# Monroe Spike Meeting 10/15



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

These are the options proposed by the area biologist and regional manager for the southern unit for the Monroe with the topic of spike hunting on the unit. They admitted Monroe has higher success rates and a large difference between it and other units on how many spikes are taken off the unit, and they would like to try and address the issue.

The two options that will be proposed to the board are:

*Elminate spike hunting on the Monroe unit
*Elminate the rifle spike hunt from the Monroe unit while leaving the archery and muzzy


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

How many "spike meetings" have you attended?---------SS


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Springville I think you mean " unicorn" meetings.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I went to this one SS that's all you need to know. I'm simply providing information, don't get into some conversation not about what the topic is. Pay attention to the topic not the author, enough stupid pointless conversations. Stick with the **** topic, some of you need to get over your mass obsession with me. It's flattering, but get over me.


----------



## COWAN (Oct 7, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I went to this one SS that's all you need to know. I'm simply providing information, don't get into some conversation not about what the topic is. Pay attention to the topic not the author, enough stupid pointless conversations. Stick with the **** topic, some of you need to get over your mass obsession with me. It's flattering, but get over me.


I think you need to chill out, go hunt, and just enjoy it while able to. Its spike hunting big deal, enjoy it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

It can be a big deal. It's a big enough deal there was a meeting about one unit in the state. Just thought I'd post the options that will be presented.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Meeting aka Gas Station Bitch Session.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

If this unit is as bad off as you say it is then the state should just switch it over to a general season open bull unit and increase the opportunity for people in that area.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I went to this one SS that's all you need to know. I'm simply providing information, don't get into some conversation not about what the topic is. Pay attention to the topic not the author, enough stupid pointless conversations. Stick with the **** topic, some of you need to get over your mass obsession with me. It's flattering, but get over me.


Go take your meds. What did you ever do with you kitty love website? I feel sorry for any DWR employee in that area.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Spike hunting needs to end on the Monrore AND several other units!

GOOD to see the ball rolling, Hopfulfy these changes will happen before 2014.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

are the meeting minutes available online or did the napkin get thrown away?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Smart azz- BS, Like this ,, exactly whats ruined this forum ^^^^^^^


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

meeting minutes are protocol.......I would like to see them. I think it is the guys that continually say that the sky is falling that ruin most things.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> are the meeting minutes available online or did the napkin get thrown away?


^^^^^no one has a sense of humor anymore. That was funny!!


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Smart azz- BS, Like this ,, exactly whats ruined this forum ^^^^^^^


Funny Goofy, I think people who always spin negativity and peddle their own little selfish agendas have brought the forum down. In my opinion, the " smart azz BS" offers a little comic relief and is more than welcome as far as I'm concerned. Besides, don't act like you're above a snide comment once in a while.

I really like your hunting posts. But in my opinion....your op-Ed sucks.-----SS


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

I also would like to read the minutes of this meeting. I searched the DWR website and there is no mention of any meetings.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

If I didn't know this poster's history I'd think you guys were a bunch of d-bags for the way you are responding to him, but given his inflammatory bs in other threads I guess he has it coming to him.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

spikes poop in clumps


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

colorcountrygunner said:


> If I didn't know this poster's history I'd think you guys were a bunch of d-bags for the way you are responding to him, but given his inflammatory bs in other threads I guess he has it coming to him.


You have no idea. This goes back years to the old DWR site. He's a peach.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

I'm guessing the minutes don't exist. Maybe it was a "secret" meeting with the DWR, one eye and Bigfoot. Bigfoot is concerned there are no deer on the Monroe to eat and has been chasing spikes.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I don't know any of you, and am not being sarcastic... But 1 Deer, didn't you post saying that you think Monroe archery should be spike only and in another thread that there needs to be less spike hunting on the Monroe Unit? This confuses me :shock:


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

I agree with goofy completely the smaller units to include the oquirh/standsbury unit were never big enough to hold a spike hunt with having negative results on the overall herd there is simply not enough bull calf recruitment to maintain herd strength and as for as a cow hunt no unit in the state should have a cow hunt if the herd is not up to its caring capacity I/E the population of the oquirh herd stands at around 6-7 hundred elk with a caring cap at 9 hundred so why the heck are we killing cow s and spikes


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> They admitted Monroe has higher success rates and a large difference between it and other units on how many spikes are taken off the unit


Hyperbole without data. How about adding in something of substance . . .

How many spikes were taken on Monroe? From the number of hunters afield, and the success rate, I extrapolate that 154 were taken last year (the most recent year for which data [not anecdotal observations] is available).







​How many spikes are there? I estimate about 303 produced each year. 1400 winter population estimate, 85% of which are cows, X 51 calves per 100 cows, with a conservative assumption of 50% males (I have seen data indicating more males than females born/survive). 























​So, you are saying that of the approx 303 spikes produced per year, it is unsustainable to harvest 154? Your contention is that the remaining 149 spikes produced, per year, are insufficient for necessary recruitment for mature bull harvest and other losses (winter, predator, illness, etc)? Is that what you are trying to say with your hyperbolistic anecdotal post?

Keep in mind that less than 40 or so mature bulls were legally harvested off Monroe in 2012. (0 general archery, 4 LE archery, 18 early LE any weapon, 5 late LE any weapon, 7 muzzle loader LE, and 3 premium).

Now, if if the complaint is that there is not enough mature bulls per 100 cows, as the trend has been downward, fine. But state that. This crapola about the herd being decimated by spike hunting is ridiculous. Over a hundred yearling bulls survive their first winter (the most likely one to cause premature death), but less than half that numbers is harvested each fall as mature bulls they need to replace. I don't have enough data to say if that is sufficient given other attrition, but how about you look up the most basic pubilcly-available info before you go off about the sky is falling, and figure out that spike hunting is probably not the issue.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Stop ruining one eyes fantasy with facts! It will get you nowhere.


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

mack1950 said:


> I agree with goofy completely the smaller units to include the oquirh/standsbury unit were never big enough to hold a spike hunt with having negative results on the overall herd there is simply not enough bull calf recruitment to maintain herd strength and as for as a cow hunt no unit in the state should have a cow hunt if the herd is not up to its caring capacity I/E the population of the oquirh herd stands at around 6-7 hundred elk with a caring cap at 9 hundred so why the heck are we killing cow s and spikes


You are working off of old numbers. See above. The 2012 winter estimate put the Oquirrh-Stansburry above objective slightly. Good thing the biologists are thinking ahead, and not waiting until _after_ the objective is passed in order to take action. It would be all too easy to overshoot the objective without slowing it down as it approaches objective.

All those in favor of eliminating spike hunts, I suppose you would prefer to have a herd with closer to 50/50 mix of bulls and cows? It would trend that direction without selective harvest of males. But at what cost? Sure, you could have your pick of more bulls, but fewer people would be able to hunt. With the decreased percentage of cows, annual recruitment would be lower.

For example - in the monroe unit, were there 50/50 bulls to cows so that hunters saw bulls every time they found elk, then annual production would not be approximately 606 elk. Annual production would be closer to 357 elk. You would have to harvest _fewer_ mature bulls each year than is currently sustained in order to maintain the status quo. Just because there are more bulls does NOT mean you can harvest more. In fact, just the opposite is true as there are fewer bulls produced every year by the reduced number of cows. Everyone looses in such a scenario.


----------



## COWAN (Oct 7, 2012)

1Deer I think its great that you are concerned with elk numbers in your area, I am as well in my area the Nebo unit. But.... isn't spike hunting selective harvest and way better than killing cows? Spike hunting seems just fine to me, the killing of cows is what is disturbing to me. I about died when I was asked if I had seen any cows this year durring the spike hunt. I told the hunters no (politely) and moved on. I had no idea cow tags were available, just wrong to me.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

I stand corrected on the numbers unfortunately the biggest part of the elk numbers increase goes to the Kennecott herd with for the biggest part is unhunted other than a few being taken on the cwmu unit there. for those who don't believe that excessive spike hunting has a negative effect on these unit than ask the tag holders who hunted these units this year the archery hunt on the oquirhs was from what I here less than 10 percent and I have been told that no bulls were taken on the archery limited hunt. the rifle and muzzyhunt s are still being calculated. its all up to individual believe and im sure not going to change any bodys believes. during the spike hunt this fall I have seen on most days 30 to upwards of 100 elk a day of course im glassing from a elevated position and looking into all the hidden basins I could see 12 spikes harvested 3 others found shot and not recoverd and we have had hunters in the field. though im sure there are others as of last night we could locate only 4 spikes and one was packin a back leg and separated from the herds. while im not a biologist its simple math to figure out there are not a lot of bulls to add to the total population of bulls figuring at the least 20 mature bulls that will be harvested again just ask the folks who drew a permit on this unit over the last couple of years what they think of the bulls that they have seen


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Goofy .. Them that get it get it, Them that don't never will..Archery Spike Bull only on Monroe.. Ya I can go for that. Should do the same with what ever Deer R left on that Mountain..Got an idea.. Lets wait until it's to late then we can all Bi--- together!


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

mack1950 said:


> I stand corrected on the numbers unfortunately the biggest part of the elk numbers increase goes to the Kennecott herd with for the biggest part is unhunted other than a few being taken on the cwmu unit there. for those who don't believe that excessive spike hunting has a negative effect on these unit than ask the tag holders who hunted these units this year the archery hunt on the oquirhs was from what I here less than 10 percent and I have been told that no bulls were taken on the archery limited hunt. the rifle and muzzyhunt s are still being calculated. its all up to individual believe and im sure not going to change any bodys believes. during the spike hunt this fall I have seen on most days 30 to upwards of 100 elk a day of course im glassing from a elevated position and looking into all the hidden basins I could see 12 spikes harvested 3 others found shot and not recoverd and we have had hunters in the field. though im sure there are others as of last night we could locate only 4 spikes and one was packin a back leg and separated from the herds. while im not a biologist its simple math to figure out there are not a lot of bulls to add to the total population of bulls figuring at the least 20 mature bulls that will be harvested again just ask the folks who drew a permit on this unit over the last couple of years what they think of the bulls that they have seen


 Asking tag holders who were unsuccessful should not be how we define how the herds are doing. To many factors play into why a hunter is unsuccessful, weather, time in the field, planning, effort, etc. 
Them saying they didn't see much isn't a good way either. I hunted the Manti, archery deer, and I ran into countless elk hunters on four wheelers who were complaining about a lack of elk and talking about how the DWR needs to fix the problem. I told them to get off the roads and deep into the canyons and you will find elk. If these hunters get surveyed there information to the DWR is just opinion based at best.
This is why the State hire biologist and does a count on herds. 
If there was a meeting I really want to see the minutes and data presented, I'm not calling 1 eye a liar or anything I just want to see what was presented.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Everyone you need to understand I started this thread as an information thread . This meeting was held locally at the Sevier county building. Call Vance if you don't believe me. The reason it was held was because at the last southern RAC meeting this topic was of some concern and they didn't think they would have enough time to implement changes by next season in the unit if they didn't get rolling now. Those two options will be brought to the board if you don't believe me now you'll believe me then. I can photo shot the meeting agenda, or simply post the meeting agenda and info if anyone would like.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

I will say one thing about elk management. I have not met one person that put in for antlerless elk that didn't draw. Which got me to searching the numbers last year the DWR had a quota of 15012 antlerless elk tags in the drawing, thats CMWU included. That seemed like a lot but then they also had those emergency tag sales for areas effected by fire and I'm not sure what the numbers on that were. 
This year 2013 they had a quota of 20251! Now that's a lot of cow tags.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

This thread just looks like anything that One eye puts up is trashed by a few others. 

I do like the charts on the amount of elk on each unit... I was told the other day that the DWR did not know how to count... This now confirms it for me!!!!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

mikevanwilder said:


> I will say one thing about elk management. I have not met one person that put in for antlerless elk that didn't draw. Which got me to searching the numbers last year the DWR had a quota of 15012 antlerless elk tags in the drawing, thats CMWU included. That seemed like a lot but then they also had those emergency tag sales for areas effected by fire and I'm not sure what the numbers on that were.
> This year 2013 they had a quota of 20251! Now that's a lot of cow tags.


I have 3 cow bonus points. No draw, figure that one.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Yes TAK, people on this forum seem to like highjack threads they don't agree with, and get it off topic so they don't have to talk about the topic, and instead avoid it because they have little ground to stand on.

On the numbers of the packet Vance handed out last night, the numbers showed that 2011 harvest of spikes on Monroe was at 165. By there cow, calf, and bull calf estimates they estimated 170 spike bulls for that years season on the unit. That would have left 5 remaining spikes. Obviously that figure is not correct, and Vance himself said that figure is not correct, and the best they can do is come up with some numbers based on what they've seen THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE CORRECT. Vance and the regional manager also noted that success rate statistics should be looked at when the plan is revised in 2015 because they are unsure of how accurate success statistics are, and mandatory reporting may be an option. Another number that they said was skewed was the count of elk on the Monroe is actually lower than the estimate you are seeing. It bothers me when the DWR, can sit in a meeting and say we realize your concern but this is just a small group of 30 people out of 1,000 hunters, well where do they get there success rate data? From a small amount of the hunters that hunted. 

There was someone in the room who said maybe as hunters we want a 1:1 ratio of cows to bulls, personally I thought this was a stupid stand on things. I am all for bulls, but if the elk population is growing and can reach its objective of 1,800 on the unit, more bulls will be seen. A 1:1 figure like the gentleman suggested is a really dumb idea IMO. It would devastate the elk herd on Monroe if you have the same amount of bulls as cows and devastate the quality with tons of broken antlers because of all the competition. I think 30-40:100 cows is plenty and I fill spike hunting has its management strategies that work very well. I just don't feel like you can continue to pick on a unit like Monroe that is now at 25-30:100 ratio, and leave units like the San Juan with lower spike kills at a ratio of 70-80:100. You have to target spike hunting to specific units that need it at times, and lessen the effects of it on units that don't. There are units across the state with 25-30 bulls per 100 cows, and then there are units with 70-80 bulls per 100 cows. You should have heavier spike harvest on the 70-80 bull units than on the 25-30 bull units in order for better management. I'm not against spike hunting as I've said many times, but there are places that need it more and less than others.

This year the DWR is expecting about 165-170 spike harvest off the Monroe again as a side note, and about 130 cow harvest as a side note.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

One eye assumes that with archery and rifle the tag holders are 100% successful. We have proven this to be wrong. He screams slaughter every year. One eye and few others will never get it.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

Yeah lets have limited entry spike hunts that roam from unit to unit based on the whim of 30 people. 

Management at it's best.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

A bow nut where does the DWR get there success rates? From a small percentage of hunter surveys right? So what makes that number any more accurate? And your saying certain units don't need more spike killed than other units? With the bull to cow ratios so high on certain units.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I don't assume 100% what I assume is that success is higher than 14%. By the DWRs numbers on the projected amount of spikes expected on the Monroe to how many are killed that would be a 97% kill rate on the unit with the spikes. That figure is obviously bogus, but why accept their success rate numbers if other numbers they have are so far off?


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I don't assume 100% what I assume is that success is higher than 14%. By the DWRs numbers on the projected amount of spikes expected on the Monroe to how many are killed that would be a 97% kill rate on the unit with the spikes. That figure is obviously bogus, but why accept their success rate numbers if other numbers they have are so far off?


Because success rates tend to be on the higher side. Not lower. They can't count every single animal on every unit. To expect that is living in your fantasy land.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Obviously healthy could be as little as 10-15 bulls per 100 cows. But you have to tend to the 20 year wait to draw a tag somewhat. I think I and everyone could be happy with 35:100. The problem is you have places like San Juan and it's just an example that are at an unhealthy nearly 80:100 with lower harvest, and Monroe at around 25:100 with a lot higher harvest. Spike hunting works but it needs to be more precise and effective for units. I know that's hard to accomplish but I think it would make things better and more evenly spread. 

As for the numbers there's a pretty significant difference between 97% and 20% harvest of spikes on a unit. That's not just a little error, it's significant enough that if there that far off it could create problems .


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> A bow nut where does the DWR get there success rates? From a small percentage of hunter surveys right? So what makes that number any more accurate? And your saying certain units don't need more spike killed than other units? With the bull to cow ratios so high on certain units.


I have had a survey for every tag that I have had for the past three years. Even tags that I purchased over the counter.

That leads me to believe that the DWR has a fairly broad knowledge of what animals are being harvested on each unit. Animal counts will always be a best guess scenario base on the way that they have been doing the counts for decades. When you come up with a more accurate way of counting I'm sure that we would all be ears.

Oh wait maybe not.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

> I will say one thing about elk management. I have not met one person that put in for antlerless elk that didn't draw. Which got me to searching the numbers last year the DWR had a quota of 15012 antlerless elk tags in the drawing, thats CMWU included. That seemed like a lot but then they also had those emergency tag sales for areas effected by fire and I'm not sure what the numbers on that were.
> This year 2013 they had a quota of 20251! Now that's a lot of cow tags


For your info, since I got called for one of these tags, there were two hunts with 25 tags each according to the dwr when I picked mine up in price. This was for the gordon creek/ and mohrland stump flat.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

abownut, They were also discussing if spike tags should be mandatory harvest surveying, is that good enough to tell you they are also unsure of the accuracy of their numbers? He admitted they are not sure that is an accurate figure. I have only filled out harvest surveying for 2 out of the last 8 big game tags I have gotten. Both were elk, one LE one Anterless, the others were archery elk, and deer tags. I haven't had a deer survey in years and years, but I'm sure those numbers are correct too.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

As for counts...... they base tag numbers off of counts they are getting, if their counts are all 70% off like they were on that estimate, then that could create pretty big problems for the future. I understand the division has the state, law, hunters, trophy hunters, and farmers/landowners to deal with. I believe they do a pretty good job of providing good opportunity for both hunters and trophy hunters I can't knock them on that. They please the state because for deer and elk they are under objectives on almost every unit, and the only people I think they please to well is farmers who bitch too much.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Yep. It's all a conspiracy. Black helicopters and trying to screw 1 eye. Anyone ever tell you you're paranoid?


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Muleskinner,
Ask JK Rowling how writing ideas on a napkin worked out for her? 

Maybe ask that crazy crew down there how their gas station and napkin meetings turned out concerning 30 seperate deer units.

Some groups get results, some groups cry on the internet. Hopefully this group can get some results!

Got to love the passion applied and not just posted on the web! Good luck gents!!!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

I see that you have a great sense of humor as well Muley. Unless your reference to JK Rowling was comparing the meeting to a fantasy novel. I am fully aware that many great ideas are sketched on a napkin as a result of brainstorming but planned government backed meetings are typically a bit more formal.

I would love to read the meeting minutes, agenda and see the list of attendees. I would also like to see the supporting data (notice I said supporting) rather than just hear about counts and surveys that are claimed to be off by 70% and how it is all a conspiracy created by people that don't know any better.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Ill photoshoot the meeting agenda packet later.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Some do need to accept though that they admit there numbers could be very wrong, but of course most of you would never think to give that side of the story some thought. You find comfort in accepting what your told always. It isn't always the best way to be.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Mcfly you either make me laugh uncontrolably,or give me heartburn:grin: You and Goofy should get paid for all the entertainment you put on here.:mrgreen:


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

johnnycake said:


> For your info, since I got called for one of these tags, there were two hunts with 25 tags each according to the dwr when I picked mine up in price. This was for the gordon creek/ and mohrland stump flat.


Before they called the people who put in they issued 75 extra for the Gordon creek area and 100 more for the morhland stump flat area, that went with the same hunt dates as the original hunt, nov to jan. This was not the DWR calling unsuccessful hunters, it was a first come first served kind of thing. Then after that hunt was over I believe for like 3 weeks they called those who put in and didn't draw to see if they wanted to hunt. I believe that is what you had. 
What I can't understand is why they didn't just go straight to calling for the first part.
I'm not sure what they told those that they called, but have been told it was depredation control permits.
It looks like this year they just added a second hunt altogether that starts late Jan or early feb.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Some do need to accept though that they admit there numbers could be very wrong, but of course most of you would never think to give that side of the story some thought. You find comfort in accepting what your told always. It isn't always the best way to be.


I am a numbers guy and base what I believe on what informs me the best. Word of mouth or second hand news via a biologist that may or may not exist does not go very far with me at all. Especially after hearing from you that you believe that a degree is nothing more than a piece of paper. First it discredits the biologist that you then turn into the all knowing source of information. Hard to determine what to believe because of your methodology.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

If your basing your knowledge on flawed information that is in many cases not correct, your view and knowledge are only as correct as the information your provided which you yourself did not gather, yet you accept them as true and without flaw . If you watch areas yourself over a decade of time and see significant decreases in different form in all areas you go, well that's information you yourself can see and compile. Funny how you disputed lonetrees view on selenium mrmule that was also a study done by someone with a peace of paper.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

I tend to believe the DWR's numbers even if they are flawed. They are more accurate than the ones you make up. 

Question, do you need to stick your head up a cows ass to see where a T bone steak comes from? I think you do based on your non belief of anyone in the DWR.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Dunkem said:


> Mcfly you either make me laugh uncontrolably,or give me heartburn:grin: You and Goofy should get paid for all the entertainment you put on here.:mrgreen:


You're sweet. Thanks. Piece out


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

martymcfly73 said:


> You're sweet. Thanks. Piece out


eace:


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Dunk, 
You're symbol means "peace" not piece....I think


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Muley73 said:


> Dunk,
> You're symbol means "peace" not piece.


Im a peaceful kind of guy:smile:


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> If your basing your knowledge on flawed information that is in many cases not correct, your view and knowledge are only as correct as the information your provided which you yourself did not gather, yet you accept them as true and without flaw . If you watch areas yourself over a decade of time and see significant decreases in different form in all areas you go, well that's information you yourself can see and compile. Funny how you disputed lonetrees view on selenium mrmule that was also a study done by someone with a peace of paper.


I never disputed his view on selenium once One Eye. Show me ANY post that I did. I have just not decided that it is the primary cause or the primary answer to the problem.

Furthermore, you have no idea to this day what I believe or disbelieve even in regards to this thread, other than I doubt the validity of said meeting. I will tell you that I tend to believe performed research that has been done by somebody that is paid to perform a job versus somebody that may have more ulterior motives or performs his head counts of spikes taken by hearsay or even seeing a mere 16 spikes taken from x amount of square miles . I am tired of hearing just one faction of a group, if not just one or two people, out of hundreds, if not thousands strong claiming that the research is unfounded or performed incorrectly, when in fact it is the primarily the only true research that is being performed. When you get to the point that you have actual biological studies and research to go off of that you can back with printed evidence that can be substantiated.........well then I may have your back. Until then, you sir, can believe what you want to believe and I will do the same. Capiche?


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Dunk,
> You're symbol means "peace" not piece....I think


I was referring to one eyes "peace" of paper. I wish we all had world "piece"


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Muleskinner, as I said before if you do not believe this meeting took place call Vance Mumford the DWR biologist of the area, and ask him. Then as him what public opinion of people who actually hunt, watch, and travel on the unit every day is. Ask him if he believes spike harvest is too high on the Monroe unit compared to other units. Ask him if he thinks the 14% success rate could be a flawed statistic. Ask him if he thinks the population count could be flawed. He will answer yes with an explanation to all these questions. 


I am not discrediting Vance or anyone else in the division that they are not doing their job. I am not saying that they are meaning to get the numbers wrong. I don't know for sure the numbers are wrong. From personal experience, and by being on and all over the unit at least 4-5 times a week every year for the last decade, which I gurantee you is 
more than a biologist spends on one given unit during a year, I have seen large decreases in the amount and quality of the bulls on this unit. Am I saying stop spike hunting because of it, no, but reduced harvest on this specific unit, which is highest for spike harvest in the state, must be implemeneted. I'm not saying the numbers they have come up with are not real numbers that they believe to be true, but with the trend I've personally experienced on the unit from year to year, compared to the numbers they release, do not match up, that is why I believe there are some large flaws in these numbers. Numbers are only numbers, whether released by the DWR or not, they represent what is thought not what for sure is.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> Smart azz- BS, Like this ,, exactly whats ruined this forum ^^^^^^^


So start your own site for upscale selective hunters and those with Ph'd in wildlife management.

The huddled masses will be fine without the elitist whining and negative Utah sucks rant.

I love my spike hunts and chance to "perhaps" draw 2-3 LE elk tags and "perhaps" 2 OIL tags in Utah. The day that acceptance does not work; travel or moving are options.


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

I like the idea of 1-I moving. I am sure Idaho will take him. Can we start a list of guys that would be willing to help him move?


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Hey, easy there......I like hunting in Idaho.


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

No offense to Idaho, Skinner. I hunt up there with my brother but anywhere but Utah would be better. Maybe it would silence 1-nut.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

None taken. I don't take offense to him either fact be known. Just don't agree with all of it.........or even most of it...............or even half of it. Good thing is though is that I don't have too.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Anybody want to get together for a spike meeting tomorrow morning at the local diner? I'll even print an agenda to make it official so we can post about it tomorrow night. :grin:

On a serious note, I don't know the first thing about the monroe, so if there is a biological reason for tag cuts/changes in spike hunting, I don't oppose it. However, if it is a bunch of good ol' boys manufacturing a crisis that really isn't one, then I don't agree that a dang thing should be done differently just to appease someone's opinions fueled by hearsay and only viewing the unit with one eye(  ) open.


----------



## pheaz (Feb 11, 2011)

Post the agenda or it didn't happen.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

pheaz said:


> Post the agenda or it didn't happen.


That's what I've been waiting for.


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

Did you guys discuss the eagle and hawk problem?


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

1-nut sure is quiet tonight. Maybe he is fighting off eagles and hawkers in the Monroe unit.


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

I'll make sure the feather and fur area manager is aware of this conversation. Maybe she'll chime in which would be awesome. Generally she leaves the gas station bullcrap sessions to others but I'd like to know the science and data that support those two "proposals". And why wasn't notice of this "spike meeting" posted? Amy? What up with that?!?!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Here's your **** agenda. It's you idiots who can't accept changes over time that need to open your eyes, but wait change, we can't do that that might slightly reduce hunting opportunities and hurt all your little feelings. You sit here in the fairy land that you believe whatever you hear and go along with whatever is happening. Wake up look around a little and form your own thoughts and opinions. None of you have those, you simply have your opinions and thoughts because of what others have told you and you accept anything your told. Anyway here it is. Now everybody reply to my post since your all so obsessed with trying to disprove things you know nothing about other than what you've been told. Glad I'm so popular I'll talk to you all tomorrow.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

Badger said:


> 1-nut sure is quiet tonight. Maybe he is fighting off eagles and hawkers in the Monroe unit.


Probably took him all night to type that "so called official document" to further along his agenda of becoming forum 1god-I.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

klbzdad said:


> I'll make sure the feather and fur area manager is aware of this conversation. Maybe she'll chime in which would be awesome. Generally she leaves the gas station bullcrap sessions to others but I'd like to know the science and data that support those two "proposals". And why wasn't notice of this "spike meeting" posted? Amy? What up with that?!?!


And who called this meeting? And who was invited? And are we now going to hold meetings with locals only on every deer, elk, antelope, bighorn sheep, etc. unit? I thought we were told in the Option #2 debate that that wouldn't happen. Sounds like each unit is now going to be managed according to the local consensis and we'll end up with 30 or 38 RAC's (or UAC's). Many on this forum would just love that, but I sure hope not 'cause I actually live in the Beaver unit which I've hunted only once about 15 years ago (elk). Maybe I'll have to buy 4 more houses in Cedar City to qualify for each of the "local" units I do (did) hunt.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Look what I found........you don't stand for anything very long.

#1DEER 1-I 
Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sevier County
Posts: 1,764








*Re: REDUCE THE AGE OBJECTIVE ON TWO THIRDS OF THE LE ELK UNITS T* 
Ummmmmm.... no. 2.5 years? No way that will ever be the age objective for most of Utah's elk herds. It's nice having the best elk herd in the nation, and more boone&crocket bulls than any other state. The new elk plan has already been passed and age objectives went up not down, it's obvious the state isn't planning on heading in the opposite direction with the elk herds. I'm happy with the states management on elk, and if you want fresh meat you can always get a spike tag, so there is some opportunity to kill elk in Utah, with the biggest bulls anywhere. So I would say age objective is not going to be reduced nor should it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Muleskinner, I am not saying spike hunting does not have its place. Spike hunting is perfectly fine with me, it's just so obvious that certain units get much more pressure and much more success, and much more spike kill than other units. That creates an unbalanced management plan that is not good for ANY units. Without specific unit to unit management certain units get hit hard and fall to not enough bulls on the unit, and others barley get hit at all and get at an unhealthy high level of bulls in the herd. You can see it when some units have 25:100 ratio and some have 80:100 ratio. That's bad management for both of those units, to fix it you need a certain amount of people hunting each of those units, not unlimited amount of free for all go where ever you want kind of hunt. Everyone who disagrees with me is all about opportunity, statewide, and regional management. In this day and age with the accuracy of weapons, the amount of roads, the types of transportation we use, and all the other advancements hunting has seen, statewide and regional management is not healthy for most units in the state, things need to be broken down in order to manage specific units for what they specifically need. We don't open cow hunts on the Manti unit if the Fishlake unit is over objective do we? So why do we let bull numbers and bull:cow ratios fall out of wack on every unit some being to high, some being to low? 

None of you disagreeing with me can disagree with the fact that many units around the state have too low or too high of bull:cow ratios, and a way to fix that would be to better pinpoint the management of spike hunting on each unit in the state, rather than the free-for-all we have now. Some of you can't grasp the concept you don't loose opportunity, choose where your going to hunt and hunt there, you don't need to have the option to run on some other unit and kill something. This is why I love option 2 for deer, it should help some units increase buck numbers over time, people can just run up on an easy unit and kill something now, they have to stick within their boundaries.

As for anyone who doesn't want to believe the agenda. Call Vance Mumford or Southern Region manager and ask if the meeting took place, I could care less if you believe me because those 2 options will be put in front of the board for approval for next hunting season. 

And yes local communities and people who actually live in the region of the units I believe should have more say than people who like to run down and overrun them. Where on the units daily, all the time, we should have more say than someone from Orem, Salt Lake, or Ogden who know nothing about the units and have been on them once or twice a year. We should be able to live with what's in our backyard, and not with what people who have nothing to do with the area do to it, and the idiotic choices they make based on a fairy tale land where you hunt everything all the time and there's still going to be something left. This applies to you to, I should have less say in what happens to units that are not in my region, I don't know about them, don't know there problems, and don't know what you've seen. So you leave your opinion out of places you have nothing to do with and I will too.


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

I personally cannot take you serious anymore 1-I after that last post. That wildlife in the hills behind your home belong to EVERYONE in this state! Did you forget the public trust doctrine? Do we need to turn this thread into a NAMWC thread to remind you? Wow....


----------



## Highbrass (Dec 31, 2012)

The elk heard on Monroe is a state resource for the state's citizens. They belong just as much to the people clear up in Logan as they do the people who actually live in the unit. Furthermore, if the slaughter is anything like you claim, DWR biologists will take the appropriate measures for what they feel is best for the heard, even if that doesn't align with your opinion on what should happen.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Yea that was about the dumbest thing I have ever read in my life. He is in my book the forum jester now. For entertainment purposes only.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

I think 1 eye just called all you guys fairies?!


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Yea that was about the dumbest thing I have ever read in my life. He is in my book the forum jester now. For entertainment purposes only.


Welcome to the club. Membership is growing daily.

Hey 1 eye, is there anymore room on the mothership? Where do they stick that probe?? In a Chevy tailpipe maybe?


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

Had a short conversation with the area feather and fur director for the Monroe. Yes, there was a meeting to discuss the local's displeasure with seeing fewer of the older age class bulls and the high success rate of the spike hunt. Yes, there will be a couple of recommendations presented during the WB work meeting. Yes, its important for all sportsmen, statewide, to voice their concerns, approval, or disapproval of those proposed plans at their perspective RAC. No, I have not changed my mind concerning 1-I the jester and not taking him serious anymore.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> And yes local communities and people who actually live in the region of the units I believe should have more say than people who like to run down and overrun them.


Just for that dumbass statement everybody should take their spike tags and OVERRUN you stupid unit and kill every last elk down there.

So tell us how you really feel Stupid!


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Lol! Yeah those gas station napkin meets never go any where. Same guys fighting the same guys on the inter web and then those moving forward and getting things done. Can't wait to see the Opt 2 changes next year. 

Small victories gents, small victories. 

As a side note, just because you disagree with One Eye doesn't make him wrong or a jester. To think it does just makes you foolish. The locals do have a better pulse of a unit as a general rule. That is just common sense. But then again I was one of the crazy ones that believed Opt 2 would actually pass.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Okay let me explain something to all of you. You don't understand the situation because your not a part of it. Yes you have a right to those animals as much as me you say. But you don't have the right to devastate herds in the state you know nothing about and because you don't care about. A lot of you are taking the side that you don't care what's left as long as you get to go out and have the chance to shoot something. You can ask anyone around the unit or surrounding units what they think of the division and the "figures" they calculate. Anyone you ask who isn't in bed with the division sticking their nose up the divisions tailpipe (like many of you are) will tell you their is such a significant downfall of quantity and quality its amazing the division continues to stand on the ground that things are improving.

You are set aside from the ground of the situation, you really know nothing more than what your told. You will have this fight with anyone who spends time on the Monroe, Beaver, Fishlake, Pahvant, Dutton, or other units. They are over hunted overran and are now feeling the effects of hunts that last from August straight through January, that put pressure in every cubby of every corner of the units. You have no real knowledge or experience on what I am talking about, so keep your comments, opinions, and numbers you pull off the internet to yourselves. 

It's odd to me how many of you defend the divisions numbers but when their numbers show that on this unit 162 spikes were killed last year and they projected 167 spikes total on the unit, leaving only 5 spikes after hunting season, well you go ahead and throw that out and sit here and still act like they are so accurate. There not there's a number that proves their counts are far off. All but 5 spikes were killed? This is an inaccurate, ridiculous number. Seeing is believing, not looking at numbers like this and being fooled into believing them as accurate figures. But keep going along with guesstimates and counting, because your the minority. You speak your opinion loud here on the forum but most hunters in Utah see what is happening, they won't be fooled by statistics they'll believe what they actually see.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

a_bow_nut said:


> Just for that dumbass statement everybody should take their spike tags and OVERRUN you stupid unit and kill every last elk down there.
> 
> So tell us how you really feel Stupid!


I don't feel stupid at all. I know about the places I hunt, YOU DON'T so don't give me the bull**** non-sense that you can act like you do.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Lol! Yeah those gas station napkin meets never go any where. Same guys fighting the same guys on the inter web and then those moving forward and getting things done. Can't wait to see the Opt 2 changes next year.
> 
> Small victories gents, small victories.
> 
> As a side note, just because you disagree with One Eye doesn't make him wrong or a jester. To think it does just makes you foolish. The locals do have a better pulse of a unit as a general rule. That is just common sense. But then again I was one of the crazy ones that believed Opt 2 would actually pass.


Option 2 was a great change to our deer system. It was about time Utah changed its deer management to parallel other states, and the effects are already beginning to help.

And as for the local concern on a unit? Why the **** do you think they had the meeting all you smart people? Because the regional manager, and your smart biologist wanted local public opinion on the item, not from people who are separated from the subject and it is not a concern to them. That might be why you didn't hear about it and weren't invited to come huh? I'm sorry if that hurt all of your feelings you weren't invited, there, there.They had the **** meeting for a reason, and that napkin meeting will hold more water than you internet bitching and crying that you might have to only hunt and choose one unit once the elk plans up. Keep crying but the few of you crying will be crying even harder after the plan runs out and you see unit by unit hunting on every hunt/


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

So you honestly believe that after the hunts there are 5 spikes left on the entire unit? Ahahahahahah!! 

You really need to get some air. Pulling your head out if you arse will do wonders. I'm going to make a special trip to hunt Monroe next year with everyone I can round up. I can't wait.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

But hey guys look what all your bitching got you last time...., option 2


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Marty read into the sarcasm, no I don't believe that, but by the divisions numbers that is what was projected BY THERE NUMBERS was left after last hunting season. Your the one who should stand by and believe that figure after all their numbers couldn't be far off. Again let me restate that was by the UDWR numbers, 5 spikes were left.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

1-eye,
I'm glad that you are so passionate about this cause. I hereby nominate you to be president over the Monroe Unit Spike Elk Protection Society. I also second your nomination for Official UWN Forum Jester. I think you will serve both roles nicely. 

Hey McFly, Can I come on next years spike hunt on the Monroe with you guys? I have never wanted to kill a spike before.......but all this talk has got me fired up to slay one.------SS


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Option 2 was a great change to our deer system.





#1DEER 1-I said:


> But hey guys look what all your bitching got you last time...., option 2


You should run for president.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

+1 for the spike for me also. Plus I hope that they have another cow hunt too.


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

I think it's so funny how 1nut and the other local yocals get all wound up over the Monroe unit. A unit that they will MAYBE get to hunt big bulls once in their life. 

1Nut, when was the last time you had a bull tag for Monroe?
How many bull elk bonus points do you have?

I understand why Muley73 wants 400 inch bulls behind every tree, the more big bulls there are the more $$$$$ SFW can wh-ore out permits for.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Any bets on whether that group gets anything done?

You all bet against them on Opt 2? What unit are you all hunting deer in this year? First you don't believe there was a meeting then you belittle a group because they are concerned about the health of the unit? In a world of jesters you all pick One Eye. That is comical! Overhunting a unit to prove an Internet point I guess you guys will have a joyful camp. No thanks I'll steer clear and share my fire with a diffenrence maker. Maybe after you could organize a garbage pick up and check it off as the quarterly UWC scout project.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

What I'm saying is many of you are very hypocritical. One minute you believe the DWR's numbers,but then I bring up a number that you don't agree with either, and instead of saying, yeah their way off, you discredit it. The number I gave you is an accurate "educated guess" the division took and failed miserably on. Yet you won't address that issue. Whose to say their other numbers are anymore correct then the guesses they make when their wrong? I forgot you won't pay any attention to the figure you can prove 100% for yourself are wrong, but you'll give great credit to figures they put on the internet that have no proof that their right. Were you their when they did the counts? Is their video of the counts? Is there anything at all proof other than whats on a PDF format that tells you those figures are true? No, okay then keep you inaccurate opinions to yourself, they hold no ground if you have no proof. 

You can sit here and poke fun at me all you want, but I'm actually concerned on the subject. You guys take it as a game where you sneak around questions, deny proof that their are flaws, and simply try to make it a joke so you don't look wrong in the situation. You resort to name calling and changing the subjects in order to avoid and discredit information posted. You've posted nothing that is proof of anything. You know nothing about the situation. You just throw jokes around in order to avoid the subject because you have no other information to bring to the table. Your all computer chair biologists who don't go get the information and look for yourselves. You post figures you had nothing to do with gathering. You throw out numbers you believe are true, but have no proof they are. You comment on situations you have no knowledge of. And you attempt to show experience when you've never done any hands on work or knowledge. You act as if you've put in all the work and have all the knowledge of a subject that I have watched over a decade when you haven't. 

Keep Your opinions that are formed by others that you simply take as accurate, and I'll have the opinions I've gained over a decade of watching many places I love to hunt get flushed down the drain. This goes outside the Monroe unit, most areas aren't what they were even 6 years ago, and with the trend, 6 more years will just be further down the drain, until we get to the brink, and something will be done. I don't want to fall to the brink of ruining things before we fix them. Sorry I'm just kind of funny that way.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

a_bow_nut said:


> +1 for the spike for me also. Plus I hope that they have another cow hunt too.


Of course you do, because you don't care about management you just care about opportunity and killing. Sorry to burst your bubble but the cow hunt was a 1 year test. This is what I mean by when it's not in your own backyard you care less .


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Are you crying 1 eye?

SS and a bow nut are more than welcome to come on the Monroe Spike Slaughter of 2014. I second the nomination of 1 eye. Miley 73 can be his #2. As long as he brings his Don Peay monogrammed knee pads and some mouthwash. Sounds like you'll need both.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

See Marty, you have no good information to add just bull****. Shows how much weight your opinion should hold on the issue. You won't accept there could be a problem so there's no way you'll accept a solution.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

:focus:

Serious question here!!

For those of you who know more about herds and the affects, I have a question.

One of the proposed "solutions" was to end the spike hunt or end it to rifles. Now, to me if 165 spikes were taken then that means "hey, there are a ton of spikes down there!"

If you were to eliminate the hunt, what would be the consequences of that many extra bulls running around in an area? Obvious things are winter kill, overgrazing, etc... But I am just curious if the area is arguably one of the richest in the state for spikes, wouldn't an overpopulation be something that could occur fairly easily? In a matter of one closed year?


The only thing I could see them doing to monitor a single area is make it like the deer hunt, and have individual units and issue a tag amount. Can't say I don't hate that my 3 pieces of northern land are all different units now, but I understand the need for it with deer and crowding. But with elk is the same need there?

Also, this lets you know when they issue tags for an area they often not only overestimate the animals, but underestimate. Every spike in Monroe was killed according to last years count.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Of course you do, because you don't care about management you just care about opportunity and killing. Sorry to burst your bubble but the cow hunt was a 1 year test. This is what I mean by when it's not in your own backyard you care less .


And that is where you are wrong. I have been rallying to get as many elk taken off of the Wasatch unit also.

All of the cow hunts and the addition of the late bull hunt has me as happy as a pig in sh1t.

This year during the archery hunt is the first year that I actually saw more deer than elk and it was wonderful.

Don't try to lump the rest of us in with what you think is best for all of us.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

One eye I have plenty to add. You're full of BS. I dispute everything you say and ALL of your numbers. Seriously though, I am going to organize a spike hunt to the 435 next year. I might even bring some wolves.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Yeah that's me. Internet banter cracks me up. Keep up the good work Deer 1. Fun to check in on occasion. I'm off to hunt some more. Take care all!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Being accused of being a computer chair biologists by 1-I is about as good as gets.

I for one have never and will never dispute that there are errors within the system, in fact I am 100% convinced that there are and always will be errors within such a complex subject. I just think it is hilarious that one minute the spike hunt is BS and it needs to be abolished, the next minute it is okay but needs to be tweaked, then 1-I has nothing against it and then it needs a major overhaul or abolished again. *If you are going to make such a bold claims own them. *

I especially think it is entertaining to hear that "everybody else" doesn't have any knowledge that is worth a hoot and all we want to do is to slaughter everything and destroy HIS land and resources. That sums up everything for me.


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

I know where there are more than enough spikes and cows on the Panguitch unit for anyone willing to get into the thick and put their bugle calls away. I fill my general archery elk tag every year on Panguitch. There are plenty of spikes killed on this unit as well, but between this unit and the Boulder, we clearly don't have a shortage of those 400+ bulls you say are so rare in the state. This year has been a banner year for big bulls in Utah and I can't wait to see the results of the current survey. Clearly cross unit management does work so local input might be valuable, but its NOT the primary key to management. Plenty of road hunters get pissed because their expectations of a super stupid 390" bull standing broadside 20 yards off the road aren't met. I'll peek at some notes from that meeting and we'll all get to hear and read about the proposals to the WB and RACs. Lets wait to see what the science is on these before someone pokes an eye out.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> Any bets on whether that group gets anything done?
> 
> You all bet against them on Opt 2? What unit are you all hunting deer in this year? First you don't believe there was a meeting then you belittle a group because they are concerned about the health of the unit? In a world of jesters you all pick One Eye. That is comical! Overhunting a unit to prove an Internet point I guess you guys will have a joyful camp. No thanks I'll steer clear and share my fire with a diffenrence maker. Maybe after you could organize a garbage pick up and check it off as the quarterly UWC scout project.


So...what you're saying is that 50 or so of us hunting spikes won't make a difference? We will make a huge difference, and you and one eye can enjoy your fire together talking about the good old days when there used to be hundreds of spikes running around. Maybe you could invite goofey elk for some pseudo-biology lessons?-------SS


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

Come on 1Nut answer my questions.

How many bull elk bonus points do you have?
Have you ever in your life had a Monroe bull elk tag?

Here's a homework assignment for you, it might help you out later in life. 
Their, there, and they're. Learn the meanings and learn how to use them properly.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

blackdog said:


> Come on 1Nut answer my questions.
> 
> How many bull elk bonus points do you have?
> Have you ever in your life had a Monroe bull elk tag?
> ...


I have a 5 year waiting period at this very moment I drew this year, and I did not apply for or draw the Monroe unit. With what the last decade has done to it, it is not worth the 20 years of points or 12 for archery to waste o the shadow of a unit that it is from what it used to be. I chose not to use my points on the Monroe unit. No I have not had a Monroe bull tag in my life, and I may not for a long time, but it either needs to be worth the wait, or the wait needs to be less, because waiting 20 years for a once or twice in a lifetime tag, is not worth dealing with spike hunters and the low quality of bulls we are seeing on many units now. Using "there" properly is not my main concern.



> I know where there are more than enough spikes and cows on the Panguitch unit for anyone willing to get into the thick and put their bugle calls away. I fill my general archery elk tag every year on Panguitch. There are plenty of spikes killed on this unit as well, but between this unit and the Boulder, we clearly don't have a shortage of those 400+ bulls you say are so rare in the state. This year has been a banner year for big bulls in Utah and I can't wait to see the results of the current survey. Clearly cross unit management does work so local input might be valuable, but its NOT the primary key to management. Plenty of road hunters get pissed because their expectations of a super stupid 390" bull standing broadside 20 yards off the road aren't met. I'll peek at some notes from that meeting and we'll all get to hear and read about the proposals to the WB and RACs. Lets wait to see what the science is on these before someone pokes an eye out.


Well klbzdad, science left room for all those bulls to exist, scientifically all those spikes have meaning. Doesn't nature know what it's doing? We are the ones who adjust nature to meet our own needs and whether you like it or not killing spikes is an adjustment to. Science and nature didn't intend for all those spikes to be killed, man did, it had nothing to do with science. The science you speak of is science created in order to better fit our needs as a society by growing herds, putting animals where they weren't before and so on.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

SS,
Never said 50 additional hunters wouldn't make a difference. However I highly doubt you could organize 50 hunters to all go down and hunt spikes together on the Monroe. Hell you can't seem to organize more then 3 or 4 to show up at a WB meeting? And again what exactly do you plan on proving if you did? That you're all big enough jackasses to try and personally harm a unit because you disagree with someone on the Internet forum. I mean seriously that is clown behavior. Good luck, again I'll put my money on the guys making a difference and getting results.

The truth is there are more behind the scenes meetings and groups giving input and caring about their units than most are aware of. If you dont know about them its probably because you don't either care enough are are irrelivent. That hurts some feelings I'm sure but its how the world works. If Deer 1 would not have come on here and posted anything how many of you guys would have known about the meeting? How many of you even had any idea about the changes on the Monroe or the status of the herd? A group of concerned sportsmen that spend time of the Monroe asked for a meeting with the DWR to discuss their concerns. That is how it should be.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> One eye I have plenty to add. You're full of BS. I dispute everything you say and ALL of your numbers. Seriously though, I am going to organize a spike hunt to the 435 next year. I might even bring some wolves.


You have nothing to add but personal attacks and jokes on me, simply because I disagree with where you stand. I'm not a mindless zombie who believes and goes along with everything he's told. Open your f***ing eyes and go out and watch area after area go down hill and then tell me about accurate figures. See again you give no information, no comments, nothing, but stupid BS that is pointed towards me not the subject or conversation. You disagree with me and have no more proof or know how of the situation, so you are no more right than me. You can show me figures and files but they are not yours, you did not collect the data, you cannot validate it. Just because its there doesn't mean it's right.


> Being accused of being a computer chair biologists by 1-I is about as good as gets.
> 
> I for one have never and will never dispute that there are errors within the system, in fact I am 100% convinced that there are and always will be errors within such a complex subject. I just think it is hilarious that one minute the spike hunt is BS and it needs to be abolished, the next minute it is okay but needs to be tweaked, then 1-I has nothing against it and then it needs a major overhaul or abolished again. *If you are going to make such a bold claims own them. *
> 
> I especially think it is entertaining to hear that "everybody else" doesn't have any knowledge that is worth a hoot and all we want to do is to slaughter everything and destroy HIS land and resources. That sums up everything for me.


What the **** are you talking about? I stand firmly that spike hunting is a good way to keep bull:cow ratios at a healthy level, but you can't do that for everywhere in the state when people can hunt any unit they want. You have units with 80:100 ratios and units with 13:100 ratios, that's too big of difference to act like the current system is working. Neither one of those systems is healthy. You need an option 2 unit by unit management for spike hunting to control and delegate where tags are needed more, less, and distributed on a year to year basis. Otherwise you are taking too many bulls on one unit, and not nearly enough on another. Common sense and statistics show you that. You can't have unhealthy units of bull:cow ratios all over the state just so you have the pleasure of knowing you can hunt where ever you **** well please. I am not asking to get rid of spike hunting or saying it is bad. I am saying you need to pick where you want to hunt, put a cap on units with tags, and more evenly distribute the harvest of spike across the state. That is where I stand, you make a senseless argument telling me I don't stand on the same ground. I believe spike hunting is a great tool, but it is being used ineffectively and is not being used in a way that is more beneficial. It's like any tool, it's useful, but only if it's being used correctly. If you use it wrong, it can create more trouble than if you hadn't used it at all. You can't have a gap of 13-80:100 on LE units and say that spike hunting is being used as an effective tool to manage across the state. It is over utilized on some units and under utilized on others.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> SS,
> Never said 50 additional hunters wouldn't make a difference. However I highly doubt you could organize 50 hunters to all go down and hunt spikes together on the Monroe. Hell you can't seem to organize more then 3 or 4 to show up at a WB meeting? And again what exactly do you plan on proving if you did? That you're all big enough jackasses to try and personally harm a unit because you disagree with someone on the Internet forum. I mean seriously that is clown behavior. Good luck, again I'll put my money on the guys making a difference and getting results.
> 
> The truth is there are more behind the scenes meetings and groups giving input and caring about their units than most are aware of. If you dont know about them its probably because you don't either care enough are are irrelivent. That hurts some feelings I'm sure but its how the world works. If Deer 1 would not have come on here and posted anything how many of you guys would have known about the meeting? How many of you even had any idea about the changes on the Monroe or the status of the herd? A group of concerned sportsmen that spend time of the Monroe asked for a meeting with the DWR to discuss their concerns. That is how it should be.


No all people on here like to do is come on the internet and throw out bogus arguments that they know all about it because they've looked on the big game report and there's no possible way there is any problem. Many of them have never visited the unit or have been there once or twice, but of course they know all about it due to 3-4 pages they have read on the annual report. They're much more informative and reliable resources than someone who's hunted, watched, and utilized the unit for the last decade. But like I said you computer desk biologists know much more than any hands on experience could ever tell anyone.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

It's like reading Dr. Seuss with no rhyme or reason.

Ode to 1-EYE

I don't see spikes
when on me hikes.
It's spikes me likes,
but not dead spikes.
The cows we likes
will all be dikes.
I do not likes dikes without spikes.
Your counts don't count.
They can't be right.
Stay off me land
you have no right.
You have not hiked
the hikes I've hiked.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> SS,
> Never said 50 additional hunters wouldn't make a difference. However I highly doubt you could organize 50 hunters to all go down and hunt spikes together on the Monroe. Hell you can't seem to organize more then 3 or 4 to show up at a WB meeting? And again what exactly do you plan on proving if you did? That you're all big enough jackasses to try and personally harm a unit because you disagree with someone on the Internet forum. I mean seriously that is clown behavior. Good luck, again I'll put my money on the guys making a difference and getting results.
> 
> The truth is there are more behind the scenes meetings and groups giving input and caring about their units than most are aware of. If you dont know about them its probably because you don't either care enough are are irrelivent. That hurts some feelings I'm sure but its how the world works. If Deer 1 would not have come on here and posted anything how many of you guys would have known about the meeting? How many of you even had any idea about the changes on the Monroe or the status of the herd? A group of concerned sportsmen that spend time of the Monroe asked for a meeting with the DWR to discuss their concerns. That is how it should be.


Do you have the napkin minutes from the "behind the scenes" meetings that 1 eye attends? Or are the for monogrammed knee pad holders only?


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> It's like reading Dr. Seuss with no rhyme or reason.
> 
> Ode to 1-EYE
> 
> ...


Bahahahahahah!! Funniest thing I've read in a while


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Marty, you sound so stupid. The area biologist was there the regional manager was there. Come on , it's not like it's an unorganized underground meeting. It was organized and had good reasoning, quite looking stupid disputing that.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> It's like reading Dr. Seuss with no rhyme or reason.
> 
> Ode to 1-EYE
> 
> ...


Like I said you can't add good information just childish BS. You have no information to dispute you just distract from the topic by poking fun.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Poor Jester. Can't take a joke.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Because all you do is joke and add no information to the conversation.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Marty, you sound so stupid. The area biologist was there the regional manager was there. Come on , it's not like it's an unorganized underground meeting. It was organized and had good reasoning, quite looking stupid disputing that.


Was bigfoot there too? What did he have to say about all this?


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Like I said you can't add good information just childish BS. You have no information to dispute you just distract from the topic by poking fun.


 And we have yet to see any pertinent information form you either.

#1deer 1I is the pot calling the kettle black. -BaHa!-


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I've given plenty. I've given bogus numbers that were obviously wrong by the division. I've given personal experience over yet last decade. I've given you the info the meeting was held, who was there, and what it was about. What exactly have you added?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> Was bigfoot there too? What did he have to say about all this?


Idiotic comments like this disprove your knowledge, opinion and the validness of what you say more and more.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Idiotic comments like this disprove your knowledge, opinion and the validness of what you say more and more.


I could say the same about your multiple threads. I guess it's all in the 1 eye of the beholder.


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> No all people on here like to do is come on the internet and throw out bogus arguments that they know all about it because they've looked on the big game report and there's no possible way there is any problem. Many of them have never visited the unit or have been there once or twice, but of course they know all about it due to 3-4 pages they have read on the annual report. They're much more informative and reliable resources than someone who's hunted, watched, and utilized the unit for the last decade. But like I said you computer desk biologists know much more than any hands on experience could ever tell anyone.


Well, since you are clearly referring to my post - the only one with any sort of real data to work off of - I'll wade back into the stench of this pig-pen of a thread.

First - IF as you say, some employees in the Southern Region have information that is not incorporated into the annual report, _that is a serious issue!_ What you have alleged should be getting someone reprimanded or terminated IMO. I have contemplated following up on exactly this and seeing to it that the issue is fixed. That headquarters is ignoring 'real' data, or that 'real' data is not being passed to headquarters is unacceptable. I don't think you understand the gravity of the allegations you are making.

Second - Wildlife management decisions should rarely, if ever, be made on anecdotal observations. While aerial counts are only periodic, inherently produce some level of error, and statistical sampling of results will only approximate actual outcomes, it is *far and away better* than a handful of individuals sharing uncontrolled anecdotal observations.

Third - You are sharing second and third-hand information and claiming it is better than the final published data that the DWR has spent a lot of time and money gathering and reporting. That is a silly argument at best, and will get you no-where.

I don't condone the grade-school-playground-like bullying that you have received (on the contrary, I find it quite off-putting and is the crap that kills online communities), but boy, it's not much wonder you get such flack. Put up some REAL data, some REAL observations, some REAL information to support you claims. If you can't, then perhaps you should put down the shovel and quit digging your hole deeper. It is beyond silly though to be attacking REAL information as if it is of far less value than what you are putting out to support your assertions - which is nebulous and unsubstantive at best.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

No I actually post and contain information and have experience with the subjects you do not, and yet you think you know everything about it anyway. What are you going to bring to meetings? Jokes? I'm sure you'll look really intelligent and credible.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Oh mcfly.......if you were relevant then you wouldn't need minutes to know what happens at those meetings. I'm sorry little buddy.


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> No I actually post and contain information





#1DEER 1-I said:


> I've given bogus numbers that were obviously wrong by the division.


There must be some limitations in communicating what you think you are communicating. At one point, you cite how you have "given bogus numbers", and turn right around within minutes and claim you have given "information" and poo-poo the official data of the DWR? Seriously? I am no DWR lover - I'd put $100 down that I have more reason to be a hater of the DWR than any 10 of you combined. But I'm certainly not so arrogant or ignorant as to pretend they don't have a process in place for defining, as best as possible, the reality of the situation. And that defining of the situation by data is going to be infinately more valuable that "bogus numbers" you throw out and claim is useful information.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Oh mcfly.......if you were relevant then you wouldn't need minutes to know what happens at those meetings. I'm sorry little buddy.


No need to be sorry little buddy. I forgive you.


----------



## clean pass through (Nov 26, 2007)

1 deer and other option 2 supporters. 

I understand your concern about too many spikes being taken off of the Monroe, IF THE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT! I believe the numbers of spikes being taken off that unit are correct because they are dead and it is not that hard to count the non living. However the part I really don't think is right is the total number of spikes that survive. If the unit has absolutely no areas for spikes to hide and is a unit that is that easy to hunt then maybe it does need to be managed different. However I just don't see the survival rate being accurate. The units I know very well, Boulder, Wasatch, and the Cache still have plenty of spikes left. I too know that the numbers the DWR put out about the Boulders are not even close to right most years, this is because my experience and knowledge from on the ground and being on the unit. Like you have on the Monroe. No, I am not a biologist but I too have been hunting a long time and feel I do know something about what I see and don't see. 

A DWR biologist told me a couple years ago..."If a spike makes it through the spike hunt, with the bulls we now have on the units in the state, it is a waste of space and feed. Because that bull will not be shot for 5 or 6 years in reality" If you really want more elk on that unit you should be more concerned about the cows and the cows not dropping calves that make more elk. Spikes don't do the breeding (for the most part). You need a very limited amount to get through the hunts in order for the whole system to work. 

So in summary if Monroe is that easy to hunt then maybe we do need to limit the amount of tags. That is if indeed there are only 5 spikes left in the herd after each year. However I really doubt that number is accurate. Plus if that unit was that easy to find the elk on, then why did the spider bull just appear one year. (That is another debate.)

1 deer you do catch a lot of crap on here but in all honestly you do IMHO call it on yourself. Yes, there are things wrong with the way things are managed in UT and other states for that matter but the sky is not falling all of the time. That seems to be the way you think however. So if you want some friendly advise(which I am sure you don't)..........exercise a lot and eat right.........cause you need to watch out for a heart attack because of all the worrying you do.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Charina said:


> Well, since you are clearly referring to my post - the only one with any sort of real data to work off of - I'll wade back into the stench of this pig-pen of a thread.
> 
> First - IF as you say, some employees in the Southern Region have information that is not incorporated into the annual report, _that is a serious issue!_ What you have alleged should be getting someone reprimanded or terminated IMO. I have contemplated following up on exactly this and seeing to it that the issue is fixed. That headquarters is ignoring 'real' data, or that 'real' data is not being passed to headquarters is unacceptable. I don't think you understand the gravity of the allegations you are making.
> 
> ...


First, I am not alleging that anyone has given "fake" data, I am saying I don't believe the data given is accurate. I gave you a very good example of 97% of estimated spikes by the division on one unit were killed. Obviously 97% were not killed and that is a very inaccurate figure. They estimated 170 spikes that year on the unit and 165 of them were killed, yet there were obviously more than 5 spikes left on the winter range. Here is an example of their "guesstimate data" that is completely wrong and inaccurate so there's you first figure.

Second, a decade of hunting, being on a unit and all over it weekly, and viewing year after year the downgrade of the units population, is not an inaccurate observation. I guarantee I have spent more time on the unit in the last year than the area biologist. No I do not fly a helicopter across the unit, but I observe it year after year, area after area, and it isn't hard to see areas, and great areas I might add, do not hold hardly anything anymore . This applies both to summer ranges and especially winter ranges where I've noticed this. And I have given figures that have proved the inaccuracy of the DWR's numbers and estimation data.

Third, every bit of data you read in the big game report and statistics given by the DWR are also 2nd and 3rd hand data, unless of course you were there when the counts took place or flew the chopper yourself.

In conclusion you have no evidence that you have compiled or created, you only have what you've been told by the division. There numbers could be very inaccurate I think if you asked a biologist they'll tell you the same thing. They don't know for sure, and I'm not at all saying they aren't doing their job. I'm simply saying I do not believe they are accurate with a lot of their data, you do but you have to realize that it could be inaccurate and it is also second and third hand information.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Charina said:


> There must be some limitations in communicating what you think you are communicating. At one point, you cite how you have "given bogus numbers", and turn right around within minutes and claim you have given "information" and poo-poo the official data of the DWR? Seriously? I am no DWR lover - I'd put $100 down that I have more reason to be a hater of the DWR than any 10 of you combined. But I'm certainly not so arrogant or ignorant as to pretend they don't have a process in place for defining, as best as possible, the reality of the situation. And that defining of the situation by data is going to be infinately more valuable that "bogus numbers" you throw out and claim is useful information.


 I don't hate the DWR, I simply think they are inaccurate, you cannot condemn me for that. I am saying that I provided statistics from the divisions research that they have come up with some very inaccurate numbers, and this can be proven 100%, whereas the numbers so many take as truth cannot be proven as 100% accurate. Numbers that can be disproven 100% are bogus numbers, understand that.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

clean pass through said:


> 1 deer and other option 2 supporters.
> 
> I understand your concern about too many spikes being taken off of the Monroe, IF THE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT! I believe the numbers of spikes being taken off that unit are correct because they are dead and it is not that hard to count the non living. However the part I really don't think is right is the total number of spikes that survive. If the unit has absolutely no areas for spikes to hide and is a unit that is that easy to hunt then maybe it does need to be managed different. However I just don't see the survival rate being accurate. The units I know very well, Boulder, Wasatch, and the Cache still have plenty of spikes left. I too know that the numbers the DWR put out about the Boulders are not even close to right most years, this is because my experience and knowledge from on the ground and being on the unit. Like you have on the Monroe. No, I am not a biologist but I too have been hunting a long time and feel I do know something about what I see and don't see.
> 
> ...


 I agree with a lot of what you say. And no the 5 spikes making it is not accurate, more do make it, the DWR is very wrong and inaccurate there. I am not trying to create the sky is falling picture. I am trying to say wake up and fix something before you have unhealthy managed units all over the state. You can't have one unit at 13:100 and another at 80:100, that's not good management, and the 13:100 is not where it should be for an LE unit, and the 80:100 is not at a healthy ratio for the herd. You must micromanage to better keep populations on each unit healthy, this is what I am saying. Fix it before it's too far broken.


----------



## clean pass through (Nov 26, 2007)

So 1 deer

How many spikes making it through would be acceptable for you?


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

What is in your opinion a healthy ratio and what do you base this opinion upon?

Furthermore...........how do you define what a healthy herd is?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

> How many spikes making it through would be acceptable for you?


I think that with the 1,400 estimated herd, 70% being cows you can figure 980 cows, well figure 70% have successful calving so 686, half as bulls, 343 bull calves, out of those 343, you loose about 30% to predators, winter, etc. leaving 240 bulls that should in a pretty good world make it to be spikes, you kill an average of 165 on the unit leaving you with 75 bulls, now you have 80-100% success rates on LE hunts on the unit and they give out about 35 tags for the unit. Lets say 30 of those tags get filled, you end up with 45 bulls to breed the 980 cows, that's to low of number for me, which is probably about what it sits at now. That's not acceptable for the unit that it is or an LE unit in general. If you keep plastering it year after year that number will only get lower. I think that in order to have good enough recruitment for a healthy herd, and an acceptable LE unit I would like to see 130-150 of those spikes make it through the hunt. That brings the ratio up quite a bit and the recruitment is much better.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> What is in your opinion a healthy ratio and what do you base this opinion upon?
> 
> Furthermore...........how do you define what a healthy herd is?


Glad we can just talk again rather than throw such funny jokes around.-O,-
A healthy ratio would be anything between 10:100- 30:100, but these are LE units where talking about that take 20 years to draw so with that in the equation, 10:100 isn't acceptable. A balance has to be found. 80:100 like on some units obviously isn't healthy, so that needs to be balanced. The only way you can do this is ensure less pressure on 10:100 units and more pressure on 80:100 units and change this accordingly. I think 35-45:100 is a good number that is a healthy population and is addressing the fact that these are LE units people wait 20 years to draw and hunt once or twice in their lifetime.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Glad we can just talk again rather than throw such funny jokes around.-O,-
> A healthy ratio would be anything between 10:100- 30:100, but these are LE units where talking about that take 20 years to draw so with that in the equation, 10:100 isn't acceptable. A balance has to be found. 80:100 like on some units obviously isn't healthy, so that needs to be balanced. The only way you can do this is ensure less pressure on 10:100 units and more pressure on 80:100 units and change this accordingly. I think 35-45:100 is a good number that is a healthy population and is addressing the fact that these are LE units people wait 20 years to draw and hunt once or twice in their lifetime.


How do you define a healthy herd?


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

If you were one of the remaining bulls that had to do his "duty" and impregnate 21.7 cows per year, you wouldn't be complaining.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I think that with the 1,400 estimated herd, 70% being cows you can figure 980 cows, well figure 70% have successful calving so 686, half as bulls, 343 bull calves, out of those 343, you loose about 30% to predators, winter, etc. leaving 240 bulls that should in a pretty good world make it to be spikes, you kill an average of 165 on the unit leaving you with 75 bulls, now you have 80-100% success rates on LE hunts on the unit and they give out about 35 tags for the unit. Lets say 30 of those tags get filled, you end up with 45 bulls to breed the 980 cows, that's to low of number for me, which is probably about what it sits at now. That's not acceptable for the unit that it is or an LE unit in general. If you keep plastering it year after year that number will only get lower. I think that in order to have good enough recruitment for a healthy herd, and an acceptable LE unit I would like to see 130-150 of those spikes make it through the hunt. That brings the ratio up quite a bit and the recruitment is much better.


So you are willing to use second hand numbers now that you think are inaccurate to begin with? Sorry 1-I. You just lost me again.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

time for me to politely bow out of this


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> How do you define a healthy herd?


A healthy herd is a herd at a population level it's habitat can support and is primarily composed of cows and calves. Along with that you need enough bulls in the herd to breed hopefully all the cows on the unit. Along with those things though you have to cater to LE and a 20 year wait for a tag not being a letdown since it's almost a once in a lifetime experience. A healthy herd could probably be 85% cows and 15% bulls. A herd on an LE unit though for human purpose probably needs 35-45% bulls to keep people happy and comfortable. And you do have to tend to that number somewhat because the money from tags is what in the long run will nurture the whole herd .


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> So you are willing to use second hand numbers now that you think are inaccurate to begin with? Sorry 1-I. You just lost me again.


I'm using numbers no I don't agree with, but you do so I gave you an example. The further you dig into those numbers you start to realize the in inaccuracy of them. Now I figured everything on the higher side and with their population estimate still came up with 9 less bulls per 100 cows than their numbers say.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I think that with the 1,400 estimated herd, 70% being cows you can figure 980 cows, well figure 70% have successful calving so 686, half as bulls, 343 bull calves, out of those 343, you loose about 30% to predators, winter, etc. leaving 240 bulls that should in a pretty good world make it to be spikes, you kill an average of 165 on the unit leaving you with 75 bulls, now you have 80-100% success rates on LE hunts on the unit and they give out about 35 tags for the unit. Lets say 30 of those tags get filled, you end up with 45 bulls to breed the 980 cows, that's to low of number for me, which is probably about what it sits at now. That's not acceptable for the unit that it is or an LE unit in general. If you keep plastering it year after year that number will only get lower. I think that in order to have good enough recruitment for a healthy herd, and an acceptable LE unit I would like to see 130-150 of those spikes make it through the hunt. That brings the ratio up quite a bit and the recruitment is much better.


30% winter kill/predation on elk? Where does that number come from?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I think you can assume at least 30% of your calf crop will be lost to predators and winter.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Nope.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I admit that's a guess what do you think tree?


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> 30% winter kill/predation on elk? Where does that number come from?


Where are any of your numbers coming from 1I? Are you making them up as you go? Or, are these numbers that have been gathered and audited?

You are correct in stating the the 198 spikes harvested in 2011 in inaccurate. That is the total bull harvest for the unit for that year including LE. The actual spike harvest was 141 (126 any weapon & 15 MZ) That leaves an more than 60 spikes to survive into adulthood based on your provided estimate. That seems reasonable.

I see no value in disregarding the DWR's counts. They are obviously not 100% accurate, that level of detail is impossible to obtain. However, using mathmatically proven statistical analysis puts the counts very close. If the numbers are significantly off, then every wildlife agency in the country is practicing psuedo science and decades of analysis will need to be thrown out the window.

Quality on the Monroe has not fallen as a result of spike hunting. Spike hunting didn't happen there until 2009...this is only the 4th year that it has been in effect. Quality has fallen because the age objective for the Monroe had been lowered and LE tags tripled from around 20 in 2002 to 65 in 2011. Consequently, the age class of bulls harvested fell from a peak of 8+ to a 3 year average of 6.5. Now the age objective has been bumped to 7.5-8 and LE tags have been cut dramatically to 29. "Higher Quality" will grow back into the herd over the next several years regardless of spike harvest. In fact, in order to maintain that herd, the spike hunt will become necessary to ensure that the bull:cow ratio doesn't grow to high resulting in very ineffecient reproductive productivity.

Access on the Monroe may very well result in higher harvest rates on that unit, but not to the point of destroying the herd.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I think you can assume at least 30% of your calf crop will be lost to predators and winter.


****, how many cats, coyotes, foxes, wolves are there on the Monroe? That's a lot.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Between disease, winter kill and predators your saying loosing 100 calves is not close to a real figure?


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Between disease, winter kill and predators your saying loosing 100 calves is not close to a real figure?


Spring counts indicate the Monroe has averaged about a 50:100 calf to cow ratio for the past decade. By that point the vast majority of those calves will surivive well into adulthood. That is the same time of year that they are generating the 1400 estimate for the herd total. Broken down it looks something like this.

1400 total population
1190 = cows/calves; 210 = bulls (15:100 ratio - 2012 count)
396 = calves (50:100 ratio - 2012 count)


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

1-nut, you might have more success hunting predators than telling the dwr how to do their job.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Well what I think and what's commonly accepted can be two different things and my opinion doesn't have much bearing on the subject. I've heard more than once from biologists that pretty much the only thing that kills an elk in Utah is a bullet. Of course this is an overstatement, but in the absence of severe winter, the numbers I've seen are typically lower than 30%. But it obviously depends on a variety of factors.

My point was to show that the "30%" was a complete assumption or guess. 

It'd be good to see actual calculated trends or numbers. Elk are much easier to accurately count than deer. There should be some good data from your Monroe spike working group. Let us know what you find out.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Tree yes I admit that's an assumtion, but I don't think any of us assume no elk calves are lost to predators or winter. Also if estimates show 50% of cows had calves, in my estimate I calculated 70% had calves so that evens things out to make the calculations pretty accurate with the numbers I used.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> Where are any of your numbers coming from 1I? Are you making them up as you go? Or, are these numbers that have been gathered and audited?
> 
> You are correct in stating the the 198 spikes harvested in 2011 in inaccurate. That is the total bull harvest for the unit for that year including LE. The actual spike harvest was 141 (126 any weapon & 15 MZ) That leaves an more than 60 spikes to survive into adulthood based on your provided estimate. That seems reasonable.
> 
> ...


As for this I am using data from the packet at the spike elk meeting, I'll post photo shots of the rest of the packet if I have time today, it may be 2012 information not 2011, the estimate showed though that only 4 spikes were projected making it by the DWR, if their numbers were correct which they weren't. Bull:Cow ratios are out of wack on different units across the state spike hunting can be an effective tool to fix this, it just has to be used correctly.


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> As for this I am using data from the packet at the spike elk meeting, I'll post photo shots of the rest of the packet if I have time today, it may be 2012 information not 2011, the estimate showed though that only 4 spikes were projected making it by the DWR, if their numbers were correct which they weren't. Bull:Cow ratios are out of wack on different units across the state spike hunting can be an effective tool to fix this, it just has to be used correctly.


The number you used is the total bull harvest for the 2011 season.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I used 165 total bull harvest was 198. The numbers are in that agenda packet, they are projecting 160-165 this year.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

martymcfly73 said:


> One eye I have plenty to add. You're full of BS. I dispute everything you say and ALL of your numbers. Seriously though, I am going to organize a spike hunt to the 435 next year. I might even bring some wolves.


Checklist: Recruit PETA in July to tag spike and cow elk with GPS darts as part of elk protection program. Convince Border Patrol to schedule training session where agents can track elk who will play the roll of illegal immigrants tagged by Minutemen with GPS darts. (role play). Large mobile command center arrives day before elk hunt. Posse of 801 hunters roll in to act as border patrol and are given GPS units and radio. Drones with GPS and Thermo imaging launch first day of elk hunt and by noon it's over. Strap them to the hood boys and drive around 435 land.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Checklist: Recruit PETA in July to tag spike and cow elk with GPS darts as part of elk protection program. Convince Border Patrol to schedule training session where agents can track elk who will play the roll of illegal immigrants tagged by Minutemen with GPS darts. (role play). Large mobile command center arrives day before elk hunt. Posse of 801 hunters roll in to act as border patrol and are given GPS units and radio. Drones with GPS and Thermo imaging launch first day of elk hunt and by noon it's over. Strap them to the hood boys and drive around 435 land.


Again just jokes, no actual information.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Again just jokes, no actual information.


Wasatch Unit POUNDED every year and yet some of those wily spikes allude death and grow up.

My suggestion is get a job with all your wasted time posting crap and use the money to buy a tag in WY. Live a little and think of this.

Ted Cruz and Mike Lee still think they are right. Fools don't know they are fools


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Checklist: Recruit PETA in July to tag spike and cow elk with GPS darts as part of elk protection program. Convince Border Patrol to schedule training session where agents can track elk who will play the roll of illegal immigrants tagged by Minutemen with GPS darts. (role play). Large mobile command center arrives day before elk hunt. Posse of 801 hunters roll in to act as border patrol and are given GPS units and radio. Drones with GPS and Thermo imaging launch first day of elk hunt and by noon it's over. Strap them to the hood boys and drive around 435 land.


The ball is already rolling on this^^^^^


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Wasatch Unit POUNDED every year and yet some of those wily spikes allude death and grow up.
> 
> My suggestion is get a job with all your wasted time posting crap and use the money to buy a tag in WY. Live a little and think of this.
> 
> Ted Cruz and Mike Lee still think they are right. Fools don't know they are fools


Which is exactly why you can't see past the ignorance that's been pounded into your brain. You can't kill, kill, kill, year after year, after year, after year, and expect that nothing is changing. This is why management is a tool not something nature intended. Nature never intended for people to manipulate numbers and herds, again management is a tool we use not something nature intended.

Why don't you move to Wyoming, and I'll watch changes happen here in Utah, how about that? As for wasted time, it seems your still here?

The wasatch unit is not the situation I am addressing right now is it Dukes? No, and I won't address it because I know nothing about it, I haven't hunted there, seen what happens, or watched it the last decade go to ****. So I have no comment about the wasatch unit. You worry about what you know, and I'll worry about the areas I know. And you just brought in another very good reason for unit by unit management, stop the rediculous pounding of certain units, while other units simply aren't hit as hard and not nearly enough spikes come off them. Micromanagement is the only way to effectivly manage populations, you can't manage the state as one whole, otherwise instead of having good areas everywhere, you have a few good areas and a bunch of ****ty ones all because assholes like you need there "opportunity" to hunt every unit in the state and it will hurt there feelings if we make them hunt one unit. Too bad I'll say it I don't care if I hurt all your tender feelings and you backlash at me with nothing but personal attacks and jokes. I could care less that you are on the defense because I don't agree with you. In fact I like it because by showing how upset you are I don't agree with you, I think you all know that my way is the way it will be, and you'll all be sitting in a corner crying because you have to choose one place to hunt, I'm going to feel so **** bad for you when you have a boundary you have to hunt, I bet that will just end your worlds.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> The ball is already rolling on this^^^^^


 And once again like I said, no argument just BS.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Which is exactly why you can't see past the ignorance that's been pounded into your brain. You can't kill, kill, kill, year after year, after year, after year, and expect that nothing is changing. This is why management is a tool not something nature intended. Nature never intended for people to manipulate numbers and herds, again management is a tool we use not something nature intended.
> 
> Why don't you move to Wyoming, and I'll watch changes happen here in Utah, how about that? As for wasted time, it seems your still here?
> 
> The wasatch unit is not the situation I am addressing right now is it Dukes? No, and I won't address it because I know nothing about it, I haven't hunted there, seen what happens, or watched it the last decade go to ****. So I have no comment about the wasatch unit. You worry about what you know, and I'll worry about the areas I know. And you just brought in another very good reason for unit by unit management, stop the rediculous pounding of certain units, while other units simply aren't hit as hard and not nearly enough spikes come off them. Micromanagement is the only way to effectivly manage populations, you can't manage the state as one whole, otherwise instead of having good areas everywhere, you have a few good areas and a bunch of ****ty ones all because assholes like you need there "opportunity" to hunt every unit in the state and it will hurt there feelings if we make them hunt one unit. Too bad I'll say it I don't care if I hurt all your tender feelings and you backlash at me with nothing but personal attacks and jokes. I could care less that you are on the defense because I don't agree with you. In fact I like it because by showing how upset you are I don't agree with you, I think you all know that my way is the way it will be, and you'll all be sitting in a corner crying because you have to choose one place to hunt, I'm going to feel so **** bad for you when you have a boundary you have to hunt, I bet that will just end your worlds.


I'll ask again, are you crying? I can almost see the tears on your monitor. " fine, nobody likes me, everybody hates me. I'll just go eat some worms!"


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> And once again like I said, no argument just BS.


I'm not going to argue with an idiot. Sometimes people can't tell who the idiot is. So if I stop it will once again be crystal clear who the idiot is.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> I'll ask again, are you crying? I can almost see the tears on your monitor. " fine, nobody likes me, everybody hates me. I'll just go eat some worms!"


Actually it's perfectly fine, you're the ones having the attitude of ignoring the topic and conversation because you have nothing to say. As I said give me **** all you want, you've brought no revalence to the topic and show how little your input should be considered or matter. You look less and less credible every post you give in this thread. So keep going I'm perfectly okay with it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> I'm not going to argue with an idiot. Sometimes people can't tell who the idiot is. So if I stop it will once again be crystal clear who the idiot is.


martmcfly, did you write that? Wow that's good, I swear I've heard that before.

You don't argue my points because you can't, you know you have no real say or knowledge of the topic I am discussing.


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I used 165 total bull harvest was 198. The numbers are in that agenda packet, they are projecting 160-165 this year.


No, you indicated 198 spikes were killed. 165 still leaves 40+ spikes. 165 would be at the top end past 4 years. 40 spikes still leaves enough bulls to more than replace what is currently being killed on the LE hunts.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> SS,
> 
> The truth is there are more behind the scenes meetings and groups giving input and caring about their units than most are aware of. That is how it should be.


-BaHa!-

Glad to hear you guys are concerned about your units. Carry on.-------SS


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> you end up with 45 bulls to breed the 980 cows, that's to low of number for me,


No wonder you think the sky is falling. You are leaving out several generations of bulls from your consideration. Using your own numbers, but adjusting for the mistake, by your own consideration there are plenty of bulls to provide for highly competitive breeding.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> No, you indicated 198 spikes were killed. 165 still leaves 40+ spikes. 165 would be at the top end past 4 years. 40 spikes still leaves enough bulls to more than replace what is currently being killed on the LE hunts.


You better reread things.... You are wrong.


----------



## jayo (Jul 10, 2013)

18 pages and all I came away with is there was a meeting with napkins, if you don't live in Monroe you shouldn't be able to hunt there, which isn't a problem because there are no more spikes, and guys are worried about their units, nobody can do math good, 1I is a Jester, Muleskinner is a Dr., Mcfly is a joker and I have a headache. Did I miss anything?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

jayo said:


> 18 pages and all I came away with is there was a meeting with napkins, if you don't live in Monroe you shouldn't be able to hunt there, which isn't a problem because there are no more spikes, and guys are worried about their units, nobody can do math good, 1I is a Jester, Muleskinner is a Dr., Mcfly is a joker and I have a headache. Did I miss anything?


You missed the part where many are hiding behind ignorance because they think there so smart due to 2nd hand information they hold so dear in their hearts to be true. Yet when you disprove that information they don't address it they run to the corner of their fairy land and make jokes in order to distract from the topic at hand. You are all incredible, hypocritical, whine asses who bitch and moan because you can't see a different side. You follow the leader no matter how much or how little sense he comes up with like mindless zombies. Have some opinions and observations of your own , quit hiding behind the ones others made for you, that you weren't even remotely a part of.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

jayo said:


> 18 pages and all I came away with is there was a meeting with napkins, if you don't live in Monroe you shouldn't be able to hunt there, which isn't a problem because there are no more spikes, and guys are worried about their units, nobody can do math good, 1I is a Jester, Muleskinner is a Dr., Mcfly is a joker and I have a headache. Did I miss anything?


Something about fairies and Zombies??


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> Something about fairies and Zombies??


Funny Marty glad your still back on the kindergarten playground adding nothing knowledgable as usual. And here's the thing, I'm not out to be an ******* . I disagree with you Marty. I know more about what's in my own backyard than you , and you should accept that. It's nothing personal but you and I don't see eye to eye and never will probably . But I have a right to voice my opinion and get what I want in the state too. Don't force your opinion and views on me either. I don't have to have the same ones. I spend just as much money as you and guarantee I spend asuch and more time outdoors than almost anyone. I have right to voice my concerns and what I've seen as well, and as much right to get what I want out of hunting in the state as any citizen . Understand that if nothing else .


----------



## Badger (Aug 27, 2013)

Blah, blah, blah. Shut it 1-nut.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Monroe aught be LE for all species and hunts. And I'm not talking about only letting 20 guys hunt. For all the reasons I have mentioned before that unit gets abused and over hunted so it needs to be managed accordingly. Its too soon to say. But so far it appears option 2 has had very positive effects on the hunting quality there. I suspect that may not be the case on all units because not all units are over hunted like Monroe was. 

And I totally get the 801/435 thing. Its the same as city slicker Feds in DC cramming wolfs down our throats out here in the west. More than half of these guys on this site from the 801 are fat lazy firemen or cops that rarely get out of the station. And believe Utah's deer herd is down due to housing development taking up all of Utah's winter habitat. So what do they know right? 

Now the sad truth to the matter. Its not the city boys coming down on the opening weekend killin all the game. Its the slobby ******* hillbillies of Seivier, Sanpete and Piute counties that to all the killin that hurts the place. You know the guys who steal **** out of camps. Leave beer cans on the side of the road. Roll their blazer and leave it on the mtn for a month. Burn their trash in their campfire. (kinda) Hunt with or without a tag. Not sayin everyone from those counties are like that. Not sayin that at all. The CU does have its fair share though. Not like the Uintah basin though. Nothing that bad. Kinda like what you find down around Ceder City or Tooele but less churchy and inbred. -O,- 

All kidding aside. Really its the local guys who cruise up after work or hunt every weekend and scout it 5 times and have hunted it their whole lives that do all the killin. We cant have these virtual unlimited tags allotments on the Monroe. Like the deer was for so many yrs. It was LE that got the elk to where it is today or was yesterday. So I support a liberal LE spike hunt on Monroe but agree the way it is today is unacceptable.

I know of 3 spike and one cow that were taken off that unit during the archery in the last 2 yrs. That the DWR doesn't know about. And I would bet my paycheck the figure for unreported harvest would shock you. I don't want to make any guesses at numbers but IMO its far far higher then reported in this thread.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

Sweet. The truth comes out and all along it is 1-eye's fault since he is a local. I knew we would get to the bottom of this. Good job all around!


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Now the sad truth to the matter. Its not the city boys coming down on the opening weekend killin all the game. Its the slobby ******* hillbillies of Seivier, Sanpete and Piute counties that to all the killin that hurts the place. You know the guys who steal **** out of camps. Leave beer cans on the side of the road. Roll their blazer and leave it on the mtn for a month. Burn their trash in their campfire. (kinda) Hunt with or without a tag. Not sayin everyone from those counties are like that. Not sayin that at all. The CU does have its fair share though. Not like the Uintah basin though. Nothing that bad. Kinda like what you find down around Ceder City or Tooele but less churchy and inbred.


Sounds about right to me. But mainly the Sevier guys right?  I can't let my Sanpete born wife see this.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Oh I agree, the unit is easy to hunt if you know the unit. If you don't it's hard to find animals no matter where you go if you have no idea about it. And even if you do show up in the right spot those who have hunted it for decades will have gotten their first. Badger get it through your thick skull you know nothing about the situation, so you shut it and keep your uninformed opinions to yourself.

And last year shows 0 spike were killed on archery, I know of at least 4. Their statistics get less and less accurate every day in my eyes.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

No and yes my cow tag was for there I didn't attempt to use it.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Monroe aught be LE for all species and hunts. And I'm not talking about only letting 20 guys hunt. For all the reasons I have mentioned before that unit gets abused and over hunted so it needs to be managed accordingly. Its too soon to say. But so far it appears option 2 has had very positive effects on the hunting quality there. I suspect that may not be the case on all units because not all units are over hunted like Monroe was.
> 
> And I totally get the 801/435 thing. Its the same as city slicker Feds in DC cramming wolfs down our throats out here in the west. More than half of these guys on this site from the 801 are fat lazy firemen or cops that rarely get out of the station. And believe Utah's deer herd is down due to housing development taking up all of Utah's winter habitat. So what do they know right?
> 
> ...


Ahahahahahah!!! One if the funniest things I've read on here! Right up there with ode to 1 eye.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Again Marty you have no ****ing credibility at all. You have no points, no info, no experience, second hand info, and yet you think you can discredit others. Keep living in your fantasy, that's the only place you have any valid points.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

blumkin said:


> So you are saying you will continue to hunt monroe for spikes and you will apply for cow permits but claim that you wont attempt to harvest animals? Ha ha good one. Way to be a steward of the unit.


I haven't killed a spike on the Monroe since the first year it was legal and that was with a bow.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I haven't hunted a spike since then either. Personally.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

blumkin said:


> So your purely a trophy hunter. Inches mean every thing and if everybody that draws cant kill a record book animal the units in trouble and general tags should be discontinued untill you can.


No I'm not purly a trophy hunter. I've killed spikes, cows, does, small bucks. But when I can see that there is a problem, I don't support the slaughter of the animals I enjoy seeing and hunting. I don't agree with all the tags issued and you have to understand for me to eat a tag or not hunt, because hunting is what I love to do, I truly believe their is a problem, or there is no way I would not hunt, or voluntarily eat a tag. I really do believe there's a problem, understand that, I won't contribute to the problem I feel is happening.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> No I'm not purly a trophy hunter. I've killed spikes, cows, does, small bucks. But when I can see that there is a problem, I don't support the slaughter of the animals I enjoy seeing and hunting. I don't agree with all the tags issued and you have to understand for me to eat a tag or not hunt, because hunting is what I love to do, I truly believe their is a problem, or there is no way I would not hunt, or voluntarily eat a tag. I really do believe there's a problem, understand that, I won't contribute to the problem I feel is happening.


That's you right to not hunt. But don't impose your will on everyone else.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Marty I'm not trying to ruin your hunting opportunity but opportunity is not worth ruining places.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Alas,the party is over:mrgreen: And only 20 pages!Hope there is a ballgame on tonight.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Heck, we still have a spike hunt to plan. Who says the party's over------SS


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

I know of six spikes that were killed on this unit. I knew the quality of bulls would go down because of all the new spike units. Remember I-400? I-400 was a very good proposal and spike tags should only be a management tool and rotated to units when it's needed.


The problem with Utah is we have retards (SFW) managing our elk herds. We started killing a lot of cows to make room for more bulls in the herd. SFW didn't realize until later that Bulls can't get pregnant (retards) so this reduced the recruitment of the herd. Fewer cows equals fewer calves equals fewer bulls. They issued management tags and because to many broken antler bulls were shot then SFW cried again. SFW didn't want to issue more bull tags because that would reduce quality so they wanted spike tags to reduce the number of bulls and now spike tags are reducing the quality. 

Can't we just say that SFW is clueless, and they don't know how to manage elk?

Everything is the same on the forum Goofy is complain about every unit because the quality of bulls are going down on the Wasatch when the elk are being managed to objective. Goofy why have objectives if you don't want to follow them?


If the Elk quality is down the only people to blame is SFW. They own the problems, but Goofy keeps drinking their koolaid.

Last night Goofy was laying on the Spanish Fork Main Street passed out with a dixie cup in hand with a big pink koolaid stain on his shirt. His wife is going to kill him if she can't get the stain out of his shirt.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Yeah I posted it on both threads. You don't need to whine about it.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Thanks I really appreciate it that you think I'm one of "them"


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Hello my friend Fatbass. Alabama looks like they might win another championship this year


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Good to see you fatty. Where you been hiding?------SS


----------



## fatbass (Sep 11, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Hello my friend Fatbass. Alabama looks like they might win another championship this year


Bama owes it all to the little sister slap that the utes gave them in 2008.
3 crystal footballs sure feel good.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

The Utes woke Alabama in 2008 and Nick Sabin vowed to not be embarrassed again.


----------



## jayo (Jul 10, 2013)

The guys from the gutpile are mean. I can't believe they would treat a guy like this.:-?


----------

