# "The Future of ELK Hunting"



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

In 1989 Utah began issuing spike-only tags to increase the number of mature bulls on many of the elk units in Utah. The idea was to allow a certain percentage of the yearling bull elk population to be harvested while restricting the harvest of mature bulls. This also enabled the DWR to issue several thousand spike tags with low harvest numbers, allowing for many people the opportunity to hunt yearly with reduced harvest of the bull population. We believe the spike tag still has its place in the management of both elk and elk hunters. However, we also believe that in many areas, spike-only hunts are not the most effective management tool. Accordingly: 

1) We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, Wasatch, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert. This will allow more bulls to reach maturity on the (a) units, increasing the number of mature bulls that can be harvested yearly. This change will also reduce the bull:cow ratios on the (b) units which currently have an excess of mature bulls. Issuing spike tags for a determined time will reduce the number of bulls being recruited into the mature bull population without affecting quality. Although many spike-only tags will be eliminated, at least three new hunting opportunities will be created: Spike-only hunting on (b) areas, increased any-bull permits for (a) areas, and increased cow elk tags that can be issued in the future as a result of lowered bull:cow ratios on these units. 

2) We propose changing the season dates on the (a) units to the following: 
September 1-21 Limited Archery, any-bull 
September 26-October 4 Limited Muzzleloader, any-bull 
October 6-14 Limited Rifle any-bull 
All three seasons Premium Limited any-bull 

3) We propose changing tag allotments for the (a) units from 60/25/15 (any weapon/archery/muzzleloader) to 50/30/20. Giving more tags to primitive weapons combined with the season date changes will decrease harvest success rates, allowing for more mature tags to be issued for all weapon choices. We also propose that these tags be allocated by individual sub-units on the Wasatch unit. 

4) We propose the (a) unit tags be issued thru a preference point drawing, while keeping the remaining 23 limited entry elk units under the current bonus point system. We propose hunters a one-time option of converting their elk bonus points into preference points, if desired. This could be done only when applying for the first time in the preference point drawing. There would be no waiting period for hunters successful in drawing an (a) unit permit. 

5) We propose that tooth data and harvest/hunt reporting be mandatory for all hunters in (a) areas. Anyone failing to report would not be eligible to apply in the big game drawing the following year. 

SUMMARY 

We believe that by the changes in season dates, elimination of spike tags, getting bull to cow ratios in check with the EMP, mandatory reporting, tag allotment changes on the (a) units, more tags can be issued while maintaining quality. In addition, by redeploying the spike tags from the (a) units to the (b) units, the bull to cow ratios on the (b) units will become more inline with the desired ratios per the EMP. This proposal will allow more hunters the opportunity to hunt mature quality animals in Utah without losing yearly opportunities for OTC tags.


----------



## truemule (Sep 12, 2007)

Who is "We"?

It looks good on the surface but I like to see numbers.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Sounds kind of like I400? or whatever it was called. I agree with true who's We?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Just read through it quick,,,,but a couple thoughts.

Spike hunting on your (B) units was already introduced last year.

If they issue (A) tags through a preference points system and then have no waiting period,
It will create a "pyramid" with the tags only being issued to top point holders.
So, in essence, there will be a waiting period determined on how many tags available,
versus number of point holding applicants. Your still going to wait a number of years 
in between tags.


This would also make an already "confusing" draw system even worse for most hunters.

Although,, I do like the tag allocations and date changes .

But, I don't see the DWR and Wild Life Board changing much from the 2011 proposals that
are on the table right now.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Yes, Goofy this was written awhile ago. I believe it's better than the proposal being address for 2011. This proposal is a less drastic change which I believe will make more hunters happy.

No, real numbers yet, but if you let spikes become branch antlered bulls instead of killing them when their spikes then you will have more mature bull elk on the unit thus increasing LE tags.


----------



## Petersen (Sep 7, 2007)

And if anyone here wants to dig through the 59 pages on this and the I400 proposal, have at it. It's all in the old DWR forum archive: http://utahwildlife.net/dwr_forum/viewt ... 9&p=224021


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I like I400 a lot more than what I hear being bantered around by the elk committee. What CS put up is a rough draft from early in the process. When I get a second I will put up the latest draft that I liked from the many meetings held by several from this site among others. Now that the DWR and even the Wildlife Board seem willing to move season dates around, I think many parts of I400 could be set in motion. Rotating spike hunts on units seems better that what we have now, moving the rifle hunt out of September should be a done deal, waiting periods would likely have to stay as they are, or go to something like deer with a 2 year waiting period for those who draw a tag in I400 and a 5 year waiting period for those who draw a LE tag. There is a lot than can/should be done, and with the state redoing the Elk Management Plan this fall we should get this moving again.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

"We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, _*Wasatch*_, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert."

As a Wasatch hunter, and have been since birth, this really runs the cold steele in and a full twist....


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

TAK said:


> "We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, _*Wasatch*_, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert."
> 
> As a Wasatch hunter, and have been since birth, this really runs the cold steele in and a full twist....


There ya go I400 lovers,,This is why it will not pass.
The ole spike hunters just wont let her go.
I learned my lesson in a 1997 RAC meeting when I suggested eliminating spike only
hunting so more mature bull tags could be issued............

THEY ALL WANTED TOO SHOOT ME !!! :shock: :shock:


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Every year I chase spikes and about every 3-4 years I also draw a cow tag. I'm sitting on 9 points so someday soon I hope to chase bigger bulls. 

When I started hunting elk in the early 80's it sucked. A raghorn was a trophy and the herds were stagnant. Utah now is known as a example of how to do things right. Spike, Any Bull, and Cow opportunities give over the counter hunting opportunities. Draw units give hunters the opportunity to occassionally draw a tag for a excellent trophy.


----------



## ramrod (Apr 15, 2008)

Something needs to change. It took me 17 years to draw a limited entry elk tag , after a 5 year waiting period and by the time I put in again it could take 20 plus years to draw another tag . that’s way to long for a Utah resident to draw a limited entry elk tag. At my age I may never get the chance to hunt trophy bulls again.
I friend of mine drew a limited entry elk tag a few years back he said he wont even try to draw again because he feels it would just be a waste of money he doesn’t think he will ever draw again under are currant system.
I would like to see spike elk hunting ended and more limited entry opportunity available to Utah residence. I wouldn’t have a problem waiting a few years to hunt elk if I know it would be a great hunt with low hunting pressure and animals are not to spooked to hunt. It is nice to go hunting when you are seeing animals every day and you have the opportunity to pick the animal you want to harvest .
The key word to hunting in Utah is conservation. not trying to make everyone happy or trying to sell as many tags as possible for revenue purposes.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> TAK said:
> 
> 
> > "We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, _*Wasatch*_, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert."
> ...


I don't care if you take me spikeys away, just give me a tag every year! Now that is what I am talking about! To hell with Deer hunting, Elk hunting is the game I play!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I don't care if you take me spikeys away, just give me a tag every year! Now that is what I am talking about! To hell with Deer hunting, Elk hunting is the game I play!


You can always draw a cow elk tag which is better than shooting a spike and the success rate is higher.


----------



## Chief Squatting Dog (Oct 23, 2009)

"We" like it. well thought out coyoteslayer.


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

after watching the limited entry archery hunt on the standsbury/oquirh this year i wonder why would anyone put in for this hunt as a limited entry there was more preasure put on these elk than anytime since i have been involfed
in them. some units are just not big enough to put up with a spike hunt. this unit has never been open to spikes and it shouldnt be, i know that the standsbury side which has only a limited amount of elk maybe 50 on the outside lost as far as we can tell the whole years bull crop. thats total not within soung game managament. spike hunts are a good tool to help bring along a herd to a point where trophy bulls are avalable and some of the bigger units can support spike hunting but at what cost unless you are lowering the
limited entry tags you may well be harvesting more bulls than are recruited into the herds by the currant years bull calfs. these kind of studies take time not a whim by the board of big whims and wishes. as it is while there was some nice bulls taken on this unit as a whole it looks like the currant excess on this unit
has finally started to show up in the harvest stats. you simply cannot harvest more bulls than the calf recruitment will replace if you do in time the currant 
big bull status of this state will dwindle till its only a fond memory. my applogish for the soap box routine but its seems like the big game board is only interested in the money concept at least to me it does.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

The biggest hurdle ANY change is going to have is the attitude by some hunters that they have waited "X" amount of years and The DWR "OWES" them a big bull. The current plan, and the attitudes of hunters that go along with that plan will be will be the greatest agent against any change. I still say that that the state sould manage 8 or so units for an absolute premium elk hunting experience, switch the rest to branch antlered bulls with a cap on permit numbers and the season in mid October. The any bull units would remain as they are and spike only tags as needed on the premium units as needed. All elk tags would be issued through the draw process and bonus points would be used when a hunter draws any elk tag, regardless of season or unit.


----------



## yak4fish (Nov 16, 2007)

For the most part it sounds good. The one thing I don't like is the addition of a
preference point system. In fact I think it is time the DWR put all Bull elk tags in the same bonus point pool including spike tags and any bull areas. This would force hunters to choose between hunting every year and waiting for a quality unit. It should shorten the wait for the LE units and possibly releive some of the pressure on the any bull units because it would stop the double dipping going on now. Adding another point system just adds confusion and locks hunters into the system they choose when the first start putting in for points. 
One point system for all bull elk and burn your points when you draw a tag simple system and hunters should move through faster than they are now.


----------



## ramrod (Apr 15, 2008)

yak4fish said:


> For the most part it sounds good. The one thing I don't like is the addition of a
> preference point system. In fact I think it is time the DWR put all Bull elk tags in the same bonus point pool including spike tags and any bull areas. This would force hunters to choose between hunting every year and waiting for a quality unit. It should shorten the wait for the LE units and possibly releive some of the pressure on the any bull units because it would stop the double dipping going on now. Adding another point system just adds confusion and locks hunters into the system they choose when the first start putting in for points.
> One point system for all bull elk and burn your points when you draw a tag simple system and hunters should move through faster than they are now.


+ 1 
I would like this system


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> > I don't care if you take me spikeys away, just give me a tag every year! Now that is what I am talking about! To hell with Deer hunting, Elk hunting is the game I play!
> 
> 
> You can always draw a cow elk tag which is better than shooting a spike and the success rate is higher.


My success rate is nearly perfect as it is... I think of the years I have hunted spikes I have ate tag soup twice. Once last year (only because of missing) And one other year because I had some things come up and only hunted maybe one day. 
Also the area I like to hunt has a very limited number of antless tags. Because I can hunt spikes every year, our ELK hunt is like the old Deer hunt days.



> We propose eliminating the issuing of spike tags on the following five units (a): North Cache, Wasatch, Nebo, Fish Lake, and La Sal. We also propose introducing spike-only hunting to the following five units (b): San Juan, Monroe, Pahvant, Paunsaugunt, and SW Desert. _*This will allow more bulls to reach maturity on the (a) units, increasing the number of mature bulls that can be harvested yearly. This change will also reduce the bull:cow ratios on the (b) units which currently have an excess of mature bulls*_.


More Bulls to reach maturity? What is wrong with the grundles that "we" have now? Speaking about the Wasatch. True there is not a million 400 class bulls but, any day, anytime you can go to about any place on the Wasatch and count dozens of Mature bulls. No, again not the 400 bulls but grundles of 300 plus bulls and larger ones also. How was it that Tex-O-Bob said it... "Elk Pettying Zoo"... My opinion it is easier to find a bull on that unit than it is a cow!


----------



## mack1950 (Sep 11, 2007)

sounds like this would have some thing to help rotate the points along alot faster and let the hunters decide what they want to do for themselfs, hunt every year are keep feeding the beast till they get the permit they want for 
the bigger bulls


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TAK said:


> More Bulls to reach maturity? What is wrong with the grundles that "we" have now? Speaking about the Wasatch. True there is not a million 400 class bulls but, any day, anytime you can go to about any place on the Wasatch and count dozens of Mature bulls. No, again not the 400 bulls but grundles of 300 plus bulls and larger ones also. How was it that Tex-O-Bob said it... "Elk Pettying Zoo"... My opinion it is easier to find a bull on that unit than it is a cow!


The problem many hunters have with the "grundles" we have now is that very few hunters get a chance to hunt them. The Wasatch is my second favorite LE unit after Dutton. I have never had a problem getting into elk and getting away from the crowds on the Wasatch. I400 started over a voiced opinion about spike tags two years ago, and has been changed many times since the first draft. I am no longer in favor of eliminating spike tags on the Wasatch, but I am in favor of either a cap per I400 unit, or a rotating spike hunt every 2-3 years. By lowering the number of spikes harvested each year you can increase the number of mature bulls that can be harvested each year. And, by lowering the success rates you can increase the number of permits issued each year as well. I think the statewide spike hunt in 2009 opened a lot of hunters eyes on the impact more hunters in the field has on success rates.

While I realize 'over-crowding' is not what many hunters with LE points want, that is why we are only talking about 3-4 units. It was originally suggested that we leave 8-10 LE units 'premium' with tag allotments and season dates basically the same as now, with spike tags issued to help keep bull:cow ratios in line. Since hunters are resistant to major change, we dialed it back to 3-5 units that be managed somewhere between the current any-bull units and the Limited Entry units.

So, here is what I would like to see as of today:
3-5 units be managed under the "I400" 
I400 units have a tag allotment of 50% to any-weapon, 30% to archery, and 20% to muzzle loader instead of the current 60% to any-weapon, 25% to archery, and 15% to muzzle loader that the LE units now have.
Archery season be September 1-17 
Muzzle loader season be September 25-October 1
Any-weapon season be October 5-11
Manage the units to bull:cow ratios, NOT to harvest age objectives. With the bull:cow ratio objective being 30:100.
The draw would be under the same hybrid bonus/preference system used for the LE units, but drawing a I400 permit would only have a two year waiting period instead of the five year waiting period of the LE units.
The units I would like to see implemented are representative of each of the five Regions. The Northern Region would have the North Cache, the Northeast Region would have the Book Cliffs, the Central Region would have the Nebo, the Southeastern Region would have the LaSals, and the Southern Region would have the Panguitch Lake.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Thanks Pro... 
I can see that side of the coin, but the problem is taking the spikes away and you know **** well they might increase the mature bull hunt by say 10 permits, so ALL them people will be looking for them tags come spring.

I think that at least the Wasatch and Manti Units could handle drawing out more tags each year. From what I see is "Grundles" of bulls that I know I and many others would be happy with. It is my guess the Bull to Cow ratio is off. Or I can't find cows but find bulls around every tree!!! That aint all bad though.

I will say also this is a personal thing to me. I am not into the Deer hunt, yet I love my Elk hunts. Spike or not I and faimily and friends love the time we spend in the area that we enjoy. So ya it is a personal thing, and when the I-400 came up I never even gave it a look because i never seen WASATCH IN IT! 
**** it that is my Mountain! :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TAK said:


> Thanks Pro...
> I can see that side of the coin, but the problem is taking the spikes away and you know **** well they might increase the mature bull hunt by say 10 permits, so ALL them people will be looking for them tags come spring. Not if the bull:cow ratio objective is set at 30:100. Every LE unit in Utah that I have set foot on as ratios at least that high, with several with ratios higher than 50:100. Add in the lower success rates due to the permit allotment, and season date changes, a cap or rotating spike tag system, and I foresee at least a 30% increase mature bull tags for the I400 units is year one, with increases in following years.
> 
> I think that at least the Wasatch and Manti Units could handle drawing out more tags each year. From what I see is "Grundles" of bulls that I know I and many others would be happy with. It is my guess the Bull to Cow ratio is off. Or I can't find cows but find bulls around every tree!!! That aint all bad though. I agree that bigger units like the Manti and Wasatch can and SHOULD handle more tags due to their size in area and elk populations. The major hurdle, in my opinion, is managing to harvest age averages. They force a unit to carry excess bulls to get the harvest age at or above objectives, causing fewer tags to be issued for perceived 'quality'. But, since these two units are also the most popular for spike hunting, involving either in I400 is a deal killer in my opinion.
> ...


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

I understand easing into change, and not messing up a good thing. 

I believe it is wrong to allow hunters to hunt elk every year AND build points for limited entry hunts. All elk tags should be issued through a single application and draw. Your elk preferance points would go towards ANY tag a hunter draws as their first choice. If a hunter draws their first choice their points go back to zero. No waiting period would apply in this scenerio. I would also like to see Utah go to a point system like Nevada's, where the points are squared and everyone goes in the drawing together.

I believe deer should be handled the same way. All deer tags should be issued through the same drawing. If a guys first choice is to hunt the wasatch front with a bow, he shouldn't be plugging up the system by aquiring points for a Book Cliffs rifle tag as well. 

Just like now, if a hunter draws a 2nd or 3rd choice then they aquire a point and get a permit for their alternate area.

I also believe that the elk in one of the non premium units should be managed stricly to bull to cow ratio. Age Class should not be a factor. 

Lastly, on units like the wasatch and manti, they are running near 100% on their LE Rifle hunts and near 20% on their spike hunts. Move the rifle hunt into the 2nd week of October and go 50%,25%, 25% rifle archery and Muzzle loader. If the success rate could be limited to 40% or less then the numbers of tags could be greatly increased. 

Issue all the tags through the drawing process and kill the elk as branch antlered bulls instead of spikes.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

prettytiedup said:


> I believe it is wrong to allow hunters to hunt elk every year AND build points for limited entry hunts. All elk tags should be issued through a single application and draw. Your elk preferance points would go towards ANY tag a hunter draws as their first choice. If a hunter draws their first choice their points go back to zero. No waiting period would apply in this scenerio.I would also like to see Utah go to a point system like Nevada's, where the points are squared and everyone goes in the drawing together. I like the idea of losing your points if you obtain ANY male elk permit, but I like the hybrid bonus/preference Utah has in play over any others I see out there. The problem is trying to change too much or too many things all at once.
> 
> I believe deer should be handled the same way. All deer tags should be issued through the same drawing. If a guys first choice is to hunt the wasatch front with a bow, he shouldn't be plugging up the system by aquiring points for a Book Cliffs rifle tag as well. See above.
> 
> ...


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

The problem is all these changes simply fall into the "Not in my backyard" catagory. Special interest lobbying won't allow it to happen. Just the way I see it, after sitting through a few hundred hours of elk committee, RAC, and Board meetings.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> TAK said:
> 
> 
> > **** it that is my Mountain! :mrgreen: The Wasatch was included from Day One as one of the I400 units, not sure how you missed it. But, like I have said, including such a popular spike unit so close to the Wasatch Front would sink the ship, so I have removed it and added the Book Cliffs. The reason I think the Book Cliffs is a great unit for I400 is because the Books is also a LE deer unit, and soon to be a OIL bison unit. As long as the unit is managed for trophy deer/elk/bison all will suffer. I say put deer higher on the 'trophy chain' than elk on this unit.


Didn't miss it becasue I never read it! Might have skimmed it....


----------



## idiot with a bow (Sep 10, 2007)

this is a dumb topic...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Packout said:


> The problem is all these changes simply fall into the "Not in my backyard" catagory. Special interest lobbying won't allow it to happen. Just the way I see it, after sitting through a few hundred hours of elk committee, RAC, and Board meetings.


I agree,,,,None of this stuff has a snowballs chance in hell.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

CO, WY, ID are nice options if people don't like UT elk management. 

Leave my spike hunt as is.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

Packout said:


> The problem is all these changes simply fall into the "Not in my backyard" catagory. Special interest lobbying won't allow it to happen. Just the way I see it, after sitting through a few hundred hours of elk committee, RAC, and Board meetings.


Packout,
I agree totally. Until elk are managed by the DWR and the biologists and NOT special interest groups nothing will change.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> CO, WY, ID are nice options if people don't like UT elk management.
> 
> Leave my spike hunt as is.


This is the biggest problem with the Elk management plan. It's "YOUR" spike hunt. It's the next guys "400 BULL" hunt.

I could care less if you kill a spike, as long as it costs you your points to do so. We'll see how many people love their spike hunts then. I would personally rather hunt older bulls, that is my choice also.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

prettytiedup,,Just a little "inside" info here.

The DWR and there biologist have really NOT been able to manage any species in
a manner they would like for quite a few years now......" biologically sound management"
They are directed by the Wild Life Board on what , and how to do almost EVERYTHING!
The board "IMHO" is also influenced HEAVLY by special interest groups,,,SFW,RMEF,,,etc.

Politics have almost completely taken over management of Utah's wildlife resources on 
every level.............And Utah's elk heard is at the very TOP of the political agenda.

Unfortunately,,I don't see any changes coming in near the future.....


----------



## ramrod (Apr 15, 2008)

So are all states this messed up or is Utah the exception


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

Go to Colorado if you want to kill an elk every other year...stay in Utah if you've already killed plenty of elk and you've become more discriminatory regarding antlers...
...I'll be hunting closer to Meeker than Vernal this year...mainly because I want to get my dad on a bull before he gets too old...and there's probably more elk in the White River National Forest than there is in the entire Northern Region of Utah...


----------



## truemule (Sep 12, 2007)

prettytiedup said:


> Dukes_Daddy said:
> 
> 
> > CO, WY, ID are nice options if people don't like UT elk management.
> ...


As long as there is some any bull units in the management so I can hunt spike or open bull you can have my points. I would love to shoot a big bull, but not at the expense of loosing the ability to hunt often instead of once every 15 years to feed my ego. 
I hunt to hunt, I enjoy the meat and experince. If all you want are antlers (a.k.a big bulls) they auction some off every year. I'm sure you could get a nice pair for about the same price as 15 years of application fees, a tag, and hunting supllies would cost.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

ramrod said:


> So are all states this messed up or is Utah the exception


Go to sites like this for other states and you'll see similar complaints. Utah is not the exception, managing wildlife on public land is a tall order doing it in a way that while make all hunters happy is impossible.

Since the elk committee is meeting and drafting a new Elk Management Plan, if change is going to happen, now is the time to push.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> prettytiedup,,Just a little "inside" info here.
> 
> The DWR and there biologist have really NOT been able to manage any species in
> a manner they would like for quite a few years now......" biologically sound management"
> ...


Goofy,

No inside info there. I have sat through waaaay too many RAC and WB meetings to believe otherwise........


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

stablebuck said:


> Go to Colorado if you want to kill an elk every other year...stay in Utah if you've already killed plenty of elk and you've become more discriminatory regarding antlers...
> ...I'll be hunting closer to Meeker than Vernal this year...mainly because I want to get my dad on a bull before he gets too old...and there's probably more elk in the White River National Forest than there is in the entire Northern Region of Utah...


I hunt either deer or elk (or both) every year in Colorado. I just don't figure I ought to pay $500 to do there what I should be able to do here as a resident.

I still say there is room for both. 8-10 Ultra premium elk units AND units that offer more opportunity at branch antlered bulls.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

truemule said:


> prettytiedup said:
> 
> 
> > Dukes_Daddy said:
> ...


In one of my earlier posts I mentioned that the any bull units should remain as they are. You just have to aquire the tags through the draw and use your points if you get one as a first choice. I also believe that the spike hunts COULD be used on the ultra premium units to help control bull to cow ratio while the LE hunts could be managed in part by age class.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

prettytiedup said:


> stablebuck said:
> 
> 
> > Go to Colorado if you want to kill an elk every other year...stay in Utah if you've already killed plenty of elk and you've become more discriminatory regarding antlers...
> ...


you're right! They pull bulls out of the Uncompahgre that compare to bulls on the San Juan or Boulder. There is no reason why Utah can't have more OTC branched antler opportunity. I don't buy in to the special interest group influence thing either. If any state has special interest group influence it would be CO. I just believe it is the knuckleheads in charge in this state...


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

Here is some Inside info... The Wasatch is mine... So stay off of it!


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

Just leave it how it is. Keep changing stuff around nobody can keep up with all of the changes. You just getting knowing the new rules and the next year they change. About the points why should we lose are points for going after a alien/spike ? Just because we didn't draw are LE tags.If you lose your points for getting a alien/spike tag then you will have every one and there dog in the draw for a big bull. just leave it how it is my 00.2 worth.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

TAK said:


> Here is some Inside info... The Wasatch is mine... So stay off of it!


Is not.... I saw it first. So there! :roll:


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

dkhntrdstn said:


> Just leave it how it is. Keep changing stuff around nobody can keep up with all of the changes. You just getting knowing the new rules and the next year they change. About the points why should we lose are points for going after a alien/spike ? Just because we didn't draw are LE tags.If you lose your points for getting a alien/spike tag then you will have every one and there dog in the draw for a big bull. just leave it how it is my 00.2 worth.


Everyone and their dog ALREADY is in the draw for a big bull.

Change is inevitable. They changed the deer season for 2010. There are major changes in store for 2011. You cant stop change.

I remember hunting Elk in the 80's (on the Wasatch :shock: ) when any bull with antlers was a trophy. A rag horn 4pt would be the biggest bull killed in an entire canyon. Going back to that is NOT what any of us want. Tweaking the system to get people through draw faster, increasing opportunity to harvest more mature bulls while still allowing people who want wait for a once in a lifetime opportunity to do so is a win, win, win situation, IMO.

My family owns property on the Manti unit. The fact that under the current system neither my 10 yr old or 5 year old will ever get to hunt a mature bull on the very property they have grown up on is a very sobering thought.

Some of us pretend that antler size doesn't matter.... Yet, if I were to put anyone on a herd of elk with a spike, a 280" bull, and a cow, and if their permit was good for any of those animals, the only way the 280" bull isn't hitting the ground is if bull fever had set in so bad that they missed completely. As a whole and in general, based on my completely un-scientific research, most hunters would prefer to harvest the largest animal available or possible. Some will shoot the first legal critter they find, but I have never heard anyone say "I had him broad side at 20 yards, I was at full draw....But he was just too big. I let him walk." Unless they were in a spike only area. :?

Strictly my opinion.


----------



## stablebuck (Nov 22, 2007)

the times they are a-changin'
-Bob Dylan


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

For those who say we should just leave it as it is, do you have kids? If so, do you want them to ever hunt mature bulls on ANY LE elk units in their lifetime? If so, them you should be calling for change, and lots of it. This is my main motive for getting involved in game management, for sitting on various committees, attending RAC's/Wildlife Board meetings, my kids. My son, Beau Hunter, is five years old. If things stay the same, his odds of ever drawing a tag on a LE unit ONCE in his lifetime is bleak. I have been lucky, I was able to kill some decent bulls before the LE system took over the state, I also have drawn three great elk tags in the last decade, allowing me to kill two bulls over 360 with a bow and passing many bigger bulls on my last dance in 2008 as I was holding out for a specific bull. If I never obtain another tag I will be content and happy. But, if my son/daughters aren't able to experience a part of what I have, I will be saddened and troubled as to why we put such inane policies in play that are beneficial to such a small MINORITY of hunters.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

So what about those "kids" who started accumulating points when they were young and are now adults waiting with baited breath for their opportunity to hunt elk the way all those in front of them have? I would dare bet the largest portion of hunters right now are in the 20-30yr old range, which most likely also happens to be the same group who are in the 6 to Max point range...are they just basically going to be told to shove off? 

I'm all about opportunities for the youth and preserving the future of hunting. But, I'm also all about drawing a LE bull elk tag on the Pahvant that I've waited 13 years for. I agree some changes need to be made, but I know there's quite a bit of "management" that's been based off "skewed" or innacurate #'s.

Hate on this post as much as you want, but I guarantee there are TONS of hunters out there who agree. From the meetings I've attended, the RAC members I've spoken with and the other sportsman I talk with...I've come to the conclusion many of the folks who are really pushing for major changes are those who have already drawn and hunted their "OIL Elk tag" or spent too many years waiting to draw their LE deer tag, and are now too far behind to catch up for elk.

I believe there are many out there who are honestly trying to look out for the wildlife and future generations, and for that I respect you. At least you're out trying to do something good.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

gwailow said:


> So what about those "kids" who started accumulating points when they were young and are now adults waiting with baited breath for their opportunity to hunt elk the way all those in front of them have? I would dare bet the largest portion of hunters right now are in the 20-30yr old range, which most likely also happens to be the same group who are in the 6 to Max point range...are they just basically going to be told to shove off?


We are talking *3-5* units out of *30* LE units. How is that telling people to "shove off"? :roll:

I have draw three great LE elk tags, and I will NOT put in for any unit other the the same unit I drew the last three on, which means I will never draw a tag again, not even an archery tag, and I am 100% okay with that. Of those in the 20-30 year old range, how many would gladly shoot a 300-330 class bull? Why should they have to wait 20+ years to do that when there are easy solutions to allow them the opportunity to hunt for that class of elk w/o making it a OIL type tag?


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

gwailow
Again, I am sure you don't want to go back and read the entire thread. The unit you have mentioned is one that I do think should remain as a premium unit. 

I shold make it known that I am not talking about I400 or what ever. I don't think changing 5 units will make any difference. 

All I am saying is there has to be a better way of balancing the system. Somthing is going to change sooner or later. either we can get involved and try to affect or we will have to suffer the effects of change.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Here is a solution to improve odds.

1) Raise the tag prices to around $999
2) Hit your cc at the time you apply and hold the money until the draw.
3) Applicants for LE Elk are not able to apply for general deer or elk. 

Seperate those who really want to hunt LE and those you profess desire! 

Utah is challenged by the people population versus elk population equation. If you really want to hunt big elk save the pennies and buy a CWMU landowner tag for $5-10K.

Many hunters have $80K in rigs (truck, trailes, quads) at elk camp so the can't afford it argument doesn't fly. 

Save the spike hunts!!!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Raising tag prices and requiring up front money would only take a few applications out....
And I'm all for it,but,Wyoming dose it this way and there's NO applicant shortage there.

The Wasatch falls into "not in my backyard" for me too...I don't want to see it changed.


----------



## yak4fish (Nov 16, 2007)

Are you guys going to get serious and try and push this proposal through this year?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

yak4fish said:


> Are you guys going to get serious and try and push this proposal through this year?


We've always been serious, the timing just hasn't been right. Now that the Elk Management Plan is being redrafted, the timing is right.

Raising prices and having people pay up front ? That's a "solution" to the problem? in the words of TAK........................WOW.


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

Goofy elk if the money was required up front for the tag I would bet there would be more then a few who would not apply. Right now a guy can put his whole family in for a few dollars. Do you think there would be an application put in for everyone if a guy had to put all the money for those tags in up front?


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

cklspencer said:


> Goofy elk if the money was required up front for the tag I would bet there would be more then a few who would not apply. Right now a guy can put his whole family in for a few dollars. Do you think there would be an application put in for everyone if a guy had to put all the money for those tags in up front?


I bet 90% of people use a CC for the draws. So if they are putting the hole family in then they will just keep doing it. That wont stop them.sorry


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

I agree most do use a credit card. Most apps. are done online. But I would bet most use it on the bases that they will not draw or only one person might get lucky and draw a LE tag. I would still bet that even those that use a credit card would hold out on putting everyone in there family in if they had to pay up front for all the LE tags. Utah has one of the highest number of applicatons per tags. Why do you think that is? Most state want money up front.


----------



## prettytiedup (Dec 19, 2007)

Colorado requires the money up front as well. Doesn't seem to make much difference in odds. I look at it as a loan to CO for them to use the interest to hopefully help the wildlife.


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

$999.00... That will be when I send in a check... Post dated! 

pro is Right....... TAK says WOW!!!!!!!!


----------



## Fishracer (Mar 2, 2009)

Hunters want to hunt. There are alot of reason why i hunt and what is on the animals head is not one of them. Like what was said in another post, Take my points and what every you want but dont take my hunting away. People want to hunt every year. It is tradition. It is something we all have been doing for a very long time, fathers, grandfathers. Right now there are plenty of elk more than in years past. If I400 were to pass, in 5 years you would have people on here complaining about the quality of elk and that something needs to be done. There are no 400 bulls out there. Somewhere along the line hunting turned into " who killed the biggest animal" contest. I will take my spikes, cows, 2 point bucks, ect. It lets me hunt.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

Fishracer said:


> Hunters want to hunt. There are alot of reason why i hunt and what is on the animals head is not one of them. Like what was said in another post, Take my points and what every you want but dont take my hunting away. People want to hunt every year. It is tradition. It is something we all have been doing for a very long time, fathers, grandfathers. Right now there are plenty of elk more than in years past. If I400 were to pass, in 5 years you would have people on here complaining about the quality of elk and that something needs to be done. There are no 400 bulls out there. Somewhere along the line hunting turned into " who killed the biggest animal" contest. I will take my spikes, cows, 2 point bucks, ect. It lets me hunt.


+1


----------

