# Elk Archery Cow



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

I'm throwing this out to see how other hunters feel. 

I know of three Hunters that drew Cow Elk tags for a late season unit. They are hunting Archery Deer and Elk with GS tags in hand. All three shot Cows on the GS archery to fill there GS Archery Elk tags. 

Now, this is my thought on the situation..... I think it is wrong to take a cow and not a Bull on the GS hunt. (when you have drawn a Cow tag) Sure, it's a hunters choice hunt and its that individuals decision. 

To limit the number of Cows taken and control the herd the DWR has the Antlerless draw. So why is the DWR giving precedence to the Archery Elk hunters? 

I was an avid archery hunter in my twenty's to mid forty's. I NEVER shot at or killed a Cow during the hunt. I've harvested spike bulls about every other year during that time. IMO, any archer with some competence can kill a Cow. It's like sitting ducks.

I'd like to see the Elk Archery hunt Bull only and have a draw for XX amount of Cow tags for Archers. Similar to what it was 20 years ago for the Muzzleloader hunt. The DWR offered 1000 tags for Cow Elk ML. 

So BOBMS AWAY now and tell me how I'm trying to change the hunts, etc. I know there are some forum members that feel as I do.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

The name of the game is population control. There were not enough cows getting killed so they instituted being able to fill a cow tag during any hunt you have a tag for. They absolutely want those cow tags filled. More opportunity equals more success.

DH and Youth Any weapon Deer Tag holders can fill a cow tag on the archery,muzzle loader deer, Any weapon deer and the general elk hunt. They want them dead!


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

Omg ffs.... :roll:

The powers that be have determined the herd can sustain unlimited archery tags with minimal success and not hurt populations. You know of 3 cows that have been killed. I know piles of people who never even saw a cow they could kill during the hunt. The sky is not falling, the world is not ending. If you don’t agree with killing cows, fine. Don’t shoot one. But don’t take opportunity from others for you own selfish reasons. If you can draw a cow tag AND kill a cow on your general tag in the same year, good for you! And in case you haven’t noticed, most bowhunters are half retarded anyways. No way are most guys going to find success consistently year after year. 10% kills the 90%. That number doesn’t warrant taking opportunity from everyone else because YOU want that. I’d bet most archery elk hunters would be very opposed to limiting their options to only spikes. Every bowhunter in my family and friends would definitely be against it.

QUIT ADVOCATING FOR TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AS HUNTERS. THAT IS OUR BIGGEST ENEMY. NOT DECLINING HUNTER NUMBERS


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

QUIT ADVOCATING FOR TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AS HUNTERS. THAT IS OUR BIGGEST ENEMY. NOT DECLINING HUNTER NUMBERS

I knew you would chime in and advocate I'm being selfish and trying to take away opportunity from hunters. When in reality, I'm NOT.

The DWR offers the opportunity to harvest a cow to archery hunters (IMO) to sell more tags to get more $$. Unlimited tag numbers prove that. Ya the success rate is low for Archers, I get it, been there, done it.

You stated that the DWR wants the cows dead. So, if that's the case, why not add those cow numbers to the rifle hunters during the Antlerless draw??? Higher success rate, and a higher chance of the DWR reaching the harvest goals. Seems real simple to me. 

https://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/203353-elk-archery-cow.html#


----------



## APD (Nov 16, 2008)

taxidermist said:


> QUIT ADVOCATING FOR TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS AS HUNTERS. THAT IS OUR BIGGEST ENEMY. NOT DECLINING HUNTER NUMBERS
> 
> I knew you would chime in and advocate I'm being selfish and trying to take away opportunity from hunters. When in reality, I'm NOT.
> 
> ...


They did. You just have to pay $30 and hunt where they want you to.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

If you limit archery tags to bull only, you would have a kill rate of less than 5%, especially in UT where general season opportunities are so limited to shoot a bull and worse yet when it is limited to a spike only in most areas.

I've hunted UT off and on over the years with archery tackle and have never had the opportunity to shoot a spike but have taken cows nearly every time.

I disagree with the practice of having multiple antlerless tags and multiple abilities to fill one tag.

As for the statement of 90% of elk being killed by 10% of hunters, does that mean the remaining 10% are killed by 90% of the hunters?


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

The DWR works off statistics and models. Their models show that they can offer unlimited archery opportunity for cows and it doesn’t upset the balance they are trying to achieve. If they were to issue unlimited rifle tags it wouldn’t work due to the better efficiencies of that weapon. It’s all a statistics game. They know the general success odds from past years and averages, and that’s why the elk herd can, in general, sustain unlimited opportunity on cows presently.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

High Desert Elk said:


> As for the statement of 90% of elk being killed by 10% of hunters, does that mean the remaining 10% are killed by 90% of the hunters?


We all know this is "generally" a true statement. You have those guys/gals that are consistently successful year after year, and then you have everyone else that wanders around in the woods hoping they get lucky. Sure, it's an over generalization, but not by much!


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

If shooting a cow on the archery hunt is like shooting sitting ducks, please send me the GPS coordinates so I can go fill my freezer with some elk meat before my spike/any bull/cow permit expires in a couple of days.

I would prefer to shoot a spike of course, but I have not drawn an elk tag of any sort in at least 4 years and would love to obtain the meat for my family.

I do not agree with having every tag ever allotted in its own separate draw. We have enough draws as it is.


----------



## olibooger (Feb 13, 2019)

I shot a cow...but I've never shot sitting ducks 🤔


----------



## TPrawitt91 (Sep 1, 2015)

Haha cows are pretty hard to get close to as well. Typically they are in groups with lots of eyes, ears, and noses to catch you with. Getting in front of them can be an easy way to get close but takes a little luck to be in the right place at the right time. Then there is sitting a blind/tree over water which can be effective. But seeing a cow and stalking in on her is no easier than other animals


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

olibooger said:


> I shot a cow...but I've never shot sitting ducks &#129300;


Your not hunting the correct pond. :shock: OK, sitting ducks was the wrong term to use. Where I hunted archery elk, I had the opportunity to let an arrow loose multiple times during the season on cow elk.

I like what's being brought up on the topic! some I rely didn't consider. Keep it coming.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

This opportunity for archery hunters doesn't bother me. If it got to the point where too many cows were being killed and it was negatively impacting the herds and therefore the other weapon draws, I might revisit my opinion. I just don't think the population is being negatively impacted by this rule, so I'm okay with it to give archery hunters an advantage.

I will tell you what DOES bother me though...knowing all the handouts archery hunters get in the rules and they still complain. But that is a topic for another day...


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

APD said:


> They did. You just have to pay $30 and hunt where they want you to.


Not sure what your referring to when you typed They did. We have had a shortage of anterless tags with any weapon for a few years now. Taking in some cases 5 years to draw. I used to plan on drawing every other year.

Like taxidermist said I think it is a money maker for the division. They get money from the archers and extra money from people not drawing tags.

Heck I have hunted archery elk that last 2 years because of it. I suck bow hunting and I killed a Cow


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Brookie said:


> Not sure what your referring to when you typed They did. We have had a shortage of anterless tags with any weapon for a few years now. Taking in some cases 5 years to draw. I used to plan on drawing every other year.


This is true, but I do not believe the unlimited archery tags being able to be used for bull or cow is the cause of it.

This rule has me considering picking up a bow myself. Having to wait 4-6 years to hunt a Manti cow elk tag is pretty ridiculous, for sure!


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

This is an interesting topic. I like to look at numbers so a quick break down is that:
-Archery overall success rate is around 12-15% (includes antlerless)
-Archers shoot between 650-750 antlerless elk a year. 
-Archery harvest ratio is approx 50/50 - bulls to antlerless
-Many spike units have a ratio of 2 or so antlerless killed for every spike bull killed. (While Any Bull units have a 3 or 4 bulls to 1 antlerless kill rate)
-Antlerless draw hunt success usually hovers in the 50% range.

So if the UDWR wanted to kill those 700 antlerless elk thru antlerless draw opportunities they could issue approx 1,400 more antlerless elk tags. Which is a 15-20% increase in draw permits each year. 

But doing that would decrease archery success rates by half to about 6-7% success. 

So yes- archers do impact the herds and they do impact the number of antlerless draw permits which are available. But is that a problem worthy of revamping the system and reducing archery success rates to mid single digits?


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Brookie said:


> Not sure what your referring to when you typed They did. We have had a shortage of anterless tags with any weapon for a few years now. Taking in some cases 5 years to draw. I used to plan on drawing every other year.
> 
> Like taxidermist said I think it is a money maker for the division. They get money from the archers and extra money from people not drawing tags.
> 
> Heck I have hunted archery elk that last 2 years because of it. I suck bow hunting and I killed a Cow


They refers to the DWR. They (the DWR) issue $30 "control" elk permits that can be bought and the permit allows you to kill a cow in one of, I think, 11 "control" units where the elk population is over objective. You have to have a valid bull permit for the same area to get the control permit. There are other considerations too, but this is basically how it works. If I forgot something, don't crucify me here...just going off of memory from a couple years back.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

MWScott72 said:


> They refers to the DWR. They (the DWR) issue $30 "control" elk permits that can be bought and the permit allows you to kill a cow in one of, I think, 11 "control" units where the elk population is over objective. You have to have a valid bull permit for the same area to get the control permit. There are other considerations too, but this is basically how it works. If I forgot something, don't crucify me here...just going off of memory from a couple years back.


Ya!! They (DWR) did this on the Wasatch Unit and after a couple years it was harder than ever to see an Elk. If the DWR wants a unit harvested, offer the tags to the Antlerless draw. Packout gave the odds of success with any weapon seasons. Again.....I think it comes down to the $$$$ the State can get.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

taxidermist said:


> MWScott72 said:
> 
> 
> > They refers to the DWR. They (the DWR) issue $30 "control" elk permits that can be bought and the permit allows you to kill a cow in one of, I think, 11 "control" units where the elk population is over objective. You have to have a valid bull permit for the same area to get the control permit. There are other considerations too, but this is basically how it works. If I forgot something, don't crucify me here...just going off of memory from a couple years back.
> ...


Did they offer control tags on the Wasatch? I seem to remember that they issued more tags in the antlerless drawing over several years and that was what tanked it. I don't remember it being the control tags.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Yes, there were control tags on the Wasatch at one point.


----------



## TPrawitt91 (Sep 1, 2015)

There are no elk on the wasatch, can confirm


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

TPrawitt91 said:


> There are no elk on the wasatch, can confirm


:rotfl:


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Packout said:


> This is an interesting topic. I like to look at numbers so a quick break down is that:
> -Archery overall success rate is around 12-15% (includes antlerless)
> -Archers shoot between 650-750 antlerless elk a year.
> -Archery harvest ratio is approx 50/50 - bulls to antlerless
> ...


But Archery Elk tags are unlimited so I'll see your 1,400 tags and raise you however many tags Utah hunters with a bow want to buy.

(Nice work on the data though :mrgreen


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

I think what Packout is saying is that on average, unlimited archery tags contribute 650-750 dead cows at the end of the season. This is regardless of how many tags are actually sold. While there may be blips here and there over the years, the average is what it is over time.


----------



## Endoren (Nov 19, 2020)

I do understand your concerns. If you don't want to kill cows, then don't do it. There are people who are really fond of it, and it will be unfair to take this opportunity from them. Still, I do understand what you are talking about. Although, the rates are not that serious. If there were wagyu cows, then the prices would have been much higher. It's a pity that they don't live in the wild. Just kidding. Anyway, the meat is just fabulous. I've read on thejapaneseway.com, that the secret of its taste and juiciness is the special diet and their zen-like shelter. Man, this is insane!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

me too.

err....wait. Um.....what?


----------



## lucky duck (Dec 17, 2008)

> I do understand your concerns.


Finally some one who will listen ;-)

I have many, many concerns.........
Is that a pimple or a boil, should it be that hot too the touch.....
I wonder what that pimple popper Dr. lady charges?

Do elk get pimples? What about deer? 
Do they consult their fellow herd members for medical advice?


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

Vanilla said:


> advantage.
> I will tell you what DOES bother me though...knowing all the handouts archery hunters get in the rules and they still complain. But that is a topic for another day...


Right, it is not the same as 40 years ago when archery hunters were using a stick, string, and arrow. When using traditional gear they needed the handouts. Now with modern archery tackle you have the ability to drop $2,000.00 and start flinging arrows 100 yards and wounding animals with sights, triggers, stabilizers, and lasers. They might as well use a rifle....

Same thing goes for muzzle loaders.... Breech loading, fire stick, and scoped. I call BS


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

ns450f said:


> Right, it is not the same as 40 years ago when archery hunters were using a stick, string, and arrow. When using traditional gear they needed the handouts. Now with modern archery tackle you have the ability to drop $2,000.00 and start flinging arrows 100 yards and wounding animals with sights, triggers, stabilizers, and lasers. They might as well use a rifle....
> 
> Same thing goes for muzzle loaders.... Breech loading, fire stick, and scoped. I call BS


chalk it up to the dedicated hunter program. I say get rid of it. Let's go back to "pick your weapon".


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

PBH said:


> chalk it up to the dedicated hunter program. I say get rid of it. Let's go back to "pick your weapon".


I'm not sure what that'll accomplish... besides limit opportunity that utah hunters have screamed so much for in the past.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Utah could be the ultimate opportunity state with OTC tags all around and doubling of LE tags as well with just a couple simple tricks!

1. Archery hunters must pull their bow strings back with their fingers, no releases

2. All current any weapon and muzzloader hunts must use open sight flint lock muzzleloaders with patched round balls. Have a few 10 day seasons to even out the crowds from late September to late October.

There ya go folks--I have given you the keys to the kingdom--opportunity abounds, points become a thing of the past with just these two simple tricks!


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Airborne said:


> Utah could be the ultimate opportunity state with OTC tags all around and doubling of LE tags as well with just a couple simple tricks!
> 
> 1. Archery hunters must pull their bow strings back with their fingers, no releases


Took a cow by shear *luck *in 2019 using a finger tab, 2 pins, no rear peep, and a 1991 bow that is 43" ATA. Speaking of which, all those new shorter bows will have one helluva pinch shooting fingers. I probably couldn't do it again. I aimed for the vitals, I hit the carotid artery at the base of the neck. Ode to torquing the bowstring, something you don't do shooting with a release. I practiced shooting fingers twice a day in my basement, every day for months, and I still torqued the string :roll:



> 2. All current any weapon and muzzloader hunts must use open sight flint lock muzzleloaders with patched round balls.


I'll meet you almost halfway, and say no effing scopes! Maybe give up sabots too. Currently using sabots mainly because their easier to load. I'd use a solid 50cal conical if I could get them down the pipe easier. Looking at you Thor! Projectiles aside, scopes, in and of themselves, have really screwed up muzzy more then anything else, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## jason21 (Sep 18, 2018)

Im on board for returning muzzleloader to an actual muzzleloader sense. Basically the only thing that makes most utah "muzzleloaders" a muzzleloader, is in the **** name. Guys are making 400-500 yard shots with their muzzleloaders all the time now with how good these builds are getting. Dont get me wrong, i think theyre super cool and if i could afford to drop 10k on a gunwerks ML, and draw a decent LE tag in half the time, id totally be down. But if they reverted the regs, i wouldnt be mad either


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Utah's game herds are not increasing and if we are being honest with ourselves we will be lucky to maintain the status quo.

What is increasing exponentially is our human population. The reckoning is coming and Utah hunters are going to have to come to terms with it if they want to hunt. Either drop the fancy toys that increase success rates or go back to more primitive hunting weapons where success is limited but opportunity abounds.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Airborne said:


> Utah's game herds are not increasing and if we are being honest with ourselves we will be lucky to maintain the status quo.
> 
> What is increasing exponentially is our human population. The reckoning is coming and Utah hunters are going to have to come to terms with it if they want to hunt. * Either drop the fancy toys that increase success rates or go back to more primitive hunting weapons where success is limited but opportunity abounds*.


https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/bg/mule_deer_plan.pdf

"By the mid 1970s it was apparent that deer populations were in decline and, in many areas, below the
carrying capacity of the habitat. In 1975, Utah again adopted a statewide buck-only hunting strategy and
a symposium was held in 1976 to discuss the decline of mule deer in the west (Workman and Low 1976).
Under buck-only hunting deer populations went through a series of boom and bust cycles. The peak
harvest of buck deer in the state occurred in 1983 when 82,552 bucks were harvested during the
general season hunts. Buck hunter numbers also peaked in 1983 with 228,907 hunters participating in
the general season deer hunt, whereas the total number of hunters peaked in 1988 with nearly 250,000
total hunters afield"

"Over the past 20 years, an average of 27,619 bucks has been harvested in Utah each year. The harvest
level has remained relatively constant over this time period with a low of 21,292 in 2011 and a high of
34,402 in 2016. During the same time period, buck-to-doe ratios have shown an increasing trend in Utah
with average ratios on public lands across the state rising from 13 bucks per 100 does in 1998 to 19
bucks per 100 does in 2018 (Figure 2). *With fewer hunters and higher buck-to-doe ratios, hunter success
has increased on general-season units*. Statewide average hunter success during the general-season any
weapon hunt in 2018 was 39.3% compared to 31.1% during the 1998 any weapon hunt"


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Thanks for helping me make my point middlefork, much appreciated!

Imagine a world where every single deer hunter last year, all 104,353 resident hunters were able to hunt each and every year and the success percentage was around 15% with the weapon restrictions put in place. You could probably go back to state wide also! No more pick your unit. Folks would have to practice more with their weapon but that never hurt anyone. Just food for thought


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

I'd be on board to give up high mag scopes, 209 primers and what not. If they would have just capped the scopes at 2x or even 4x we wouldn't have so many 500 yard heros.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Airborne said:


> Utah's game herds are not increasing and if we are being honest with ourselves we will be lucky to maintain the status quo.
> 
> What is increasing exponentially is our human population. The reckoning is coming and Utah hunters are going to have to come to terms with it if they want to hunt. Either drop the fancy toys that increase success rates or go back to more primitive hunting weapons where success is limited but opportunity abounds.


The secret about Utah is out. The biggest indicator is the housing market. From what I've read, a large portion of offers on houses are from california, and at least a few of those bids will be sight unseen. Beyond that, one of my local vet clilnics has been booming over the last year, and every day they get new clients from california.

This is after covid, before covid I was already seeing things I didn't otherwise see in years past. Traditional family camps were a sure thing, up until the last couple of years. I remember reading an article last year about how some dude got in a fight with some mexicans from california because they were in his annual spot. I get it, but the situation was handled badly.

Before that , we were already on the rise. We've got high density housing where I live now. Horse pastures have given way to condo/townhomes.

Sad to say, the writing is on the wall, and has been for the last 5-6 years at least. Covid pushed it over the edge, and the urban sprawl has kicked into overdrive.

All of this translates into more people on public lands, more tags being sold, and more human pressure in all its forms.

In sum, I'd rather have more hunting opportunities with primitive weapons. Half the reason for hunting, at least to me, is the experience. I'd rather have a good time with less people. I like being out almost every weekend during spring/summer/fall, and not confined to a 5-7 day trip once a year or two - screw that. When i'm out enough to where I'm on sensory overload in town... that is the mark of a good year!

edit: as an aside, the increase in people is why i've taken up backpacking and hammock camping - to get away from all the people. We're probably going to sell our trailer this year, never even used it last year and i'm tired of maintaining it. It's easier to find a place to put down a tent or two then it is to find a trailer camp.


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

Lone_Hunter said:


> In sum, I'd rather have more hunting opportunities with primitive weapons. Half the reason for hunting, at least to me, is the experience. I'd rather have a good time with less people.


If you want less people on your hunts, leave technology restrictions the way they are, which will result in less tags offered. Limit technology and you'll see tag numbers increase over time. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

MooseMeat said:


> If you want less people on your hunts, leave technology restrictions the way they are, which will result in less tags offered. Limit technology and you'll see tag numbers increase over time. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.


Moose is correct and also wrong. He is correct with our current season dates and hunts but for this revolutionary paradigm shift ya gotta think outside the box. Stick with me but what if our only gun weapon season was flintlock and what if we had 4 different 10 day seasons from late Sept to Oct. Current demand would say we have 80,000 folks who like to gun hunt so we break that up to 20,000 folks per season. Now everyone gets to hunt otc, the same amount of deer are killed, and you have less hunters on landscape than you do in our current any weapons season. See-->OTC tags, less hunter competition, same deer killed, more opportunity.

Dudes loose their minds when they can't have spy camera tech on every tree in this state so I'm doubting the popularity of my idea. Guys just flipping love their toys.

For the record Moose i'm confident you would kill hundreds of head of game if forced to use a flintlock :grin: but so would I


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Adding more season is good until you try to figure out where to add them. Then you start taking away from others and their hunting seasons. Try pulling the LE rifle elk hunt out of the middle of September and you'll see what I mean. 

But I do agree that getting rid of scopes on the muzzle loader would be a nice start. Don't even allow 1x scopes just open sights. Quite a few other states do it this way and they have some good hunts.


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

Here’s a question I haven’t seen asked yet.

Why are we shooting big bulls on LE hunts, with rifles, in November? Why not make it a muzzleloader hunt, no scopes, and issue more tags? I get we won’t ever see the early rifle dates out of September, but why are we doing a late rifle hunt too? Let’s switch it up and do a late muzzy hunt.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

Critter said:


> But I do agree that getting rid of scopes on the muzzle loader would be a nice start. Don't even allow 1x scopes just open sights.
> 
> Meh : We should keep at least 1x just for the sake of the animals. Bullet placement and ethical kills. And also everyone in Utah has a 1x power scope in their drawer ready to go.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

7MM RELOADED said:


> Critter said:
> 
> 
> > But I do agree that getting rid of scopes on the muzzle loader would be a nice start. Don't even allow 1x scopes just open sights.
> ...


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

Some people kill and some people care how they kill . 1x gives no range advantage over open sights


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

And it is actually a hindrance in a lot of situations. 

If you are saying that it is needed because of peoples eyesight, I have a hard time focusing on the front and rear sights along with the animal. But I have found iron sights where I have no problems and this is in Colorado where any scope is not allowed.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

MooseMeat said:


> Here's a question I haven't seen asked yet.
> 
> Why are we shooting big bulls on LE hunts, with rifles, in November? Why not make it a muzzleloader hunt, no scopes, and issue more tags? I get we won't ever see the early rifle dates out of September, but why are we doing a late rifle hunt too? Let's switch it up and do a late muzzy hunt.


Short answer is the majority by far of hunters want to/are hunting with a rifle.

This leads to the complaint by some that the allowance of scopes on muzzle loaders make it easy for rifle hunters to overwhelm those that already hunt with a muzzle loader.


----------



## RemingtonCountry (Feb 17, 2016)

7MM RELOADED said:


> Perhaps hunters need to learn how to get within range such as less that 150 yards before they pull the trigger.
> 
> Colorado has no problem with hunting elk with open iron sights on their muzzle loaders, along with Oregon and Idaho I believe.


I went on an elk hunt near Island Park a few years ago. It was AWESOME!

Lead only projectiles, no sabots, loose powder only, open ignition, no 209 primers, no scopes. Even though I didn't tag out, it was an absolute riot.


----------



## jason21 (Sep 18, 2018)

RemingtonCountry said:


> Critter said:
> 
> 
> > I went on an elk hunt near Island Park a few years ago. It was AWESOME!
> ...


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

MooseMeat said:


> If you want less people on your hunts, leave technology restrictions the way they are, which will result in less tags offered. Limit technology and you'll see tag numbers increase over time. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.


 Respectfully, I disagree, and what I said after the part quoted was relevant.

Allowing greater technology, for example, scopes on muzzeloaders (there was absoulutely NO GOOD REASON to do so btw), has lead to more hunters shifting to muzzy from rifle. At the very least, it gives the perception to make things easier, at worst, it really does. I tend to think the latter. They are coming out with muzzloaders that can hit at centerfire rifle ranges, topped with a scope, and muzzy is effectively changed into a second rifle season. What was the point of muzzy again? _Primitive _weapon was it?






Greater tech, gives greater edge. With greater edge, will come increased success, how much is debateable, but an increase in tags being punched will surely result in less tags being issued. Less tags, with more people buying OTC or putting in for a draw due to higher population, means your hunting once, every 2-3 years. I like hunting every year. I'd rather suck it with a ****ty primitive weapon with less chance of success. The alternative is watching hunting videos on the couch, with zero chance of success. No thanks.

As for avoiding people, the best way is to go where others wont go because it's inconvenient or hard, using a weapon that isn't efficient or easy. That weeds a lot of people out. Unfortunately there's too many roads, but that's a different subject entirely.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Yea, technology sucks.

https://americanshootingjournal.com/whitworth-sniper-rifle/

(Sorry Dallan. I got tired of waiting)


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

middlefork said:


> Yea, technology sucks.
> 
> https://americanshootingjournal.com/whitworth-sniper-rifle/
> 
> (Sorry Dallan. I got tired of waiting)


Yeah I knew someone would bring something like that up. Sniper rifle... ok got it.

Question:
Are you at war with elk and deer? Is this a two way range? Is second place a body bag?

Or is it considered a "sport", where we limit ourselves so we don't commit cervidae genocide? So the population continues and we always have something to hunt? Cause honestly, If you want to go full on and not limit yourself on weapons, then why limit tags? Why limit anything?

Screw it! Lets kill them all and let God sort them out! -O,-


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I only wanted to point out a problem I see in your argument of primitive weapons.

I am perfectly capable of limiting my killing of cervidae. I have for many years without anybody having to codify what I use to pursue them. In fact if I am honest it has been many years since I actually have. Not for lack of opportunity but because of personal choices I have made concerning what I want to kill.

You want to up opportunity for people to hunt, great then maybe punish those that are successful rather than tell them how. Granted that creates its own set of problems but if the answers were simple they would already incorporated.


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

You could limit our legal weapons used for hunting to spears, sling shots and knives and you’ll still never see OTC general deer hunting in Utah again. And with $FW calling the shots on everything, the odds of anything drastic happening with restrictions is slim. Look how fast the trail cam and baiting bill died. There’s going to be a lot more push back on weapon restrictions than the trail cams got.


----------



## cedar (Jul 29, 2013)

Having muzzleloader without scope is more fun. lets learn how to getting close to animals and experience rewarding and real hunt.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

middlefork said:


> I only wanted to point out a problem I see in your argument of primitive weapons.
> 
> I am perfectly capable of limiting my killing of cervidae. I have for many years without anybody having to codify what I use to pursue them. In fact if I am honest it has been many years since I actually have. Not for lack of opportunity but because of personal choices I have made concerning what I want to kill.
> 
> You want to up opportunity for people to hunt, great then maybe punish those that are successful rather than tell them how. Granted that creates its own set of problems but if the answers were simple they would already incorporated.


I wasn't intending on questioning your ethics in specific, I was speaking in general terms.

Limiting tech in the case of archery is a bit harder. Crossbows are sort of a no brainer, as their arrow trajectories are a bit better then bows. Or has DWR allowed crossbows during archery already?

Limiting tech in the case of rifle, in some cases is also a no brainer. Obviously letting a 50 BMG rip accross a valley to make mincemeat of a deer or elk is, or should be off the table. How about those new scopes which compute a firing solution for you? I think those were disallowed, takes all the sport out of it.

Muzzy, right now, is FUBARed. Long range smoke poles with glass removes, (at least in my opinion) a major reason to hunt with a muzzy to begin with. Some would argue to do away with inllines, 209s, sabots and the like. I say just leave the glass for rifle season where it originally was.


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

Lone_Hunter said:


> Limiting tech in the case of rifle, in some cases is also a no brainer. Obviously letting a 50 BMG rip accross a valley to make mincemeat of a deer or elk is, or should be off the table. How about those new scopes which compute a firing solution for you? I think those were disallowed, takes all the sport out of it.
> 
> Muzzy, right now, is FUBARed. Long range smoke poles with glass removes, (at least in my opinion) a major reason to hunt with a muzzy to begin with. Some would argue to do away with inllines, 209s, sabots and the like. I say just leave the glass for rifle season where it originally was.


Have you ever personally seen what a .50 does to a deer? It's not as impressive as you would hope to imagine.

I always laugh when I hear guys start arguing the point that tech rifles = bang flop dead chit every time the trigger is pulled. This is utah we are talking about. Utards everywhere. This is the state where people have to be reminded on a yearly basis to slow down and use caution when the first snow hits the valley, and still there's morons who F it up. Most of these dudes don't know how to use their 8k set up, let alone shoot it accurately. Guys struggle, bad, to hit a deer the first shot at 300 yards, on purpose. Are there guys who can do it, consistently, every shot, without effort? Absolutely. But those dudes can usually hit stuff with the first shot no matter what the weapon is. Throw a single shot muzzleloader in the hands of the general hunter, and things really go to hell fast. I've witnessed countless times on the rifle deer hunt, people miss the first shot. And the 2nd. The 3rd. The 4th. Then they start single feeding it and around shot 6 they might hit fur. Try getting that many rounds off at a deer with a muzzy. It's not gonna happen. I saw a guy cycle through his muzzleloader and his 3 other buddies guns in about 2 minutes on a 3 point last year. It was musical muzzleloaders like you've never seen before. The deer still got away.

I'd love to see open sight muzzy hunts again in utah. I agree it would add an element to the hunt that most guys don't have, that a long range gun and scope combo can level out for them. But I don't think it'll help our problem as much as many of would would like to think.


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

Airborne said:


> Utah could be the ultimate opportunity state with OTC tags all around and doubling of LE tags as well with just a couple simple tricks!
> 
> 1. Archery hunters must pull their bow strings back with their fingers, no releases
> 
> ...


Couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Last I looked the Any weapon / Muzzle loader tags come from the same pool. So saving bucks is not really the idea behind them.

Nobody is telling you you can't get closer or hunt with open sites or a flint lock, round ball or whatever. If that is how you travel then go for it.

If the success rate between the two is what is causing you grief you first need to prove that it is causing a problem. So far it does not seem that the UDWR is that worried. And when it is then the easy road is less tags. Less tags does not seem to be the answer either but easy to implement.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

MooseMeat said:


> I always laugh when I hear guys start arguing the point that tech rifles = bang flop dead chit every time the trigger is pulled.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

MooseMeat said:


> Have you ever personally seen what a .50 does to a deer? It's not as impressive as you would hope to imagine.
> 
> I reluctantly watched a you tube of over in Afghanistan of what one does. I wouldn't watch it twice.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I have blown holes completely through deer and elk with a .50 caliber muzzle loader and neither one of them were with jacketed bullets, solid lead. 

The last deer that I shot with my .54 caliber there was a hole the size of a basket ball where it came out on the off side of the ribs. That bullet was a 430 grain maxi-ball solid lead that I had cast.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Big difference between a 50 cal muzzy, and a 50 BMG out of a Barret or similar rifle.

Anyway, I think I'm done. Given what's coming up in the news today, this thread suddenly seems extremely frivolous. Given the current trajectory, if people/states decide they've had enough at some point in the future, I question if we'll still have public land to hunt on, and I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

middlefork said:


> Last I looked the Any weapon / Muzzle loader tags come from the same pool. So saving bucks is not really the idea behind them.
> 
> Nobody is telling you you can't get closer or hunt with open sites or a flint lock, round ball or whatever. If that is how you travel then go for it.
> 
> If the success rate between the two is what is causing you grief you first need to prove that it is causing a problem. So far it does not seem that the UDWR is that worried. And when it is then the easy road is less tags. Less tags does not seem to be the answer either but easy to implement.





middlefork said:


> Last I looked the Any weapon / Muzzle loader tags come from the same pool. So saving bucks is not really the idea behind them.
> 
> Nobody is telling you you can't get closer or hunt with open sites or a flint lock, round ball or whatever. If that is how you travel then go for it.
> 
> If the success rate between the two is what is causing you grief you first need to prove that it is causing a problem. So far it does not seem that the UDWR is that worried. And when it is then the easy road is less tags. Less tags does not seem to be the answer either but easy to implement.


I am viewing this discussion as a complete relook at our entire system for the purpose of increasing opportunity for all hunters, decreasing crowding, and taking roughly the same number of bucks off the landscape. I think limiting the lethality of the weapon systems we use is a viable way. It's a discussion of ideas.

I can't tell how you are viewing this discussion because you haven't laid out any alternatives. If you like the status quo then fine, say that and be done. This is a discussion about wildlife policy not 'you do you' colloquialisms

Hunter numbers have and will continue to increase in the state. Deer numbers are not increasing at the same level. The current system will mean more waiting and waiting for a tag. If that's what Utah hunters want then so be it.

I am here to discuss alternatives and float ideas. I know where the status quo leads, I'm interested in alternatives, even radical ideas. Share em if ya got em but don't bring what we already have (we already know this) and for others-- don't tell us nothing will change. $hit changes daily and those in charge now may not be in the future.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I already said above. Why punish people by how they hunt and instead have consequences for success. It is not all hunters limiting the tag numbers but only the successful ones.

You already have limitations on take with other animals and even fish. Maybe with big game you could limit take by imposing a waiting period after successfully filling a tag? And yes that would create enforcement problems but none that don't already exists.

I too am discussing alternatives. They just don't involve trying to come up with telling anybody they can only use what I find acceptable.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

middlefork said:


> I already said above. Why punish people by how they hunt and instead have consequences for success. It is not all hunters limiting the tag numbers but only the successful ones.
> 
> You already have limitations on take with other animals and even fish. Maybe with big game you could limit take by imposing a waiting period after successfully filling a tag? And yes that would create enforcement problems but none that don't already exists.
> 
> I too am discussing alternatives. They just don't involve trying to come up with telling anybody they can only use what I find acceptable.


So you want to punish successful people--didn't think I would run in to a full blown socialist on the ole UWN :grin: just kidding of course

It's an interesting take, although it still has folks sitting on the sidelines which if the discussion is about increasing opportunity for the populous (even the successful) then your idea doesn't seem to help in that regard. I would like to see your specifics regarding waiting periods and how it would work in your mind with current demand and success percentages. How many years would a successful general deer hunter have to sit out to increase the overall hunters on the landscape while decreasing crowding?

The law already tells folks what is and isn't acceptable in regards to weapons. That isn't a radical concept by itself. I have never shot a flint lock rifle in my life, they are not my weapon of choice. I simply looked at all the weapons available and said to myself--'well this one looks like it would be hard to make super lethal because it has so many limitations'. Same with archery being fingers on the string--simple limitation that takes the lethality out of a compound bow. You seem to think that this is me wanting others to hunt just like me and it's not true.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I don't think there is a solution that increases opportunity and decreases crowding. Those seem like polar opposites. I didn't see your idea accomplishing this either. Perhaps I am wrong.

In some cases people are already sitting out 2-4 years trying to draw a tag. It doesn't matter if they are successful or not. Give them an incentive not to fill a tag and let them hunt more often.

If the secret to more tags available is to limit lethality I think that is a really long shot to succeed. But again you would have to convince everybody that it would and they all would have to accept reduced success rate. I sincerely hope you are one hell of a salesman.

And somewhere in your theory you still have to address the biggest and most efficient category - the rifle hunter.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

posts #31 & 40:

Utah could be the ultimate opportunity state with OTC tags all around and doubling of LE tags as well with just a couple simple tricks!

1. Archery hunters must pull their bow strings back with their fingers, no releases

2. All current any weapon and muzzloader hunts must use open sight flintlock muzzleloaders with patched round balls. Have a few 10 day seasons to even out the crowds from late September to late October.

Stick with me but what if our only gun weapon season was flintlock and what if we had 4 different 10 day seasons from late Sept to Oct. Current demand would say we have 80,000 folks who like to gun hunt so we break that up to 20,000 folks per season. Now everyone gets to hunt otc, the same amount of deer are killed, and you have less hunters on landscape than you do in our current any weapons season. See-->OTC tags, less hunter competition, same deer killed, more opportunity.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

You are correct middlefork that the idea is an incredible long shot and I'm just flappin my gums here but ideas start somewhere. Look at the current HAMS hunts. The idea of less lethal weapons is a thing and is catching on. It is the only way I can see to increase opportunity while killing the same # of big game animals. We can spread out crowding over several hunting periods.


----------



## MooseMeat (Dec 27, 2017)

Lone_Hunter said:


>


1. Have you ever personally held one of those rifles in person? The weight alone will stop guys from packing those around in the mountains.

2. How many utards do you believe owns one of those and uses it for hunting purposes? I'd bet the number is closer to 0 than it is 25.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

middlefork said:


> I don't think there is a solution that increases opportunity and decreases crowding.


I don't think crowding is an issue that can be solved. Back in the day, just about everybody on the mountain after Labor Day had a tag in hand. From what I'm seeing now days, actual hunters are the minority. The crowds are recreational folks and/or "helpers" just enjoying the outdoors. All forecasts are that Utah's population will continue to grow, so crowding will only increase in the foreseeable future.

As for opportunity, we've got rifle (any weapon) hunts, muzzie hunts, bow hunts, early season, late season, youth hunts, mentor hunts...we've about wrung the rag dry and yet here we are. Fiddling with permits can only go so far.

At this point, the only way we can really expand opportunity any further is to build the resources. At the very least, we need to conserve what we've got. RMEF proclaims "Hunting is Conservation", but that's not true. Hunting is a conservation tool. A hammer is a tool, but you'll have a hard time building a house if a hammer is the only tool you've got.


----------



## Stoneger (Dec 17, 2020)

Endoren said:


> I do understand your concerns. If you don't want to kill cows, then don't do it. There are people who are really fond of it, and it will be unfair to take this opportunity from them. Still, I do understand what you are talking about. Although, the rates are not that serious. If there were wagyu cows, then the prices would have been much higher. It's a pity that they don't live in the wild. Just kidding. Anyway, the meat is just fabulous. I've read on thejapaneseway.com, that the secret of its taste and juiciness is the special diet and their zen-like shelter. Man, this is insane!


Haha, good joke! Btw, It would be a nice business idea!


----------

