# Dead Dog = $50



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

Let the coyote killin commence!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Let the coyote killin commence!


Halleluiah, Amen and Amen!!! OOO°)OO


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Let the coyote killin commence!


It never stopped. 8)


----------



## kailey29us (May 26, 2011)

Does that go into effect now or July like most other new laws?


----------



## muleymadness (Jan 23, 2008)

Which counties offer it?


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm i guess i better put the one i got today in the freezer for a bit


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

I hope there are some restrictions like time of year/etc.


----------



## amadkau (Sep 7, 2011)

That's great news. I know there are a lot of questions unanswered but did it go through the whole legislative process yet? And has anyone ever gotten the previous $20 bounty or know the process to get this new one?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> I hope there are some restrictions like time of year/etc.


Why does it matter?


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

I think it is apparent that killing yotes at specific times will help mule deer more than me shooting one during the rifle hunt. It gives an incentive to kill more of them at the right time instead of year round.


----------



## leviwin (Dec 7, 2011)

I really think this is a waste of money. It is certainly not the most effect way to control coyotes. When I lived in Nevada lots of dogs got there ears cut off for bounties and the state of Nevada doesn't offer any. You would be amazed at how much the state has already paid to kill coyotes in Nevada. I was amazed at how many Utah plates you saw out in the hills looking for dogs.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

What budget does this money come from?


----------



## leviwin (Dec 7, 2011)

I don't know, but would guess that it might come from coyote control money they ask you to donate.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> I think it is apparent that killing yotes at specific times will help mule deer more than me shooting one during the rifle hunt. It gives an incentive to kill more of them at the right time instead of year round.


From page 4 of Fur bearer guide book...

Coyote hunting: Coyotes are not protected in
Utah. They may be hunted without a license, year
round.

Should be added,,,spotlighting legal, year round, all rural counties!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Umm, I think you missed CT's point.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Umm, I think you missed CT's point.


Nope. I didn't...

No regulations should be put on coyote hunting period.....

If they wanted to only pay the $50 bounty at certain times fine,
But that's it....


----------



## wilky (Jun 19, 2011)

what counties are the $50 being offered

i am hopeing to head out in the next few weeks when i begin scouting for my hunts even getting 1 coyote will help pay my gas ($50 is even more incentive for me as gas i cut down my driving alot with the rising gas prices


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > Umm, I think you missed CT's point.
> ...


This was my point. Only pay the bounty during the times when killing yotes helps the deer the most.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

Rumor has it that the bounty is only offered in certain counties and you have to prove you are a resident of that county--anyone else hearing this?

I think this law will eventually prove worthless as far as controlling coyotes in Utah. Not only will the coyotes be chased around by every rookie--making them call shy, but you will have greedy people doing dumb things around farmers and ranchers livestock. You will eventually see the farmers and ranchers locking up their property because coyote hunters are out and about trashing, harassing, and damaging fence and property. When the state gains control of the BLM lands, this public land will soon be locked up or sold by the state too. 

If you think it's hard to call a coyote now, wait until every Tom, Dick and Harry is afield chasing and educating them. Utard legislature at work again!


----------



## kailey29us (May 26, 2011)

HighNDry said:


> Rumor has it that the bounty is only offered in certain counties and you have to prove you are a resident of that county--anyone else hearing this?


I dont think they can make a restriction like only residents of a certain county. I can see them saying you have to sign something saying you shot the dog in the county where the bounty is offered.


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

then get a lawyer, cause i know at least juab restricts it to residents.

the only way putting a price on an animals seriously impacts the population is if regulations are minimal & multiple people can make a living off of it.


----------



## reb8600 (Sep 8, 2007)

kailey29us said:


> I dont think they can make a restriction like only residents of a certain county. I can see them saying you have to sign something saying you shot the dog in the county where the bounty is offered.


It is already done that way so yes they can do it. I expect that is the way it will continue. I still have not seen anything say it is a state wide bounty. Right now only certain counties offer it and the coyotes should be shot in those counties. Of course everyone knows that most are killed somewhere else.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

It isn't a statewide bounty, yet. It has passed the Legislator at this point. Still needs to be signed by the Governor.


----------



## Caddis36 (Oct 26, 2007)

I hope everybody is still singing this same tune when they realize they are tacking $5 (SB 87)onto your big game license to pay for Coyote control and Bounties. It's only $5 to me but I know how most of you guys like to B&%$#^ when the price of anything goes up


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

bounties are more cost effective than paid shooters/trappers. average cost on pros can run as high as $500 per coyote because he has to cover his expenses & earn a living. but if that money is put toward a bounty & it's high enough for several really good people to earn a living you can get 2-4X as many killed off.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Pops2 said:


> bounties are more cost effective than paid shooters/trappers. average cost on pros can run as high as $500 per coyote because he has to cover his expenses & earn a living. but if that money is put toward a bounty & it's high enough for several really good people to earn a living you can get 2-4X as many killed off.


Oh, if only your logic were true!

Bounties may be more cost effective per coyote killed, but not per deer saved. It's my understanding that if you kill a member of the dominant pair at the wrong time of year, the other locals just go off and do their own thing and you end up with 2-4X MORE than when you started. In any case, just like comedy, timing is everything.

Earn a living? That's $50,000 per year minus expenses which means 1,000 coyotes per year or 19-20 coyotes per week year round (see above) or 2-3 per day with no time off or 4 per day with weekends off. It also means a lot of lost sleep and a lot of ground covered trying to find uneducated coyotes and turning in the ears. Also, since there is only $500,000 set aside for that little statewide project, only 10 of you could do it even if nobody else does. And 10,000 coyotes killed per year likely doesn't even keep up with the coyote birth rate. (No one knows how many there are!)

Yes, I know, we're only targeting the problem areas but who's to regulate or verify the location of the kill when there' $50 at stake.

This was/is nothing more than a PR move for SFW and our legislators and will not live up to it's title!


----------



## phorisc (Feb 2, 2011)

The reason they are now $50 each is cause there are too many of them..And clearly it has been determined (by the DNR?) that the mule deer decline is due to coyotes...Kill them all whenever you can...Only reason you'd want to not kill them during the summer is if you liked to skin them and sell the hide(though now that the bounty is so high its silly to try and sell hides for less the what the bounty is worth)...but if your interested in exterminating them...shoot them all whenever you get a shot...


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

The bounty will not help the deer herd. Even if it did, you are losing more area to hunt deer due to development and private property owners locking land up. As Utah continues to cry for more industry, more tourism, more development, you will see more environmental types moving in, buying up the prime foothill property, the mountain resorts, and making areas that you could hunt, areas that you can't hunt. 

I'm pretty sure deer hunting for the general public is soon to be a thing of the past, just as fishing the rivers and streams of Utah are becoming a thing of the past.

Eventually, the only hunters and fishers in Utah will be those who can afford to pay outfitters and landowners for access.

Best find something else to enjoy.


----------



## reb8600 (Sep 8, 2007)

+1 on the comment by HighNDry


----------



## phorisc (Feb 2, 2011)

What can we do to prevent utah from doing this?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

phorisc said:


> The reason they are now $50 each is cause there are too many of them..And clearly it has been determined (by the DNR?) that the mule deer decline is due to coyotes..


No.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

phorisc said:


> What can we do to prevent utah from doing this?


From doing what? Offering a bounty on coyotes? Why is it a bad thing to pay out bounties on dead coyotes? The reason for offering the bounties are one thing, however it is just a drop in the bucket in the scheme of things.


----------



## Homer (Sep 1, 2011)

I wish they would also put a bounty on fox, raccoons, pigeons and trespassers.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Homer said:


> I wish they would also put a bounty on fox, raccoons, pigeons and trespassers.


+1 1/8 :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Homer said:
> 
> 
> > I wish they would also put a bounty on fox, raccoons, pigeons and trespassers.
> ...


A-FREAKING-MEN!


----------



## phorisc (Feb 2, 2011)

well if your gonna reply with dumb answers no one is gonna listen to you...I asked what we could do to prevent utah from taking control of federal land...not why utah shouldn't pay bounties. The 2 aren't related.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

phorisc said:


> well if your gonna reply with dumb answers no one is gonna listen to you...I asked what we could do to prevent utah from taking control of federal land...not why utah shouldn't pay bounties. The 2 aren't related.


Are you talking to me? Dumb answers? Maybe, IMO, the question didn't warrant an intelligent answer. _(O)_

We don't agree with this issue. I think the State of Utah SHOULD take control of federal lands. I don't think the Federal government has any business controlling lands (or wildlife) in Utah. I was against this back when Bill Clinton did it, and I am still against it. Sorry, I can't with a good conscience answer your question.


----------



## ram2h2o (Sep 11, 2007)

HighNDry said:


> The bounty will not help the deer herd. Even if it did, you are losing more area to hunt deer due to development and private property owners locking land up. As Utah continues to cry for more industry, more tourism, more development, you will see more environmental types moving in, buying up the prime foothill property, the mountain resorts, and making areas that you could hunt, areas that you can't hunt.
> 
> I'm pretty sure deer hunting for the general public is soon to be a thing of the past, just as fishing the rivers and streams of Utah are becoming a thing of the past.
> 
> ...


100% right. In a few years only the well heeled and landowners will have places to hunt. Any State lands or Federal lands will be like Disneyland during hunting seasons. If the state gets control of the Federal lands I will guarantee the legislators will take care of the lobbyists and rich folks and allow them to buy and tie up the land so the general public will not have access to them. Just like they did the rivers and streams for fishing.
In many of the states back east and down south there is no open land. You have to be a landowner or be in a high priced hunting club to be able to hunt.


----------



## Homer (Sep 1, 2011)

Let's say all this doom and gloom were true, you could always buy or lease your own land. If it is going to be the Armageddon of hunting like you say, you should have no problem finding others to throw in with you. Then you'll have an army if help take care if all the annoying critters, including trespassers :O•-: :lol:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I am still wondering how hunting is alive and thriving as well, if not better, in states with little.....VERY LITTLE federal land..........................Are Utah's politicians really that different from the other 49 states?


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

proutdoors said:


> I am still wondering how hunting is alive and thriving as well, if not better, in states with little.....VERY LITTLE federal land..........................Are Utah's politicians really that different from the other 49 states?


hunting is NOT thriving in a lot of eastern states, many are experiencing a steady decline in license sales. several eastern states have serious issues w/ recruiting the next generation of hunters. most have two main problems land access/crowding on limited public lands & unnecessary high age requirements to hunt/shoot. new york for example requires a kid to be 14 before they can even touch a gun at all (loaded, unloaded, supervised or not even airguns).
the states that are effective at maintaining license sales have a lot of public land (state & federal) spread across the state, relatively low cost & comprehensive licenses and low or no minimum hunting/shooting age. these are mostly in the south east. in fact due to age restrictions, a lot of people that can afford it from new england & new york join souther hunt clubs or just road trip w/ their kids.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

LEADING DEER HUNTING STATES
(Licensed Resident Deer Hunters)
Pennsylvania 1,299,372
Michigan 1,005,000
Wisconsin 894,543
New York 812,446
Texas 645,000

I'd say eastern states are still doing well.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Eastern states are doing quite well and in a few of them you can take more than one deer and some as many as 10 as long as only one of them is a buck. The problem is that you need to buy a hunting lease on private property in quite a few of them to hunt and that is driving out a lot of the younger hunters.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Pops2 said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > I am still wondering how hunting is alive and thriving as well, if not better, in states with little.....VERY LITTLE federal land..........................Are Utah's politicians really that different from the other 49 states?
> ...


Nice spin, but short on reality. Of course people living in big cities have little access.........ever try to hunt in a city park............. :roll: When you compare apples to apples, meaning people in rural areas in the east to people in rural areas in the west, hunter recruitment/retention is comparable. Over the last 25 years I have talked...at length...with thousands of eastern hunters, and guided several hundred of them in Colorado for elk. They come from all walks of life, but they are every bit as passionate about hunting as any of us westerners. Instead of joining special interest groups, they form hunting clubs for about the same amount of out of pocket expenses. They spend as many days in the field, in many cases MORE, as us 'lucky' folks that are being told what to do by politicians.

There are NO eastern states with anything close to 70% of the land being owned by the federal government.....you can even add up state, county owned land for ANY/ALL eastern states and you won't get anywhere near 70% of the land being owned by the government!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Truely, for the last time! Whitetail vs mule deer, elk and pronghorn. Oranges ain't apples! Guided several hundred of them in Colorado for elk? So how come they don't stay home and hunt them?


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> LEADING DEER HUNTING STATES
> (Licensed Resident Deer Hunters)
> Pennsylvania 1,299,372
> Michigan 1,005,000
> ...


i can't say anything about the first three as i have no experience w/ them. but new yorkers were the majority of nonresident hunt club members in VA & NC when i lived in those states. TX is another state i have lived & hunted in quite a bit. TX has consolidated hunting licenses, that means you buy one license to hunt deer, squirrel or quail. so that is the number of total licenses not the number of deer hunters. the last time i bought a tx license they sold 1 million that year. the first time i bought a tx license they sold just under 1.2 million. i've watched the state go from 1 million deer to 2 to 4 & back to 2 million. in TX the only public land that can be deer hunted w/ modern firearms W/O lottery is the 50,000 acres of national forest near houston. there are a couple of other opportunities for archery. of the 1 million acres of public access land less than half is open for deer at all & only about 70,000 is not lotteried (think premium limited entry). i've watched access to private land go from asking to $1500-2500 a year. most of my friends & relatives that could afford that expense chose instead to go to WY for antelope or CO & eventually UT for general season & semi guided elk. i don't know about you, but i don't consider license sales cut in half over 20 years as thriving.


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

Critter said:


> Eastern states are doing quite well and in a few of them you can take more than one deer and some as many as 10 as long as only one of them is a buck. The problem is that you need to buy a hunting lease on private property in quite a few of them to hunt and that is driving out a lot of the younger hunters.


in many eastern states landowners &/or clubs w/ large enough blocks of land can join quality deer management (QDM) or deer management assistance programs (DMAP). state biologists review the property & make management recommendations to maximize quantity & quality of browse, provide bedding cover and determine deer populations & sex ratios. since big bucks are the goal of these programs, the biologists will issue extra antlerless (DMAP/QDM) tags based on the number of does they want taken off. i know of some properties that had unlimited DMAP/QDM tags. and in these programs there is no requirement to use regular tags first (they do have to use regular tags for bucks). so hunters could burn a dozen DMAP/QDM & still go out on public land and burn their half dozen regular tags. i have known guys that legally killed more than 20 deer in a season in VA & NC.


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

proutdoors said:


> Nice spin, but short on reality. Of course people living in big cities have little access.........ever try to hunt in a city park............. :roll:


 more real than your reply. especially if you really believe the extra 20-30 min of driving is the determining factor for urban/suburban hunters.



proutdoors said:


> When you compare apples to apples, meaning people in rural areas in the east to people in rural areas in the west, hunter recruitment/retention is comparable.


 no argument there. but rural hunters aren't the voting block that saves or loses outdoor rights & priveledges. suburban and urban (to a lesser extent) hunters are where your numbers rise & fall. w/o them you wind up like britain or california.



proutdoors said:


> Over the last 25 years I have talked...at length...with thousands of eastern hunters, and guided several hundred of them in Colorado for elk. They come from all walks of life, but they are every bit as passionate about hunting as any of us westerners. Instead of joining special interest groups, they form hunting clubs for about the same amount of out of pocket expenses. They spend as many days in the field, in many cases MORE, as us 'lucky' folks that are being told what to do by politicians.


while you were talking, over the last 35 years i've lived & hunted in VA, NC & TX and hunted SC, GA & TN. i don't doubt any hunters' passion, but like surfing in UT w/o the place to go do it it's hard to participate & harder still to interest your kids. i've seen places i gun hunted as a kid become archery only for deer & shotgun only for small game because subdivisions were built around it. or like hoffman state forest in NC, 10,000 acres pulled from the public & leased to a private hunt club. unfortunately the same suburban & urban hunters whose votes we need, are the main ones shelling out a grand or two for hunt club memberships that lock down most of the private land. the large numbers of hunters that can't afford the cost of a lease plus the regular expenses of hunting depend heavily on public land.



proutdoors said:


> There are NO eastern states with anything close to 70% of the land being owned by the federal government.....you can even add up state, county owned land for ANY/ALL eastern states and you won't get anywhere near 70% of the land being owned by the government!


 true, but the federally owned national forests are the largest blocks of undeveloped public land available to eastern hunters. but ownership of public lands isn't significant to the discussion. what is significant is that there is enough land spread over the state that a hunter, especially a suburban hunter, can be in the field within an hour.


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

elkfromabove said:


> Oh, if only your logic were true!
> 
> Bounties may be more cost effective per coyote killed, but not per deer saved. It's my understanding that if you kill a member of the dominant pair at the wrong time of year, the other locals just go off and do their own thing and you end up with 2-4X MORE than when you started. In any case, just like comedy, timing is everything.


oh but it is true. coyotes VERY RARELY use large & medium wolf social structures of multigeneration nonbreeders led by a breeding pair. coyote pups tend to disperse, willing or not, before the age of 2 & most before the birth or weaning of the next litter of siblings. after dispersal they seek mates & territories. so by the age of two most coyotes "do their own thing." breeding adults respond to pup mortality & increased food from less competition by having larger litters. so killing "dominant pairs" is key to long term population reduction. but you still need to take out 80% of the population in an area to have a significant effect.



elkfromabove said:


> Earn a living? That's $50,000 per year minus expenses which means 1,000 coyotes per year or 19-20 coyotes per week year round (see above) or 2-3 per day with no time off or 4 per day with weekends off. It also means a lot of lost sleep and a lot of ground covered trying to find uneducated coyotes and turning in the ears. Also, since there is only $500,000 set aside for that little statewide project, only 10 of you could do it even if nobody else does. And 10,000 coyotes killed per year likely doesn't even keep up with the coyote birth rate. (No one knows how many there are!)


i didn't realize there was a set amount necessary to earn a living. silly me i always though it varied depending on the needs of the individual & the cost of those needs. as for the numbers, during the fur boom of the 80s there were longliners taking 10-20 $75-100 coyotes PER DAY. even now, i know wolfers in NY, IL & IA taking 100 coyotes a season hunting mostly weekends & holidaysfrom Oct-Feb. lack of funding does not negate the accuracy of my arguement. between market hunting & wolf bounties of the last two centuries, there is substantial evidence to back my logic.



elkfromabove said:


> Yes, I know, we're only targeting the problem areas but who's to regulate or verify the location of the kill when there' $50 at stake.
> 
> This was/is nothing more than a PR move for SFW and our legislators and will not live up to it's title!


this i actually agree with.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Pops2, You'll get no argument from me regarding the biology of breeding pairs (I said it was my understanding. Apparently, I misunderstood.) nor the amount of money it takes to make a living (I used my own situation which I think is typical), but thanks for making my points even better than I did. 

(1) The timing (Oct-Feb) has to be right for the killings to be effective.

(2) Killing the dominant pair is a major key.

(3) $500,000 (Actually $600,000) won't cover the bounties needed to kill enough coyotes (80%) to make a difference. That is, unless the DWR/Counties only provide bounties on regulated/verifiable kills in targeted areas. And even if they could, that's still only 12,000 coyotes in a state with 46,548 sq mi (29,790,720 acres) of deer habitat. And that's still only 12,000 coyotes per year whether we kill them at the rate of 20 per person per day or 1 per person per month.

(4) Coyotes adjust the litter sizes according to pup mortality and available prey. Removing competition will simply mean larger litters and more adults to kill two years from now.

You didn't comment on the pup recruitment (birth) rate, but I'm pretty sure there are more than 12,000 pups reaching maturity every year, thus:
(5) Professionals are still needed to make a difference, even at their high cost, which, BTW, comes from a different fund.

(6) This bill will never live up to it's title, "Mule Deer Protection Act", especially in the long run.

FWIW, I appreciate your insight.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> Truely, for the last time! Whitetail vs mule deer, elk and pronghorn. Oranges ain't apples! Guided several hundred of them in Colorado for elk? So how come they don't stay home and hunt them?


Good hell, I guided UTAH hunters for elk in Colorado as well..............and mule deer..............and mountain lion..............and bear...............and antelope...............and bighorn sheep.....!

The bottom line is: privatizing land would NOT end hunting, it would ENHANCE hunting, as the private sector is ALWAYS better at managing resources, and at meeting customer wants/needs.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Once again another post getting highjacked. :twisted:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

proutdoors said:


> The bottom line is: privatizing land would NOT end hunting, it would ENHANCE hunting, as the private sector is ALWAYS better at managing resources, and at meeting customer wants/needs.


I agree!

But you wouldn't have to privatize the land. Wildlife could be treated like any other publicly owned resource. Timber, Graze, Water, Coal, Oil, Gas, Mineral, Lease the rights to private concerns to extract the most out of it.

I get Monroe. :mrgreen:

What does the predator population look like out east? Particularly deer eaten predators? I understand they have plenty of black bear coyote. But what about Mtn lion?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> But you wouldn't have to privatize the land. Wildlife could be treated like any other publicly owned resource. Timber, Graze, Water, Coal, Oil, Gas, Mineral, Lease the rights to private concerns to extract the most out of it.
> 
> I get Monroe. :mrgreen:


 HELL NO! Timber management on public land is HORRIBLE! Look at how the beetle infestation has been handled. Same for the other resources on public lands. These are some of the biggest reasons I DESPISE 70% of Utah being owned/CONTROLLED by the feds!! :evil:


----------



## Homer (Sep 1, 2011)

I pray daily for lightning to strike 12 MILE and clean that whole range up


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

muleymadness said:


> Which counties offer it?


I posted this on another thread but I'll put it here too.

[attachment=0:2otzlvaw]Counties with bounty.JPG[/attachment:2otzlvaw]


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Homer said:


> I pray daily for lightning to strike 12 MILE and clean that whole range up


You pray? Since when?


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I'll chime in as a former Texan. Some aspects of hunting certainly are better there. There is a lot more land than here for sure, miles and miles of feed range. Our winter range is quickly dwindling and I don't think anyone would deny that. The animals there don't have to deal with winter kill like they do here. That obviously pays off in the form of extra animals every year. 

The opportunity to hunt in Texas is a huge expense and the common man's access to hunting is quickly going the way of the dodo bird. My own lease there was on marginal ground that really only produced hogs and javelinas and it ran over $2000 per year. Want a chance to hunt really nice bucks? Be prepared to fork over $7-10K annually just to have a spot to hunt. 

Hunting is a rich man's sport in Texas. You have to pay to play. Utah is head and shoulders above Texas in the form of opportunities available to everyone.

I don't know what all this has to do with coyotes... :?


----------



## Homer (Sep 1, 2011)

proutdoors said:


> Homer said:
> 
> 
> > I pray daily for lightning to strike 12 MILE and clean that whole range up
> ...


Forever but obviously I am doing it wrong


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Stop by my place and I'll have my wife teach you the proper way......after all, she has whipped cancer three times..... :mrgreen:


----------



## Homer (Sep 1, 2011)

That's great! My wife they said hers was gone in december, but apparently it's decided to come back. Most evil crap there is!!

I do need to stop by. Everytime I drop off the hill I think about needing to stop by.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Please do. And, bring your wife/family!


----------

