# Nebo Elk number's, Waaaaay Down?



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I just spent the whole week on Nebo unit, I can't believe how few mature bull's I saw.
I've been in almost every drainage from Nephi to Payson, Sled's, ATV's, and foot.

Yesterday I saw 250 head total , Several different group's , Only 5 spikes, 6 Rag
horn's, and 2 small 6 x 6's. It was that way all week, Last year in the exact same
places there were 60 to 70 bull's, or MORE.

I also know that on the high-way 89 side,were I live, the number's are way off as well.

Anyone seeing any decent bull's left on the Nebo unit???? 

I'm looking at track's hard, and glassing all hill sides, I know you'll never see them all.....
But wow!!!!!!! Where are they?


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

I called in about a 330-340 bull over by the saw mill last year and then after the hunts were over I saw another small six point over on the Santaquin side. As for the southern end of the unit, there are still some cows crossing by the dairy but no bulls to get overly excited about.


----------



## muleman (Nov 9, 2007)

I hunt the unit on the spike hunt and ride the unit all year. The past few years have been a steady decline with a huge drop off this year. I talked to the conservation officer this year and he said he had never seen the hunting as slow as he did this past year. Usually we run into bulls on every ridge we ride and glass but this year we were lucky to see elk. we have a spot that you can walk to from the loop road that over looks sawmill and the nebo drainage. I can honestly say while glassing there this year i walked away a few times with not seeing any elk. I've never had that happen before until this year.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Muleman, your dead right on the steady decline and huge drop off.

Got the spotting scope out again today, a few bull's on the dream Mine,
But nothing close to last year. 50% less animals and 50% smaller bull's.

Has anyone seen ANY bull's over 325 On winter range in the Nebo unit 
since the first of the year?????


----------



## Nueces (Jul 22, 2008)

So what is the cause for the numbers to drop off like that?


----------



## muleman (Nov 9, 2007)

Poor management by the DWR. They gave out way to many bulls tags in the last few years and they gave out hundreds of cow tags each year for a few years before that. Also I have a problem with the amount of livestock that runs in the nebo creek and pole canyon drainages. The elk have to compete with the cows over grass and forage and you can ride these drainages during the summer and drink nothing but dirt. The cows totally trample springs and over graze the pole canyon area which is crucial calving area for the elk. the forest service told me all the damage in the area was caused by elk. :evil: yea right. I have challenged them to come ride with me so we can assess the situation together but never get a response from them to join me.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

There has not been a cow hunt on the north-east side of the Nebo for 3 or 4 years. So you can cross that off as a cause. They have issued a ton of limited entry permits, but many of those are archery and have low success rates. So while permit numbers are higher, success is lower. That said, they are issueing too many bull tags because a substantial portion of the herd is on private lands. 

We saw the same situation on the forest as you guys, less bulls less cows. Numbers on our ranch were consistent to years past though, maybe down 10%. One thing I noticed last year was antler growth didn't seem as strong as years past. Bulls we have watched for the past 3-7 years just didn't put on the same bone. No mature bulls came in larger than they were the year before. Only a few 3-4 year olds from 2007 came in larger. Antler growth was down. 

The elk are also wintering a little different this year. Those elk on the West side have been shot and displaced from their usual patterns. I do know of 35-40 bulls wintering on private lands not viewable from the road. Only one giant, the rest are potential bulls. The South end of the unit is average from everything I have heard this year. 

Last point to remember is the Nebo was supposed to be managed for 5-6 year old bulls. Like most units in the state, the average age of harvested bulls was over objective. The Nebo was averaging 7.5 year olds. So there must be decrease in quality to knock the unit back down to 5.5. That is the plan anyway. The Nebo (and many other units) will never be what they were in the 2000-2007, unless extreme changes are made to the management plan. It would have to be managed on the same strategy as the San Juan, Pahvant, or the South West Desert. 

The Nebo's glory days are over.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Packout, PM sent.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

A lot of elk are still pretty high on the mountain. They are staying on the south facing slopes where the snow has melted off. I can show you 8 nice bulls right now in one canyon and then if you go three canyons over then there is 6 more nice bulls. My favorite bull in the bunch is the 7x6 with a kicker. There are still a lot of bulls around, but they are hanging in a lot of pockets that you can't see from the road. 

Is the Nebo unit doomed. Of course not, but imagine how many more bulls would be on the unit if a few more spikes were allowed to survive? It's over the objective and they need to issue more tags to keep bringing the average age of harvest down.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> A lot of elk are still pretty high on the mountain. They are staying on the south facing slopes where the snow has melted off. I can show you 8 nice bulls right now in one canyon and then if you go three canyons over then there is 6 more nice bulls. My favorite bull in the bunch is the 7x6 with a kicker. There are still a lot of bulls around, but they are hanging in a lot of pockets that you can't see from the road.
> 
> Is the Nebo unit doomed. Of course not, but imagine how many more bulls would be on the unit if a few more spikes were allowed to survive? It's over the objective and they need to issue more tags to keep bringing the average age of harvest down.


Not arguing with you here but where exactly are you seeing these bulls that's not from the road? Reese's flat is a major SOB to get up in a vehicle right now, the loop road is still closed and getting anywhere that you can actually see animals in Bear canyon isn't good as well. Not doubting you, just asking, you can PM me if you want.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> but imagine how many more bulls would be on the unit if a few more spikes were allowed to survive? It's over the objective and they need to issue more tags to keep bringing the average age of harvest down.


Aren't these two comments contradictory? On one side you ask us to imagine how many more bulls there would be if a few more spikes were not killed and then in the next comment you say that we are over objective and need to kill more bulls.... :?:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I think the bull quantity was too high and they are getting more inline with were they should be on most LE units. As the number of bulls decreases and the number of tags stays high 'quality' will decrease as well. I am NOT a fan of the spike tags, as I feel it is a lazy way to 'manage' bull numbers by the DWR. I think you will see an improvement on units like the Nebo due to a decrease in spike hunters on that unit as many spike hunters will shift to places like the Pahvant.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I look at this thread and just shake my head,,,,,,

A year ago I brought the up the fact that Nebo had peaked year's back and a few
guy's on here beat the chit out me.. 

I told them, way to many tag's,,,,,,They told me way to many bull's......Well,

One more fall off like this year and there will be a very large number of unhappy LE tag holder's............As it stand's now, I can't see blowing more than 5 or 6 point's on Nebo.

During this winter I've spent a lot of time on the Wasatch and Manti as well, The carry
over bull's on these unit's are not as good as last year,,,,,,But FAR better than Nebo.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Did the elk get killed off or did they run off? I mean, do you really think it's a problem with hunter management or is the problem about habitat quality?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Aren't these two comments contradictory? On one side you ask us to imagine how many more bulls there would be if a few more spikes were not killed and then in the next comment you say that we are over objective and need to kill more bulls....


Yes we do need to kill more bulls to bring the average age of harvest down, but if we don't allow spikes to grow up and mature then the quality will greatly suffer because we are eating both ends of the pie. I sure hope a lot of hunters who now hunt spikes on the Nebo go to new spike units.

Again Wyo2ut if more spikes grew to maturity and we kept issuing more tags to meet the average age of harvest then the Nebo unit would be better off, then if we kept slaughtering baby elk and mature bulls.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Finn, There are a few elk that cross back and fourth on the east side, (Hwy 89).
The Thistle area see's elk going every direction, and around Indianola once and a while.
But the most of west side is I-15, then on down past Lavan, no elk migrating there.

In 32 year's I've not seen enough movment to say there's even a chance they "ran off".


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Yes we do need to kill more bulls to bring the average age of harvest down, but if we don't allow spikes to grow up and mature then the quality will greatly suffer because we are eating both ends of the pie. I sure hope a lot of hunters who now hunt spikes on the Nebo go to new spike units.
> 
> Again Wyo2ut if more spikes grew to maturity and we kept issuing more tags to meet the average age of harvest then the Nebo unit would be better off, then if we kept slaughtering baby elk and mature bulls.


You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth....the quality of the Nebo unit didn't decline until the DWR started issuing more LE tags to reduce the average ages of harvested elk. By issuing more LE tags, the bull/cow ratios have probably been reduced. The decline in the quality of elk on Nebo--if real--has NOTHING to do with spike hunting. As the LE tags have increased, the number of high-end bulls has declined because hunters tend to crop off the largest bulls each year. IF more and more tags are issued, the crop-off takes place at lower and lower levels.

There is no doubt about it...quality will drop off as the DWR has increased LE tags to reduce bull/cow ratios...but that is necessary. The disturbing thing about this thread is that the same hunters complaining about quality decreasing are the same hunters that keep the WB from issuing more LE tags. Afterall, the whole reason many units are approaching 1/1 bull cow ratios is because hunters have been afraid of losing quality. Ironically, the whole reason the DWR went to a statewide spike hunt is to reduce bull/cow ratios without harming quality as much.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> has NOTHING to do with spike hunting. As the LE tags have increased, the number of high-end bulls has declined because hunters tend to crop off the largest bulls each year. IF more and more tags are issued, the crop-off takes place at lower and lower levels.


Do you think big bulls grow on trees? If more spikes are allowed to grow up then they replace the matures bulls that were are killing and the cycles goes round and round. You have never been able to get this through your head. If you have less branch antler bulls being recruited to the herd than eventually you will have to cut back on the number of mature bull tags. If spikes are allowed to grow into branch antlered bulls then you wouldn't have to cut back on tags because younger bulls will be replacing the older bulls.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Not county any CWMUs or depredation hunts, the DWR issued 36 archery tags, 80 any-weapon tags, 22 muzzleloader tags, and 4 premium tags for the Nebo unit in 2008. That adds up to a total of 142 tags. By just going off 2007 harvest percentages, approximately 13 of the 36 archery tags would have been filled, 64 of the any-weapon tags, 6 of the muzzleloader tags, and all 4 premium tags for a total of 87 bull elk harvested.

By way of comparison, 76 bulls were harvested in 2007 and 61 bulls were harvested in 2006. After looking at those numbers, I have a hard time believing that in one year's time the DWR suddenly killed all the bulls.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Do you think big bulls grow on trees? If more spikes are allowed to grow up then they replace the matures bulls that were are killing and the cycles goes round and round. You have never been able to get this through your head. If you have less branch antler bulls being recruited to the herd than eventually you will have to cut back on the number of mature bull tags. If spikes are allowed to grow into branch antlered bulls then you wouldn't have to cut back on tags because younger bulls will be replacing the older bulls.


Again, coyote, the only thing that has changed on the Nebo unit the last few years is the number of LE tags, NOT the number of spike tags. Spike hunting cannot be blamed for any decline in bull numbers. What you are talking about has NOTHING to do with Nebo. The DWR has been increasing LE tags to reduce bull/cow ratios and the average ages of harvested elk.

Also, even if you eliminated the spike elk hunt and still killed the same number of bulls, quality would go down...probably further down than if no spike hunting existed.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Not county any CWMUs or depredation hunts, the DWR issued 36 archery tags, 80 any-weapon tags, 22 muzzleloader tags, and 4 premium tags for the Nebo unit in 2008. That adds up to a total of 142 tags. By just going off 2007 harvest percentages, approximately 13 of the 36 archery tags would have been filled, 64 of the any-weapon tags, 6 of the muzzleloader tags, and all 4 premium tags for a total of 87 bull elk harvested.
> 
> By way of comparison, 76 bulls were harvested in 2007 and 61 bulls were harvested in 2006. After looking at those numbers, I have a hard time believing that in one year's time the DWR suddenly killed all the bulls


.

I never said the bulls have been killed off. I said just think about how many more bulls and tags we can offer if more spikes were allowed to grow up because we are KILLING TWICE the number of spikes than mature bulls. If we cut the spike harvest in half then we would have a bunch of new bulls in the herd and MORE opportunity because the NEBO unit has room for more elk growth. THUS more opportunities to hunt bigger bulls. The bull to cow ratio is 31/100 so it not extremely high.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Again, coyote, the only thing that has changed on the Nebo unit the last few years is the number of LE tags, NOT the number of spike tags. Spike hunting cannot be blamed for any decline in bull numbers. What you are talking about has NOTHING to do with Nebo. The DWR has been increasing LE tags to reduce bull/cow ratios and the average ages of harvested elk.
> 
> *Also, even if you eliminated the spike elk hunt and still killed the same number of bulls, quality would go down...probably further down than if no spike hunting existed*.


How would it go down if you have more bulls added to the herd? As long as the elk aren't at carry capacity then it wont affect the herd. PLUS you can issue more tags to take out surplus bulls to create more room for growing bulls and cows which then gives hunters more opportunities and this my friend is the overall goal.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> I never said the bulls have been killed off. I said just think about how many more bulls and tags we can offer if more spikes were allowed to grow up because we are KILLING TWICE the number of spikes than mature bulls. If we cut the spike harvest in half then we would have a bunch of new bulls in the herd and MORE opportunity because the NEBO unit has room for more elk growth. THUS more opportunities to hunt bigger bulls. The bull to cow ratio is 31/100 so it not extremely high.


Now you are backing off... :roll: What is this thread about? Isn't it about why the numbers of bull elk seem to be so low on Nebo? Again, you can't blame the low numbers of mature bull elk on Nebo to spike elk hunting because spike elk hunting has been consistent....the only thing that has changed on Nebo is the number of LE tags.

This thread has nothing to do with trying to create more opportunity to hunt bigger bulls...it is asking whether too much opportunity to kill bigger bulls exists and whether the DWR is killing the quality by issuing too many tags. Again, the ironic thing is that this exact fear is what has reduced our opportunity to hunt bigger bulls year in and year out for quite some time. And, the whole reason the DWR went to statewide spike hunting is because of that fear....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> How would it go down if you have more bulls added to the herd? As long as the elk aren't at carry capacity then it wont affect the herd. PLUS you can issue more tags to take out surplus bulls to create more room for growing bulls and cows which then gives hunters more opportunities and this my friend is the overall goal.


Because you will still be killing the same number of bulls...instead of killing them as spikes, you are killing them when they are mature. By doing this, you are simply cropping off the high end bulls at levels lower and lower. The whole reason we have spike elk hunting is to protect quality and still be able to kill bulls...


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

*Coyoteslayer wrote*


> A lot of elk are still pretty high on the mountain. They are staying on the south facing slopes where the snow has melted off. I* can show you 8 nice bulls right now in one canyon and then if you go three canyons over then there is 6 more nice bulls. My favorite bull in the bunch is the 7x6 with a kicker. There are still a lot of bulls around, but they are hanging in a lot of pockets that you can't see from the road. *
> 
> *Is the Nebo unit doomed. Of course not*, *but imagine how many more bulls would be on the unit if a few more spikes were allowed to survive? *It's over the objective and they need to issue more tags to keep bringing the average age of harvest down.


*Wyo2ut wrote *


> Now you are backing off... What is this thread about? Isn't it about why the numbers of bull elk seem to be so low on Nebo? Again, you can't blame the low numbers of mature bull elk on Nebo to spike elk hunting because spike elk hunting has been consistent....the only thing that has changed on Nebo is the number of LE tags.


For an english teacher you sure have a hard time reading. How you correct your students papers? Here is what I wrote.

Here I will type it again for you. The nebo unit isnt doomed but imagine how many more bulls could be recruited to the herd if more spikes grew up.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> For an english teacher you sure have a hard time reading. How you correct your students papers? Here is what I wrote.
> 
> Here I will type it again for you. The nebo unit isnt doomed but imagine how many more bulls could be recruited to the herd if more spikes grew up.


 O|* O|* O|* O|* O|* O|* O|* O|* O|*

Let's try this again:

Coyoteslayer wrote
"Is the Nebo unit doomed. Of course not, but imagine how many more bulls would be on the unit if a few more spikes were allowed to survive? It's over the objective and they need to issue more tags to keep bringing the average age of harvest down."

Again, these two statements are self-contradictory because one implies that we would have more bull elk if we stopped killing spikes while the other says we need to kill more bull elk to bring average ages down. In other words, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MORE BULLS BEING RECRUITED INTO THE HERD BECAUSE YOU WOULD STILL BE KILLING THE SAME NUMBER OF BULLS.

IF you kill them when they are spikes, you are protecting the quality of the mature bulls by limiting the number of the big bulls being killed and allowing the remaining spikes/yearlings from being killed and allowing them to grow and mature.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Again, these two statements are self-contradictory because one implies that we would have more bull elk if we stopped killing spikes while the other says we need to kill more bull elk to bring average ages down. In other words, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MORE BULLS BEING RECRUITED INTO THE HERD BECAUSE YOU WOULD STILL BE KILLING THE SAME NUMBER OF BULLS.


Yes you would have MORE bulls recruited to the herd if you killed 100 mature bulls every year to keep the average age of harvest Near objective and then you had 200 branched antlered bulls recruited to the herd. The averaGe age of harvest would go back up with all the extra bulls recruited and then you would have to issue even more tags. HUNTER OPPORTUNITY

Wyo2ut you will argue until you are blue in the face and pass out about this spike issue because you LOVE killing baby elk.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Again, these two statements are self-contradictory because one implies that we would have more bull elk if we stopped killing spikes while the other says we need to kill more bull elk to bring average ages down. In other words, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MORE BULLS BEING RECRUITED INTO THE HERD BECAUSE YOU WOULD STILL BE KILLING THE SAME NUMBER OF BULLS.


Yes you would have MORE bulls recruited to the herd if you killed 100 mature bulls every year to keep the average age of harvest Near objective and then you had 200 branched antlered bulls recruited to the herd. The averaGe age of harvest would go back up with all the extra bulls recruited and then you would have to issue even more tags. HUNTER OPPORTUNITY

Wyo2ut you will argue until you are blue in the face and pass out about this spike issue because you LOVE killing baby elk.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Again, these two statements are self-contradictory because one implies that we would have more bull elk if we stopped killing spikes while the other says we need to kill more bull elk to bring average ages down. In other words, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MORE BULLS BEING RECRUITED INTO THE HERD BECAUSE YOU WOULD STILL BE KILLING THE SAME NUMBER OF BULLS.


Yes you would have MORE bulls recruited to the herd if you killed 100 mature bulls every year to keep the average age of harvest Near objective and then you had 200 branched antlered bulls recruited to the herd. The averaGe age of harvest would go back up with all the extra bulls recruited and then you would have to issue even more tags. HUNTER OPPORTUNITY

Wyo2ut you will argue until you are blue in the face and pass out about this spike issue because you LOVE killing baby elk.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Again, these two statements are self-contradictory because one implies that we would have more bull elk if we stopped killing spikes while the other says we need to kill more bull elk to bring average ages down. In other words, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MORE BULLS BEING RECRUITED INTO THE HERD BECAUSE YOU WOULD STILL BE KILLING THE SAME NUMBER OF BULLS.


Yes you would have MORE bulls recruited to the herd if you killed 100 mature bulls every year to keep the average age of harvest Near objective and then you had 200 branched antlered bulls recruited to the herd. The averaGe age of harvest would go back up with all the extra bulls recruited and then you would have to issue even more tags. HUNTER OPPORTUNITY

Wyo2ut you will argue until you are blue in the face and pass out about this spike issue because you LOVE killing baby elk


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

THERE WYO2UT 4 POSTS IN A ROW BECAUSE EVEN THE WEBSITE THOUGHT YOU SHOULD READ IT 4 TIMES.



> Wyo2ut you will argue until you are blue in the face and pass out about this spike issue because you LOVE killing baby elk


Wyo2ut, Wyo2ut, are you awake? Did you pass out? Squeeze my hand if you can hear me. Fixed Blade is here to perform CPR. Should I call 911?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Just got my hand's on the 2008 hunting stat's. Thought I'd put Nebo's on this thread.

2008 hunting statistic's for Central, LE Nebo elk

Archery) 35 hunter's afield, 8 successful, average age bull 7.5

Anyweapon) 81 hunter's afield, 59 successful, average age bull 6.3

muzzle loader) 20 hunter's afield, 15 successful, average age bull 4.7

Premium) 5 hunter's afield, 4 successful, average age bull 6.0


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Finn, There are a few elk that cross back and fourth on the east side, (Hwy 89).
> The Thistle area see's elk going every direction, and around Indianola once and a while.
> But the most of west side is I-15, then on down past Lavan, no elk migrating there.
> 
> In 32 year's I've not seen enough movment to say there's even a chance they "ran off".


Thanks for that.

The reason I ask is because there was a day when the elk really liked the southern end of the unit - Cold Spring Flats, Sage Flats, etc. But they moved out years ago and are still scarce as hen's teeth south of Log Canyon. I'm thinking they don't like that area anymore and I'm wondering if the unfavorable conditions, lack of water or whatever it is, is moving north.

And by the bye, I remember the huge winter herd that always congregated in Nephi where the golf course is. Haven't really seen that for a few years, now.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

Finnegan said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > Finn, There are a few elk that cross back and fourth on the east side, (Hwy 89).
> ...


There are still elk migrating around Levan, just not the bull herds like it used to be; for the most part it's just cows and calves right now. The herd that hung out by Yuba is almost all gone, occasionally you will see a few migrate back and forth on the ridge but IMHO the reason for the lack of elk on the southern end is due to the open bull unit on the west side. As for Log Canyon, the last time I saw good bulls up there was in '06, my brother had a LE muzzy tag that year and since that time the biggest bull I have seen up there would be in the 320 range.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Archery) 35 hunter's afield, 8 successful, average age bull 7.5


Wow...somebody shot a couple of really old bulls.

Why the big discrepancy between the bowhunt and the muzzie?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Wow...somebody shot a couple of really old bulls.
> 
> Why the big discrepancy between the bowhunt and the muzzie?


Maybe because there was only 8 killed by archers so it's easier to get an average age of harvest of 7.5 if even 4 bulls were 7 or older.

The ML hunt has always been harder on the Nebo because the bulls get pushed in more remote areas.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Disagree on the remote area's, most of the elk habitat is easly accessable.
Now the high country on Nebo mountain is remote , but no elk up high.

I can have someone drop me off at Black Hawk campground and walk to my
house on Hwy 89 in 2 hours. or off the Summit trail to the head of Nebo creek, 2hrs.
From payson Lake to Bennie creek 1 hour walk..Access is very easy every where.

The only places elk realy have is the private ground. and depending from year to year
who draws tag's,,, somtimes they get shot up hard there too.

I also know what larger bull there were got hit hard this year on the riflehunt,,
I belive that is why the age drop on the muzzy hunt.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Disagree on the remote area's, most of the elk habitat is easly accessable.
Now the high country on Nebo mountain is remote , but no elk up high.

I can have someone drop me off at Black Hawk campground and walk to my
house on Hwy 89 in 2 hours. or off the Summit trail to the head of Nebo creek, 2hrs.
From payson Lake to Bennie creek 1 hour walk..Access is very easy every where.

The only places elk realy have is the private ground. and depending from year to year
who draws tag's,,, somtimes they get shot up hard there too.

I also know what larger bull there were got hit hard this year on the riflehunt,,
I belive that is why the age drop on the muzzy hunt.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I can have someone drop me off at Black Hawk campground and *walk* to my
> house on Hwy 89 in 2 hours. or off the Summit trail to the head of Nebo creek, 2hrs.
> From payson Lake to Bennie creek 1 hour *walk*..Access is very easy every where.


I have highlighted the key words in your post. Many hunters road hunt or drive their wheelers. Black Canyon holds a lot of elk and the only way down is on foot or on horses. The Canyons below Bald Mtn and Nebo hold a lot of elk, but the only way to get to them is on foot or horses. The Canyon where the Microwave tower is (near the Nebo loop) road is great for seeing elk, but you have to hike to get them. I have seen a few good bulls on Dry Mountain and it's all on foot or horses. Sullivans is all on foot or horses.

The Narrows up Santaquin Canyon hold a lot of elk. The access is limited to foot and horses. The school bus above the Narrows is limited to foot and horses.

Pretty much all of Loafer Mtn is limited to foot and horses.

Now tell me again that you disagree areas aren't as remote???? :lol: :lol: :roll: :roll:


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

BTW Goofy, you shoot a bull down in any of those places and it's a lot of hard work getting one out without horses. A lot of guys don't have the ambition and I have seen it first hand.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Romote would be the High Uinta's, or the roadless Bookcliff's or Most of the Escalante
sheep unit,,,Places like that.

Not somewere you can horse ride or walk from bottom to top and back in less than 1 day.
The nebo unit is very simple when you have a rifle tag and the elk are bugling.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Not somewere you can horse ride or walk from bottom to top and back in less than 1 day.
> The nebo unit is very simple when you have a rifle tag and the elk are bugling.
> goofy elk


I never said it wasn't simple. I said it less accessible to a lot of guy who don't have horses or don't have the ambition to go hiking.

You look at the success rate on the ML hunt is basically about 50%. It's because bulls get pushed to private lands They also get pushed into the thick timber or into more remote areas of the unit. If you hike or take horses to those areas then you will find the elk. The Nebo unit is LESS accessible then the Wasatch, Manti, Fishlake, Monroe, Bookcliffs etc.


----------



## muleman (Nov 9, 2007)

I have to agree with coyoteslayer. I ride Blacks and all of Nebo creek with horses and I'm here to tell you alot of places people can glass a great distance but can't get into the country. A buddy of mine killed a bull in 05, I packed it out for him and let me tell ya it was a chore gettin him out. BUT the elk numbers are down in these pockets


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Muleman, did you ever see that dead horse a few years ago on the Blacks Canyon trail near the monument?


----------



## muleman (Nov 9, 2007)

I didn't see it... We had a wreck over in the head of nebo creek a few years ago, we got lucky and came out of it okay. we were packin an elk out and the horse rolled in some timber, had to cut the elk off and get the saddle off. Needless to say I can see how people can loose livestock in that country.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Just got my hand's on the 2008 hunting stat's. Thought I'd put Nebo's on this thread.
> 
> 2008 hunting statistic's for Central, LE Nebo elk
> 
> ...


****....my guess was off by 1...



wyoming2utah said:


> Not county any CWMUs or depredation hunts, the DWR issued 36 archery tags, 80 any-weapon tags, 22 muzzleloader tags, and 4 premium tags for the Nebo unit in 2008. That adds up to a total of 142 tags. By just going off 2007 harvest percentages, approximately 13 of the 36 archery tags would have been filled, 64 of the any-weapon tags, 6 of the muzzleloader tags, and all 4 premium tags for a total of 87 bull elk harvested.


A couple of interesting things--1) the numbers show similar success rates for hunters overall from previous years 2) Average ages of harvested elk is around 6, so the DWR is at the upper limit of the objective...maybe a bit over 3) similar success rates and average ages at the high-end of the objective lead me to believe that the number of bull elk is probably close to where it should be...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> A couple of interesting things--1) the numbers show similar success rates for hunters overall from previous years 2) Average ages of harvested elk is around 6, so the DWR is at the upper limit of the objective...maybe a bit over 3) similar success rates and average ages at the high-end of the objective lead me to believe that the number of bull elk is probably close to where it should be...


I agree. I think Utah hunters got spoiled, me included, and we expect quality/quantity of bulls to be higher than what the objectives from the management plan call for.

I still believe the spike tags are outdated and need to be done away with. Their purpose was to allow more bulls to reach maturity, that has been accomplished. Now we should be adding more branch antlered bull tags in the form of primitive weapons and we should be moving the rifle hunt out of September. Archers enjoyed a 22.9% success rate, if you tripled the number of archery tags the success rate would decrease even further allowing for more opportunity while not hurting 'quality'.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

looked up the harvest states and it seems that maybe we have cut the cream from the pool and started to drink the milk as far as the oquirh/standsbury unit. could it be that maybe just maybe were taking to many bulls from these units and its just know starting to show up in the harvest records :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: seems like a real good reason to start killing baby bulls huh.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> looked up the harvest states and it seems that maybe we have cut the cream from the pool and started to drink the milk as far as the *oquirh/standsbury unit*. could it be that maybe just maybe were taking to many bulls from these units and its just know starting to show up in the harvest records seems like a real good reason to start killing baby bulls huh.


Mack, the spike hunt will definately ruin that unit and the DWR will be forced to cut back on the number of mature bull tags all because of lazy management. It will be a slaughter and the recruitment will be non-existent.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

BINGO: to bad the specalist who dream up these ideas cannot understand basic herd managment


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Mack, the spike hunt will definately ruin that unit and the DWR will be forced to cut back on the number of mature bull tags all because of lazy management. It will be a slaughter and the recruitment will be non-existent.


That is absolutely ridiculous...the sky isn't falling and still won't. My heck, look at all the units with spike hunting now...not one of them is in terrible shape. And, when only 1,500 tags are added and when the spike hunters are spread out, no one unit will be pressured overwhelmingly.

For the bajillionth time, the DWR will NOT have to cut back tags because of spike hunting....like Anis Aoude explained, we still have room to increase LE tags even when we add the 1,500 spike tags. And, from what I understand, the DWR is going to propose that very thing this year...increases in LE tags for most units. You can, by the way, mark my words too--LE elk hunting will NOT be ruined by spike tags!

You can disagree with the idea all you want...but portraying it as some end-all-doom-and-gloom-ruining of good elk hunting in Utah is pure garbage. And, the concept/biological principles behind the philosophical reasons for the plan are sound...


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

that may be true with some of the larger units in the state but there are some that have small enough elk populations that coyotes statements are absolutly true. the unit we have been talking about has a total population by the dwr estimate of under 800 elk half of those are in the northern part of the unit which is controlled by kennecott and other than one cwmu unit has no hunting on it period. the southern half has three small groups the ophir herd, the mercure mine herd and the standsbury herd , as it stands know there are over 35 bull tags issued with a success ratio of close to 100 percent add in the other major factor of wounding loss, winter mortality, desease, you are going to loose around 40 to 45 mature bulls a year. know let s talk about replacements coming into the herd you start with for arguments sake 100 cows on the hill take away the 40 calfs that are in the mix know were down to 60 cows, if every cow dropped a calf thats 60 devided by half of that know were down to 30 bull calfs and were in trouble already becouse not all the calf are gonna make it and not all the cow are gonna drop calfs so 30 is not a realistic number and with the number of bulls being taken out at the top end the units in trouble already add the spike hunting into the mix and you can see were coyote and i are coming from. know i do realize there are more than 100 cow s on the south end but i dont think there are much more than 200 combining all 3 groups. In short spike hunting just will not work in this unit IF you want a unit here.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

BS......spike elk hunting--especially considering that only 1,500 more hunters will be added and the total number of spike hunters will be spread across the state--will not hurt a single unit's population. Again, the doom-and-gloom prophecies are a joke....


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> BS......spike elk hunting--especially considering that only 1,500 more hunters will be added and the total number of spike hunters will be spread across the state--will not hurt a single unit's population. Again, the doom-and-gloom prophecies are a joke....


Have you ever been on the Oquirrh range during the fall? Do you realize how close it is to SLC? How can you kill spikes and INCREASE the number of mature bulls killed each year and maintain 'quality'? It is impossible. If you take form the top and from the bottom you have LESS than if you only take form the top or the bottom. Simple math tells one that. The Manti/Wasatch/Fish Lake have large elk herds, Oquirrh/Monroe/Pahvant do not. That makes harvesting spikes dangerous and begging for bad things to occur.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

An elk herd such as Monroe has 800 elk on it. Being conservative it has 195 bulls, 391 cows, and 214 calves with half the calves being bull calves. 96 LE tags plus an unknown number of landowner tags were issued in 2008 with a 75% overall success rate which equals 72 mature bulls killed on the unit. If 2009 stays the same, not likely as the tag numbers will almost assuredly increase, plus an unpredictable number of spikes this fall you will kill over 100 bulls on Monroe in 2009. That is roughly ONE THIRD the number of bulls in the herd. Now, per Anis' THREAT, you add even more tags in 2010 while still killing an unpredictable number of spikes and after 3-4 years of this inane plan you WILL have a major void in such a small herd of elk in mature bulls. A small accessible unit like the Oquirrh close to SLC WILL be impacted more than you imply. I'll bet you a steak dinner on it!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

:roll: ...the sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling! Run chicken little run.... :roll: 

I ain't buying what you are selling, Pro...it's all BS!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> :roll: ...the sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling! Run chicken little run.... :roll:
> 
> I ain't buying what you are selling, Pro...it's all BS!


Sadly, when I am proven right we will all pay for pin heads not being willing to do it in a sensible and reasonable way that is desirable for MOST elk hunters. :evil: You can NOT kill a good portion of the older bulls while also killing a good portion of the recruitment, it is impossible to not have a huge void by doing so.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I'll bet you a steak dinner on it!


I'd even buy to watch the two of you sit down for a steak dinner!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > I'll bet you a steak dinner on it!
> ...


 :mrgreen:


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Ya know, I guess we were just "SPOILED" on Nebo there for a few year's, Heck there 
never should have been that many 350 to 380 bull's there anyway. And I do believe it
is a direct result of harvesting spike's off the bottom and mature bull's off the top.

I wonder how every one will react if after a few year's of taking bull's off both end's on
Pavant and monroe, and there is a noticeable drop in quality????
What will happen then? Time will tell.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> That is absolutely ridiculous...the sky isn't falling and still won't. My heck, look at all the units with spike hunting now...not one of them is in terrible shape. And, when only 1,500 tags are added and when the spike hunters are spread out, no one unit will be pressured overwhelmingly.
> 
> For the bajillionth time, the DWR will NOT have to cut back tags because of spike hunting....like Anis Aoude explained, we still have room to increase LE tags even when we add the 1,500 spike tags. And, from what I understand, the DWR is going to propose that very thing this year...increases in LE tags for most units. You can, by the way, mark my words too--LE elk hunting will NOT be ruined by spike tags!
> 
> You can disagree with the idea all you want...but portraying it as some end-all-doom-and-gloom-ruining of good elk hunting in Utah is pure garbage. And, the concept/biological principles behind the philosophical reasons for the plan are sound...


Thank GOD you didn't become a biologist. How do you expect to replace the older bulls in the herd that you're harvesting and also at the same time your killing spikes so you have less bulls recruited to the herd PLUS issue more mature tags in the future????????

*PLEASE ANSWER THIS WYO2UT???? IT'S IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THE RECRUITMENT CANNOT KEEP UP WITH THE HARVEST.*

Oquirrh-Stansbury won't have enough spikes surviving to become branch antlered bulls to meet the demand for the LE bulls tags thus the reduction in LE tags OR close the UNIT to spike hunting.

Wyo2ut, you love killing baby elk so much that you have lost all sense of reality.


----------

