# Excess Bucks



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

This video was taken on a public land general unit last week, which has a B/D ratio under 18/100.
It breaks my heart to think that a few people would want to put an end to scenes like this.
How many people have seen 10 or more bucks feeding together on a general unit and then think it's just a waist of excess bucks that should have been killed the year before?
Sorry for the quality of video. The bucks were about a mile away.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

At least 8 of those bucks should be shot by a hunter that didn't get a tag last year and won't get a tag this year because a few guys like you get all broken hearted over excess bucks. Does PETA come to mind? Do some reading on the consequences of having to many buck deer on a range. 

Geez you need to start a new thread to look for support for cutting deer tags? Good luck finding support.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> At least 8 of those bucks should be shot by a hunter that didn't get a tag last year and won't get a tag this year because a few guys like you get all broken hearted over excess bucks. Does PETA come to mind? Do some reading on the consequences of having to many buck deer on a range.
> 
> Geez you need to start a new thread to look for support for cutting deer tags? Good luck finding support.


obviously your the type that either hunts private land or only thinks about the deer hunt a few weeks in advance.
Anyhow, get a life will ya. 
Maybe you and ole GBell can cry on each others shoulder.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

I'm thinking maybe not. Seems Gbell is thinking more like you, when you peel the onion back he's just plugging his own agenda. 

And I hunt any where I can. Mostly public but I never turn down a chance to hunt anywhere I can.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I'm taking the bait like a planted fish, but bringing up PETA multiple times on a hunting forum to a hunter just shows your ignorance on the issue. How did these excess bucks manage themselves pre hunters? Yes, we have hunted since cavemen, but not in the masses!

You are also bringing it up to a member who arguably posts the most out of season action.. I have to bet my money you spend no where near the time afield as ridgey!


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

Wow, nice video ridge. I've got no problem with excess bucks. I like excess bucks and I get a tag pretty much every year. I don't fill it every year because I like excess bucks. PETA? Wow, get a clue.


----------



## Elkaholic2 (Feb 24, 2013)

It's all about opportunity!!!

I personally have 6 big game tags this year. 4 of which are in utah. 2 are antler-less tags. Two of the tags went undersubscribed in the draw and one is over the counter! The other took 4 preference points and is a doe pronghorn tag. The opportunity is there for the willing. Obviously the people that don't have a single tag in their pocket don't want to hunt or are ignorant to the fact that they have these options available to them. that's the way I see it! I don't feel bad about that...

I think it's time to focus on all the coyotes killing deer along every interstate and highway I've driven the last two weeks! Never knew that a coyote could turn a deer inside out in one blow! Amazing!:shock:


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Elkaholic2, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You have 2 antler-less tags! You doe killers are the ones that need to be taken to the wood shed. I don't eat antelope but you sound like a bionafied game hog to me. All I want is a buck deer tag and I don't want to wait 4 years like you just did to get one. I only hunt bucks, obviously you care nothing about growing the deer herd so don't play holier than thou with us.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

ramdomelk, look up the definition of fecundity. Read the definition and the associated discussion. Copy and paste the definition and associated discussion here on this thread so we all know that you've read it. If you do that and you still need me to explain the different in deer populations after masses of hunters began hunting them and deer populations 300 hundred years ago, I'd take the time to explain the obvious to you.

Do it I dare you.


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

Well, this post has taken an interesting turn, cool video ridge, thanks for sharing with us that can't get out as much. I have no problem seeing "excess" bucks. More opportunity for this year, no? Osage, you need to relax a little dude. It sounds like you didn't get a buck tag this year? There are elk tags available. Ridge wasn't going the direction you took this thread, he was just getting the rest of us excited for the hunt this year. Got me pumped. The most bucks I've seen together at one time is 5, maybe 6. Way cool video Ridge.


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

Ha Ha OO, has been stroking us for a few weeks now. 

Ridge, I appreciate that you are a quality guy and have
No problem with that in any way. In fact I have no problem
Personally with anybody on this board. We can disagree and
Not have to be idiots. 

OO, I'd love to know of just one time I've ever
Supported going below a 15-100 ratio? Once will
Do. That ratio has nothing to do with being a trophy
Hunter or opportunist. It has to do with data and personal opinion. 
If you think I'm playing both sides or pushing an agenda
You are right. I'm pushing the agenda of deer and deer
Hunters. Whose agenda are you pushing??


----------



## stick&string89 (Jun 21, 2012)

Nice video


----------



## fishreaper (Jan 2, 2014)

In the defense of the gentleman taking doe animals, does taste better anyways.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

The year before the DWR took 3 point restrictions away, I counted 27 head of 3 point or better bucks on a ridge in the Book Cliffs. After they removed the restrictions, and they slaughtered almost everything. went to the same ridge after restrictions were removed, u would have played hell finding a half a dozen bucks. Then closed it off for how many years? Then had the Ba--s to blame the slaughter on drought.. I Thought you video was GREAT. Don't let the DWR know where it was taken.. They might close it off do to drought>>


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I think oo is coyoteslayer yankin your chain


----------



## Elkaholic2 (Feb 24, 2013)

osageorange said:


> Elkaholic2, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You have 2 antler-less tags! You doe killers are the ones that need to be taken to the wood shed. I don't eat antelope but you sound like a bionafied game hog to me. All I want is a buck deer tag and I don't want to wait 4 years like you just did to get one. I only hunt bucks, obviously you care nothing about growing the deer herd so don't play holier than thou with us.


You crack me up!!!

I get a buck tag every year in utah! There were tags leftover! Why didn't you buy one?

never have killed a doe mule deer in utah. I just drove to kamas from Ogden and counted 4 doe mule deer turned inside out along the side of the interstate. That were new from last weekend when I counted 11 deer and 3 bucks...

If you haven't eaten pronghorn, maybe you should! They taste a lot better than a mid elevation mule deer. I have an antler-less elk tag and doe pronghorn tag. It took four years to get the pronghorn tag. The deer and elk tags like I said went undersubscribed! How does that make me a hog for buying tags that no one is willing to buy. then they turn around and cry about not being able to hunt!

Maybe you should consider coyote hunting! You don't even need to buy a license! And the dwr will pay you for the ones you kill!

Growing deer is another discussion! Which all of us on here can agree to certain points needs to be handled and dealt with. But I won't even start that debate! -O\\__--O\\__-

I'm going to look for some excess bucks and brookies now!


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

Someone has something to prove here...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Personaly, I believe we are about to witness one of the BEST general deer
hunts Utah has seen in many years !!!!!!!!!!!

This will equate to ALOT of happy hunters,,,:!:..

The deer mangment plan needs TO SYAY AS IS......IMO.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Goofy, for those who drew tags--I think you are right. However, those of us with the black eye from the draw will still have fun looking at all the bucks.


----------



## Archin (Oct 5, 2013)

Loved the footage. I love antlers -*|*-


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Nice video ridgetop. You seem like you love what you're doing.

Elkaholic2, keep doing what you're doing. If they didn't have excess does then there wouldn't be excess tags. Nothing wrong with snapping up an extra tag or two that the slow hunters missed. More tags, more hunting, more fun. 
I love antelope meat better than muledeer too. The trick is to take care of it right away. Sounds like you already knew that. Good luck on your hunts this year ridgetop and Elkaholic2.



Elkaholic2 said:


> You crack me up!!!
> 
> I get a buck tag every year in utah! There were tags leftover! Why didn't you buy one?
> 
> ...


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

And I got top of the page! Bonus.


----------



## clean pass through (Nov 26, 2007)

Cool video Ridge.....

I believe general season should be managed for hunter opportunity not trophy quality! However just because you see 10 bucks together in June, July, or August does not mean the buck to doe ratio is over 15. Anyone who does is "up in the night," or just does not have experience scouting in the summer. Moot point as far as that goes neither side wins, trophy or opportunity guys! I just went and scouted the area I drew for and saw 29 bucks in two mornings of hiking/scouting with my 10yr old son. Only about 8-10 of those bucks were yearling bucks. I probably only saw 20 does the whole time. Do I believe the Buck to doe ratio is way off.... nope. I was scouting where I usually see bucks not does. I would dare to say Ridge was doing the same thing in the area he was scouting. I don't agree with Ridge and others (trophy hunters) on a lot of their ideas that effect all of the sportsmen, however I respect their ideas agree or not. I personally don't really have a desire to shoot a small buck, but I am not going to say I wont shoot a two point ever again, cause I have kids and believe they have to see something hit the ground in order to want to continue to hunt. My son has saw plenty and is sufficiently addicted :mrgreen:. My daughters have not however. 

As far as people complaining about not getting a tag of any kind! People that did not fill all the choices out on the application (five choices) have no reason to complain about not hunting deer this year. If you want to complain about not getting the unit you wanted to, complain away. But if you didn't get a tag and your complaining about that, you had your chance. As far as obtaining numerous tags........you play the game right and you will win some times. Plus there is always, OVER THE COUNTER elk tags. 

Hopefully my ramblings made some kind of sense -O,-. 

I don't really like the unit thing, but it is what we have right now and we have to deal with it. I think 15 bucks to 100 does is reasonable. However the studies show you don't need that many bucks to breed all the does. I think it is a even balance between Opportunity (Biology aspect) and Trophy hunters (Social aspect).


----------



## Elkaholic2 (Feb 24, 2013)

longbow said:


> Nice video ridgetop. You seem like you love what you're doing.
> 
> Elkaholic2, keep doing what you're doing. If they didn't have excess does then there wouldn't be excess tags. Nothing wrong with snapping up an extra tag or two that the slow hunters missed. More tags, more hunting, more fun.
> I love antelope meat better than muledeer too. The trick is to take care of it right away. Sounds like you already knew that. Good luck on your hunts this year ridgetop and Elkaholic2.


Thanks longbow! Good luck on your outings as well!

In utah Best tasting buck mule deer live above 9500ft(exception of ag fields) Best tasting and tender elk are 3.5 years old or younger! Best tasting pronghorn de-boned and on ice ASAP!


----------



## Raptorman (Aug 18, 2009)

Great video, thanks for sharing. I have no problem with excess bucks. I too love me some nice doe/cow steaks. Nothing wrong with a good meat hunt every couple of years.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Nice video Ridge. Thanks for sharing it.

You've got to love the bachelor groups of summer. Just the guys hanging out, chowing food, swapping stories and the like. And thing is, that is just what this group is. Bucks run together in the summer. This is no indication of overall herd composition. Just like a video of 30 does with no bucks is any indicator. This is a nice group of bucks hanging out in the summer. Nothing more. Nothing less. It doesn't mean there are excess bucks. It doesn't mean there aren't. Just means they are grouped up right now. 

So, aside from some nice mid-summer eye candy, this doesn't tell us ANYTHING about the herd in this area. Which I'm OK with. Thanks Ridge for sharing a pretty cool video!


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

What good are all those buck if no one can hunt em. They would be just like the elk in this state! Oh wait, you can wait a quarter century to draw a bull tag. I suppose that's fine for elk, because that seems to be what's popular, but don't make deer hunting like that. I like the family tradition, the hunting camps, the chance to hunt every year, even if that means I have to work hard for a buck. Cause truth be told, a trophy deer comes off of every public unit in the state every year and the population of deer is approximately the same today as it was in 1996 fluctuating around about 300,000 deer. Those numbers don't have anything to do with cutting tags! The years deer were down follow years when winter weather was harsh.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Nice video Ridge. Thanks for sharing it.
> 
> You've got to love the bachelor groups of summer. Just the guys hanging out, chowing food, swapping stories and the like. And thing is, that is just what this group is. Bucks run together in the summer. This is no indication of overall herd composition. Just like a video of 30 does with no bucks is any indicator. This is a nice group of bucks hanging out in the summer. Nothing more. Nothing less. It doesn't mean there are excess bucks. It doesn't mean there aren't. Just means they are grouped up right now.
> 
> So, aside from some nice mid-summer eye candy, this doesn't tell us ANYTHING about the herd in this area. Which I'm OK with. Thanks Ridge for sharing a pretty cool video!


If we let the B/D ratio drop down to 7-10/100 like some people seem to be ok with. I can promise, you will not see big bachelor groups of bucks like that any more.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

ridgetop said:


> If we let the B/D ratio drop down to 7-10/100 like some people seem to be ok with. I can promise, you will not see big bachelor groups of bucks like that any more.


I don't know of anyone personally, nor have I read on this site of anyone who seems to be ok with dropping ratios down to the numbers you state. Not sure where you come up with that statement...:shock:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

On my way to a three day scouting trip and saw several different four points going up spanish fork canyon. Good to see and glad this state is finally turning around. Im betting this is the best hunt in fifteen years! Bucks seem to be everywhere.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

stillhunterman said:


> I don't know of anyone personally, nor have I read on this site of anyone who seems to be ok with dropping ratios down to the numbers you state. Not sure where you come up with that statement...:shock:


Are you kidding me?
Gbell and many others, even Kevinitis and yourself seem to support the idea that excess bucks are a waste and the does can be bred just fine with 7-10/100 ratios. Well I tend to disagree that excess bucks are a waste. That's all.
These same people keep saying they don't want every unit in the state to be like the Henries. 
That too is a little extreme, to say the least.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

IMO,

We finaly have a system in place to provide good/decent deer hunting 
on general units.............Excess bucks NO..:!:..:!:..

Good/better hunting oppertunity? Absolutely YES....


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

ridgetop said:


> Are you kidding me?
> Gbell and many others, even Kevinitis and yourself seem to support the idea that excess bucks are a waste and the does can be bred just fine with 7-10/100 ratios. Well I tend to disagree that excess bucks are a waste. That's all.
> These same people keep saying they don't want every unit in the state to be like the Henries.
> That too is a little extreme, to say the least.


Maybe I'm just getting old and senile, or my interpretations are off. Frankly, I have NEVER said bucks above the breeding threshold are a waste, never, and never will. I like to see the critters as much as anyone, even when not hunting. I also agree with Mr skinner that we should manage our wildlife not just for hunting, but for the aesthetic benefits to the public at large as well. That certainly doesn't mean we need to run the general units like the LE units.

I think Gordy has said before that when the B/D ratio drops below the 15 threshold, he is all for cutting the tags if required/as required by the current plan. But when we have growing numbers in good years, don't be stingy with the tags if the excess bucks are there to hunt and not putting the herd in jeopardy. It isn't that confusing to me. Seems folks always tend to argue using extreme examples on both ends.

Anyway, nice vid, thanks. Seen much the same thing couple weekends ago on a northern unit many fellers/gals think sucks, lol.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

stillhunterman said:


> Maybe I'm just getting old and senile, or my interpretations are off. Frankly, I have NEVER said bucks above the breeding threshold are a waste, never, and never will. I like to see the critters as much as anyone, even when not hunting. I also agree with Mr skinner that we should manage our wildlife not just for hunting, but for the aesthetic benefits to the public at large as well. That certainly doesn't mean we need to run the general units like the LE units.
> 
> I think Gordy has said before that when the B/D ratio drops below the 15 threshold, he is all for cutting the tags if required/as required by the current plan. But when we have growing numbers in good years, don't be stingy with the tags if the excess bucks are there to hunt and not putting the herd in jeopardy. It isn't that confusing to me. Seems folks always tend to argue using extreme examples on both ends.
> 
> Anyway, nice vid, thanks. Seen much the same thing couple weekends ago on a northern unit many fellers/gals think sucks, lol.


Now that's the Perry I've come to like. Your spot at my campfire is now open again.
I also agree with many others. This year could be one for the ages. Many of those excess bucks with be harvested.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Kevinitis said:


> Oh wait, you can wait a quarter century to draw a bull tag.


You can go buy 1 of the 10,000 remaining bull tags, and you can have it done before you finish your wheaties.


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

I just like colorado, Montana and wyomings model for elk, where many areas are general season and people can shoot a good bull elk across much of those states. Sure you can hunt spikes in almost all of Utah or you can crowd into the few any bull areas (and still shoot a spike) along with everyone else who has an any bull tag. In either case you have menial success rates. But what if many more of our elk hunting areas were any bull? I just like that idea. Meanwhile, we have bulls dying of old age across the whole state. Sure we produce the most boon and crocket elk of any state, but that's because we only let a few hunt them. The whole idea behind the North American Model for Wildlife Managment is that you manage the wildlife for the greatest common good so that everyone has an opportunity to hunt. The whole push for more trophy animals undermines that model and makes our excellent system more like what they have in Europe, where only the weathy and royalty get to hunt. So I'm not opposed to having more bucks, or managing them well, i'm all for that. I'm just against this idea that every animal out there has to be a huge buck and that there needs to be bucks everywhere. And I am against all this tag cutting when it really isn't founded on anything other than special interest groups pushing for bigger bucks. It also isn't founded on what MOST hunters want. The UDWR has done two surveys in the last five years that show that the majority of hunters want to hunt deer every year, even if that means that they would have lower success. The goal for managment all my hunting life has been 15 buck per 100 does. That is defensible scientifically and allows the most people the opportunity to hunt. There will still be trophy animals on each unit, and someone will get one of those each year. But what kind of trophy is it if all bucks shot are trophies?


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Your in good company kevinitis lots of us like minded guys here. When a few of us that really understand the NAMWM get loud and proud some of our friends shrink from the spotlight but we know what they up to. Nobody wants to be connected to guys like you and I when the world is watching. But the dies been cast. Majority rules boys, more tags headed our way! 70% beats 30% every which way. Open those units up folks 70% just want to hunt every year how can 30% continue to hold back 70? They can't!

What kind of trophy is it if all bucks shot are trophies?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Send those ideas and opinions in emails to the Mule Deer Planning Committee, boys, where it'll do some good!

Lee Tracy ([email protected]), Dave Freiss ([email protected]), Eric Thacker ([email protected]), Kevin Albrecht ([email protected]), Mike Laughter ([email protected]), Randy Dearth ([email protected]), Robin Naeve ([email protected]), Robert Byrnes ([email protected]), Spencer Gibbons ([email protected]), Ben Lowder ([email protected]), Bill Bates ([email protected]), Byron Bateman ([email protected]), Dax Mangus ([email protected]), DeLoss Christensen ([email protected]), Kent Hersey ([email protected]), Kris Marble ([email protected]), Michael Christensen ([email protected]), Randy Larsen ([email protected]), Roy Hampton ([email protected]), Rusty Aiken ([email protected]) Steve Dalton ([email protected]), Kreig Rasmussen ([email protected])
Facilitator: Ashley Green ([email protected]) Chair:Justin Shannon ([email protected])


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

^^^^^^^^^^^^

On the same note, I know a large group that realy LIKE's the current
deer managment plan-----
And would like to see it remain the way it is...at least the next 5 years.

Those that "like it" how it is now should also E-mail this commity as-well.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

Nice video, Ridge. How about a video of some excess zion unit bulls!


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

goofy-elk, explain this to us if you can. 

Why should a large group or any other group get to decide anything on any management plan when they are in the minority? Your large group cannot possibly constitute more than 30% and it most likely less because your group doesn't make up the entire 30%. does it. 

Why should 30% of the hunting public have influence over deer management for one year much less less five years?

You like the current five year plan because it gives you trophy hunters control over the majority of the rest of us. I'm not surprised that you want to keep it the same. We don't. And we out vote you 2.3 to 1. The hard truth.

Sorry to disappoint you and your minority large group. More tags coming boys.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Osage I think your up in the night and dont understand the system we have. Your 2.3% or what other bogus number you come up with are a bunch of couch sitters. They dont show up at the wracks, they dont understand the system and according to you dont draw tags. Ha ha ha to the couch sitters. The ones who do understand the system pull tags and are the vocal minority at the wracs and wildlife meetings. Sorry to pop your bubble but tags aint going up unless deer numbers go up. That's just the way it is.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

So,

First we have Mcfly change to Kolraynor,

Then Coyoteslayer to osageorange,--------Same BS, different user names.

What next?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> goofy-elk, explain this to us if you can.
> 
> Why should a large group or any other group get to decide anything on any management plan when they are in the minority? Your large group cannot possibly constitute more than 30% and it most likely less because your group doesn't make up the entire 30%. does it.
> 
> ...


I hate being rude but you really just don't get it. 
I love how you guys cling onto that 70% of all hunters "just want to hunt every year". Although I didn't get to take the last survey, I did the one a couple years ago.
I was one of the 70% that answered hunting with friends and family was important and I would like to hunt every year. I'm pretty sure Goofy and SW answered the same way.. 
We all would like to hunt every year but at what cost?
You want to at any cost but we feel differently.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

swbuckmaster you don't know who's setting where nor do you know who is showing up and who's not. Your always barking for around the corner. When it comes to Gbell swinging a leg over the bobwire your crotch must stay pretty tender most of the time as well.

Regardless of who I used to be or who I've never been goofy you wisely changed the subject and didn't answer my question. Why should your large group have any say in the process where as you only represent 30% or less of the hunting public. You didn't even try and you won't because you know you can't.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

ridgetop I don't like being rude nor do I appreciate others being rude. Is it rude to suggest that you might be a little chaffed yourself from walking around with a leg on either side of the enclosure.

You voted for more tags now you defend excess bucks. Cognitive dissonance! Perfect example wouldn't you say? How do you eat that cake and want it too? 

swbuckmaster thinks I'm up in the night? ridgetop your lights been on a long long time after dark yourself. Might help to get a little sleep now and again.


----------



## utahhunter678 (Nov 3, 2012)

*Nothing wrong with seeing bucks like this.*

That is a beautiful scene. Anyone who doesnt appreciate it is crazy!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> On the same note, I know a large group that realy LIKE's the current
> deer managment plan-----
> ...


 That's great to hear! Then they should email their opposition to the following proposals (or, at least parts of them) that have come up so far:

"*Wildlife Board Motion*
*Late Fall 2013 - Target Date - Mineral Mountain Range*
* MOTION*: I move that we ask the division to study the issues and concerns of making the Mineral Mountain Range (west side of Beaver unit) a limited entry unit and that it be discussed during the revision of the deer plan with the Deer Management Committee. This is to be placed on the action log."

AND

"*PARTNERS in PINE VALLEY*
_"Concerned Citizens and Advocates for the Enhancement and Conservation of Habitat and Wildlife on the Pine Valley Unit.....thus Preserving our Hunting Rights and Traditions for Generations to come"_
TO... THE STATEWIDE MULE DEER COMMITTEE:

Five Year Mule Deer Plan Recommendations for the Pine Valley Unit.....
*Habitat and Water*
Work very closely with the BLM and Forest Service to repair and enhance existing guzzlers and catchments. Also support and encourage continued water development for wildlife.
*Predators*
Develop parameters in Mule Deer plan to trigger state help in predator control. Closely monitor Doe/Fawn ratios with coordinated effort from BLM, FS, Division of WL and Sportsmen. We need to help the Fawns alive!
*Poaching*
Renewed campaigns via media to alert public that poaching violations will not be tolerated. Emphasize what the penalties are and encourage law enforcement to maximize those penalties.
* Highway Mortality*
Construct fences where economically feasible along Hwy 18 and an increase in flashing signs as a continued reminder of potential wildlife/auto collisions.
*Deer Population*
Recommend and increase in Mule Deer population @ 750 per year over the life of the 5 year plan, to meet the management objective of 16,000 for the Pine Valley Unit. Also... that the Buck/Doe ratio increases correspondingly to a minimum of 23/100.
*Adult/Youth Hunters*
Until such time as the above objectives and ratios have been achieved, we propose that the Adult any-weapon season be 5 days and 9 days for Youth.

We would greatly appreciate your consideration in these matters!"


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I agree EFA.

I wouldn't be surprised to see many groups rally to get "their" unit better.

This is, and will be the actions more likely to take place by local groups.

Just the opposite of what osageorqange suggests.

I also beleive NO changes with the deer mangenment plan would be favorable
for the general preception ... 
And also would be good to see results of current plan after a 5 year run.


----------



## koltraynor (Jun 16, 2014)

goofy elk said:


> So,
> 
> First we have Mcfly change to Kolraynor,
> 
> ...


Go home Goofy you're drunk.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

^^^^^ No I'm not ......^^^^^^^^

Mcfly, why are you using a new name anyway????
I'd say ur the one that's "drunk" thinking forum members cant see right through this.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> I agree EFA.
> 
> *I wouldn't be surprised to see many groups rally to get "their" unit better.
> 
> ...


I tend to agree with you goofy. Local groups, especially those with SFW pull down south, seem to hold a fair bit of sway with the Division in getting things accomplished on 'their' units. I certainly can't blame them for taking action on the concerns they have, whether I agree with them or not: being proactive in the hunting world is sorely lacking pretty much across the board so it's good to see some groups voicing their concerns.

The problem I have is that too many times the 'my unit' mentality of these groups on the general units restricts the general hunters for purely social reasons, and the DWR seems to go along with it. Pushing to turn more general units such as the Mineral Mountain unit into another LE unit is another nail in the coffin, so to speak. The same with raising the B/D ratio's on Pine Valley to 23/100 post hunt; they have wanted that ever since option two was initiated, as I recall.

I also know a great many hunters who DON'T like the current plan, but would rather have it and see it through for another five years than change it--AGAIN--mid stream. Option 2 is here to stay, no doubt about that. So yeah, I agree we need to make a plan and see it through, for once anyway. :mrgreen:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

A lot of folks don't understand that a huge catalyst for moving to unit deer management. Was getting off of this crazy statewide deer management train. I know there was strong support from hunters in the Monroe unit for opt 2. And probably the straw was a few good men that live at the bottom of that hill that seen the light, largely based on what they could see in their own back yards. It really had little to do with trophy hunting.

I would expect to see more individual unit lobbying like in pine valley and other units. Or at least that's what I would like to see.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

I here what you're saying IB, however the DWR wasn't managing deer on a state wide basis, they were doing so on a UNIT basis. Option two simply gave them more control over hunters, and I can see some benefits for that.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> A lot of folks don't understand that a huge catalyst for moving to unit deer management. Was getting off of this crazy statewide deer management train. I know there was strong support from hunters in the Monroe unit for opt 2. And probably the straw was a few good men that live at the bottom of that hill that seen the light, largely based on what they could see in their own back yards. It really had little to do with trophy hunting.
> 
> I would expect to see more individual unit lobbying like in pine valley and other units. Or at least that's what I would like to see.


Hopefully there can be some compromise on what these groups want. Not giving them all they want but meeting in the middle somewhere.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

These so called local unit groups will fail for two reasons. All they really care about is taking more tags away so they can see and hunt bigger deer close to home. Secondly, they are gutless and without determination and they lack the support from the local hunters (remember boys 70/30) and for darn sure they don't have the support of the local decision makers much less the State decision makers. They will whine and cry for a few months then wilt and return to oblivion from wench they came. By this time three years from now nobody will even remember the effort. Think about it. How many times have these silly little proposals been made around the State and come to nothing. These are the fantasy dreams of the .005% and have .001% chance of germination and zero chance of bearing fruit.

goofyelk.....here's what's next.

goofyelk-your ripping a hole in your britches bud, the fence your playing giddy-up on is really messing you up as you change from one tender foot to the other. First you say you want to leave things the way they are for five years then you immediately hop to the other foot to encourage local unit groups who want to change things on there local unit. In the same paragraph goofy???? Good lord your fickle logic is doing little for your tarnished reliability.

Heres a little something to help you rub the sleep out of your eyes boys. There is only one successful local deer unit hunters group. They are the only group that ever gets anything done in the entire State. Why does the group exist? Who are the hunters/members in the group? Why is this group the only active persistent take no prisoners group? They are a business group boys. There business depends on how successful they are. There business depends on how well the deer on there local unit are doing. Do you ever wonder why they won't take no for an answer and the hunters on every other group can't unite long enough to attend a RAC meeting together? These guys are as local as local gets. No State affiliation. No National affiliation. Not recruiting new members. Not in the least interested in any unit but there local unit. They don't apologize for there behavior. They don't justify there behavior. They don't let anybody interfere with there behavior. You think they do it because they love to hunt or like to see larger herds of deer? Come on. They are highly motivated because the State deer herds that live on there local unit are critical to there business. As the local deer goes so goes there business. I guar·an·****-te-ya if there was no monetary reason for the local group to exist, they too would be just like these other flash in the pan guys like the current Beaver and Pine Valley bunch. They too would be here today gone tomorrow.

You think these piddly little local groups mean a one thing to anybody that makes a decision for the State? Wake up fellers.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Time will tell osageo who's right and who wrong ....

I've been playing this game alot of years,

Your up in the night if you think these so called "unit groups" will fail !!!

Your the one that needs to rub the sleep out of your eye's.............


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Remember Goofy........he refers to everybody as "boys" for a reason. It isn't a compliment. He really believes that everybody here is inferior and doesn't get it. Throw in a feller or two and he is just like everybody else, except he is the only one that is awake in his opinion. Think I will take a nap again.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

goofy, it's pointless to try and reason with that guy.
He really doesn't get it. 
BTW OO, just because I say I would like to hunt every year and still want to see all unit stay above 15/100 B/D ratios. Doesn't mean I'm on both sides of any fence. 
You can have it both ways right now with the way the system is currently run.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

I'd love to reason with you ridgetop, take a run an responding to my rational rather than to trying to decide if in up in the night.

I've given example after example of way I think the way I do, you keep deciding not to engage in my reasoning. So who is it that's trying to reason. 

Lets take an simple example, so see if your willing to reason. We'll go slow, a small step at a time.

First track of reasoning will use is your statement:

You want to hunt every year.

Do you think everyone has the same right, that is to want to hunt every year?

Second track will try is your statement:
You want to see all unit stay above 15/100 B/D.

Can you provide a biological research study that proves we require 15/100 to have a health deer herd or is your desire for 15/100 B/D purely a social political hunting desire you have. It's a very honest question and your answer will help determine where our reasoning goes from here.

Remember, like goofelk, I've been around a long while myself, read a lot of post here and read a lot of opinions elsewhere and a lot of government reports in between. These questions have been asked long before I started being unreasonable. I wasn't any where near the first one to espouse the things I've written in this post. I've simple repeated to a great degree what you and your Utah Wildlife Forum peers have been discussing for 5 or 6 years.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I'm starting to think osageorange is realy lonetree...:grin:....


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> I'm starting to think osageorange is realy lonetree...:grin:....


ha! LT does just fine under his own screen name, good or bad...8)


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> I'm starting to think osageorange is realy lonetree...:grin:....


No. Just a want a be.
He doesn't use big enough words.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> I'd love to reason with you ridgetop, take a run an responding to my rational rather than to trying to decide if in up in the night.
> 
> I've given example after example of way I think the way I do, you keep deciding not to engage in my reasoning. So who is it that's trying to reason.
> 
> ...


Ok, I'll answer your questions. I have nothing to hide.

You say:
Do you think everyone has the same right, that is to want to hunt every year?
Answer:
Nobody has the right to hunt, only the opportunity.

You say:
Can you provide a biological research study that proves we require 15/100 to have a health deer herd or is your desire for 15/100 B/D purely a social political hunting desire you have. It's a very honest question and your answer will help determine where our reasoning goes from here.

Answer: 
I don't need to prove any biological reason. That's up to the biologists to prove why we shouldn't.
Yes, it is very much a social reason to keep a 15/100 B/D ratio and that is very much part of the mule deer plan.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

We will see goofy.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Thanks ridgetop. Good start.

I confused you in the way I worded my first questions. I agree, it is an opportunity. I was just trying to clarify what I understood you to say in an early post. That was, as I recall, that you said you wanted to hunt every year and thought others wanted the same thing. 

I was trying to ask if you believe that everyone else should able to "want" to hunt every year too? Do you?

If then, 15/100 is a social rather than a biological ratio, how would you like the ratio set at 25/100? Some would.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Here is what the current objectives are set at ...3 yr avg..trends..permit numbers.

*Hunt Name Objective 2011 2012 2013 3_yr_avg Permits Permit Rec*
Beaver 18-20 16.1 16.4 17.8 16.7 Increasing 3150 3000
Box Elder 15-17 20.2 15.1 11.6 15.6 Decreasing 4000 3800
Cache 15-17 12.3 15.8 13.2 13.8 Decreasing 7100 6600
Central Mountains, Manti/San Rafael 15-17 14.0 15.6 18.7 16.1 Increasing 8800 8800
Central Mountains, Nebo 15-17 10.3 13.7 21.4 15.1 Increasing 4000 4000
Chalk Creek/East Canyon/Morgan-South Rich 18-20 33.9 33.5 27.3 31.6 Decreasing 6800 6800
Fillmore, Oak Creek 18-20 21.3 27.4 22.2 21.6 Decreasing 450 450
Fillmore, Pahvant 18-20 17.0 17.8 23.9 19.1 Increasing 1550 1550
Kamas 18-20 19.2 27.9 22.9 23.3 Decreasing 3200 3200
La Sal, La Sal Mtns 15-17 23.1 11.0 17.4 17.2 Increasing 1800 1800
Monroe 15-17 14.5 18.3 23.3 18.7 Increasing 1200 1400
Mt Dutton 18-20 18.2 13.7 22.2 18.0 Increasing 650 650
Nine Mile 18-20 23.5 24.6 22.5 23.5 Decreasing 1300 1300
North Slope 18-20 18.4 15.6 15.4 16.5 Stable 3450 3250
Ogden 18-20 19.8 20.2 19.4 19.8 Stable 2500 2500
Oquirrh-Stansbury 15-17 15.4 12.3 20.2 16.0 Increasing 2100 2500
Panguitch Lake 15-17 18.3 18.7 19.8 18.9 Increasing 3000 3200
Pine Valley 18-20 17.5 23.9 20.6 20.7 Decreasing 3800 3900
Plateau, Boulder/Kaiparowits 15-17 15.6 24.7 17.1 19.1 Decreasing 2000 2000
Plateau, Fishlake 18-20 19.3 13.7 19.3 17.4 Increasing 1300 1300
Plateau, Thousand Lakes 18-20 26.7 17.3 24.8 22.9 Increasing 200 200
San Juan, Abajo Mtns 15-17 18.8 14.2 17.5 16.8 Increasing 2500 2500
South Slope, Bonanza/Vernal 15-17 10.7 9.8 12.8 11.1 Increasing 1450 1350
South Slope, Yellowstone 18-20 14.3 19.6 19.4 17.7 Stable 1500 1500
Southwest Desert 18-20 32.4 29.9 29.2 30.5 Stable 700 750
Wasatch Mtns, Currant Creek/Avintaquin 18-20 15.3 20.0 21.0 18.8 Increasing 4000 4000
Wasatch Mtns, West 15-17 19.1 16.2 18.3 17.9 Increasing 7500 7900
West Desert, Tintic 15-17 5.9 - 26.4 16.2 Limited Data 900 900
West Desert, West 15-17 5.9 - 26.4 16.2 Limited Data 700 600​
Zion 18-20 22.7 24.5 23.8 23.6 Stable 3000 3100


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> Thanks ridgetop. Good start.
> 
> That was, as I recall, that you said you wanted to hunt every year and thought others wanted the same thing. I was trying to ask if you believe that everyone else should able to "want" to hunt every year too? Do you?


What kind of sentence is that?
Anyway, just because I "want" something, doesn't mean I will get it.
No. I would not like to see any general seasons managed at 25/100. 
If the Mineral Mountains were to become its own sub-unit LE. I would like to see it managed no more than 25/100. Not any higher and then the unit on the East side of I-15 could be lowered to 15-17/100, to receive more tags lost from the division.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Let me put it this way, can I assume that you think everyone can "want" to hunt every year?

You support 15/100, you don't support 25/100 GS, would you support 6/100 GS?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> Let me put it this way, can I assume that you think everyone can "want" to hunt every year?
> 
> You support 15/100, you don't support 25/100 GS, would you support 6/100 GS?


Everyone has the opportunity to hunt every year if they "want".
No. I will never support a 6/100 B/D ratio as a standard.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

stillhunterman said:


> I here what you're saying IB, however the DWR wasn't managing deer on a state wide basis, they were doing so on a UNIT basis. Option two simply gave them more control over hunters, and I can see some benefits for that.


 Perry, I'm anxious to hear those benefits!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

ridgetop said:


> Hopefully there can be some compromise on what these groups want. Not giving them all they want but meeting in the middle somewhere.


 The average Utah deer hunter did that already with the loss of statewide archery and the regional any weapon and muzzy tags with the 30 unit stucture, and the increased buck to doe ratio (18-20) on some of the general hunt units, but it now seems it wasn't quite enough! Will it ever be?


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

ridgetop

Your okay with everyone wanting a tag, every year. Your okay with 15/100 but not okay with 6/100 or 25/100. 15/100 is a social issue. Why is 15/100 acceptable? If your okay with everyone wanting a tag, and 6/100 would allow more guys to get a tag, why do you support 15/100 but not 6/100? Why is 15/100 acceptable but not 6/100?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

osageorange said:


> ridgetop
> 
> Your okay with everyone wanting a tag, every year. Your okay with 15/100 but not okay with 6/100 or 25/100. 15/100 is a social issue. Why is 15/100 acceptable? If your okay with everyone wanting a tag, and 6/100 would allow more guys to get a tag, why do you support 15/100 but not 6/100? Why is 15/100 acceptable but not 6/100?


Ok, I guess I'll be a little rude. 
Are you really that stupid or do you just like to hear yourself talk? 
Go back and reread what I have been saying all along.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

elkfromabove said:


> Perry, I'm anxious to hear those benefits!


Lee my friend, you know how I felt about option WTF at it's inception, and that certainly hasn't changed at all. There are only two things that I see it doing that might be considered a benefit:

-If B/D ratios drop below objective, it's a bit easier to control tag numbers for that particular unit, vs. having to cut tags on a region wide basis. That presumes the deer herd is specific to that unit and doesn't over lap others.

-And here's a stretch: It MIGHT reduce over crowding in some areas, but I really doubt it. Had to add something cause I used the 'plural' when I said 'benefits', haha...8)

One could easily argue against both of the above, I know I have in the past. Just being a glass is half full kinda guy since we have to live with option WTF...


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

stillhunterman said:


> Lee my friend, you know how I felt about option WTF at it's inception, and that certainly hasn't changed at all. There are only two things that I see it doing that might be considered a benefit:
> 
> -If B/D ratios drop below objective, it's a bit easier to control tag numbers for that particular unit, vs. having to cut tags on a region wide basis. That presumes the deer herd is specific to that unit and doesn't over lap others.
> 
> ...


 Another benefit I have seen is that we finally got rid of those horrible 3 and 5 day hunts. 
The return of the 9 day season has been very enjoyable.


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> I'm starting to think osageorange is realy lonetree...:grin:....


I was thinking 1 eye.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

ridgetop said:


> Another benefit I have seen is that we finally got rid of those horrible 3 and 5 day hunts.
> The return of the 9 day season has been very enjoyable.


 But the Pine Valley Partners want the 5 day hunt (for adults) to return until they get to the 23/100 B/D ratio and, then, of course, they'll make a proposal to let the adults hunt for 9 days just like the kids. Really? And they'll also make a proposal to return the tags they'll have to cut to get there when they "discover" that the 5 day hunters kill as many bucks as the 9 day hunters. Really?

The problem with seeing the glass half-full is that before Option #2 the glass was 3/4 full for the average deer hunter and if we continue to allow these proposals to pass the glass will soon only be 1/4 full (or less) for the average deer hunter.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

elkfromabove said:


> But the Pine Valley Partners want the 5 day hunt (for adults) to return until they get to the 23/100 B/D ratio and, then, of course, they'll make a proposal to let the adults hunt for 9 days just like the kids. Really? And they'll also make a proposal to return the tags they'll have to cut to get there when they "discover" that the 5 day hunters kill as many bucks as the 9 day hunters. Really?
> 
> The problem with seeing the glass half-full is that before Option #2 the glass was 3/4 full for the average deer hunter and if we continue to allow these proposals to pass the glass will soon only be 1/4 full (or less) for the average deer hunter.


That's why I object to and heartily disagree with those proposals, per a previous post...


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

stillhunterman said:


> Lee my friend, you know how I felt about option WTF at it's inception, and that certainly hasn't changed at all. There are only two things that I see it doing that might be considered a benefit:
> 
> -If B/D ratios drop below objective, it's a bit easier to control tag numbers for that particular unit, vs. having to cut tags on a region wide basis. That presumes the deer herd is specific to that unit and doesn't over lap others.
> 
> ...


 Easier to control tag numbers? You mean like the Panquitch Lake unit that has 3,200 more deer than the population objective and a rising B/D ratio of 19.8 on a 15-17 unit with a total of 200 new tags? Those 70 additional bucks killed are really gonna bring those numbers down, ya think? Oh, the reason given? We're back to the perceived overcrowding issue, the very thing you suggest might be a benefit. It's undoubtedly easier alright, but I guess it's a matter of who you want to control the numbers!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Isn't pine valley wanting to manage their way. And SLC or the wasatch telling them what's best for their unit. Just like Washington telling utah how to manage wildlife? 

If its believed that the folks of pine valley are going to ruin that unit and you don't hunt there regularly. What business is it of yours anyway? Just like the wolf issue, I will defer to the locals and stakeholders to decide what happens in their own backyard.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

elkfromabove said:


> Easier to control tag numbers? You mean like the Panquitch Lake unit that has 3,200 more deer than the population objective and a rising B/D ratio of 19.8 on a 15-17 unit with a total of 200 new tags? Those 70 additional bucks killed are really gonna bring those numbers down, ya think? Oh, the reason given? We're back to the perceived overcrowding issue, the very thing you suggest might be a benefit. It's undoubtedly easier alright, but I guess it's a matter of who you want to control the numbers!


Like I said Lee, one could easily argue against the two points I made. You're preaching to the choir here...


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> Isn't pine valley wanting to manage their way. And SLC or the wasatch telling them what's best for their unit. Just like Washington telling utah how to manage wildlife?
> 
> If its believed that the folks of pine valley are going to ruin that unit and you don't hunt there regularly. What business is it of yours anyway? Just like the wolf issue, I will defer to the locals and stakeholders to decide what happens in their own backyard.


I would expect nothing less from you IB. Me, don't hold to that type of thinking. Stakeholders? Every hunter is a stakeholder, not just the locals, as are all Utahns when it come right down to it.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

It gets harder and harder for me to listen to so many hunters act as if they own the rights for all things that are considered hunt-able. Especially coming from the same people that often criticize the younger generations for acting like they are entitled.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> Isn't pine valley wanting to manage their way. And SLC or the wasatch telling them what's best for their unit. Just like Washington telling utah how to manage wildlife?
> 
> If its believed that the folks of pine valley are going to ruin that unit and you don't hunt there regularly. What business is it of yours anyway? Just like the wolf issue, I will defer to the locals and stakeholders to decide what happens in their own backyard.


Coming to your theater, er unit, soon!

And since we've divided the state up into 30 deer hunting units and forced everyone to make a choice, now everybody has "their" unit to worry about. Or, I guess we could keep switching units as our current choices get "fixed". At least until they're all "fixed". I'll guarantee you that the push ain't stopping at Pine Valley or Mineral Mountains or Panguitch Lake or Monroe Mountain.

And if the locals and stakeholders get to decide what happens in their own backyard, maybe we should disband the State Mule Deer Planning Committee so I could save the $100 and 8 hours that it takes to drive back and forth from Enoch. Thanks for the idea!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

elkfromabove said:


> Easier to control tag numbers? You mean like the Panquitch Lake unit that has 3,200 more deer than the population objective and a rising B/D ratio of 19.8 on a 15-17 unit with a total of 200 new tags? Those 70 additional bucks killed are really gonna bring those numbers down, ya think? Oh, the reason given? We're back to the perceived overcrowding issue, the very thing you suggest might be a benefit. It's undoubtedly easier alright, but I guess it's a matter of who you want to control the numbers!


Elk are you opposed to Option 2 then? Or just presenting a back and forth with someone who said they are also opposed to it, but went out of their way to present benefits? Trying to keep up.

I have noticed better bucks last year and less people. Call it weather, opt 2, predator management that I partake in on my hunting grounds and the surrounding winter grounds.... Call it what you want, but I like it more than I did 5 years ago.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Now we are getting somewhere.

And maybe a little game management can be reimplemented instead of just wildlife management. If we can get that not all critters will get a leg up. It defies game management logic to manage for capacity predators and prey while trying to harvest a bunch in the fall. Which don't forget that number largely depends on availability. 

I think it's a wonderful trend. If pine valley and the sorts fail miserably. Then the wasatch can learn something and pine valley and the likes will have to eat crow. There really is more than one way to skin a cat. I'm interested in finding the best way. And for the last 30yrs the DWR hasn't found it. 

Don't worry you'll always have places like soapstone where you can hike for miles and never see a thing. And there is peace of mind that a human ha sent altered the wildlife tapestry to serve his whims.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Deleted by poster! I'll respond after the Mule Deer Committee is dismissed!


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

ridgetop-I am stupid. So what? 

You didn't answer the question. So are we through or do you want to take another run at it? Don't worry what you did or didn't say in previous posts. Let's just re-enforce your position again, so we understand your logic. 

Why don't you support a 6/100 B/D, if it will allow more guys to get a tag?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

EFA, a few deciding what's best for 1000s? Kinda like the mule deer committee? Or the mule deer working group. Seems to me the latest trend is more democratic then anything we've had before. 

Should we sit back and watch the DWR mismanage the only deer herd we care about in the state. Honestly folks in pine valley or Monroe don't want to tell hunters of the north slope how they will manage. Some may have some interest in that unit because they hunt it also and they are welcome to join that constituency lobbying for change there. 

I know I can't rely on the UWC to better my units deer herd. I mean all I hear from them are weather and habitat. Can't winter feed, predator control hardly works if it works at all. Fawning timing is just fine a b/d ratio right at the margin is fine and it makes sense to send 2000 hunters into a unit that only has 1000 buck. And lastly AR doesn't work because hunters are too stupid to identify a 3 pt or better and AR only results in smaller buck because they are all targeted. Pffff!


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

Iron Bear said:


> Isn't pine valley wanting to manage their way. And SLC or the wasatch telling them what's best for their unit. Just like Washington telling utah how to manage wildlife?
> 
> If its believed that the folks of pine valley are going to ruin that unit and you don't hunt there regularly. What business is it of yours anyway? Just like the wolf issue, I will defer to the locals and stakeholders to decide what happens in their own backyard.


Rant Begin!!!

And thank God we've finally gotten to the root of the issue.

This fiasco of a management plan exists for one reason and one reason only,
Dixie Wildlife, Beaver SFW and the Richfield boys were sick of northern hunters killing "their" deer.

Dixie Wildlife and Beaver SFW tried for years to end statewide archery. They tried the overcrowding B.S. and couldn't do any better than regional restrictions. The same crew that would have you believe this unit management plan has anything to do with an increase in our deer herds also sold enough idiots the idea that 6500 bowhunters were WAY more over crowded than almost 26.000 rifle hunters. Tell me how that works.

I predicted back before this fiasco started that almost every unit would have it's fan club, I believe back then my exact words were, "We're gonna have 30 Friends of the Paunsagunt" pop up and demand more and more exclusion and higher buck to doe ratio's. Guess who rallied these troops back then and guess who is rallying the troops now. SFW, Guides and those that follow the philosophy of high success low opportunity.

Now to get to Iron Bears quote, Rural Utah is THE tail wagging the dog. Deloss Christensen worked for a couple of years to get us to this point. I heard him speak at several RAC and WB meetings over the year. Well he finally hit the right nerve with Jake Albrecht and the rest is history.

So Iron Bear, Let me ask you this question how are hunters in Utah being represented??

Facts
80% of all hunting licenses sold are sold along the Wasatch Front.

With 80% of the consumers in one area, it would be expected that their representation would reflect their numbers. It doesn't. I've watched the two northern reps get outvoted time after time by the rural regions that only represent 20% of the hunters in the state. Now our Central Region rep is the past President of SFW?? Explain that %$#@.

If the selfish hunters in the Peoples Republic of Southern Utah want to go it on their own, by all means have at it. WITHOUT THE FUNDING THAT THE HUNTERS ALONG THE WASATCH FRONT BRING.

I told SW that I didn't think these tags were ever coming back. Now you know why.

And for the love of all things holy be smart enough to know that this current cluster*&^% of a management plan has not one **** thing to do with any increases in our herds.

Rant end!!!


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Why don't we make Utah's skiing more popular and more enjoyable for everyone by restricting skiers to one ten-day season about every other year, when they win a lottery for a ski resort they had to choose 8 months before the season. Of course they will be fined if they ski in another ski resort. Skiers can take plesure knowing these restrictions have made it possible for big money skiers to ski better runs than the average skier could ever enjoy. Sometimes they will be able to watch these privileged skiers skiing on TV.


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

osageorange said:


> ridgetop-I am stupid. So what?
> 
> You didn't answer the question. So are we through or do you want to take another run at it? Don't worry what you did or didn't say in previous posts. Let's just re-enforce your position again, so we understand your logic.
> 
> Why don't you support a 6/100 B/D, if it will allow more guys to get a tag?


How many years do you think you could have a 6/100 BD and have more people get tags? What success rate do you think there would be?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

To be honest I don't think that deer hunters are being represented. "Wildlife" management has taken over. The human has been relegated and vilified and excluded from the equation. We manage in spite of hunting not for hunting. 

I'm no fan of any conservation groups. I despise the DH program I never have and never will pay a guide. Except to kill a female cougar. I support land owners and believe they do have more rights to the animals they support then the general public. I think habitat has been the biggest bs scam pulled over on game hunters there is. And has been the vehicle for bringing in high dollar hunts. 

I'll say this I want unlimited OTC statewide 3 season any sex tags back. I've given up hope that the DWR has the will to get us there. So I am more confident like minded individuals here on Monroe will at least get us back on the right track here.


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> To be honest I don't think that deer hunters are being represented. "Wildlife" management has taken over. The human has been relegated and vilified and excluded from the equation. We manage in spite of hunting not for hunting.
> 
> I'm no fan of any conservation groups. I despise the DH program I never have and never will pay a guide. Except to kill a female cougar. I support land owners and believe they do have more rights to the animals they support then the general public. I think habitat has been the biggest bs scam pulled over on game hunters there is. And has been the vehicle for bringing in high dollar hunts.
> 
> *I'll say this I want unlimited OTC statewide 3 season any sex tags back.* I've given up hope that the DWR has the will to get us there. So I am more confident like minded individuals here on Monroe will at least get us back on the right track here.


not asking for much are you?


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

redleg said:


> Why don't we make Utah's skiing more popular and more enjoyable for everyone by restricting skiers to one ten-day season about every other year, when they win a lottery for a ski resort they had to choose 8 months before the season. Of course they will be fined if they ski in another ski resort. Skiers can take plesure knowing these restrictions have made it possible for big money skiers to ski better runs than the average skier could ever enjoy. Sometimes they will be able to watch these privileged skiers skiing on TV.


Yeah, because riding over the same terrain by many people is the same as killing a living thing. Can't shoot a deer 17374728292 times, but you can ride a slope that many.

I wish the schools had analogy training 101.


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

redleg said:


> why don't we make utah's skiing more popular and more enjoyable for everyone by restricting skiers to one ten-day season about every other year, when they win a lottery for a ski resort they had to choose 8 months before the season. Of course they will be fined if they ski in another ski resort. Skiers can take plesure knowing these restrictions have made it possible for big money skiers to ski better runs than the average skier could ever enjoy. Sometimes they will be able to watch these privileged skiers skiing on tv.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

bugchuker said:


> not asking for much are you?


More than 100,000 deer are killed every year here in Utah. I'd rather hunters be doing it.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Iron Bear said:


> More than 100,000 deer are killed every year here in Utah. I'd rather hunters be doing it.


You do understand that hunters killing more doesn't prevent those other deaths right?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I have a better grasp of the deer herd dynamics then most.

I'm suggesting why not set a predation objective. We know how many deer a cougar kills. But we don't know how many cougar we have. Best figures put it about 2000 cats. Thats 100,000 deer to feed them. Why not manage to have say 1000 or 500 cats and have that number be more like 25,000 to 50,000. Would 500 cougar not keep disease in check? 

Again I say as hunters we serve similar roles as natural predators. If we manage for capacity predators we limit the amount humans can harvest sustainably. It's really not that complicated.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Cutting the cougar population in half isn't complicated?

Since when did predators lose their right to be a part of Utah's ecosystem?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Ok we can continue to reduce tags so the cougar can have there rights. Because hunting for 10 days and only seeing a half dozen 2 pt is simply unacceptable to most hunters. 

This is the second time I have gone with out a tag in my life. I'm not happy at all about it. It doesn't sit we'll with me that I get to sit by after contributing to the system for decades. But I guess the cougar has its rights according to so many. It's really insane if you think about it. I guess that's why so many live in denial about it or think somehow that deer a cougar just killed was going to run off and starve to death anyway. So it didn't matter. 

Sorry, I run a business and I can't spend more than I make. At least not for very long. If I need to increase savings I can do one of 2 things increase revenue or decrease spending. If I'm looking to decrease spending I would look at my largest expenditure. If we have 2000 cougar then they kill more deer then any other single factor. So I can't ignore that.

It's difficult and expensive to control and monitor cougar populations. I agree! But again they have a greater effect on the deer herd the any other single factor. So they deserve the attention. There have been several creative methods that could be deployed to achieve the harvest needed. How much time, money, thought and effort is put into managing hunter harvest. They know nearly every single deer that is killed by a human. And know almost nothing or record nothing about what cougar kill. Primarily due to they simply don't want to know. That's crazy! 

I get real passionate about cutting tags and not talking about doing something to prevent the deer left on the range from reduced hunter harvest becoming natural predator food. And serving as increased capacity for them. So IMO PETA couldn't be happier that deer hunters of all people think that cougar have all the rights in the world to thrive. 
SFW couldn't be happier that cougar have replaced hunters as the primary factor to cull the herd. Land mangers (Feds) don't sell deer tags they sell graze so "f" deer and the hunters they bring. Get rid of that browse the cattlemen are asking for more graze. The DWR wanted to get out of the holy crap look at all those deer in town starving why don't you feed them business. (Capacity cougar really helps with that) not to mention you may know that in the 80s the department of fish and game changed its name to dept of wildlife. Signifying a change in direction. Basically an attempt to replicate a wildlife tapestry close to pre settlement as possible. We'll Mother Nature never accounted for a general hunt for 100,000 people. There was a time when we did manage for hunters. 1930s to the 1970s.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Selling unlimited tags OTC for either sex was not managing for hunters. It was not managing at all. 

Also most hunters don't hunt for 10 days and see half a dozen two points. Most hunters hunt a few days from a pickup, or an ATV, walk a few hundred yards and watch their clones that are doing the same thing on the other side of the hill. They then head back home or to camp and complain about all of the other hunters.


----------



## paddlehead (May 30, 2014)

The more bucks the merrier. I love do deer hunt as much as anyone, but I DON'T want to hunt for a forked horn, no matter if it is a general unit or not. Too many tags and all you get is a young buck deer herd. Let the new hunters kill a fork horn, and then hold out for bigger from then on. That practice alone, if we can get people to do it will help improve our general season hunting. My first was a forkie, and have had no desire to shoot another one. I haven't shot at a lot of deer since then, but by not shooting the first one I see I get to HUNT a lot more! If you love to HUNT, hold out for bigger, and in the long run, theoretically, you will have more and bigger to shoot at.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

paddlehead said:


> The more bucks the merrier. I love do deer hunt as much as anyone, but I DON'T want to hunt for a forked horn, no matter if it is a general unit or not. Too many tags and all you get is a young buck deer herd. Let the new hunters kill a fork horn, and then hold out for bigger from then on. That practice alone, if we can get people to do it will help improve our general season hunting. My first was a forkie, and have had no desire to shoot another one. I haven't shot at a lot of deer since then, but by not shooting the first one I see I get to HUNT a lot more! If you love to HUNT, hold out for bigger, and in the long run, theoretically, you will have more and bigger to shoot at.


See, this is where people attack you and say you are a trophy hunter....

Wanting to shoot a buck that is more than 1.5 years old isn't a bad thing. I like seeing more 3's and 4's. Nothing wrong with that!!


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

Niether cougars, coyotes, or bears are cuasing deer herds to remain lower. Sure they may have some small effects, but that is not the reason why the deer herds are what they are. The fact of the matter is, that most of the deer lost in this state are lost in early spring after a harsh winter, or are lost to highway vehicle strikes. Many of you shed hunters can attest, becuase after a harsh winter you probably have seen all the dead fawns lying uneaten by predators on the winter ranges (thats where ya'all are finding sheds). I walk them in the spring after harsh winters and within a short distance count tons of dead fawns, and none of them were eaten by anything. In fact they died of starvation and exposure. 

Deer numbers are up this year but that has nothing to do with how many tags were given out, and everything to do with the fact that we have had relatively mild winters over the past couple of years. But we are one harsh winter away from a big drop despite the cutting of tags. So this year it will be good for guys with tags. But even in a year when deer numbers are up, tags didn't go up and now I find myself for the second year in a row without a tag. And BTW, I did select down to the 5th choice (Currant Creek, Cache, Ogden, Kamas, Morgan) and I did include alot of areas with 15/100 does. This year was especially important to me because I was hoping to take my little kids 10, 8, and 5 deer hunting with me. Sure, there were bow tags to be had after the draw, but I can't take those squirmy little kids on a bow hunt and have any prayer of success. I don't have a muzzle loader so that option was off the table. The fact of the matter is that tags are much tougher to come by and that trend is only going to get worse. 

I look at the population of deer on the Big game annual report (see 2012 version on UDWR Website) and what I see from that data is that deer herds since 1996 or so have been fluctuating around 300,000 deer mark and looks to me that it is pretty stable since then. In the years after a harsh winters the herds are down a bit, in the years after a few mild winters the herds are up. And that's whether the herd is managed for 15/100 or 18/100 or 25/100. 

What the buck/doe ratio is, is a managment decision and really does not have much to do with biology. But managment objectives are supposed to be set according to what the majority of the public wants and managment decisions influence how much opportunity there is for the public to hunt. Surveys show most hunters want more opportunity (despite lower quality bucks) because they realize that what is more important than huge antlers are getting out with family, raising their kids to hunt, and perhaps putting a little meat on the table. Yet a vocal minority, that is in the pocket of the UDWR, and who have a disproportionate say at RAC meetings, and spots on the wildlife board, has dictated the cutting of tags. 

What option 2 is doing is decreasing tags, making it more difficult to hunt with family and friends, and making it so I can't take my kids hunting this year, despite the fact that deer numbers are up. This up coming winter (el nino year), we are like to have that harsh winter so the deer population will again be knocked just below 300,000. The only thing those excess bucks are gonna do is die on a winter range, or take the place of a doe so that population growth the next time around is gonna be lower. HOW THE HELL AM I SUPPOSED TO GIVE MY KIDS THAT DEER HUNTING EXPERIENCE WHEN I CAN'T DRAW A GENERAL SEASON TAG FOR TWO YEAR? 

Oh and BTW, what those back yard boys pushing for managment of certain units for higher numbers are gonna find is that when they have a unit managed for higher buck/doe ratios they won't be able to draw a tag either because everyone in the state will be going after those units. Thats because dudes like me with 2 points, who live up north, are gonna sweep in and get those tags next year. But they will have all those big bucks to LOOK AT.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Saying you cant take those squirming kids with you on a bow hunt and not be successful is not only a cop out but untrue. Its the best hunt in the state to take kids scouting and hunting!


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

swbuckmaster said:


> Saying you cant take those squirming kids with you on a bow hunt and not be successful is not only a cop out but untrue. Its the best hunt in the state to take kids scouting and hunting!


Depends on the kids. Also, look at success rates, bow hunter success is generally less thann 12%, and thats even when most bow hunters hunt by themselves.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

You missed the boat imho! You draw an archery tag with second-fifth choice and you dont loose points. Your hunting, seeing game and spending time with your kids. Nothing funner then being in the hills that time of year. The bow hunt is a training hunt for kids. 

If I can take my girls out scouting and hunting durring the archery hunt and be successful anyone can! My girls have seen more bucks on public land by the age of five than most adults have seen in their life. Why because I didnt look for excuses of why they will make me unsuccessful I looked only at the positives. My girls were with me for 99% of my bear hunt and they will be with me on my archery deer hunt this year. 

My daughter didnt draw her rifle tag this year but she did draw second choice archery. If I get my buck she will have a chance at hunting deer from aug 16th clear into the end of november and she will have a rifle tag next year! This will be three years of successful tag in hand applications. What she makes of the tag is all up to her. You could be in the same boat.


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

RandomElk16 said:


> See, this is where people attack you and say you are a trophy hunter....
> 
> Wanting to shoot a buck that is more than 1.5 years old isn't a bad thing. I like seeing more 3's and 4's. Nothing wrong with that!!


Ha Ha, 
Maybe you and Paddle could start early with marking
Bucks that are acceptable for harvest!! Ya know
Like the forest service does with trees they want
Cut. Maybe a splash of pink paint, or perhaps
Some marking tape tied around a bucks neck.

GMAFB!!!


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

swbuckmaster said:


> You missed the boat imho! You draw an archery tag with second-fifth choice and you dont loose points. Your hunting, seeing game and spending time with your kids. Nothing funner then being in the hills that time of year. The bow hunt is a training hunt for kids.
> 
> If I can take my girls out scouting and hunting durring the archery hunt and be successful anyone can! My girls have seen more bucks on public land by the age of five than most adults have seen in their life. Why because I didnt look for excuses of why they will make me unsuccessful I looked only at the positives. My girls were with me for 99% of my bear hunt and they will be with me on my archery deer hunt this year.
> 
> My daughter didnt draw her rifle tag this year but she did draw second choice archery. If I get my buck she will have a chance at hunting deer from aug 16th clear into the end of november and she will have a rifle tag next year! This will be three years of successful tag in hand applications. What she makes of the tag is all up to her. You could be in the same boat.


Ok, I see your point, yes you can take little kids bow hunting. But we already had one point, and thought it would be a slam dunk for a rifle deer hunt. My kids are ADHD, and don't sit still very well, and probably don't have the patience to sit still and wait for very long. That leaves spot and stock, and I would never even get close with three little pitter pater feed walking behind me. When they are teenages, I will take them bow hunting. But this is their first big game hunt and I wanted a different experience. Plus we put in as a group, my buddy, his brother-in-law, my brother, and a friend from work. None of those guys except me, have bows and don't bow hunt. In fact for one guy it would have been his first deer hunt (took hunter's saftey last year and went elk hunting with us). It took a huge effort just to get on the same page with everyone for the application, what with all the units, guys wanting to go different places, pulling together hunter ID numbers, etc. All that was left over after the draw was junk deer tags, that you had to buy at 8:00 am the morning of, and were sold out within minutes. Besides, some guys just like rifle hunting better and there is no reason (I can see) why folks should not have the opportunity to take kids hunting when deer numbers are up across the state, and when things really arn't all that bad (compared to hunts since 1996). All because of some decision pushed by elitists horn porn adicts to raise the buck/doe ratios and break everything into small units which only serves to complicate the application process. For me hunting has always been about family and friends, camping out, sitting around the campfire talking guns and hunting stories, enjoying the outdoors while hunting, and perhaps putting meat on the table. I'm fine shooting two points. If I wanted a huge buck, there are places to get those in every unit. What was done since 1996 was fine in my opinion and I would rather have that then not get tags each year. Besides, people should not have to game a complicated system just to get a tag each year.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I see your point when applying as big groups of people. Its a coordinated effort to get everyone up to speed and It definatly hurts your chances at tags. 

The deer numbers going up and tag numbers not going up is a function of the way utah chooses to take three year trends into account before issuing tags.
They try and smothe out the flash in the pan spikes in deer numbers


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

GBell said:


> Ha Ha,
> Maybe you and Paddle could start early with marking
> Bucks that are acceptable for harvest!! Ya know
> Like the forest service does with trees they want
> ...


For as smart as you can be, you sure flop the other way often.

Saying I skip yearlings isn't a bad thing, and you only proved my point to him that you consider people who want to shoot a buck thats balls have dropped trophy hunting.

Give ME a break!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

swbuckmaster said:


> If I can take my girls out scouting and hunting durring the archery hunt and be successful anyone can!


 You forgot your disclaimers! You mean anyone who has the same priorities, income, transportation, time, relationships with their children, children who like the outdoors, health, schedule, hunting skills, interests, numbers and ages of children, equipment and family support can be successful like you! I'm sure I missed a few, but there isn't anyone like you. We're all unique and so are our circumstances and it's probably not a good idea to try to project your situation on the rest of us. Your way of doing things related to hunting works great for you, but don't assume it works for everyone or even anyone else.


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

There are way too many 3 points in that video. They all need to be killed.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

After 6 years of reading this forum and others, I believe there are not two hunters that want the same thing out of the Utah deer hunt. 

I want unlimited OTC buck tags and most of the bucks in the herd will be yearlings, on the other end of the demand line is the guy that wants all the units to have a lot of bucks reaching full maturity very few tags for hunters each year. The balance of hunters are somewhere in between these two.

Who's interests and who should be able to have deer and hunters managed the why we would like?

Why is one way better than another?

Who should get to decide what kind of hunt we have, and why should that individual or small group of individuals get to decide what the rest of us get to have?

Why does the guy what wants to hunt mature bucks get to hunt that way?
Why does the guy what wants to hunt every year get to hunt that way?
Why does the guy what wants some of both kinds of hunting opportunities get to hunt that way?
Why don't we have a different kind of hunt on all thirty units?
Why can't there be thirty different kinds of deer herds and thirty different kind of hunting opportunities?
Why should one kind of hunt be on 25 units and 5 kinds of hunt be on the rest of the units?
Why shouldn't there be more diversity on the 30 units so there are more options for more diversity in the kinds of hunting opportunities?

Again, none of us want what the other guy wants, so why can't Utah hunters have more choices?


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Kevinitis said:


> Ok, I see your point, yes you can take little kids bow hunting. But we already had one point, and thought it would be a slam dunk for a rifle deer hunt. My kids are ADHD, and don't sit still very well, and probably don't have the patience to sit still and wait for very long. That leaves spot and stock, and I would never even get close with three little pitter pater feed walking behind me. When they are teenages, I will take them bow hunting. But this is their first big game hunt and I wanted a different experience. Plus we put in as a group, my buddy, his brother-in-law, my brother, and a friend from work. None of those guys except me, don't have bows and don't bow hunt. In fact for one guy it would have been his first deer hunt (took hunter's saftey last year and went elk hunting with us). It took a huge effort just to get on the same page with everyone for the application, what with all the units, guys wanting to go different places, pulling together hunter ID numbers, etc. All that was left over after the draw was junk deer tags, that you had to buy at 8:00 am the morning of, and were sold out within minutes. Besides, some guys just like rifle hunting better and there is no reason (I can see) why folks should not have the opportunity to take kids hunting when deer numbers are up across the state, and when things really arn't all that bad (compared to hunts since 1996). All because of some decision pushed by elitists horn porn adicts to raise the buck/doe ratios and break everything into small units which only serves to complicate the application process. For me hunting has always been about family and friends, camping out, sitting around the campfire talking guns and hunting stories, enjoying the outdoors while hunting, and perhaps putting meat on the table. I'm fine shooting two points. If I wanted a huge buck, there are places to get those in every unit. What was done since 1996 was fine in my opinion and I would rather have that then not get tags each year. Besides, people should not have to game a complicated system just to get a tag each year.


Kevinitis, one thing I will say is that if you don't take the opportunity to take you kids out scouting, IMO you are missing what is probably the best opportunity to actually teach your kids how to hunt. The fact that they can be restless is an advantage. No pressure on them or you and only great opportunities to learn patterns, how the animals act and it can be great fun for all. Throw in a fishing rod and you have all the makings of a great time. You will not feel the pressure that a tag will most certainly place on you and your kids will have a better time for it. When the hunt does come you will all be hunters as a group for it.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

osageorange said:


> After 6 years of reading this forum and others, I believe there are not two hunters that want the same thing out of the Utah deer hunt.
> 
> I want unlimited OTC buck tags and most of the bucks in the herd will be yearlings, on the other end of the demand line is the guy that wants all the units to have a lot of bucks reaching full maturity very few tags for hunters each year. The balance of hunters are somewhere in between these two.
> 
> ...


Perhaps that is why we are all different and enjoy different things. If you are married why did you marry a woman with the color of hair that you wife has? Perhaps I don't care for that color perhaps I do, it is just our personal preference.

If you want to hunt every year in Utah there are ways that you can hunt bucks every year, you just have to change and adapt to the way that the rules and regulations are set up. I personally like to hunt mature bucks and see no need to kill a yearling or 2 year old buck but enjoy watching them. At one time I would shoot the first buck that I saw with antlers, but over the years I have changed my priorities as far as the size of deer that I want to bring home. The same goes for elk. I prefer the any bull areas instead of the spike hunt or I hunt in another state other than Utah to harvest a animal that I want to shoot.

My biggest problem with Utah hunters is that they will complain after shooting their 2pt that there are no large bucks anymore. For some reason they don't understand where the mature, larger bucks come from. But the next year that they have a tag they will shoot the first animal that comes along that has antlers, be it a spike, 2pt or a 30" 4x4.

In the end none of us really get what we want out of the deer hunt except for the enjoyment of being out in the wild chasing after a animal that we want to bring home for the table or to hang on the wall. And in the long run just how long do you think that the herds would sustain a harvest of 95% of the bucks out there? One, two, in three years there would soon be very few bucks to hunt and with no bucks the does will not get bred so no fawns the next year and then you'll be complaining that something needs to be done to bring the herd back the way that it was in 2014.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> EFA, a few deciding what's best for 1000s? Kinda like the mule deer committee? Or the mule deer working group. Seems to me the latest trend is more democratic then anything we've had before.
> 
> *Except the Mule Deer Committee members and the Mule Deer Working Group members are not self-appointed, but are asked to participate by long established regulating agencies. And they are purposefully made up of members with differing viewpoints, so there is an actual discussion and learning experience.*
> 
> ...


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Critter, your right, none of us do get what we want however, there is opportunity to provide more diversity, is there not? 

Why wouldn't it make sense to try some additional diversity with in the State?

Add diversity and allow hunters to choice what kind of hunt they'd like to have. Like you point out, as you've aged, your interests have changed, wouldn't hunters be more satisfied if there were 10 or 15 different kinds of hunts they could select from, as their interests change from year to year or from decade to decade. 

Why do we need to be saddled with three choices, GS, LE or Premium LE, all managed by buck doe ratios and nothing else. 

Why should I have to settle for what elkfromabove and his group wants, or what iron bear and his buddies want, or SFW and that group wants, or what Gbell and his archers want or what swbuckmaster and his family wants? 

I understand why swbuckmaster wants what he wants, I understand elkfromavove and the UWC want (more or less from what I've read), I know where SFW and their members are coming from (more or less), I understand what Critter and his older friends would like, I can appreciate iron bear's agruments, and ridgetops and randomelks. 

I get it, not only do I get it but I'm not troubled by any of it, it's simple a matter of different guys have different interests and there pushing for what they believe there entitled to or have a right to. I have not conflict with that, it's human nature and to be expected.

The question is, why don't you understand that guys like me are the same as you all. We want something different than the rest of you. And I'd argue that there are others that want still something different still. Don't they have as much right to have their needs and interests addressed as you all do yours?

There is ample opportunity to provide greater diversity, does anyone of you care to consider more diversity or are you simple going to insist that everyone, that has a different interest in hunting, comply with your view of what the sport should be? It certainly has looked that way to me, for the last six years. 

As long as our biologists tell us we are not harming the deer herd, and the State protects the biological health of the resource, the way we hunt deer is absolutely just a social issue. I'm willing to grant you opportunities to enjoy some of yours, are you willing to allow me the opportunity to enjoy some of mine?


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

All western states have to deal with social and political issues when it comes to managing wildlife, but I have to admit, none of them seem to be able to hold a candle to what the UDWR has to deal with. I'm actually amazed they can get any real science based work done at all, what little they do anyway. What a shame.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I don't really want to get into a dust up over the UWC's faults. I was really just venting about SFW getting vilified while the UWC get put on a pedestal. 

So let's not waste a dime on coyote control because it ha sent been proven to work beyond a shadow of a doubt. In that case what about the 100s of millions we have poured into habitat? Is the UWC making sure to only support projects that been proven without a shadow of a doubt?

Go ahead back down the river we go. Its completely asinine. Weather and habitat. I guess we had 40 yrs of perfect weather from the 30s to the 70s and nobody mentioned to cattle and sheep that the habitat has turned for the worse. Because we have more cattle and sheep living in utah then ever before despite all this terrible habitat. Give me a break!


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

Random I apologize for my previous post. 

Probably should have voiced my displeasure without
Being such a Richard. 

I haven't killed a deer in several years, the last three
Because tags have been hard to come by and before that
Because I didn't see a buck I wanted to kill. 

Still it was my choice not to drop the string that year. 
I struggle with letting others decide what I should or shouldn't
Shoot. As long as it's legal it's nobody's business but mine. 

In a way, to achieve what you would consider acceptable would
Require telling me and my kids or another hunter and their kids
They can't hunt. We know biologically this plan does squat to grow
Deer and only let's the minority of hunters decide what is acceptable
To place a tag on.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

With so many "in the know" and theorist's bouncing around on one thread... how'd that early rifle deer tag discussion thingy go?


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

Unless you go to the meetings and have a loud enough voice, settling for what someone else wants is the norm. If you're are passionate enough and have a big enough wallet, er a I mean group of people that share your same interests, start your own "conservation" group and go to the meetings, voice your opinion there.


----------

