Significant restrictions are being proposed in 2024 Novembers RAC's

I'm Not Against APR's!

But I Seen It FAIL!

How You Gonna Enforce It?

And Without The Amendment I Posted Above To HELL-F'N-RIGHT, A PISSCUTTER Fine Or A Slap On The Wrist When Joe Blow Couldn't Hold Back Long Enough To Count Points & Wastes A Buck/Or A Few Bucks Fixes Nothing!

And Here's Another Deal!

There Are More Than Just 3 or 4 Units In This State That Need Drastic Change!
 
Again if our deer herds are that bad come out and tell us no food salads please just straight up. I can work with the truth.
 
elkassassin said:
We Can't Do This Tikka!

The 1080 Would Kill The Coyotes!

The Raven That Eats All The Sage Chicken Eggs Would Tip Over Cuzz he Chewed On The 1080 Induced Coyote!

The Magpie Who Is HELL On Small Game Birds & Eggs Would Chew On The 1080 Induced Coyote As Well & He'd Go TEATS Up!

The Perty Turkey Buzzard Would Get A Taste & He'd Go Belly Up!

Oh We Can't Have This.........................!
Click to expand...
It would solve all the world's problems... 😁
 
I have hunted the Boulder and Thousand Lake my whole life, so these proposals hit close to home. I will do whatever it takes to draw a permit. I have been in the Dedicated Hunter Program five different times, and I hunt Muzzleloader or Archery in the years I'm not in DH.

I read the entire proposed management plan, and there are some real head-scratching moments in there: https://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac_minutes/2024-11-mule-deer-statewide-management-plan-2025-30.pdf

For example, why the Boulder Unit? The Boulder unit is doing great right now and improving every year! I just finished my 3rd year of Dedicated Hunter and saw lots of mature bucks, and their data corroborates that.

The Boulder had nearly 31 bucks per 100 does last year. That's on the high end of what LE units are managed for.

This proposed plan also suggests reducing the buck-to-doe ratio as quoted here "In the interest of long term-herd health as well as optimizing hunter participation and engagement, this plan sets buck-to-doe ratio objectives for all units in the state and directs us to manage more general season deer units to a buck-to-doe ratio objective of 15-17 with fewer units managed at 18-20 (see Table1). "

The table shows the Boulder as a unit being lowered into the 15-17 range.
screenshot-wildlife_utah_gov-2024_10_30-11_54_16.png


They will have to increase tags significantly to bring this and most other units to their objective of 15-17 bucks per 100 does.
If weapon restrictions are in place to reduce success rates, you will need to increase the permit numbers even more to reduce the number of bucks on the landscape. It just seems odd that they chose a unit that is already improving to be one of their guinea pigs...
 
elkassassin said:
I'm Not Against APR's!

But I Seen It FAIL!

How You Gonna Enforce It?

And Without The Amendment I Posted Above To HELL-F'N-RIGHT, A PISSCUTTER Fine Or A Slap On The Wrist When Joe Blow Couldn't Hold Back Long Enough To Count Points & Wastes A Buck/Or A Few Bucks Fixes Nothing!

And Here's Another Deal!

There Are More Than Just 3 or 4 Units In This State That Need Drastic Change!
Click to expand...
Have we ever seen an APR implemented on a limited quoata unit?
 
Now for the Thousand Lake. That unit is a dumpster fire. I'm not sure how they found 100 deer to get their buck-to-doe ratio. (I'm convinced that the deer they count migrate onto the unit from the Fishlake after the hunts are over.)

Their solution? Weapons restrictions (including archery) AND making it a Limited Entry unit!

You can already draw this permit with 0-1 points for archery and muzzleloader! Who in their right mind would burn LE points on it?!?!?

Sure, try the weapons restrictions, but why tag it as LE? They already tried that, but it wasn't a great unit.

Thousan.png
 
I am all for more opportunities to hunt. I would like a tag every year. I feel that if we really want to increase opportunity, we should make people choose between limited-entry deer hunts and general season.

Those who want tag cuts can apply for limited-entry units where the tags are reduced, and the buck-to-doe ratios and mature buck numbers are higher.

They can then deal with the consequences by only drawing a tag once every decade or two (that's what they want right). That would address the point creep issue on limited-entry units and make drawing a general season tag much easier.
 
One more...

Did anyone catch this in that long list of proposals?


Another option the statewide mule deer committee explored to get more opportunity to our hunters was ways to reduce applications. In 2024, 88% of dedicated hunter applicants also applied for general-season buck deer permit. The Division would like to propose to only allow hunters to apply for a general-season buck deer permit/point OR the dedicated hunter COR/point– but no longer allow them to apply for both types of permits.

I was one of those 88%. I get why you do that, but why stop there...
 
Plateau said:
One more...

Did anyone catch this in that long list of proposals?


Another option the statewide mule deer committee explored to get more opportunity to our hunters was ways to reduce applications. In 2024, 88% of dedicated hunter applicants also applied for general-season buck deer permit. The Division would like to propose to only allow hunters to apply for a general-season buck deer permit/point OR the dedicated hunter COR/point– but no longer allow them to apply for both types of permits.

I was one of those 88%. I get why you do that, but why stop there...
Click to expand...
I think this was mentioned above in this thread…..
 
diablo said:
I think this was mentioned above in this thread…..
Click to expand...
It was!
Simpleton said:
Back to the recommendations.. what do you all think of the little tid bit about only being able to apply for either GS or DH, not both, but still keeping the points separate?

I think it is a step in the right direction, however, I think they would be better off if they took it a tiny step further and made DH an option in the General Season Draw rather than having two sets of points for the same species on the same units. Seems it would be cleaner if they just said DH is a general season option (archery, muzzleloader, early ALW, regular ALW, and DH) and keep them all in the same point pool.
Click to expand...
Plateau said:
One more...

Did anyone catch this in that long list of proposals?


Another option the statewide mule deer committee explored to get more opportunity to our hunters was ways to reduce applications. In 2024, 88% of dedicated hunter applicants also applied for general-season buck deer permit. The Division would like to propose to only allow hunters to apply for a general-season buck deer permit/point OR the dedicated hunter COR/point– but no longer allow them to apply for both types of permits.

I was one of those 88%. I get why you do that, but why stop there...
Click to expand...
SPOT ON! Speak to me Plateau! Unless having points in their pocket makes people feel all warm and fuzzy, there is zero benefit to having the GS, DH, and LE draws and points be separate.
 
Are You Saying None Of The Same DRATS Wouldn't Be Hunting There Pulling The Same BS Tactics?

Like You've Heard Me Say It A 100 Times Before This Thread Showed Up:

I'm All For APR's!

But Embed My Amendment Of HELL-F'N-RIGHT In To The Rules & Most Of The BS Would Stop!



slamdunk said:
Have we ever seen an APR implemented on a limited quoata unit?
Click to expand...
 
I've Also Said Many A Times:

Start 3 OPPOR-F'N-TUNIST Deer Units!

Let The OPPOR-F'N-TUNISTS Manage Them 3 Units As They Damn Well Please!

But Within A Year Or 2 Don't Come A BAWLIN After They Are F'ED Up Beyond A Repair!

Let Them Have Un-Limited Tags!

Let Each One Of Them buy 5 Tags If They Like!

Give Them All The OPPORTUNITY They Want On Them 3 Said Units!

But when Then 3 Units Are Destroyed They Can Just Keep Getting Tags & Have Their Opportunity At ABSO-F'N-LUTELY Nothing!
 
To Let The MOTL Bucks Live Past Age 2!

APR's Are Not For Everybody!

To Let SOME Guys Have A Chance At A Decent Quality Buck That Have Waited UMPTEEN Years To Finally Get A Tag & A Chance At A Decent Buck!

To Maybe Bring Some Decent Genetics Back In To The Herd!

A Buck That Was Sired By 5 Generations Of Spikes/JUNK Genetics Will Only Be JUNK No Matter How Long He Lives!



ktg said:
What is the desired outcome of having an APR?
Click to expand...
 
slamdunk said:
Pick a unit, purchase one of two tags.
Either a mature buck only or a yearling buck only.

Which will sell out first?
Click to expand...
Sell out? Mature Buck Only. Everyone sitting in their comfy chair dreams of a big buck, but something magical happens when the aroma of last night's booze and gun powder fills the brisk morning air after thoughts of dozens of Instagram likes danced in the dreams of last night.
 
elkassassin said:
How Many Opportunists Are In The Pile Compared To Guys That Want A Chance At A Decent Buck?
Click to expand...
What's a decent buck? With APR, if everyone is thinking a 2.5 year old buck is decent, that's what they'll get, although not as many as they might expect. If they expect something older than that, they'll be deeply disappointed.
 
It would make an interesting poll question.. but pitted against one another, one doesn't stand a chance.

Maybe if asked in a set of questions:

If tags were spike/two point only for GS deer, would you buy a tag? Paired against the same question if tags were for mature buck only, would you buy a tag?

I think I know how that would go in the poll, but hey, I've been surprised and wrong plenty before.
 
Simpleton said:
It would make an interesting poll question.. but pitted against one another, one doesn't stand a chance.

Maybe if asked in a set of questions:

If tags were spike/two point only for GS deer, would you buy a tag? Paired against the same question if tags were for mature buck only, would you buy a tag?

I think I know how that would go in the poll, but hey, I've been surprised and wrong plenty before.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the mature buck tags would go first, but then the others would be gone in no time.
 
Hey ktg?

If You Look Above You'll See Where I Recommended An APR of a 5 Point Minimum!

Agreed,Not All Of The 5+ Point Bucks Would Be Big But Some Of Them Would Be!

ktg said:
What's a decent buck? With APR, if everyone is thinking a 2.5 year old buck is decent, that's what they'll get, although not as many as they might expect. If they expect something older than that, they'll be deeply disappointed.
Click to expand...
 
I Can Just See The WHINING BEACHES Now If A 5 Point Minimum APR Was recommended & Approved!

Guess Where Them Same WHINING BEACHES Would Be Applying For A Tag The Following Years?
 
elkassassin said:
Hey ktg?

If You Look Above You'll See Where I Recommended An APR of a 5 Point Minimum!

Agreed,Not All Of The 5+ Point Bucks Would Be Big But Some Of Them Would Be!
Click to expand...
That would work out perfectly for opportunists They could sell unlimited tags over the counter. No matter how many people hunted, the buck:doe ratio would still be over the DWR's target. (which would also happen under any APR, except a 'reverse APR')
 
Last edited:
Buck : Doe Ratio is such a useless tool to describe the health of a deer herd, imo.

A herd could have 15 bucks and 75 does alive in an entire unit from drought and hard winters and the DWR would sit and tell us the unit is above objective and they need to issue more tags and extend seasons because "bucks don't have fawns."

How about DWR improves our deer herds before pretending they're the expert on improving deer herds. Utah is easily one of the worst states in the west for deer herds, maybe only above Idaho. I'm sick of the people managing a failing herd telling me they're the experts.

:: rant over ::
 
grizzly said:
Buck : Doe Ratio is such a useless tool to describe the health of a deer herd, imo.

A herd could have 15 bucks and 75 does alive in an entire unit from drought and hard winters and the DWR would sit and tell us the unit is above objective and they need to issue more tags and extend seasons because "bucks don't have fawns."

How about DWR improves our deer herds before pretending they're the expert on improving deer herds. Utah is easily one of the worst states in the west for deer herds, maybe only above Idaho. I'm sick of the people managing a failing herd telling me they're the experts.

:: rant over ::
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more!

Carrying capacity has to be in there somewhere 🤷‍♂️
 
Bigwiffy said:
Speaking of carrying capacity how much would you say your Lapua weighs with your 40x scope?


When you talk to your tech committee please let them know you all look silly worrying about APR's when you are carrying a weapon you can shoot across continents with.
Click to expand...
I wonder what he used to illegally kill that wounded 2pt he mentioned putting out of its misery in the book cliffs back in the 90s?
 
Last edited:
My Comments to the Wildlife Board and RAC

I have been been in the Dedicated Hunter program since its inception. I have hunted the same area in the Cache Unit for over 46 years. I have been extremely satisfied with deer hunting. Last year hunters were required to pull magnifying scopes off of muzzleloaders. This change cost $500 for a new sight system. Under this new proposal I will have to scrap my current muzzleloader and invest $500 to $600 for a muzzleloader that fits the restricted muzzleloader definition.

We will also be required to remove our scopes off our rifles. “If only our rifles had iron sights”, so back to the store to purchase a rifle with iron sights. Another six to nine hundred dollars. This research study could cost each hunter a minimum of $1,200 if they are in the Dedicated Hunter program or $500 to $900 if they draw muzzleloader or rifle tag.

The Cache unit currently has around 200 Dedicated Hunters. Each hunter completes 32 hours or they buy their hours at $40 per hour. If half of the dedicated hunters drop out due to the new equipment requirements, it could be a loss of 3,200 volunteer hours. Will other sportsman’s organizations step up to complete the volunteer hours? Will habitat projects on the Cache unit not be completed?

What is the purpose of this proposal? Is it to increase the number of licenses sales or is it to increase the number of bucks?

The Cache unit currently has 17 bucks per 100 doe’s post season.

Objective is 15 to17 bucks per 100 doe’s post season. The Cache unit is very weather dependent. When we have a hard winter we lose our deer. If we have more bucks than objective, it takes longer for the deer herds to rebound from winter loss. The bucks out-compete the doe’s for survival, reducing the reproduction and survival of fawns.

Next year I will be 62 and my eyesight is declining. I depend on a scope to insure I make a humane harvest. Open sights including a peep sight with a globe front sight has made precision shot almost guess work. I can’t imagine a new hunter using open sights when the hunter education course allows them to use scopes to pass their shooting proficiency test.

Lets wait until the data is collected from this years hunt before significant changes are made impacting the 4,000 plus hunters that hunt the Cache unit.

This proposal doesn’t do anything for habitat that will sustain deer numbers.
 
We've Got 100 Head Left In The Unit But BY GAWD 15 Of Them Are PISSCUTTER Bucks!

The WORST GAWD-DAMNED Deer Management Ever DREMPT The Hell Up!


grizzly said:
Buck : Doe Ratio is such a useless tool to describe the health of a deer herd, imo.

A herd could have 15 bucks and 75 does alive in an entire unit from drought and hard winters and the DWR would sit and tell us the unit is above objective and they need to issue more tags and extend seasons because "bucks don't have fawns."

How about DWR improves our deer herds before pretending they're the expert on improving deer herds. Utah is easily one of the worst states in the west for deer herds, maybe only above Idaho. I'm sick of the people managing a failing herd telling me they're the experts.

:: rant over ::
Click to expand...
 
Hunter61 said:
My Comments to the Wildlife Board and RAC

I have been been in the Dedicated Hunter program since its inception. I have hunted the same area in the Cache Unit for over 46 years. I have been extremely satisfied with deer hunting. Last year hunters were required to pull magnifying scopes off of muzzleloaders. This change cost $500 for a new sight system. Under this new proposal I will have to scrap my current muzzleloader and invest $500 to $600 for a muzzleloader that fits the restricted muzzleloader definition.

We will also be required to remove our scopes off our rifles. “If only our rifles had iron sights”, so back to the store to purchase a rifle with iron sights. Another six to nine hundred dollars. This research study could cost each hunter a minimum of $1,200 if they are in the Dedicated Hunter program or $500 to $900 if they draw muzzleloader or rifle tag.

The Cache unit currently has around 200 Dedicated Hunters. Each hunter completes 32 hours or they buy their hours at $40 per hour. If half of the dedicated hunters drop out due to the new equipment requirements, it could be a loss of 3,200 volunteer hours. Will other sportsman’s organizations step up to complete the volunteer hours? Will habitat projects on the Cache unit not be completed?

What is the purpose of this proposal? Is it to increase the number of licenses sales or is it to increase the number of bucks?

The Cache unit currently has 17 bucks per 100 doe’s post season.

Objective is 15 to17 bucks per 100 doe’s post season. The Cache unit is very weather dependent. When we have a hard winter we lose our deer. If we have more bucks than objective, it takes longer for the deer herds to rebound from winter loss. The bucks out-compete the doe’s for survival, reducing the reproduction and survival of fawns.

Next year I will be 62 and my eyesight is declining. I depend on a scope to insure I make a humane harvest. Open sights including a peep sight with a globe front sight has made precision shot almost guess work. I can’t imagine a new hunter using open sights when the hunter education course allows them to use scopes to pass their shooting proficiency test.

Lets wait until the data is collected from this years hunt before significant changes are made impacting the 4,000 plus hunters that hunt the Cache unit.

This proposal doesn’t do anything for habitat that will sustain deer numbers.
Click to expand...

And people will claim this doesn’t take opportunity away from anyone.

Very well said Hunter61.
 
It’s only a 5 year study, so just don’t hunt your backyard anymore for the next 5 years, right bessy? No biggie! Not taking any opportunities away from anyone here…
 
Vanilla said:
It’s only a 5 year study, so just don’t hunt your backyard anymore for the next 5 years, right bessy? No biggie! Not taking any opportunities away from anyone here…
Click to expand...
I was told from the top it will be changed to a 6 year due to "cycles".

I think it's safe to assume this also is part of the "proposal" as well.
 
But How Many More 5 Or 6 Year Studies Do We Have?

I Know I Probably Don't Have Any Left In Me!

But I'd Sure Like To See Every-bodies Kids/Grand-Kids Have A Chance At Something!



Vanilla said:

​

It’s only a 5 year study, so just don’t hunt your backyard anymore for the next 5 years, right bessy? No biggie! Not taking any opportunities away from anyone here…
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
But I'd Sure Like To See Every-bodies Kids/Grand-Kids Have A Chance At Something!
Click to expand...

We agree on that! So let’s keep doing things that do NOT build our deer herd at all and add in making it harder to actually hunt. That ought to do the trick, huh my friend?

But at least some on here will be able to find that 4 pointer on the hunt going forward!!!
 
Maybe if more would look beyond the actual hunting and killing part and what affects our personal success, maybe we'd see a bigger picture of what's being done to help deer and other wildlife increase or at least sustain.

Just this morning while having my coffee i was reading about 50 deer underpasses that have been built or being built and all the GPS collared deer to study migration routes and where to help the animals.

There's far more to management of wildlife than how to kill them.
 
slamdunk said:
I couldn't agree more!

Carrying capacity has to be in there somewhere 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
It amazes me that someone like grizzly doesn't understand how the unit by unit management plans actually work and how a biologist determines tag numbers each year but for you to not understand, is plain out disappointing. Especially with your heavy involvement with the MDF and the DWR committee's. I would have thought you knew the unit deer plans inside and out. Carrying capacity and herd numbers most definitely are part of the equation, along with buck/doe ratios when determining tag numbers for each unit.
 
Last edited:
ridgetops said:
It amazes me that someone like grizzly doesn't understand how the unit by unit management plans actually work and how a biologist determines tag numbers each year but for you to not understand, is plain out disappointing. Especially with your heavy involvement with the MDF and the DWR committee's. I would have that you knew they unit deer plans inside and out. Carrying capacity and herd numbers most definitely are part of the equation, along with buck/doe ratios when determining tag numbers for each unit.
Click to expand...
I never insinuated i don't know how it works, I apologize if it came out that way.

My comment was more in tune with carrying capacity and herd management as a whole and how it varies from unit to unit.

I get in a hurry to comment sometimes when I'm at work.
 
ridgetops said:
It amazes me that someone like grizzly doesn't understand how the unit by unit management plans actually work and how a biologist determines tag numbers each year but for you to not understand, is plain out disappointing.
Click to expand...
I understand how they say it works; I've read many white papers on mule deer and habitat improvements and spoken directly to Todd Black about mule deer management plans, not just gotten a bunch of anecdotal opinions on forums and from what I think I see in the woods.

I also know the proof is in the pudding (at least it would be in the private sector) and that Utah's mule deer management is not actually working, i.e. improving Utah's mule deer.

I don't know anybody that would say Utah's mule deer are faring better than 15 years ago, 30 years ago, 50 years ago, etc... Do you?

Undoubtedly, range encroachment is a huge part of that decline. Does anybody think range encroachment will lessen in the next 50 years? Will there be less homes on the foothills? Heck, our legislature is openly trying to sell BLM land to developers to build more homes on deer habitat (and they're using our tax dollars to lobby the citizens for support).

Where will our deer herds be a decade from now, or 20 or 30 years from now, at the current trajectory? What are we doing to change that trajectory?
 
Last edited:
grizzly said:
I understand how they say it works; I've read many white papers on mule deer and habitat improvements and spoken directly to Todd Black about mule deer management plans, not just gotten a bunch of anecdotal opinions on forums and from what I think I see in the woods.

I also know the proof is in the pudding (at least it would be in the private sector) and that Utah's mule deer management is not actually working, i.e. improving Utah's mule deer.

I don't know anybody that would say Utah's mule deer are faring better than 15 years ago, 30 years ago, 50 years ago, etc... Do you?

Undoubtedly, range encroachment is a huge part of that decline. Does anybody think range encroachment will lessen in the next 50 years? Will there be less homes on the foothills? Heck, our legislature is openly trying to sell BLM land to developers to build more homes on deer habitat (and they're using our tax dollars to lobby the citizens for support).

Where will our deer herds be a decade from now, or 20 years from now at the current trajectory? What are we doing to change that trajectory?
Click to expand...
Todd is a good dude, he knows his stuff about wildlife.
I missed him on Deseret but occasionally see him on MDF projects.
 
Which western state is seeing a better mule deer situation today than they were 15, 30, or 50 years ago? Which states have increased their mule deer numbers over that timeline?

I’m certainly not saying Utah is doing well with this, because we are not. However, it seems ignorant to single out Utah when every state is seeing similar results and declines pretty much across the board. There may be short term outliers of improvement, we’ve even seen that in Utah, but where are all these mule deer success stories in western states for us to copy?
 
I haven't read it myself, but I was told Colorado is going to all draw on their deer state wide, no more OTC.

As stated above, it's all over the west.
 
hossblur said:
Can you point me to the scoped rifle season, I can't find the dates
Click to expand...
This is the only proposed rifle hunt on the Cache.

(e) a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1), with the following restrictions:

(i) not semi-automatic;

(ii) no attached scope; and

(iii) utilizes a straight-walled cartridge with a minimum bullet diameter of .35 caliber and a minimum case length of not less than 1.16 inches.
 
middlefork said:
This is the only proposed rifle hunt on the Cache.

(e) a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1), with the following restrictions:

(i) not semi-automatic;

(ii) no attached scope; and

(iii) utilizes a straight-walled cartridge with a minimum bullet diameter of .35 caliber and a minimum case length of not less than 1.16 inches.
Click to expand...
That is just plain stupid, crazy talk right there.🙄
 
middlefork said:
This is the only proposed rifle hunt on the Cache.

(e) a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1), with the following restrictions:

(i) not semi-automatic;

(ii) no attached scope; and

(iii) utilizes a straight-walled cartridge with a minimum bullet diameter of .35 caliber and a minimum case length of not less than 1.16 inches.
Click to expand...

Between my brothers and I, I’m guessing we own 15+ rifles. Not a single one would be a lawful firearm in the Cache unit.

But this is about opportunity! So they say, and have convinced some. I’m not buying it, and I’ll be here to say “I told you so” just like Hossy would expect me to be!

It’s only 5 (6???) years, right? What’s the big deal?!?!
 
Hey Nilly!

I'd Lone You One!

You'd Best Not Teach It Any Bad Habits!


Vanilla said:
Between my brothers and I, I’m guessing we own 15+ rifles. Not a single one would be a lawful firearm in the Cache unit.

But this is about opportunity! So they say, and have convinced some. I’m not buying it, and I’ll be here to say “I told you so” just like Hossy would expect me to be!

It’s only 5 (6???) years, right? What’s the big deal?!?!
Click to expand...
 
Here are the weapon definitions of the proposed plan.
https://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac_minutes/memorandum-2024-10-17-deer-hunt-strategies-research-proposal.pdf

It does not have to be straight-walled.

Restricted weapons definitions:
Restricted archery — current definition with the following additional restrictions:
(a) must be a single-stringed longbow or recurve bow with no cables, pulleys or cams;
(b) has no sights; and
(c) has a draw weight of 40 pounds or more.
Restricted muzzleloader — current definition with the following additional restrictions:
(a) the ignition system is limited to traditional flintlock, wheellock, matchlock, musket cap, or percussion cap which must be entirely visible when the hammer is drawn back. All other ignition systems, including 209 primers, are prohibited; and
(b) contains only open sights or peep sights.
Restricted rifle — current definition with the following additional restrictions:
(a) contains only open sights or peep sights; and
(b) cannot be semi-automatic.

Do you think the Northwest Legal CVA's fit this requirement?
https://muzzle-loaders.com/products...07Qxus6UKFIM9hnwliRDiIvzQcj6gU83WCeJwGKyuFazE

I have a CVA Optima and for $50 could convert it to musket caps. I'm just not sure it would fit the "entirely visible when the hammer is drawn back" requirement. I guess it probably wouldn't.
 
middlefork said:
This is the only proposed rifle hunt on the Cache.

(e) a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1), with the following restrictions:

(i) not semi-automatic;

(ii) no attached scope; and

(iii) utilizes a straight-walled cartridge with a minimum bullet diameter of .35 caliber and a minimum case length of not less than 1.16 inches.
Click to expand...

That's wrong. It's all good to debate, agree with or complain about the proposal, but at least use the correct information. It is proposed to be a restricted weapon hunt for ML and rifle, not a hams hunt. 400+ posts, I bet you guys had a great discussion and won over the opposition, which ever side you are on- just hopefully based on facts. haha Carry on.

R657-5-48. Restricted Weapons Hunt.​

(1)(a) The Wildlife Board may prescribe Restricted Weapon Type hunts for any big game species.

(b) A person who has obtained a Restricted Weapon Type permit may not hunt within Cooperative Wildlife Management unit areas.

(c) A person who has obtained a Restricted Weapon Type permit may only hunt within the unit specified on the permit and no other general season, limited entry, or premium limited units, except as provided by the Wildlife Board in the guidebooks for big game.

(d) A permit issued for a Restricted Weapon Type season identified in Subsection (1)(a) allows a person to take a species designated on the permit within the area, during the season dates, and using the weapon type described in Subsections (2) through (6) and specified on the permit.

(3) "Restricted Muzzleloader Equipment" means muzzleloader equipment as detailed in Subsections R657-5-10(1) and (2) with the following restrictions:

(a) the ignition system is limited to traditional flintlock, wheellock, matchlock, musket cap, or percussion cap which must be entirely visible when the hammer is drawn back. All other ignition systems, including 209 primers, are prohibited; and

(b) contains only open sights or peep sights.

(4) "Restricted Rifle Equipment" means a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1) with the following exceptions:

(a) contains only open sights or peeps sights; and

(b) cannot be semi-automatic.

(6) A person who has obtained an any weapon permit for big game may use any restricted weapon authorized in this section to take the species authorized on the permit.

(7) Electronic communication to receive real-time information on hunter or game location to aid in the stalking of a specific big game animal is prohibited on a restricted weapon hunt.
 
Vanilla said:
Which western state is seeing a better mule deer situation today than they were 15, 30, or 50 years ago? Which states have increased their mule deer numbers over that timeline?

I’m certainly not saying Utah is doing well with this, because we are not. However, it seems ignorant to single out Utah when every state is seeing similar results and declines pretty much across the board. There may be short term outliers of improvement, we’ve even seen that in Utah, but where are all these mule deer success stories in western states for us to copy?
Click to expand...
Those are two different thoughts...

1. Utah in relation to other states (where we're either dead last or second-to-last only to Idaho, IMO).

2. The trajectory of our deer herds and what we're doing to correct that decline.

______________

The point is mule deer are in decline and that Utah "experts" have not done anything to earn their stripes. We're quickly facing critical mass and the proposals from DWR will do nothing to right the ship.

It's time to change horses because what they've been doing isn't working... even in relation to neighboring states.
 
grizzly said:
Those are two different thoughts...

1. Utah in relation to other states (where we're either dead last or second-to-last only to Idaho, IMO).

2. The trajectory of our deer herds and what we're doing to correct that decline.

______________

The point is mule deer are in decline and that Utah "experts" have not done anything to earn their stripes. We're quickly facing critical mass and the proposals from DWR will do nothing to right the ship.

It's time to change horses because what they've been doing isn't working... even in relation to neighboring states.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The only horse they’ve ever ridden is the restrict hunters more and more horse. I’m not on board with any more of that crap. They’ve failed to help deer through managing people for too long to think they finally found the silver bullet of human management to build deer herds. It ain’t gonna happen, and those that just want an easier go at bigger deer are going to lead us to a point of no return, eventually.
 
Packout said:
That's wrong. It's all good to debate, agree with or complain about the proposal, but at least use the correct information. It is proposed to be a restricted weapon hunt for ML and rifle, not a hams hunt. 400+ posts, I bet you guys had a great discussion and won over the opposition, which ever side you are on- just hopefully based on facts. haha Carry on.

R657-5-48. Restricted Weapons Hunt.​

(1)(a) The Wildlife Board may prescribe Restricted Weapon Type hunts for any big game species.

(b) A person who has obtained a Restricted Weapon Type permit may not hunt within Cooperative Wildlife Management unit areas.

(c) A person who has obtained a Restricted Weapon Type permit may only hunt within the unit specified on the permit and no other general season, limited entry, or premium limited units, except as provided by the Wildlife Board in the guidebooks for big game.

(d) A permit issued for a Restricted Weapon Type season identified in Subsection (1)(a) allows a person to take a species designated on the permit within the area, during the season dates, and using the weapon type described in Subsections (2) through (6) and specified on the permit.

(3) "Restricted Muzzleloader Equipment" means muzzleloader equipment as detailed in Subsections R657-5-10(1) and (2) with the following restrictions:

(a) the ignition system is limited to traditional flintlock, wheellock, matchlock, musket cap, or percussion cap which must be entirely visible when the hammer is drawn back. All other ignition systems, including 209 primers, are prohibited; and

(b) contains only open sights or peep sights.

(4) "Restricted Rifle Equipment" means a rifle as detailed in Subsection R657-5-8(1) with the following exceptions:

(a) contains only open sights or peeps sights; and

(b) cannot be semi-automatic.

(6) A person who has obtained an any weapon permit for big game may use any restricted weapon authorized in this section to take the species authorized on the permit.

(7) Electronic communication to receive real-time information on hunter or game location to aid in the stalking of a specific big game animal is prohibited on a restricted weapon hunt.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I apparently was picking up the wrong definition.

Still doesn't make sense on the Cache. Save bucks to lose them to winter.
 
middlefork said:
Thanks for the clarification. I apparently was picking up the wrong definition.

Still doesn't make sense on the Cache. Save bucks to lose them to winter.
Click to expand...
Huh? It should still be managed for the same buck to doe ratio- so there should still be a similar number of bucks going into the winter, possibly a more varied age structure.
What if people have to settle on a younger buck because they can't wack an older buck from 700 yards? Maybe harvest the young bucks at a higher rate, which could actually reduce loss, as studies show the yearlings die at a higher rate (outside of hunting). Might be a great idea or maybe not. Might not even pass. The theory is interesting. (not my theory, but I can see how it may work) And there is some pain involved with the proposed change.
 
I agree. The proof is in the pudding. All the indicators say increase tags. Seriously what do you think will happen?

I re-upped for DH after the winter of 21/22 knowing how bad it was. Not a problem. I knew what I was getting into. I'm not one to complain about conditions.

Just not convinced The Cache should be a experimental unit. It's been one of the most studied units in the state for a long time.
 
hossblur said:
Can you point me to the scoped rifle season, I can't find the dates
Click to expand...

Vanilla said:
Between my brothers and I, I’m guessing we own 15+ rifles. Not a single one would be a lawful firearm in the Cache unit.

But this is about opportunity! So they say, and have convinced some. I’m not buying it, and I’ll be here to say “I told you so” just like Hossy would expect me to be!

It’s only 5 (6???) years, right? What’s the big deal?!?!
Click to expand...

When dad had cancer the DWR wouldn't give him the keys to gates, nor give him a pass to drive on closed roads. On the Manti, where he literally lived in a sheep camp.

Obviously the DWR was taking away his oppurtunity.
 
hossblur said:
When dad had cancer the DWR wouldn't give him the keys to gates, nor give him a pass to drive on closed roads. On the Manti, where he literally lived in a sheep camp.

Obviously the DWR was taking away his oppurtunity.
Click to expand...

And none of those are any better than your lazy, crappy previous analogies Hossy!

I feel like you either know you’re wrong and too darn stubborn to acknowledge it, or you’re not trying. You’re usually way more persuasive than this.

Step up your game. I need someone to offer something intelligent in favor of these proposals. The DWR’s videos didn’t do it for me. And I’m losing interest.
 
Hey Nilly?

Do You have A HAWKENS SmokePole?

Do you Have A Fred Bear?





Vanilla said:
And none of those are any better than your lazy, crappy previous analogies Hossy!

I feel like you either know you’re wrong and too darn stubborn to acknowledge it, or you’re not trying. You’re usually way more persuasive than this.

Step up your game. I need someone to offer something intelligent in favor of these proposals. The DWR’s videos didn’t do it for me. And I’m losing interest.
Click to expand...
 
Vanilla said:
And none of those are any better than your lazy, crappy previous analogies Hossy!

I feel like you either know you’re wrong and too darn stubborn to acknowledge it, or you’re not trying. You’re usually way more persuasive than this.

Step up your game. I need someone to offer something intelligent in favor of these proposals. The DWR’s videos didn’t do it for me. And I’m losing interest.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for you to unveil the mighty Oz behind the curtain.

Maybe if you say "they" a few more times?
 
hossblur said:
You didn't know that lifetime license also guaranteed lifetime weapon as well?
Click to expand...

This kind of comment makes me laugh.

These proposals change nothing for me. In the end, they probably benefit me more than anyone other than the 3800 others in this state like me.

So you can try to question my reasoning all you want. You look silly when you try to do it, however.

Have at it boys. Screw everyone else over all you want. I’m still going to hunt, and I guess I don’t need to waste any more time trying to defend your ability to do so too.
 
You all can continue to talk about restricting other kinds of hunters all you want. I’m kind of interested in this quote right here:

IMG_4356.jpeg


@Packout - tell us more about this. All these APRs and weapon restrictions don’t do much for this. This is what I want to talk about. Help us out. Explain to us what is happening that we don’t know about. How we growing more deer?
 
Some Of What I've Been Screaming For 45+ Years Starting To Sink In Nilly?

As Bad As I Thought The Deer Herd Had Got By 1980!

GAWD Would I Like To Go Back To It!

Here We Are Almost 45 Years Later & This Is The Best We Could Do?
 
elkassassin said:
Some Of What I've Been Screaming For 45+ Years Starting To Sink In Nilly?
Click to expand...

Bessy, I like messing around with you, but goodness sakes, if you think this is a new message from me then you’re the least lucid guy this side of President Biden!

How many times have you read a post from me saying we need to quit managing people and start managing deer? How many times have I told how dumb HELL RIGHT is because it’s all about people management and won’t grow deer? Good golly Ms Molly, you need to pay attention!

More deer is what we need, and that ain’t measured in inches. Clear enough for ya?
 
Vanilla said:
This kind of comment makes me laugh.

These proposals change nothing for me. In the end, they probably benefit me more than anyone other than the 3800 others in this state like me.

So you can try to question my reasoning all you want. You look silly when you try to do it, however.

Have at it boys. Screw everyone else over all you want. I’m still going to hunt, and I guess I don’t need to waste any more time trying to defend your ability to do so too.
Click to expand...

Thanks for defending the non loss of 3800 tags in the name of oppurtunity.

To be clear, you are advocating for weapon oppurtunity, not hunt oppurtunity.

I'll take the tag. If we go spears and sling shots, I'll still take the tag. I'd never bot hunt over a scope
 
Did You Miss Where I Said We Need To Grow More Deer Numbers On This Sight For The Last 25 Years?

Vanilla said:
Bessy, I like messing around with you, but goodness sakes, if you think this is a new message from me then you’re the least lucid guy this side of President Biden!

How many times have you read a post from me saying we need to quit managing people and start managing deer? How many times have I told how dumb HELL RIGHT is because it’s all about people management and won’t grow deer? Good golly Ms Molly, you need to pay attention!

More deer is what we need, and that ain’t measured in inches. Clear enough for ya?
Click to expand...
 
hossblur said:
Thanks for defending the non loss of 3800 tags in the name of oppurtunity.
Click to expand...

I will always defend the “non loss” of any tags. You see, I’m an opportunist. Something you used to claim you were too! I think deep down inside you realize how silly your take is on this. In time, you will admit you swung and missed here. Unfortunately, it will be too late. We’ll already be way too far down the path to come back.

I like seeing people get to hunt. It makes me happy to see people out doing this. Non loss of tags is a great thing!!! But once it gets down to 3800, don’t come crying to me!
 
Amen bessy! But I’ll take it a step further:

Quit placating selfish people that want an easier road to bigger deer and you won’t have to cut tags either.
 
My solution/5 year plan for the mule deer!!!!

Cut all Deer units tags in half! General and limited entry.

Charge 90$ per tag so that the division can still get their money! Or even charge 120$ for a tag to make up for my next recommendation.

Get rid of all late season hunts, for example.

HAMS hunts, extended archery, late muzzy hunts!
No doe hunts!!

I guarantee these measures will immediately start to improve the deer herd and hunt.

But instead of doing measures like this, that you know will work, and that will keep money in the bank for the DWR, they go on to propose these stupid measures that they cannot enforce or regulate in the field. It’s one thing to make these measures, but when you absolutely have no way of enforcing them in the field, they won’t work . Even if they did have a way of enforcing them in the field, these measures are barely a drop in the bucket to what needs to be done statewide. Not sure if you all noticed, but in this plan, they added 10 new hunts between antelope, deer and elk.

Even our limited entry units for the most part have been degraded to hopefully you can find 150 inch deer. Units like the once proud book cliffs, diamond Mountain, Vernon, San Juan, and many others have been downgraded to opportunity limited entry hunts.
The days of being able to hunt every year are over, everyone is going to have to be OK with only hunting every 3 to 4 years if you expect to have any type of quality or quantity-out there.
Cmon DWR for once do something that has a chance to improve things, instead of just doing things that make people happy and doing things to appease the crowd. Actually make some strong changes that will actually have an impact!!!!
 
My Tag Already Costs Me More Than That!

MuleyKiller11 said:
My solution/5 year plan for the mule deer!!!!

Cut all Deer units tags in half! General and limited entry.
Click to expand...
MuleyKiller11 said:
Charge 90$ per tag so that the division can still get their money! Or even charge 120$ for a tag to make up for my next recommendation.

Get rid of all late season hunts, for example.

HAMS hunts, extended archery, late muzzy hunts!
No doe hunts!!

I guarantee these measures will immediately start to improve the deer herd and hunt.

But instead of doing measures like this, that you know will work, and that will keep money in the bank for the DWR, they go on to propose these stupid measures that they cannot enforce or regulate in the field. It’s one thing to make these measures, but when you absolutely have no way of enforcing them in the field, they won’t work . Even if they did have a way of enforcing them in the field, these measures are barely a drop in the bucket to what needs to be done statewide. Not sure if you all noticed, but in this plan, they added 10 new hunts between antelope, deer and elk.

Even our limited entry units for the most part have been degraded to hopefully you can find 150 inch deer. Units like the once proud book cliffs, diamond Mountain, Vernon, San Juan, and many others have been downgraded to opportunity limited entry hunts.
The days of being able to hunt every year are over, everyone is going to have to be OK with only hunting every 3 to 4 years if you expect to have any type of quality or quantity-out there.
Cmon DWR for once do something that has a chance to improve things, instead of just doing things that make people happy and doing things to appease the crowd. Actually make some strong changes that will actually have an impact!!!!
Click to expand...
 
Vanilla said:
You all can continue to talk about restricting other kinds of hunters all you want. I’m kind of interested in this quote right here:

View attachment 162361

@Packout - tell us more about this. All these APRs and weapon restrictions don’t do much for this. This is what I want to talk about. Help us out. Explain to us what is happening that we don’t know about. How we growing more deer?
Click to expand...
Wait- you mean there is more to the Plan than how we hunt surplus bucks? I guess everyone bypassed those other parts....

So the idea is to have everyone who buys a deer point to attend a temple quarterly. It doesn't matter which temple, LDS, Krishna, Buddist, Temple of the Sun, etc.. Whatever each person feels is right for them- we don't want to take away anyone's choice. They will be asked to pray for what ever precipitation or conditions are needed. If we pray for snow and it snows too much then we can pray to stop the snow. We can pray for the optimal conditions to fawn, giving our fawns the best chance to survive. We can pray for rain. And we can pray that only the proper amount of bucks are killed during the season- this idea will allow us to issue more tags, without impacting the herd.

On the serious side-
Direct the UDWR to get involved with govt agencies to protect areas of development. Become more of the planning process.
Trying to get a similar program to wetlands where mitigating lands are used to offset developed areas.
Continue studying fawn survival, migration, etc.. to try to understand mule deer.
Emphasis on summer range habitat work and not as much on winter range.
Fencing education on how to fence with deer in mind.
Protect migration corridors.
Predator management.
Winter feeding and study.
Etc....

In the end, Mother Nature will be the one who decides if mule deer grow or if they die. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Bad winters, drought, and many other of the 1000 cuts are suppressing Utah deer. If we have optimal conditions for 5 years then the deer will be back- until the next weather event kills them. Trying to mitigate some of that loss is the goal- and there are parts of the Plan that attempt to do that.

Buck hunting is just a part of the plan, yet it is the only thing most people care about. Weapon restrictions are a valid try- in an attempt to provide a diversified age structure, while hunting at current GS levels. If people are less picky and harvest younger bucks, which have been shown to die at a higher rate than other deer, there may be a positive outcome to protect deer and opportunity. The idea may pass or it may fail.

I didn't read all the posts so maybe the above was already covered. I did read how some people will never trust valid studies, some are ok with a large portion of collateral damage/death of bucks to do aprs, and some think the UDWR would issue the same number of tags if there were 15 bucks and 100 doe or if there were 1500 bucks and 10000 doe. Wild times on MonsterMuleys.
 
slamdunk said:
I haven't read it myself, but I was told Colorado is going to all draw on their deer state wide, no more OTC.

As stated above, it's all over the west.
Click to expand...
Maybe I missed it due to blocking some people, but Colorado is already draw only for deer.

OTC implies I can take a group of guys to Walmart and we can all come out with tags. And pretty much unlimited in number. You can’t say that about leftover/ reissue. Don’t see how you can call that OTC. Limited, first come first served maybe but not OTC

They may change how returned tags are handled to where they go to the next person in line. But there will still always be some leftovers of tags that don’t sell out.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

39CF1278-093B-4351-8A40-E22D4318A741.jpeg
Top 3 Buck for muleyslayerwa
image elk.png
42D841CB-EB65-44BD-A1A6-4FFB902114AF.jpeg
3DEFA42C-0F64-443D-BBE9-83191F9F9192.jpeg
CA0A6D2B-4116-466D-99BF-06A933309EE5.jpeg
190CB485-E0EC-4265-AB43-A7FCC48161A5.png
IMG_20131230_075456_134.jpg
Screenshot_20230911_120936_Facebook.jpeg
We6OUJBoSxmKJoAhYMIDnA.jpg
150477.jpeg
IMG_9982.jpeg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom