Eastmans - Wrong Again!?

HuntElk4Fun · Feb 8, 2012

Is it just me or who else is sick of the incorrect MRS garbage coming out in the mags!? I just got the latest issue and began looking at Montana. They been touting a change in deadlines yet still put elk and deer due June 1st!!! Feel bad for the guys who miss the new March 15th deadline!

Next I hit New Mexico where I read all about the new sheep units, wait they missed it completely! I'm sure glad I get another mag who got that state right!!

This comes off the heels of reading Wyoming and Utah- 2 states I know and seeing mistake and omission after omission!

I've decided when it comes to accurate and timely information you get what you pay for and glad I pay more for the other!!!!

Irritating... can't say I trust any of the MRS information knowing what little research they seem to truly be putting into it!

carterj16 · Feb 8, 2012

lot of cut and paste from years prior.

TOPGUN · Feb 8, 2012

That's what happens when you lose all your best people over the last few years and are out trying to hunt to make TV shows and let cheap rookies that don't know squat put a magazine together! I get them for the stories and pictures guys are submitting and not for that MRS section!

nontypical · Feb 8, 2012

I kinda like it.Those magazines have been bad news for any good hunting spots out west. Odds are twice as bad(or worse)since the inception of those magazines.Too much info out there nowdays.Do your own homework!Don't rely on info from any mag!

never_satisfied · Feb 8, 2012

I subscribe to both of there magazine and probably always will
But I do agree on there MRS.It has gone downhill each of the last 3 years.

kingfish · Feb 8, 2012

LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-12 AT 07:02PM (MST)[p]I won't re-up on any of them!!! I miss the old Petersons hunting when Boddington was writing for them.....I'm done with these self described experts...Muley Crazy, Eastmans hunting, Trophy hunter....I'm done. I do just fine without them.....

Government doesn't fix anything and has spent trillions proving it!!!
Let's face it...After Monday and Tuesday, even the calender says WTF!

Tikka · Feb 8, 2012

X2 kingfish I've been out for a few years now!!!!!

TOPGUN · Feb 8, 2012

Kingfish---Craig is still Executive Field Editor for Petersen's Hunting and has one or more articles in eash month's issue!

Buckhunter1 · Feb 9, 2012

If you spend any time in a couple states and have hunted their big game you probably know those states much better than the couple of mags that give up all the popular units.I quit all the mags a long time ago as I KNOW where I want to hunt for about 10 lifetimes. BH1

30Hart · Feb 9, 2012

I think they serve a pretty good purpose. If you haven't hunted out West...it's a start. If you are a veteran, at the very least I want to know what areas to stay away from. For example, if your area suddenly shows up on their Top-10 list...obviously draw odds will take a dive...time to find a new spot. I want all the info I can get my hands on, sometimes its not black and white like their lists, but the other info that's beneficial to a seasoned hunter like myself. Either way I take everything with a grain of salt.

30Hart · Feb 9, 2012

Oh yes sorry, I think they blew it the last issue...Montana was all screwed up...no excuse for a professional publication. Instead of sending it out and making a disclaimer next month, they needed to work overtime, get it done, and send it out late if they had to.

gznokes · Feb 9, 2012

I agree and disagree.

On the one hand Eastmans did blow it on all the afore mentioned points. Also lots of typos and grammatical errors in the last issue. But I decided to cut them some slack bc they had the exclusive on that 290+ inch buck on the cover.

On the other hand, I will put their WY MRS up against any publication. The one this year was nuanced and complete and IMO very accurate. Eastmans does know WY very well. If they could do that for every State it would help readership and subscriptions.

The other thing about Eastmans is they do print updates in their newsletters. I'll bet $50 they update their NM errors before the deadline.

Ill even go so far as to say that the way they cover WY is a standard for the industry. I always feel like Huntin Fool is copping out when they don't cover from a residents perspective in UT. It's their own home State! It's their chance to shine!

I'm hope Huntin fool can keep its quality up since Garth is gone. I thought the discussion about UT's general units was barely passable.

>Oh yes sorry, I think they
>blew it the last issue...Montana
>was all screwed up...no excuse
>for a professional publication.
>Instead of sending it out
>and making a disclaimer next
>month, they needed to work
>overtime, get it done, and
>send it out late if
>they had to.

beech18 · Feb 10, 2012

I enjoy reading story's and looking at pictures of these magazines. The information they give I only use as a referance point. I talk to biologists and or game wardens for units before applying check on unit information, and have each game/fish/wildlife web sites book marked on my computer. However, In some cases, will see what each publication recommends for hunting area's and put in units that they do not recommend.

Deerlove · Feb 10, 2012

Where did Garth go??

HuntElk4Fun · Feb 10, 2012

gznokes-

Serious on WY?? I won't go into detail but how about unit 113?! Listed it closed. How about all of the Jackson units closed now they missed? Speaking of huntin fool- they got all of those right. I'm a Wyoming native and huntin fool did a great job compared to Eastmans

kilbuc · Feb 10, 2012

After being one of the original subscribers and submitting photos and having them published I dropped Eastmans several years ago. Had bad experience, lets just say they don't support local conservation groups.

from the "Heartland of Wyoming"

oilcan · Feb 10, 2012

HuntElk4Fun for the last two years in the Utah issue the Huntinfool has stated that you could return your Elk tag and get your points back but would not get a refund.WRONG you also get the refund.

Last i checked Utah is there home state.I subscribe to both but when i apply for a hunt i feel it's my responsability to make sure the info i use to make my decision is correct.If it's wrong who is gonna pay for it not Garth or Eastmans i will.

randyh1221gj · Feb 10, 2012

Saw this pop up today:
==============================

Eastmans' Hunting Journals

With EHJ 129 hitting maillboxes now, we want to remind you that the application deadline for MT is not correct. MT approved their deadlines two days after we went to print, so we didn't catch it in time. The new deadline is March 15, not June 1 as it states. The draw will be the same way except that you'll now apply for both the general and limited entry at the same time. If you draw the general, you'll be placed into the drawing for the limited entry based on which unit you selected. If you don't draw the limted entry and select the bonus point option, you'll receive one bonus point per species you applied for. Also, New Mexico released 5 new sheep units that were not listed in the charts in EHJ 129. Look for them in the upcoming EBJ 70 and in the Feb E-newsletter, as well as on here. Thanks!

HiMtnHntr · Feb 11, 2012

As has been noted, Eastman's and Huntin Fool do not offer much information that is not readily available to you from the various states. They just compile it and present it attractively. The information is not "mind-blowing" or some kind of a special secret.

As far as the commentary on areas in Eastman's goes, you are reading opinions that may or may not be based on personal experience. You have to take this information with a grain of salt. I don't pay much attention to this.

I look at Eastman's for one main reason: I like to see what they'll say about the states I hunt because, unfortunately, they do influence the draw odds.

How many times have we read on this very board that someone applied for an area just because Eastman's or Hunting Fool recommended it?

And, how many times have we read on this board that a hunting area is not all it's cracked up to be?

DonVathome · Feb 11, 2012

I LOVE eastmans, but yes I have noticed a lot of errors this year. Like all blue chip in WY!

To be honest HF seems to be more accurate overall but also costs a lot more.

Still love the magazines (both) but EHJ made a few big slips this year and I have not seen any attempt to correct it, yet.

I think both seriosly missed the ball informing their readers that huge chunks of AZ elk units 1 & 27 are CLOSED completely until 2013. You cannot set foot in them, period. Crowds hunters and gives elk a place to hide and there is no way to get to them.

TOPGUN · Feb 11, 2012

LAST EDITED ON Feb-11-12 AT 03:58PM (MST)[p]

I just got the newest magazine with the MRS for NM, Montana, and WY in it. I didn't know Montana had any OTC elk licenses. Is that a screwup on Eastmans part? Also, what are you referring to when you say "like all blue chips in WY"? I also can't figure out where Guy talks about the second and third choice people all being equal in the random draw regardless of whether a guy has PPs or not. I thought the way things are that say when you have PPs and go into the Special elk draw with an impossible first choice and the General Tag as your second that you are guaranteed that tag and keep your PPs when it goes to the random draw for your second chance. If what he stated is true and all are on equal grounds for the remaining tags in that draw, then you wouldn't be 100% sure to get the General Tag. So is that another mistake he has made or am I missing something?

Califelkslayer · Feb 11, 2012

My understanding of your WY question is that if you paid the Special price, didn't draw your 1st choice and did put General in as your second choice, you would go into a random drawing for the Special General tag with everyone else that did the same thing.

So if there are more tags than folks in this situation, you are guaranteed. And any remaining tags will go into the regular draw for General tags.

But it's possible that with the publicity this is receiving, there may be more applicants in this situation then tags.
Won't know for another couple of weeks.

THEELKREAPER · Feb 11, 2012

It does suck that some of the info was incorrect, but I know a lot of people that use the Colorado MRS section (where I'm from) and it does give them valuable info. I'm not saying mistakes area good thing or acceptable, but it does a great job making sense of things. I would much prefer reading through the MRS section than trying to make sense of the DOW website for most states....especially if I was coming from back east.

Everybody is human and mistakes happen...I'm sure they will fix it and get things worked out.

WapitiBob · Feb 11, 2012

LAST EDITED ON Feb-11-12 AT 11:22PM (MST)[p]Points are not used for 2nd and 3rd choices in WY.
So far, on the Special side there are more tags than applicants, therefor the GEN tags are guaranteed draw as 2nd choice.

TOPGUN · Feb 12, 2012

Thanks WB! I was pretty sure that was the case. Then I remembered the scenario we're talking about and forgot that the number of tags has always exceeded the applicants and made that possible, when it and other scenarios can change every year. I guess basicaly you can say that nothing is a sure thing until the draw is complete and your name shows as drawing a tag.

gznokes · Feb 12, 2012

Huntinelk4fun

I didn't audit the eastmans WY MRS report to the degree you did. I also agreed w the point that they had some glaring errors.

Here is what they do well
1. Zones of winter kill (easy to read maps)
2. Listing units w parallel general seasons (helpful for understanding pressure)
3. Listing the amount of public land for every unit
4. Breaking down their grade for every unit on the basis of trophy potential, pressure, etc (yes it's subjective but it's a cool way for them to rationalize their recommendations)
5. grading the physicality of the terrain

After I look at this then I verify it for myself and see if I agree. I think they have a great format for WY. I wish they'd do the same for other States.

llamapacker · Feb 13, 2012

Eastmans does a great job for the price of a subscription. Sign up for the e-newsletter as well and you will always be current.

It always amazes me to see what some hunters expect from these outfits. Newsflash - you are only getting the same "secret" information as about 50,000 other hunters! It is a definite help in unfamiliar areas, but if you really think you can just pick one of the top units in any publication's lists and magically have B+C animals wandering through your camp every day, then I have a bridge to sell you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, knows where every large buck / bull/ ram, etc., lives in any given state. And each year people take great animals out of areas listed as fair or marginal in these publications. In general, these publications do a good job of ranking units against others in the state. This doesn't mean somebosy else doesn't have a honey hole elsewhere that might be better. Or that you will shoot a great animal in the top unit. If you look at the data from any of the "great" units, you will see that many people each year in these units shoot mediocre animials, at least by record book standards. And many of these same people had wonderful hunts of a lifetime, and they are satisfied with the experience. What makes you happy may not turn on others, and vice versa. Off my soap box.... Well, maybe not...

I tend to read these type threads as falling into one of three major categories:
1. The OP wants to inflate their own ego by saying how much better / more knowledgable they are then the professionals. A close corollary is jealousy directed towards tearing down others.
2. An attempt to slam the competition to somehow drive business to their competitors.
3. An attempt to manipulate the business into providing some additional service free of charge.
A minor additional category:
4. The rare case when someone is pointing out the faults of a business to ensure others aren't misled.

I'm really not talking about the original poster on this thread. I don't know him or her at all, and can see that he may be in fact trying to warn others in this case. There have just been so many threads lately complaining about and slamming some really reputable groups that I decided to vent.
There, I feel better now...
Bill

TOPGUN · Feb 13, 2012

Thanks Mike, I mean Bill, LOL!!!

Outdoors · Feb 13, 2012

Eastmans decided a few years ago to spread the MRS between 2 magazines as a way to pump up revenues. You suddenly needed to subscribe to 2 mags rather than 1. Costs me more now yet the MRS quality has fallen.

We can argue quality of a unit but the deadline is cut and dried. No excuse for Eastmas making a mistake with a critical data point. If the application deadline is not important then don't list it in the MRS. If you list it, proofread it and cross-check for accuracy.

TOPGUN · Feb 13, 2012

LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-12 AT 08:47PM (MST)[p]That was about as sorry a comment as I can think of coming from someone who is supposed to be a professional! In fact, that post alone tells me exactly what you are and that's a pompous azzhole!!!

Also, the post preceeding yours was incorrect in that all you need to do to get all the MRS sections that Eastmas put out is to go online and register with your subscriber number for either of the magazines you get. You are then privy to all the MRS information that goes into both magazines. There is way too much information to only put the MRS into one or two months when each magazine is bimonthly.

greatwestern · Feb 15, 2012

LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-12 AT 11:21PM (MST)[p]Eastmans' is ONE of the most literally incompetent publications out there...the MRS section is just absurd, which is a good thing! Yea, lead the sheep to false waters, surely! I for one certainly don't mind

Petersen's Hunting borders on being a newsstand tabloid anymore, Boddington lost his touch quite a while ago...haven't read anything captivating, or even enjoyable by him for quite some time. The magazine itself is pretty much garbage in its current form. I just read Craig's latest (yes, buffalo...AGAIN) article in Sports Afield, and it was pretty much deplorable, despite the elementary 'twist' he tried to put on it.

There are really *no* good sporting publications available that cater to discerning readers anymore...most everything has gone the way of either 'pop culture', 'executive class', or in the case of Eastman's and such ilk, false and over-glorified 'blue-collar' redundance; replete with abyssmal writing and editing skills.

Also strongly disagree with whomever claimed Hanes was one of the best Eastman's ever had. That poor dude is a pitiful blowhard of the absolute greatest proportion.

But then of course, we have Western Hunter, whom could out-compete poor ol Cameron by virtue of sheer numbers...

edit---*Not Many*...consistency-wise anyway

delmag1942 · Feb 15, 2012

I sure wish that the username Garthcarter would be blocked on here. I just reviewed all of the posts and there I am sure it is not "the" Garth Carter.

TOPGUN · Feb 15, 2012

After making that last post in response to the GC one, I got to thinking the same thing! If it was really "the" GC, he would have to ba an awfully stupid individual to make posts like that and others under that username. I should have not responded and just sent a PM telling him to knock it off or members would ask Founder to deepsix him.