# LIMITED ENTRY!? REALLY!?



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Okay... SO I learned something VERY valuable today... Apparently it's been in place for over 30 years, but I just learned about it today...

Did you know that in some of our most coveted LIMITED ENTRY areas, they sell landowner vouchers for BUCK deer? I've known about DOE deer, but no clue that BUCK deer vouchers existed. Anyhow... Did you also know that these vouchers can be sold by the holder of the voucher... In the case that I know first hand of, for $6,500 (+$85 for the actual cost of the voucher)? Apparently this "Is the DWR's way of paying back the landowners for damage done to their crops by the animals." So a guide goes out... Hooks up with a landowner, buys a voucher for $85... Then turns that in to $6,415 PROFIT... on a unit that is supposed to be LIMITED ENTRY... Hmm... 

Sounds to me as though this system is close too, if not MORE crooked than the CWMU program. At least with the CWMU program, the crookedness (is that a word?) is already known up front.


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

welcome to big "money", I mean big game.


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

I didn't know they sold buck deer vouchers.... it's crazy how much money can be made off of those.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Known this for many many years, kindof surprised people didnt know. It happens when a large percentage of a LE unit has private ground within it. I thought I heard in the Bookcliffs landowners get as much as 10% of the total tags to use/ sell off. 

Books buck deer tags used to sell for 4-5k, no idea what they sell for now. A guy with the cash could buy a tag and hunt there every year, no waiting in line.


-DallanC


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

To answer your question, yes the rule has been around for years, you can even get them on general season deer units. I have asked this before, i will ask again, what would you rather have a private landowner who has real cost of feeding wildlife and we the people pay for it or a landowner who demands that we the people remove all wildlife from there private property. 

Which one? If you choose to have a landowner who is willing to have feed and provide habitat for wildlife, how should they or should they not be compensated?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Known this for many many years, kindof surprised people didnt know. It happens when a large percentage of a LE unit has private ground within it. I thought I heard in the Bookcliffs landowners get as much as 10% of the total tags to use/ sell off.
> 
> Books buck deer tags used to sell for 4-5k, no idea what they sell for now. A guy with the cash could buy a tag and hunt there every year, no waiting in line.
> 
> -DallanC


I think someone who buys a landowners tag should only be allowed to hunt the landowner's property and not the whole LE unit.


----------



## VAPORPEST (Apr 16, 2009)

I have seen this for years on the Vernon deer LE.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Blanding asks a valid question. I have 
One as well, should we manage our herds
To maximize the value of these tags via
Inch management and restrictive low
Opportunity high success rate hunts??

To answer Todd's question, the wildlife is
Not the landowners property. What they 
Consume and damage is. I would rather
See a system that is more balanced than
The 90/10 rule implemented. I would like
To see incentives given to landowners that
Promote overall opportunity and not just
Trophy heads. There can be a win / win.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

VAPORPEST said:


> I have seen this for years on the Vernon deer LE.


This is the unit that the situation I was talking about is in.

The more I thought about this, the more it almost makes sense. I'd rather see this, instead of the situation down south where the D-Bag landowner wiped out a bunch of animals (poaching & wasting in my opinion), rather than giving the DWR a chance to remove them. I know it goes on all over general season units... With DOE tags... No idea they included buck tags in there. That's where I was caught off guard.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

its been in place for just about as long as there has been limeted entry unit i can remembr purchasing a vernon permit from a land owner for around 300 buck s know day you would not be able to sniff it lol the voucher program as we have it today was intended to compensate the individual land owner by allowing him to hunt his own property however he can if he wishes sell the voucher to anyone willing to pay his price its not unlimted as in the vernon unit there are only around 34 vouchers that are split between the landowners there to be elegable they have to have so many acres in production of somekind and the landowners have there own co=op like the vernon irragation company with a point of contact. there is a full list of those l/e permits that have vouchers on the big game page of the dwr website. if you want one you are going to pay through the nose though as the folks who hold the vouchers pretty well know what there worth to the hunting public


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

I thought everyone knew about this? Obviously if you have enough money you can hunt LE every year.


----------



## hawkeye (Feb 18, 2008)

I too like the idea of limiting the landowner permits to hunting on the landowner's private property. If a landowner is being "compensated" for allowing wild game on his property then let's limit that landowner to hunting the animals on his property. Why should we allow the landowner free reign to hunt the entire unit? Is that landowner willing to allow the general public to hunt his private property?

The landowner permit program seems like many of the other government programs--they start out as a limited, narrow program to compensate landowners. Over time, however, they grow into a large, commercial enterprise. How many landowner permits are issued for the Paunsaugunt unit? How about Diamond Mountain?

Hawkeye


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

To anyone whining about vouchers. 

So how many bucks do you think are taken statewide through vouchers? 

Why do you care? Is it because a human is enjoying a hunt you aren't?

The sustained reduction of 1 or 2 cats would more than mitigate the effects of landowners vouchers on any given unit in the state. 

Again I ask why do we look to limit hunters first?


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Ask yourself? How can the State Take Public Land down on the Pauns. and turn it Private. That was over 10 yrs ago.. Get an old map and see what used to be public State owned land. 2 Brothers took it to court after an attempt to Archery hunt the land. they had hunted before. THE LOST>> ALL ABOUT THE MONEY! Rumor has it that George Straight paid 30 K to hunt the same property a year after for a 30" Buck..


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

:roll:


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

hawkeye said:


> I too like the idea of limiting the landowner permits to hunting on the landowner's private property. If a landowner is being "compensated" for allowing wild game on his property then let's limit that landowner to hunting the animals on his property. Why should we allow the landowner free reign to hunt the entire unit? Is that landowner willing to allow the general public to hunt his private property?


I agree they should only be able to hunt their own lands...but extend the season to when the animals are actually on the property which in a lot of cases is November to feb. bring on the landowner deer rut hunts! Remember each unit is where a deer is born breeds eats and dies or something like that so essetially they are still hunting the same deer herd.  Maybe Utah should just mirror colorados landowner program and also have 4 seasons. :O•-:


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

I don't believe they should be able to sell the landowner vouchers. Give them away or use them themselves sounds much more logical to me for the intended purpose. No, the landowner does not own the animals, but I do believe that a landowner should have the ability to hunt his own land or let others hunt his own land every year. If you don't want the animals to eat your crops then perhaps a landowner should consider a cost:benefit analysis that will tell them whether the cost of putting up a bigger fence will be offset by the benefit of having a full harvest that is unmolested by the resident ungulates.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Yep the rule has been around for a long time. Usually for a landowner voucher for deer the tag is for the landowners land not the whole unit. However there are associations of land owners where the tags are unit wide and then there are the CWMU's.

I think you can get one buck tag for every 640 acres. You can also get tags for property damage that you can show, such as cow elk tags for fence damage even on smaller parcels.


----------



## hawkeye (Feb 18, 2008)

Iron Bear-

My complaints with landowner permits are as follows: (1) there are too many given out on particular units; (2) the hunter using the permit can hunt the entire unit as opposed to the landowner's private property; and (3) the hunter using the permit can choose which season he wants to hunt. According to the DWR's website, the following landowner permits were issued out by the DWR this year:

Vernon - 35 permits
Book Cliffs - 26 permits
Diamond Mountain - 44 permits
Paunsaugunt - 18 permits

I often used to wonder why there were so many Paunsaugunt permits available for auction at the various banquets but then I realized that a large number of those permits were landowner permits. In addition to being able to hunt the entire unit, I believe that the owner of a landowner permit can choose which weapon/season he wants to hunt. Historically, Paunsaugunt landowner permits sell for $10-12,000 a piece. That is a lot of money.

I do not doubt that certain landowners are affected by the presence of wild game on their property, and that we need to have a way to compensate them and encourage them to tolerate the animals. However, I believe that the current system has become another subsidy for the landowners and opportunity for the wealthy to avoid their turn in line. Why not limit the landowner permits to only hunting the landowner's private proeprty? That way, the hunter is actually hunting the same property and animals that were the basis for issuing the landowner permit on the first place.

Someone tell me where I am wrong.

Hawkeye


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

Hawk.

Who should decide what no. Should be given?

Why should one just be allowed to hunt landowners ground when the deer leave his property?

So if John smith landowner has 1200 acres of hay and feeds over 400 deer and the vast majority of those deer come in after dark do you recommend that if I buy a tag I should be able to shoot at night. If those same 400 deer are on those fields from November through January should I also be able to hunt during that time period?

Hope you see the flaw in your theory of only hunting the landowners property. 

Which would you rather have? A landowner who willingly feeds 400 deer six months out of the year or 325 fewer does?

BTW true case situation.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

I tend to agree with Flinger. The reason the hunts occur unit-wide is because the animals may not be using the land during the hunts due to seasonal use. If they are going to give LO permits then they should be unit wide. 

I do not see it as a subsidy to a landowner, but more as a compensation. The State has Rules which allow for compensation to private landowners for wildlife use-- cash, permits, labor, materials, etc.... The compensations occurs for 2 reasons--

1- The animals use the land. They eat crops, can destroy fences, etc. I know deer have less impact, but it is an impact when herds are using the lands.

2- The landowner is unable to hunt their lands. This program was put in place years ago to compensate landowners who were then unable to buy tags and hunt their lands due to making the units "limited entry". Imagine hunting your land for generations and then some lobbyist and bureaucrats decide to encompass your land within an area which disallows you hunting. 

These tags do open private lands to hunters as all lands enrolled in an LO can be hunted by public tag holders (with the exception of Diamond Mtn). Most landowner associations give permits on a percentage basis. Most landowners do not get a permit every year. I know a guy on the Books who gets a tag every 4-5 years. Some on the Diamond Mtn get a tag every 8-10 years. Some of the larger landowners do get tags more often.

The LO LTD Unit tag program could be made to be family only, but I doubt it would get any traction in the Process.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Your number make my point. 

Take 2 lions off Vernon and save about 50 bucks per yr from an early demise. And you will also have 50 more doe per yr to breed more bucks to shoot. 

You would only have to take out 1 lion on Pauns or Books to mitigate vouchers.

Again I look to limit hunters as a last resort. After all we are the one's paying for the program. And I hardly want to stick it to the land owner because in many cases its private lands that are subsidizing public lands with game. And I still don't know of a rich guy who owns land and actually considers the revenues from the wildlife on it as anything more than supplemental at best.

If you want to get rich don't go into the hunting business.


----------

