# Very surprised at the number of successful draw applicants!



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

I remember when it was decided that the state of Utah was going to go to 30 different deer units there were a lot of rumblings about how hard it might be to draw a tag now. Tags were reduced by 500 which even though is pretty inconsequential is still a reduction nonetheless. It seems as if almost every person I know drew out this year! Out of the 6 people in my family that put in, every single one of us drew out! Possibly this could be because we put in for the Zion unit and since the Zion unit is predominantly private not very many people apply there because they would have a lack of accessible land to hunt on?

However, a friend of mine and his family who put in for units where pretty much everything is public reported similar results, they all drew out! Through reading the draw results threads on these forums it looks like many of you drew out with a good number of your hunting partners too. Does it seem this way to anybody else? 

The only person I know of that didn't draw is my cousin who lives up in Murray but I just forwarded him the link that goofy elk posted in the "doom and gloom" thread that shows the remaining tags that will be sold in July, so maybe he's not out of luck! By the way, why are there leftover tags if roughly half the general season deer applicants who put in every year don't draw out? Is it because a lot of them only put in for first and second choices and some units had more tags available than hunters who put in for them?

Anywho, just an observation that I had. Good luck to everyone this year!


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

i know alot of people who didnt draw a tag at all... and they applied for what they thought were easy units to draw. i cant complain, me and everyone else in my family drew tags for the area of our choice. come on august!!


----------



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

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

I've seen just the opposite like Shaun. Most the people I hunt with and or know, did not draw a tag. Many who did including myself got their third or fourth and sometimes even their fifth choices.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Guess I've just been around a lucky group of individuals. Hopefully the people that got hosed have better luck next year.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

I think most of us knew this first (and probably second) year was going to be a crap shoot with unpredictable results. We were forced to try and outguess the masses and some of us went too far with our logic. I figured I'd draw my first choice, Panguitch Lake, which I did, but then I had 2 preference points and I applied for an archery tag. But I still know others who didn't draw even with 5 choices. What realy surprised me was that unit 4/5/6 filled up. I figured I could probably buy a tag over the counter on that one if I had to.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



colorcountrygunner said:


> ..Hopefully the people that got hosed have better luck next year.


Thanks. My group got hosed this year.. I really thought we would have drew the GS tags at least..


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

You a lucky man. Myself and 5 family members did not draw. And I hope this take away of State Wide Archery Blows up in the Face of who ever is in charge!! Now that I have seen all the tags that are to be sold on a first come first serve.. I don't know if I will ever stop Bit---- bout what I think is a major HOSE JOB....Sure go get a permit for Northern Utah. Then try and find an area thats not private. or deep pocket units.. ALL CRAP!!


----------



## gooseblaster (Sep 2, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Old....just curious but what unit did you apply for that was tough that 6 people couldn't pull a tag?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



elkfromabove said:


> I think most of us knew this first (and probably second) year was going to be a crap shoot with unpredictable results. We were forced to try and outguess the masses and some of us went too far with our logic. I figured I'd draw my first choice, Panguitch Lake, which I did, but then I had 2 preference points and I applied for an archery tag. But I still know others who didn't draw even with 5 choices. What realy surprised me was that unit 4/5/6 filled up. I figured I could probably buy a tag over the counter on that one if I had to.


There's over 900 archery and muzzy tags still available for unit 4/5/6. If they don't sell in July, there will be more rifle tags available.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



ridgetop said:


> elkfromabove said:
> 
> 
> > I think most of us knew this first (and probably second) year was going to be a crap shoot with unpredictable results. We were forced to try and outguess the masses and some of us went too far with our logic. I figured I'd draw my first choice, Panguitch Lake, which I did, but then I had 2 preference points and I applied for an archery tag. But I still know others who didn't draw even with 5 choices. What realy surprised me was that unit 4/5/6 filled up. I figured I could probably buy a tag over the counter on that one if I had to.
> ...


You're right! I guess that's part of the crap shoot. But since I already have a tag, maybe my daughter will be able to get an any weapon on that unit. She lives in Magna anyway and can get there after work if need be. We'll have to keep an eye on it! Thanks for reminding us.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Of my 8 relatives we applied as 5 independent applications and drew 100% in one of the largest units in the state. I personally only applied for one and only unit as it is my spot and where we have a good spot to stay. I thought that it might be a tough draw and that is why we did not apply as large groups, so that at least many of us could hunt. I had several neighbors who did not draw 1st-3rd choices, but I don't recall which they were. 
I think there were certain units seriously over applied and others very under subscribed resulting in excess tags in those. It was just bound to happen in the first year that all this crap happened. Next year we may see the same happen with the opposite units being under subscribed possibly and a few years to really stabilize. If anyone just really wanted to hunt wherever it may be they would be wise to opt for all 5 units, which may not do any good unless it were the typically under subscribed areas in what used to be the north region.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Next year it will over correct, units undersubscribed this year will be slammed next year. Its going to take a few years to even out.

-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Nothing drawn in my camp and I know a lot of guys at work that didn't draw either. 2 guys that did draw did because of the amount of private land their unit has. I had 5 options on my app just to cover as many babses as possible.



DallanC said:


> Its going to take a few years to even out.
> -DallanC


You are correct in that statement. I said this in another thread where the question was what are our odds of drawing. It may be 3 to 5 years before the whole thing levels out and you can figure some kind of odds even before tag numbers are out.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

It seems to be running half and half with the folks I know. My group of 4 drew out for the rifle hunt in 4/5/6 but I know a couple people that didn't draw with multiple choices listed and one that drew his 4th choice. this whole thing will definitely be a crap shoot for the next couple years...and then point creep will begin to set in on the more popular units.


----------



## hnt4food (Oct 28, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Did anyone draw a boulder rifle tag? My dad, brother and myself were unsuccessful for that unit


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Most of the people I associate with drew some sort of permit however I am not sure whether it was a first choice or second. I drew a CWMU I was trying to get. Hopefully it'll pan out at least for my two boys to have a good time. My dad and brothers all drew out as well. There were a few guys at work who didn't but I don't know where they were drawing or attempting to draw. This will be an interesting system to watch over the next few years. I just hope the preference point I purchased this year for a dedicated permit will assure my draw of the dedicated next year.


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



BigT said:


> Most of the people I associate with drew some sort of permit however I am not sure whether it was a first choice or second. I drew a CWMU I was trying to get. Hopefully it'll pan out at least for my two boys to have a good time. My dad and brothers all drew out as well. There were a few guys at work who didn't but I don't know where they were drawing or attempting to draw. This will be an interesting system to watch over the next few years. I just hope the preference point I purchased this year for a dedicated permit will assure my draw of the dedicated next year.


Yep, I may do dedicated just so I can archery hunt my area for thee years. I probably wouldn't even pick up a rifle or muzzy. But when I can't draw the archery tag on my first choice, I don't want to hunt every other year when before this option 2 crap I could get an archery tag every year...


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Am still so PO'D! I can't stand it. Take away State Wide Archery is a huge boat load of CRAP>> Question I have IS WHY? The DWR couldn't give me an answer..


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



oldfudd said:


> Am still so PO'D! I can't stand it. Take away State Wide Archery is a huge boat load of CRAP>> Question I have IS WHY? The DWR couldn't give me an answer..


To be "FAIR" :roll:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Yup. The perception of fairness.


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

oldfudd said:


> Am still so PO'D! I can't stand it. Take away State Wide Archery is a huge boat load of CRAP>> Question I have IS WHY? The DWR couldn't give me an answer..


How are they suppose to manage individual units and have statewide archery? Isn't it a little counterproductive to allow archery hunters go to any unit? Which would overcrowd the better units.

For instance say there are 15 units with 20 buck to Dow ratio and the other 15 have 13-15 buck to doe ratio, which do you think more archery hunters would go to? Even though archery success rate is very low, it would hinder the current objectives of the DWR.

Sorry if my grammar/formatting is off, writing this from my phone.


----------



## hnt4food (Oct 28, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

The state has been managing individual units for a long time. this is just the first year hunters will be limited to the smaller units. The Buck to doe ratios could have been managed just fine while keeping statewide archery. The reason it was stopped is because it's not fair  that archery get to hunt the whole state while the rifle guys are only limited to their little area :roll:


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

No archer goes to specific units just because the buck to doe ratio is higher. At least none that I know. I go where I've been before or is really close to me so I can go up after work. I'm not going to waste my time driving 3-4 hrs to some spot that has a high buck population. That's why taking away the state wide is a joke.


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

hnt4food said:


> The state has been managing individual units for a long time.


Very true. How would you rate the deer numbers right now in Utah? I would guess most would say that the numbers are pathetic. The former way of managing deer didn't work.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Uni said:


> Very true. How would you rate the deer numbers right now in Utah? *I would guess most would say that the numbers are pathetic.* The former way of managing deer didn't work.


Those that would say the numbers are pathetic are only speakinh about the areas they frequent and/or know. Mule deer numbers in Many areas in Utah are actually up. in the last 2 years. There are some areas where numbers are down and that is due to many of the factors that have been discussed. The area I typically hunt has more deer now than in the past 20 years.

Don't be so quick to critisize or judge the DWR. While deer numbers are dropping at an alarming rate in other states like Nevada and Colorado; Utah deer numbers have not dropped as significantly (now come the attacks from those who don't believe DWR numbers because they are better biologists from their recliners).


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

MadHunter said:


> Uni said:
> 
> 
> > Very true. How would you rate the deer numbers right now in Utah? *I would guess most would say that the numbers are pathetic.* The former way of managing deer didn't work.
> ...


I agree the DWR does a great job. I believe they made archery unit by unit for reasons other than "to be fair".


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Uni said:


> I agree the DWR does a great job. I believe they made archery unit by unit for reasons other than "to be fair".


"They" (DWR) didn't make archery unit by unit, the Wildlife Board did and it was strictly for social reasons. One was to spread out the bowhunters so that they couldn't "overcrowd" any area, but that issue was proven to be a bogus issue in 2009. The other reason was "to be fair" to rifle hunters. In fact, the DWR didn't recommend changing statewide archery to unit by unit because they said there was no biological advantage to doing so. They only said they could handle it if the Board decided to do it, which is what happened!

FWIW, there has already been some talk in some of the RAC's about changing some of the other "unfair" advantages the archers have, ie; the length of the seasons, extended archery seasons and areas, either sex extended archery deer hunts and either sex elk hunts. Even with all these "unfair" advantages, the success rate for archers is only about half the success rate for rifle hunters, but apparently even that is too much!!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

What was done and is in the works to be done is absolutely despicable. Archery could actually be given a few more perks and still be biologically sound to the herds.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

I know I better but on my flame retardant suit before saying this but here goes...

The archers always preach about the much lower success rates that they have compared to rifle hunters as a reason they should have longer seasons, statewide access, etc..
But honestly, how many of you talk to some mouth breathers with a bow every year that they say, "Hit one yesterday but couldn't find it...hit one this morning but couldn't find it...hit one tonight but couldn't find it..." Just because archers aren't "tagging" a lot of deer doesn't necessarily mean they aren't killing a lot of deer.

...and here we go!!!! o-||


----------



## trophyonly (Jun 12, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Report this postReply with quoteRe: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican
by MadHunter » Jun 05, '12, 5:48



> Don't be so quick to critisize or judge the DWR. While deer numbers are dropping at an alarming rate in other states like Nevada and Colorado; Utah deer numbers have not dropped as significantly (now come the attacks from those who don't believe DWR numbers because they are better biologists from their recliners).
> 
> Some interesting facts and quota recommendations (especially for Deer) from Nevada's Division of Wildlife for 2012:
> http://ndow.org/about/news/pr/2012/Apri ... quota.shtm


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



colorcountrygunner said:


> I know I better but on my flame retardant suit before saying this but here goes...
> 
> The archers always preach about the much lower success rates that they have compared to rifle hunters as a reason they should have longer seasons, statewide access, etc..
> But honestly, how many of you talk to some mouth breathers with a bow every year that they say, "Hit one yesterday but couldn't find it...hit one this morning but couldn't find it...hit one tonight but couldn't find it..." Just because archers aren't "tagging" a lot of deer doesn't necessarily mean they aren't killing a lot of deer.
> ...


Being an archery hunter myself I hate hearing that also, but there are slob hunters with every weapon. I know Finn posted some studies showing wounded rates are actually lower for archery hunters than rifle hunters.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



colorcountrygunner said:


> I know I better but on my flame retardant suit before saying this but here goes...
> 
> The archers always preach about the much lower success rates that they have compared to rifle hunters as a reason they should have longer seasons, statewide access, etc..
> But honestly, how many of you talk to some mouth breathers with a bow every year that they say, "Hit one yesterday but couldn't find it...hit one this morning but couldn't find it...hit one tonight but couldn't find it..." Just because archers aren't "tagging" a lot of deer doesn't necessarily mean they aren't killing a lot of deer.
> ...


Per your handle and your post, it looks like you've been down this road before, but since it hasn't yet ended in the results you are seeking, you thought you'd bring it up again! And regardless of what anyone says (or has said) you aren't going to change your viewpoint. Surveys, facts, studies, don't matter when you hear, or think you hear that "every year" bowhunters are saying "Hit one yesterday/this morning/tonight but couldn't find it."

My question to you is; If you totally had your way, what should happen to the archers of Utah? In other words, what are the results you are seeking?


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Talk to a bunch of archery hunters out in the field over the last 48 yrs I agree with some of what your saying bout hit one this morning , hit 2 more this evening.. Most guys will tell you they have hit a half dozen! I think there bustin out there egos, lettting people know what great shots they are just not good hunters. It's has alot to do with whats being shoved into heads of younger and new archery hunters.. Hunting shows, archery shops telling these new hunters you can stick a deer or an elk at 120 yards with this new bow. The kill zone is so small at that distance. and a bunch of guys may have to jump off the wheeler or climb out of the back of a pick up truck after the shot and go on a 5 to 8 hour tracking job.Hell with that!! it's just a deer.. ( plenty of Them around) I' myself have lost 2 deer in 48 years. Hey! it happens..Always thought the object of hunting with a bow was to get close not get far away.Muzzy Hunters lose deer. Rifle Hunters lose deer. Highways lose deer. But to take away State Wide Archery because some Screw Ball folks. who have no idea bout whats going on. Well, I feel have made a terrible mistake! The support for the Peays and the rest that made the decision is slipping quick. So enjoy your moments of power. you all will get the boots.. sooner the better.


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Elkfromabove,

I completely agree with color country. I quit achery hunting because I was one of those guys who killed more than I tagged. I know I'm not alone.

I would like to see the argument disappear that archers have hardly any impact on a the deer/elk herd; therefore, they are entitled to longer dates and more areas. They should have to pick a region if everyone eles has to (that has been changed). They shouldn't get almost a month to hunt the entire state while rifle hunters get reduced to 3 days in some areas. I don't mind them getting a little more time. I don't mind the Wastch Front getting more days as a late season management tool (should be a doe hunt though.) I just don't agree that they impact the herd significantly less than the rifle hunters. I don't agree that they should get a lot more perks.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



provider said:


> Elkfromabove,
> 
> I completely agree with color country. I quit achery hunting because I was one of those guys who killed more than I tagged. I know I'm not alone.
> 
> I would like to see the argument disappear that archers have hardly any impact on a the deer/elk herd; therefore, they are entitled to longer dates and more areas. They should have to pick a region if everyone eles has to (that has been changed). They shouldn't get almost a month to hunt the entire state while rifle hunters get reduced to 3 days in some areas. I don't mind them getting a little more time. I don't mind the Wastch Front getting more days as a late season management tool (should be a doe hunt though.) I just don't agree that they impact the herd significantly less than the rifle hunters. I don't agree that they should get a lot more perks.


Not to be rude, but there is really nothing to disagree with. It is all facts based on harvest percentages. Archery hunters have about a third the success rate as rifle hunters and as I mentioned above there have been studies done showing that wounding rates for archery are lower than for rifles hunters. I don't like policies and decision being made on the statement of fairness, it just doesn't settle well with me.

I will concede that it does annoy me (I have been guilty of it myself) when archery hunters saying they have no impact on deer. This is not true, they have an impact it is just not as much. I would also bet that if archery permits were increased success rate may go down even more having more hunters in the field.

Utah is one of the least archery friendly states, so I guess some should feel lucky they don't live in one of those other states. :shock:


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



elkfromabove said:


> colorcountrygunner said:
> 
> 
> > I know I better but on my flame retardant suit before saying this but here goes...
> ...


What are the results I'm seeking? Well I'm just talking out of my butt here because I know this would never happen, but this is what I'd love to see. You know that thread that got posted recently about Ted Nugent getting in trouble for breaking the law in Alaska? The one where he wounded a black bear, couldn't find it, then went out and shot another one? I'd like it if Utah had that same law...one bloody arrow and you're done (same for a muzz hit or a rifle hit). Of course there would be no way to enforce this and it would be on the honor code so the unethical morons would just continue their practices.

I wouldn't even think twice about archery hunters having a month long hunt if they all had the restraint to do this. I do believe the archery hunters take a bigger toll than some would like to think. I also believe that you are subscribing to the "surveys, facts, and studies" that support what you want to believe.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

"Hey Jimmy, look at that buck on that ridge."

"Wow, how far is that?"

"Dunno, my ott six has enough energy to kill something up to a half mile."

"Hold 'bout 4 foot high."

"Bam!!"

"Where'd he go? Did you hit him?"

"Naah, I missed, let's go have a beer."

"sounds good......"


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Treehugnhuntr said:


> "Hey Jimmy, look at that buck on that ridge."
> 
> "Wow, how far is that?"
> 
> ...


That happens too, I wont deny that. It doesn't happen for a month straight though with a very large chunk of the rifle hunters flocking to the southern region.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

The idea of people flocking to the southern region is completely false and perception based.

The number of public acres per hunter in the south during archery season when it was statewide was almost 3 times as many than in the north. This was the whole reason they decided to pick your region for a year. To see how many people actually chose to hunt the south. Result? All the complaining was over nothing. Documented, every last hunter.

And, t6he relative number of hunter days afield is higher for even other weapon. Yes, archers get 4 weeks to hunt, roughly 13000 for last several years. Compared to 83000 rifle hunters in the field for 9 days, what does deductive reasoning tell us the result might be?

For math's sake, let's assume that every hunter hunted every available day using rough numbers from the last 10 years.

Archery - 13000 x 28 = 354,000 hunter days afield.

Any weapon/muzzy - 747,000

Similar wound rates? It's documented that general season archery, rifle and muzzy are similar. LE deer hunts are a different story, but that's apples and tomatoes for this thread.

Looks like more than double to me. Resource taxation is really what matters in the end, yes?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

"Hey Bubba, look at that buck on that ridge."

"Wow, how far is that?"

"Dunno, my *new carbon fiber split limb mega-cam bow* has enough energy to kill something up to a half mile."

"Hold 'bout 4 foot high."

"fling!!"

"Where'd he go? Did you hit him?"

"Naah, I missed, let's go have a beer."

      

"sounds good......"


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Treehugnhuntr said:


> "Hey Jimmy, look at that buck on that ridge."
> 
> "Wow, how far is that?"
> 
> ...


AMEN.

Slob hunters are slob hunters no matter which weapon they use.

Sadly until there is a way to enforce ethics this way of hunting will continue.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Understood Gary, but walking a hundred yards and hiking across a big nasty canyon to check are definitely different critters.

There're unethical hunters or people who just don't know any better in all facets. To generalize to leverage a point doesn't justify anything. Facts, those are good things to base opinions on. At least from my speculative perspective.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Treehugnhuntr said:


> The idea of people flocking to the southern region is completely false and perception based.
> 
> The number of public acres per hunter in the south during archery season when it was statewide was almost 3 times as many than in the north. This was the whole reason they decided to pick your region for a year. To see how many people actually chose to hunt the south. Result? All the complaining was over nothing. Documented, every last hunter.
> 
> ...


You provided facts and broke this down in a way that was actually persuasive to me instead of just throwing out a snotty tone like elkfromabove and I commend you for that.


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

I have only hunted one rifle season in my entire lifetime and hated all two weeks of it. You can have however long or short the rifle season is and I'm in the DH program, thanks. I chose archery because I enjoy getting close to the animals, studying them, not having them taste gamie or full of hormones. My senses and wit against theirs and most of the time, they win. So, because I have more time to hunt, I am far less likely to pull back on even a 28 inch 4x4 a week in since I don't feel pressured and neither do the animals. I've listened to every single complaint against archers in Utah and they all crack me up. Do I know idiots that will wound animals left and right, you betcha and they get an earful and aren't welcome in our camp and those in camp make it a point to shadow them in the field moving animals away from them until they hunt elsewhere. But what it ultimately comes down to is the ethics that young hunters are raised and introduced into whatever firearm they are going to hunt game with.

I was always told, "_if you have to question your shot, you don't take it._" *Retreat, Re-position, Re-estimate, and Resume...the four "R"s*. I'm almost 40 and have lost ONE mule deer and ONE elk. Its how I was taught and not a credit to my personal skills at all.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

...and to think he said my viewpoint couldn't be changed! :lol:


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Go ahead ,we are all entitled to speak are minds. All I know is, I've archery hunted Southern and Southeastern Utah my entire life. Bout 20 days a year. One thing I Can say. Most hunters head for home after about 6 days.. As for the Rifle season, according to the stats put out by DWR 70% of deer harvested in the State are harvested in the first 3 1/2 days.So why go back to a 9 day hunt in some units..Back in the day we all had to choose your weapon hunt. .Didn't here alot of people complain then..


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

The season length for rifle is a very interesting thing to me. And it among anything else, has driven me away from rifle hunting in Utah all together. The 3 day (or 5 day) gives one Saturday - the opener - to hunt. My experiences hunting the rifle hunter are horrid. The concentration of people is unsafe. With a 9 day hunt, at least people could be spread out by time. But having one weekend, with only one Saturday, concentrates people by geography AND time, which to me, creates unsafe hunting conditions. The 3-day hunt DEMANDS this unsafe concentration. So I don't rifle hunt any more in Utah. Archery hunters do not have this situation. I personally don't want to see archery opportunities go the same was as rifle. That is, I want archery to remain four weeks, or longer if possible because it avoids concentrating everyone on the same place on the same day. But I'd like to see the rifle hunts extended in time to include 3 weekends - for no other reason than to spread out over time, when people are hitting the hills. With tag numbers capped anyway, there is no reason not to do that. So long answer to your question - why have it be longer than 3 days? Because it isn't safe.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



GaryFish said:


> The season length for rifle is a very interesting thing to me. And it among anything else, has driven me away from rifle hunting in Utah all together. The 3 day (or 5 day) gives one Saturday - the opener - to hunt. My experiences hunting the rifle hunter are horrid. The concentration of people is unsafe. With a 9 day hunt, at least people could be spread out by time. But having one weekend, with only one Saturday, concentrates people by geography AND time, which to me, creates unsafe hunting conditions. The 3-day hunt DEMANDS this unsafe concentration. So I don't rifle hunt any more in Utah. Archery hunters do not have this situation. I personally don't want to see archery opportunities go the same was as rifle. That is, I want archery to remain four weeks, or longer if possible because it avoids concentrating everyone on the same place on the same day. But I'd like to see the rifle hunts extended in time to include 3 weekends - for no other reason than to spread out over time, when people are hitting the hills. With tag numbers capped anyway, there is no reason not to do that. So long answer to your question - why have it be longer than 3 days? Because it isn't safe.


I think you make many very valid points. I also dislike the 3 and 5 day hunts. I think 9 days minimum for rifle hunters.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Again perception. The 3 and 5 day hunts were only implemented at the demand of hunters and their representatives, not as a result of division recommendation. Any state bio in the know will tell you that it did nothing to curb harvest and actually put more pressure on animals all at one time. In addition, many people hunted the entire hunt instead of on the weekends and it has been speculated that many people harvested bucks they may have passed on, were there an additional weekend opportunity.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Treehugnhuntr said:


> The 3 and 5 day hunts were only implemented at the demand of hunters and their representatives, not as a result of division recommendation.


What hunters requested the 3/5 day hunts? In all honesty - I didn't know that recommendation came from hunters/representatives. What hunter in their right mind would recommend that? I'm not arguing - just perplexed. Any help?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



colorcountrygunner said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > The idea of people flocking to the southern region is completely false and perception based.
> ...


Tree, Thanks doing what I was unable to do.

CCG, I apologize for my "snotty tone". I didn't intend it to be that way. It's just that we've been over these issues so many times and it always falls upon the archers to provide a defense which we've done. Yes, we refer to studies, surveys, facts that show archers have an actual lower success rate because that's what all of them show. We have yet to see such info from rifle hunters that shows otherwise. If you can find something, please feel free to post it.

And, FWIW, I agree with your proposal regarding a bloody arrow/bullet and you're done, though it would be much harder to find the bloody bullet.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Gary, Southern folk at the RACs and a few select wildlife board members.

Pretty much the same folks that screamed about the mysterious non-existent flocking of northerners to the south.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Thanks Tree. I still can't comprehend that.


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Elkfromabove,

I must concede that the "published" information supports your cause; however, I cannot reconcile published information with what I hear from hunters. I consistently hear year after year more about archery losses. Rifle hunters talk about kills. Archers talk about hits.

Even though published data supports archers, I have never seen a good, comprehensive study published in Utah. I wonder why the division never publishes the survey results from limited entry hunts. Every single hunters reports on those.

Another thing, deer that are wounded during a rifle hunt have a much better chance of getting finished off by another hunter. It never happens with archery.

I just can't reconcile the stats with what I have observed among friends year after year.

You can argue that I'm ignoring data, but I will hold onto my doubts until limited entry data is published - or a better study. Again, I hear about rifle kills about as much as I hear about archery hits. Maybe that's lousy science, but I can't let it go yet.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Jahan's statement made me curious, so I went and looked up the Deer harvest from the 2010 report. Here is what I found.

Total State wide Success: 23.9%
General Rifle Success: 25.1%
General Muzzle Success: 22.7%
General Archery Success: 17.7%

Personally miss when I could buy one tag and 3 permits and hunt when I want too. But alas, somebody thought they had a better idea. Seems to me that since we have major restrictions on hunters now, that they should just issue tags based on the 25% and let us hunt all three seasons.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

If we have a cap on the number of licenses, and figure 25% success rate across the board, then who cares what weapon we hunt with? I'm with you. If you get a tag, hunt it with the weapon(s) you choose. I have no problem with that.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



GaryFish said:


> If we have a cap on the number of licenses, and figure 25% success rate across the board, then who cares what weapon we hunt with? I'm with you. If you get a tag, hunt it with the weapon(s) you choose. I have no problem with that.


If this method was used you would see a fairly large tag cut. IMO this is going in the wrong direction. My opinion is we should be pushing for more opportunity not trying to decrease it based off of social issues.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



provider said:


> Another thing, deer that are wounded during a rifle hunt have a much better chance of getting finished off by another hunter. It never happens with archery.


On the flip side, one could say that archery wounded deer have a much higher survival rate.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



Treehugnhuntr said:


> On the flip side, one could say that archery wounded deer have a much higher survival rate.


I'm not sure I'd buy that. It would be an interesting study. A bullet will either pass through, or get stuck in muscle tissue. Once embedded, it will cause problems, but won't continue to slice and dice when the animal moves. An arrow will either pass through, or get stuck. If the broadhead is still in the animal, the broadhead will slice and dice whenever the animals moves. A bullet's greatest damage is the initial shock upon impact, and then tissue damage resulting from that impact. If the initial tissue damage isn't fatal, the animal will probably survive. An arrow kills by slicing things along. If still embedded in the animal, it will still slice when moved. Wouldn't it? Just thinking out loud here.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



jahan said:


> GaryFish said:
> 
> 
> > If we have a cap on the number of licenses, and figure 25% success rate across the board, then who cares what weapon we hunt with? I'm with you. If you get a tag, hunt it with the weapon(s) you choose. I have no problem with that.
> ...


I don't think it would be as big as you might think under the current system. Right now archery and muzzy tags are a percentage of the general alloted tags.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



provider said:


> I wonder why the division never publishes the survey results from limited entry hunts. Every single hunters reports on those.


I would absolutely support a mandatory reporting on ALL big game tags (not just Limited Entry or Antlerless) to generate this type of data and shed some light on this archers v.s rifle hunters debate. Heck, it takes 3 minutes to complete that survey.


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Tree,

Probably true, not sure that's really a plus. I know a number of rifle guys who have killed elk or deer that had an arrow in them. Meat was infected, just dying slow deaths. Saying a wounded deer will get over it really doesn't make up for much in my book.

I'll be done now. I have a lot of respect for you guys. I don't hate archers or archery, I just reject that its a more pure form of hunting that should be promoted above the others. I've said how I feel and why.

Peace!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



provider said:


> Elkfromabove,
> 
> I must concede that the "published" information supports your cause; however, I cannot reconcile published information with what I hear from hunters. I consistently hear year after year more about archery losses. Rifle hunters talk about kills. Archers talk about hits.
> 
> ...


I'm not going to dispute the point that you may HEAR more about archery animal losses because it's probably true. But consider these following points when you decide whether or not what you hear is actually what takes place.

Point #1 - Archers are generally close enough to the animal to see the hit. We usually know when we hit (or miss) an animal by the blood spot, actual hole, arrow sticking out, and/or animal's reaction because we're close enough to have visual confirmation. In fact, we usually see or hear the animal go down!

Point #2 - Archers are taught (self-taught usually) to follow up a shot even if the animal doesn't react as if it's been hit or we don't see the hit or miss. Archers know an arrow hit animal often doesn't even know it's been hit because there is no booming sound, no heavy impact or no strange, close movements.

Point #3 - And archery followups are much more likely to happen because we want our arrows back! They're too expensive to lose.

Point #4 - And archery followups are more likely to happen because we usually don't have to go very far to go to confirm a hit or miss.

Point #5 - An arrow wound doesn't have the same mortality risks that a rifle wound does. It's cleaner, smoother and with little bone damage.

Point #6 - I think a lost animal seems to be more of an embarrassment to a rifle hunter than an archer so they don't talk about it much. And I also don't think they follow up as much. I'm not sure why this is, but I know in my case, it's a matter of trying to find out what happened. Several years ago, I lost a bull elk that I shot at 25 yards. The arrow went clear through and I recovered my arrow and I was sure he was down within a 100 yards or so. When I (and some other bowhunters who volunteered to help) couldn't find him after following the blood trail for about a half mile and with it getting dark, I asked a rifle hunting friend (among others) to help me the next morning. We found blood pools, a bed where he spent the night, scattered blood spots and/or hoof prints for another mile, but finally, the trail ran dry. To this day I still don't know what happened, but I do know that my friend still hates bowhunting/bowhunters and sites my case every time the subject comes up. How many times that story has been told to how many people in how many versions will never be known, but I'm sure it's a lot. My version is that we spent 91 man-hours trying to recover an animal that obviously survived. I'm disappointed in the hit, but proud of the effort I made to find the animal and solve the mystery. Your version may be different.

Point #7 - Yes, arrow wounded animals are harvested all the time. Maybe not in the numbers the bullet wounded animals are, but the number of hunters would explain that.

Do archers lose animals? Of course! Have I lost some? Yes, (1 elk and 5 deer during my 40+ years of bowhunting.) and I can tell you about every one of them, but I can also tell you of the ones I lost while rifle hunting. But I won't!!


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

You are painting with a wide ethical brush there.

I've personally seen 4 guys in the back of a toyota chasing deer through a hayfield up into square net fence while flinging arrows the whole way. If I had something to record the video I woulda turned them in. Dunno if they hit any, alot of deer spilled over into private property that they didnt have access to, but they didnt follow up on any.

-DallanC


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



DallanC said:


> You are painting with a wide ethical brush there.
> 
> I've personally seen 4 guys in the back of a toyota chasing deer through a hayfield up into square net fence while flinging arrows the whole way. If I had something to record the video I woulda turned them in. Dunno if they hit any, alot of deer spilled over into private property that they didnt have access to, but they didnt follow up on any.
> 
> -DallanC


And you are painting 16,000 people with a very narrow brush.

We all know there are jerks who archery hunt (or rifle hunt or eat in restaurants or drive cars or even go to church), but most of the people who do those things act responsibly and we have no reason to notice or remember them and thus we don't talk about them, but we certainly remember and talk about the bad ones. My narrow gun hunter brushes include several unknowns who have looked at me through their scopes, one hunter who tried to claim a deer my father shot and when my father wouldn't give it up, he slammed the butt of his gun down on the ground and it discharged almost blowing his head off, a group of Hispanics who fired a dozen shots early opening day over mine and my daughter's heads at a spike buck on the other side of the canyon and when the buck went down, the yelling between them and another group further down the canyon went on for over an hour, and then there was a former hunting companion who couldn't wait for my daughter to get out of his truck to shoot a three point on his side of the road so he jumped out and legally shot it with his pistol, but made my daughter use her tag because it wasn't big enough for him. There are others, but you get the idea.

The vast majority of those 16,000 archery hunters and their encounters are as I painted and that's why I used "more likely", "usually", "probably", and other such terms when I painted with that wide brush. On the other hand, you didn't use those terms when you painted, leaving the impression that you felt ALL or most bow hunters are like the jerks you described. We are not!, any more than all or most rifle hunters are like the narrow brushes I've encountered.

Two other issues really bug me about the fairness issue. Notice that archers never try to rewrite the rules to make rifle hunting "fair". It's always the other way around. We don't insist that you get within 50 yards for your shots, or that you get only one shot per load, or that you practice more, or that you can't use scopes, or that you can't use a rest, etc.
And the other issue is that archers are always required to establish innocence, while rifle hunters are never required to establish guilt. They don't have to show that archery hunters actually lose more deer, they just have to make the accusation and archers have to try to prove otherwise. I sure hope I never have to face a judge or jury that thinks that way.

Actually, there are at least two other fairness issues that bug me. At what point is it "fair" enough that we can stop "fixing" it? and how does "fixing" it make things better for the "fixers"?

Straighten me out here, please, so that I'm not on this computer 'til 1:09 am trying to solve these dilemmas! OK 1:11!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

You've had some very bad run ins with gun idiots. No doubt. And that sucks.

I am not in the camp to take any kind of opportunity away from archers, or any hunters. The way I see it, take a group of 100 people from any kind of activity - archery, rifle, upland, fly fishers, quilters, sports fans, duck hunters, whatever. Of the 100, 10-15 will be total jack wagons. 10-15 will be guys you'd welcome in your camp/boat/stream any time and could be good friends. The other 70-80 are decent enough guys, might do things a little different than you, but they respect you and you respect them and you do your thing and everyone is good. By sheer mass, when you get 3-4 times more rifle hunters, you just have 3-4 times more slobs. And they are concentrated on a single weekend which only makes it worse.

Naw. I respect archers for what you do. I don't want that limited. I don't care that you have four weeks or any of that. Have at it. Have fun and best of luck to you. Really. Do your thing and have a great time. Your enjoyment of the archery hunt in no way affects me on a rifle hunt.

As a rifle hunter, I don't like the 3/5 day season. It makes no sense, and compromises safety and concentrates the jerk wad hunters by both space and time, making for a bad hunting situation. My thoughts to extend the rifle hunt to three weekends does nothing to any archery season whatsoever. And has nothing to do with fairness. It is ONLY to do with a safe and enjoyable rifle hunt.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*



GaryFish said:


> You've had some very bad run ins with gun idiots. No doubt. And that sucks.
> 
> I am not in the camp to take any kind of opportunity away from archers, or any hunters. The way I see it, take a group of 100 people from any kind of activity - archery, rifle, upland, fly fishers, quilters, sports fans, duck hunters, whatever. Of the 100, 10-15 will be total jack wagons. 10-15 will be guys you'd welcome in your camp/boat/stream any time and could be good friends. The other 70-80 are decent enough guys, might do things a little different than you, but they respect you and you respect them and you do your thing and everyone is good. By sheer mass, when you get 3-4 times more rifle hunters, you just have 3-4 times more slobs. And they are concentrated on a single weekend which only makes it worse.
> 
> ...


Good post, I agree with most of what you said. I would be curious to see what a three week rifle season success rate would be? I think it may cause other issues as far as other hunts, but it could probably be worked out. I like all weapons and respect people who have their particular preferences.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

A 16-day rifle hunt would take in 3 weekends.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

*Re: Very surprised at the number of successful draw applican*

Actually, I think it would be a great idea to have a 3 weekend rifle hunt! And looking at the calendar for the next two years, the muzzy deer and elk hunts and interrupting the deer rut may also come into play, but I think it could be worked out.

The benefits? Fewer hunters per day, especially toward the end. A more flexible vacation/hunting schedule. The safety issue. Less divisiveness between the the various hunting groups. Possible higher success rate.

The possible downsides? The muzzy hunts (and maybe others). Seven more days of pressure on the deer. Higher success rate.

I know that the DWR has verified that shortening seasons does nothing or very little to change the harvest rate, but whether or not lengthening the season would work to the benefit of the herds and/or the hunters is unsure. However, like the 2 of you, I believe it ought to be considered.


----------

