for spikes on ANY unit within the state of Utah next fall?


*And antlerless!!!* Welcome to your new Southern Region elk units (SW Desert, Fillmore Oak Crk So, Pahvant, Monroe, Mt Dutton, Panguitch Lake, Paunsaugunt, Kaiparowits) all you archery elk hunters who normally hunt elk elsewhere! Come join the crowds!!! -()/>- **O** /**|**\ -#&#*!- O|*


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Mezmarley said:


> So let me see if this is correct...
> 
> I can archery elk hunt for spikes on ANY unit within the state of Utah next fall?


Sure, unless you want to hunt deer at the same time, in which case you can only hunt spikes in your deer region.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Finnegan said:


> Mezmarley said:
> 
> 
> > So let me see if this is correct...
> ...


But, since you only have to *pick, not draw, a region, any region* for deer this next year, then you still get to choose ANY unit, except Diamond Mt. See my previous post!!!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> all you archery elk hunters who normally hunt elk elsewhere! Come join the crowds!!! -()/>- **O** /**|**\ -#&#*!- O|*


Wont' this actually spread things out? I mean, previously every in the south had to head to Boulder, Fish Lake, and Beaver to hunt spike elk (all of which have 400 bulls killed every year). Now, all those people who typically make the trek to those places have other options. Panguitch, Dutton, Monroe. So, aren't we actually thinning out the pressure on those other units? Will there really be more hunters in the field? Or will the same number of hunters just be spread out more in Utah?

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me! More opportunity while spreading out hunters at the same time.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Well you will have 6,000 more spike hunters and who knows how many more archery elk hunters. Many units won't have as much recruitment to the herd. The Monroe mtn will be easy to get a spike or cow with all the roads.


----------



## Caddis36 (Oct 26, 2007)

Where do you get 6000 spike hunters from, they only increased the tags to 12,500 for all 23 units, last year there was 11,000 for 7 units


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

General season archery elk tags are either sex and UNLIMITED........
along with NO cap on southern region bow deer, thats a lot of new "COMBO" Archery
hunting south of I-70.... There will be a lot of hunters heading south on I-15
come 8/15/2009..................More than there was this year......Any bet's?


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

No cap on archery tags (deer)?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

You have to pick a region for archery deer , But no cap on any region.

There could be 10,000 guys pick the southern region and all get permits
as long as it's under the 16,000 total tags availible.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

So that was the trade off, unlimitted tags for pick your region. However they can put a cap back on no problem and without any fuss, but losing statewide that I believe is the first step to whatever "they" are up to. :evil:


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

PBH said:


> elkfromabove said:
> 
> 
> > all you archery elk hunters who normally hunt elk elsewhere! Come join the crowds!!! -()/>- **O** /**|**\ -#&#*!- O|*
> ...


FWIW, my post was more tongue-in-cheek than an actual complaint. Sorry my sense of humor is so wry. 

Anyway, you do make a reasonable case, but IMO only if we have the same total number of deer *and* elk hunters as we do now, and only if they scatter from, not to, the unidentified areas that are perceived as overcrowded. Since hunters now get a 2 for 1 (deer & elk) archery hunt on all those new spike/cow areas, there will be many more of them getting both tags and choosing to hunt the Southern Region during the combined deer and elk hunts.
And, remember, it's the archery deer hunters, not the archery elk hunters who are supposedly overcrowding those unidentified areas, and they've been able to hunt those LE elk areas all along, and will continue to do so, but now they can also take a spike or cow elk in their favorite deer area. So you can scatter the elk hunters all you want, but it's the already scattered deer hunters that are "overcrowding".

The truth of the matter is that we don't know who is complaining, how many are complaining, what specific areas are perceived as overcrowded, who is actually doing the perceived overcrowding, nor even what overcrowding means. Yet the archery deer hunters are the only ones being targeted because they are the only ones that can be regulated. Then the Wildlife Board opens up these same overcrowded areas to archery spike/cow elk hunters who hunt at the same time as the overcrowding archery deer hunters. *You cannot manage the deer and elk hunts and hunters separately when both hunts happen at the same time in the same place, and hunters are allowed to hunt either or both animals* yet that is just what the DWR and Wildlife Board are trying to do.

Bottom line, they are pitting the archery elk and deer hunts against each other by restricting one and expanding the other for a perceived social problem expressed by a small number of unidentified people. That's neither professional nor wise!


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Flyfishn247 said:


> If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.


I still don't see it this way. I actually see fewer hunters hunting the Boulder, which is good for me. I see things spreading out. Hunters now have the option of choosing Panguitch, Monroe, Indian Peaks, and Dutton on top of the others units that have always allowed for spike elk hunting.

but, I guess if the south is really going to be that crowded, maybe I'll head up north. Sounds to me like I could have the Wasatch and Uinta units all to myself!!

If people are going to complain about the spike elk hunting, I think they can find better arguments than increased pressure on the hunting units. I think the pressure will be relieved on some units. Other units will obviously have in increase but is it enough to warrant a panic about overcrowding? I think not. Just my opinion.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Flyfishn247 said:
> 
> 
> > If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.
> ...


Sums up your mentality right there. It's all about you isn't it? :roll:


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Flyfishn247 said:


> If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.


Wait a second....I thought nobody wanted to hunt spikes? :roll: Are you saying that a large portion of the hunting community wants to actually hunt spikes?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Flyfishn247 said:
> 
> 
> > If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.
> ...


People will hunt spikes when they have no/little other options, as you well know. The reduced the number from the original 17,000 recommended by Anis because they knew they couldn't sell that many spike tags. Just curious, how many people applied or bought a point for MATURE elk in 2008? A few more than 12,500, yes? That means a SMALL portion of the hunting community prefer spike tags over mature bull tags. :?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> People will hunt spikes when they have no/little other options, as you well know. The reduced the number from the original 17,000 recommended by Anis because they knew they couldn't sell that many spike tags. Just curious, how many people applied or bought a point for MATURE elk in 2008? A few more than 12,500, yes? That means a SMALL portion of the hunting community prefer spike tags over mature bull tags. :?


Oh...so you are saying that people want the opportunity to hunt spikes if they cannot hunt mature bulls. I see. So, offering people the opportunity to hunt these spikes if they cannot draw an LE tag is a good thing, right? Because we both know that you cannot offer 12,500 general season any-bull tags across the LE units...

....Like I have said a hundred times, I would love to shoot a mature bull too. And, when I am eligible to apply again, I will also apply for a mature bull tag, but...until I draw, I am glad that I can hunt elk across the state...even if it is just spikes!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Sums up your mentality right there. It's all about you isn't it? :roll:


No. It isn't. That's the great thing about this proposal. It's going to benefit a whole lot more people than just me. So, while it does help me out, in more ways than just what's been mentioned here, it also helps out many other hunters by spreading out hunters to a wider range of hunting areas.

So, Pro -- what's up with I-400?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > People will hunt spikes when they have no/little other options, as you well know. The reduced the number from the original 17,000 recommended by Anis because they knew they couldn't sell that many spike tags. Just curious, how many people applied or bought a point for MATURE elk in 2008? A few more than 12,500, yes? That means a SMALL portion of the hunting community prefer spike tags over mature bull tags. :?
> ...





PBH said:


> So, Pro -- what's up with I-400?


It's gaining momentum as I type. 8)


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

> wyoming2utah wrote:
> Flyfishn247 wrote:
> If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.
> 
> Wait a second....I thought nobody wanted to hunt spikes? Are you saying that a large portion of the hunting community wants to actually hunt spikes?


All I was pointing out is hunters are more apt to go try a "virgin" unit versus one that has been pounded (no pun intended) by spike hunters over the last few years. So I think you will see an increase of archery elk hunters in the Southern region because many of the newly opened units are in the South, and thus more archers who typically hunt say Central for the spike opportunities will be selecting Southern as their region of choice for the first part of the archery deer. This will only validate to a higher degree the previous notion there was "overcrowding" in the South.



> If the DWR/WB/Southern hunters thought there was over crowding before, wait until all these spike hunters head south to hunt these newly opened elk units. You will see an real increase in archers since they can hunt both deer and elk in their southern region of choice. Way to go WB, reminds me of the typical politician, only out for special interests and not the voice of the people.
> 
> I still don't see it this way. I actually see fewer hunters hunting the Boulder, which is good for me. I see things spreading out. Hunters now have the option of choosing Panguitch, Monroe, Indian Peaks, and Dutton on top of the others units that have always allowed for spike elk hunting.


PBH,

I too hunt Boulder (archery), have for years, and I have never seen a archer there hunting primarily spikes on the archery hunt (I am not saying there isn't any, I just have never met any). A lot of hunters are hunting both deer and elk, and for these, I highly doubt you will see much of a decrease in hunters. There may be a decrease in the number of rifle hunters though.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> [
> 
> 
> PBH said:
> ...


Been gaining momentum for a number of years, hasn't it? It seems like every year that goes by, that momentum gets hit with something new, like statewide spike tags. So, is it gaining momentum, or is it falling further and further behind?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...


Well, since a couple of high ranking folks from the 2 biggest conservation groups approached me about I400 last week I would say its gaining. It has been less than two years seen I400 was hatched, but keep the hyperbole going, it makes you look less ignorant. :roll:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Flyfishn247 said:


> PBH,
> 
> I too hunt Boulder (archery), have for years, and I have never seen a archer there hunting primarily spikes on the archery hunt (I am not saying there isn't any, I just have never met any). A lot of hunters are hunting both deer and elk, and for these, I highly doubt you will see much of a decrease in hunters. There may be a decrease in the number of rifle hunters though.


Flyfish -- consider: I live in Cedar City. In the past I have had to drive to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt archery elk. (I'm still in my waiting period to apply for LE elk tag). I'm sure there are many other hunters who also were limited to heading to Boulder or Fish Lake to continue to hunt archery elk (or any other weapon). But, with the new law I don't have to drive all the way to Boulder or Fish Lake to hunt spike elk. Now, I can simply drive to Panguitch if I choose.

Won't that have some affect on pressure? It definitely will. Units like Boulder and Fish Lake will certainly see a reduction in pressure. When you open up that many additional options for hunters, they will use them. Pressure may go up on Panguitch, Monroe, Dutton, etc -- but by how much? There are numerous options now.

And, how many people will think, just like the majority of those complaining here, that pressure is going to go up and decide to abandon the southern for a "less crowded" northern region? That's where I'm headed. Forget that crowded south, I'm heading north.

Pro -- just saying -- it's been two years, and nothing has happened. Glad to hear that you are still gaining momentum. I wish you the best in your endeavor.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Flyfish -- consider: I live in Cedar City. In the past I have had to drive to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt archery elk. (I'm still in my waiting period to apply for LE elk tag). I'm sure there are many other hunters who also were limited to heading to Boulder or Fish Lake to continue to hunt archery elk (or any other weapon). But, with the new law I don't have to drive all the way to Boulder or Fish Lake to hunt spike elk. Now, I can simply drive to Panguitch if I choose. Have you never heard of the Beaver? :roll:
> 
> Won't that have some affect on pressure? It definitely will. Units like Boulder and Fish Lake will certainly see a reduction in pressure. When you open up that many additional options for hunters, they will use them. Pressure may go up on Panguitch, Monroe, Dutton, etc -- but by how much? There are numerous options now. Panguitch and Monroe have much lower elk populations than Fish Lake and Boulder. With uncapped archery tags how can YOU predict the number of spike hunters on ANY given LE unit? You can't!
> 
> ...


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

PBH, you brought up a good point I failed to consider. Archers may have hunted deer on Boulder mainly because of the option to hunt elk at the same time. Now with numerous options to hunt spikes elsewhere, maybe some of these archers will move off of Boulder. Personally, I hunt Boulder for deer and the Uintas and Wasatch for elk. There is a chance I may see a reduction in the number of hunters in my deer area.  We shall see....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Panguitch and Monroe have much lower elk populations than Fish Lake and Boulder. With uncapped archery tags how can YOU predict the number of spike hunters on ANY given LE unit? You can't![/color]


The same way you can predict how many spike elk will be killed on Monroe, I guess. :lol:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Have you never heard of the Beaver?[/color] :roll:


Obviously, I have. However, just like Cedar Mountain (an any bull unit), I choose not to hunt the Beaver.



proutdoors said:


> Panguitch and Monroe have much lower elk populations than Fish Lake and Boulder. With uncapped archery tags how can YOU predict the number of spike hunters on ANY given LE unit? You can't![/color]


 And either can you. Pro -- give hunters some credit. We're not all stupid. Some of us understand that the herds are small, and thus our chances of finding a spike may be more limited than a unit with a larger herd. We can use the limited logic we have to deduce that small herd size plus high numbers of hunters might equal limited success. That will obviously have an affect on my decision as to where I'll hunt. Do you honestly believe that thousands of hunters will head to a unit with relatively few animals? Don't hunters do their homework prior to making decisions on where to hunt? Give some credit to these people you claim to represent. We're not all dumb. I might be, but not all are.



proutdoors said:


> What LE units in the Northern region are you headed for? All the LE units in the northern region already are either spike only or any-bull. :roll: You now will have spike hunters heading south to the Pahvant, Monroe, SW Desert, Dutton, Panguitch Lake, and to the SE to the San Juan.[/color]


 What does that matter? If all those people are going to head south to these recently opened units to hunt spikes, won't pressure from open units like the Uinta go down? If so, I'll go to the north slope and look for a mature bull. You need to realize that people like me enjoy hunting elk. I'm not favoring spike elk over mature elk. I just want the opportunity to hunt elk, as do others. My opportunity has just increased with this new law change, as has many other hunters.



proutdoors said:


> I can see arrogance is a family trait.[/color] :?


 You're too easily offended and insecure. I offered you my best. It was a compliment. I apologize if the written word is sometimes hard to understand, or is misinterpreted. I still offer you the best in your push for I400. I do think that, win or lose, it is a good thing to get involved. You're doing that, and you're also including many other hunters. That's a good thing. Instead of getting pissed off -- ACCEPT THE COMPLIMENT!!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Flyfishn247 said:


> PBH, you brought up a good point I failed to consider. Archers may have hunted deer on Boulder mainly because of the option to hunt elk at the same time. Now with numerous options to hunt spikes elsewhere, maybe some of these archers will move off of Boulder.


That's exactly my point. With all the added options this allows deer and elk hunters to choose from, many units will see a decrease in pressure. The additional units that are now open may see an increase, but I don't see it as so much to consider it "over crowded". The playing field just got a whole lot bigger.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> You're too easily offended and insecure. I offered you my best. It was a compliment. I apologize if the written word is sometimes hard to understand, or is misinterpreted. I still offer you the best in your push for I400. I do think that, win or lose, it is a good thing to get involved. You're doing that, and you're also including many other hunters. That's a good thing. Instead of getting **** off -- ACCEPT THE COMPLIMENT!!


If for one minute I believed you were sincere I would 'accept' your comments as a compliment. How is: "Pro -- just saying -- *it's been two years, and nothing has happened*. Glad to hear that you are still gaining momentum. I wish you the best in your endeavor" a compliment? :roll:

Also, you said you "had to" travel clear to Fish Lake to hunt spikes, I was showing an option you left out to make your case _seem_ stronger.

I believe a pile of spike hunters will hunt the 'new' LE units, as it is somewhere they have wanted to hunt because they hear/read all stories of the monster bulls on Pahvant/SW Desert and Spidey on Monroe. It also will be used as scouting by many hoping to draw a tag fro that LE unit down the road. It has NOTHING to do with being stupid, or of me thinking they are stupid.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

3rd time is a charm?

Pro -- I think what you are doing with I400 is great. It is getting people involved in the decision making process. That's a good thing. Good job. Keep it up.




My comments about the length of time were just that. It's been two years, and nothing has come up. Is this still alive? Are you gaining momentum, or losing it? You claim that you are gaining momentum. Good for you, and those supporting I400. It will be interesting to see if I400 ever gets its day. Again, good luck to you.


Also, I do have to travel to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt spike elk. I have to because I decline the opportunity to hunt units like the Beaver or Cedar Mountain. Thanks for worry about that for me.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Also, I do have to travel to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt spike elk. I have to because I decline the opportunity to hunt units like the Beaver or Cedar Mountain. Thanks for worry about that for me.


You were being intellectually dishonest earlier when you said you "had to" travel to Fish Lake/Boulder because you INTENTIONALLY left off mentioning the Beaver. :roll:

As for the 'compliment', third time is the charm. 8) :mrgreen:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> You were being intellectually dishonest earlier when you said you "had to" travel to Fish Lake/Boulder because you INTENTIONALLY left off mentioning the Beaver. :roll:


Wait a minute. I thought I was the guy that "spun" things around? Now it's you? Calling me dishonest? Come on Pro, you're a better person than that. You don't need to resort to mud slinging.

FWIW this is what I said:
(I think you forgot this one)


PBH said:


> I mean, previously everyone in the south had to head to Boulder, Fish Lake, and *Beaver* to hunt spike elk (all of which have 400 bulls killed every year).


Later, I said:



PBH said:


> In the past *I* have had to drive to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt archery elk.


Now, for one reason or another, I did HAVE to choose either Fish Lake or Boulder. For me, Beaver was NOT an option. Some of the decision may have been personal choice, but that was not the limiting factor. It was, however, an option for other hunters, as noted in my first quote.

you can call me many things. Call me arrogant. Call me an ass. Don't call me dishonest. I'm an honest person.

Get this thing back on track...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Flyfish -- consider: *I live in Cedar City. In the past I have had to drive to either Fish Lake or Boulder to hunt archery elk.* (I'm still in my waiting period to apply for LE elk tag). I'm sure there are many other hunters who also were limited to heading to Boulder or Fish Lake to continue to hunt archery elk (or any other weapon). But, *with the new law I don't have to drive all the way to Boulder or Fish Lake to hunt spike elk.* Now, I can simply drive to Panguitch if I choose.


This would be the post I am referring to. You made NO mention of Beaver. :?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> This would be the post I am referring to. You made NO mention of Beaver. :?


Apologies for leaving the Beaver out. I'll try to remember to include the Beaver in my future posts. Please see my previous explanation.

Is this better?:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

*\-\* :wink:


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

I400 will gain a lot more popularity because of this whole statewide spike tag issue. Hunters will be upset when they are hunting LE bulls with all the new spike hunters on the unit with them. The Nebo, Wasatch, La Sals, N. Cache and Fish Lake might have a surplus of bulls this coming year which benefits I400 because more tags can be issued the following year.

Utah might have the best elk hunting in the world, but only a few people get to enjoy it. Utah hunters have to sacrafice waiting 15 plus years for their OIL elk hunt because we have people here in Utah that think killing yearling bulls is wonderful and the best management tool. Colorado, NM and Arizona hunters get to hunt more mature bulls and Utah hunters are baby elk killers because this is pretty much the only opportunity we get besides the anybull unit, which aren't specular by any means.

The spike tag is a crappy opportunity tag. Mr. Johnson said that Colorado should issue spike elk tags. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: Colorado might kill raghorns, but that sure beats the opportunity elk hunting opportunities here in Utah.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

Coyote-
The spike hunts will be long after the LE hunters are in there.
They hunt in september, the spike hunts will be during the general in october.....no conflict.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Im talking about the archery spike elk hunters hunting with archery hunters who have a San Juan, Pahvant tag.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> Im talking about the archery spike elk hunters hunting with archery hunters who have a San Juan, Pahvant tag.


Ok, gotcha :lol:


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

They will be pissed off when some archery spike hunter blows their chance at calling in a big bull. The Wasatch, Manti, Fishlake units are bigger unit so there has always been less conflicts, but even then there is still conflicts.


----------



## Mezmarley (Nov 25, 2007)

Exactly....15 years to draw a LE archery tag, once-in-a-lifetime basically, and here comes Norman with his Hoochie mama blowing through country like he's the only one out there. 

I wonder how many spike hunters will be involved in fist fights this year????


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Mezmarley said:


> Exactly....15 years to draw a LE archery tag, once-in-a-lifetime basically, and here comes Norman with his Hoochie mama blowing through country like he's the only one out there.
> 
> I wonder how many spike hunters will be involved in fist fights this year????


Good thing UBA made it so LE hunters get the last 5 days w/o spike hunters. Yet I sure took a lot of heat last year for getting that implemented. :? Looks better and better for the LE tag holders on ALL units now. 8)


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2008)

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on my following hypothesis, but isn't the solution to cutting down cow/bull ration and burning off prefrence points, and increasing herd quality rather simple?

I think if the dwr implemented management bull hunts for archers only at the tune of about 100 tags per unit, depending on the herd size, from august 1st to august 15th, that it would be an awesome idea.

Point 1.
First off the bulls wouldn't be busted up and shooting a busted up 6x6 would be a drastically reduced problem.

Point 2.
Bow hunters have to get in close for the kill. They would know exactly what they were shooting before they dumped the string. Make them pass a management ethics course and prosecute anyone caught shooting raghorns or questionable non-management bulls. Heck, anyone at 50 yards know the difference between a mature 5x6 and young 5x6 that will make a great bull the next year.

point 3.
Freakin Pro would have more bow tags in the field and might just shut his fat you know what up on here.

And there you have it, yet more free wisdom from the great stinkystomper :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Stinkystomper said:


> Someone correct me if I'm wrong on my following hypothesis, but isn't the solution to cutting down cow/bull ration and burning off prefrence points, and increasing herd quality rather simple?
> 
> I think if the dwr implemented management bull hunts for archers only at the tune of about 100 tags per unit, depending on the herd size, from august 1st to august 15th, that it would be an awesome idea.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dark Cloud (Dec 17, 2007)

The only thing that would make this better is if you could buy an over the counter cow tag for all the new areas  Then we could just shoot all of the elk out and you guys could stop fighting over why it is good and why it is bad, because there would be no more elk to worry about.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

stinky sent me a PM asking what I 400 is, apparently he has been holed up in underground for the last 2 years. :roll:

Here is a rough draft posted in August 2007:


> In 1989 Utah began issuing spike-only tags to increase the number of mature bulls on many of the elk units in Utah. The idea was to allow a certain percentage of the yearling bull elk population to be harvested while restricting the harvest of mature bulls. This also enabled the DWR to issue several thousand spike tags with low harvest numbers, allowing for many people the opportunity to hunt yearly with reduced harvest of the bull population. We believe the spike tag still has its place in the management of both elk and elk hunters. However, we also believe that in many areas, spike-only hunts are not the most effective management tool. Accordingly:
> 
> 1) We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, Wasatch, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert. This will allow more bulls to reach maturity on the (a) units, increasing the number of mature bulls that can be harvested yearly. This change will also reduce the bull:cow ratios on the (b) units which currently have an excess of mature bulls. Issuing spike tags for a determined time will reduce the number of bulls being recruited into the mature bull population without affecting quality. Although many spike-only tags will be eliminated, at least three new hunting opportunities will be created: Spike-only hunting on (b) areas, increased any-bull permits for (a) areas, and increased cow elk tags that can be issued in the future as a result of lowered bull:cow ratios on these units.
> 
> ...


We have presented this to numerous conservation groups with very positive responses. This proposal was developed by many members of this forum, a lot of research and talks with biologists/hunters/conservationists/DWR personnel has resulted in a viable and creative elk management concept that has even gotten responses from folks in other states such as Oregon/Arizona/New Mexico/Idaho.


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2008)

I personally think I 400 would be a great idea. I originally thought it would turn utah into NM but the tags are no where near what we issue. For example, we issue 125 bow bull tags, 300 ranch unit wide bow tags, 200 muzzy bull tags, 125 rifle bull tags, and about 400 ranch unit wide rifle/muzzy bull tags. Unit 34 in NM is the sacramento mountains which is equivalent to dutton in Utah. I could easily take a gun on the rifle elk hunt in that unit and take a 360+ bull every year. 400 would be really tough but do able. Problem with the area is that the amount of tags makes the elk extremely jumpy. They are very skittish and only true hunters can find them. Sure they are plentiful, but its no walk in the park like what most utah hunters seem to want. If we had tags cut in half unit 34 would be awesome in every way. You guys with I400 would be an equivalent of about 15% of our current total tag allotment, half of half of our current tags. Trust me, that would still be an awesome hunt.


----------

