# Bring back the State wide archery hunt!



## bloodtrail (Sep 20, 2007)

I am so disgusted with the Wildlife Board's arbitrary decision to subject archery hunters to the new 30 regions. The experiment two years ago proved that there was no reason to restrict archery hunters with regions and now they have come back with a much worse restriction.

I will keep contacting the Board members to complain about this horrible new rule and hope that each of you will do the same. If you are involved in any efforts to fight the new restrictions, please post so we can help.

I will now have to choose between the three areas that I enjoy hunting for no other reason than a bunch of rifle hunters complained that it isn't fair. Archery hunters have such low harvest rates that these restrictions have no management purpose!


----------



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

Archery hunters have been taking it up the tail pipe in this state for decades. It aint gonna change...

This is a rifle state. Get used to it.


----------



## Snag32 (Sep 11, 2010)

Seems to be the way it's going in several western states. Here in Oregon the game commission doesn't listen to the recommendations of the biologist. They throw archers a few bones to try and keep them quiet. In Nevada the biologists recommended an increase in deer tags...commission reduced the hunting opportunities by 15% as I recall. What I don't get is if we pay highly schooled professional biologists why do we have "commissioners" that override them? Do they know more than the biologists? Powerplay, egotistical, ........


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Snag32, has brought up a very good point. Why don't we listen to the biologists more? 

Because, Social issues get in the way. 

You have these groups that say we want bigger bucks, crying fowl that they don't see enough 200 class deer on their property, or when they take their casual drive in the mountains. They unfortunately have been the vocal majority and the WB has responded with the current system.

Become part of the process. Go to RAC's, and WB meetings. LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

horsesma said:


> Snag32, has brought up a very good point. Why don't we listen to the biologists more?
> 
> Because, Social issues get in the way.
> 
> ...


Great post! The vocal minority has been running the show for some time now, it is time for the majority of hunters to be heard.


----------



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

Don't you mean the vocal minority with the deep pockets and the strong political pull...


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Don't you mean the vocal minority with the deep pockets and the strong political pull...


I stand corrected. Still should voice your opinion. Then when you don't get what you want you can cry about it. Like I have been.


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

It's a bad way to look at it but.........it doesn't matter what you do, it's not going to change. It doesn't matter how many show up to a RAC or write the WB or get involved in some group.IT FLAT OUT DOESN'T MATTER! ! ! That was shown back when they limited the archery season 2 years ago and once again next year when they are going to have archery participate in the 30 unit deal. It's been proven that limiting archery doesn't accomplish anything. It's also been proven that the majority DON'T want to limit archery....but the board will do whatever they want, that's been proven as well. So, tell me, what is joining a group and speaking out going to accomplish? It has accomplished absolutely nothing so far! 

Like I said, I'm sure it is the wrong way to look at it but it all seems like pizzing in the wind to me.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I would like to point out that the board that did away with statewide archery and the members that supported it are all but gone. It's going to be interesting any way you slice it.

And.... you'll never score from the bench.


----------



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

The powers that be in this state are all for high percentage, money making, cattle grazing land protecting, guide and outfitter stroking, trophy antler taking, hunting practices. Archery hunting can boast all but six of these practices... Archery hunting will always get the shaft (pun intended) when it comes to big game management decision making. Period. Especially in a state where money grubbing, trophy taking, politically backed special interest rules the roost.

Archery hunting is all about sound big game management with optimal opportunity for many with a huge chance of perusing a trophy animal in ANY area. But we all know we can't have that! NO! We want opportunity for the privileged few, and the ones with lots of money, in tiny micro managed areas, every 15 years or so, for a 90% chance to kill a BIG critter. :? :roll: 

Retards!

There is NOTHING you can do about it! I called it 20 years ago when SFW was borne and nothing has changed...

Politics and money will prevail. The end.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Archery hunters have been taking it up the tail pipe in this state for decades. It aint gonna change...
> 
> This is a rifle state. Get used to it.


 :roll: That was an eye roll incase you didn't notice. I don't agree with every policy (or even alot of them) however I do believe us archery hunters have it MUCH better than the rifle hunters. The fact of the matter is our deer herds on public land are struggleing and "they" don't have a clue how to manage it. It has NOTHING to do with money, politics, organizations... It is flat out they don't know what to do or what will work. Hunt elk, we have a sweet month long elk hunt and several months long in some areas. Sheesh if you can't kill an elk in that amount of time you aren't ever going to kill one.

IMO cancel the entire deer hunt for about 10 years.


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

I feel this same way about the Elk archery hunts. The whole LE area control VS spike only and any bull areas. I'm not saying you can't kill a great bull in any bull areas but they are extremely limited. I would much rather go close to home and have a chance at a bigger bull. Even if it was more like every 5 years versus every 15. The deer regions for archery is just ridiculous. Sadly I don't feel like anyone has a chance at getting the "big government" to listen to the average tax paying Americans.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> TEX-O-BOB said:
> 
> 
> > Archery hunters have been taking it up the tail pipe in this state for decades. It aint gonna change...
> ...


 :roll: Sorry I had to get in on this eye rolling action. :lol: Doing this will accomplish exactly what? Nothing, just like limiting archery hunting statewide, I could go on and on and on. :mrgreen:


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

TEX, Agree with you 100% Sh-- Canning State Wide Archery is A JOKE.47 years and ready to drag up after this year..
May head for the Elk Utah or Colorado. Just Happy to have a tag this year.66 yrs young. and the thoughts of maybe wating. 2 yrs or so to get a tag. Well do the math. Good Lord can't beleive it may be coming to an end. THANKS TO THE POWERS TO BE>>>>


----------



## bloodtrail (Sep 20, 2007)

Since this is a political game and not a management game, we have to find a way to play the political game. I don't know exactly how to do this, but until the Governor feels some pressure from the masses, nothing will happen. I hope that it is true that most of the rejects at the WB that voted for these changes are gone! Now it is time to push for a repeal of the entire mess they created!!!

On another note, the State will never get management right until it stops focusing on the bucks per doe ratio and pays attention to getting areas up to carrying capacity in population numbers. The obvious problem with managing bucks to does is that is is easier to "improve" the ratio by killing does which makes the ratio look good but sends the population size on a negative spiral. I would rather have twice as many deer with only 10 bucks to 100 does than a small population with 15 buck to 100 doe ratio. A larger population will always lead to more bucks to be hunted and more bucks for the lazy ass road hunters to find on their rifle hunts.


----------



## katorade (Sep 23, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> TEX-O-BOB said:
> 
> 
> > Archery hunters have been taking it up the tail pipe in this state for decades. It aint gonna change...
> ...


The biologist I talk to and hear from are guys that say how many tags that should be given to the area, then the High up guys always give more tags then what the biologist say, In the end it is all about money!

I guess I can't go out on a four wheeler and kill a nice buck every time I go out which so many people seem to believe.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

bloodtrail said:


> Since this is a political game and not a management game, we have to find a way to play the political game. I don't know exactly how to do this, but until the Governor feels some pressure from the masses, nothing will happen. I hope that it is true that most of the rejects at the WB that voted for these changes are gone! Now it is time to push for a repeal of the entire mess they created!!!
> 
> On another note, the State will never get management right until it stops focusing on the bucks per doe ratio and pays attention to getting areas up to carrying capacity in population numbers. The obvious problem with managing bucks to does is that is is easier to "improve" the ratio by killing does which makes the ratio look good but sends the population size on a negative spiral. I would rather have twice as many deer with only 10 bucks to 100 does than a small population with 15 buck to 100 doe ratio. A larger population will always lead to more bucks to be hunted and more bucks for the **** hunters to find on their rifle hunts.


There are at least four ways to play the political game. #1- Become a major player! Apply for a position on your RAC or even on the Wildlife Board. It may take several tries (years), but there are positions open almost every year because they are staggered. #2- Personally contact (phone, email, fax, and snail mail), on a regular basis, ALL of the RAC members, the Wildlife Board members, the Governor, and the legislators representing your district. Make sure you express your views in a reasonable manner, with true personal stories, accurate facts, concerns about how things will change for you and your hunting partners, and alternative suggestions. Use humor if you have to, but avoid attacking the person, name-calling, foul language and personal threats. #3- Speak out in conversations with friends and other hunters. Again, have your facts straight and do it in the manner stated above. #4- Letters to the editor. See above!!

I suspect that the big outrage won't really happen until hunters get the 2012 Proclamations in their hands and they try to figure out how to get deer tags to hunt their favorite region. Most of the deer hunters I've talked to have had no idea any of this is happening simply because, to them, the deer hunt doesn't have the priority that most of the people pushing these changes think it has. I hope the DWR staff will be ready for the phone calls and emails. And I hope they will refer the irate callers to the Wildlife Board.

If you really want to get back statewide archery, continue to gripe if you must, but GET BUSY!!! Politics is a numbers game and we (Those, including you, who oppose Option #2) need the numbers!! -O|o- -~|- :O_D:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

politics isnt a numbers game its a money $$$$$$$$$$$$ game. How do you compete with a group that is using $$$$$$$ to push their agenda with our tags?

YOU CHANGE HOW THAT GROUP GETS ITS TAGS. YOU LOBBY ITS NOT FAIR THAT ONE GROUP GETS ALL THE TAGS.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Jahan, I would like to see our overall numbers increased across the entire state. I believe increasing the herd numbers is the only way to increase the buck to doe ratio. This is why I said to shut the entire hunt down. I don't really know if that is the answer, but I am not impressed with any of the other answers...of course this is coming from a guy who would prefer the entire state to be 3 point or better as well.

I truely don't think anybody knows how to manage deer. This isn't a "poor picked on archery hunters" issue, this is a poor deer population issue. I do know that if someone does have a answer it will take political power to make it work. The fact of the matter is the worse place to spend money is give it to the government. I will leave it at that...


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Money game? I thought it was all about gathering input from stakeholders and making decisions that are best for conservation...dammit, why doesn't anybody tell me these things!

Okay, new strategy. Play the players (instead of the RACs.)

Many Utah landowner/outfitters have never understood the benefit$ of bowhunting from a business perspective. A hunter with a rifle pays his money and like any customer, has expectations. He expects to kill a trophy animal and due to the fundamental business need for customer satisfaction, he likely will. With such high success rates, the only way to build the business is to increase the number of trophy animals. (That's the motivation for several important management decisions in recent years.) Bowhunting presents a better business model because it doubles the customer base (or more) AND reduces hunter expectations to increase customer satisfaction. A typical bowhunter is happy if he can just get on some animals, even if he doesn't get an opportunity for a shot.

Budget conscious politicians are starting to figure out the bowhunting business. While the con tag program has generated some impressive revenue, fact is that those funds can't substitute for excise taxes or be as effective without them. (State pays 25%, PR reimbursement is 75%). Bear in mind that archers buy more equipment, (and can double the retail customer base). Meantime, other politicians are just starting to hear from constituents in the local Chamber of Commerce where hunting season is vital for the success of many rural "Mom & Pop" businesses.

On the side...the largest and most influential organization in Utah boasts 10,000 members. We can't blame decision makers for going along with that organization in the absence of better alternatives. But archers could dwarf that inflated number (as a voting block) if there was cause or leadership to unite us. There are archery communities scattered all over the state and clubs that are healthy and thriving in even the most rural areas. In aggregate, the number would be enough to get any politician's attention.

I understand the frustration, believe me, but this is not the time to wimp out. It's time to cowboy up like never before with new strategies. If at first you don't succeed, change what you're doing.


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

+1, great post Finn!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Finnegan said:


> On the side...the largest and most influential organization in Utah boasts 10,000 members. We can't blame decision makers for going along with that organization in the absence of better alternatives. But archers could dwarf that inflated number (as a voting block) if there was cause or leadership to unite us. There are archery communities scattered all over the state and clubs that are healthy and thriving in even the most rural areas. In aggregate, the number would be enough to get any politician's attention.


This is a great point and the model has been created by which this CAN happen. The UWC is a model where the membership decides what stances the organization takes rather than a board and those wishes are then advocated for at RAC's and WB meetings. Obviously there are some boundaries there but the point is the platform has been created where an archer, or any other type of sportsmen, simply needs to sign up an vote for what they want. Who cares what the name of the organization is or how long they've been around, if any org walks into a WB meeting as states, "We represent 15,000 sportsmen" I can GUARANTEE you they will have everyone's attention in the room even if those 15,000 people never step foot in a RAC or WB meeting.

The biggest problem that UWC faces today is that MANY sportsmen only get involved when they give the company in Nevada their $10 per app fee and when they head out to try and punch their tag. We MUST find ways to get those sportsmen involved. All you have to do is sign up for a free membership and vote guys!!! You decide, not a board.

It's true there are many small orgs out there and if they were to band together they could have a much larger voice. The UWC has been and will continue reaching out to as many of these orgs as possible this summer to get an understanding of who supports bringing back statewide archery and we will be working towards sending one loud unified message in this falls RAC's!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

bullsnot said:


> Finnegan said:
> 
> 
> > On the side...the largest and most influential organization in Utah boasts 10,000 members. We can't blame decision makers for going along with that organization in the absence of better alternatives. But archers could dwarf that inflated number (as a voting block) if there was cause or leadership to unite us. There are archery communities scattered all over the state and clubs that are healthy and thriving in even the most rural areas. In aggregate, the number would be enough to get any politician's attention.
> ...


OK, OK, OK, Quit hounding me, already!!! I finally signed up! :shock: Are you happy now? OOO°)OO


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Good man! Happy to have you aboard. :-|O|-:


----------

