# A chance to make a difference!



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Since my other thread got shut down (Thanks Ray & Sean), how about if we get a chance to talk about the Deer Management Plan on this thread AND send a comment(s) to the DWR, RAC's and Wildlife Board.

https://wildlife.utah.gov/online-rac.html

Then:

https://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac/2019-11_rac_packet.pdf


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I agree. Email your ideas and concerns ASAP! Waiting until the meeting when they have already heard from other people and already formed an option, will make it harder to change their minds. By letting them think about your ideas well before the meeting gives you a better chance of being heard. Good luck.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

If they change the deer LE waiting period to 5 years are the current people on a waiting period now going to be grandfathered in to the 2 year period ???


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

7MM RELOADED said:


> If they change the deer LE waiting period to 5 years are the current people on a waiting period now going to be grandfathered in to the 2 year period ???


Bingo! That would be an excellent question to ask at one of the meetings or on the survey linked above.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Wow...

I watched the video for the "Proposed rule amendments to address point creep, lost opportunities and equity in the hunt drawing process". The examples given of hunters who sit at max points and have turned in their tag just prior to the first day of the season is eye opening. One particular deer max point holder has drawn a Henry's tag every year for the last 10 years and turned the tag in just days before the seasons opens... and two Zion bighorn tags were turned in this year just days prior to the season opening.

In most cases due to short notice those tags cannot be reallocated to another hunter... and that data that Lindy shares is also eye opening. 

I'm all on board with the changes that were presented in that portion of the proposed changes... but I would take it one step further, I would also support if the waiting periods were applied if the tag was not turned in more than 30 days prior to the hunt. 

I'm all about "gaming the system" to your advantage... but this is egregious and needs to be stopped.


----------



## Ray (May 10, 2018)

derekp1999 said:


> Wow...
> 
> I watched the video for the "Proposed rule amendments to address point creep, lost opportunities and equity in the hunt drawing process". The examples given of hunters who sit at max points and have turned in their tag just prior to the first day of the season is eye opening. One particular deer max point holder has drawn a Henry's tag every year for the last 10 years and turned the tag in just days before the seasons opens... and two Zion bighorn tags were turned in this year just days prior to the season opening.
> 
> ...


Ten bucks says the Henry's person is an anti


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Ray said:


> Ten bucks says the Henry's person is an anti


Pro or anti... doesn't matter to me... that's one tag every year for the last 10 years that has not likely been reallocated to a hunter because of the short period of time that the Division has to find an alternate willing to take the tag.

I'd support additional penalty to a hunter who turns a tag back in with such short notice that the Division cannot reallocate the tag... if the Division cannot reallocate the tag, apply the waiting period as well.


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

If they know it's the same person they need to ban them from applying for anything at all. How ridiculous.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> Pro or anti... doesn't matter to me... that's one tag every year for the last 10 years that has not likely been reallocated to a hunter because of the short period of time that the Division has to find an alternate willing to take the tag.


You would be hard pressed to convince me they couldn't find a hunter willing to take that Henry's tag on short notice. They just go down the list calling numbers until someone says "Hell yes I'll take it!"

-DallanC


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I know if they ever offered me a Henry Mountain deer tag I would take it without doing any scouting. But then I know that my chances of drawing a deer tag down there are about as good as Utah changing all of their liquor laws so I don't even bother. 

But on the tag I hunted down there when it was a general season tag and know what I would do. 

But they do need to put some restrictions on returning the tags. Just because the tag holder hasn't see what he likes is no reason to turn it back in. A few of the reasons should be such as medical with a note from a doctor, military orders, death in the family, and for Utah church obligations such as a mission call. There are others but those were a few that I came up with.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I have bashed turning in tags on short notice before and gotten heat for it - on this very forum.

My dad had a heart surgery and wasn't sure if he would get to hunt that year. He had a Henry Deer tag. Turning it in either beginning of June or July - right after getting the physical tag. He was adamant that he wanted to give someone the best preparation they could have. 


Others go down and see that there are only 215" deer not 220" deer so they turn it in. Silly as hell in my opinion.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Only three reasons should be allowed to turn a tag back in:

1) death, and then it should be transferred if possible

2) sudden medical condition

3) unforeseen sudden "mandatory" work assignment or something very similar.

Turning a tag back in because it's hot, dry, or just can't find the horns you want shouldn't be a reason. LE means limited permits to give a quality hunt and chance at a good animal. Never a guarantee.

Without being able to turn a tag back in may very well make some people think twice about putting in if conditions may not provide the hunt they want. Others may not care and shooting a 165" buck is good enough.

Without turning a tag back in for what may be something "frivolous" would definitely put that person on the waiting list (going back to the example of turning Henry's deer and BH sheep tags in mere days before the hunt begins) taking them out of the mix to let someone else have a shot at it.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I'm all about the proposed changes in the presentation Lindy gave, except for the variance for expo tag holders. I don't know why we are allowing that to happen. I hold the same view on conservation tags. The private CWMU and LOA tags I don't really care about because those are tags that were never or will never be available to the general public. So they can do what they want, but the expo and conservation tags should not get a variance option. There is no need for it. Those are supposed to be for wildlife and for conservation. 

If we are truly about just making it for wildlife or conservation, we should be okay that we don't get the chance to hunt the next year. 

I haven't had time to go through the others yet.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I have always thought that the reasons on returning tags should be very limited. If it were me I would extend the penalties out to less than 60 days prior to the hunt.

And I disagree with the variances, particularly on the expo and conservation tags.

Losing your preference points by obtaining any tag will certainly bite a few people. I always thought they wanted those cows and does killed. I though that's why they let you hunt them at the same time if you had another permit for the same area.


----------



## TheHunted (Feb 22, 2016)

Filled out a survey the other day. I agreed with all recommendations except the previously stated variances for expo and conservation tags. And I don’t like more OIL archery only. I don’t understand why we all of the sudden started catering to the archery crowd.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

TheHunted said:


> And I don't like more OIL archery only. I don't understand why we all of the sudden started catering to the archery crowd.


Increase in tag revenues without an appreciable increase in kill rate...


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

TheHunted said:


> Filled out a survey the other day. I agreed with all recommendations except the previously stated variances for expo and conservation tags. And I don't like more OIL archery only. I don't understand why we all of the sudden started catering to the archery crowd.


Because they are organized!


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

TheHunted said:


> I don't understand why we all of the sudden started catering to the archery crowd.


I have asked this same question in a few RAC meetings and emails and have received the following answers:

1. More opportunity
2. Spread hunters out to prevent overcrowding
3. For the Henry Mountains Bison hunts, the archery-only hunts help them meet management objectives. The bison head into remote country as soon as the bullets start flying, and become harder to find and harvest. The Division reported to me that the bison don't move nearly as much during the archery season, so they're better able to get the harvest they need.
4. For the Zion bighorn hunt, they can potentially take advantage of seasonal migration of the sheep off Zion National Park to provide more opportunity.

I have been a vocal critic of archery OIAL hunts for awhile, but I don't oppose them if they are the best tool available to meet a management objective. I question whether that is the case for the Book Cliffs bison hunts, because harvest has historically been at or near 100% on those.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Tonight's RAC meeting in Springville starts early. 5:30 pm.

I guess it's going to be a long one.

I've sent several letters, comments and hunt reports in.
IMO, deer, antelope and elk numbers are down on every unit we've been on this year.
I'll be at the board meeting.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> Tonight's RAC meeting in Springville starts early. 5:30 pm.
> 
> I guess it's going to be a long one.
> 
> ...


So, did anyone from this forum go yesterday? If so, how did it go?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

According to a writer for the Daily Herald every thing was approved and that the Central RAC is the only one that counts.

https://www.heraldextra.com/news/st...cle_cb9ea605-7ba8-5c66-816f-74dfeba447d0.html


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Critter said:


> According to a writer for the Daily Herald every thing was approved and that the Central RAC is the only one that counts.
> 
> https://www.heraldextra.com/news/st...cle_cb9ea605-7ba8-5c66-816f-74dfeba447d0.html


Thanks, Critter!

Anyone else? What about the other items?


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

elkfromabove said:


> So, did anyone from this forum go yesterday? If so, how did it go?


DISCLAIMER: Everything in this post is based on my memory, which is getting worse by the day.

The mule deer plan was passed as presented with some minor changes to the CWD rule. They had proposed a rule that stated that you were only allowed to bring clean skull plates back from CWD-positive states. The language was changed to allow for clean skulls (so people can still get euro mounts).

There was some opposition to having the late-season LE muzzleloader deer hunts on all general units, but ultimately a motion to stop that was voted down.

The hunting seasons and rule amendments passed as presented, except for a similar change in wording on the CWD rule.

The CWMU plans and permit numbers were passed as presented with the exception of the Junction Valley CWMU. The CWMU had proposed adding some public land to the boundary (to make the boundary more enforceable) and adding one public permit every 3 years as compensation to the public for removing deer hunting access to that public land. The RAC didn't like that at all and voted to deny the requested boundary change.

I have a harder time remembering everything about the proposed rules to address point creep, etc. because it was getting late and the RAC split it out into several motions. This was a bit of a contentious topic, with varying opinions across the RAC and from the audience. However, my memory is that the RAC ultimately voted to approve almost all of the Divison's recommendations, except to keep the maximum group size on the youth any bull elk hunt at 2. The rationale there was that it would spread the permits out among more families.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Hoping for an update from the southern region tonight...

o-||


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I was thinking of driving to Green River for the meeting tomorrow night but with the storm coming in I'll pass this year.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Is the "preference point" rule applying to antlerless elk?

And people haven't cared about the 5 year deer waiting period?


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

RandomElk16 said:


> Is the "preference point" rule applying to antlerless elk?
> 
> And people haven't cared about the 5 year deer waiting period?


Yes, it does apply to antlerless elk. Even if you buy it over the counter or from a CWMU.

And there are certainly people who aren't happy about the 5-year waiting period on deer, but it's hard to justify a 2-year waiting period when deer are actually harder to draw than elk these days.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Clarq said:


> Yes, it does apply to antlerless elk. Even if you buy it over the counter or from a CWMU.
> 
> And there are certainly people who aren't happy about the 5-year waiting period on deer, but it's hard to justify a 2-year waiting period when deer are actually harder to draw than elk these days.


I think these changes are funny. They want to control the elk population so they have control tags and private land tags, but if I get one of those I miss out on what could be a better tag.

The tag purchases from landowners or CWMU are far more expensive and I don't see why those impact points. That would be like LE deer and GS deer impacting eachother. Maybe they should - maybe we shouldn't separate deer between GS and LE lol.

You split dedicated and regular deer - I can't imagine that dedicated application doesn't go down. I was going to apply but now I won't. Maybe they don't care, but that is 3 years of hours I was willing to donate to them.

As for the 5 year waiting for deer - it's like I said before - LE elk and deer each year take a step closer to OIAL status. The fact is there is nothing to solve for point creep in a preference based way. It will continue to climb and climb. And climb.

Anyways - it is what it is I suppose. These guys get set on a decision and it's bound to happen. They seem to know what they are doing (or not really at all).


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

Funny how pool jumping doesn't even come up with anyone, ok let me have it..


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Pool jumping dose not effect anything. Its a wash.

Unit jumping inside the pools has an effect though.

The only way we will ever have a chance at catching up in the deer pool is if Utah where able to sustain a deer heard of 600,000 plus deer.

And issue ALOT more permits.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> The only way we will ever have a chance at catching up in the deer pool is if Utah where able to sustain a deer heard of 600,000 plus deer.
> 
> And issue ALOT more permits.


I'm in! Sounds easy. Let's just do that.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Pool jumping dose not effect anything. Its a wash.
> 
> Unit jumping inside the pools has an effect though.
> 
> ...


ya that's what I mean unit jumping  inside the pools.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> Pool jumping dose not effect anything. Its a wash.
> 
> Unit jumping inside the pools has an effect though.
> 
> ...


If we are never going to catch up, and things will only continue to get worse, why keep going down the same path?


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

The same path means big money for the select few. I say the whole mess is all about the all mighty dollar.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Those people who bought lifetime deer licenses for $500 are laughing their asses off right now.


-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Those people who bought lifetime deer licenses for $500 are laughing their asses off right now.
> 
> -DallanC


Laughing? Not really. Grateful for foresight, maybe. Wondering/worried what they will do to us next? A little.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Vanilla said:


> DallanC said:
> 
> 
> > Those people who bought lifetime deer licenses for $500 are laughing their asses off right now.
> ...


Never laughed but like Vanilla just glad that I saw what was a good deal and went for it. When I bought my LL that $500 was over a weeks wage and I debated it for a couple of years before I finally decided to buy one. When I bought mine I figured that it would take 15 years to get that $500 back but when I moved out of Utah 2 years later it paid for itself quite fast.

But you have to remember all a LL gives is is a deer general season combo license with fishing and small game. We are still subject to all waiting periods and fees for LE and OIL tags.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I wish I had bought one. At the time I didn't think I would live long enough to pay for itself. Oh well another if I shoulda woulda.


----------

