# Trumpeter Count?



## JerryH

So how many have been popped?


----------



## Goshawk

I know there is at least 5


----------



## Clarq

Edited. See follow-up below.


----------



## gander311

Funny, when I was at the swan check at BRBR on Saturday the 12th about 2:30 PM, she told me only 3 had been checked so far this season.

Sounds like it’s a little all over the board. I hope the “official count” is a little more concrete than what we’re hearing.


----------



## gander311

Side note, there was a kid getting his bird checked in right before me. 8 years old, and answered all the survey questions on his own without looking up at his mom for backup or anything. Even confidently gave his satisfaction rating a 4 out of 5, and the lady taking the survey said “room for improvement, okay…” 

The bird was literally longer than he was tall, but when he was done at the table, he grabbed the neck, slung the body over his shoulder, and lugged it back to his vehicle. Absolutely made my day. It was awesome and hilarious


----------



## Clarq

gander311 said:


> Funny, when I was at the swan check at BRBR on Saturday the 12th about 2:30 PM, she told me only 3 had been checked so far this season.
> 
> Sounds like it’s a little all over the board. I hope the “official count” is a little more concrete than what we’re hearing.


I realize I probably made a bad assumption. We were at the check station just before it closed at 7:00 on Saturday the 12th. I asked her about it and she reported that she was aware of 7. I assumed that was as of the day before because she didn't mention checking any herself that day (though that's not to say she didn't - she just didn't mention it).

Sounds like it's probably more accurate to say 7 as of Saturday evening. Sorry for the confusion. I need to be careful about what I read into things.


----------



## gander311

I wasn’t saying you were wrong, I was commenting on what seems to be misinformation from the check station. But maybe not. I realize they’re not getting live updated information either.

If the count really is 7 already, then it’s hard not to think it’s getting shut down early this year again. Seems like that is the new norm.


----------



## Fowlmouth

I’m not sure what the bill has to measure to be considered a Trumpeter. I have seen a dozen or more posted kills on Facebook that are Trumpeters without a doubt. Not sure if they are counted as Trumpeters or not. Depends on the bill measurement.


----------



## MrShane

I had a chance to kill a giant Trumpeter Weds afternoon, floating above my decoys at 7 yards from the end of my barrel.
I did not pull the trigger because I am not an anti-hunter that steals opportunities from my fellow waterfowlers.


----------



## 1BandMan

From the looks of Facebook posts we're at 17 or 18.
What the official count is may be just 7.


----------



## MooseMeat

The trumps definitely took a beating this last weekend 🤭


----------



## taxidermist

Does the USF&W have the numbers and track the locations of the Trumpeter kills? If so, do they post the kill to publicly?


----------



## Fowlmouth

Pretty obvious from photos that most of the Trumpeters are killed at Public Shooting Grounds.


----------



## Clarq

I emailed Blair Stringham and he told me that I can call any regional office to get an update on the count.

He reported that the count was 11 as of when I got the email (about an hour ago), with a guess that more would get checked today as the weekend hunters bring their birds in.

I'm really wishing I got mine Saturday so I didn't have to worry about a season closure. I might try to hunt a night or two this week in case the season doesn't last beyond that.

So... does no one care about the 5 year waiting period? Or do they honestly not know what they're shooting at? I can understand how some accidents would happen, but I'm still surprised so many are getting taken.


----------



## MooseMeat

Clarq said:


> I emailed Blair Stringham and he told me that I can call any regional office to get an update on the count.
> 
> He reported that the count was 11 as of when I got the email (about an hour ago), with a guess that more would get checked today as the weekend hunters bring their birds in.
> 
> I'm really wishing I got mine Saturday so I didn't have to worry about a season closure. I might try to hunt a night or two this week in case the season doesn't last beyond that.
> 
> So... does no one care about the 5 year waiting period? Or do they honestly not know what they're shooting at? I can understand how some accidents would happen, but I'm still surprised so many are getting taken.


The ones I’m seeing killed are shot by very experienced guys on purpose. Just like before the 5 year wait was implemented. It’s their tag, let them choose. Obviously numbers aren’t struggling, I don’t understand what the big deal is to some about them being shot. It is what it is.


----------



## MrShane

It is not “ it is what it is”.
It is a calculated decision to kill a Trump.
You are making a conscientious decision to help close a hunting opportunity.
If you kill a Trump on purpose you might as well sign up and join the ranks as an anti-hunter.
What if there was a rule that after 100 calf Elk were killed the Elk season was shut down for the year?
How would everybody feel about that?
I would actually like the DWR to take it one step further next year.
If you are an experienced Swan hunter with one or more previous kills, you are also cited/fined for voluntarily stealing hunting opportunities from fellow hunters.


----------



## Fowlmouth

Yeah guys don’t care about a 5 year waiting period. If they did they wouldn’t post photos or check their birds in. I’m sure others don’t check their swans in, and fill out the harvest survey as non-successful.
Actually, the waiting period will be more like 7 or 8 years because you have to have points to draw.


----------



## MrShane

Follow-up question:
How much should a so-called ‘experienced’ Swan hunter be fined for intentionally promoting the anti-hunter agenda?


----------



## Fowlmouth

I think if a $1000 fine was implemented (for anyone) you would see a lot less hero photos. There would still be a few that wouldn't care though. I have a bunch of swan points, but I don't bother with the hunt anymore because it has closed early the last 3 or 4 years. We never used to shoot swans until Thanksgiving at the earliest. Now you have to worry about it closing before then.


----------



## gander311

Fowlmouth said:


> I have a bunch of swan points, but I don't bother with the hunt anymore because it has closed early the last 3 or 4 years. We never used to shoot swans until Thanksgiving at the earliest. Now you have to worry about it closing before then.


Selfishly, this is my biggest frustration with the early closure the last few years. I also used to consider Thanksgiving "go" time for my swan tag and didn't even think about chasing them until at least that week, but now it feels like a race. My favorite time to hunt them is at the very end of the swan season, hopefully with ice around by that time. But ever since the recent changes, re-opening PSG, etc., it's closed early every year, and seems to be closing sooner every year since. It has definitely changed the overall feel of the hunt.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish

I mean. From what I saw at PSG. People were just trying to get a swan with little thought to what they were shooting other than it was a swan or a flock of swans. Lots of people shooting way to high to be able to identify what they were shooting at. Only a few of the flocks were willing to decoy, most were on their way to the rest area and you were trying to catch them in between.

I don't know if I can really blame people who have never shot a swan before for trying to get a swan. If you have harvested a swan before, then you have experience to know what you are hunting for and looking at. There is a lot less internal pressure on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc swan; than the first swan. 

I also do not recall hearing a trumpeter that day. I know from looking for pheasants at SC that there were a ton of swans in the rest area of SC that were tundras due to sound.


----------



## JerryH

I kinda enjoy stirring this pot every year


----------



## RemingtonCountry

Hunted PSG on Saturday, saw 5 swans downed on the pond I was on.

3 of which were recovered, and 2 of them were 100% Trumpeters. 2 birds circled our decoys twice and we made the call that they were Trumpeters, went over to the guy and girl set up next to us and they crushed both of them. They came in quiet, and "honked" a few times as they were headed to the other guys, confirming our suspicions. Skybusters on the dike hit two birds as they were flying over (bright red chest as they flew close to us) and coasted down a ways behind us. They did pull one down from a mile up and recovered that one, but I wanted to hurry and get back to the parking lot to ask if they were going to go get the other two they shot but didn't make it in time..


----------



## taxidermist

Go back the way it was before PSG opened to swan hunting. Close PSG to swan hunting, and go back to fewer tags allocated. Or leave it alone and close the hunt down in the middle of November. Or a later opening date and possible split 1-2 week closer for swan.

I've had multiple opportunities to shoot Trumpeters and didn't. Didn't tag out on two permits. I try to play by what the biologists explain and the reason for "asking" not to have them shot. Oh well, I guess the guys with Swan Permits will be staying home come this Saturday.


----------



## Airborne

I am not a waterfowl person but have killed a swan and have buddies who hunt a lot of Waterfowl. If I was king of the duck people here is what I would propose:

1. If you kill a Trumpeter you are can no longer hunt swans in Utah at all. no tundra's, nothing. Consider this your 'Once in a Lifetime' swan tag and you are done
2. Along with #1, if you kill a trumpeter there will be a $500 fee. Again, much like a big game Once in a Lifetime tag, it's gonna cost you to kill a trumpeter

I know duck dudes target trumpeters, I would say that most are killed on purpose as it's a rare species and it's not against the law. Selfishness is ever present on the marsh. This would at least make it costly to the dudes doing it and you could tell the Feds and enviro's that the DWR is fining folks who break the law. This structure would make it less likely for them to take away the swan hunt. It's also not so steep of a penalty that guys would not turn in their trumpeters which is the risk with making things too punitive. That's my perspective anyways.


----------



## TPrawitt91

All hail the King of the Duck people!


----------



## MrShane

I would like to see the fine be ‘loss of waterfowling privileges’ for one year.
Remember, this is only for people who have killed at least one or more Swan previously.
That should make an ‘experienced’ hunter wake up and realize how many fellow hunters he is screwing.


----------



## Fowlmouth

It's a contest to see who the top 20 will be to get the season closed. A simple solution for most of this problem would be to close PSG again.


----------



## wyogoob

Fowlmouth said:


> It's a contest to see who the top 20 will be to get the season closed. A simple solution for most of this problem would be to close PSG again.


Yes, close PSG.


----------



## stick&string89

Keep public open and it’s dumb to impose a fine for something that’s legal to shoot. I killed a tundra this year but a trump is on my hit list. Everyone needs to just worry about themselves. If you get a trump. Good for you. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Fowlmouth

stick&string89 said:


> Keep public open and it’s dumb to impose a fine for something that’s legal to shoot. I killed a tundra this year but a trump is on my hit list. Everyone needs to just worry about themselves. If you get a trump. Good for you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


exceot for the other thousand hunters that don’t get a chance to fill their tags. Not everyone lives North of I-80 and not everyone has a schedule that allows a lot of hunting time.

The DWR has got to do something better to deter people from shooting Trumpeters. Plain and simple it is a selfish act to purposely target these birds. I felt differently about it a few years ago, and I would have shot a Trumpeter given the chance. However,now knowing there are more Trumpeters and more of a chance that the season will close early and screw hunters out of their chance to harvest, I would not shoot a Trumpeter.


----------



## stick&string89

Fowlmouth said:


> exceot for the other thousand hunters that don’t get a chance to fill their tags. Not everyone lives North of I-80 and not everyone has a schedule that allows a lot of hunting time.
> 
> The DWR has got to do something better to deter people from shooting Trumpeters. Plain and simple it is a selfish act to purposely target these birds. I felt differently about it a few years ago, and I would have shot a Trumpeter given the chance. However,now knowing there are more Trumpeters and more of a chance that the season will close early and screw hunters out of their chance to harvest, I would not shoot a Trumpeter.


Fowl I agree with most of what you say in your post. Just like any other hunt people may need to prioritize when they get out. I’m not familiar with waterfowl hunting south of I-80. Would a possibility for a southern zone for swan work? I have no idea about this. Maby even spilt the zones in the Davis County area. Just a thought. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Clarq

First, let me say that I don't doubt at all that PSG is where a lot of trumpeter harvest is going on.

That being said, has there ever been data published that would shed light on just how much it's going on up there? I know the Division asks each successful hunter where the bird was harvested. If PSG is a real problem, they ought to know it by now and they ought to recommend closing it. Waterfowl recommendations should be coming in the December RAC cycle - maybe it will be on the agenda?

It just seems strange to me that trumpeters would find their way to PSG but not further south. Wouldn't they be on their way through the same as the rest of them?

Part of me thinks that they're all getting shot up there simply because so many swans get shot up there. For example, if 60% of the swan harvest occurs there (I have no idea what the real number is - just for example), then it wouldn't be at all surprising to see 60% of the trumpeter swans come out of there. If 30% of the swan harvest occurs there but 60% of the trumpeter harvest occurs there, then I'd be more convinced that there's a problem.

Just thinking out loud. I was there Saturday and I couldn't believe the crowds. The parking lots at Hull Lake looked about like they did on opening day. With all those people, I have to wonder whether it's nothing more than a numbers game.

I love swan hunting at PSG, but I'd give it up in a heartbeat if doing so stopped the season from closing early.


----------



## Fowlmouth

stick&string89 said:


> Fowl I agree with most of what you say in your post. Just like any other hunt people may need to prioritize when they get out. I’m not familiar with waterfowl hunting south of I-80. Would a possibility for a southern zone for swan work? I have no idea about this. Maby even spilt the zones in the Davis County area. Just a thought.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I honestly don't know how many swans make it to Southern Utah?????? I don't know if it's a Federal regulation thing to keep it North, or if it's set up in the Northern part because that's where the swans are. I think a lot of the swans go to the Sierra Nevada area.


----------



## MooseMeat

Clarq said:


> First, let me say that I don't doubt at all that PSG is where a lot of trumpeter harvest is going on.
> 
> That being said, has there ever been data published that would shed light on just how much it's going on up there? I know the Division asks each successful hunter where the bird was harvested. If PSG is a real problem, they ought to know it by now and they ought to recommend closing it. Waterfowl recommendations should be coming in the December RAC cycle - maybe it will be on the agenda?
> 
> It just seems strange to me that trumpeters would find their way to PSG but not further south. Wouldn't they be on their way through the same as the rest of them?
> 
> Part of me thinks that they're all getting shot up there simply because so many swans get shot up there. For example, if 60% of the swan harvest occurs there (I have no idea what the real number is - just for example), then it wouldn't be at all surprising to see 60% of the trumpeter swans come out of there. If 30% of the swan harvest occurs there but 60% of the trumpeter harvest occurs there, then I'd be more convinced that there's a problem.
> 
> Just thinking out loud. I was there Saturday and I couldn't believe the crowds. The parking lots at Hull Lake looked about like they did on opening day. With all those people, I have to wonder whether it's nothing more than a numbers game.
> 
> I love swan hunting at PSG, but I'd give it up in a heartbeat if doing so stopped the season from closing early.


Lots of trumps make the journey south of psg, which is why the cut off on the south boundary is I-80. For some reason they don’t go west at that point like the tundras do. They keep going south. I’ve seen 1 killed at HC mid November. I’ve shot 2 at FB. 1 was end of October, the other was around the first of November.

i wish they would allow a state wide swan hunt. With that said, over half of the swans I have encountered in utah, juab or sevier counties over many years, are trumpeters. But tundras do make their way down south too. The quota is 20. Let’s make it state wide and go from there. The number is obviously going to be hit, regardless of the boundaries.

it’s really funny to see grown men get their panties in a wad over a dam white duck and a quota being met regarding their harvest, but have zero issues over lion and bear quotas being met during the same calendar year. Quotas being met indicates healthy populations. It’s something to celebrate. Not get azz hurt about and lose sleep over.


----------



## MWScott72

There was alot of discussion at last years RAC about the early closures as of late, and this is why the 5-year wait was implemented if you take a Trumpeter. 

There was also discussion of closing PSG, but it seemed that the possibility of a 5-year wait would deter people enough to keep PSG open instead of closing it.

Also, from memory, I believe it was around half the Trumpeters killed are killed at PSG. Closing it would seem to be a good option if the goal is to keep the swan season open longer.

One thing is for certain - if the swan hunt closes early this year with the current restrictions in place, you can plan on more restrictions in the near future that are more punitive in nature.

BTW - the RAC I attended was Central.


----------



## Clarq

MooseMeat said:


> it’s really funny to see grown men get their panties in a wad over a dam white duck and a quota being met regarding their harvest, but have zero issues over lion and bear quotas being met during the same calendar year. Quotas being met indicates healthy populations. It’s something to celebrate. Not get azz hurt about and lose sleep over.


Apples to oranges.

We are purposefully trying to harvest certain levels of bears/lions. The quotas for them are a target we hope to hit. When it comes to swans, our target harvest for trumpeter swans is 0. Big difference. The quota serves as a protection to the species.

The orientation course (which is now an annual mandatory inconvenience for us all thanks to the trumpeter-targeters) spells this all out in plain detail. It's disingenuous to try to put a positive spin on the quota being hit and the season ending early. Excessive trumpeter harvest will not lead to a good outcome for hunters, period.

It's obvious that the annual orientation course, the checking program, the five year waiting period, etc. all exist because the Division and the Wildlife Board are trying hard to get trumpeter harvest down to lower levels. They know our swan hunting opportunities may be in jeopardy if we don't do so.

Obviously, hunters are free to do what they want within the bounds of the law. But they shouldn't be surprised when people call their selfish behavior for what it is. I've had my disagreements with the Wildlife Board (same as most of us), but I'm really happy with their decision to impose a 5 year waiting period for anyone that shoots one. It's good to know that everyone who shot a trumpeter on purpose this year can't come back and do it again for at least 6 or 7 years.


----------



## MooseMeat

Clarq said:


> Apples to oranges.
> 
> We are purposefully trying to harvest certain levels of bears/lions. The quotas for them are a target we hope to hit. When it comes to swans, our target harvest for trumpeter swans is 0. Big difference. The quota serves as a protection to the species.
> 
> The orientation course (which is now an annual mandatory inconvenience for us all thanks to the trumpeter-targeters) spells this all out in plain detail. It's disingenuous to try to put a positive spin on the quota being hit and the season ending early. Excessive trumpeter harvest will not lead to a good outcome for hunters, period.
> 
> It's obvious that the annual orientation course, the checking program, the five year waiting period, etc. all exist because the Division and the Wildlife Board are trying hard to get trumpeter harvest down to lower levels. They know our swan hunting opportunities may be in jeopardy if we don't do so.
> 
> Obviously, hunters are free to do what they want within the bounds of the law. But they shouldn't be surprised when people call their selfish behavior for what it is. I've had my disagreements with the Wildlife Board (same as most of us), but I'm really happy with their decision to impose a 5 year waiting period for anyone that shoots one. It's good to know that everyone who shot a trumpeter on purpose this year can't come back and do it again for at least 6 or 7 years.


If they “hoped to hit” the lion and bear quotas, they’d allow more hunting methods to be legal on all the hunts. They are offered as a public opportunity to hunt a species that is at population levels which can sustain a predetermined harvest number. Just like swans. The population can sustain a 20 trump harvest. The feds set that number, not me. Until I see it in print that ALL trumpeter harvest is illegal, I really don’t care what guys choose to harvest with their tag.

it’s just like deer hunting. I hate to see a grown man shoot a 2 point every year they have a permit. But there’s many members just on this site alone who are guilty of doing it, and if they get called out for THEIR choice, the person who does Say something gets immediately hammered by the pro 2 point pounders. It’s just funny to me to see guys be all for all types of legal harvest, until it comes to a big white stupid bird. Then there’s some imaginary line that’s crossed and you’ll be burned at the stake for crossing that line, intentionally or not.


----------



## 1BandMan

Is it really about laws?
What if it were legal to hang out at old lady's mailboxes and bash them in the head for their social security checks?
Maybe I'd rather not hear your answer Moosemeat.


----------



## Airborne

Moose-->Nobody is going to shut down all lion hunt for hitting a quota early and nobody is going to shut down the deer hunt because 2 points are killed. This is absolutely apples and oranges--totally different thing my man. There are a lot of non hunters who want the entire swan hunt shut down. They are going to use the trumpeter quota as a means to try and shut down the swan hunt. Swan hunts are relatively rare in the US. Treehuggers have played this game a lot between species to get hunts shut down all over the US--it is their tactic and you are playing into it. This is why panties get tied in knots, if you can't see the logic in this I don't know what to tell ya.


----------



## MooseMeat

Airborne said:


> Moose-->Nobody is going to shut down all lion hunt for hitting a quota early and nobody is going to shut down the deer hunt because 2 points are killed. This is absolutely apples and oranges--totally different thing my man. There are a lot of non hunters who want the entire swan hunt shut down. They are going to use the trumpeter quota as a means to try and shut down the swan hunt. Swan hunts are relatively rare in the US. Treehuggers have played this game a lot between species to get hunts shut down all over the US--it is their tactic and you are playing into it. This is why panties get tied in knots, if you can't see the logic in this I don't know what to tell ya.


13 states allow the hunting of mtn lions. 9 states allow the hunting of swans. Guess which list is growing shorter on states who allow certain hunts annually as of the last 10 years…. Also, take a stab at which species have a higher population.

Antis don’t care WHAT it is you are hunting. They care that you ARE hunting. They hate that Sandhill cranes are shot at the rate they are… If you can’t see that bigger issue, you’re too worried about 1 chapter in the lesson instead of the entire book.


----------



## Fowlmouth

The issue I have with guys targeting Trumpeters has nothing to do with their population numbers. The problem is, the season closes early and takes opportunity away from others that have permits. Again, it’s a selfish act plain and simple.


----------



## Packout

This analogy seems to be a little more comparable- "What if" there are 15,000 spike elk hunters- once 50 illegal bulls are killed we are shutting down the spike hunt for the year. Oh and the offending hunter gets to keep the illegal bull, mount it, post it on social media and talk about how they got one. Killing 50 illegal bulls won't hurt the overall population, but it is rough on all the other spike hunters.

I understand there is an identification issue, but guys knowingly targeting one species are an issue to the other 2,000 hunters. We talked about this in the last waterfowl RAC- the UDWR has the data showing more trumps are taken on PSG, but they didn't support closing it. You can watch the Central RAC discussion from 11-09-21 starts at the 19min-35min.


----------



## backcountry

Airborne said:


> Moose-->Nobody is going to shut down all lion hunt for hitting a quota early and nobody is going to shut down the deer hunt because 2 points are killed. This is absolutely apples and oranges--totally different thing my man. There are a lot of non hunters who want the entire swan hunt shut down. They are going to use the trumpeter quota as a means to try and shut down the swan hunt. Swan hunts are relatively rare in the US. Treehuggers have played this game a lot between species to get hunts shut down all over the US--it is their tactic and you are playing into it. This is why panties get tied in knots, if you can't see the logic in this I don't know what to tell ya.


Is anyone actually shocked to see who values the spirit of the law and policy versus who is defending twenty selfish hunters?

I don't even think this is about anti-hunters. This is about protecting the legacy of American hunting which chose generations ago to value the community at the same level as the individual. Imagine where we'd be if hunters mocked conservationist with taunts about their "panties" instead of advocating the short term sacrifice of their self interest to protect certain species and therefore maintaining the sport?

Differentiating between incidental take and target species use to be a minimal expectation in hunting. It's good to see that line remains bright with most people. Those advocating otherwise are the ones begging thru their behavior for the feds to reverse course on the slow progress we're seeing with swan hunting.


----------



## MooseMeat

Packout said:


> This analogy seems to be a little more comparable- there are 15,000 spike elk hunters- once 50 illegal bulls are killed we are shutting down the spike hunt for the year. Oh and the offending hunter gets to keep the illegal bull, mount it, post it on social media and talk about how they got one. Killing 50 illegal bulls won't hurt the overall population, but it is rough on all the other spike hunters.
> 
> I understand there is an identification issue, but guys knowingly targeting one species are an issue to the other 2,000 hunters. We talked about this in the last waterfowl RAC- the UDWR has the data showing more trumps are taken on PSG, but they didn't support closing it. You can watch the Central RAC discussion from 11-09-21 starts at the 19min-35min.


Not even close. It’s not illegal to kill a trumpeter with a swan tag. It’s illegal to kill a big bull with a spike tag.

the tag says SWAN. Just like the tag says SPIKE BULL.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> Is anyone actually shocked to see who values the spirit of the law and policy versus who is defending the selfish desires of twenty hunters?
> 
> I don't even think this is about anti-hunters. This is about protecting the legacy of American hunting which chose generations ago to value the community at the same level as the individual. Imagine where we'd be if hunters mocked conservationist with taunts about their "panties" instead of advocating the short term sacrifice of their self interest to protect certain species and therefore maintaining the sport?
> 
> Differentiating between incidental take and target species use to be a minimal expectation in hunting. It's good to see that line remains bright with most people. Those advocating otherwise are the ones begging thru their behavior for the feds to reverse course on the slow progress we're seeing with swan hunting.


🤣

here comes another mental health disorder diagnosis. I can feel it.

how much real hunting experience do you have besides hunting for a spot to put your tent off the side of the paved road?


----------



## Packout

MooseMeat said:


> Not even close. It’s not illegal to kill a trumpeter with a swan tag. It’s illegal to kill a big bull with a spike tag.
> the tag says SWAN. Just like the tag says SPIKE BULL.


I guess I should have included the words "what if" or "suppose" - but I thought everyone people could understand it was just a hypothetical example. I guess I was incorrect in that presumption.....

Would anyone here be on board to legally allow a quota of 50 non-spike bulls to be killed during a spike elk season and then shut down the whole hunt when that quota is met? And No, I'm not recommending that.....


----------



## MooseMeat

Packout said:


> I guess I should have included the words "what if" or "suppose" - but I thought everyone people could understand it was just a hypothetical example. I guess I was incorrect in that presumption.....
> 
> Would anyone here be on board to legally allow a quota of 50 non-spike bulls to be killed during a spike elk season and then shut down the whole hunt when that quota is met? And No, I'm not recommending that.....


Sure. Then take their points and throw a 5 year wait on them as well. Another way to address point creep! Sounds like a win to me


----------



## 1BandMan

It's not real hard to see where this will end up. The only reason it has gone on longer or may go for another year or two is the money the state collects. 
It will likely be the feds who bring the hammer down on the Utah hunt.
The Trumpeter killers can put another notch in their pearl handle pistol grips as this privilege will likely be taken from us with their taxidermy mounts being the only reminents of the once popular hunt thus making it completely and totally ILLEGAL (Moosemeat) to shoot a swan of any kind.

It wasn't illegal to purposely shoot Trumpeters but it was most definitely selfish.


----------



## CPAjeff

I tend to agree with Moose on this one - - - if the tag says "SWAN" then it seems moronic to place certain regulations under this "SWAN" canopy. I'm not a huge fan of the season closing down early due to the harvest of the unicorns of the marsh (i.e. trumpeters), but that's life. We need to stop expecting others to act in a certain way . . . the utilitarian approach, in the modern-age, simply doesn't work for the masses.

IF the state, and feds, were so concerned about the harvest of trumpeters, maybe it should be COMPLETELY ILLEGAL to kill a trumpeter. Change the name of the hunt to "TUNDRA SWAN" and then persecute the offenders who check in a Trumpeter, or those seen/known to have killed one.

Examples of illegal bulls vs swans is completely apples to oranges.


----------



## 1BandMan

Isn't it painfully obvious that there absolutely cannot be grey with Utah waterfowl hunters? It is obvious that they cannot police themselves and it needs to be bolded, black and white, and underlined.
The hunting of swan will be made illegal by the feds. 
Anyone want to put a little wager on it?


----------



## CPAjeff

1BandMan said:


> Isn't it painfully obvious that there absolutely cannot be grey with Utah waterfowl hunters? It is obvious that they cannot police themselves and it needs to be bolded, black and white, and underlined.
> The hunting of swan will be made illegal by the feds.
> Anyone want to put a little wager on it?


I completely agree. Modern societies simply cannot have grey areas any longer - laws are the most universal equalizer. Hoping/praying someone will act a certain way, to benefit society, is truly a lost concept. 

I bet within 10 years, swan hunting won't exist.


----------



## Fowlmouth

My guess is PSG gets closed again after this season.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> It's not real hard to see where this will end up. The only reason it has gone on longer or may go for another year or two is the money the state collects.
> It will likely be the feds who bring the hammer down on the Utah hunt.
> The Trumpeter killers can put another notch in their pearl handle pistol grips as this privilege will likely be taken from us with their taxidermy mounts being the only reminents of the once popular hunt thus making it completely and totally ILLEGAL (Moosemeat) to shoot a swan of any kind.
> 
> It wasn't illegal to purposely shoot Trumpeters but it was most definitely selfish.


Then why TF did the FEDS raise the quota from 10 to 20? Seems like they should have went from 10 to 5 if they were that worried about it.

I will gladly smoke another trumpeter the next opportunity I get, in your honor.


----------



## MrShane

I love Moosemeats implied suggestion to print the tags as ‘Tundra Swan’ only!
I can definitely agree with you there MM.
Thank you, great suggestion and solves my concerns.
If we can get as many people as possible to support MM’s idea, maybe we can get it passed through the RAC’s?


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> Then why TF did the FEDS raise the quota from 10 to 20? Seems like they should have went from 10 to 5 if they were that worried about it.
> 
> I will gladly smoke another trumpeter the next opportunity I get, in your honor.


MM, you used to preach ‘do not ever take away opportunity’.
Why the change of opinion all of a sudden?


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Isn't it painfully obvious that there absolutely cannot be grey with Utah waterfowl hunters? It is obvious that they cannot police themselves and it needs to be bolded, black and white, and underlined.
> The hunting of swan will be made illegal by the feds.
> Anyone want to put a little wager on it?


So… you’d shoot a pintail as part of your daily limit of the opportunity presented itself. Their numbers aren’t great right now and further restrictions have been implemented because of it. Shame on anyone who is part of the problem by killing those… and cans… and blue bills… and woodys… and redheads 

or is that not how this works?

At least you’ll have your mounts to look at!


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> MM, you used to preach ‘do not ever take away opportunity’.
> Why the change of opinion all of a sudden?


I’m not recommending any opportunities being taken away. Which is why I’m in favor of guys shooting whatever swan they want.


----------



## gander311

I got the email from the DWR 45 minutes ago. As of the email the official count is 14 trumpeters harvested.


----------



## MooseMeat

CPAjeff said:


> I completely agree. Modern societies simply cannot have grey areas any longer - laws are the most universal equalizer. Hoping/praying someone will act a certain way, to benefit society, is truly a lost concept.
> 
> I bet within 10 years, swan hunting won't exist.


Most hunting won’t exist in 10 years, unless you have a lot of money to pay for it. Go watch the last few RACs. That Brock clown wants to take away opportunities from hunters because it’s too successful. Packout wants to take away opportunities from “special interest” groups (archers), but at the same time doesn’t see any issues taking tags from the public and giving those to a special interest group to make millions off of every year through auctions or privately held drawings…

your public hunting opportunities will be chipped away at with every RAC and WB meeting held. In 10 years, you’re right. Swan hunting and many other hunts we enjoy will be voted away


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> Then why TF did the FEDS raise the quota from 10 to 20? Seems like they should have went from 10 to 5 if they were that worried about it.
> 
> I will gladly smoke another trumpeter the next opportunity I get, in your honor.


You better do it soon. I don't believe the feds will entertain a trumpeter hunt for much longer since the new game is to fill that quota as soon as it is possible.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> You better do it soon. I don't believe the feds will entertain a trumpeter hunt for much longer since the new game is to fill that quota as soon as it is possible.


Notch #3 on my pearl grips coming right up!


----------



## gander311

I like CPAJeff’s idea of changing it to a “Tundra Swan” tag. Seems like an easy way to eliminate the purposeful take of trumpeters.
Because like many have said, like it or not, it’s not illegal. I used to lean more into that camp that a guy can do what he wants if it’s legal. But now seeing the trends of what it’s doing to this hunt the last few years, I’m falling more into the camp of trying not to be selfish and shortening the hunt for others. If it became a tundra swan tag, that would maintain the same harvest objective, you could keep the same areas open, and in theory the hunt would stay open longer again. All things which would maximize opportunity.


----------



## MrShane

backcountry said:


> Is anyone actually shocked to see who values the spirit of the law and policy versus who is defending twenty selfish hunters?
> 
> I don't even think this is about anti-hunters. This is about protecting the legacy of American hunting which chose generations ago to value the community at the same level as the individual. Imagine where we'd be if hunters mocked conservationist with taunts about their "panties" instead of advocating the short term sacrifice of their self interest to protect certain species and therefore maintaining the sport?
> 
> Differentiating between incidental take and target species use to be a minimal expectation in hunting. It's good to see that line remains bright with most people. Those advocating otherwise are the ones begging thru their behavior for the feds to reverse course on the slow progress we're seeing with swan hunting.


How can you say this is not about ‘anti-hunters’?
If a person chooses to make a decision that directly effects a hunting opportunity to be shut down, that is the absolute core agenda of the anti-hunting agenda.
Anyone who willfully shoots a Trumpeter knowing the consequences of their act will lead to a hunt being closed is an ‘anti-hunter’ and should be weeded out of our ranks.
Hence, an ‘experienced Swan hunter’ killing a Trump should lose waterfowling privileges for one year.


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> I’m not recommending any opportunities being taken away. Which is why I’m in favor of guys shooting whatever swan they want.


You better read what you just said a few more times and think about it.
By shooting “ whatever Swan they want” WILL lead to opportunities being taken away.
Give me a minute to find a crayon and I will try my best to help you and other Trump shooters comprehend your actions.


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> You better read what you just said a few more times and think about it.
> By shooting “ whatever Swan they want” WILL lead to opportunities being taken away.
> Give me a minute to find a crayon and I will try my best to help you and other Trump shooters comprehend your actions.


Is that why they started issuing more tags a few years ago, as well as raising the quota 100% from what it once was?


----------



## MrShane

Maybe this will help our anti-hunters (Trumpeter shooters) understand the path they are on (I doubt it from the responses I have read on this subject but I have to try….).


----------



## TPrawitt91

MooseMeat said:


> Then why TF did the FEDS raise the quota from 10 to 20? Seems like they should have went from 10 to 5 if they were that worried about it.
> 
> I will gladly smoke another trumpeter the next opportunity I get, in your honor.


I mean, I have no skin in this game, but can someone please explain why the limit was raised if killing them was an issue? Moose is using common sense here. WHY WOULD THEY INCREASE THE LIMIT OF TRUMPS, if they are concerned about the trumps getting killed? Seems like they would have made it 0 if it were an issue.


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> Notch #3 on my pearl grips coming right up!


Get er done.

I'd be surprised to see another Trumpeter hunt after 2024.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Get it done.
> 
> I'd be surprised to see another Trumpeter hunt after 2024.


We have a trumpeter hunt? Since when? I’ve only ever been aware of a swan hunt! I want a trump only tag!


----------



## wyogoob

I'm in BRBR. There's a single Trumpeter flying around my spread, kinda lost, like it's looking for it's mate.

I won't shoot it, my call.


----------



## wyogoob

As of this morning the Trumpeter count is 14.

Yikes


----------



## MrShane

wyogoob said:


> View attachment 154465
> 
> 
> I'm in BRBR. There's a single Trumpeter flying around my spread, kinda lost, like it's looking for it's mate.
> 
> I won't shoot it, my call.


Goob, I KNEW you were a real hunter.
Thank you for not helping shut me out of my Swan hunting opportunity.
Karma does exist!
I had the same opportunity as you just last Weds but I care about my fellow waterfowlers.


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> We have a trumpeter hunt? Since when? I’ve only ever been aware of a swan hunt! I want a trump only tag!


That's obviously what it's evolved to is a Trumpeter hunt. Trumpeters are obviously and purposely being targeted. With all the braggers of passing on tundras to kill them, all the hero pics posted all over the internet of their trophies and the hunt closing a month early because of it let's t's call it what it is.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> That's obviously what it's evolved to is a Trumpeter hunt. Trumpeters are obviously and purposely being targeted. With all the braggers of passing on tundras to kill them, all the hero pics posted all over the internet of their trophies and the hunt closing a month early because of it let's t's call it what it is.


It’s a swan hunt, and the majority of those killed are tundras. So let’s be realistic and honest about what it really is.


----------



## wyogoob

MrShane said:


> Goob, I KNEW you were a real hunter.
> Thank you for not helping shut me out of my Swan hunting opportunity.
> Karma does exist!
> I had the same opportunity as you just last Weds but I care about my fellow waterfowlers.


Yeah, good on you.

I may get one accidently but I won't do it on purpose.


----------



## Clarq

Hope you get one today, Goob! If you're willing, would you mind letting me know how the ice is up there?


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> Maybe this will help our anti-hunters (Trumpeter shooters) understand the path they are on (I doubt it from the responses I have read on this subject but I have to try….).


I’ve been called a lot of things, but an anti hunter, this is a first 😂 for an anti, I’ve sure sent a pile of animals to the promise land, including my 2 trumpeters. I’ll gladly take your label and wear it with pride.


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> It’s a swan hunt, and the majority of those killed are tundras. So let’s be realistic and honest about what it really is.


Only because the two point shooters aren't skilled enough to kill one.
Kinda like pintails too. People just aren't skilled enough because there's just not as many of them.


----------



## stick&string89

MrShane said:


> Goob, I KNEW you were a real hunter.
> Thank you for not helping shut me out of my Swan hunting opportunity.
> Karma does exist!
> I had the same opportunity as you just last Weds but I care about my fellow waterfowlers.


I don’t think this makes someone a “real” hunter if they don’t shoot a trump. Shoot what legal If you choose. No reason to have to justify it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MrShane

stick&string89 said:


> I don’t think this makes someone a “real” hunter if they don’t shoot a trump. Shoot what legal If you choose. No reason to have to justify it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sure it does. 
Please refer to ‘so simple a flowchart a 1st grader could understand it’ flow chart posted an hour or two ago.
There IS a difference between a hunter who cares about opportunity and a hunter who does not.


----------



## wyogoob

Clarq said:


> Hope you get one today, Goob! If you're willing, would you mind letting me know how the ice is up there?


Thanks man.

There was a lot of open water at 6:30 am, lots of ducks flying. By 8:30 pretty much everything had about 1/4" or more of ice, nothing flying but geese.

Finally it's starting to thaw, some ducks moving around. Swans aren't moving at all.


----------



## 1BandMan

Goob should cap the Trumpeter. He could then have bragging rights and post hero pics on Facebook.
Skill=Trumpeter


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> I’ve been called a lot of things, but an anti hunter, this is a first 😂 for an anti, I’ve sure sent a pile of animals to the promise land, including my 2 trumpeters. I’ll gladly take your label and wear it with pride.


That is what I was afraid of.
You are proud of what you are doing by helping shut the season down.
If my crayon drawing can’t help you, I don’t know what else to say other than ask if you have grandson’s and would like to see them dump one of these big birds out of the sky one day?
Let’s keep chatting and maybe you can convince me of your position if I am not able to convince you of mine?
Help me to understand what will happen to all of us if everyone takes your position?


----------



## 1BandMan

MrShane said:


> That is what I was afraid of.
> You are proud of what you are doing by helping shut the season down.
> If my crayon drawing can’t help you, I don’t know what else to say other than ask if you have grandson’s and would like to see them dump one of these big birds out of the sky one day?
> Let’s keep chatting and maybe you can convince me of your position if I am not able to convince you of mine?
> Help me to understand what will happen to all of us if everyone takes your position?


It could be a vicious case of SPS as well.
If Moose has SPS he's likely doomed.


----------



## MrShane

1BandMan said:


> It could be a vicious case of SPS as well.
> If Moose has SPS he's likely doomed.


I do not know what SPS is?


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> I do not know what SPS is?


I drive a big lifted truck with big tires, I shoot big rifles, I’ve got big motors on my toys, i love big things…. He’s fascinated with the size of my PeePee. Which explains quite a bit.


----------



## JerryH

This is shaping up nicely!


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> That is what I was afraid of.
> You are proud of what you are doing by helping shut the season down.
> If my crayon drawing can’t help you, I don’t know what else to say other than ask if you have grandson’s and would like to see them dump one of these big birds out of the sky one day?
> Let’s keep chatting and maybe you can convince me of your position if I am not able to convince you of mine?
> Help me to understand what will happen to all of us if everyone takes your position?


The best part of all of this is I don’t even have a tag this year. I could have, chose not to even apply. Sure I’d love to see my kids and their kids knock them down. I’d also love to see them have general hunting opportunities that we have now. Reality is, that won’t happen. Regardless of what I choose to fill my swan tag with, the size of buck I hold out for, the cow elk I shoot with my bow, etc… watch these meetings being held. Discussions are being had and decisions are being made by people with zero experience with any of these things. It’s inevitable. It’s the way of the world.

the bottom line is this: the feds have determined the current numbers can sustain not only a 10 trump harvest, but now a 20 trump harvest. Numbers could also sustain a tag increase from 2,000 to 2,750. That all indicates that neither swan species being hunted in utah, is in danger or decline. So until that changes OR the harvest of any trumpeters is made illegal, there should be no issues with the harvest of 20 big, stupid, white ducks that a few guys choose to target.


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> I drive a big lifted truck with big tires, I shoot big rifles, I’ve got big motors on my toys, i love big things…. He’s fascinated with the size of my PeePee. Which explains quite a bit.


I'm afraid it's true and he's indeed been diagnosed..... Maybe self diagnosed, but never the less 
he's without a doubt and definitely compensating.

Sorry Moose it's a devastating disease with little hope. Beating your chest much and often may help but ultimately no matter how much game you kill, no matter how many huge turbo's you put on your huge truck it unfortunately is what it is.


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> The best part of all of this is I don’t even have a tag this year. I could have, chose not to even apply. Sure I’d love to see my kids and their kids knock them down. I’d also love to see them have general hunting opportunities that we have now. Reality is, that won’t happen. Regardless of what I choose to fill my swan tag with, the size of buck I hold out for, the cow elk I shoot with my bow, etc… watch these meetings being held. Discussions are being had and decisions are being made by people with zero experience with any of these things. It’s inevitable. It’s the way of the world.
> 
> the bottom line is this: the feds have determined the current numbers can sustain not only a 10 trump harvest, but now a 20 trump harvest. Numbers could also sustain a tag increase from 2,000 to 2,750. That all indicates that neither swan species being hunted in utah, is in danger or decline. So until that changes OR the harvest of any trumpeters is made illegal, there should be no issues with the harvest of 20 big, stupid, white ducks that a few guys choose to target.


While I appreciate your time to respond back, I disagree that all those things you mentioned will cease to exist.
And we definitely don’t want to fuel the fire of people who want it to come to a screeching halt.
I believe if we are careful now and make wise choices ( something our Mom’s would say to us) I think these such activities could be around for you to take your grandkids out and participate in.


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> While I appreciate your time to respond back, I disagree that all those things you mentioned will cease to exist.
> And we definitely don’t want to fuel the fire of people who want it to come to a screeching halt.
> I believe if we are careful now and make wise choices ( something our Mom’s would say to us) I think these such activities could be around for you to take your grandkids out and participate in.


I’m sure that same thought was had by many in Michigan regarding dove hunting… and lion and bear hunting in colorado, Oregon, Washington, California, etc… enjoy it while it lasts. Tip toe on those egg shells if it helps you sleep better at night. In the end, we will still have the same result.


----------



## MooseMeat




----------



## MooseMeat




----------



## JerryH

MooseMeat said:


> View attachment 154470


Now this is funny! 

But instead of Hevi steel. It should of been Hevi's Dead Coyote


----------



## MooseMeat




----------



## MrShane

“What we have here is a failure to communicate, some men you just can’t reach”.
Well, now I know how the DWR feels in it’s education programs.
P.S. I still LOVE your idea to make it a ‘Tundra Swan Tag’.


----------



## backcountry

MrShane said:


> How can you say this is not about ‘anti-hunters’?
> If a person chooses to make a decision that directly effects a hunting opportunity to be shut down, that is the absolute core agenda of the anti-hunting agenda.
> Anyone who willfully shoots a Trumpeter knowing the consequences of their act will lead to a hunt being closed is an ‘anti-hunter’ and should be weeded out of our ranks.
> Hence, an ‘experienced Swan hunter’ killing a Trump should lose waterfowling privileges for one year.


You are using the term differently than I. Something can be different in purpose and have similar or even the exact same impact. What you call "anti-hunters" I simply call selfish and short sighted. Anti-hunting as I understand it is fundamentally about eliminating hunting at all. 

It's unfortunate to me that so many people are openly talking about selfish behavior they know leads to closed seasons and eventually eliminating hunting that category of game. That type of defeatism and nihilism is self-serving and hunting doesn't thrive in that sort of environment. But the indicators have been there for this subgroup for a long time. They are just more vocal now. They just don't see that they are the threat to the very sport they love. "Who needs enemies when you have friends like this" comes to mind for hunting culture and community.

It seems to me a group of hunters are actively abandoning (and publicly advocating against) our heritage. Gatekeeping between incidental take and intentional targeting of game is an easy and bright line. Trying to muddy the waters on that issue does not serve the hunting community at large. We've spent decades advertising the honor and integrity of our sport as a important form of conservation. It only takes a few years of a handful of selfish hunters to make non-hunters, ie the majority of Americans, second guess their support for our sport. The history of migratory waterfowl remains one of the most important success stories of hunters (and a highlight of America in general). It would be ironic if a handful of hunters weaponize that heritage against the community. And individuals who don't see that underestimate the power of symbolism, especially in regards to how Americans view these birds.

*It's a statement of the time that the wok to decriminalize incidental take of protected species is now being criticized by these hunters. We are doomed to repeat some painful lessons if that approach persists. That cultural shift was not on my bingo card.


----------



## backcountry

Folks should go back and read the Federal Register from 2019 when USFW published their final rule to increase limits. Even under a very hunter friendly administration they were transparent about their rational and intent. They estimated 1 additional trumpeter harvest a year over the 2.1 average before the 2019 season. That number was poetically blown out of the water by the handful of selfish hunters intentionally targeting this species. If you don't think that figure being exceeded in such a profound way will garner a response than I don't know what to say. But anybody that understands the notice & comment process of federal rule making is likely bracing for a wave of letters that will accurately and justifiably highlight how wrong the agency was in their process and projections. I would wager it's already getting attention with the USFW.




















Federal Register, Volume 84 Issue 74 (Wednesday, April 17, 2019)


----------



## stick&string89

MrShane said:


> Sure it does.
> Please refer to ‘so simple a flowchart a 1st grader could understand it’ flow chart posted an hour or two ago.
> There IS a difference between a hunter who cares about opportunity and a hunter who does not.


The flow chart is ridiculous. I care about opportunity. However there there is “opportunity” to shoot a trumpeter so you can’t fault someone for it. If people want the “opportunity” to hunt swan they may need to get out before the last couple of weeks. People have a chance to make their own opportunity whether it’s to get out and hunt a tundra or a trumpeter. Just may end a little earlier. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MrShane

JerryH said:


> This is shaping up nicely!


Think anybody is getting educated?


----------



## MrShane

stick&string89 said:


> The flow chart is ridiculous. I care about opportunity. However there there is “opportunity” to shoot a trumpeter so you can’t fault someone for it. If people want the “opportunity” to hunt swan they may need to get out before the last couple of weeks. People have a chance to make their own opportunity whether it’s to get out and hunt a tundra or a trumpeter. Just may end a little earlier.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Is it ridiculous?
I don’t think it went over your head, you are a smart guy.
You just posted you care about opportunity but if you want that opportunity you better hurry and get out there now and hunt before that opportunity is lost before the season closes early.
Season dates are set to provide opportunity for as long as possible.
Why is there even a threat of the season closing early? 
Because certain individuals are willingly performing an act to stop hunting.
The act to intentionally stop hunting is being performed by our own people.
What do you want to call Trumpeter Targeters, Swan harassers?
I prefer to call them anti-hunters because of the choices they are making.
See the connection?
I think the flow chart scared you with how non-ridiculous it actually is.


----------



## backcountry

stick&string89 said:


> The flow chart is ridiculous. I care about opportunity. However there there is “opportunity” to shoot a trumpeter so you can’t fault someone for it. If people want the “opportunity” to hunt swan they may need to get out before the last couple of weeks. People have a chance to make their own opportunity whether it’s to get out and hunt a tundra or a trumpeter. Just may end a little earlier.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's the problem though. There is a difference between designated opportunity and legal. The legal threshold for Trumpeters is 20 birds but it's not the goal of policy. The 20 birds are an acceptable buffer to preserve the tundra swan hunt. That buffer exists not for the purpose of hunting trumpeters but to eliminate the need for punitive measures while conserving that population.

There really isn't a good analog in the hunting world to compare Trumpeters to. The best I can think of is how we accept a range of exceedance of ideal quantities in life, wether it's commercial QC work or environmental conditions. The goal isn't to reach the upper limit of what's tolerated. The goal is to allow a range of less than ideal outcomes to balance out experience (or product quality) against the unfortunate need of intervention and it's side effects.

Intentionally hunting trumpeters may not be illegal but it's not the opportunity Utah DNR is protecting. If we keep exceeding USFW projections (and we have 6-fold) and reaching the upper limit of allowed take than we are justifying reconsideration of federal rules. That inherently creates justification for federal intervention and regressive policy, if the goal is maintaining tundra swan hunting as an opportunity.

Intentionally targeting trumpeter swans is the exact opposite of protecting hunter opportunity in the middle to long run. 

And the irony is with a little self restraint by a couple dozen hunters we could actually see trumpeter swan populations reach a threshold that justifies targeted hunting of the species. When you understand the history of why swan hunting was opened in Utah in the first place it's not crazy to think that could happen in many of our lifetimes...if people show restraint now.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> That's the problem though. There is a difference between designated opportunity and legal. The legal threshold for Trumpeters is 20 birds but it's not the goal of policy. The 20 birds are an acceptable buffer to preserve the tundra swan hunt. That buffer exists not for the purpose of hunting trumpeters but to eliminate the need for punitive measures while conserving that population.
> 
> There really isn't a good analog in the hunting works to compare Trumpeters to. The best I can think of is how we accept a range of exceedance of ideal quantities in life, wether it's commercial QC work or environmental conditions. The goal isn't to reach the upper limit of what's tolerated. The goal is to allow a range of less than ideal outcomes to balance out experience (or product quality) with the need for intervention.
> 
> Intentionally hunting trumpeters may not be illegal but it's not the opportunity Utah DNR is protecting. If we keep exceeding USFW projections (and we have 6-fold) and reaching the upper limit of allowed take than we are justifying reconsideration of federal rules. That inherently creates justification for federal intervention and regressive policy, if the goal is maintaining tundra swan hunting as an opportunity.
> 
> Intentionally targeting trumpeter swans is the exact opposite of protecting hunter opportunity in the middle to long run.
> 
> And the irony is with a little self restraint by a couple dozen hunters we could actually see trumpeter swan populations reach a threshold that justifies targeted hunting of the species. When you understand the history of why swan hunting was opened for the first place it's not crazy to think that could happen in many of our lifetimes...if people show restraint now.


If you took the time you study geography, migrations patterns (historical and present) band return data, nesting grounds and stopover locations, you’d also understand the reasoning for such a hunt as well. It’s not just a social topic. There’s biological reasons behind an implemented hunt as well. But let’s not bring that up.

Have you looked into the topic they aren’t as concerned about that it’s a “trumpeter”, as they are where that trumpeter came from?

there’s a reason there aren’t any swan hunting opportunities even being discussed in Florida or Hawaii.


----------



## backcountry

Read the published federal rule and get back to me. You are currently reading between the lines to justify your conclusion. And I never said it was just or even primarily a social* topic, your lack of basic reading comprehension is showing again. In fact, I referenced the reason the tundra swan hunt was introduced in the 60s, ie biological.

Ignorance often accompanies selfishness and arrogance.

Those who care about conservation and opportunity know the assay project isn't complete and therefore not able to be used to justify policy, yet. Hopefully in the near future trumpeters will be able to be targeted for hunter opportunity and conservation as that means they are stable enough to justify such management tactics. That would great for hunters and the environment.

Using the incomplete assay project to justify selfish hunter's behaviours now is jumping the gun. Such confirmation bias is bad enough at the individual level but it's really problematic at the community level when it comes to policy.

*But the social aspect is a variable, and a big one. This story has been gaining steam for several years now and these hunters are handing antis the perfect opportunity to reduce hunter opportunity. And a reduction or elimination of Utah swan hunting would be a huge win for them. And success like that carries momentum.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> Read the published federal rule and get back to me. You are currently reading between the lines to justify your conclusion. And I never said it was just or even primarily a social* topic, your lack of basic reading comprehension is showing again. In fact, I referenced the reason the tundra swan hunt was introduced in the 60s, ie biological.
> 
> Ignorance often accompanies selfishness and arrogance.
> 
> Those who care about conservation and opportunity know the assay project isn't complete and therefore not able to be used to justify policy, yet. Hopefully in the near future trumpeters will be able to be targeted for hunter opportunity and conservation as that means they are stable enough to justify such management tactics. That would great for hunters and the environment.
> 
> Using the incomplete assay project to justify selfish hunter's behaviours now is jumping the gun. Such confirmation bias is bad enough at the individual level but it's really problematic at the community level when it comes to policy.
> 
> *But the social aspect is a variable, and a big one. This story has been gaining steam for several years now and these hunters are handing antis the perfect opportunity to reduce hunter opportunity. And a reduction or elimination of Utah swan hunting would be a huge win for them. And success like that carries momentum.


Show me where it says anywhere that the take of a trumpeter swan with a legal tag, during open season, is prohibited. Get back to me on that.

*if only you spent as much time hunting as you do talking about it… you might actually get to kill something one of these days! There’s more to hunting than just forums and the internet. MeatBeater on Netflix doesn’t count either.


----------



## backcountry

I won't be defending that idea given that's not remotely my argument. 

I've shown explicit evidence about their justification and projections. The intentional targeting of trumpeters the last 3-4 years has far exceeded their projections. Anybody that understands federal rule making knows that matters. And the feds have no problem clamping down because of such behavior (and errors). The team that wrote the final ruling made it clear such an exceedance would instigate reconsideration of the 2019 policy.


----------



## .45

backcountry said:


> I won't be defending that idea given that's not remotely my argument.
> 
> I've shown explicit evidence about their justification and projections. The intentional targeting of trumpeters the last 3-4 years has far exceeded their projections. Anybody that understands federal rule making knows that matters. And the feds have no problem clamping down because of such behavior (and errors). The team that wrote the final ruling made it clear such an exceedance would instigate reconsideration of the 2019 policy.


----------



## .45

Last I heard the count is 15, anybody have something different?


----------



## .45

.45 said:


> Last I heard the count is 15, anybody have something different?


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> I won't be defending that idea given that's not remotely my argument.
> 
> I've shown explicit evidence about their justification and projections. The intentional targeting of trumpeters the last 3-4 years has far exceeded their projections. Anybody that understands federal rule making knows that matters. And the feds have no problem clamping down because of such behavior (and errors). The team that wrote the final ruling made it clear such an exceedance would instigate reconsideration of the 2019 policy.


Hard to debate something that is true…

Again. The feds made the call to raise the quota and issue more tags. The DWR along with the feds, chose to re open a historical known trumpeter hotspot, to swan hunters, at the exact same time. If you want to point fingers and make someone the bad guy, be mad at the government, state and federal. Not the guy who spent $38 on a annual combo license, $25 for an annual duck stamp, $10 application fee X2 (it takes 1 point to draw) and $15 tag fee to shoot a swan, which for some, choose to shoot a trumpeter if presented with the opportunity. You can also be irate at the WB (and RACs) who chose NOT to eliminate PSG as a hunt area last year when this very topic was at the table. They kept it open for hunting. There’s a whole list of people to point fingers at, but hunters, or “anti’s” are the Focus point… haha alrighty.

do you want to burn guys At the stake who shoot an even more rare species of swan to utah, mute or Buick swan? Or is it just the trumpeter that tickles you in your special place?


----------



## MooseMeat

.45 said:


> Last I heard the count is 15, anybody have something different?


15. And I have knowledge of a 16th being checked in tomorrow, as of 4:15 this afternoon.


----------



## taxidermist

Just eliminate the swan hunt all together. Simple fix! Then listen to the folks grip about a lost hunt. It's happening, but some are trying to keep it going.

Make it if you kill a trump you loose your waterfowl hunting privileges for 10 years. Better yet, loose AL hunting privileges for 10 years.


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> Hard to debate something that is true…
> 
> Again. The feds made the call to raise the quota and issue more tags. The DWR along with the feds, chose to re open a historical known trumpeter hotspot, to swan hunters, at the exact same time. If you want to point fingers and make someone the bad guy, be mad at the government, state and federal. Not the guy who spent $38 on a annual combo license, $25 for an annual duck stamp, $10 application fee X2 (it takes 1 point to draw) and $15 tag fee to shoot a swan, which for some, choose to shoot a trumpeter if presented with the opportunity. You can also be irate at the WB (and RACs) who chose NOT to eliminate PSG as a hunt area last year when this very topic was at the table. They kept it open for hunting. There’s a whole list of people to point fingers at, but hunters, or “anti’s” are the Focus point… haha alrighty.
> 
> do you want to burn guys At the stake who shoot an even more rare species of swan to utah, mute or Buick swan? Or is it just the trumpeter that tickles you in your special place?


The DWR/State of Utah would sell more swan permits all around and there wouldn't be a trump quota if it were up to them either.
The Fed's however will step in.
I'm still up for it. Anyone want to take me up on the wager that there's not a 2024 swan hunt in Utah?


----------



## backcountry

Remember folks, if we see a decrease in opportunity (ie literally happened the previous three years) it was all worth it because a few people justified taking the non-target species because they had to pay the published prices the other 2730 swan hunters also had to pay.

I think we should take a moment of silence to honor their profound struggle. May we never forget them: The few, the greedy, the vain.

Ultimately, there really isn't much point debating community ethics and self restraint with such folks. The more influence such people have though, the harder it becomes to honestly claim the mantle of the conservation minded ethics our community has rested on for so long. Hopefully the average American can see that folks within the hunting community pushback and try to moderate said influence.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> The DWR/State of Utah would sell more swan permits all around and there wouldn't be a trump quota if it were up to them either.
> The Fed's however will step in.
> I'm still up for it. Anyone want to take me up on the wager that there's not a 2024 swan hunt in Utah?


Sure. I’m betting there is a 2024 SWAN hunt in utah. What are we betting?


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> Remember folks, if we see a decrease in opportunity (ie literally happened the previous three years) it was all worth it because a few people justified taking the non-target species because they had to pay the published prices the other 2730 swan hunters also had to pay.
> 
> I think we should take a moment of silence to honor their profound struggle. May we never forget them: The few, the greedy, the vain.
> 
> Ultimately, there really isn't much point debating community ethics and self restraint with such folks. The more influence such people have though, the harder it becomes to honestly claim the mantle of the conservation minded ethics our community has rested on for so long. Hopefully the average American can see that folks within the hunting community pushback and try to moderate said influence.


I’d hardly call you a participant in the “hunting community”. News flash: there’s more of my type than there is yours. Or the so called “average American”. Abiding by the laws set forth by the powers that be. Within the laws, you and your few can take your “ethics” and pound sand. I’ve never seen someone convicted in the court of law entirely upon an “ethics” violation.

if they want to make changes, then they will. Until then, like I said, pound sand bunny humper 🖕🏿🥰


----------



## backcountry

1BandMan said:


> The DWR/State of Utah would sell more swan permits all around and there wouldn't be a trump quota if it were up to them either.
> The Fed's however will step in.
> I'm still up for it. Anyone want to take me up on the wager that there's not a 2024 swan hunt in Utah?


Don't they evaluate trends every year before they decide on the annual swan policy? (Please correct me if I'm wrong)

Do you think they'll choose to go straight to no hunt versus reverting to lower quotas? I know folks with USFW (or did), though nobody in the relevant program, and it seems there are a lot of hunters in their ranks. I'm not certain they'd do a complete closure as a remedy at this point but it's not out of the possible given their expectations and projections were obliterated by a sudden shift in hunter behavior (coupled with a healthier trumpeter population). 

I also think the state folks do care about waterfowl conservation even if their range of ideal hunting quotas differs from the feds. I just don't think most people go into that field hoping to shut down hunting opportunities.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> I just don't think most people go into that field hoping to shut down hunting opportunities.


Find me a single post, quote, video, caption on a pic where a utah swan hunter went afield with the intent to shut down a hunting opportunity. You won’t find it, because it doesn’t exist! No one leaves their house in the morning in hopes of closing a hunt. They don’t climb out of bed when it’s cold and think “I’m doing this to ruin it for everyone.” you’ve made this little scenario up in your head, when reality is far from it. They are going SWAN HUNTING. And they shoot a phuckin SWAN when they fly over! It’s that simple.


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> Find me a single post, quote, video, caption on a pic where a utah swan hunter went afield with the intent to shut down a hunting opportunity. You won’t find it, because it doesn’t exist! No one leaves their house in the morning in hopes of closing a hunt. They don’t climb out of bed when it’s cold and think “I’m doing this to ruin it for everyone.” you’ve made this little scenario up in your head, when reality is far from it. They are going SWAN HUNTING. And they shoot a phuckin SWAN when they fly over! It’s that simple.


That is hilarious MM.
Of course they want to shut the hunt down early, that is how Trump Targeters get their jollies.
I don’t even want to know what they do to that poor Swan when they get home.
They are literally warned, over and over, that if they choose to kill a Trump they are helping to shut dowwn a hunt.
They literally sign their name and pay money to accomplish forwarding the anti-hunting agenda.


----------



## backcountry

> Find me a single post, quote, video, caption on a pic where a utah swan hunter went afield with the intent to shut down a hunting opportunity. You won’t find it, because it doesn’t exist! No one leaves their house in the morning in hopes of closing a hunt. They don’t climb out of bed when it’s cold and think “I’m doing this to ruin it for everyone.” you’ve made this little scenario up in your head, when reality is far from it. They are going SWAN HUNTING. And they shoot a phuckin SWAN when they fly over! It’s that simple.


In all sincerity, please take a remedial reading course. You are arguing against things that I haven't stated and it seems to stem from a lack of such basic skills. A deficit in that capability likely leads to a lot of misunderstanding in your life that is unnecessary. You've misread (and misrepresented) my actual statements twice in this thread alone and it's led you to tilt at windmills so fanatically that even our famous friend would find it excessive.

Hint: "field" is a reference to the biologist of the DWR, whom I mentioned in my actual statement. And even with your mistake I would actually be making the exact argument you did, ie I *DON'T* "think most people go into that field hoping to shut down hunting opportunities." Even with your selfish worldview I haven't argued you seek out shutting down hunting opportunity, but you are clearly comfortable supporting behavior that leads to that exact outcome. You are actively cheerleading such behavior. And it's plain as day to anyone who was mentored or trained under classic American hunting conservation. I'm not shocked at all that you consistently minimize the role of ethics in our sport.

*PS, there are ~ 15 million hunters in the US. They literally and empirically can't outnumber the "average American" who doesn't hunt. Even if every hunter was as selfish as you advocate (they aren't) you would still be outnumbered more than 10 to 1. Your claims are patently ridiculous.


----------



## MrShane

Take this feller for example:
He is an educated Swan hunter.
He has taken the orientation course and knows he has a minimum wait period of five years for another tag.
He has signed his name, like ALL of us did, KNOWING every Trumpeter killed goes to a quota and after that quota is met the hunt is shut down and all Swan hunting opportunity for others is removed.
Would he make the same anti move if he knew HIS opportunity to waterfowl hunt would be taken away for a year for his actions?
His decision did not hurt him, it hurt others.


----------



## MrShane

wyogoob said:


> Thanks man.
> 
> There was a lot of open water at 6:30 am, lots of ducks flying. By 8:30 pretty much everything had about 1/4" or more of ice, nothing flying but geese.
> 
> Finally it's starting to thaw, some ducks moving around. Swans aren't moving at all.


Well Goob, how did it go today?


----------



## Fowlmouth

I doubt we will be having this discussion next year if they close PSG.

I think I’ll take the boat out tomorrow and shoot some ducks…,😎


----------



## 1BandMan

MrShane said:


> Take this feller for example:
> He is an educated Swan hunter.
> He has taken the orientation course and knows he has a minimum wait period of five years for another tag.
> He has signed his name, like ALL of us did, KNOWING every Trumpeter killed goes to a quota and after that quota is met the hunt is shut down and all Swan hunting opportunity for others is removed.
> Would he make the same anti move if he knew HIS opportunity to waterfowl hunt would be taken away for a year for his actions?
> His decision did not hurt him, it hurt others.


There's at least a dozen..... probably more with hero shots on Facebook. There are the same posts with comments that they passed on "hundreds" of Tundras to complete their Trumpeter hunt.
With attitudes (same/similar to MM's) like this how couldn't the feds step in?


----------



## 1BandMan

Dr


MooseMeat said:


> Sure. I’m betting there is a 2024 SWAN hunt in utah. What are we betting?


Don't go more than your willing to lose


----------



## wyogoob

Fowlmouth said:


> I doubt we will be having this discussion next year if they close PSG.
> 
> I think I’ll take the boat out tomorrow and shoot some ducks…,😎


Man, the ducks were hot and heavy tonight!!


----------



## Vanilla

7 pages today? Dang. This isn’t even about credit card hits!

I see both sides of this issue, and I think the real answer is simply increase the quota. The numbers can sustain higher harvest. I know that is absolutely the LAST thing that is going to happen, but it’s probably the right thing to do.

I get how some folks targeting trumps are harming other swan hunters down the road, and I’m sensitive to that notion, but I’ll never fault someone for legally killing something they possess a lawful permit to harvest.

I really do think if they took PSG out of the swan area this little issue would resolve itself.It might make killing tundras a lot harder too. Eventually the birds will figure out where they won’t get shot.

*Edit- I’ve had multiple swan tags but killed my first swan last year, a tundra. Had a trump come in feet down in the decoys…I would have shot it. No doubt in my mind.


----------



## wyogoob

MrShane said:


> Well Goob, how did it go today?


Slow, slow, slow for swan, but I managed to get an adult Tundra over my decoys at the end of the day.


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> Take this feller for example:
> He is an educated Swan hunter.
> He has taken the orientation course and knows he has a minimum wait period of five years for another tag.
> He has signed his name, like ALL of us did, KNOWING every Trumpeter killed goes to a quota and after that quota is met the hunt is shut down and all Swan hunting opportunity for others is removed.
> Would he make the same anti move if he knew HIS opportunity to waterfowl hunt would be taken away for a year for his actions?
> His decision did not hurt him, it hurt others.


I see you’re in my old waterfowl group. Hang tight, we’ll fix that asap.

His decision cost him 5 years of swan hunting opportunity, which he willingly accepted. It was his choice. That impacts him more than anyone else up to this very second.

he’s a good dude. And choosing to put just him on blast and exclude the other 14 2022 trump killers speaks volumes about your character. It’s also a little creepy


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> In all sincerity, please take a remedial reading course. You are arguing against things that I haven't stated and it seems to stem from a lack of such basic skills. A deficit in that capability likely leads to a lot of misunderstanding in your life that is unnecessary. You've misread (and misrepresented) my actual statements twice in this thread alone and it's led you to tilt at windmills so fanatically that even our famous friend would find it excessive.
> 
> Hint: "field" is a reference to the biologist of the DWR, whom I mentioned in my actual statement. And even with your mistake I would actually be making the exact argument you did, ie I *DON'T* "think most people go into that field hoping to shut down hunting opportunities." Even with your selfish worldview I haven't argued you seek out shutting down hunting opportunity, but you are clearly comfortable supporting behavior that leads to that exact outcome. You are actively cheerleading such behavior. And it's plain as day to anyone who was mentored or trained under classic American hunting conservation. I'm not shocked at all that you consistently minimize the role of ethics in our sport.
> 
> *PS, there are ~ 15 million hunters in the US. They literally and empirically can't outnumber the "average American" who doesn't hunt. Even if every hunter was as selfish as you advocate (they aren't) you would still be outnumbered more than 10 to 1. Your claims are patently ridiculous.


A little real world hunting experience would go a long ways with you. Your little belief system you’ve created based upon internet findings about the topics being discussed are far from reality. When you decide to get further than 100’ feet from your Subaru and actually have the balls (or skill) to pull the trigger on something, come back and join the conversation. Until then, you’re just blowing hot air up your skirt, hiding behind a computer.


----------



## taxidermist

Find me a single post, quote, video, caption on a pic where a utah swan hunter went afield with the intent to shut down a hunting opportunity. 

I believe YOU have stated that in this post, with your intensions of targeting a trump. "It's not a law" is one thing you've written. Read back through your comments and you'll find some. 

I'm sure glad I purchased points this year and didn't apply for the tag! At least I'll have an opportunity next year before they eliminate the hunt.


----------



## taxidermist

Maybe


MooseMeat said:


> I see you’re in my old waterfowl group. Hang tight, we’ll fix that asap.
> 
> His decision cost him 5 years of swan hunting opportunity, which he willingly accepted. It was his choice. That impacts him more than anyone else up to this very second.
> 
> he’s a good dude. And choosing to put just him on blast and exclude the other 14 2022 trump killers speaks volumes about your character. It’s also a little creepy


Maybe the Moderators should ban you from the Forum *AGAIN* for five years. Then you could go stir crazy not being able to stir the pot here.


----------



## MooseMeat

taxidermist said:


> Maybe
> 
> Maybe the Moderators should ban you from the Forum *AGAIN* for five years. Then you could go stir crazy not being able to stir the pot here.


You think this is the only account I’ve got? 🤣


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> I see you’re in my old waterfowl group. Hang tight, we’ll fix that asap.
> 
> His decision cost him 5 years of swan hunting opportunity, which he willingly accepted. It was his choice. That impacts him more than anyone else up to this very second.
> 
> he’s a good dude. And choosing to put just him on blast and exclude the other 14 2022 trump killers speaks volumes about your character. It’s also a little creepy


I don’t even know who he is?
His picture says it is photo shopped, I don’t even know if it is real?


----------



## 1BandMan

Oh golly gheeze. He's going to get you banned for posting a fellow "sportsman" not being very ethical (but within the law).
MM's connection to this person you might want to look into a bit more. It would likely be entertaining.
The reason I mention this is there's, as I've said before, 10 more hero pics and stories of blatantly killing Trumps on the same Facebook page that MM's not too concerned about. I wonder why?


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> I don’t even know who he is?
> His picture says it is photo shopped, I don’t even know if it is real?


You’re obviously not as informed and up to date on the social media trump posts as you like to believe


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Oh golly gheeze. He's going to get you banned for posting a fellow "sportsman" not being very ethical (but within the law).
> MM's connection to this person you might want to look into a bit more. It would likely be entertaining.
> The reason I mention this is there's, as I've said before, 10 more hero pics and stories of blatantly killing Trumps on the same Facebook page that MM's not too concerned about. I wonder why?


I’m not concerned because he had a swan tag and he killed a swan. 100% legal all around.


----------



## MrShane

You are correct MM.
I read this site, a fishing site, and a Mule Deer site.
Sometimes Walleye Central.
That pic was sent by a neighbor who has a tag and was saying how many Trumps were shot.
I will remove pic immediately but I thought it was no big deal because it was posted by him somewhere else.
You both have a good day.


----------



## backcountry

Moosemeat speaking about character is one of the most ironic things I've read in the internet, ever. And him acting like he gets to dictate who can speak to a subject is hilarious. But he also thinks it's about his relative hunting skill (much better than mine) instead of the policy at hand. The same guy thinks degrading women (ie panties and skirts comments) is a display of respectable character.

For those playing along and actually care about the policy of swan hunting in Utah, here are the words of DWR: "*the hunt is only intended for tundra swan*" (pg 34 of guidebook). You can also read the USFWS Pacific Flyway working groups publications and how Utah's privilege to hunt swan is contingent on attempting to minimize the take of trumpeters. The goal and intent of this hunt is plain as day and it's inconsistent with the intentional targeting of trumpeters.

That same guidebook explicitly mentions the future of the hunt is contingent upon how hunters behave in the field this season. Those acting selfishly or advocating to do so while ironically trying to blame the DWR or USFWS are actively undermining the relationship hunters have with those agencies and the public.


----------



## wyogoob

I called the Division. They said "16 Trumpeters, unofficially, as of the end of the day yesterday"


----------



## wyogoob

A view from the other side:








Hunters Are Killing Trumpeter Swans In Utah When They Shouldn’t Be


I may not be successful but I’m going to try to keep today’s post as short as possible. I went off on a rant recently and I’d prefer not do it again. Not so soon anyway.




www.featheredphotography.com


----------



## wyogoob

A good number of supposed trumpeter swans are being posted on a popular Utah waterfowl Facebook group. Some of these are pictures of tundra swans that have been Photoshopped to look like Trumpeters. 

That's just not funny.


----------



## MooseMeat

paddler said:


> No surprise you feel that way. Lifted trucks, big guns, big motors indicate you're compensating for not just SPS but ESS as well. Very common in your demographic, and I'm confident they'd shoot trumpeters also. Their overarching attitude is, "I got mine, screw you!".
> 
> As for your hashtag, it doesn't belong here. Keep your stupidity to yourself.


Oh, my words and opinion hurt your feelings. #notsorry


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> Moosemeat speaking about character is one of the most ironic things I've read in the internet, ever. And him acting like he gets to dictate who can speak to a subject is hilarious. But he also thinks it's about his relative hunting skill (much better than mine) instead of the policy at hand. The same guy thinks degrading women (ie panties and skirts comments) is a display of respectable character.


Now we are to the point where we are discussing my character haha the mental health topic is surely up next! 😂 you won’t find anyone who loves, respects and cherishes a woman, more than me, especially my wife. They are by far the greater sex. I’m sorry you can see past my sarcasm and intent of my comment and take it literally or seriously, as an attack at a woman.

you’re sense of humor, sarcasm or intent needs some work. Not everything is literal.


----------



## MooseMeat

wyogoob said:


> A view from the other side:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hunters Are Killing Trumpeter Swans In Utah When They Shouldn’t Be
> 
> 
> I may not be successful but I’m going to try to keep today’s post as short as possible. I went off on a rant recently and I’d prefer not do it again. Not so soon anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.featheredphotography.com


If we shouldn’t be killing them, then it needs to be illegal. Plain and simple.


----------



## backcountry

I always love it when people self proclaim such things yet their actions (including voluntarily making misogynistic statements) speak volumes otherwise. "I love women so much that I honor them by insulting men via cliches about women". Such profound depth of character and love. FTX has more value than those self proclamations.

Like I said: the few, the greedy, the vain. Those are three characteristics that often undo the hard work of generations of people in other communities. Hunting is not immune.


----------



## MrShane

We should probably get this thread back on track how we can educate/teach Trumpeter hunters that their actions are causing damage to one thing they love, waterfowling.
It seems that we have educated a little less than 1% of our fellow hunters.
How do we teach the remaining 1% they are leading the remaining 99% of us right down the anti-hunter agenda path?
Who would support that next year any ‘experienced’ Swan hunter (someone with one or more Swan kills) loses their waterfowling privileges for one year?
It would still let someone kill a Trump and add it to the quota, but at a much more sacrifice than not being able to hunt Swans for five years.
Now, that is opportunity!


----------



## paddler

MrShane said:


> We should probably get this thread back on track how we can educate/teach Trumpeter hunters that their actions are causing damage to one thing they love, waterfowling.
> It seems that we have educated appx. 98% of our fellow hunters.
> How do we teach the remaining 2% they are leading the remaining 98% of us right down the anti-hunter agenda path?


Good luck, Shane, you're going to need it. "There's none so blind as those who will not see."


----------



## JerryH

Anybody work anymore?


----------



## TPrawitt91

JerryH said:


> Anybody work anymore?


Haha I'm working right now, I watch servers reboot in a data center all day. Plenty of time to watch you guys fight over big white ducks lol


----------



## Vanilla

Ron said:


> If I were King of the World I’d ban hunting of swans of any species, hunting of all predators and trophy hunting. I’d also make trapping of any and all wildlife strictly illegal, with harsh penalties for those who persist. And I’d get rid of the federal government’s notorious and deliberately misleadingly-named “Wildlife Services”.


From Goob’s link. Seems like the author of this piece would be fun to hang out parties…


----------



## Irish Lad

MooseMeat said:


> If we shouldn’t be killing them, then it needs to be illegal. Plain and simple.


This makes sense.


----------



## backcountry

Standard stuff: make sure people read the guidebooks, teach community ethics (including why they exist), etc

The challenge for this is understanding the sudden shift from previous years before the USFWS increased limit. What happened? We went from an incidental harvest of ~ 21% annually to 115% of the designated buffer last year. Something changed and we aren't likely to fully mitigate the problem without understanding why.


----------



## TPrawitt91

Vanilla said:


> From Goob’s link. Seems like the author of this piece would be fun to hang out parties…


If I'm not mistaken, polls show ~80% of Americans approve of legal hunting. I know we like to talk a lot about the anti's coming for us, but my honest impression is hunting is supported my almost everyone. The guy in that link is more in the minority than hunters, even if hunters are a minority of the population. 



https://www.fishwildlife.org/application/files/7715/5733/7920/NSSF_2019_Attitudes_Survey_Report.pdf



From this survey analysis,"Overall, 80% of Americans approve of legal hunting. Approval of hunting is highest in the Midwest (at 86% approval) and is lowest in the Northeast (72%). Americans’ level of approval of hunting has remained generally consistent over the past quarter century, with a gradual increase in approval since 1995 when approval was at 73%."


----------



## paddler

JerryH said:


> Anybody work anymore?


Not me. At least not work work. 

Just wondering how long it will take the mods to edit the post I commented on. Or maybe politics is okay now? Just let me know.


----------



## Stimmy

Close Public and 90% of this problem would be resolved.


----------



## 1BandMan

There's absolutely zero chance to convince these folks from Utah who are intellectually challenged (I believe once known as Utards) that it's a bad idea to shoot what biologists and conservationalists are trying to protect due to low numbers.
If the quota was raised to 50, 50 trumpeters would die in Utah that year.
The Utah F&G as a solution would likely bump the quota to 50 as well as double the amount of permits and open it up state wide.
I really believe the best and only solution is to shut it down completely which I believe the feds will do.


----------



## MrShane

JerryH said:


> Anybody work anymore?


You know me Jerry, I put in a good 10-15 hrs/week!


----------



## TPrawitt91

MrShane said:


> You know me Jerry, I put in a good 10-15 hrs/week!


So basically, living the dream!


----------



## MrShane

1BandMan said:


> There's absolutely zero chance to convince these folks from Utah who are intellectually challenged (I believe once known as Utards) that it's a bad idea to shoot what biologists and conservationalists are trying to protect due to low numbers.
> If the quota was raised to 50, 50 trumpeters would die in Utah that year.
> The Utah F&G as a solution would likely bump the quota to 50 as well as double the amount of permits and open it up state wide.
> I really believe the best and only solution is to shut it down completely which I believe the feds will do.


No, I don’t want it shut down.
I want to see my four grandsons kill a Tundra and realize they are true conservationists, I want to fight for opportunity.
Killing a Trumpeter is fighting against having opportunity.


----------



## MrShane

TPrawitt91 said:


> So basically, living the dream!


Yes, not a bad gig at all.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> There's absolutely zero chance to convince these folks from Utah who are intellectually challenged (I believe once known as Utards) that it's a bad idea to shoot what biologists and conservationalists are trying to protect due to low numbers.
> If the quota was raised to 50, 50 trumpeters would die in Utah that year.
> The Utah F&G as a solution would likely bump the quota to 50 as well as double the amount of permits and open it up state wide.
> I really believe the best and only solution is to shut it down completely which I believe the feds will do.


So to be clear regarding ethics of the UWN, the slang use of “tards” is acceptable, but “panties in a wad” is a derogatory and demeaning statement towards women… but the legal take of a swan is where the line is really crossed?


----------



## backcountry

1BandMan said:


> There's absolutely zero chance to convince these folks from Utah who are intellectually challenged (I believe once known as Utards) that it's a bad idea to shoot what biologists and conservationalists are trying to protect due to low numbers.
> If the quota was raised to 50, 50 trumpeters would die in Utah that year.
> The Utah F&G as a solution would likely bump the quota to 50 as well as double the amount of permits and open it up state wide.
> I really believe the best and only solution is to shut it down completely which I believe the feds will do.


After reading more of the history and reports I'd wager they'd take an intermediate step before closing the season down altogether. I believe they temporarily reduced tag numbers and the trumpeter quota in the past. It seems like they try to find a balance between preventing such an exceedance and preserving the opportunity for most hunters, who know it's a tundra swan hunt.

I disagree with Vanilla's take in his post last night but a big difference between now & the past is the healthy trumpeter population we have now compared to the earlier experimental phase a few decades ago (when USFWS was trying to design the arrangement). We might be getting close to a more liberal quota or even a designated Trumpeter swan hunt. Hopefully the ongoing feather study eventually shows many of these trumpeters are coming from the stable populations to the north. If so, the data would likely support a designated hunt. We just need the community to patient and not jump the gun.

I hope they don't shut the hunt completely down. And I'd hate to see a specific WMA closed to the hunt because of a handful of hunters, as I understand it hunting the tundra swans in such places helps maintain the equilibrium in such habitats. And I can't believe some hunters are basically begging for more explicit bans on species. Our community thrives when our ethics prevent the need for a top down, compliance heavy approach.

*And MM is correct that such a term is derogatory. It's one of the more hateful words out there, no matter how it's adapted.


----------



## 1BandMan

I said intellectually challenged or once known as.
They are very very real and there are herds and herds of them. Call them or yourself in this case what you want MM.


----------



## Irish Lad

MooseMeat said:


> If we shouldn’t be killing them, then it needs to be illegal. Plain and simple.





Irish Lad said:


> This makes sense.


I've never hunting swans, but I just took the swan orientation course online. Are both species pretty vocal most of the time ? Is it really hard to tell difference between them when they get within 40 yards as suggested? Thanks


----------



## MrShane

Well….I’m going Swan hunting right now while I still can.
I am looking for a very particular Tundra.
If I have a Trumpeter come in I will try to shoot it, with my camera.


----------



## gander311

backcountry said:


> The challenge for this is understanding the sudden shift from previous years before the USFWS increased limit. What happened? We went from an incidental harvest of ~ 21% annually to 115% of the designated buffer last year. Something changed and we aren't likely to fully mitigate the problem without understanding why.


But there are some factors that very clearly changed. The DWR increased the number of tags, increased the trumpeter quota, and reopened swan hunting north of Forest Street. That area includes PSG, which by most accounts is where the majority of the trumpeters have been killed. It is no coincidence that in the years since that change, the hunt has closed early every season since then. And to my knowledge in the 20+ years I've paid attention to the Utah swan hunt, was never closed early in all the years prior that Utah offered a swan hunt with a trumpeter quota cap. Even back when that quota was only 10.

I've never hunted PSG for swans, and I've never had an issue getting my swan in years past (I believe I've shot 7 now) So selfishly for me, I see the simple solution as closing PSG again, or changing it specifically to a "Tundra Swan" tag. Either should have fast and dramatic results to reducing the harvest of trumpeters, either incidental or intentional. In my opinion, allowing the season to go the full length, and the swans to start distributing across the WMA's further south will greatly increase the opportunity to the average public land hunter who is trying to fill a swan tag, versus allowing PSG to remain open and the greatly decreased season length that's been leading to. An additional 2-3 weeks or more of season during peak swan migration would be very beneficial to most hunters.


----------



## backcountry

I hate that it likely takes closing a WMA for swan hunting but it sounds like a pretty strong consensus of swan hunters here support the idea. I agree that is a better option than closing early and eliminating the hunt for so many other folks.

With PSG...is the idea of the closure the fact that intentionally targeting trumpeters there is simply too tempting?


----------



## MooseMeat

Irish Lad said:


> I've never hunting swans, but I just took the swan orientation course online. Are both species pretty vocal most of the time ? Is it really hard to tell difference between them when they get within 40 yards as suggested? Thanks


When they come by solo, silent at 40 yards, it’s tough to differentiate between the two if you haven’t looked at a pile of swans over a long period of time. I had one shot over my decoys that came in solo. We had no idea even at 20 yards it was a trump until it was picked up.


----------



## MooseMeat

gander311 said:


> But there are some factors that very clearly changed. The DWR increased the number of tags, increased the trumpeter quota, and reopened swan hunting north of Forest Street. That area includes PSG, which by most accounts is where the majority of the trumpeters have been killed. It is no coincidence that in the years since that change, the hunt has closed early every season since then. And to my knowledge in the 20+ years I've paid attention to the Utah swan hunt, was never closed early in all the years prior that Utah offered a swan hunt with a trumpeter quota cap. Even back when that quota was only 10.
> 
> I've never hunted PSG for swans, and I've never had an issue getting my swan in years past (I believe I've shot 7 now) So selfishly for me, I see the simple solution as closing PSG again, or changing it specifically to a "Tundra Swan" tag. Either should have fast and dramatic results to reducing the harvest of trumpeters, either incidental or intentional. In my opinion, allowing the season to go the full length, and the swans to start distributing across the WMA's further south will greatly increase the opportunity to the average public land hunter who is trying to fill a swan tag, versus allowing PSG to remain open and the greatly decreased season length that's been leading to. An additional 2-3 weeks or more of season during peak swan migration would be very beneficial to most hunters.


When I shot my first one in 2015, when checked in I was told I was #4. I believe the number was 6 total for the season, the highest on record at the time. When I shot my 2nd one in 2017, I was #2. I don’t think it got above 3 that year. 2019 it spiked. Guess which year they increased tags and opened PSG? Coincidence? 🤔

I ate a tag last year because of an early closure. I lived. Didn’t lose more than 20 minutes of sleep over it either. First tag I’ve eaten in my life (aside from lion tags). Oh well. Could have drawn a tag this year too. Applied for points. I’m not even remotely sad about not hunting them this year. 5 year wait sits pretty good with me at this point to kill a big trumpeter for the wall. Which is no different than guys going around the country in pursuit of the NA 41, targeting specific, legal species with every trip they make to the marsh.

if I had it my way, we’d separate tags. 15 trump tags, 2,500 tundras. No wait for tundras, 5 year for trumpeter. Can apply for either Or, but not both. Open the entire state to swan hunting. Open the season November 1 and run it to December 15. If a trumpeter hunter kills a tundra, you pay $500 to the DWR or add an additional 5 years to your wait period. Your choice. If a tundra hunter kills a trumpeter, 10 year wait period and $500 fine. Anyone caught and convicted of killing swans and not checking them in lose all hunting rights in utah for 10 years. Youth of course can have a lesser punishment/fine, but are not immune. Win/win/win.

or just make all trumpeter harvest illegal with a fine and 10 year wait period for swans and open it up state wide. I’d love to not have to drive 2 hours for a 10 minute hunt when I could drive 5 minutes and shoot one in my backyard.

OR…. Just close down everything north of forest street.

all 3 options would solve the problem.


----------



## gander311

backcountry said:


> With PSG...is the idea of the closure the fact that intentionally targeting trumpeters there is simply too tempting?


In my opinion, for whatever reason trumpeters like being in the PSG region, so more just get shot there whether it's on purpose or incidentally. 

Like I said, I've never hunted PSG for swans, so I don't know why they are there so much more distinctly. But using that same fact that I've never hunted swans there also leads to why I have that opinion. In all my years of swans hunting and hundreds of days in Utah marshes overs those decades, I've only ever seen confirmed trumpeters (in Utah) one time in the other WMA's (including all the surrounding WMA's to PSG, and lots of days on private marsh in that vicinity as well). I understand that is anecdotal evidence but seems to add to the idea that they more specifically pass through that small area of PSG for some reason. It is a relatively small area comparatively, and in my mind wouldn't be a huge loss in exchange for another 20 or so days of hunting elsewhere. 

I've already said this, but as long as it is legal (I'm not saying ethical, the right choice, or anything else) there is literally no legal grounds for making people choose to not shoot them intentionally. So it's simple, remove that option. Make it illegal, or close the area they're being shot by the largest margin. I won't shoot one intentionally anymore, but I can't hate on someone who chooses to do so legally with the tag they have. As has been discussed at a broken record rate here, it has to be black and white. Leave gray area, and it's going to be exploited. 

Until any of those actions are taken, it's just a bunch of bored dudes arguing on a dumb internet forum for no reason and accomplishing nothing. Haha.


----------



## Irish Lad

gander311 said:


> But there are some factors that very clearly changed. The DWR increased the number of tags, increased the trumpeter quota, and *reopened swan hunting north of Forest Street*. *That area includes PSG,*





MooseMeat said:


> *OR…. Just close down everything north of forest street.*


This sounds like it should be tried. Sounds easy to do and doesn't unduly hammer somebody for unintentionally taking a Trumpeter


----------



## JerryH

Trumpeters are in southern Davis & northern Salt Lake Counties. They travel past PSG'S.


----------



## MooseMeat

17 now…


----------



## gander311

JerryH said:


> Trumpeters are in southern Davis & northern Salt Lake Counties. They travel past PSG'S.


I understand and agree, but the most get shot at PSG by far. 

If they closed PSG, and the quota is still hit, then move on to other options. But if they close PSG and the quota doesn't get hit, then success! It's the easiest and fastest solution in my mind.


----------



## backcountry

gander311 said:


> In my opinion, for whatever reason trumpeters like being in the PSG region, so more just get shot there whether it's on purpose or incidentally.
> 
> Like I said, I've never hunted PSG for swans, so I don't know why they are there so much more distinctly. But using that same fact that I've never hunted swans there also leads to why I have that opinion. In all my years of swans hunting and hundreds of days in Utah marshes overs those decades, I've only ever seen confirmed trumpeters (in Utah) one time in the other WMA's (including all the surrounding WMA's to PSG, and lots of days on private marsh in that vicinity as well). I understand that is anecdotal evidence but seems to add to the idea that they more specifically pass through that small area of PSG for some reason. It is a relatively small area comparatively, and in my mind wouldn't be a huge loss in exchange for another 20 or so days of hunting elsewhere.
> 
> I've already said this, but as long as it is legal (I'm not saying ethical, the right choice, or anything else) there is literally no legal grounds for making people choose to not shoot them intentionally. So it's simple, remove that option. Make it illegal, or close the area they're being shot by the largest margin. I won't shoot one intentionally anymore, but I can't hate on someone who chooses to do so legally with the tag they have. As has been discussed at a broken record rate here, it has to be black and white. Leave gray area, and it's going to be exploited.
> 
> Until any of those actions are taken, it's just a bunch of bored dudes arguing on a dumb internet forum for no reason and accomplishing nothing. Haha.


I can understand that conclusion even if I find it
unfortunate. Part of my background is studying resource management and various frameworks available. Moving from a cooperative framework to a compliance based one has very real consequences. In this case it could (likely would) resolve a problem. It also means the community isn't displaying enough restraint to justify less top down oversight. That sends a very real signal to current and future managers.

I wish more hunters understood why we have the buffer of incidental take and why the framework of the last four years could have been a boon for the hunting community. These liberal quotas were a sign the agencies trusted us to self regulate.

I've seen various communities go down the increased oversight route and it's easier to be implemented than deconstructed. Luckily the WMA system has a long relationship with hunters which gives our relationship with managers more flexibility. But managers don't forget behavior like the last four years when they go on to design other programs and opportunities. The 80+ hunters who behaved this way have taught those professionals a very specific lesson that will inform them for years to come.

I definitely disagree on how a community interacts with these individuals. Its obvious there are no legal consequences and I'm uncomfortable adjusting the system too far too penalize future hunters. But a community can self police itself. Most healthy ones do exactly that. We've had a long run of the hunting community being able to foster a strong ethic when training & mentoring hunters that reduced the types of outcomes we are discussing.

Unfortunately something has shifted, and it's not just opening habitat or population numbers of trumpeter swans. The internet has put a spotlight on a subset of individuals who are comfortable ignoring the intent of hunts even if it means depriving the vast majority of fellow hunters the opportunity these agencies are intentionally trying to protect. I am (obviously) very comfortable gatekeeping in those moments because the path ahead for a community that doesn't self-police inevitably involves a heavy hand from the top down.

I won't be advocating for the closure of a specific WMA but I better understand why some think it's the best recourse. I just hope the collateral damage the last four years has caused is minimal because it could offer some very powerful ammunition to be used against us. And the threat of such changes seems to be enough justification for some to justify even more selfish behavior at the expense of protecting our community and the sport we love. That's a nasty cycle.


----------



## taxidermist

gander311 said:


> I understand and agree, but the most get shot at PSG by far.
> 
> If they closed PSG, and the quota is still hit, then move on to other options. But if they close PSG and the quota doesn't get hit, then success! It's the easiest and fastest solution in my mind.


If they were to close PSG, (which I like) they also need to go back to the 2000 tags. That was the amount given out prior to opening PSG. That is when they bumped it 750 tags.


----------



## Vanilla

As has been mentioned, PSG was not always part of the swan area. It’s very recent that it became open for swans. It would not unduly burden hunters at all, and would MOST DEFINITELY have an impact on the number of trumps shot.

There will still be some, but it will not be like it is since they open PSG.


----------



## JerryH

This thread has almost the exact responses as a thread I started last year. Alot of passion on both sides of the fence for the big white bomber. One thing to think about is the trumpeter population seems to be doing well? Or better than they have. Where are these trumpeters coming from? Its not just Red Rocks or Yellowstone? Some studies should be put in place to confirm their actual breeding locations and migration routes? 

Looks like this will be the last week. What will all those goons over on utah waterfowl association page post up now? Maybe it will be lookin for decoys. Post up whatcha got. Or lookin for a boat. Post up whatcha got.


----------



## paddler

MWScott72 said:


> Good Lord Paddler...could you just refrain just a little bit? Or is your head so far up...OK, I'll do the refraining now. Geeze! You couldn't figure out MM was talking about the bird???
> 
> As to trumpeters (after an exhaustive read, and now my wife is mad at me bacause I'm doing this and not making dinner). If it's not illegal to kill a trump, then it's not illegal. At some point hunters have to stop eating their own.
> 
> That said, if killing trumps is going to cause the entire swan hunt to go the way of the Dodo, then first remove PSG from the hunt area. If that doesn't work, make trumps an OIL bird - and if you harvest one, you're done hunting swans in UT OR institute a 10 year wait inlf the OIL thing is too harsh. Do something if killing trumps is causing harm to the overall hunt opportunity. However, if the law says it's legal, then it's just that. If you don't like that, then beotch to your RAC or WB and get it changed.


See posts 120, 121, 159 and 162.


----------



## DREW_22

I got my swan last night at FB. 😎


----------



## 1BandMan

I've seen WAY too many posts of asshats purposely killing Trumpeters and bragging of how they went about doing it. 
These mentally challenged asshats aren't far and few between. There's a whole freakin' state full of them, and killing the Trumpeters was definitely no accident or lack of experience/intelligence.
It's my opinion and hopefully an easy conclusion for the feds as well........ that waterfowl hunters in Utah are far too stupid to have any grey area whatsoever to play with regarding a swan hunt. 
They've proved it time and time again since 2019.
Shut it all down. Make it all black and white. 
No need to identify anything, no wasted time on ethics courses, no temptation for hero shots or taxi mounts, nothing. Make it illegal with high federal fines and multiple year loss of privileges imposed.
Problem without a doubt, mostly solved.


----------



## MooseMeat

Vanilla said:


> Paddler is a disease. Time to eradicate that disease.
> 
> That’s all for now.


Be patient. That vaccine he surely took all doses of needs more time to weed out some than it does others.


----------



## MooseMeat

DREW_22 said:


> I got my swan last night at FB. 😎
> View attachment 154506


Beautiful bird! Congrats!


----------



## MooseMeat

paddler said:


> See posts 120, 121, 159 and 162.


Purely coincidental


----------



## MooseMeat

After all this swan talk, I’m feeling a little jealous now of those who have tags. Here’s the last trumpeter I shot. A juvy yes, but man did he make a splash!


----------



## MooseMeat

Here’s a great post on the “other” waterfowl page regarding trumpeter swans









Utah Waterfowl Association - Uncut | Facebook


A page where real world Utah waterfowl hunters can discuss, cuss, agree, disagree and hotspot places without fear of getting the ban hammer. Have fun. Invite whoever you want, as long as they...




www.facebook.com


----------



## Fowlmouth

There were plenty of swans flying around Farmington Bay today. They all got off the club property at 12:35 and headed North. It was pretty cool. Also, kudos to the Farmington Bay maintenance staff for grading the roads, it made my day. They were horrible last week and smooth as a babies butt today.


----------



## 1BandMan

MM continues to prove my point.
Thank you!


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> MM continues to prove my point.
> Thank you!


There’s nothing to prove after it’s been determined that the swans are killed legally by tag holders during the open season. It’s really that simple. But I do respect opposing views. They just hold more weight with me when more than personal ethics and beliefs have been violated.


----------



## MrShane

My Hunt is over for the night and I’m all picked up. Did not find the tundra I was hoping to see so no shots fired. Did have one trumpeter come within range but it was easy to let him go. I did not want to be one of the 20.


----------



## backcountry

Ugh, I'll never understand the purpose of insulting an entire state like 1man just did. Prejudice comes in a diverse range of forms.

JerryH,

There is a multi-year study tracking the birds that are harvested. They haven't finished it according to the last Pacific Flyway notes. 

Seems like there is reason to believe some of the trumpeters are coming from populations in Canada that have been stable for a long time. If true and in large enough numbers that takes pressure off the quota and could justify a dedicated Trumpeter hunt in the near future. That could turn out to be another feather in the cap of the hunting community, if we play out cards right. The last four years could undermine that possibility.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> No, Moosemeat meant exactly what Paddler interpreted and he said so in his first post that referenced it. His post was only a couple hours after the announcement.
> 
> I am glad I have Paddler on ignore though.
> 
> View attachment 154508


🥺 there’s emotional support available for those who need it. Find those safe spaces! The dreaded results and news will come soon and you’ll need a place to go sort out your feelings (the early swan season closure, to be clear for those who like to misinterpret things)


----------



## 1BandMan

I've met and hunted with with some great folks. I've witnessed some really great unselfish deeds and possibly the best people I know in the marsh, however the percentage of crazy game horney, selfish, disructive, ENTITLED people are unreal.
Ut#$& is far from a new label. There's a lot of these folks that's left quite the impression on a lot of people here as well as neighboring states. 
I don't feel a bit bad saying so.
If the shoe fits, wear it around. If it doesn't, please accept my apologies.


----------



## paddler

I've never put in for a tag, as shooting a swan has never really appealed to me. Many years ago I was hunting on the ice at FB. A couple of guys who had tags but no decoys walked in to explain they'd been unable to fill their tags. I invited them to hunt in my spread and both filled their tags. They were thrilled. Don't know who these guys were, but IIRC, they were brothers?








They really aren't difficult to fool. They even like inflated trash bags. Pardon the photo, it's from my film days, Kodachrome 64, all manual Olympus OM-1:








Oh, and yes, I'm fully vaccinated, a total of five so far. Believing in science and being high risk by virtue of age, it's the prudent approach.


----------



## Clarq

Some interesting reading for those interested in human psychology:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

"Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD or infrequently APD) is a personality disorder characterized by a long-term pattern of disregard of, or violation of, the rights of others as well as a difficulty sustaining long-term relationships. Lack of empathy is often apparent, as well as a history of rule-breaking that can sometimes include law-breaking, a tendency towards substance abuse, and impulsive and aggressive behavior."

These people can't even comprehend prosocial behaviors, and some take pleasure in tormenting others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.5 to 3.5 percent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

"Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a mental disorder characterized by a life-long pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, a diminished ability to empathize with others' feelings, and interpersonally exploitative behavior. Narcissistic personality disorder is one of the sub-types of the broader category known as personality disorders. It is often comorbid with other mental disorders and associated with significant functional impairment and psychosocial disability."

These people place themselves so far above others that they can't empathize or care about others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.8 to 6.2 percent.

Considering the prevalence rates of each of these, we can ascertain that between about 1.3% and 8.7% of people have one or the other. Apply that to a pool of 2,750 swan tag holders, and there are between 36 and 240 swan hunters who will do what they want to, regardless of how much they are educated, because they're either deliberate saboteurs or they don't have it in them to care about anyone but themselves. Compare that to the quota of 20 and it's not hard to see why the season keeps closing early.


----------



## MooseMeat

Clarq said:


> Some interesting reading for those interested in human psychology:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder
> 
> "Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD or infrequently APD) is a personality disorder characterized by a long-term pattern of disregard of, or violation of, the rights of others as well as a difficulty sustaining long-term relationships. Lack of empathy is often apparent, as well as a history of rule-breaking that can sometimes include law-breaking, a tendency towards substance abuse, and impulsive and aggressive behavior."
> 
> These people can't even comprehend prosocial behaviors, and some take pleasure in tormenting others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.5 to 3.5 percent.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
> 
> "Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a mental disorder characterized by a life-long pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, a diminished ability to empathize with others' feelings, and interpersonally exploitative behavior. Narcissistic personality disorder is one of the sub-types of the broader category known as personality disorders. It is often comorbid with other mental disorders and associated with significant functional impairment and psychosocial disability."
> 
> These people place themselves so far above others that they can't empathize or care about others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.8 to 6.2 percent.
> 
> Considering the prevalence rates of each of these, we can ascertain that between about 1.3% and 8.7% of people have one or the other. Apply that to a pool of 2,750 swan tag holders, and there are between 36 and 240 swan hunters who will do what they want to, regardless of how much they are educated, because they're either deliberate saboteurs or they don't have it in them to care about anyone but themselves. Compare that to the quota of 20 and it's not hard to see why the season keeps closing early.


Ah yes. There it is. I knew it was coming 😂


----------



## DREW_22

Now I have a wikipedia diagnosis?


----------



## Clarq

DREW_22 said:


> Now I have a wikipedia diagnosis?


Here's one more fun one for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Note that I didn't mention you at all. The fact that you took it personally might indicate something, though. 🤣


----------



## backcountry

Those are some frightening figures. I'm shocked it doesn't come up more often in resource management education. Even the low end figures would challenge just about any system design for stakeholders. 

Talk about the tragedy of the commons. No wonder it's haunted societies for so long.


----------



## Vanilla

So I’m going to throw something out here, a serious wild a$$ idea, just for fun.

Do you all think that reasonably intelligent, healthy, well-adjusted individuals could possibly just see this one differently from one another?

Some of those that want no trumps shot aren’t actually virtual signaling ethics police d bags? And some of those that are okay with trumps being shot up to the designed quota are not selfish, narcissistic psychopaths? Maybe, just maybe people on both sides of this issue happen to be good folks that love hunting and just hold a different opinion from you?

Naaaah, that’s just crazy sheet you read about on story books, good people having healthy, adult, mature discussions about issues. Back to your regularly scheduled pizzing matches! Each side, to your corner and prepare for battle with the evil enemy!!!

(Some of ya’ll sound so stupid in this thread! Just sayin…)


----------



## DREW_22

I apologize Clarq.- I thought that was in response to the beautiful SWAN I harvested with my tag legally.


----------



## MWScott72

One additional observation. The antis don't just hate trumpeter hunters...they hate all swan hunters and want SWAN hunting shut down period. It doesn't matter whether it's a trump or tundra.

The quota is there to simply protect the species from what is deemed as overharvest. Meeting that quota does nothing to hurt the trumpeter population as the 20 birds is what is deemed an acceptable take. If anything, hitting 20 birds accomplishes what the antis can't accomplish themselves - it shuts the season down so no additional swans can be taken, period.

I see that as a bad thing for hunters, but again, trumpeters aren't illegal to take, so...


----------



## 1BandMan

backcountry said:


> Those are some frightening figures. I'm shocked it doesn't come up more often in resource management education. Even the low end figures would challenge just about any system design for stakeholders.
> 
> Talk about the tragedy of the commons. No wonder it's haunted societies for so long.


Mental health is the"red headed wicked step child" that people ignore and try to play like it doesn't exist until it effects them in some way. 
People have little to no interest in the issue until there's a school shooting or something similar that effects them or their family but unfortunately it's quickly forgotten about shortly after. No resources and no money is ever spent to assist in any effort to help those folks with mental health problems.
The hypothesis is valid and like the unbelievable issues we have here in Utah with Autism at a rate far greater than other states just might somehow explain and enforce my theory as well, like it just might be something in the water.......but I seriously doubt it.
Is it instead a cultural thing? 
Hard to say, but it certainly exists here in Utah.


----------



## CPAjeff

This is my favorite thread …


----------



## DREW_22

All sorts of doctors tonight


----------



## backcountry

I'm not medically diagnosing anyone but selfish is a 100% accurate descriptor in this situation. This hunt is a perfect experiment (and a good example of the tragedy of the commons) to expose how people prioritize certain values. Hunters are posed with a couple choices, all of which carry consequences. 

A communitarian choice leads to selective harvest consistent with the explicit intent of the governing agencies. The negative consequences of that is passing up on some opportunities to harvest.

The selfish choice involves intentionally targeting trumpeters for personal gain. The negative consequence of that is the closure of the swan hunt to all others with a permit who haven't harvested.

Both send signals to the community. And communities respond when they are deprived of opportunity.

There are few other hunts that carry these type of stakes. And there are few other hunts in which we get the privilege to not only interact with federally protected species but also a buffer of incidental take of those not designated as target species. 

The selfish approach is sabotaging that opportunity. 

*Caveat: the third choice involves accidental take wether through simple mistake or lack of skill. Intent differentiates itself from selfishness here. And historically our community was able to stay below the quota in all years before the 2019 season.


----------



## Vanilla

Name-calling, labeling, diagnosing, and belittling are the 4 pillars of effective persuasion. I read it on UWN.


----------



## backcountry

There is a point at which a minority of any community do enough damage to justify honest & accurate labeling. And in this case their most vocal mouthpiece seems to relish in the meaning of that description. 

Do people like MM actually seem interested in honest conversation? I mean he just tried to disguise his intentional political taunting when only 24 hours earlier he blatantly said what he was accused of. 

I think you'll find the majority of folks kindly disagreeing. Heck, I don't like the idea of closing a WMA but I can totally see Gander's viewpoint. 

But there are consequences to being so selfish and one of those is being called out by the community you are part of. And it serves a valid purpose.


----------



## MrShane

Vanilla said:


> So I’m going to throw something out here, a serious wild a$$ idea, just for fun.
> 
> Do you all think that reasonably intelligent, healthy, well-adjusted individuals could possibly just see this one differently from one another?
> 
> Some of those that want no trumps shot aren’t actually virtual signaling ethics police d bags? And some of those that are okay with trumps being shot up to the designed quota are not selfish, narcissistic psychopaths? Maybe, just maybe people on both sides of this issue happen to be good folks that love hunting and just hold a different opinion from you?
> 
> Naaaah, that’s just crazy sheet you read about on story books, good people having healthy, adult, mature discussions about issues. Back to your regularly scheduled pizzing matches! Each side, to your corner and prepare for battle with the evil enemy!!!
> 
> (Some of ya’ll sound so stupid in this thread! Just sayin…)


I am a d-bag psychopath then, because I fall in the middle of your scale Vanilla.
I don’t mind the Trumps being shot but the punishment is a slap on the wrist for stealing opportunity from others.
Let the Trumps be shot, but for that ‘privilege’ of screwing your fellow hunter than the trade-off needs to be exchanged for the Trump shooter to sit in the corner and watch for a year.
Opportunity for opportunity.
Some people wait for years for a tag.
If a guy wants a Trump and it is such a grand prize, then sitting out of the game for a year should easily be worth it?

And don’t shut down PSG to all for a few selfish hunters, it is a beautiful place to hang out.

Just use a little ink to print ‘Tundra’ in front of ‘Swan’ on tags next year and we all get to have fun, for the entire season.


----------



## MrShane

MWScott72 said:


> One additional observation. The antis don't just hate trumpeter hunters...they hate all swan hunters and want SWAN hunting shut down period. It doesn't matter whether it's a trump or tundra.
> 
> The quota is there to simply protect the species from what is deemed as overharvest. Meeting that quota does nothing to hurt the trumpeter population as the 20 birds is what is deemed an acceptable take. If anything, hitting 20 birds accomplishes what the antis can't accomplish themselves - it shuts the season down so no additional swans can be taken, period.
> 
> I see that as a bad thing for hunters, but again, trumpeters aren't illegal to take, so...


You are 100% correct that by killing a Trumpeter you just made yourself a tool for the anti-hunters to accomplish their agenda:
To put a stop to Swan hunting, if only for just the year.
When Utah hits 20 Trumps, the antis just succeeded.
Any Trump shooter must ask themselves if they are happy they just joined their ranks?


----------



## 1BandMan

Vanilla said:


> Name-calling, labeling, diagnosing, and belittling are the 4 pillars of effective persuasion. I read it on UWN.


I'm no doc nor do I claim to be.

I'm also no biologist. But the basics of swan hunting by those biologists and conservationists paid to do so appear to me to be quite simple. The privilege to hunt swan is incredibly basic. There are enough Tundra Swan to allow their harvest. There are not enough numbers of Trumpeter Swan to allow their harvest. A quota for Trumpeter Swan was set as a buffer not a goal to be reached every year.
The buffer is there to offset hunters with inexperience or incorrect identification ie. shiz happens.
Trumpeter Swan and the harvest thereof is not illegal. Again, this was likely set to buffer those hunters with inexperience and/or incorrect identification to not be penalized.
I'm 100% sure it was not set up as a challenge or for the few selfish folks to put one on the wall or brag about it on a social media site. Whether the bragging or garbage talk is in fun to screw with other waterfowl hunters or otherwise doesn't matter.

I really don't know why I keep posting in this thread as I've never hunted swan nor do I want to. They aren't a very challenging bird to decoy or shoot. I've stood up in the blind several times and tried to wave them off the decoys and they still land in your face.
They are, however, quite beautiful and majestic, and I'd hate to see a specie with few numbers to begin with become even fewer however.... maybe that's why you folks keep hearing from me.

I'm speaking from my own logic and see the resolution to be quite simple as well and have voiced that opinion.

The game started back in 2019 by those gamehog folks who scoff the system and like to play the grey areas. Like this thread, there are zero happy mediums to be had. Close the hunt and avoid stupid games.


----------



## MWScott72

Selfishness is NOT a mental illness. It's a flawed character trait. Let's not make this what it isn't.


----------



## Clarq

Vanilla said:


> So I’m going to throw something out here, a serious wild a$$ idea, just for fun.
> 
> Do you all think that reasonably intelligent, healthy, well-adjusted individuals could possibly just see this one differently from one another?
> 
> Some of those that want no trumps shot aren’t actually virtual signaling ethics police d bags? And some of those that are okay with trumps being shot up to the designed quota are not selfish, narcissistic psychopaths? Maybe, just maybe people on both sides of this issue happen to be good folks that love hunting and just hold a different opinion from you?
> 
> Naaaah, that’s just crazy sheet you read about on story books, good people having healthy, adult, mature discussions about issues. Back to your regularly scheduled pizzing matches! Each side, to your corner and prepare for battle with the evil enemy!!!
> 
> (Some of ya’ll sound so stupid in this thread! Just sayin…)


I didn't say that any particular individual has any particular psychological condition, particularly related to those who would shoot a trumpeter swan. I don't have enough information about any of those people to understand why they do what they do.

I'm trying to make the point that it only takes a system that relies on a group of people self-regulating can be disrupted by a very small minority. In the case of swans, 20 / 2,750 = 0.7%.

The division is making an attempt to reduce trumpeter harvest and prolong our hunting season via education. However, considering the reality of human psychology, there's pretty strong evidence that more than 0.7% of people simply will not care, no matter what they do.

My position has historically been that we all ought to cooperate so we can keep the season open as long as possible. I'm realizing now that it's an unrealistic hope, given how many swan tags there are, how many trumpeters it takes to get the season shut down, and human nature in general.

As far as I can tell, those who disagree with me take the position of, "if it's legal, I'll do what I want." Fair enough. I get it on some level.

If that's how we want to operate, we're going to exactly what we ask for. The laws will become more and more restrictive until desired hunter behavior is achieved. It's pretty clear that the feds don't want us to keep this up every year, and thus, I have to believe further restrictions are on their way. I assume PSG will be the first to go. Tags might get cut next. After that, who knows? Maybe trumpeter harvest will be criminalized? The season will be shut down entirely? I'm not sure how far it will go before they're satisfied. That's not a road I'm interested in going down, but it looks inevitable.


----------



## 1BandMan

MWScott72 said:


> Selfishness is NOT a mental illness. It's a flawed character trait. Let's not make this what it isn't.


Heh, heh selfishness is not by itself a mental illness, however may be an indication of one.


----------



## paddler

Clarq said:


> Some interesting reading for those interested in human psychology:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder
> 
> "Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD or infrequently APD) is a personality disorder characterized by a long-term pattern of disregard of, or violation of, the rights of others as well as a difficulty sustaining long-term relationships. Lack of empathy is often apparent, as well as a history of rule-breaking that can sometimes include law-breaking, a tendency towards substance abuse, and impulsive and aggressive behavior."
> 
> These people can't even comprehend prosocial behaviors, and some take pleasure in tormenting others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.5 to 3.5 percent.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
> 
> "Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a mental disorder characterized by a life-long pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, a diminished ability to empathize with others' feelings, and interpersonally exploitative behavior. Narcissistic personality disorder is one of the sub-types of the broader category known as personality disorders. It is often comorbid with other mental disorders and associated with significant functional impairment and psychosocial disability."
> 
> These people place themselves so far above others that they can't empathize or care about others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.8 to 6.2 percent.
> 
> Considering the prevalence rates of each of these, we can ascertain that between about 1.3% and 8.7% of people have one or the other. Apply that to a pool of 2,750 swan tag holders, and there are between 36 and 240 swan hunters who will do what they want to, regardless of how much they are educated, because they're either deliberate saboteurs or they don't have it in them to care about anyone but themselves. Compare that to the quota of 20 and it's not hard to see why the season keeps closing early.


And here I thought you were talking about the person referenced in post #120, not swan hunters. If the shoe fits...

The photo I posted above was taken December 10, 2009. Given the selfishness exhibited by some, the season will never last long enough for another like it to be taken. Maybe in some twisted reality they believe that willfully shooting a trumpeter, thereby reducing the opportunity of other tag holders is okay. Something doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical.

Why not make shooting a trumpeter a once-in-a-lifetime tag? You shoot a trumpeter, you're done, just like bison, sheep, etc? No big deal. Guys like MM can shoot their trumpeter, but just once. The recidivism rate will be zero. You could also make it retroactive. Wouldn't that piss off those aholes?


----------



## MooseMeat

Clarq said:


> Some interesting reading for those interested in human psychology:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder
> 
> "Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD or infrequently APD) is a personality disorder characterized by a long-term pattern of disregard of, or violation of, the rights of others as well as a difficulty sustaining long-term relationships. Lack of empathy is often apparent, as well as a history of rule-breaking that can sometimes include law-breaking, a tendency towards substance abuse, and impulsive and aggressive behavior."
> 
> These people can't even comprehend prosocial behaviors, and some take pleasure in tormenting others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.5 to 3.5 percent.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
> 
> "Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a mental disorder characterized by a life-long pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, a diminished ability to empathize with others' feelings, and interpersonally exploitative behavior. Narcissistic personality disorder is one of the sub-types of the broader category known as personality disorders. It is often comorbid with other mental disorders and associated with significant functional impairment and psychosocial disability."
> 
> These people place themselves so far above others that they can't empathize or care about others. Prevalence is estimated at 0.8 to 6.2 percent.
> 
> Considering the prevalence rates of each of these, we can ascertain that between about 1.3% and 8.7% of people have one or the other. Apply that to a pool of 2,750 swan tag holders, and there are between 36 and 240 swan hunters who will do what they want to, regardless of how much they are educated, because they're either deliberate saboteurs or they don't have it in them to care about anyone but themselves. Compare that to the quota of 20 and it's not hard to see why the season keeps closing early.


And there we have it. Mystery solved! Thanks scooby doo!


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> And historically our community was able to stay below the quota in all years before the 2019 season.


And prior to 2019 PSG wasn’t available to swan hunters AND there was 750 less tags.

but, if you’d had been actually been an active participant in hunting at that time, you’d know and understand that that concept.

The stupidity or lack of ability to comprehend simple concepts is incredible. Since I’ve had many attacks at my personal health, I’m making my own diagnosis with you. Take a guess at which disability I’ve determined you have.


----------



## MooseMeat

paddler said:


> Why not make shooting a trumpeter a once-in-a-lifetime tag? You shoot a trumpeter, you're done, just like bison, sheep, etc? No big deal. Guys like MM can shoot their trumpeter, but just once. The recidivism rate will be zero. You could also make it retroactive. Wouldn't that piss off those aholes?


I’ve shot 2. I’m good with not killing another. Or killing a 3rd, 4th, etc… either way, I won’t get mad, nor will I care. It is what it is.

...............


----------



## .45

I called the Springville UDWR yesterday, their numbers are at 18 with 2 pending.
The Salt Lake office claimed 17 with one pending.

Does anybody have real true numbers?


----------



## CPAjeff

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3tFYFAzQBh3CGh3M6MS9Dc?si=o1WelkpzThiqhuw4OqYiOQ&nd=1



An oldie, but a goodie about the swan hunting in Utah.


----------



## Clarq

MooseMeat said:


> And prior to 2019 PSG wasn’t available to swan hunters AND there was 750 less tags.


We also have to acknowledge that there are way more trumpeters around than there used to be. The division has stated in public meetings that they're pretty certain of that. I'd agree and I think most long time swan hunters probably would too.

I hunted PSG for years before they opened it to swan hunting. It used to be a good place to escape the crowds in November. I saw maybe one trumpeter there over the course of many years prior to about 2019 or so. I've seen multiple there every year for the past few. Something has changed, and in my mind, that's the real "mystery" I wish I could solve.

I personally don't believe closing PSG would stop us from hitting the quota. It might prolong the season, though. I'm watching for the RAC packet and am curious to see what they recommend.


----------



## MooseMeat

.45 said:


> I called the Springville UDWR yesterday, their numbers are at 18 with 2 pending.
> The Salt Lake office claimed 17 with one pending.
> 
> Does anybody have real true numbers?


17 with a juvy pending


----------



## Vanilla

1BandMan said:


> I'm also no biologist. But the basics of swan hunting by those biologists and conservationists paid to do so appear to me to be quite simple. The privilege to hunt swan is incredibly basic. There are enough Tundra Swan to allow their harvest. There are not enough numbers of Trumpeter Swan to allow their harvest.


Oh it’s pretty clear you are not a biologist! But thanks for the note. As far as your certain declaration of incredibly basic biology goes, are you SURE the trump numbers are not sufficient to allow harvest? Would the buffer even be allowed if that were the case? Again, it’s quite simple…if the numbers could not sustain some harvest, would the feds allow even the buffer? Use some of that basic logic to view things the other way, you might be surprised what you find. 
[/QUOTE]



1BandMan said:


> I really don't know why I keep posting in this thread as I've never hunted swan nor do I want to.


Again, this isn’t a surprising revelation. You have a VERY strong opinion here, but it isn’t a very educated one. Which is unfortunate. But par for the course anymore in our world.



1BandMan said:


> Like this thread, there are zero happy mediums to be had. Close the hunt and avoid stupid games.


There is no middle ground, and your solution is to just close the hunt? A hunt you don’t participate in? And others are selfish and fueling the anti-hunter agenda????

I think there is middle ground here. Go back to what we were doing just 3 years ago (no PSG in swan area) and we will see the targeting of trumps go down significantly. Finish the DNA studies to confirm most of these birds are from Alaska/Canada, and the concern about a sensitive population goes down a ton. Putting a 5-year wait period if you kill a trump seems like middle ground.

There is lots of middle ground here. The policy makers you referenced earlier about being paid to make educated decisions sure think there is middle ground.

It is unfortunate that some have made the targeting of trumps a thing. I can disagree with their decision making without vilifying them, diagnosing them, belittling them, etc.


----------



## Vanilla

MrShane said:


> I am a d-bag psychopath then, because I fall in the middle of your scale Vanilla.



This actually made me laugh! Literally, laughed out loud, not in the “LOL” way people say. Well done.


----------



## TPrawitt91

Vanilla said:


> Oh it’s pretty clear you are not a biologist! But thanks for the note. As far as your certain declaration of incredibly basic biology goes, are you SURE the trump numbers are not sufficient to allow harvest? Would the buffer even be allowed if that were the case? Again, it’s quite simple…if the numbers could not sustain some harvest, would the feds allow even the buffer? Use some of that basic logic to view things the other way, you might be surprised what you find.




Again, this isn’t a surprising revelation. You have a VERY strong opinion here, but it isn’t a very educated one. Which is unfortunate. But par for the course anymore in our world.



There is no middle ground, and your solution is to just close the hunt? A hunt you don’t participate in? And others are selfish and fueling the anti-hunter agenda????

I think there is middle ground here. Go back to what we were doing just 3 years ago (no PSG in swan area) and we will see the targeting of trumps go down significantly. Finish the DNA studies to confirm most of these birds are from Alaska/Canada, and the concern about a sensitive population goes down a ton. Putting a 5-year wait period if you kill a trump seems like middle ground.

There is lots of middle ground here. The policy makers you referenced earlier about being paid to make educated decisions sure think there is middle ground.

It is unfortunate that some have made the targeting of trumps a thing. I can disagree with their decision making without vilifying them, diagnosing them, belittling them, etc.
[/QUOTE]
Vanilla is on point and it’s not even 9am! Cheers to a happy Thursday everyone!


----------



## wyogoob

.45 said:


> I called the Springville UDWR yesterday, their numbers are at 18 with 2 pending.
> The Salt Lake office claimed 17 with one pending.
> 
> Does anybody have real true numbers?


Geeze, who knows. Called Salt Lake DWR at 8:30 am yesterday and they said 16 "unofficially" 

Then I went to turn in my swan at the Ogden UDWR at 2 pm and they said 15.

Nice to have you on here. Hope yer doing OK.


----------



## backcountry

The population of trumpeters is definitely healthier and that alongside opening PSG would explain increased incidental take. That's an obvious numbers game. 

I guess we'll see how much that was if they close PSG. It seems pretty obvious from posts here though that intentional targeting is also playing an important role. Going to be interesting to see how the feds respond to that aspect in the years to come.

I sincerely hope they don't create a financial penalty. The entire point of such quotas was to protect hunters from exactly that outcome. But a handful of people often ruin such charitable relationships.

Sounds like the season will be closed soon. Can't wait for the headlines pointing out to our fellow Americans that we are incapable of not shooting non-target species. And the public won't blame just 80 people, the entire community will be the target.

Four out of four years is a bad record.

*Per reporting/record keeping: sounds like they could benefit from some discipline internally. There is clearly a lag in the count given the timeframe allowed to report but the agency could easily have an internal memo with an official count each morning. Employees should only report that unless they get another official statement.


----------



## wyogoob

backcountry said:


> ............................................................
> 
> *Per reporting/record keeping: sounds like they could benefit from some discipline internally. There is clearly a lag in the count given the timeframe allowed to report but the agency could easily have an internal memo with an official count each morning. Employees should only report that unless they get another official statement.


Boy, I'd say. A simple "Trumpeter Hotline" would be good. When a trump is turned in a DWR employee enters, updates, it in a program on his computer. The public can access the program on the phone, the DWR website or even Facebook. Some states have similar programs for bears, lions, other animals that have closures when harvest numbers are met.


----------



## Vanilla

wyogoob said:


> Some states have similar programs for bears, lions, other animals that have closures when harvest numbers are met.


Wait...never mind. I wouldn't want people to actually question things they've posted on this thread! 

Anyone that has checked a swan knows that there is no real-time updating. There may be a purpose to this, folks. Just saying.


----------



## MWScott72

I disagree with your supposition Backcountry. While it is unfortunate that the season will close early, the general public isn't going to go into hystrionics because 20 trumpeters were killed. That was the quota agreed upon as sustainable that would not hurt the population. They won't care one bit that 20 were killed. All the general public will do is raise an eyebrow that the season closed early - then they'll be distracted by the next headline and move on. Swans aren't wolves and don't have near the pull that big, furry dogs have on the non-hunting public.

The only people we need to worry about are the feds and to a lesser degree, the DWR. They will make the decisions on whether this current run of early season closures is really a "bad thing" for trumpeters. I'm not losing any sleep over what the antis can or can't do on this issue. There is precedent for a swan hunt that's been around for decades. A couple years of trumpeter take aren't going to kill that opportunity when there are obviously plenty of tundras around. Until the numbers are known on the trumpeter population and where these birds are coming from, the regulators will continue to tighten restrictions on then, but I don't believe swan hunting, in general, is going anywhere. There's too much precedence, lots of tundras, and lots of evidence that the trumpeters are doing better than expected.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> The population of trumpeters is definitely healthier and that alongside opening PSG would explain increased incidental take. That's an obvious numbers game.
> 
> I guess we'll see how much that was if they close PSG. It seems pretty obvious from posts here though that intentional targeting is also playing an important role. Going to be interesting to see how the feds respond to that aspect in the years to come.
> 
> I sincerely hope they don't create a financial penalty. The entire point of such quotas was to protect hunters from exactly that outcome. But a handful of people often ruin such charitable relationships.
> 
> Sounds like the season will be closed soon. Can't wait for the headlines pointing out to our fellow Americans that we are incapable of not shooting non-target species. And the public won't blame just 80 people, the entire community will be the target.
> 
> Four out of four years is a bad record.
> 
> *Per reporting/record keeping: sounds like they could benefit from some discipline internally. There is clearly a lag in the count given the timeframe allowed to report but the agency could easily have an internal memo with an official count each morning. Employees should only report that unless they get another official statement.


Have you ever hunted swans?


----------



## MooseMeat

MWScott72 said:


> I disagree with your supposition Backcountry. While it is unfortunate that the season will close early, the general public isn't going to go into hystrionics because 20 trumpeters were killed. That was the quota agreed upon as sustainable that would not hurt the population. They won't care one bit that 20 were killed. All the general public will do is raise an eyebrow that the season closed early - then they'll be distracted by the next headline and move on. Swans aren't wolves and don't have near the pull that big, furry dogs have on the non-hunting public.
> 
> The only people we need to worry about are the feds and to a lesser degree, the DWR. They will make the decisions on whether this current run of early season closures is really a "bad thing" for trumpeters. I'm not losing any sleep over what the antis can or can't do on this issue. There is precedent for a swan hunt that's been around for decades. A couple years of trumpeter take aren't going to kill that opportunity when there are obviously plenty of tundras around. Until the numbers are known on the trumpeter population and where these birds are coming from, the regulators will continue to tighten restrictions on then, but I don't believe swan hunting, in general, is going anywhere. There's too much precedence, lots of tundras, and lots of evidence that the trumpeters are doing better than expected.


But in the end, it still isn’t the DWR you need to worry about. It’s the rogue WB and RACs


----------



## DREW_22

Well doctors, internet lawyers, ethics course teachers, and any others who apparently have WAYYY too much time on their hands. What's the diagnosis of someone who gets fired up about a picture on the infowebs without knowing ANY of the details or story?? I think it's an [email protected] .
I wasnt one of the 20 "selfish criminal villains" who should be cast into the fire and brimstone because they have a different opinion. (Sarcasm font - since everything needs to be black and white for some of you goons.)


----------



## Daisy

wyogoob said:


> Boy, I'd say. A simple "Trumpeter Hotline" would be good. When a trump is turned in a DWR employee enters, updates, it in a program on his computer. The public can access the program on the phone, the DWR website or even Facebook. Some states have similar programs for bears, lions, other animals that have closures when harvest numbers are met.


The DWR already does this every day on one of the seasons/programs they regulate. Not a new concept for them.


----------



## backcountry

I don't think it's a matter of expecting a wave of irrational reactions. I do believe the optics and facts are horrible for us though. And such optics have a real effect on public opinion and often lead to citizens writing the relevant agencies. 

Do I think we'll weather the storm? Yes. Do I think the feds will over react? No, as I stated before they seem inclined to take intermediate steps and value hunters.

But beyond the immediate impact of headlines, we also can't ignore the damage this does to our legacy and heritage. We are a diminishing minority. This erodes the ability for us to claim a focus on conservation, which is built on intentional foundation of self restraint. It only chips away at it a little but it's done so in a very public way and for a species that holds real symbolic meaning. (It's a similar delicate balance with sandhill crane) And that's not an issue of anti-hunters, it very much includes ranks of our own and our supporters. That is not an endless well of generosity we can keep drawing from.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> I don't think it's a matter of expecting a wave of irrational reactions. I do believe the optics and facts are horrible for us though. And such optics have a real effect on public opinion and often lead to citizens writing the relevant agencies.
> 
> Do I think we'll weather the storm? Yes. Do I think the feds will over react? No, as I stated before they seem inclined to take intermediate steps and value hunters.
> 
> But beyond the immediate impact of headlines, we also can't ignore the damage this does to our legacy and heritage. We are a diminishing minority. This erodes the ability for us to claim a focus on conservation, which is built on intentional foundation of self restraint. It only chips away at it a little but it's done so in a very public way and for a species that holds real symbolic meaning. (It's a similar delicate balance with sandhill crane) And that's not an issue of anti-hunters, it very much includes ranks of our own and our supporters. That is not an endless well of generosity we can keep drawing from.


Answer my question


----------



## 1BandMan

Vanilla said:


> Oh it’s pretty clear you are not a biologist! But thanks for the note. As far as your certain declaration of incredibly basic biology goes, are you SURE the trump numbers are not sufficient to allow harvest? Would the buffer even be allowed if that were the case? Again, it’s quite simple…if the numbers could not sustain some harvest, would the feds allow even the buffer? Use some of that basic logic to view things the other way, you might be surprised what you find.





Vanilla, since you thrashed me and talk about things that only a biologist would have an idea and also come up with conclusions that I’m sure the UDWR and the Federal Biologists don’t know about, when and where did you get your degree?????

500 Yellowstone birds doesn’t seem like a huge amount to me, but I might be wrong. There must be 10’s if not 100’s of thousands of Alaska and Canada birds as well. What’s the last count you did on those?

If there’s sufficient numbers to purposely harvest trumpeters, why are we having this conversation? You as a biologist need to have this conversation were having with the UDWR and the feds and let them know that swan need to be added to the general waterfowl harvest. Of course you would need to let them know what you’ve determined to be the daily limits for them.

In my eyes Vanilla you fall into the same category as the smart ass douchebags that ignore the obvious and target trumpeters. 
And since there are so many of you the hunt shouldn’t continue.


----------



## Vanilla

1BandMan said:


> In my eyes Vanilla you fall into the same category as the smart ass douchebags that ignore the obvious and target trumpeters. And since there are so many of you the hunt shouldn’t continue.


I sincerely could not give two (poops) less what I am in your eyes. So view me any way you want! I won’t lose an ounce of sleep over your continued completely uneducated and irrational opinion here.

I don’t need to let the DWR or the feds know anything about limits. They’ve already set those for us. I’m just not going to cry because hunters hunt legally within those set limits.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> And since there are so many of you the hunt shouldn’t continue.


And I’m the anti hunter hahahahaha


----------



## Vanilla

MooseMeat said:


> And I’m the anti hunter hahahahaha


Bingo!


----------



## 1BandMan

Vanilla and MM. Peas in a pod.

Poachers, gamehogs, slob hunters etc are there own enemy if they consider themselves sportsman.


----------



## wyogoob

Daisy said:


> The DWR already does this every day on one of the seasons/programs they regulate. Not a new concept for them.


Great news, why can't, or don't, they do it for swan?


----------



## wyogoob

JerryH said:


> So how many have been popped?


Hey Jerry, you should put a poll in this thread.

This could be bigger than the thread about throwing cigarette buts on the ice at Scofield back when the UDWR had the UWN and it was a political forum disguised as an outdoor forum.


----------



## backcountry

wyogoob said:


> Great news, why can't, or don't, they do it for swan?


Especially since it's regarding a federally protected species. 

The technology has been around long enough that it could be an app that sends push notifications to everyone who drew for the swan hunt that season. There would still be the issue of a potential lag because of the 72 hour reporting period but at least everyone could be informed as the quota is approached. 

It would have the secondary benefit of encouraging those who haven't harvested yet to possibly expedite their next day hunting.


----------



## wyogoob

So I'm looking at this dude on Facebook that got a monster Trumpeter.....accidently.....I think. That bird is like 5 1/2 feet long. Just Incredible, I could make 2 pots of swan neck soup outta that thing!

uh...just saying

I'm on shift as an administrator today so opinions are a no-no. Although, it would be safe for me to say that the swan recipes posted here in "The Whole Swan Cookbook" thread work for Trumpeters as well as Tundra Swans.









The Whole Swan Cookbook


Go back and read this thread I've never tried swan. Is it differ from cooking a goose of a chicken? I saw info that they are hard to cook. A swan doesn't cook up as easy as chicken. They're similar to a wild goose. .




www.utahwildlife.net


----------



## wyogoob

I have a friend that works at the UDWR. Rumor has it the Trumpeter harvest count is between 15 and 21.

I just made that up, I don't have any friends.


----------



## JerryH

CPAjeff said:


> https://open.spotify.com/episode/3tFYFAzQBh3CGh3M6MS9Dc?si=o1WelkpzThiqhuw4OqYiOQ&nd=1
> 
> 
> 
> An oldie, but a goodie about the swan hunting in Utah.


Thanks posting Jeff. Very informative and worth a listen


----------



## JerryH

If guys only had this much passion for Grebes


----------



## MooseMeat

JerryH said:


> If guys only had this much passion for Grebes


Or seagulls


----------



## JerryH

MooseMeat said:


> Or seagulls


I have no love for seagulls!


----------



## Fowlmouth

This article is from 2019, the first year the hunt closed early. Good points on both sides. They give an estimated population of 10,000 Trumpeters in the Rocky Mountain region. Here we are 3 years later and looking at an early close again. (For 4 straight years in a row)
Utah hunters killed 20 rare trumpeter swans by accident this year. Here’s why that matters. (sltrib.com)


----------



## one4fishing

Wow guys. I can’t believe I read through this whole thing. 
No tags or points for me this year because I put off doing last years survey for 1 day too long.  
It doesn’t seem right that it’s going to cost me 100 bucks for my 12 year old and I to put in for points again. When a Trumpeter targeter has no fine.


----------



## Vanilla

Fowlmouth said:


> Utah hunters killed 20 rare trumpeter swans by accident this year. Here’s why that matters. (sltrib.com)


When I read about this Shaw guy from California and his analysis of eating swans, it makes me wonder...Is Goob really from Wyoming? Or is he a Californian in disguise?



Trib Article said:


> The 20 trumpeters killed by Utah hunters won’t have an impact on a bird that now exceeds its target population of 10,000 adults and subadults, according to Gary Ivie, president-elect of the Trumpeter Swan Society, a nonprofit dedicated to the species recovery.


Wait, so the president of a society dedicated to the recovery of trumpeter swans says that killing 20 trumps won't have a negative impact on the species? But 1bandman says that the numbers cannot sustain any harvest! I'm so confused. Who should I believe??? This is a tough one...


----------



## Amy

A couple more were just checked in at our Salt Lake office. We're at 19 now.


----------



## backcountry

JerryH said:


> If guys only had this much passion for Grebes


Grebes are fascinating little creatures.

Hopefully folks are paying attention to them and how important GSL is for their populations. I'd hate to see the Salton Sea become the trend instead of a warning.


----------



## RemingtonCountry

Amy said:


> A couple more were just checked in at our Salt Lake office. We're at 19 now.


Amy, thank you for checking in, pardon the fanfare on the thread!


----------



## wyogoob

Vanilla said:


> When I read about this Shaw guy from California and his analysis of eating swans, it makes me wonder...Is Goob really from Wyoming? Or is he a Californian in disguise?
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, so the president of a society dedicated to the recovery of trumpeter swans says that killing 20 trumps won't have a negative impact on the species? But 1bandman says that the numbers cannot sustain any harvest! I'm so confused. Who should I believe??? This is a tough one...


Yeah, who should we believe. I can remember when Trumpeters were in trouble so I've been researching Trumpeter Swans some. One article says at one time there were only 79 left, another said only 200 left in the lower 48, another said 110 left on the planet......on and on. 

Shaw? haha


----------



## 1BandMan

Vanilla said:


> When I read about this Shaw guy from California and his analysis of eating swans, it makes me wonder...Is Goob really from Wyoming? Or is he a Californian in disguise?
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, so the president of a society dedicated to the recovery of trumpeter swans says that killing 20 trumps won't have a negative impact on the species? But 1bandman says that the numbers cannot sustain any harvest! I'm so confused. Who should I believe??? This is a tough one...


I'm not confused biologist Vanilla.

*Is it a Tundra hunt or is it a Trumpeter hunt?*

Again if your research and knowledge warrants a open swan hunt you need to get with your fellow fed and state biologists and let them know what the daily limit should be.


----------



## JerryH

Fowlmouth said:


> This article is from 2019, the first year the hunt closed early. Good points on both sides. They give an estimated population of 10,000 Trumpeters in the Rocky Mountain region. Here we are 3 years later and looking at an early close again. (For 4 straight years in a row)
> Utah hunters killed 20 rare trumpeter swans by accident this year. Here’s why that matters. (sltrib.com)


10,000 trumpeters thats great! I wonder how many died from Avian flu this year. Probably more than 20?

I don't have dog in this fight. I've only shot 2 the last one was in the 90's. It just wasn't that exciting to me. Maybe the lure for some is they are so dumb and big. Everybody needs their own trophy I guess.

Myself I'd take a goose coming in bawling and rocking his head back and forth anyday over a swan.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> Grebes are fascinating little creatures.
> 
> Hopefully folks are paying attention to them and how important GSL is for their populations. I'd hate to see the Salton Sea become the trend instead of a warning.


Your silence speaks volumes..................................................


----------



## wyogoob

Trib Article said:

The 20 trumpeters killed by Utah hunters won’t have an impact on a bird that now exceeds its target population of 10,000 adults and subadults, according to Gary Ivie, president-elect of the Trumpeter Swan Society, a nonprofit dedicated to the species recovery.

10,000 Trumpeters - Holy Cow, that'll be the end of this thread.

Hey, there were 3 to 4 billion Passenger Pigeons in America back in the day.....but who's counting.


----------



## wyogoob

JerryH said:


> ...............................................
> 
> Myself I'd take a goose coming in bawling and rocking his head back and forth any day over a swan.


Another poll opportunity Jerry. One more Trumpeter and this thread's dead.


----------



## JerryH

wyogoob said:


> Another poll opportunity Jerry. One more Trumpeter and this thread's dead.


Next year!!


----------



## MrShane

wyogoob said:


> I have a friend that works at the UDWR. Rumor has it the Trumpeter harvest count is between 15 and 21.
> 
> I just made that up, I don't have any friends.


You lie Goob!
I am your friend.


----------



## wyogoob

This thing says there's 60,000 Trumpeters left!!
Good grief, I'm thinkin Wyoming will open a Trump hunt and Utah will go to 50 Trumpeters.


----------



## MrShane

So help me one more of you kill a Trumpeter you better hope I don’t meet you in the parking lot!
I still need more time to find that Tundra I am looking for.
I will not be sharing one of my white Monsters or Mexican Cokes with you…


----------



## CPAjeff

@Amy to the rescue!!


----------



## Catherder

wyogoob said:


> Another poll opportunity Jerry. One more Trumpeter and this thread's dead.


Not necessarily. I think this one has "whens it going to start" or the covid thread potential. 

Sorry, don't have a dog in the fight but wanted to IBTL and get in on the fun. 

I did come across a picture a while ago of 13 yr old Catherder holding the swan I harvested back in the day. Maybe I'll post it up to contribute something substantive.  Sure didn't
have to worry about Trumpeters and closures back then.


----------



## backcountry

wyogoob said:


> Trib Article said:
> 
> The 20 trumpeters killed by Utah hunters won’t have an impact on a bird that now exceeds its target population of 10,000 adults and subadults, according to Gary Ivie, president-elect of the Trumpeter Swan Society, a nonprofit dedicated to the species recovery.
> 
> 10,000 Trumpeters - Holy Cow, that'll be the end of this thread.
> 
> Hey, there were 3 to 4 billion Passenger Pigeons in America back in the day.....but who's counting.


And I believe the overall numbers continued to increase since then.

But it's definitely not all smooth sailing. The white bird count of the sub-population of the GYA trumpeters decreased by 32% during the last survey. That's the population that currently dictates policy for the Utah swan hunt.

Overall the RMP trajectory seems to remain healthy. Hopefully it stays that way but it's not certain which is why the agencies are remaining relatively conservative in quotas (ie not open to targeted hunting yet). 

The PFC's next meetings appear to be in February through March. Will be interesting to see what they discuss.


----------



## gander311

1BandMan said:


> *Is it a Tundra hunt or is it a Trumpeter hunt?*


Does this answer your question?
The tag doesn’t specify, and in that gray area lies the root of the problem. Again, for the record I personally would choose to not shoot a trumpeter at this point in my life. But I think this picture of my tag from this current season very clearly demonstrates why some are choosing to shoot trumpeter swans.
I can’t believe I’m doing this, because I’m kind of over the polar opposites arguing on this thread. Middle ground seems hard to come by these days in the world we live in, no matter what the topic is. We can’t even agree on some as fellow hunters. It makes me sad.


----------



## Vanilla

gander311, not all heroes wear capes!


----------



## backcountry

To be fair, it only takes going to one RAC meeting to realize that hunters often can't agree but they also disagree pretty passionately on fundamentals on a regular basis. These flare ups aren't limited to the internet, that's for sure.


----------



## gander311

Vanilla said:


> gander311, not all heroes wear capes!


Now you’re going to make fun of me for wearing a cape? It was one time, and I thought it was a costume party…

😂😂😂


----------



## Vanilla

Touche!

I said "not all," but apparently some do. 

Do you just love the band 311? I think they're pretty good myself. I haven't listened to them in a long, long time. "Siri, play 311.."


----------



## .45

And to think Amy had to read all this garbage. Some of you guys should be ashamed.

emails are going out, it’s over.


----------



## MrShane

Amy said:


> A couple more were just checked in at our Salt Lake office. We're at 19 now.


Thank you Amy, please don’t check in any more for a few more weeks.
May I please get your thoughts here, what is the UDWR’s vibe on how we have stolen our own opportunity to hunt from ourselves.
What might happen to us next year due to our actions?


----------



## MrShane

.45 said:


> And to think Amy had to read all this garbage. Some of you guys should be ashamed.
> 
> emails are going out, it’s over.


What are you talking about, this is the exact stuff she needs to see.
How else can the DWR fix the problem causing issues like this.


----------



## Vanilla

Amy is a PR professional that goes above and beyond to keep hunters in the loop by posting relevant information on outdoor forums. Whether she reads this thread or not is irrelevant to any changes that should or will be made. 

If you want changes made, quit posting on this site or others like it thinking that your voice has been heard. If you are not telling it to the RACs and WB, you are not telling it at all.


----------



## gander311

If you’ll notice, my account was started in 2008. I loved that band in high school in the late 90’s and it was an easy way to add those numbers to any account name I made online for next decade or so. Gander was my first lab’s name, and combined with “311” it usually was an available username.

I still like the band, but my life is different than it was back then. (Think “occasional high school parties” versus “reluctant but willing bishopric member”) I did however go see them in concert this last summer when they were here. It had been 10 years or more since the last time I saw them. Still great live, but man was the crowd different than I remember. Basically just a bunch of middle aged overweight white guys such as myself hanging on to what youth they used to have…Haha

But I digress. Back to swans and my last comment regarding them. Hopefully the Feds and DWR can find a better solution than all of us geniuses on this Internet forum. And I hope the hunt remains for years to come, and can get back to the times where we had time to hunt them clear into December, which was my personal favorite. I don’t hate any fellow waterfowlers for their legal choices. I have my opinions, and they have theirs. I don’t wish to impose my ethics on others. I just hope for a realistic middle ground that will keep most swan hunters happy. I say most, because nothing will make everyone happy as this thread has made glaringly apparent.

Best of luck to all you remaining tag holders.

Here’s to cupped white wings and huge black feet hanging in your decoys.


----------



## backcountry

.45 said:


> And to think Amy had to read all this garbage. Some of you guys should be ashamed.
> 
> emails are going out, it’s over.


.45,

I've tried to read a few of your previous posts but they've just been quotes without remark. Am I missing something with those or was there a problem posting?


----------



## Amy

Thanks, Vanilla. Here's the official news release about the closure. And I know there are a lot of strong feelings on this issue (as evidenced by all the opinions and posts in this thread). I'll forward this thread to our waterfowl coordinator, although I'm guessing she's already very aware of it.


----------



## .45

backcountry said:


> .45,
> 
> I've tried to read a few of your previous posts but they've just been quotes without remark. Am I missing something with those or was there a problem posting?


Eyeglasses and age. Sorry


----------



## 3arabians

gander311 said:


> If you’ll notice, my account was started in 2008. I loved that band in high school in the late 90’s and it was an easy way to add those numbers to any account name I made online for next decade or so. Gander was my first lab’s name, and combined with “311” it usually was an available username.
> 
> I still like the band, but my life is different than it was back then. (Think “occasional high school parties” versus “reluctant but willing bishopric member”) I did however go see them in concert this last summer when they were here. It had been 10 years or more since the last time I saw them. Still great live, but man was the crowd different than I remember. Basically just a bunch of middle aged overweight white guys such as myself hanging on to what youth they used to have…Haha
> 
> But I digress. Back to swans and my last comment regarding them. Hopefully the Feds and DWR can find a better solution than all of us geniuses on this Internet forum. And I hope the hunt remains for years to come, and can get back to the times where we had time to hunt them clear into December, which was my personal favorite. I don’t hate any fellow waterfowlers for their legal choices. I have my opinions, and they have theirs. I don’t wish to impose my ethics on others. I just hope for a realistic middle ground that will keep most Sean hunters happy. I say most, because nothing will make everyone happy as this thread has made glaringly apparent.
> 
> Best of luck to all you remaining tag holders.
> 
> Here’s to cupped white wings and huge black feet hanging in your decoys.


My wife is a huge 311 fan! Huge! She is even a member of the 311 familia. I’ve wrestled free of her choke hold to drag me to a concert of theirs for 14 years now but I finally got sick of the struggle and have tapped out. So, I’m off to a 311 concert sometime in the spring while peanut is still around. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## backcountry

.45 said:


> Eyeglasses and age. Sorry


Thx for the response. No need to apologize. My normal problem is fat fingers and small keyboards 😁

I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything.


----------



## MrShane

Vanilla said:


> Amy is a PR professional that goes above and beyond to keep hunters in the loop by posting relevant information on outdoor forums. Whether she reads this thread or not is irrelevant to any changes that should or will be made.
> 
> If you want changes made, quit posting on this site or others like it thinking that your voice has been heard. If you are not telling it to the RACs and WB, you are not telling it at all.


Vanilla,
If you actually believe Amy does not ‘hear’ what we are telling here, you are mistaken.
Every and any extra open ear helps.
Please see post 284, straight from Amy herself.
Thank you Amy for relaying these issues forward and for everything else you and the DWR does for us!


----------



## 1BandMan

So the reason the swan hunt was closed a month early, (a new record) is because it's not printed on the tag?

My driver's licence has zero rules of the road written anywhere on it. Those idiots at the DMV!!!

It's amazing I haven't killed myself or other people not having any reference.

Play stupid games, win stupid prize's.


----------



## gander311

I’ve seen them in concert 12 times. First time was in ‘95. Tiny little venue in the state fairgrounds, maybe 2,000-2,500 ish people there. No Doubt was the opening band, and then blew up a couple months later.
This is a fun sidebar. Let’s keep hijacking this thread and see how long we can keep it alive talking about an bad that most won’t even know who they are.😂

Bummed the hunt is done. I had plans to take a neighbor tomorrow for one last chance. Oh well.


----------



## .45

I’m sure goob has a recipe for tag soup. Seems I have a few to cook up this year.


----------



## Vanilla

MrShane said:


> Vanilla,
> If you actually believe Amy does not ‘hear’ what we are telling here, you are sadly mistaken.


If you think the purpose of my post was to say Amy doesn’t hear what we say, you are sadly mistaken. The fact that she reacted to my post ought to tell you all that you need to know.

But I digress, this thread is now about 311.


----------



## Vanilla

gander311 said:


> If you’ll notice, my account was started in 2008. I loved that band in high school in the late 90’s and it was an easy way to add those numbers to any account name I made online for next decade or so. Gander was my first lab’s name, and combined with “311” it usually was an available username.
> 
> I still like the band, but my life is different than it was back then. (Think “occasional high school parties” versus “reluctant but willing bishopric member”) I did however go see them in concert this last summer when they were here. It had been 10 years or more since the last time I saw them. Still great live, but man was the crowd different than I remember. Basically just a bunch of middle aged overweight white guys such as myself hanging on to what youth they used to have…Haha


I can appreciate the different perspective from the 90s to today. I loved 311, and still like them. There was an awful lot of 311, Rage Against the Machine, and Cypress Hill played from the bumps of my 15 inch Kicker subwoofer in the trunk of my car! Metallica is, always was, and always will be #1 for me. But man, this brings back a lot of memories. I guess my book can wait while I work up a nice Rage/311 soundtrack for the drive home, and hope my ears don't get seared too much!


----------



## .45

Vanilla said:


> If you think the purpose of my post was to say Amy doesn’t hear what we say, you are sadly mistaken. The fact that she reacted to my post ought to tell you all that you need to know.
> 
> But I digress, this thread is now about 311.


Amy hears all.


----------



## .45

What is 311 ?


----------



## MooseMeat

Vanilla said:


> If you think the purpose of my post was to say Amy doesn’t hear what we say, you are sadly mistaken. The fact that she reacted to my post ought to tell you all that you need to know.
> 
> But I digress, this thread is now about 311.


Hang on before we start talking about favorite bands (mine is the MOTAB 😉)

if you feel passionately about this topic on either side, submit your comments to the WB and RACs when the comment period about the waterfowl plan is open. I think it’s coming up in the next few months. It’s infuriating to see people have such strong opinions about things to the point they are threatening physical harm, then are absolutely silent when the time to talk about actual change comes around. Watch the RACs when they talk about the public input. They mention how many comments were submitted. It’s usually less than 10, especially when birds are concerned. But how many have access to the internet that hunt in utah? All of us. If public speaking isn’t your thing and you don’t want to talk in person or you don’t have time, THIS IS WHAT THIS IS FOR. But no, we just sit on the side lines and watch. Then torch some poor basturd in the Facebook comments on a waterfowl page or forum for doing what was legal. You want to talk about what an anti hunter is or a utard is, in my book it’s the guys who are silent when the time comes to make a change, but are the first to point a finger at someone who’s doing what they are allowed.


----------



## MooseMeat

.45 said:


> What is 311 ?


The number of trumpeters that will be killed by the end of the 2026 season


----------



## JerryH

Has 311 won a Grammy?


----------



## backcountry

Anybody know how the "72 hour" timeframe originated for reporting a harvest? There are definitely logistical differences between it and other species but it seems unusually long for such a specific quota. I assume it's a compromise from options. It would just be interesting to understand the decision.


----------



## gander311

JerryH said:


> Has 311 won a Grammy?


It's not about the recognition and the awards, it's about the music man! Honestly though, I have no idea. But I doubt it.

Haha, this is so much more fun than griping about the problems with the swan hunt and trying to defend myself as a psychopathic selfish a-hole for daring to have an opinion and having the audacity to suggest things I think could help extend the season. I'm such a prick for even posting here.


----------



## gander311

backcountry said:


> Anybody know how the "72 hour" timeframe timeframe originated for reporting a harvest? There are definitely logistical differences between it and other species but it seems unusually long for such a specific quota. I assume it's a compromise from options. It would just be interesting to understand the decision.


I could be wrong, because this is purely my assumption. But I thought the 72 hours was to allow people who harvest over the weekend time to get in to the DWR office when they're open again during the week. Maybe some are open on weekends, but they're not all open.

But seriously man, stay on topic. 311...


----------



## Fowlmouth

Here's my opinion on how future swan hunting should be set up. (I liked some of your ideas on what should happen)

1- In 2023 start by closing PSG to swan hunting. Reason: The hunt never closed early before PSG was included in the boundaries.
2- In 2023 if the quota is again met then print permits for 2024 that read, "Tundra Swan Hunt Only" and charge a fine to the offenders that kill a Trumpeter. 
3- Keep the 5- year waiting period in place as well as adding the fine. 

The bottom line is obviously more has to be done to deter people from targeting Trumpeters. Yes. mistakes will be made, and people will have to pay for their mistake. Most Trumpeter swan hunters proved me wrong this year by obeying the rules and having their Trumpeter swan checked in knowing there is a 5 -year waiting period to apply again. However, I'm sure not all of those that killed a Trumpeter did so. 
It really just proves the one's that did were proud of their actions. Look on Facebook and the write ups some of these guys did, and how they specifically targeted Trumpeters and they are proud of their decision to screw everyone else out of their permit. 
My bi+ch has never been about population sustainability or any of that, it's been about the season closing early for four straight years in a row and taking opportunity away from others.


----------



## JerryH

Does 311 have a upright bass player and a banjo player?


----------



## MrShane

Vanilla said:


> If you think the purpose of my post was to say Amy doesn’t hear what we say, you are sadly mistaken. The fact that she reacted to my post ought to tell you all that you need to know.
> 
> But I digress, this thread is now about 311.


Dude, I am not going to argue with you.
You yourself just an hour ago said “if you are not telling it to RAC or WB board you are not telling any one”.
You don’t even need to respond, you just have a good day and I still respect the heck out of you Vanilla.
You know my thoughts I wish you were a member of the WB!


----------



## 1BandMan

Just my belief but I bet there were a lot of Trumpeters killed that were never checked in as well.


----------



## gander311

JerryH said:


> Does 311 have a upright bass player and a banjo player?


Their bass player P-Nut stands up while he plays an electric bass guitar? Does that count?
Negative on the banjo player. If you like banjo's in the mix I suggest Mumford and Sons, but's this is neither the time, nor the place for that discussion. 

Thanks for playing along Jerry.


----------



## backcountry

I'd wager the agencies have the same idea regarding PSG and/or have been hearing similar opinions.

There also seems to be a feedback loop from year to year happening. Day of 20 count threshold:

2019: Dec 6
2020: Nov 27
2021: Nov 26
2022: Nov 17

Migration patterns play a clear role but I'd wager hunters are also seeing the trend and changing their behavior as well. I wouldn't be shocked if folks are heading out earlier and possibly changing their shooting behavior based on concerns of an early season closure.

How much longer will that trend continue to lead to even shorter seasons? I'm guessing it can only compress so much but (assuming no changes in policy and migration pattern is similar) what is a hunter to think about likely closure date in 2023 as they are planning their hunt?


----------



## Fowlmouth

1BandMan said:


> Just my belief but I bet there were a lot of Trumpeters killed that were never checked in as well.


And Tundra Swans too…..,


----------



## MrShane

Fowlmouth said:


> Here's my opinion on how future swan hunting should be set up. (I liked some of your ideas on what should happen)
> 
> 1- In 2023 start by closing PSG to swan hunting. Reason: The hunt never closed early before PSG was included in the boundaries.
> 2- In 2023 if the quota is again met then print permits for 2024 that read, "Tundra Swan Hunt Only" and charge a fine to the offenders that kill a Trumpeter.
> 3- Keep the 5- year waiting period in place as well as adding the fine.
> 
> The bottom line is obviously more has to be done to deter people from targeting Trumpeters. Yes. mistakes will be made, and people will have to pay for their mistake. Most Trumpeter swan hunters proved me wrong this year by obeying the rules and having their Trumpeter swan checked in knowing there is a 5 -year waiting period to apply again. However, I'm sure not all of those that killed a Trumpeter did so.
> It really just proves the one's that did were proud of their actions. Look on Facebook and the write ups some of these guys did, and how they specifically targeted Trumpeters and they are proud of their decision to screw everyone else out of their permit.
> My bi+ch has never been about population sustainability or any of that, it's been about the season closing early for four straight years in a row and taking opportunity away from others.


Amen Fowl, other than don’t close PSG and instead of five year wait on Swans it is one year suspension of waterowling privileges.
It’s not like a Trumpeter has giant fangs of gold or talons made of ivory to brag about.
Drinking their blood does not cure ED ( actually, not sure about that one. Hmmmm.).
There is simply only ONE reason to target a Trump over a Tundra.
Bragging rights that you helped shut fellow hunters out of a chance to enjoy our beautiful Utah Swan hunt experience.
Keep those types out of our marshes, if only for one year.
If that Trump means that much to you, isn’t it worth it to sit out a year?
Decisions, decisions…


----------



## JerryH

gander311 said:


> Their bass player P-Nut stands up while he plays an electric bass guitar? Does that count?
> Negative on the banjo player. If you like banjo's in the mix I suggest Mumford and Sons, but's this is neither the time, nor the place for that discussion.
> 
> Thanks for playing along Jerry.


I'm trying.


----------



## gander311

backcountry said:


> I'd wager the agencies have the same idea regarding PSG and/or have been hearing similar opinions.
> 
> There also seems to be a feedback loop from year to year happening. Day of 20 count threshold:
> 
> 2019: Dec 6
> 2020: Nov 27
> 2021: Nov 26
> 2022: Nov 17
> 
> Migration patterns play a clear role but I'd wager hunters are also seeing the trend and changing their behavior as well. I wouldn't be shocked if folks are heading out earlier and possibly changing their shooting behavior based on concerns of an early season closure.
> 
> How much longer will that trend continue to lead to even shorter seasons? I'm guessing it can only compress so much but (assuming no changes in policy and migration pattern is similar) what is a hunter to think about likely closure date in 2023 as they are planning their hunt?


 Absolutely this plays a role. Or at a minimum it did for me and my hunting partner. I mentioned it way back at the beginning of this fiasco. Prior to the recent years of this hunt, I didn't start thinking about hunting swans until around Thanksgiving, and preferred waiting even longer to hunt them further south and over ice if the weather cooperated. 

After eating a tag last time I had one due to an early closure, this year I got after it much earlier, knowing full well that if I didn't get one soon, the opportunity would slip away. I filled my tag last weekend, and if I'm being honest, I wouldn't have shot the bird I did when I did if I knew I could keep hunting longer. But I pulled the trigger knowing at least I got in "before the buzzer". And in retrospect, it's a good thing I did. Because I haven't been back in the marsh since last Saturday, and would've eaten a tag yet again.


----------



## Fowlmouth

MrShane said:


> Amen Fowl, other than don’t close PSG and instead of five year wait on Swans it is one year suspension of waterowling privileges.
> It’s not like a Trumpeter has giant fangs or talons made of ivory to brag about.
> Drinking their blood does not cure ED ( actually, not sure about that one. Hmmmm.).
> There is simply only ONE reason to target a Trump over a Tundra.
> Bragging rights that you helped shut fellow hunters out of a chance to enjoy our beautiful Utah Swan hunt experience.
> Keep those types out of our marshes, if only for one year.
> If that Trump means that much to you, isn’t it worth it to sit out a year?
> Decisions, decisions…


I suspect by just closing PSG the quota won’t be met, and this discussion won’t exist next year.


----------



## MrShane

Fowlmouth said:


> I suspect by just closing PSG the quota won’t be met, and this discussion won’t exist next year.


I agree 100%, but I would prefer to keep hunters spread out, and PSG is still a great place to hunt/hang out at.


----------



## Fowlmouth

Nice job Jerry, you brought the waterfowl forum back to life.


----------



## .45

I watched 3 seconds of 311 on YouTube, is that Joe ****ers son?


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Just my belief but I bet there were a lot of Trumpeters killed that were never checked in as well.


That’s an awful bold statement coming from someone who’s never hunted them


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> That’s an awful bold statement coming from someone who’s never hunted them


MM, to be fair, you suggested it with your Starter Kit meme.
Unless you meant the shovel to dig a pit blind…


----------



## JerryH

Jeremy I have to say there was better bands from the 90's


----------



## 1BandMan

MooseMeat said:


> That’s an awful bold statement coming from someone who’s never hunted them


Just an educated guess.
A lot of your bestist buds on Facebook started posting their hero shots two plus weeks ago.
I counted quite a few (as many or more the DWR had tallied which I doubt was every Trump in Utah at the time) and got lost on just how many I had counted when some of those posts come up missing.


----------



## gander311

Jerry, you won't get any argument from me. There are definitely better bands that came out of the 90's. 

That song is far from my favorite song of theirs (and technically that song came out in the early '00's) but I absolutely get that they're not a sound for everyone. They were a very niche band, and they fit a very specific sound for a very specific time in my life.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish

1BandMan said:


> Just my belief but I bet there were a lot of Trumpeters killed that were never checked in as well.


Like in deer areas that are 3 point or 4 point or better. 

Forkies in the ditch after it is discovered that they are not legal.


----------



## 3arabians

My wife saw 311 in concert 4 times this year! Arizona, Las Vegas, Colorado and here. She is crazy about 311, I’m telling ya. Seems like Blue October is going to be a close second soon. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter

Utah DWR just posted on FB that the swan season has been closed 24 days early







Utah's swan hunt closes early for 4th consecutive year after federal harvest limit for trumpeter swans met


Utah's swan hunting season has closed 24 days early after the federal quota of 20 trumpeter swans was met on Nov. 17. This is the fourth consecutive year that the swan hunt had to be closed early.




wildlife.utah.gov


----------



## 3arabians

JerryH said:


> Jeremy I have to say there was better bands from the 90's


My wife thinks this is their worst song. It’s more like this:







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla

Keep in mind that shutting down PSG is ONLY for the swan hunt. Duck and goose hunters, have at it!

If anyone is truly concerned about this, that one thing needs to be act #1. If that doesn’t work to keep the season open, more extreme measures can take place.


----------



## JerryH

You guys should of gotten into Counting Crows. Maybe it wouldn't of been such a Long December lol


----------



## 1BandMan

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Like in deer areas that are 3 point or 4 point or better.
> 
> Forkies in the ditch after it is discovered that they are not legal.


Yes, exactly like that. But likely more intentionally. Many finding their way on someone's wall.


----------



## Vanilla

gander311 said:


> Haha, this is so much more fun than griping about the problems with the swan hunt and trying to defend myself as a psychopathic selfish a-hole for daring to have an opinion and having the audacity to suggest things I think could help extend the season. I'm such a prick for even posting here.


I don’t know gander311, but he is now my favorite person on this forum. I had no clue if 311 had to do with the band, I was mostly joking, but I’m glad I posted it and brought this out. And this post above may me laugh, and I needed a laugh.


Well done, gander311. I owe you a Coke one day.


----------



## 2full

I'll show my age..........
Sorry, but......Who the heck is 311 ?? 


And I'm a music buff.

My favorites are Joe Walsh and Billy Gibbons.


----------



## JerryH

2full said:


> I'll show my age..........
> Sorry, but......Who the heck is 311 ??
> 
> 
> And I'm a music buff.
> 
> My favorites are Joe Walsh and Billy Gibbons.


Just another forgettable band from the 90's lol.

But Joe Walsh and Billy Gibbons will never be forgotten. More talent in their back pocket than any band out of the 90's.


----------



## backcountry

JerryH said:


> Just another forgettable band from the 90's lol.
> 
> But Joe Walsh and Billy Gibbons will never be forgotten. More talent in their back pocket than any band out of the 90's.


Now you gone and crossed a line. Looks like this is gonna be a fracas between the generations. 🤔🤪

There were a lot of Garbage bands in the 90s but some of the talent that came out of it, or found their groove, is also legendary. Just about every genre has an example: Beyonce, The Roots, Primus, Public Enemy, Radiohead, Metallica, Rage Against the Machine, Jeff Buckley. To name a few. A ton of talent that forever changed music.

Mock the sea of plaid. Mock our bad movies. But you come after our music and Gen X will.... probably sit and sulk. That was kind of the 90s trademark. 🤣

*Since we are embracing controversial topics on music I'll just go ahead and say it...the Beatles are over rated. Good, entertaining, but over rated.


----------



## 2full

Ya right......they changed music for the worse 😁

And the Beatles only changed the whole music industry.
But I really preferred the Stones myself. 😎
My little brother was the Beatles freak.


----------



## JerryH

The grandfather of grunge! Seattle didn't invent flannel


----------



## backcountry

2Full, That takes some Stones to say 😁

Some of them definitely changed it for the worse. Can't argue against that. Some bands should have been tried in front of the ICC for crimes against humanity: Chumbawamba, Los Del Mar, Right Said Fred. Dave Matthews should be locked in a room and made to listen to his albums on repeat until he breaks. Granted, on repeat is a little redundant.

But we should all be prepping like Brick Tamland for a street fight if you come after our legends.
🤪


----------



## gander311

One more swan question and then we can get back to the important band conversation.

So we know the quota of 20 trumpeters was hit, and the season is now closed. But does the state release the numbers of tundras that were checked in? I’d be very curious to see that number this year, and the previous three years and see if there appears to be any correlation between number of tundras killed and how early the season got closed.

Okay, back to music. Lots of comments about 311, but truthfully they’re not on my “all time best” list. Just impactful in my teens. For that “all time” list, I’d probably have to go with Led Zeppelin as THE number one. “When the Levee Breaks” is epic. Does it get any better than that?


----------



## Irish Lad

2full said:


> But I really preferred the Stones myself. 😎


My favorite band by far!


----------



## 3arabians

gander311 said:


> One more swan question and then we can get back to the important band conversation.
> 
> So we know the quota of 20 trumpeters was hit, and the season is now closed. But does the state release the numbers of tundras that were checked in? I’d be very curious to see that number this year, and the previous three years and see if there appears to be any correlation between number of tundras killed and how early the season got closed.
> 
> Okay, back to music. Lots of comments about 311, but truthfully they’re not on my “all time best” list. Just impactful in my teens. For that “all time” list, I’d probably have to go with Led Zeppelin as THE number one. “When the Levee Breaks” is epic. Does it get any better than that?


We can be friends. It does get a little bit better but not much. 







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wyogoob

gander311 said:


> One more swan question and then we can get back to the important band conversation.
> 
> So we know the quota of 20 trumpeters was hit, and the season is now closed. But does the state release the numbers of tundras that were checked in? I’d be very curious to see that number this year, and the previous three years and see if there appears to be any correlation between number of tundras killed and how early the season got closed.


Good question. I did see something put out by the UDWR today that said 40% of the swan tags get filled.


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> MM, to be fair, you suggested it with your Starter Kit meme.
> Unless you meant the shovel to dig a pit blind…


It’s a meme… 

and I’ve actually, hunted and shot many swans myself and have seen even more killed by others. My opinion on the subject is more valid than some commenting here, because I have first hand knowledge and experience with it. I’m more than willing to talk any of this through if you have done it yourself. You claim to have done it. I dont Agree with anything you’ve claimed here, but I will listen to you. The other clowns are just chirping


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Just an educated guess.
> A lot of your bestist buds on Facebook started posting their hero shots two plus weeks ago.
> I counted quite a few (as many or more the DWR had tallied which I doubt was every Trump in Utah at the time) and got lost on just how many I had counted when some of those posts come up missing.


I personally know 4 people who killed trumpeters this year. And guess what, that’s 4 guys who I won’t be competing with on tags next year or the next 4 after that. It’s also 4 guys who legally had tags this year and willingly took the plunge to target and harvest a very specific and by you counts, small number, of birds. Good on them. Anyone can do it on accident. When someone can do it on purpose is when it’s impressive.


----------



## 1BandMan

Stop diggin' that hole MM. You'll eventually hit water and drown.


----------



## backcountry

> My opinion on the subject is more valid than some commenting here, because I have first hand knowledge and experience with it.





> Answer my question


----------



## Clarq

Disclaimer: I'm officially checked out of this thread. 100+ responses since I last checked it this morning, and I don't have the energy nor desire to go back and read them.

I really thought y'all would be out in the marsh this evening, giving it one last go, but there weren't many folks at all. They were all too busy arguing on the internet, I guess? Not much swan action to speak of, but I did manage a shoveler to chase the skunk away. Nice night.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> View attachment 154561


🥱


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> It’s a meme…
> 
> and I’ve actually, hunted and shot many swans myself and have seen even more killed by others. My opinion on the subject is more valid than some commenting here, because I have first hand knowledge and experience with it. I’m more than willing to talk any of this through if you have done it yourself. You claim to have done it. I dont Agree with anything you’ve claimed here, but I will listen to you. The other clowns are just chirping


Moose,
Quick background:
I love talking about this stuff, I read everything everybody posts, even though I may or may not agree with their opinions.
I am strong opinionated to the point of being annoying, I admit that freely.
I have NEVER blocked OR reported anybody.
I am very politically incorrect.
I don’t swear or drink and I go to Church most Sundays but leave quick to go fish and hunt after Church.
I hunt/fish mostly lone wolf style, so not many here know me.
My nickname is Carbon Monoxide.
My real name is Shane.
Jerry, NickPan, or Paddler may or may not vouch for me. As far as I know they are the only ones on this site that have crossed my path.
I am not sure what you are saying I claimed here though?
I am not going to sleep for a bit so let’s chat.


----------



## MrShane

Clarq said:


> Disclaimer: I'm officially checked out of this thread. 100+ responses since I last checked it this morning, and I don't have the energy nor desire to go back and read them.
> 
> I really thought y'all would be out in the marsh this evening, giving it one last go, but there weren't many folks at all. They were all too busy arguing on the internet, I guess? Not much swan action to speak of, but I did manage a shoveler to chase the skunk away. Nice night.
> 
> View attachment 154562


Sorry the season closed early, I wish I could have freed myself up today even 2 hrs earlier and I would have ran you out to help you kill a Tundra on the Eve of Closure.
How did that 3.5 Citori I sold you treat you this year?


----------



## prumpf

Well this thread has been entertaining and impossible for me to keep up with. I just share how I feel being a first time tag holder this year.

1. Work Would have allowed me to go out for the first time this weekend…definitely unhappy about the closure.
2. I don’t think we will ever get back to people being respectful enough of others to make a swan hunting decision based on others.
3. My Tag opportunity just went to 0 because others chose to shoot a swan that they either did not care to identify or just plain don’t care.
4. Rules should be changed, trumpeters Are not allowed to be shot, and a penalty needs to be found. (Maybe we will have gunting
5. Unless rules are changed nothing changes, people will not care enough about others and the law is giving them green light.
6. For those who argue shooting trumpeters is not taking opportunity it’s just plain none sense. 
7.Legal doesn’t mean that it’s not an a**hole move

Raise your voice for change of policy as this thread proves that change of people is not going to happen.


Hope the mites find your trumpeter mounts 😆


----------



## Vanilla

Prumpf, but what is your opinion on 90s reggae/rock/hip hop mix bands?

(I’ve never accepted the opinion that 311 is alternative…and I think less of people that do. Deal with it!)


----------



## MrShane

prumpf said:


> Well this thread has been entertaining and impossible for me to keep up with. I just share how I feel being a first time tag holder this year.
> 
> 1. Work Would have allowed me to go out for the first time this weekend…definitely unhappy about the closure.
> 2. I don’t think we will ever get back to people being respectful enough of others to make a swan hunting decision based on others.
> 3. My Tag opportunity just went to 0 because others chose to shoot a swan that they either did not care to identify or just plain don’t care.
> 4. Rules should be changed, trumpeters Are not allowed to be shot, and a penalty needs to be found. (Maybe we will have gunting
> 5. Unless rules are changed nothing changes, people will not care enough about others and the law is giving them green light.
> 6. For those who argue shooting trumpeters is not taking opportunity it’s just plain none sense.
> 7.Legal doesn’t mean that it’s not an a**hole move
> 
> Raise your voice for change of policy as this thread proves that change of people is not going to happen.
> 
> 
> Hope the mites find your trumpeter mounts 😆


Sorry man, I ate a tag also but it was my choice.
Fortunately I have killed 5 or 6 Tundras so not as big a deal to me as you.
Try to find someone with 2 or more points and pay their app fee next year to add you on to them.
Not illegal.
With fees increasing next year and a strong likelihood a big change is coming it is very likely you might find someone willing to do that.
Same advice goes to Clarq.
There are a lot of good Dudes out there that might be able to help you redeem yourselves next year.
A month before ‘app season’ next year start a thread here for ‘point sharing’.


----------



## prumpf

Vanilla said:


> Prumpf, but what is your opinion on 90s reggae/rock/hip hop mix bands?
> 
> (I’ve never accepted the opinion that 311 is alternative…and I think less of people that do. Deal with it!)


Doesn’t offend me that you don’t care how I feel. But proves my point


Vanilla said:


> Prumpf, but what is your opinion on 90s reggae/rock/hip hop mix bands?
> 
> (I’ve never accepted the opinion that 311 is alternative…and I think less of people that do. Deal with it!)


Doesn’t hurt me that you don’t care, but proves my point that if 20 hold the power of opportunity for 2000+ those 20 better care and not treat others outdoor experience as if it was a taste of music but instead man up to the resposability to increase opportunities.


----------



## Vanilla

prumpf said:


> Doesn’t offend me that you don’t care how I feel. But proves my point
> 
> Doesn’t hurt me that you don’t care, but proves my point that if 20 hold the power of opportunity for 2000+ those 20 better care and not treat others outdoor experience as if it was a taste of music but instead man up to the resposability to increase opportunities.


It was just a joke based upon a lot of posts here today. No reason to get offended and all sensitive.

Or we can just go back to childish name calling and diagnosing people we’ve never met if you think that is a better use of the time? Because I certainly have some opinions on folks based upon the shiz I’ve read on this thread!!!


----------



## MrShane

prumpf said:


> Doesn’t offend me that you don’t care how I feel. But proves my point
> 
> Doesn’t hurt me that you don’t care, but proves my point that if 20 hold the power of opportunity for 2000+ those 20 better care and not treat others outdoor experience as if it was a taste of music but instead man up to the resposability to increase opportunities.


7/10’s of ONE percent controls 99.3% of the rest.
As far as I believe the Swan hunt is the only specie in Utah that laws/penalties are so far lopsided and skewed.
You think it would be more balanced similar to other huntable game and fowl in Utah?
I will be more than happy to be corrected?


----------



## Clarq

Let the record show that I never "diagnosed" anyone.

Granted I've missed a few pages, but the only diagnosis I saw was Paddler's diagnosis of the orange man.


----------



## MooseMeat

1BandMan said:


> Stop diggin' that hole MM. You'll eventually hit water and drown.


if you build it, they will come.

PSG all started with someone digging a hole.

you never did mention what we were betting on with the existence of a 2024 swan hunt


----------



## backcountry

I read your post as a observation that could explain such population level problems. But I can also see how others saw the original post otherwise. I think you've clarified your intent though.

And to be fair, Vanilla called someone a disease and recommended eradication. That's a pretty deep dig into name calling and it's one of the more historically haunting analogies one can make. I don't think he meant it that way but it's baggage that is carried everytime its used.


----------



## MooseMeat

MrShane said:


> Sorry man, I ate a tag also but it was my choice.
> Fortunately I have killed 5 or 6 Tundras so not as big a deal to me as you.
> Try to find someone with 2 or more points and pay their app fee next year to add you on to them.
> Not illegal.
> With fees increasing next year and a strong likelihood a big change is coming it is very likely you might find someone willing to do that.
> Same advice goes to Clarq.
> There are a lot of good Dudes out there that might be able to help you redeem yourselves next year.
> A month before ‘app season’ next year start a thread here for ‘point sharing’.


But that’s unethical and not fair to everyone else waiting in line

hi, it’s me you’re looking for. I’ve got all kinds of points squirreled away for such an occasion. We can open the bidding for a 2023 swan hunt here. $30, do I have a $30 bid? Once… twice… …?

I can’t care you ate a tag. You knew the rules to the game when you applied. We all did.


----------



## Vanilla

Backcountry, I stand 100% behind that statement. It wasn’t name calling, it was giving him his proper title. He’s worked hard to earn it, let him wear it. I’m happy to address that too if people are more interested in focusing on that at this point! 

I’ve got lots to say on that subject.


----------



## MooseMeat

backcountry said:


> I read your post as a observation that could explain such population level problems. But I can also see how others saw the original post otherwise. I think you've clarified your intent though.
> 
> And to be fair, Vanilla called someone a disease and recommended eradication. That's a pretty deep dig into name calling and it's one of the more historically haunting analogies one can make. I don't think he meant it that way but it's baggage that is carried everytime its used.


Yet you have that same person on mute. In your world, you’ve already killed them off.

i called him a weed. Which is exactly what he is.

you are sure quick to point fingers at someone for something you are extremely guilty of themselves.


----------



## brisket

311 sucks.


----------



## gander311

brisket said:


> 311 sucks.


Best post on this thread yet. Impeccable timing.
Well played good sir. Well played.


----------



## Vanilla

brisket said:


> 311 sucks.


Oy. Brisket…what the bleepity bleep bleep are you talking about?!?!? I’m aghast at suck vile words!


----------



## Fowlmouth

gander. The 40% success rate was in 2019 when the season closed 2 days early. I can only assume the success rate is much lower this year because it closed almost a month early.


----------



## gander311

Fowlmouth said:


> gander. The 40% success rate was in 2019 when the season closed 2 days early. I can only assume the success rate is much lower this year because it closed almost a month early.


I agree, I’d be shocked if it wasn’t lower. I personally know 6 people that are eating tags. In fact, of the 8 people I closely know who had tags, only myself and one other filled them. So that’s a small sample size, but only 25% successful.


----------



## Fowlmouth

If PSG is closed to swan hunting next season, I will burn my points and get a tag. I’m not doing it until things change.


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla said:


> Backcountry, I stand 100% behind that statement. It wasn’t name calling, it was giving him his proper title. He’s worked hard to earn it, let him wear it. I’m happy to address that too if people are more interested in focusing on that at this point!
> 
> I’ve got lots to say on that subject.


I have no qualm with you having beef with Paddler. I have him on my ignore list for a reason. And I've explained why I myself use labels to describe people, ie I believe there can be value in labeling behavior that hurts a community.

And, it's 100% name calling. You may feel it's a justified title but it squarely fits into the definition and it undermines the effective communication you previously mentioned when you first brought up the criticism. 

And of all the name calling, it carries very severe connotations, especially when coupled with "eradication". 

This thread has had two such names that can't escape their histories.


----------



## MrShane

MooseMeat said:


> But that’s unethical and not fair to everyone else waiting in line
> 
> hi, it’s me you’re looking for. I’ve got all kinds of points squirreled away for such an occasion. We can open the bidding for a 2023 swan hunt here. $30, do I have a $30 bid? Once… twice… …?
> 
> I can’t care you ate a tag. You knew the rules to the game when you applied. We all did.


I know that MM, that is what I declared in my opening sentence.
Read my post a few above that when I answered your request to just chat about Swan stuff.
Post #345.


----------



## brisket

Vanilla said:


> Oy. Brisket…what the bleepity bleep bleep are you talking about?!?!? I’m aghast at suck vile words!


Ha! 😁

Must be an acquired taste, I’ve never enjoyed their music. Ever. Any 311 is an instant skip for me. 🤷‍♂️

We can still be friends, though.


----------



## paddler

Well, since the hunt is now closed, one can still shoot them with a camera:


----------



## 1BandMan

backcountry said:


> I have no qualm with you having beef with Paddler. I have him on my ignore list for a reason. And I've explained why I myself use labels to describe people, ie I believe there can be value in labeling behavior that hurts a community.
> 
> And, it's 100% name calling. You may feel it's a justified title but it squarely fits into the definition and it undermines the effective communication you previously mentioned when you first brought up the criticism.
> 
> And of all the name calling, it carries very severe connotations, especially when coupled with "eradication".
> 
> This thread has had two such names that can't escape their histories.


I really don't care if I made your two person list.
Do you hold yourself higher than others or think your a celebrity of some sort?


----------



## backcountry

It's a two word list. I have no beef with you. Nor do I with Vanilla, whom I've actually grown to truly respect. Doesn't change the fact that the term you used is hideous in nature. The criticism is about that choice, not you as a person (I do on the other hand feel comfortable calling out MM differently). If you've ever worked with people with disabilities you'd understand the damage the term does.

I'll have to share your last statement with my wife. She'll get a laugh as she knows how self deprecating I actually am. You can see evidence of that in this very thread, even in humbling myself and my skill level compared to someone I clearly disfavor (which is one reason why his jabs have no impact).


----------



## taxidermist

Lets all meet up at the Chuck-A-Rama and have a real conversation. You know, talk about items that aren't a hot topic. Maybe the upcoming 2024 election and candidates running, gender identity, religion, the current economy, etc. This would be soooo much fun! It could possibly turn into the animal house food fight clip.


----------



## Irish Lad

brisket said:


> Ha! 😁
> 
> Must be an acquired taste, I’ve never enjoyed their music. Ever. Any 311 is an instant skip for me. 🤷‍♂️
> 
> We can still be friends, though.





Vanilla said:


> Prumpf, but what is your opinion on 90s reggae/rock/hip hop mix bands?
> 
> (I’ve never accepted the opinion that 311 is alternative…and I think less of people that do. Deal with it!)


I guess I'm stuck in my late 60s early 70s rock. I listened to a few of 311 songs on you tube last night, not for me, but the wife liked some of it and she usually just listens to 50s 😄 .


----------



## wyogoob

paddler said:


> Well, since the hunt is now closed, one can still shoot them with a camera:
> View attachment 154563
> View attachment 154564
> View attachment 154565
> View attachment 154566
> View attachment 154567
> View attachment 154568


Whoa! Nice pics!


----------



## wyogoob

taxidermist said:


> Lets all meet up at the Chuck-A-Rama and have a real conversation. You know, talk about items that aren't a hot topic. Maybe the upcoming 2024 election and candidates running, gender identity, religion, the current economy, etc. This would be soooo much fun! It could possibly turn into the animal house food fight clip.


Cool, I'm in. I have a number of stories I can't tell on here.


----------



## backcountry

What recipes does Goob have that aren't appropriate for even the internet? 

😬


----------



## MrShane

Just like our Swan hunting opportunities, this thread is dead.
RIP.


----------



## Vanilla

MrShane said:


> Just like our Swan hunting opportunities, this thread is dead.
> RIP.


Well it had a good run.

MrShane, I hope you go smack some ducks and geese this weekend!


----------



## MrShane

Vanilla said:


> Well it had a good run.
> 
> MrShane, I hope you go smack some ducks and geese this weekend!


Thank you Vanilla, thinking about heading out right now.
Good luck to you also in any of your outdoor pursuits.
BTW, nice Browns!


----------



## Vanilla

More to come soon! But I’m keeping them in the fishing section, not the waterfowl section, as I don’t want 20 pages!


----------



## MooseMeat

Vanilla said:


> More to come soon! But I’m keeping them in the fishing section, not the waterfowl section, as I don’t want 20 pages!


I can make it go 20 pages EASY 😏


----------



## MallardFlew

Wow... what a lovely thread... here is my take... 

I think we wait to make any changes to the swan hunt for 4 years. That will put us in a position that those who have targeted for the first few are still waiting and perhaps the amount being taken gets less and less the more people there are on the mandatory waiting list. Second... there is a huge study going on to see where the birds are migrating from. If it turns out the majority are coming from Alaska then all this bitching and moaning was for naught. 

We as a public demand a lot from the DWR. They are already and have been doing as much as they can to bide time until the study comes back and to dissuade people from shooting trumpeters. The ID course, waiting period, mandatory reporting etc.

There is also the controversial black and white take.... if you can't tell what species (ducks, geese, swans, snipe, grouse, etc.) you are shooting at.... then you should not be shooting. Perhaps a rule limiting people from shooting within 100 yards of any dike could help stop sky blasting, bad identifying, etc. 

Ultimately we do not have enough Game wardens to actively enforce any of the infractions or problems we see. Legislating more won't work because of this. Until we as sportsman take more ownership of our situations we won't be able to institute the changes needed.


----------



## one4fishing

Hey guys n gals, what a good run this thread had. 

I’ll chime in with this. 
On closing night a guy I know seen a Swan get crippled out of the stratosphere by some tungsten err….. buckshot toting dike cannoneers. He never seen anyone looking for this downed bird. 
On his hike out he came across a very crippled bird and with the last few minutes of shooting light he dispatched this bird. 
He feels pretty bad about not getting his hero shot FB bird but I’m pretty impressed he tagged out. 
I’m glad the swan circus is over. 
Carry on.


----------



## gander311

I’m not sure if I’m more sad that the swan season closed, or that this thread died off.


----------



## paddler

gander311 said:


> I’m not sure if I’m more sad that the swan season closed, or that this thread died off.


You missed out Jeremy. I wrote another brilliant post late last night, but either pushed the wrong button so it didn't post or one of the mods deleted it without saying so. It was about....


----------



## Critter

This discussion has gone off subject a number of times with a number of post being deleted. 

So it has ran it's course and I am locking it down.


----------

