Committee Question----Help me understand

[adamsoa]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-10 AT 05:46PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-10 AT 05:28?PM (MST)

I have a question about the Elk Committee proposal. They have recomended reducing the LE Elk tag numbers by 600 tags. They state that the reason for this is to increase the age class of the elk and make it a better hunt.
I am just a damn basin heathan but I dont understand the why and the proof for doing this. The DWR just released the data on the age class for these units. Almost every unit in the state is above age objective. The majority of them are at or above the new objectives. Can someone explain using the given data why we are decreasing the numbers of tags and why.

According to the DWR's numbers the age classes of elk in almost every unit are EXCEEDING those set out by the DWR.

We want bigger elk isnt the answer. IF THE OBJECTIVES ARE BEING MET AND THESE ARE BASED ON A THREE YEAR AVERAGE why are we reducing the tags. What is the fact based reason for this decision? Did someone just pull it out of his a$$?????

Success rates are also not an answer to this question. If we are going to say that we are linking tags to age class then they should be linked to age class.

They have offered NO reasoning to support their proposal. If they are just making up numbers based on arbitrary thoughts just say "we know better than anyone else what is good for the state and we will do it because we think its best". Dont tell us that we have linked tag numbers to age classes.....which have stayed basically the same for the last three years.... and that due to this we are making a huge drop in tag numbers.

Here are the numbers that they released. Swbuckmaster did some homework on these numbers and whether or not they are at or above both the current and proposed age objectives

respect my authorita

 

[HELL_ON_WHEELS]

Remember not to forget about the stupidity of the Spike hunts/kills in LE Units.
Just when you think you've seen every trick possible by the dwr up pops something that'll blow your mind.
piss on their new age objectives!

 

[swbuckmaster]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-10 AT 06:35PM (MST)[p]this data is based on the NEW AGE OBJECTIVE. So based on their own data they still need to issue more tags but they are cutting tags

here is the rest of the data they all should have been looking at.
they ignore the data and they cut tags on every unit to increase quality. when you have 99% success rate weapon in the rut is it a surprise the cream/quality is shot out!

wait until the void is created by these spike tags in a few years if it is hard to swallow these tag cuts!

you have to look at quality like a basket ball coach looks at a play ground full of kids. If you wanted to select a 7 footer out of the crowd you would want a big base of kids to select from. The larger the school the better your chances. Now lets say the kids all get n1h1 in the 9th grade and 50 percent died "kind of like our spike hunt" as a basket ball coach wanting a 7 footer your chances just went down. now compound this by having other schools coming in and recruiting your next tallest kids. As a coach what are you left with when this class graduates?

A bunch of fat, slow, short kids!

 

[HELL_ON_WHEELS]

So you agreeing with me sw?

 

[HELL_ON_WHEELS]

A couple of them units with 4.0 & 4.5 averages.
Nice management there,open units could be better than that!

 

[elkantlers]

>A couple of them units with
>4.0 & 4.5 averages.
>Nice management there,open units could be
>better than that!


Not hardly, I remember the time Utah had open units. You were darn lucky to see a bull, let alone a big bull.

I am glad to see them drop the tag numbers. I as well as others will like to see more mature bulls running the hills.

 

[swbuckmaster]

>So you agreeing with me sw?
>

lol the real question is are you agreeing with me?

for the life of me I cant understand why we have a 99% success rate weapon in the rut and then have to ask ourselves why the quality has been shot out! The numbers on this sheet are there saying that the units were at age objective for several years in a row so where are the big bulls now? My theory is genetics plays more of a role then people think. My theory is the good ones get shot out soon as they open their rutty little mouths

hellonwheels you saw my buck from a couple of years ago. That buck was 3 years old. I should have let it live!

Archery is a year round commitment!!

 

[adamsoa]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-10 AT 07:45PM (MST)[p]You as well as others would like to see more mature bulls running around in the hills? What are you talking about. Did you read any of the post above??? With one or two exceptions ALL OF THE UNITS are at objectives. The MAJORITY of the bulls killed on these units are MATURE. Even with the tag numbers being proposed, the MAJORITY of the units are meeting these standards. Most of these bulls are as big as they are going to get.

*****However, my question was, what is the relationship between tag numbers and age class. If you say that we are going to base tag numbers on age class, how can you reduce tag numbers with out a coresponding drop in age class. This seems arbitrary. Next year will we say just pick a number that sounds good and we'll go with that.

The hard numbers say that there has been almost no change in the age class of elk the last three years. In this time frame we had the Spider bull and tons of other giant bulls harvested.

This year there arent as many giants killed and look out chicken little the sky is falling. But guess what???? The age class is still the same. The bulls taken this year arent any younger then they were last year. So the argument that we dont have any MATURE bulls doesnt hold water. Same age class of bulls being killed for most of the last decade. A 330 bull isnt going to become a 380 from 7 to 8 years old.







respect my authorita

 

[elklvr]

With killing spikes, there are not going to be as many elk moving into the older age class in the near future. Therefore, there will be less opportunity to hunt a mature bull, thus the reduction in numbers? To balance things out, there has to be some take wherever there is a give, .
I would rather of had the opportunity to hunt mature bulls, but with the decision to allow open spike hunting on the limited entry units, there will not be as many mature bulls on the units to maintain the current number of permits for the older aged bulls, until the elk population increases, when and if the elk population increases that will allow more tags to be issued. Let's all hope that the correct decisions can be made to limit the amount of cow that are taken, so the herd can increase quickly and allow more opportunity for all of the hunters that would love to chase big bulls.

 

[one_dryboot]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,

Seems to me almost every unit in the state kicks out 350+ bulls every year with most units kicking a handfull of 360 to 380 and some 400 bulls every year, year after year after year.
To say "Quality" has been shot out is like saying Obama is white.

I really dont care what they do with tag numbers. If they cut tags it wont effect me mostly because I put in for a "Lesser" unit with a muzzy that wont take fifty years to draw. Yep it is a unit that is 4-5 year old age objective and they still kill 370+ bulls on a regular basis, but you better have your hiking boots on.

 

[Max_1]

Honestly I don't think that the spike hunts will have the effect that people think. I hunted the spike elk on the Manti for ten years. Every year I saw more spikes when I hunted it and for every spike I saw there were at least three branch antlered bulls that I saw. Three years ago I only hunted it for one day and saw one spike and seven bulls. The smallest being a young 6X5. If spike hunting hurts them so bad why is the age objective where it needs to be and why are the success rates so high on the Manti? By the way I agree that this plan has some very visible flaws.

 

[HELL_ON_WHEELS]

I never said Units were not at 'NEW' objectives!
A SAID!
A couple years ago you'd see smaller Bulls on average taken off/out of LE Units if the 'NEW' age objectives were put in place a couple of years after they were put in place.
Well hot damn!
I guess you & people like yourself didn't notice there wasn't as many Trophy Bulls taken in 09 compared to previous years?
I'm gonna say this one more time,you listening?
With these 'NEW' spike 'opportunists' hunts in effect as they were in 09 in LE units you'll see in the near future with day & night differences from what they used to be known for,mark it down in your Diary.
I know several Damn Well known Guides/Friends that seen a big difference in numbers of Quality Bulls 'Seen' & 'Harvested' in several of the top producing LE units in 09,this ain't 'HearSay' this is Guys that know them units as good as anybody,not to burst your bubble but some of these guys know the units better than any Biologist in the State.
You ain't going to believe me & that's fine,have NUNYA chime in on this & let him give you some piece of mind!
I've said it many times in the last couple of years:"It won't be long & a 340"-350" Bull will be a Big Bull again but Oh Boy at least some of the Opportunists will be happy,Notice I said 'Some'
You couldn't satisfy them even if you let them kill every animal in the State.
Some of you boys need to spend a little more time in the field & a little less time sucking everything the dwr says to heart!
Oh did I mention,Have a Nice Day!

 

[blazingsaddle]

Let me say first- I do not agree with the tag reduction. But...

SW you said it yourself, they have shot out the top end, The quality is slipping. Why? Because of the rifle hunt in the rut.
In order to keep that quality- they have to cut tags. How can they cut tags when they are over objective? Especially when they said they would issue MORE tags when they are over objective. Easy....raise the age objective!

According to the committee, the majority of the people want a rifle rut hunt for big bulls. And that is what they are managing for. Right or wrong. Quality is number one. The committee believes that our opportunity is found in the spike, cow, and open bull hunts.
It boils down to personal defintions of "opportunity" and "quality"
If they mange for what the people supposably want- they have no choice but to do what they are doing.

 

[yak4fish]

Doesn't look like quality has been shot out to me. Study the chart a little closer you will see that the units that are going down in 3 year average are supposed to be, as they are over age class. Take monroe as a sample 5-6 objective 7.7 three year average, trend is towards less quality. Its supposed to be!I wonder what the bull to cow ratio is on Monroe?

 

[Silentstalker]

This discussion is tiring! It goes on and on every year. Big bulls killed every year, every unit over objective, and still we raise the objective? Ridiculous.

The committee overlooked what the public input requested which was a balance between awesome premium units and some medium range units. There is not a thing wrong with having units to meet several groups of interest. It is a sad day when a small group of trophy hunters (like most of us on here are)decide we know what is best and put a strangle hold on permits.

Hopefully someday we will manage based on biology and not the dropping or raising of the value of conservation tags.

 

[rutnelk]

sw, if having the rifle hunt during the rut has "shot out" all of the big bulls, how do you explain the explosion of 375 plus bulls that Utah has produced in the past 6 or 7 years? The rifle hunt has been during the rut for at least 15 years. How did we ever get big bulls on almost every unit in the state if these vile, filthy rifle hunters shot them out back in 1995? And every year since? According to your "logic" ha ha, we would have never gotten the quality elk that we have had in the past 10 years, right? Sure the number of 375 plus bulls has been down the past 2 years, but the state is still producing quality elk on most units; with the rifle hunt during the rut.

 

[justr_86]

Animals go on up trends and down trends and there is nothing that can be done to have total control over it. What the state is doing with elk is working. IT DOES NOT NEED CHANGED. Look as far back as the data goes and you will see inclines and declines. People try to make changes to keep money and get in huge debates over it. Nothing is going to change but opportunity going in the toilet.

NO GUTS, NO STORY!!

 

[woodruffhunter]

I keep seeing and hearing about "Harvest Statistics"

Has, or will the UDWR post the actual SIZE (spike, six point.....statistics for each of the LE units?

 

[adamsoa]

No size just average age of animals harvested.

respect my authorita

 

[swbuckmaster]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-10-10 AT 11:31AM (MST)[p]>sw, if having the rifle hunt
>during the rut has "shot
>out" all of the big
>bulls, how do you explain
>the explosion of 375 plus
>bulls that Utah has produced
>in the past 6 or
>7 years? The rifle
>hunt has been during the
>rut for at least 15
>years. How did we
>ever get big bulls on
>almost every unit in the
>state if these vile, filthy
>rifle hunters shot them out
>back in 1995? And every
>year since? According to
>your "logic" ha ha, we
>would have never gotten the
>quality elk that we have
>had in the past 10
>years, right? Sure the
>number of 375 plus bulls
>has been down the past
>2 years, but the state
>is still producing quality elk
>on most units; with the
>rifle hunt during the rut.
>

lets put this in numbers so the guys that are slow or dont understand can follow.

you want to hunt the pavant early hunt and you have invested 10 years into this hunt already! I think everyone on this site would agree 10 years is a long time to wait.

Well if you are the last tool in the drawer to be selected for a tag it is going to take you another 54 years till you draw. this is beyond excessive and just one example of the problem.

I cant teach this class because the curriculum I am teaching is over your heads but I'm going to try for the sake of the guys that have so many years invested and don't understand they are getting the bone.

They just cut your tags and cut the tags in the rest of the state on 93% of the units. They are managing every unit like the pavant! if you guys cant see that killing the spikes and managing these units for these type of ages is asinine your up in the night.

what was wrong with this units this year. why was the quality down! the age of the bulls on these units were higher than last year! the data shows it was. so don't you think genetics plays a higher roll then age?

so tell me that the quality wasn't shot out "meaning over the last few years with all the tags given out the younger bulls that showed any type of quality were shot leaving a bunch of 10-13 year old 320 bulls!" the rifle in the rut is way too effective on vulnerable rutting animals. I would never work for deer so why do you guys think it works for elk is beyond me?

Archery is a year round commitment!!

 

[huntin100]

Good comments SW and others.

The reason why the ave age limits have not gone down in most units, and the quality of 370 plus bulls in many units have is simple.

Just like Dax, (a bioligist said)and others, MOST bulls 7-9 yrs old will NEVER become 350 plus bulls.

The reason why quality has gone down the past two years, is we have killed a lot of upper end bulls 7-9 yrs old. But the DATA says there are still a lot of 7-9 yr old bulls that are 320 to 350.

I have hunted a lot of LE units the past few years. No question. The number of 380 plus bulls have declined.

The question is? Do we try to save a significant number of bulls to live 7-8 years old. Even though, maybe only 2-3 out of the 10 bulls have the genetic potiential to grow 350-360 plus.

You have to have a big surplus of 7-9 yr old bulls to produce what Utah used to produce in 2006-2007 yrs.

It's not worth it to me, or our kids. It's not the best for our elk herds.

Just because many of us trophy hunters, including myself, only want to kill 350 plus bulls.

 

[rutnelk]

Now you are arguing two different aspects. I didn't say anything about tag numbers or how long it takes to draw. I only replied to the fact that you blame EVERYTHING on the rifle hunt being in the rut and you always have.

You said "for the life of me I cant understand why we have a 99% success rate weapon in the rut and then have to ask ourselves why the quality has been shot out! This has nothing to do with tag numbers or how long it takes to draw, right? Or is this over your head? And by the way, 99% is a little high. The average success on the rifle hunt in 2009 was 77%.

I know that all of the archery hunters only shoot 1 rag horn per unit, per year, so they can't be contributing AT ALL to this "shot out" problem you refer to. I know, I know, I know, there are more rifle tags than other the other weapons so more bulls are killed during the rifle hunt than the other two hunts. But don't fool yourself by thinking that ONLY the rifle hunt has an impact on the "shot out" situation.

Here was my suggestion in the "rifle hunt in the rut" thread:

How about these dates?
LE Any Weapon - 8/15 - 9/15
LE Archery - 9/16 - 9/24
LE Muzzy - 9/25 - 10/3

Everybody should be happy with these dates right? The rifle hunt is out of the rut. The achery hunt is in the rut. The success rate on the rifle hunt will go down down because this is the hardest time to hunt elk, right? More rifle tags would be the result of lower success. And muzzy guys, I'll give you more tags just because you're nice and don't beeotch as much as the archery hunters, ok, and rifle hunters. So now everyone is happy with these dates because I just accomplished everything that everyone wanted (more tags for everyone and the rifle hunt out of the rut). Let's make it happen.

 

[swbuckmaster]

>Now you are arguing two different
>aspects. I didn't say
>anything about tag numbers or
>how long it takes to
>draw. I only replied
>to the fact that you
>blame EVERYTHING on the rifle
>hunt being in the rut
>and you always have.

Rut
You don't understand me in the least little bit or you simply don't get anything I'm saying. It is my fault because it doesn't come of very well on typing.

If I could hunt every year with a rifle during the rut for deer and elk, then be able to hunt trophy animals I would. I would like to see everyone be able to. But you and I all know this is a pipe dream and something has to give. With the way it is right now tens of thousands of Utah rifle hunters will never be able to hunt elk on a LE unit. The point creep data shows this. This is a failed system!!

I am a trophy hunter to the core. I also enjoy to hunt equally as much. I don't care if I shoot something either. If I did it is just icing on the cake.

This is the entire reason I picked up bowhunting in this state. It's not because I think bowhunting is the shizz or Im an elitist bowhunter and rifle hunters are all rednecks and wrong. If I had to hunt the southern unit for those dink deer I would go back to bass fishing. I have seen the light! I have been educated on what type of opportunity can be given out and what type of hunt you can have, what type of quality exists in this state with all this piss poor management! I also know there has to be a balance, I would never cut the rifle out of the picture. I enjoy rifle hunting more than I do bow hunting!! bow hunting is way harder and requires more work! I am not saying we are better people! That is you putting words in my mouth!!!!

The butt plugg bonus point issue and the quality issue will not be solved with a shift of hunt dates.

it will not be solved with spike tags being issued.

it will not be solved with attitudes where you fight hunter against hunter. There has to be a balance.

The best example of a balanced plan I can come up with is Arizona's plan! It is the best example I can find for opportunity and quality. You don't have rifle rut hunts. you have to use your points and pick which sex you want to hunt cows or bulls. this means meat hunters will have to settle with putting a cow on the ground instead of a spike! sure there are units in arizona where it will take you many years to hunt but the whole state is not managed that way!

Archery is a year round commitment!!

 

[Prism]

It's not talked about much, but one of the main reasons quality has slipped is because of the simple fact we've got killing big bulls down to a science. Hunters are a lot more selective than they use to be and take it a lot more serious.

The late hunts have also put the hurt on the big bulls, on some units I'd bet that the average bull is quite a bit larger late vs early. I know I'd take a late tag over 90% of the early hunts.

 

[treedagain]

+1 prism....I am glad someone has a little common sense around here...

 

[adamsoa]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-10-10 AT 04:34PM (MST)[p]It also doesnt help that we have Guide mania going on out there. I try to look in on both deer and elk whenever I get the chance, I love to scout. However, with everyone wanting a 400 inch bull and 10,000 dollar finders fee's the biggest and best bulls dont have a chance.
Some of the bigger outfitters are worse at it than others but they have LOTS of guides out from July through the hunts finding and living with the biggest bulls/bucks on the mountains. Statewide I'd bet that there are hundreds of guys on the clock looking for the big one. Its gotten to be a big business.
There is a difference between me out scouting on the weekends and other times when I get a chance (though I would have my friends help) and the one guy that basically has an organization on the books looking for his big bull. They are getting paid to find the big ones.

The guides/outfitters have a reputation to uphold so they make a living finding the biggest and the best.

The DIY guys want and to the same thing, but they usually do it infrequently. The Pro's do it year after year and are good at it. You hardly ever see the guides advertise "look at the tiny bull we shot". Its the high percentage of Monster's that bring in the money and they are good at finding and harvesting them.

That was not a knock on Guides and outfitters. Just saying that they are very good at what they do and it does take a toll on the superior gened animals.



respect my authorita

 

[hoytme]

Raising age objectives, AGAIN, will not increase the number of high end bulls on a unit. In fact, it likely will lower the number. Here's why, when you target a small segment of the herd, that segment with end up with an even smaller percentage of the herd population. It's like 3-point antler restrictions for deer, if you can only kill 3-point or bigger deer, those are the deer that are going to get killed. If you put the target on B&C caliber bull, and tell hunters this is what they must/should kill to be a 'real' hunter, they will kill most of that caliber of bull each year leaver FEWER B&C bulls alive for the ensuing years creating a void in the desired class of bull. As was mentioned, Utah elk hunters have figured out how to hunt big bulls, at least in these very controlled environments. The direct results of having rifle hunts in the rut and when most of the big bulls are on winter range, along with having most of the tags issued to the most effective weapon during the two most vulnerable times of the year for big bulls is the dog chasing it's own tail. You could raise the age objectives to 15 and it wouldn't ensure better quality. All it ensures is that the undesired bulls will continue to take up space on LE units, pass on their genetics, and die of old age. Get the bulk of the tags out of the two most vulnerable times of the year for big bulls, and get the herds better balanced with fewer excess bulls running around hurting recruitment of new potentially B&C caliber bulls.