# Born again I400



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

This is a updated version of I400, please only reply to this thread and let the others die out. 

For areas that currently have spike restrictions: 

1) Eliminate or reduce spike-only restrictions, beginning with 4 or 5 pilot areas. If it becomes more popular, more areas may be introduced. See below for a description of these areas. 

2) Sub-divide the larger units such as Wasatch and Manti. 

3) Manage these smaller units with herd objectives as well as harvest age objectives. For example, 30 bulls to 100 cows in addition to 5-6 year age harvest objective. 

4) Structure the hunting seasons to move the rifle hunt out of the rut. 

Proposed hunting seasons: 

Controlled Archery: Sept. 1-21 
Controlled Muzzleloader Season 1: Sept 26-Oct 4 (same as muzzle deer) 
Controlled Muzzleloader Season 2: November 1-9 (same as gen. muzz. elk) 
Controlled Rifle Season 1: Oct 6-10 
Controlled Rifle Season 2: Oct 13-17 
General Antlerless Archery: Aug 23-Sept 14 (same as general archery elk) 

5) Require mandatory hunt reporting for I400 tags. Unsucessfull hunters must return their unused tag, Successful hunters require tooth data. 

6) Implement a preference point drawing for Controlled tags, separate from the LE drawing. Hunters must choose between the two drawings each year. 

7) These new regulations may be phased in over time. 

8)Pilot Program areas: 

North Cache 
Wasatch (will be divided into 3-6 smaller units) 
La Sal 
Nebo 
Fish Lake 

9)Continue to offer general archery tags on the pilot units. 

Tag numbers for pilot areas are being worked out, we still need to meet with some organizations in order to determine final #'s! 

Wasatch; 
248 LE tags issued in 06, 4596 total tags 
LE tags under pilot plan TBD 

LaSal; 
49 LE tags issued in 06, 429 total tags 
LE tags under pilot plan TBD 

N Cache; 
52 LE tags issued in 06, 974 total tags 
LE tags under pilot plan TBD 

Fish Lake; 
94 LE tags issued in 06, 1476 total tags 
LE tags under pilot plan 

Nebo; 
106 LE tags issued in 06, 1169 total tags 
LE tags under pilot plan TBD 

Wasatch killed 337 spikes and 168 mature bulls in 06 
LaSal killed 60 spikes and 35 mature bulls in 06 
N Cache killed 126 spikes and 21 mature bulls in 06 
Nebo killed 112 spikes and 61 mature bulls in 06 
Fish Lake killed 168 spikes and 79 mature bulls in 06 

That is 803 spikes killed vs 364 mature bulls just on these five unit units alone. 

For areas that will remain LE (premium units) 
-No changes were made to this section of the proposal. These changes may be presented in the future, after results from the 2007 LE and management hunts become available. 

1) Increase tag numbers significantly, with a proportionally larger number of tags being given to short-range weapons. Our feeling here is that this would make those hunts more enticing, and eliminate some of the competition for rifle tags. 

For areas that are currently any-bull: 
No changes are currently being proposed for any-bull units. 


Additional info: 

Under these new regulations, revenue generated from tag sales will remain the same or increase. 

These changes seem to be well supported by most hunters in Utah, based on response here on the forum and informal polls. We are making efforts to inform as many people as possible about this initiative. Your help and input is appreciated. 

Some of the things we are looking for and still in debate- 

1-Waiting period- 

AR301 did not have one so I400 will need one tin order to survive. One suggestion was a 2 or 3 year wait however if you do not harvest and return your unused tag, the waiting period would be waived. This is based on a preference point system (currently do on rifle deer)opposed to bonus point system (currently do on LE elk). 

2-Archery hunters would be allowed to hunt the pilot programs and have a choice to shoot a cow or a spike. In addition to this we would also issue Muzzle loader permits for antlerless only and rifle permits antlerless only. 

3-Tag Allotment- 

Currently the tag allotments are 60/25/15, rifle hunters get 60% of the tags and hunt the best part of the rut, archers get 25% of the tags and hunt when it is hot and the rut is not in full swing, muzzys get 15% of the tags and get the rifle leftovers and the tailend of the rut. 

Under I400, the tag allotments will be 50/30/20, rifle hunters will get 50% of the tags and hunt after the rut has slowed/stopped, archers will get 30% of the tags and hunt into the heart of the rut, muzzys will get 20% of the tags and get first crack at the elk with noise makers and still have the rut going. 

This will lower the success rates for the rifle hunters, push more hunters into the lower success seasons(primitive) and allow for more tags for ALL weapon choices. 

Basically None of the plan is set in stone yet except season dates!!!


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

A lot of things have not been updated on this one so what do you think, likes and dislikes?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I'm for anything that ENDs spike only hunting and issues more mature bull tags.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

One thing I think I do not like is subdivision of units for starters.


----------



## DBCooper (Jun 17, 2008)

Work a few side jobs, save your money, and hunt Montana!


----------



## sagebrush (Sep 8, 2007)

are you posting this for pro? at first you say it is a updated verison, then you come back and say a lot things have not been updated? seems to me you need to make up your mind.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

One question. LaSal or Manti LaSal?


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

This is a post I wrote many moons ago, just copied and pasted. My mind is not made up on a lot of things, so take that as you will. No I am not typing this for Pro, I am not his secertary. Pro was not the only one who worked on this. He will be in on the events when he gets time, right now he does not have much, but maybe soon. Have not spoken with him in a few days, but more important have not spoken with him about this in over a year. join, follow along, or ignore, comment as you wish. Talking about I400 is a lot better than doing nothing, rolling over and accepting whatever "they" decside. Not me, I will try.

La Sal, no Manti in the picture.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

What is the reason behind the split rifle? 
That time of year having only 4 days to hunt, all it takes is one storm to total shutdown that hunt. Also the DWR has already shown that there is very little difference in hunters days in the field from a 5 day hunt to a 9 day hunt. I believe it was something to the effect of 4.7 vs 4.8 days in the field. Having a 4 day hunt is a raw deal.


----------



## muley34 (Oct 11, 2007)

Count me in


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

It seemed we agreed to shorten the season because the average hunter took 2.3 days to harvest. 
One thing I posted befor Sagebrush was I wrote that, El Matedor actually wrote that specific one, I posted it. He wrote that after a meeting "we" attended. There is no owner of this, there is nothing set in stone or not debatable about this, if you like it but think it could use something added or taken away lets hear it. Lets add or subtract and re write it and see what it looks like. I do not have all the answers but will recall what descisions have been made and why as best as I can.


----------



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

_*YAAAAAAAWWWWWN*_


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I am for anyting Kelee Johnson and the wildlife board are against.

I hate spike hunts
I hate once in a life time elk hunts
I hate rifle rut hunts

I am for 
Any hunt resembeling arizona's elk plan. They have half the elk we do, still kill 400" bulls, they don't have spike hunts, and give out more tags. 

rifle management elk hunts

cow rifle hunts if herds are over objective

average age bulls 5-6 year olds
35/100 bull to cow ratios

I am for anything that is better then the point bank screw up we have now where every one thinks they are owed a 500" bull, get to shoot from the truck window at a love sick elk, and have a 2 day once in a life time hunt.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Perfect post. Arizona does do that, our plan is measured to Arizona's all the time. Arizona has 1/2 the elk, and they give out twice as many tags. You can buy an over the counter elk tag and go out and kill a 400 bull. 

Great post. You have obviously been to one of the I400 meetings.


----------



## bigbuck81 (Oct 10, 2007)

How exactly does this benefit rifle hunters? Cant we make it benefit both rifle and bow hunters? I dont want to shoot a bow. It is personal preference. I think that the rifle hunt could be better managed by doing smaller units or subunits. There should be more attention payed to the Uintahs. The Uintahs is prime habitat for the elk but is over run by the public. I think putting a management plan on the Uintahs, rifle and bow and muzzleloader, you could have a heck of alot of elk on your hands. Dont even get me started about how I feel about doing this for the deer in the Uintahs!


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

I like that the archery get to hunt doring the rut not befor. Im alittle lost on the archery getting to take a spike or a cow. So are you saying that if you draw a archery tag under this new rule that you can take a Big bull,spike or a cow? On the washch unite ?Im I understanding that right ?


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

Joey you know my thoughts and feelings on the matter.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

bigbuck81 said:


> How exactly does this benefit rifle hunters? Cant we make it benefit both rifle and bow hunters? I dont want to shoot a bow. It is personal preference. I think that the rifle hunt could be better managed by doing smaller units or subunits. There should be more attention payed to the Uintahs. The Uintahs is prime habitat for the elk but is over run by the public. I think putting a management plan on the Uintahs, rifle and bow and muzzleloader, you could have a heck of alot of elk on your hands. Dont even get me started about how I feel about doing this for the deer in the Uintahs!


A big problem with management of the Uintahs is our neighboring states. They manage to kill off the elk in their hunts when the animals have moved to wintering grounds in their respective states. Hence low quality. Plenty of places to hunt high country?


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Why not rotate hunts and hunters every 4 to 5 yrs.? Rifle rut one year, bow rut another, muzzie and so on. This gets better and better. Just think of the possibilities. Oh' we can do it. Keep going and going until everyone is happy. :wink: :lol: Lets keep going until it is really, really complicated. o-||


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

the way you help the rifle hunters out is 

letting more tags out for bow hunters. If people can hunt more than once in their life more people will pick up a bow. this will be like a stool softener to the bonus point butt plug. 

letting more tags out to rifle hunters when elk are not at their most vulnerable time allows more tags to be given out. this will be another stool softener to the bonus point butt plug.

you are a fool if you think hunting spikes helps anything out with the point system. It kills future big bulls and no one uses their points to hunt them. Killing spikes lowers the bull to cow ratio and limits the top end tags we can give out. Mark my words next year there will be tags cut across the Le units.

I say if you are going to have a spike hunt. Make it pick your region and use your points.


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

Having thought a lot about this topic the last year or so. I do like it, mostly.

What is the thought behind having two rifle hunts? And only the four day hunt? The average days hunted is lower than four days, but that is under the current plan- a hunt in the full rut. Pushing the rifle later can make it harder to be successful. Why not give them 9 full days, and only offer one rifle hunt?
Also could you explain the argument for splitting up the units into subunits? I'm not sure where I stand on that. Is this to spread out the pressure? 

If I400 were to pass- it would as a whole, still favor the majority of Utah's hunters, the rifle hunters. 
I strongly agree that it would benefit EVERY hunter if we use archers as tools to manage animals.
I like the idea of only being able to choose an I400 tag or LE tag, not both. It would undoubtably pull some hunters out of the LE pool. Freeing up more tags for the rifle only crowd.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

well I guess im my thought have changed on these. I just say put the archery hunt in the rut and put the rilfe hunters after the rut and leave the rest alone.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Not really too sure on the sub units either it makes things too complicated. I don't mind the one 9 day hunt, but the reasoning behind 2 would be to allow more hunters out at a time. 

The archery tags and perks are pretty key to this plan, that and getting the rifle hunt out of the rut. This would worsen my odds but as a whole improve the overall "butt plug". 

One hang up with this plan was the ellimination of spike tags. I will explain when I get more time. It is needed in the first couple of years but there will be a point when there is no reason you could not have them. This is my opinion, Pro sees this different.


----------



## yak4fish (Nov 16, 2007)

I like i400 for the most part. Anything that adds more bull elk tags and reduces spike tags I'm for. 
The one thing I don't like is adding the preferance point system for the I400 tags. I firmly beleive it is time to put all bull elk tags in the same bonus point drawing pool (same for buck deer tags). If you hunt bull elk you burn your points 1st, 2nd, 3rd. 4th choice Any bull, spike, LE, I400 if you draw a tag you burn your points. This will pull the "butt plug" of the bonus point pool. 
I remember a nicely worded argument for not having the preferance point pool for the I400 tags from one of the threads a year or so ago that convinced me it would be better to have all the tags in the same drawing. I will see if I can find it and copy it over here.

Allen


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

Hogan-
Correct me if I am wrong- but this plan is being pushed through mainly by bowhunters right? Think of our track record with the board?

I think that to get this through the system and passed, there is no way it will fly with a four day hunt for the rifle hunters. To think I only had four days to go in and get an animal down is pretty daunting, no matter the unit. Too many things can affect the hunt, mainly weather, family matters, jobs, ect. I understand the logic behind it, but the goal is to get it passed. In my eyes, the meat of I400 is to get the rifle out of the rut?
If it were up to me, there would be only a handful of rifle tags during the rut for the entire state- but we all know that will never happen.

Also my input is to lump all elk points in the same jar. No matter if its a spike, I400, or LE. We need to let our kids/future generations have a prayer in the system somewhere.

Please keep us posted on anything that deals with I400. The idea behind it NEEDS to happen!


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Right now I see your hunting time line as your weak link. It needs to be fixed.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

I like the whole point system into one pool, I would settle for that. And yes the plan does need polishing, that is what we are doing. Work it out. Thanks for all the comments and discussion.


----------



## Elkoholic8 (Jan 15, 2008)

I would support that plan, except for the 2 four day rifle hunts. I'm a bowhunter by heart so the 4 or 9 day hunt doesn't mean anything to me but I think you will get alot more rifle hunters onboard with the 9 day hunt. 
Most of all we need to get the 100% success rate rifle guys out of the rut. After all it is a "HUNT" not a shoot. Guys, use your skills and go find a bull. You don't need to call one right to your 4 wheeler to kill it with a rifle!!!!!
I think the other states management plans and success rates should be mentioned when this is presented before the boards. Maybe if numbers are shown they will get the idea that this state does not need to have every unit managed for record book bulls, and let a few of the average elk chasers go have fun with a limited tag every 5-7 yeards. Once in a lifetime is not good enough!!!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Just a thought for you I400 boys.........

For this to even have a slight chance at best, You guys will have to have someone
involved in the elk commitee that will be redoing the new 5 year EMP in the next
couple of months. 

If you wait to present this to the RACs in November,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WELL,to late,
Not much of a chance to change the elk plan again until 2015.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

We do not want to change the elk plan, we want 3 or 4 units, not statewide, our plan meets all criteria of the current EMP.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Joey, read goofy elk's post again.


----------



## for fun (Sep 13, 2007)

Well I am counting two 5 day rifle hunts from oct 6-10 and 13-17. I agree that if you make them 7 days it may get more rifle hunters on board. I am big for removing the rifle hunt out of the rut. If it makes more mature elk tags I am for it. Dates look great to me.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

HOGAN said:


> We do not want to change the elk plan, we want 3 or 4 units, not statewide, our plan meets all criteria of the current EMP.


Like Finn is hinting at and what goofy elk is saying is now is your opportunity to try, if you don't get on it quick your door may close and make it even more unlikely.


----------



## yak4fish (Nov 16, 2007)

I agree with Goofy, Finn and Jahan that now is the time to push I400. If we let the state wide spike hunt go for more than a year it will be very hard to remove.


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

I am a bowhunter but switch the rifle season from 4 to 9 days. Way too short for the rifle hunters out of the rut to make it enticing and it's not fair. 

I believe the subunit idea is for better management. A smaller area is easier to manage for quality and quantity. Lets put I400 in stone and make a push now before it's too late.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

i agree put the rifle hunts down as 9 days and keep them out of the rut leave the first rifle hunt as is and move the late hunt to november as it is know that would appease most of
the rifle hunters. the muzzleloaders have the tailend of the rut and 9 days so that should keep them smiling i would think.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Like I said guys nothing set in stone. The reason behind the rifle hunt 4 days is everybody harvests is 4 or less. If it goes past 4 a majority do not harvest. Having 2 4 days hunts allows twice as many hunters out, moving the line twice as fast. Everything needs worked on but it is a simple plan. 3 or 4 units would be great for everyone, trophy hunters, spike hunters, all weapon hunters etc. I am certain the DNR would adopt certain advantages out of the plan for statewide, like GETTING THE RIFLE HUNT OUT OF THE RUT. I mean come on what is the average shot for these guys? 80 yards? I need to find out who is working on the new EMP and maybe get a I400 meeting going. Anybody interested is invited, just let me know.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

HOGAN said:


> Like I said guys nothing set in stone. The reason behind the rifle hunt 4 days is everybody harvests is 4 or less. If it goes past 4 a majority do not harvest. Having 2 4 days hunts allows twice as many hunters out, moving the line twice as fast. Everything needs worked on but it is a simple plan. 3 or 4 units would be great for everyone, trophy hunters, spike hunters, all weapon hunters etc. I am certain the DNR would adopt certain advantages out of the plan for statewide, like GETTING THE RIFLE HUNT OUT OF THE RUT. I mean come on what is the average shot for these guys? 80 yards? I need to find out who is working on the new EMP and maybe get a I400 meeting going. Anybody interested is invited, just let me know.


Okay, we understand you want the rifle hunters out of the rut. But give the guy a chance to hunt! I can take the same analogy with the archery and say take the three weeks and break it down to three one week hunts and move three times as many archeries through the system. You can not take these guys that have a one week rut hunt and give them 4 days and then tell them to buck up and be happy.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

I am not saying anybody be happy. I am saying is, if the average hunter takes 2 days to harvest an elk and the longer hunters take 4 days, after that it is a do not harvest. This is just a plan. Ballpark, things will change. I am just telling you the reason it was writen down like this. Does not mean it will end up like this, there will be another meeting, come and give your .02 toward it. I also questioned this, but every meeting is usually me against everyone else. The other guys there have friends that act like allies, works against me. I am in this for the whole so if I am out #'ed, or out voted, I then assume it is in the best interest for all.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

I have friends that hunt the rifle, and the last two days of the hunt seem to be the most successful because of the Wyoming hunt overlap pressuring the animals back into Utah. Changing the number of days in the rifle will greatly diminish someone's hunt.  Leave things alone. Seems like this is more catered to the bow hunter. :roll: Someone needs to give the other side a voice.


----------



## Elkoholic8 (Jan 15, 2008)

Yes, this plan is more favorable for the archers because they are the one who need the rut to help their success rates. The archery success rates are horrible. The rifle hunters have the advantage of longer range and usually snow. Bow hunters get lonley quiet elk in hot weather. So yes this plan should help the bowhunters more. Look around at the other states, they all help the archers as much as possible. Sept 1- Sept 31, sounds like a great time to me.
Bottom line is your never going to make everyone happy because now days most peole don't care what is best for everyone, just themselves. It's too bad because we should be concerned about what is best for "us hunters". Better oppertunities lead to more hunters passing along this great sport, while poor oppertunities lead to overcrowding, and less involvement of the younger generation.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Elkoholic8 said:


> Yes, this plan is more favorable for the archers because they are the one who need the rut to help their success rates. The archery success rates are horrible. The rifle hunters have the advantage of longer range and usually snow. Bow hunters get lonley quiet elk in hot weather. So yes this plan should help the bowhunters more. Look around at the other states, they all help the archers as much as possible. Sept 1- Sept 31, sounds like a great time to me.
> Bottom line is your never going to make everyone happy because now days most peole don't care what is best for everyone, just themselves. It's too bad because we should be concerned about what is best for "us hunters". Better oppertunities lead to more hunters passing along this great sport, while poor oppertunities lead to overcrowding, and less involvement of the younger generation.


And what other state gives the rifle hunters 4 days to hunt?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

The whole premise of I400 is to increase opportunity for hunting mature bulls on 3-5 current LE units which have decent 'quality'. We looked at several different factors that limit the number of tags issued on these LE units. We felt the biggest factors where: 1)Harvest age averages being the primary factor in tag allotments 2)60% of the tags are issued to rifle hunters who experience 85-90& success rates on average 3)The majority of tags are issued for season dates in September during the main part of the rutting/breeding season. We then looked at ways we could minimize the limiting factors while maintaining higher 'quality' than the any-bull areas and most states. The result is I400, which has been modified a lot since the original draft. We also met with the DWR, SFW Board of Directors, UBA, BOU, as well as many discussions with big game biologists from several states (Utah included), and several open meetings with concerned sportsmen.

I believe we MUST use bull:cow ratios as a bigger decider in tag allotments than harvest ages. I also believe that no more than 50% of the tags should be issued to the most effective weapon (rifle), so we came up with 50% for rifle (a decrease from 60%), 30% for archery (an increase from 25%), and 20% for muzzle loader(an increase from 15%). Season dates would be changed to allow a higher number of mature bulls to survive to ensure maintained 'quality' and allow for lower success rates which in turn will result in more tags being issued. We also decided to have just one rifle season, and to keep this in the same bonus point pool as the LE tags.

I fully expect to be on the elk committee that drafts the new elk management plan, and if I am I will push I400 or something like it. I also would love to get this jump started again and it looks like many elk hunters are interested in it, so I am for getting a public meeting set up in the near future.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Elkoholic8 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, this plan is more favorable for the archers because they are the one who need the rut to help their success rates. The archery success rates are horrible. The rifle hunters have the advantage of longer range and usually snow. Bow hunters get lonley quiet elk in hot weather. So yes this plan should help the bowhunters more. Look around at the other states, they all help the archers as much as possible. Sept 1- Sept 31, sounds like a great time to me.
> ...


Colorado has 4 rifle seasons, two are 5 days in length and the other two are 7 days in length. However, I am in favor of ONE 7 day rifle season in mid-October for the I400 units.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

Welcome back Pro.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Welcome back Pro.


 8)


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

proutdoors said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Elkoholic8 said:
> ...


7 or 9 day hunts I could live with. I think you will find that the numbers of animals taken will remain pretty much the same. Like I said earlier, one storm and your hunt is done. October is an unpredictable time of year. 
One other question, has anybody given any thought to the displaced hunters getting an over the counter tag in the remaining any bull units? Or did I forget about something in the I400 plan that locks those guys out?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

pro you know Im on board


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Bout **** time you showed up. Oh and Horsema, your friends hunt public ground, I400 has nothing to do with that.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

HOGAN said:


> Bout **** time you showed up. Oh and Horsema, your friends hunt public ground, I400 has nothing to do with that.


Are not the 3-4 units you are making I400 units currently LE for big bulls and general for spikes. And are you not now making them I400 LE only or did I miss something?


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

The way I see it, I400 is an any bull area hunt with limited tags, but not as limited as the "Premium" LE. Right now you have two choices to hunt mature bulls in Utah. An over crowded, low elk population Any Bull unit, or a once in a lifetime LE tag. I400 will give hunters an additional option. You can elect to hunt mature bulls every year on an Any Bull general season hunt, hunt (presumably) every 4-6 years on an I400 hunt, or wait for your once in a lifetime premium hunt. If I400 is done with preference points, a waiting period would not have to be applied. You could add a significant amount of tags because hunters would have lower success rates and would be harvesting bulls from all age classes rather than the top end (herd bull) or bottom end (spikes). Since spikes will not be the prefered choice on these units, most will survive and add more mature bulls to be hunted/harvested. The biggest thing for me and this proposal is moving rifle out of the rut and reallocting tags among the weapon types to better benefit ALL hunters. I have followed and supported this proposal since the beginning. I and my friends are on board PRO/Hogan, just let us know what we need to do.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Just what everyone will want when they draw an LE. LOWER SUCCESS RATE!!!! :evil:


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

Success would depend on what the individual hunter puts into it. If they put in the work and the time, there is no question in my mind that they will have an opportunity at a mature bull. Whether that bull meets their particular standard is the question. Just ask PRO, on his Dutton archery hunt last year he had opportunties at bulls most people would shoot without thinking twice, but his standards were set high and ended up eating tag soup in the end. In my mind, the lower success rates will come from those who drive the roads expecting to shoot a bull from their truck or ATV or set their expectations too high and don't end up taking a shot. That is why I believe we will see more harvest of all age classes because people will be more content shooting a lesser bull. If you desire to have a guaranteed 90%+ success rate at a 350" bull than I400 isn't for you and you should stick with one of the other 24 elk units that will remain a premium LE. I400 is for those who wish to have a CHANCE at a nice bull every five years or so but understand the potential for a lesser bull or no bull at all.


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

horsesma said:


> I have friends that hunt the rifle, and the last two days of the hunt seem to be the most successful because of the Wyoming hunt overlap pressuring the animals back into Utah. Changing the number of days in the rifle will greatly diminish someone's hunt.  Leave things alone. Seems like this is more catered to the bow hunter. :roll: Someone needs to give the other side a voice.


Leave things alone so we can keep getting spike tags and MAYBE get a mature bull tag ONCE in our lifetime? Get real. What I400 does is cater to everyone. Rifle hunters included. Are you okay with having a <.1% chance of drawing a mature elk tag? I assume you are because you don't want anything to change. I400 would increase your chances of drawing a 100 fold. Even if you never apply for an I400 tag.



horsesma said:


> Just what everyone will want when they draw an LE. LOWER SUCCESS RATE!!!! :evil:


First of all, they would draw an I400 tag... Not a LE tag. Second of all, I would think most people would rather hunt mature elk every 4-5 years with a 60-70% chance success rate as opposed to hunting elk OIL with a 98% success. If I hunted the next 30 years of my life I would receive six I400 tags if it took me 5 years to draw out each time. With a 60% success rate that means I would harvest 3.6 mature elk over my next thirty years as opposed to ONE elk with the current management plan. Not to mention all of the memories, and time spent with friends/family on 6 hunts whether they were successful or not. Please open your eyes. The current system is broken for EVERYONE.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

HOGAN said:


> Bout **** time you showed up. Oh and Horsema, your friends hunt public ground, I400 has nothing to do with that.


I was referring to reducing number of days hunting hurting success. 4 days when you draw a LE tag bites. Bow hunters in my opinion are already afforded a head start. They get first crack at the animals when they are not as wary. A rifle hunter in many cases has to deal with first the bow hunters making the elk spooked then muzzleloaders, and maybe a youth hunt.( If I'm mistaken on the youth hunt I'm sorry.) It isn't all peaches and cream for rifle hunters. I guess this is what this is all about though isn't it? To make it harder for rifle hunters to have success while making the bow hunter have better success. Or am I mistaken? LE tags are not easy to come by. Just trying to give the other side a voice since not many seem to be opposed.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

MEEN said:


> horsesma said:
> 
> 
> > I have friends that hunt the rifle, and the last two days of the hunt seem to be the most successful because of the Wyoming hunt overlap pressuring the animals back into Utah. Changing the number of days in the rifle will greatly diminish someone's hunt.  Leave things alone. Seems like this is more catered to the bow hunter. :roll: Someone needs to give the other side a voice.
> ...


Lower success rate was referring to number of days. Not LE tag? You still loose your points? Or am I mistaken on this also? It is getting too complicated as it is.


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

> Lower success rate was referring to number of days. Not LE tag? You still loose your points? Or am I mistaken on this also? It is getting too complicated as it is.


One muust understand the risk, don't like it put in for a different hunt, simple as that. People put in for the Fillmore Oak Creek South elk unit with that understanding, if not it is their own fault.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

MEEN: You think the odds will be that good? People will probably flock to those odds. People who have put in for other areas in the past may shoot down your dreams. (No pun intended.) When 10 to 20 times the people put in for those hunts your odds might diminish. A lot of this is based on assumption. Will it be better? We will not know for many years to come. The current system may be broken for once in a lifetime but not for hunting a mature elk. Maybe not a 400 class bull, but a mature elk none the less.


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

horsesma-
I don't think you get the grand picture of I400.
If many people flock to I400- then does that not open the odds for the other 24 LE units? The idea is to be able to issue more mature bull tags period. It may not work, down the road we might find that out. But I will guarantee that the same road we are on is not the best one. Something has to change. We need to offer people some thing in the middle when it comes to elk.
I will bet most people would rather hunt harder and hunt a little smaller bull, a couple times in their life, than a "chance" of a OIL size bull only once in their life. Honestly-What do you think most would choose? Please answer.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

horsesma-
If more people flock to this 1-400 that right there proves it’s a success. 
This would allow less people on other units. 

If it moves people through the point system faster it is a success.

If people give up spike hunting it is a success. There is no difference in a spike bull and a six point except one set of horns ends up in the garbage.


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

horsesma said:


> MEEN: You think the odds will be that good? People will probably flock to those odds. This is exactly one of the points of I400. Because people will switch to I400 it will loosen the anal plug on the LE draws. Thus improving the odds for anyone trying to draw a LE tag. This includes all weapons!
> People who have put in for other areas in the past may shoot down your dreams. (No pun intended.) When 10 to 20 times the people put in for those hunts your odds might diminish.How are my odds going to diminish? It's a win win. If people move to the I400 pool I can either A)draw a LE tag quicker, or B)I can draw a I400 tag in 4-5 years. My odds won't diminish no matter what. Either way opportunity increases for archery, muzzleloader, and especially rifle hunters.
> 
> A lot of this is based on assumption. Will it be better? We will not know for many years to come. It is already better. We stop harvesting elk from the top and bottom of the age class and we begin to harvest elk in all age classes. It increases opportunity for you and I. It moves rifle hunters out of the rut so more elk survive. Where is the downside?
> ...


Honestly, I know you are just trying to understand it all but it appears you have been unable to comprehend my posts or any of the I400 posts. I suggest you go back and read this whole thread again. It does benefit you, I, and anyone that comes along after us. Keep in mind this is ONLY for a FEW units. It is not changing Elk hunting on all units in utah .


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

blazingsaddle said:


> horsesma-
> I don't think you get the grand picture of I400.
> If many people flock to I400- then does that not open the odds for the other 24 LE units? The idea is to be able to issue more mature bull tags period. It may not work, down the road we might find that out. But I will guarantee that the same road we are on is not the best one. Something has to change. We need to offer people some thing in the middle when it comes to elk.
> I will bet most people would rather hunt harder and hunt a little smaller bull, a couple times in their life, than a "chance" of a OIL size bull only once in their life. Honestly-What do you think most would choose? Please answer.


People can hunt a smaller bull on public now. They can also harvest a decent bull on public. Don't think for a minute I don't want better odds. When I get a draw tag I would like my hunt to be a quality hunt. 4 days may be good for some. If you just want to hunt the first thing you see. With pressure from hunters you may have a hard time finding elk one day where they were previously. You may as well hunt public. You may find drawing more times does not make a quality hunt. I still believe this caters to bow hunters. Keep the rifle at 9 days. I400 tags still basically an LE tag. Which is still going to be OIL. Wait and see. You think people are going to harvest any bull in these select areas. I think not. The quality bulls will get slaughtered. Eventually things will change again, and again, and again......May as well hold out for the once in a lifetime.


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

Horsema-
I am not in favor of the four day rifle one bit. It does not seem fair to only offer that many days. It needs to be 9 days like it is now.
You have to look at this from an archers point of view. Archers are great managment tools. Its the best way hands down to offer as many tags possible, and harvest the fewest animals. 
Of coarse it benefits archers, as well as muzzy hunters, and rifle hunters. It will, without a doubt convert some to picking up a bow, which in turn opens a spot for a rifle hunter to move forward. 
Again this is only 5 units, rifle hunters still have 24 units to pick from as far as the rut goes. I think that benefits rifle hunters a lot more than archery hunters, don't you?

If you call the open bull general public land hunt currently offered as a good hunt- well you might be one in a hundred. The success rates are terrrible, a raghorn 5x5 would be a feat to accomplish. If you can do better on the open bull areas- hunt those instead of the I400 areas or the LE areas. The I400 does not affect those areas.

You did not answer my question from my last post either-


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

a four day rifle season is BS if you ask me. :shock:


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

> People can hunt a smaller bull on public now. They can also harvest a decent bull on public.


 Your ignorance is becoming thick. Have you looked at the success rates for those units? How many times have you harvested ANY bull on a public unit in Utah? Please provide pics. If you have, my hat is off to you. That is a hard task.



> When I get a draw tag I would like my hunt to be a quality hunt. 4 days may be good for some. If you just want to hunt the first thing you see. With pressure from hunters you may have a hard time finding elk one day where they were previously. You may as well hunt public.


 If you think a public unit is half as good as a 4 day I400 unit would be you can fly a kite. Once again please re-read all the posts. Initially it was suggested to have two 4 day rifle hunts, but several people have suggested a 9 day rifle hunt which I FULLY agree with. Four days is too short IMO and unfair.



> You may find drawing more times does not make a quality hunt. I still believe this caters to bow hunters. Keep the rifle at 9 days. I400 tags still basically an LE tag. Which is still going to be OIL. Wait and see. You think people are going to harvest any bull in these select areas. I think not. The quality bulls will get slaughtered. Eventually things will change again, and again, and again......May as well hold out for the once in a lifetime.


It is apparent that you have a stiffy for archery hunters. I believe that the only reason you have a problem with this is because of archery hunters. Well, that and you have a huge misconception about Utah's current Elk hunting situation. Yes, I fully believe that people will harvest any bull. The people that want the Spidey bulls will keep on applying for LE tags. To prevent the "slaughtering" that is why season dates and lengths have been moved.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Blazingsaddle: If the answer you are looking for is (Yes!) I can't give a definitive. Most likely will. Will it make these areas a better place to hunt? We don't know yet how it will effect the outcome. It sounds like they may as well make it a public hunt in these areas. That is virtually what is happening, other than the 4 day hunts and tag restrictions. Is it better management? :?: I do not have a stiffy for archery hunters. Some of my best buddies are archery hunters. Archery hunters I would say have it pretty good here in Utah. I have a problem with over thinking things. Hunting is what you make of it. Draw or no draw. It's over thinking things that got us in the state we are in now. Season dates will not keep these areas from the big bulls being slaughtered.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

I have enjoyed the argument though. :wink: I just want this thread to keep going. It is probably a mute point to argue when it is going to happen. Not enough opposition.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

horsesma said:


> horsesma says Season dates will not keep these areas from the big bulls being slaughtered.


why don't we hunt mule deer in the rut with a rifle? simple question for an over thinker like yourselfs.

here is another question for you over thinkers
how can Arizona keep the population under objective and still kill 400" bulls with half as many elk as Utah has while at the same time giving out more tags?

Simple they use archery as a tool instead of spike tags!!! people get to hunt more than once in their life, they don't have waiting periods. If you want quality you can wait for 15 years but if you want to hunt you can hunt every 5.

in Utah in the best areas managed for numbers not quality it will take you 7 years with a bow and a five year waiting period. 12 years min if you got into the draw 7 years ago the odds are worse now. This is bull crap because we have twice as many bulls and twice as many areas to hunt as Arizona.


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

> I have a problem with over thinking things.


 I believe the problem is not thinking through things.



> It's over thinking things that got us in the state we are in now.


You are exactly right. If there weren't people such as engineers to overthink everything we wouldn't have all the luxuries we do today. Overthinking is what got us out of the caveman stage. It's the people that are okay with what we have that hold us back. I would rather overthink especially on this and get it right instead of just giving out a bunch of spike tags and not worrying about it.



> Season dates will not keep these areas from the big bulls being slaughtered.


 You can bet your fanny that season dates and permit numbers will which is all part of the I400 plan.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> Arizona.


Just a question, since we are using Arizona as an example, what is the total number of elk hunters jockeying for permits in Arizona vs Utah. In other words how many elk hunters are appling for these permits, comparing the states. I'm just thinking over all. Not even broke out by different hunting gear. Example, just plain 5000 opportunities and 100,000 hunting bodies total.

I don't know, but it would seem to make a big difference if say Arizona had 5000 total tag available and 20,000 total hunters appling for those tagges versus Utah had 4000 total tagges available and 100,000 hunter appling for those tagges. I'm just trying to figure out if you are talking apples vs apples or apples vs oranges.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

MEEN said:


> > Season dates will not keep these areas from the big bulls being slaughtered.
> 
> 
> You can bet your fanny that season dates and permit numbers will which is all part of the I400 plan.


Season date changes, weapon tag allotments, lower bull:cow ratios, combined will lower success rates and allow for a fair amount of older class bulls to escape year to year. Look at the North Cache LE, it is already basically being managed as a I400 unit many ways when you consider how many bulls are harvested each year from the unit with OTC tags in Idaho. Yet, this unit has produced several 400 class bulls and many others that qualify for the record books. This is despite having spike tags issued on it, and having OTC tags on the Idaho side of this unit where a pile of good bulls get big in Utah only to be killed in Idaho. If you took away spike bull harvests, moved the season dates around, and changed tag allotments this unit would continue to produce world class bulls, but would allow for more hunting opportunity of these bulls in Utah instead of mostly in Idaho.

Rifle hunters enjoy 85-90% success rates, muzzle loader hunters enjoy 70-75% success rates, and archery hunters enjoy 30-35% success rates. By giving a lower percentage of the tags to the most effective weapon you are not only able to issue more tags and harvest the same number of bulls, but you allow more of the higher 'quality' bulls survive due to the FACT that archers and muzzy hunters kill younger/smaller bulls on average than rifle hunters. This will help keep 'quality' at desired levels while providing for a lot more opportunity.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

hello pro havent seen ya far a while


----------



## for fun (Sep 13, 2007)

Controlled Rifle Season 1: Oct 6-10 6,7,8,9,10 five days that is not so bad
Controlled Rifle Season 2: Oct 13-17 13,14,15,16,17 five days that is not so bad.

I am still counting 2 five day rifle hunts not 2 four days. 
I am sure hogan and all involved with the plan will have it all ironed out, but the whole plan sounds better then what we have now. Hell even just 1 seven day rifle hunt would work for me.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

It is funny, before when doing this plan all the rifle hunters wanted their end to be sweeter and sweeter. I think you guys realize that sweeter is not always sweeter. The desired hunt in Utah is a rifle tag in the rut. The funny thing is guys will wait 15 years to do it and then harvest in 2. Really not a hunt, more like a slaughter. Archery hunt out of the rut, now that is a hunt. Sweeten the deal for other weapons so they are equal, and the odds will follow. Worsens my odds but gives hope to future hunters. Not a bad trade. It is time for Utah to expand it's horizons and plan for the future, not the 400 inch $$$$$ hunters.


----------



## lehi (Sep 13, 2007)

Pro, I have never really thought of it that way about the North cache Unit being I400 on the idaho side. You are right about it that the Idahoans get to hunt that unit A LOT and have very good success on it.

BTW, where can I find info on meetings on this subject? Ive never been to one of these RAC meetings. I would like to go to them to see if the elk management ever changes to something similar to this plan.


----------



## Elkoholic8 (Jan 15, 2008)

Hogan:
Maybe if you (or whoever else is pushing this plan) made up a mock proclamation with season dates, preferred tag numbers, and maps of which areas I400 would affect and which areas would stay under the current LEand general season program, this would help guys see the whole picture you are trying to paint. I think there are alot of people who read through these post and get a little confused about what the main idea is. So if the whole rule is printed right in front of them maybe it make more sence.

So far I like the idea. Our current system sucks so I'm willing to give up some of my usual hunts to try something new. Any ideas when this will be presented to the board?


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

If some one will pm me with what the I400 is all about please. I'm getting lost with all of these post and bitching.So if Pro if you will pm me with what this is all about. that would be great.I'm just not getting what this is. is it another Le hunt but just a faster way to draw a any bull tag?


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Paint as many pictures as you want. In the end there are only so many tags to go around. The lower success rate of bow hunters to rifle hunters is just a manipulation to allow more permits to be issued, but as someone has stated hunters will enjoy lower success rates.  Yea!! Just what every hunter wants. More opportunity with lower success. It may unplug the system for some. People who hunt only general will be drawn to this no doubt. People who have been putting in for LE's unless it is these area's would be remiss to change what they put in for. Taking of mature elk over spikes is good with me, but when the DWR's herd numbers change because of winter kill or higher success rates or any number of factors. Results could change quickly. If you are a rifle hunter and have thought about bow hunting this would be a good opportunity. If and when it passes. BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. There already is a big conversion to bow hunting. I for one think it is great, but did you witness what happened with the deer/bow tags. SOLD OUT IN 2.5 HOURS. This whole I400 may be good. Might work. In the end things will keep changing, and hunters will have to adapt. If you do not keep up with what is happening with the rules on a regular basis you will be left in the dark as many are. Change is inevitable. Every year this state is growing in population. That in itself is going to cause change to draw results. :wink:


----------



## MEEN (Jan 27, 2009)

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but anything going on with this? It was kind of gung ho for a little bit then it fell flat.

I was thinking about it the other day and think that the more people we can make aware of this and get on board the more likely we can make a good push. Has anyone ever thought of setting up an i400 blog at blogspot or something? I think this would be an awesome idea. It could let everyone know the details, facts, and truth about whats going on with Elk hunting. It will keep everyone up to date on whats happening and people can comment on it. 

In order to get exposure to the blog we could get a billboard along I15 referring to the current butt plug. I for one will chip in to help cover costs of the billboard.

What do you think?


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

So this thing gonna happen or not? Sounds like MEEN wants to see it pushed. Whats the latest there HOGAN?


----------



## TLB (Jul 13, 2008)

I have been reading this post with great interest. I support the I400 idea wholeheartedly. A plan like this is the only way we will ever offer our future hunters (my kids, their kids etc.) a snowballs chance in heck of quality big game hunting in Utah, not just elk either. The current system is broken and this is a plan that can move us in the right direction. If we as hunters fail to work as a team and only focus on our individual goals, our future hunters are dead in the water. My biggest concern with hunting in Utah is not my own desires to harvest a trophy, but to offer my kids, and your kids and their kids something to look forward to. As it stands right now, seriously what do we offer the future. Stop whining about a day here or a day there, and lets get a program in place that when a lot of us are nothing but worm food, our posterity will be spending time outdoors enjoying our hunting heritage.


----------

