SFW growing elk to 80, 000

T

TheElitehornhunter

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-10 AT 04:51PM (MST)[p]I took this from another post from the SFW koolaid drinking meeting. SFW wants to give landowners more tags to keep them happy.

Elk Management was discussed briefly and basically they want to work with the landowners to trade grazing rights for elk. They are working on how to make this happen with the ranchers. One proposal discussed was the idea of giving them some landowner tags for compensation in the short term so they can grow the elk herd to 80,000. Appears as though it needs to be a trade-off or a win-win in order for the ranchers to even consider it.


I think SFW should use their own tags that they get to sell for high dollars to landowners instead of taking tags that do not belong to SFW and giving them to landowners. It's their brillant idea so have them put up their own tags first.

We all know that we won't hit the 80,000 elk because of elk crop damages during the winter months. More elk means fewer deer. SFW will also be killing more spikes and cows to keep more bulls on the units. The public tags won't increase because Don knows that 1 tag that sells for $10,000 supports his interest better than putting this same tag in the public draw for $280

SFW uses their silver tongue to sell it much like Obama, but it's nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-10 AT 06:11PM (MST)[p]Ok!!! you guys need to understand ranchers are trying to make a living, if there are more elk on there property, meaning they have to run fewer cattle/sheep its gonna hurt them financially! they arent being greedy. if you lose grazing for just 20 cattle a year that is close to +/- $10,000 a year from losing calf crop (depending on the market! which last 500lb steer we sold was $1.15 lb) (ie average give or take $1 a lb for a 500lb steer x 20 steers= 10,000). wake up they have to be compensated for there loss quit being so damn ignorant. would you wanna give up 10,000 so people can hunt more freaking elk?!

Not to mention landowner means its there freaking land! not a blm grazing permit!!! there own private land!!! elk tear fences up eat as much of the same food as cattle. landowners need compensation. what dont you guys get out of the word landowner??? GEEZ!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-10 AT 06:16PM (MST)[p]theox,

To clarify, the SFW proposal is not to just compensate private land owners, but also those with public lands grazing permits.

So what you're saying is that my public wildlife has to take a back seat to cattle grazing on MY PUBLIC LANDS?

Really?

Thats your idea of "multiple use"...public lands grazing gets priority over wildlife?

I can see compensating a private land owner if elk are causing him undue damage on PRIVATE property...thats one thing.

But, when the taxpayers of the United States are gracious enough to allow a rancher to graze their cow/calf pair for $1.35 a month on public lands...I cant feel sorry for them if others feel elk, deer, etc. should be given priority on that public land.

I believe that cattle grazing should only be allowed on public lands if there is surplus forage, if it done correctly and/or enhances forage potential, etc.

Wildlife needs equal consideration on public lands...period. Unfortunately, they dont...and thats tragic.
 
so these people that have had these grazing permits for years and years genreration to generation should just be taken away there way of living so you can not only hunt but also do everything else on it 4 wheelers etc? who do you think keeps the water going on these allotments? blm sure as heck doesnt do the upkeep! every year we are up fixing water lines, troughs,ripping in new water lines making sure the water is still flowing so the cattle can drink which inturn is water for all the wildlife too! so in these tough economical times when its barely even feesible to ranch cattle anymore you wanna put more people out of work? sounds to me that you guys are the greedy ones,not the ranchers! im sorry as much as i love hunting if it means ranchers need to get there blm grazing permits stripped and loss of income for these hard working people im gonna be on the cattle industry side.
 
also did you know the mustang association owns blm grazing permits?they run freaking wild protected untouched mustangs on some allotments in the sw desert unit.id sure as heck rather have beef grazing public land than worthless mustangs
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-10 AT 06:57PM (MST)[p]ranchers do a lot more for your public lands than you do.you also wanna hunt on it for free when cattlemen pay to use it regardless of the costs. they also pay taxes too, its there public land too. my family has run cattle on their range for over 80 years, before allotments were even created and ranging up there was unregulated. were this range was no mans land people didnt hardly even venture to these parts back then.
 
Who do you think sits on the wildlife board?
well they have a few cattlemen representing the cattle.

this is just one more way SFW can pay them back for all their votes in favor of the SFW proposals.

If it smells like a skunk what is it?

politics suck!!

4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
Not gonna jump in on the cattlemans/landowner debate (although I could) but getting more elk is easy. I guarantee, SFW will have less to do with it than they would have you believe. If the habitat is there, and the ranchers get paid to let 'em eat their haystacks in the winter, elk are very prolific animals. However, you mule deer hunters are gonna be the ones to suffer. And don't expect every bull harvested to be a monster.






"Sometimes letting the cat outta the bag is a lot easier than puttin' it back in".
 
I have to go with theox on this one. Granted the AUM allotments on fed lands are way to low however who deserves to reap the profits from fed managed land? Would you rather see corporate type wildlife management groups making big bucks pimping tags or hard working ranching families making a living as they have struggled to do for decades?

It really has nothing to do with the average sportsman. It all boils down to who makes the biggest profit.

Slick
 
years and years genreration to generation . thats the problem. you have had your turn at low cost grazing.. now you think we all owe you a free ride. we dont. if you dont own enough land to feed your livestock . maybe you should try somthing else.....
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-10 AT 11:27PM (MST)[p]> years and years genreration to
>generation . thats the problem.
>you have had your turn
>at low cost grazing.. now
>you think we all
>owe you a free ride.
>we dont. if you dont
>own enough land to feed
>your livestock . maybe you
>should try somthing else.....

Ok so being the first settlers in an area means nothing? It means that we have no right to it you have all the right?my time is up? my time hasent even started my parents and uncle are currently i possesion of this stuff. hmm what a smart comment tho! oh and wait we owe you something because all of a sudden you wanna hunt it, so we need to get our cattle off? the cattle that have ranged over this area long before the elk were even introduced into it?is that the land you want? all of a sudden cattlemen are the enemy,you mean the many of which are also fellow hunters? the same ones that kill predators to keep there livestock safe which in turn helps your wildlife? you want to fight against those people?

who thinks they need a free ride from you? who the H are you that needs to give a rancher a free ride? so what do you do for work?

to your land comment pretty sure we have a good chunk of private land,and which you must have to own grazing permits but thats beside the point.
also we have done habitat work on some of our private in which wildlife also gain. we have tons of antelope on a majority of our private with also some elk and a few deer.
Also we are only allowed a certain amount of aum's on the grazing permits.its limited meaning the cattle dont eat everything on public land.the amount of aum that are now on public land since these allotments have started has been nearly cut in Half as it is currently sitting!did you know that? the elk mustangs antelope deer have there fair share and have gained land over the past several decades from cattle permits being cut!but you didnt know that did you?! your no diff than someone sitting in new york that is uneducated about hunting wanting hunting rights ripped away from you, you stating that its your turn to have the land is ignorant and plain stupid. its no different than a cattlemen grazing his cattle, versus you grazing your elk! (makes no difference to a non hunter)other than you dont do a dang thing but sit on oyur butt! are you gonna go fire up your bulldozer and rip in water lines to improve water? are you gonna bring your backhoe when a water line breaks so you can fix it? or you gonna sit on your butt complaing to the blm to fix it? are you gonna spend your time keeping elk off burn areas for two years so they establish good feed? the thing is your the one that wants something for free! your tax money doesnt do chit it pays the fat cats in washington to give you stimulous plans that dont work. it pays for people that are unemployed. how much of your tax dollars are hitting the dirt on public land?
 
ha you think ranchers are the poachers? really? huh weird? there are always a few bad apples,but ive watched an over 80 inch antelope all summer long before feeding on our hayfield in which several times i could have killed him from ten yards while cutting hay or running equipement. we have had to stop our farm equipment to allow them to get ou t of there bed to avoid running them over. ive had nice bull elk within a hundred yards while working on the field. etc the point is saying an comment like that is plain ignorant. you think the few bad apple poachers are only ranchers ?
 
I wouldn't call them bad apples. And I don't have it out for Landowners being from a land owning family myself. Just a funny comment is all. And its true. Like it or not. I happen to have a real contempt for predators. I think they account for far more unwanted kill then poachers ever had. I don't condone poachers. Just plain cheating and against the law. On the other hand I think land owners and lease holders do and have the ability to help game. As you mentioned predator control and watering. I believe their animals can be used to help range for deer. So IMO landowners and lease holder should and do have a sense of entitlement. And Land owners should have Rights to tags not have to be bribed. I heard said dozens of times on my great uncles land. Can you believe those aren't our deer. I have to agree.
 
Just a quick thought...

Why not figure out what % the 100 tags will be of the available public tags and take the same % away from the conservation and convention tags? The conservation organizations WILL get a piece of the 100 tags. Some of the additional 100 tags will be sold to/through conservation organizations. To me, it seems like the public losses tags whenever some special interest group wants a handout but the conservation tags never get touched. The conservation organizations want the general public to foot the bill (in their tag allotments) to benefit the conservation organizations. The conservation organizations take a minimum of 5% of the tags. If the elk herd is raised to 80,000 they will get 5% of the 80,000 but only the public tag allotments will have greased the wheels for the conservation tag increase. I would love to see the conservation organizations give a few tags as well. Of course they would be giving their tags as an investment for the benefit and future of wildlife but I would be willing to bet they won't give a single tag.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-10 AT 11:54AM (MST)[p]theox,

I'm not asking to end public lands grazing...only asking that grazing be done in a manner that doesnt hurt the integrity of MY PUBLIC LANDS. Its not happening though, over 70% of all BLM lands are being over-grazed....over 90% of riparian areas are in poor health due to over-grazing.

Those are facts, directly from the BLM.

I'm also asking that MY PUBLIC WILDLIFE be given EQUAL consideration on MY PUBLIC LANDS.

Your private land is yours to do with and manage as you see fit, and I fully respect and support your private property rights. I wont be asking you to do anything with that land that you dont want to do...its yours.

You showing the owners of public lands...the United States Taxpayers, some equal consideration and respect on the lands THEY OWN should also happen. I dont care how long you've had grazing rights...you dont own the land, you dont control anything but the number of cows you're allowed to graze there. The public has an absolute and total right to direct management anyway they see fit...and that includes asking federal land managers to kick your a$$, and cattle, off public lands. Not saying it will happen, but theres more than a few people who want that to happen...and I cant say they dont have valid reasons.

Myself, I think there is a compromise to be reached, a place where proper grazing can happen that limits impacts...and even ENHANCES the range quality for cattle, as well as wildlife potential. I've seen it work...I've been involved with Resource Management for over 2 decades. I've personally seen the good, the bad, and the ugly in public lands grazing.

And, to be sure, I'm not blaming the current situation entirely on public lands ranchers...the agencies and the public also are equally to blame. The public has not demanded accountability and the agencies have not complied with many of their own regulations. The ranchers arent blameless either. Its ridiculous for a rancher to treat their public land alotments any differently than they do their private...and I can assure you, that happens nearly across the board. I rarely see private lands that are in the same sad condition as most public.

To restate, I believe there is a solution out there, one that can make things better for wildlife and still allow for cattle grazing. But, there has got to be compromise on both sides...and currently, that isnt happening. My public wildlife is being compromised at the expense of poor grazing practices, and as a taxpayer I'm subsidizing the whole thing.

To top it off...I'm supposed to stand by while public lands ranchers are given elk tags to compensate for their lost grazing potential on PUBLIC LANDS????

I cant see how anyone with more than a couple firing brain cells could think thats right, fair, or even correct...

Its a joke...and a bad one at that.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-10 AT 12:35PM (MST)[p]
only 2/3 of blm land in utah even has cattle permits on it. elk feed right alongside the cattle,elk contribute to overgrazing.
ive seen mustangs overgrazing areas. its not just cattle. during the bad drought years of the earl 2000's we didnt even put cattle on our blm ranges.yet the retarde blm said we were overgrazing it. weird considering there werent even cattle on it in two years it was your elk mustangs deer etc overgrazing it idint see you up there keeping them from overgrazing.that probably has part of the so called 70 percent overgrazing it doesnt mean its the cattle doing it we shipped ours to california and sold down cattle.

you guys trying/ wanting to take grazing away from a rancher is no different than a anti hunter wanting to take hunting away from hunters. same exact concept those anti hunters are just as entitled to look view at deer elk whatever.its just as much there deer/elk as yours. we could argue for years about all this. ive got an idea why dont you just apply for your own blm permit. any u.s. citizen is allowed too. than you can run it the way you want.

if you dont care what we do on private maybe we oughta just start shooting every damn wildlife animal that steps on to it. we share our private lands with your wildlife too! so why cant you share with us? reguardless there is always gonna be wildlife on private lands, we are subject to the same hunting laws as you are on public land. an increase on elk will put an increase on private grounds. some elk will winter more/summer more on private if there are more.
we have had elk on our hayfield, deer,40+ anteolope on it everyday of the summers. we share with them as they share with us. get over it. its how it is. i guarantee if grazing is cut ranchers will have to start cutting down on the wildlife on there private to be able to run more cattle on it to compensate back what grazing permits you take i guarantee the elk numbers wont rise if thats the case.
 
This is a classic reply...and honestly EXACTLY what I expected.

Even though I suggested that:

1. I dont support the total removal of cattle on public lands.

2. Correct grazing can have a postive effect for both cattle and wildlife.

3. The blame is not solely on landowners for the current problems.

4. I think there is room for an adequate compromise, giving equal consideration for wildlife.

5. I support and agree fully with private property rights.

...you still choose to take no responsibility for anything. You blame everything else on over-grazing including deer...that are largely browsers.

Its classic, take no ownership of even a part of the problem...blame someone or something else. Continue to believe that you are the only one who should have access and utilize public lands.

If I were you, I'd strongly consider rethinking the (wrong) position you're taking on this issue. Its not going away, its only getting worse. There are many people and groups attempting to get you and your cattle kicked off public lands. Further, these people are using current laws and regulations to get it accomplished via the courts.

By not admitting that YOU are part of the problem...its impossible to be part of a fair solution that will benefit all.

Living in denial will get you nowhere fast.

Public lands are no longer being controlled by the minority of those that simply lease grazing at a highly subsidized rate. The rightful owners are demanding accountability and proper management....and they should be.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-10 AT 01:39PM (MST)[p]
classic response? you mean to not sharing our private with wildlfife . why are we the only ones that must share?

first off i didnt solely blame any one thing. i just said elk mustangs etc do as well.
yes deer are browsers but they still eat grasses etc. if you think deer dont graze you not very bright. they often do graze in fact what do you think they do in hayfields or burns etc.? deer love fresh new burns for the succulent new grasses the first year or two of new burns
i was just stating cattle dont eat all the food.

second where did i not say cattle dont overgraze? i just stated elk and other wildlife do as well. yet,you dont do a thing or anyone else to prevent it! i said cattle arent the only ones to overgraze! hello

how is there not adequate comprimise already 1/3 of blm has no grazing permits the rest the cattle are already limited! wildlife and cattle share it!
you dont care what we do on our private? well if blm touches private and its not fenced the blm thinks they control what happens on our private as well did you know that?

i like how you say there are many groups trying to get rid of public grazers. same thing for anti hunting! yet is hunting a bad thing . ranching isnt either. like i stated before your no different than the anti taking your hunting rights away. same dang thing. so maybe you should rethink your anti hunting stance casue other people dislike it and your losing ground on it.

this is the last post ill make on this topic your as level headed as the anti hunting propaganda and pro wolfers. im not gonna waste my time replying to this.
 
OK so we've got tags going to groups that fulfill the 501(c)3 status.... Well almost all of them were 501(c)3 when they sold tags legally or NOT UBA!! We've got permits going to pay for overhead for SFW and MDF so their guide buddies and landowners can have a shindig and pimp what they sell on our dime. Now we are going to give permits to cattleman's associations to bring their stock off the mountain for what??? Another 100 public tags? Like the CAT used to say JUDAS FREAKING PRIEST!!!!! No wonder Utah is the fraud capitol of the world!!!

Are ya shitting me?? Peay told us several years ago to "TRUST HIM" Well it's several years later and we still don't have the expo figures. We are considering giving tags to groups that have no land ownership!! No valid contract to receive these permits and no right to say a damn word about public lands. And ya'll are
OK with this??? I ain't even going to go in to how wrong the whole Antelope Island thing is!!! And ya'll are bitching about Obama being a parasite on the American Public???

SERIOUSLY!!!





******************************************************************
Wiley,
I am nominating that for post of the
century on Monster Muleys!

Your are spot on.
 
lol Does it just hurt when you sit down or all the time?


For the record... SFW stay the hell outta Nevada please. We don't need them or want them.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-10 AT 06:24PM (MST)[p]I remember once when I was in high school, while bringing cattle off of the summer range(public land), I was bitching to my Dad about how much of a racket my farmer friend's dad had going because he got paid to not farm land(CRP). I was saying "it's a damn good thing people like wheat so much or it would be stopped pdq"! He about fell off his horse laughing and said "it is a good thing people like beef so much and by the way, be careful not to throw any rocks!". Open mouth, insert foot.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-10 AT 07:00AM (MST) by Founder (admin)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-10 AT 07:40?PM (MST)

""As we put a 5 yr EMP in place it should be sound biology and science, not what a survey of elk hunters would like. Let the hunters and conservation groups function within the surplus animals, to simply create surplus animals to fund the system is IMO unethical and at least a plan that does not meet the requirements of... responsible wildlife management. I challenge anyone to find a study indicating population growth by increasing old age class male animals, it won't happen in fact all studies I have found indicate just the opposite will result." Mulepacker
You can find this and other great info at:

The Utah Wildlife Cooperative is a Facebook group that gives Utah hunters a place to educate, be educated, and be involved in the wildlife game management in Utah. The new EMP that is proposing an elk population of 80,000 is based on bad science and flawed logic.

The FURTHER bribing of landowners/livestock owners with PUBLIC tags is another of a long list of such bad deals for the public. When is enough enough? I grew up on a farm where we had cattle that summered on the Manti-LaSal forest, so I know that side of the issue. But, doing the right thing shouldn't take being bought off to do it.

WHAT A BUNCH OF SELF-SERVING BULLSH!T!! HO'ME SHOULD RUN FOR CONGRESS.

Slick
 
Come on elkun. I wanna know what you do for a living. Mining? Oil? Come on, gotta be some kind of subsidized lifestyle that you don't wanna talk about.

I already know BuzzH is a federal government parasite (one of "my employees") but I wanna hear your story.
 
NVB, Thought that you might want to know that SFW now is in Nevada. Got their feet on the ground and starting to grow.
 
Elk and Sheep inhabited this land long before any settlers found it and what did we settlers do? We ran them out through over hunting and probably introducing cattle on there land. See Theox, just like every thing else cattle ranching on N.F or BLM land comes to an end and your line of work ends too, just like all the construction business has. And if you think that just because you think you owen the public lands to make a living and that that right should never be taken away or you shouldn't ever have to adjust to changing times than you are in for a tough life. Many people have changed their way of making a living because things change so why not you.

Now having said that I don't want the cattle industry to fail. I think that people who have their own land should do what ever it takes to run their businesses. As for the Public land I don't think cattle should come before wildlife. As we know, wildlife is a natural resource and that should trump any cattle business any day of the week!
 
Since we all know that the Wildlife Board will follow through on their promise to the Ranchers I want to know what the ranchers are going to do to earn their tags.

Is this a free handout because the ranchers tell us that they need this or they will kill the animals on their private land?

Have any of them signed anything that states what they will do to recieve these tags. Or is this another good ole boy play that "hey we owe you guys these tags". We dont care if you run one less cow on the hill but your deserve these tags.

As for MR OX please tell me why I should care if you have one elk on your property. Why should you recieve anything for the animals there? You have been pretty clear that the land is private and you dont want to have the public there which is definately your choice. I know that the elk/antelope may roam off of your land once in a while but they are probabally a resident herd. Now you tell us that these elk eat your pasture, and compete with your cows. I get that, but if you are the only one who hunts them or sells the rights to hunt them why should you get even ONE tag from the general pool? What does the state and public recieve from your efforts.

Seems like a great deal for you. Sit back complain about the elk, not let anyone hunt them, get free tags from the state for complaining....sell those to whomever and start over again. Welfare at the greatest level. Have the cattlemen been agreed to run any less cattle for these tags or is it some kind of payoff??????

respect my authorita
 
The way it was proposed at the meeting was that it would have to be a trade for grazing rights. It was never said that these would just go to the ranchers for nothing in return.

They would trade grazing rights on public land for more elk deer grazing. This would allow the total herd to increase.

Example given was go from 3,200 cattle to 3,000 cattle and then this area should support 200 more elk.

This makes sense to me.

On the other hand, the idea that these ranchers somehow even have these rights to the PUBLIC grazing for cattle is an interesting debate.

Public land = Public resource, right???
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-29-10 AT 08:12PM (MST)[p]bla bla bla

for a rancher to give up 200 head of cattle you would have to bribe him with a hell of a lot more than one elk tag. Its a pipe dream and the ones who will loose are the general public.

this whole deal smells like Bull dung?

4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
I agree Scott. There is no way you can give the ranchers enough tags to have them go 12000 cows less. If we keep this up in a few more years it will be give out 100 tags to the general pool and the ranchers and others get the rest of them. Cant wait for that one.

respect my authorita
 
adamsoa

I was just responding to a question you had posed.

>Have the cattlemen been agreed
>to run any less cattle
>for these tags or is
>it some kind of payoff??????
>
>
>respect my authorita

Whether or not this will actually work is another issue.

What happened that made you and swbuckmaster so sensitive?
 
hey ox; let me bring u up to speed before u prove to be the biggest moron of them all; here r the mm rules; elk never get larger than 330; deer dont get larger than 170; skyline shots r unethical; running shots r unethical; most broad side shots r unethical; any shot past 10 yards is unethical; blood in pictures is unethical; riding ur dead animal in pics is unethical; buy conservation tags is unethical; blah blah blah; last mm rule;;; ranchers are bad bad people; that means ur not liked on mm anymore
 
Osok,
I'm just getting tired of the train of organizations and people that feel entitled to public tags. No I'm not putting in for any elk tags. I hunt general season and love it. But it seems that we are going so far in pimping these tags. Everyone has a hand out and it seems like a big political game that the big boys play and dont care about the average hunter.
They talk about giving 100-200 tags to ranchers. That is nothing to what they make off of the cattle on those ranges and I really dont see any policing of how they will do it. I'd bet they dont run any less cattle in the end. But they will say I wont complain about them as much as long as you grease my palm with some tags.
The organizations keep saying they will keep things at a 5% cap on special interest tags. They are already taking 600 tags for their own use (which is in excess of that percentage). Add the 200 or so ranch welfare tags and you are getting close to 20% of all the public tags. I'll bet that the percentage of elk tags taken is even higher than that, if they take a full 100-200. There are new wildlife groups stating like the Full Curl society. I'd bet almost anything that next year they have a hand out for tags, which after the lobbying is done someone will tell us all is a good thing.
Call me crazy but this path scares me to death. Again if they take 100 this year and 200 in the next couple of years we'll be creeping to 20% for these groups. When will it stop? How many is enough?

Thats enough ranting for now but it is a touchy subject.

respect my authorita
 
Stinky- haha

i know i said i wasnt gonna reply to this topic any more but i just had to thank you for the heads up, thanks for putting it in terms a dumb evil rancher that wont get any of the tags anyway can understand! you seem to always be able to put things into easily understandable terms thanks again!
 
ADAMOSA,

Full Curl Society gave away - 10 Tags - 6 dall sheep hunts and 4 stone hunts - to sportsmen who came. do the math on that one. lot of money was donated by a couple individuals to buy hunts so other hunters can live their dreams. Next year, we hope to give away 25 plus sheep hunts at Full Curl.

If the public gets 900 more elk tags and the ranchers get 100 - which ends up going to the public, what is the problem with 900 MORE TAGS ?

the whole problem here on MM and in society, is the TAKERS in life think everyone else is like themselves, selfish, self serving.

It is hard for some to think others actaully give to others.

and, it is hard for some to understand, invest a little now, work hard, get a lot more later. Sucessful businesmen understand the invest now, work hard, return comes later.

The entitlement mentaility that is destroying America is "hey, i am entitled to everything, all the time, for free." Sorry, doesn't work that way in life, in business, or in wildlife. these herds can go as fast as they came.

the number of Limted and once in a lifetime permits in utah has gone from 1,000 to over 5,000. that is a lot MORE, not less. How can anyone argue about that ? OH, i forgot, they don't like the method the money was raised to make MORE for EVERYONE !

Don
 
>ADAMOSA,
>
>Full Curl Society gave away -
>10 Tags - 6 dall
>sheep hunts and 4 stone
>hunts - to sportsmen who
>came. do the math
>on that one. lot
>of money was donated by
>a couple individuals to buy
>hunts so other hunters can
>live their dreams. Next
>year, we hope to give
>away 25 plus sheep hunts
>at Full Curl.
>
>If the public gets 900 more
>elk tags and the ranchers
>get 100 - which ends
>up going to the public,
>what is the problem with
>900 MORE TAGS ? [b/]
>
>

1000 additional tags, Where in the hell did you get that #? I asked Anis directly; 'If we do raise age objectives and get the herds to 80k under this model, what kind of tag increase are you projecting?'. His reply, though not verbatim, was that we could see as much as 100 tags[b/] added back to the public pool.

Sounds like you and Anis need to get your stories straight.

Also, and it's just speculation based on results, I would guess that when you throw the 80k number out there most people just assume that tag increases will be significant or in line with animal increases, which is NOT the case. None take into account the ridiculous age objective increase that was just implemented and never pay attention or investigate what that might mean to tag #'s. Do you count on misinformation and naivety, or was this another simple oversight?
 
>ADAMOSA,
>
>Full Curl Society gave away -
>10 Tags - 6 dall
>sheep hunts and 4 stone
>hunts - to sportsmen who
>came. do the math
>on that one. lot
>of money was donated by
>a couple individuals to buy
>hunts so other hunters can
>live their dreams. Next
>year, we hope to give
>away 25 plus sheep hunts
>at Full Curl.
>
>If the public gets 900 more
>elk tags and the ranchers
>get 100 - which ends
>up going to the public,
>what is the problem with
>900 MORE TAGS ?
>
>the whole problem here on MM
>and in society, is the
>TAKERS in life think everyone
>else is like themselves, selfish,
>self serving.
>
>It is hard for some to
>think others actaully give to
>others.
>
>and, it is hard for some
>to understand, invest a little
>now, work hard, get
>a lot more later.
>Sucessful businesmen understand the invest
>now, work hard, return comes
>later.
>
>The entitlement mentaility that is destroying
>America is "hey, i
>am entitled to everything, all
>the time, for free."
>Sorry, doesn't work that way
>in life, in business, or
>in wildlife. these herds
>can go as fast as
>they came.
>
>the number of Limted and once
>in a lifetime permits in
>utah has gone from 1,000
>to over 5,000. that
>is a lot MORE, not
>less. How can anyone
>argue about that ?
>OH, i forgot, they don't
>like the method the money
>was raised to make MORE
>for EVERYONE !
>
>Don


With all respect, you are counting a lot of chickens (actually elk) that have not hatched. Then you are calling anyone who wonders how you can be so certain as "takers" presumably not worthy of having a voice in wildlife management.

I often hear bold promises from politicians but rarely from conservationists.

Reminds me a bit of how I also hear a lot of conclusions from global warming, er climate change, folks that have no background in science but make and repeat claims that are far from proven to be based on sound science. If you question how they reached their conclusions, they label you a "Denier." Sort of like being a "Taker," eh?

That brings me back to the promised 1000 elk and I am curious how you arrive at those numbers and what the reprecussions are for you and SFW if this promised outcome does not actually develop? Will deer numbers be negatively impacted at all by the increase in elk?

My hunch is a politiciam will answer that inquiry differently than a CONSERVATIONIST.
 
Don,
So are you stating that next year or the year after the Full Curl guys won't take ANY tags other than sheep from the LE pool?

Yes the LE tags have grown but that's because a huge portion of the state is now LE units. We went from very few LE units to almost all of the state for elk and a lot of the southern part of the state for Deer. I'm pretty sure it didn't have anything to do with bribing ranchers.
You state that us takers feel entitled to everything we want now.
We just stress about the wildlife groups you represent feeling that YOU are ENTITLED to a larger portion of the public tags every year. You have done some good things for the state but when is enough enough Don? Conservation type tags are closer to 15-20 percent then 5. It seems like every year we are seeing these groups asking for more tags to fight the good fight. We are "selfish" to question why they want or need more.
You state that for this 100 tags we will get 900 more in the future. There is nothing to show that will happen. It is a guess at best.
I guess it all comes down to the fact that I'm personally sick of these groups asking for more tags every year. It seems like its never enough. I don't understand what they have done to deserve not only the number of tags but the variety of tags.
And I don't do well with anyone telling me "trust me" with wildlife. You usually hear that right before you get screwed.

Now with all of the stuff we have said lately I don't hate wildlife groups, and I like a lot of their members. I'm just a guy who loves to hunt and fish more than almost anything else. I have issues with some of their ideas and the fact that with politics they are jammed down my throat. I don't like feeling that the average guy is being taken to the cleaners on tag numbers without a valid say.

If there are any spelling or grammar errors bear with me. I'm typing this on my phone.

respect my authorita
 
adamosa:

I think we should give Don the benefit of the doubt on this one...I mean you could take a look at the expo and see that the expo has generated lots of money and the conservation efforts have resulted in more opportunity for everybody. Oh... I almost forgot, the expo has generated a lot of money but none of that money was required to be used for conservation. I am waiting for the numbers promised by Don at the last meeting. The extra tags for the ranchers are a joke. The general public continues to get the short end of the stick. I think there should be a freeze on all tags until a true accounting is done by the state on the conservation/ convention tags. Once that is done and all the money is accounted for then we can talk about cutting the conservation tag numbers (not the public tag numbers) to get the ranchers their piece of the pie.
 
"the number of Limted and once in a lifetime permits in utah has gone from 1,000 to over 5,000. that is a lot MORE, not less. How can anyone argue about that ? OH, i forgot, they don't like the method the money was raised to make MORE for EVERYONE !"

Don, I am more disappointed in your words every time I hear/read them. This paragraph is the words of a politician, NOT of a sportsman! First, you falsely imply that the increase in LE/OIL permits are solely due to the conservation permit program. That is simply NOT true, and you know that. Many factors have contributed to the increase in elk permits, and the CP is NOT even in the top five. Second, shouldn't the public that 'donates' these permits to special interest groups be concerned in how the money is raised/spent?

Also, are you going on record saying if/when the elk herd hits 80,000 there will be 900-1000 more limited entry permits available to the public? That would be around a 45% increase in permits with less than a 20% population increase. With the new EMP that was just implemented were harvest age objectives were RAISED by one and one half years across the board, how is it even remotely plausible to increase permits by an additional 900 even with 30,000 more elk?

Another troublesome comment from someone supposedly looking out for all of us:
"the whole problem here on MM and in society, is the TAKERS in life think everyone else is like themselves, selfish, self serving."

Question, who is taking from whom? Is it the public taking permits from the special interest groups, or is it the special interest groups TAKING permits from the public? How self serving is it to come on here and claim to be merely a 'giver', and claim you are the "only" one fighting the wolf issue, the "only" one that 'cares' about other hunters, the "only" one smart enough to sweet talk corrupt politicians?

Don, you have done a lot of good things for wildlife in Utah and elsewhere, I will give you that. But, when you come on here and drop carpet bomb accusations about those who want accountability and to look for ways to increase opportunity, and spew hyperbole about what SFW has done, while ignoring the wishes of the masses according to the DWR survey, you paint yourself in a corner.

You have my cell number, feel free to call and 'set me straight' anytime.

Bart Hansen
 
The more Don talks down to the average Joe, working class. The less I like him and I use to love him. I was just like hoytme, adamsoa, following Don around reading the sportsman magazine they put out. I defended him even on this forum from naysayers. I defended him to family and coworkers. Well Don you have gotten out of control. The tag grab has got to stop! Your pie eating habits need to stop! You are getting too fat on Pie! you are starting to look just like Obama with his wealth redistribution social plans. I am also sick of you squashing and fighting one of the greatest tools for opportunity without affecting the quality every chance you get.

Once people truly get the picture how screwed they are in the bonus point butt plugg you will wake a sleeping giant Don and I am going to be ringing the alarm every chance I get.

To me Don you are claiming to have been the organization responsible for our elk increase. this is absolute BS. The reason our elk are in good shape is becase they are more hardy than our deer. They are effected less by cats and coyotes. They are also not affected by the winters like the deer are.. Then on top of it Utah has been restricted to hunting them. It wasn't too long ago we were told JUST TRUST US we will take your big bull tag and issue you a spike tag and when the herds increase we will issue more big bull tags. JUST TRUST US!! Well Don the herds increased alright in fact they are at carrying capacity and have been that way for some time. This is why we have all the cow hunts. this is why the bull to cow ratio is or was out of wack on several of the units.. JUST TRUST US well it looks like I can hunt spike elk on every unit but the big bulls on Le units are out of reach in my lifetime thanks!


4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
Don, I laugh more and laugh when I read your posts. Do you actually believe what you write? That is a serious question. As people have pointed out.....You are very misleading in your numbers, and you need to quit lying to the public. We aren't that stupid.

You don't talk down to people to gain their support. Maybe you need to take some lessons in Public Relations.

Don, raising elk isn't rocket science. You also CANNOT take credit for the elk herds that we have. I actually think we could have better elk herds if SFW would quit trying to manage elk in this state.

The reason I say this is because SFW is going to make the elk herds crash as long as we keep raising age class objectives and issuing more cow tags to keep more bulls on LE units. The calf recruitment will get less and less and it will finally catch up and bad things will happen.

SFW will be the one that goes down in history for causing the whole mess when it does happen.
 
Elite
the spike tags are actually going to help the problem with the bull to cow ratios but it is a slap in the face to the guys that trusted "JUST TRUST US" and are going to wait for a chance to hunt mature 6 point bulls.

Tens of thousands of hunters are never going to have a chance on a Le unit.. all anyone that wants to dispute this has to do to prove I am correct is look at the odds page and calculate how many years it is going to take to draw any Le tag in this state with zero points if you are the unlucky one to be the last in his point group to draw. Then compound this by the void that is being created by the spike tags. Big bulls come from little bulls Don!! Mark my words people they are going to cut your Le tags in a yer or two.

4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
BTW, Don, we cannot keep harvesting spikes and mature bulls and then expect to issue more mature tags. You will cut the number of mature elk tags from the general public, but SFW won't EVER reduce the number of tags that they receive, right?

Maybe SFW needs to quit supporting the idea of killing spikes to reduce the bull/cow ratio. There are better ways to do this. A lot of people don't like to hunt spikes anyways. If you allow spikes to grow up and become branch antlered bulls then they become the future mature bulls in the herds. You could easily increase the number of mature elk tags, but SFW takes the easy way out every time instead of doing the right thing.

SFW is the reason why our bull/cow ratios are out of whack in the first place.

Don more people want to hunt mature bulls than spikes so why did you support an increase in spike permits?
 
I love it!!!! This is fantastic!!! Quit being a bunch of GREEDY BASTAGES!!! Oh sorry thats just the fly fishermen!!! Elk hunters are now apparently the socialist welfare entitled. What a bunch of chit!!! Tell me who is sucking 10% off the top here!! Tell me who is riding interest on these permits till the last possible second.
Tell me how come every time I turn around you have your hand in the publics pocket asking for more tags... Please tell me..

Apparently the belief still exists that if you repeat the same lie long enough people will eventually assume it as fact.

For the last several years I've preached the DON'T COMMERCIALIZE WILDLIFE Mantra. Now ya have a pretty good idea why and I accept all o0f your apologies

Are you A-holes awake yet???

Couple of words of wisdom then I'm done

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

CARRY ON






*****************************************************************
Wiley,
I am nominating that for post of the
century on Monster Muleys!

Your are spot on.
 
Don
Looking at the elk survey the public overwhelmingly wanted to keep the current age structure in place ( by almost 2 to 1 ). So why did you raise it? This sounds a lot like Obama health care we dont want it but you say we need it.

Also looking at the survey there was overwhelming support to see the rifle hunt moved farther from the rut and the push to utilize lower success rate weapons to provide more opportunity. You ignored this and gave us the spikes.

Then you wonder why the public is getting up set? Then you come on here and call us greedy. then you say I want 200 more tags cause I made this pie and I work hard.



4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-02-10 AT 10:23PM (MST)[p]SFW is the greedy group. They believe they are entitled to more and more tags because of things they have done.

SFW will also be the one's who destroy hunting because of their decision based on money

Like SWBUCKMASTER said, they ignore what the majority of hunters want. They don't listen to the public and they spread lies on public forums.

Don also bashes hunters on a public forum. He must not realize that we all have friends and we talk to our friends about SFW. They also spread the news about SFW to their friends.

Next think you know DON.......you have awaken the 800 pound gorilla that isn't to happy with SFW.
 
Don just like I said at the meeting IF you get us to 80k elk, THEN you can have the additional 100 tags. Why should it be the other way around?
 
Bart,

The elk survey also asked the elk hunters in the state if they were to get only 2 or 3 tags in their lifetimes, which is about what will happen with the current number of elk and elk applicants, what type of bull would they want to harvest. Q. 27 i believe.

About 45% responded they wanted a 320 to 360 bull, about 42% said they wanted a 360 plus bull and 12 % wanted a 320 or less.

The survey had several questions, with conflicting data, which teh group of 15 comittee members spend hours studying.

To meet these type bulls, the committee voted in a 12 to 3 vote to increase the age objectives, which the committee and the DWR also felt was the best measuring tool to produce the type of bulls the elk survey said the customer wanted.

The elk survey also said that hunters supported more primitive weapons, whihch SFW presented to teh Committee and RACs but teh DWR voted against this measure, even taking just one unit the Wasatch and making it mostly for archery as an experiment.

Now to the number of MORE elk tags.

The DWR figures and if you look at several of the units, you can have about 80 trophy bull tags for 1,000 elk.

15,000 more elk would mean about 1,200 more bull elk tags - 80 times 15,000 divided by 1,000.

The elk survey also showed that the majority of the sportsmen in that survey would support giving some percentage of new tags to landowners to do habitat work, if it allowed Utah to incrase its elk herds.

The sportsmen of the state will have the opportunity to determine whether they want to see an increase in elk, and for that to happen, it will most likely require getting the landowners who are not part of a system some percent of the tags.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-10-10 AT 01:08PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-10-10 AT 01:07?PM (MST)

Its a sad state of affairs when hunters have to seek the permission of landowners and/or bribe them to "allow" the state to increase elk numbers.

What a joke, just another tag give-away to a small, yet whining group of individuals. Further privatize the elk herd, take it away from the public...always a great idea. About in line with passing an (illegal) law thats in direct conflict with a state supreme court ruling regarding stream access. Defend that illegal law by bashing "greedy fly fishermen" (the public)...pretty much the pot calling the kettle black. Again, a perfect example of privatizing a public resource.

I guess setting elk objectives based on biology/science and carrying capacity is a thing of the past. Giving PUBLIC wildlife equal consideration on PUBLIC LAND is also a thing of the past.

In place of science we must now set elk objectives based on political and social reasons only.

Sad...and thats putting it mildly.

Also more than clear where SFW's loyalties really lie...if only blaringly so.
 
Hey Don, What about deer? Hasn't the decline of the deer herd benefited groups like yours? And today you still are sitting on your hands on the issue. Why wouldn't you try to increase the deer herd? Do a poll on that subject. If you are for Sportsman then you will do what you can to increase our deer herd. An animal 99% of your members hunt. So engaged with the elk meanwhile you have presided over the statewide decline of deer. With out so much as a peep to how the DWR manages that hunt. I guess the money is in habitat right.
 
dkpeay posted:

"The sportsmen of the state will have the opportunity to determine whether they want to see an increase in elk, and for that to happen, it will most likely require getting the landowners who are not part of a system some percent of the tags."

__________________________________________________________

This could very well be a true statement. Maybe things have evolved in Utah, to a point where the average guy has been marginalized to a degree that the only hope he has is to continue down the path of accomodating everyone else, while he pays the freight.

If the only option left for Utah hunters, is to continue giving away the public resource to every group that can flex more political muscle than the hunter, that is a sad state of affiars, regardless of what level of quality elk Utah can produce. I suspect that quality could be produced in any other state, if they wanted to restrict opportunity to the same degree, and give away tags to so many special interests.

And if it is the case, I hope the Utah system of exclusivity stays within the borders of the Beehive state. The other western states seem unwilling to compromise their elk hunting heritage just for the sake of older bulls.

If any group brings that mentality to surrounding states, I hope the hunters in those states stop it dead in its tracks.

I wonder how a public asset, such as wildlife, in a state with so much public land, became the currency for bartering of political favors. Evidently the notion of the Public Trust Doctrine as the courts have ruled applies to wildlife, has been legislatively or judicially rejected in UT.

Or, maybe it is just that the Utah Trustees of the Publc Trust are ignorant of their duties as fiduciary to the citizens of Utah.

Or, maybe it is that the Utah Trustees do understand their responsibilities to the citizens of UT, but have decided to act otherwise.

Who knows the reasons why this has evolved in such a manner in UT, but as someone on the outside looking in, I have to agree with Buzz. When resident hunters are handed no options, other than continuing to feed the mouths of subsidy, that is a sad day.

From the outside, it seems like resident hunters have been sold down the river. I don't live in UT, I only hunt there as a NR, whenever I get a tag, so I probably have no reason to worry about it.

Watching this unfold in Utah gives me reason to be vigilant in making sure this process does not happen in my home state.


"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-10-10 AT 03:54PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-10-10 AT 03:42?PM (MST)

Don wrote,

"The elk survey also asked the elk hunters in the state if they were to get only 2 or 3 tags in their lifetimes, which is about what will happen with the current number of elk and elk applicants, what type of bull would they want to harvest. Q. 27 i believe.

About 45% responded they wanted a 320 to 360 bull, about 42% said they wanted a 360 plus bull and 12 % wanted a 320 or less.

The survey had several questions, with conflicting data, which teh group of 15 comittee members spend hours studying."

Don, we shouldn't be managing elk based upon what a hunter wants his bull to score in the BC system. That isn't based upon biology.

Also how many people that took the survey even knows the difference between a 320 bull compared to the 360 bull?

An older bull doesn't mean he will score high. Some 8 year old bulls will still only score 320-330. It's all based upon genetics.

You also were against the management hunts. This will protect of the bulls that will only grow up to a 5x5 or 5x6. They will breed cows and pass on this same gene. They take of place on the range and your killing cows to even keep them on the mountain.

So as you target the biggest and baddest bulls on the mountain because of issue fewer tags then you will have smaller bulls down the road.

Because your killing the recruitment (spikes) before they become branch antlered bulls, therefore, fewer branch antlered bulls will grow up and become mature bulls.

Fewer cows means fewer calves recruited to the herds. Isn't that the same thing the wolves are doing in Wyo, ID, Montana?

Wolves are going to cause a crash if we don't stop them, but SFW could cause the same crash because of their management ideas.
 
Here's the survey question as I understand it, but changing the elk to apples (I like apples. I understand apples):

"Most likely from now on you're only going to get 2 or 3 apples for the rest of your life. If that's the case, would you like those to be little apples or big apples?"


Founder, this thread is all about Utah and SFW. Shouldn't it be moved to the Utah forum, like a couple of other recent threads, including mine?
____________________________

I hunt. I fish. I VOTE.

Get the F out of SFW
 
"The DWR figures and if you look at several of the units, you can have about 80 trophy bull tags for 1,000 elk.

15,000 more elk would mean about 1,200 more bull elk tags - 80 times 15,000 divided by 1,000."

Don, help me out on this. My math must be fuzzy. Using your figures we should currently have 5200 limited entry permits. 65,000 times 80 divided by 1000. Since we are nowhere near 5200 permits, why would anyone be foolish enough to think we would use this formula on the 'new' elk?
 
"About 45% responded they wanted a 320 to 360 bull, about 42% said they wanted a 360 plus bull and 12 % wanted a 320 or less.

The survey had several questions, with conflicting data, which teh group of 15 comittee members spend hours studying.

To meet these type bulls, the committee voted in a 12 to 3 vote to increase the age objectives, which the committee and the DWR also felt was the best measuring tool to produce the type of bulls the elk survey said the customer wanted."

The problems with what came out of the committee, and what the DWR actually recommended that was passed are many. For starters, the survey says MORE than half the hunters would be more than happy to take a bull under 360. You and I both know a lot more than 50% of the hunters don't know what a 350 class bull looks like on the hoof. By not being serious about moving some of the permits to primitive weapons, and by keeping the majority of permits in the rifle pool, the committee/DWR/RAC/WB showed either a lack of desire to actually comply, or a lack of understanding how to do it. The Wasatch was a smoke and mirrors proposal from the start. I told Roy H and the rest of the UBA Board it would NEVER fly the week after it was put on the table. I should have made a wager with him on this.

Raising harvest age objectives on 95% of the units is is not what the survey showed hunters wanted, yet that is what they got.
 
Dkpeay says

"The elk survey also asked the elk hunters in the state if they were to get only 2 or 3 tags in their lifetimes, which is about what will happen with the current number of elk and elk applicants, what type of bull would they want to harvest. Q. 27 i believe."




This is absolute and utter BS 2 or three times in their life. Don you cant possible believe this do you? O yes you do if you want to you can probably purchase the auction 2 or 3 times in your life I forget. people he has created the largest bonus point bonus point butt plugg in history and if he gets a hold of our deer it will get worse mark my word!

FACTS!!!
lets just look at only one unit they are all equally as bad. the facts are here on monster muleys own draw odds page. If you have zero points right now and you are the last unlucky sob on the beaver early hunt to draw his tag it will take you 109 years to draw it. So Don how are people going to draw this tag 2 or 3 times in their life? I get it Obamas health care is going to be so good people will live to 3 or 4 hundred years old right?

now you have raised the age objective on every unit in this state so the odds are going to get worse!


people do your own research don't let a sneaky politician tell you what you want to hear. look it up! the facts are here on monster muleys. look up any unit on the draw odds page and take the bonus point tags and divide that into the total elk applicants in your pool. The bonus point butt plugg is real it hurts and it needs to be loosened.
 
I haven't been fooled by crap. I would say 95% percent around here are by even thinking Elk hunting was or will be the answer to big game opportunities. Sure for the rich and lucky. But I want to hunt with my father and sons.

DEER are what we all fell in love hunting. Elk are just frosting. I noticed on a post on this very website. That many were insane to think wolf were the reason for elk decline and removing them wont help the herd increase. Sound familiar. It should its the same crap that many of you have bought when it comes to deer. Pissing and whining about a potential 80,000 critters? WTF Why not piss and moan about 400,000 deer? And how you can only hunt one season a yr.

Let elk hunt be what it is an elite hunt. Not for everyone.
 

Similar threads

F
Lasal cow elk hunt
Replies
2
Views
442
just_a_hunter
J
B
Unit 13 New Mexico Landowner Archery and Muzzleloader Tags for Auction 2024
Replies
2
Views
937
Liv2Hunt
Liv2Hunt
deadibob
To whoever turned in
Replies
22
Views
2k
elkassassin
elkassassin

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

DSCN4254.JPG
20171221_213008.jpg
20141127_132051.jpg
Ed1400TopazNik_DSC7215.jpg
IMG_1292 copy.jpg
3A3DC788-946E-489A-9468-A88E492CFC22.jpeg
IMG_2183.jpg
Mule Deer3.jpg
IMG_0690.png
100_0041.JPG
IMG_2629.jpg
IMG_2183.jpg
Back
Top Bottom