Thanks for your help on scopes

hossblur

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
11,416
It's been a STUPID long time arguing about something that never should have happened to begin with.

Hopefully, by this afternoon the optics on muzzys will be gone. And hopefully we can proceed into elimination of other tech on other platforms because it's needed.

We've become to efficient as it stands in killing deer, and the stuff just around the corner, be it nano tech, AI, or quantum computing, needs to be stopped before it starts in hunting.

I am no one. I'm not connected. I don't have a business in the hunting industry. But, I make a few calls, drop a few notes. When this issue hit the public, and slam was getting brutally, dishonestly, and savagely attacked, for volunteering his time, and communicating in this forum it took me not long to see that the folks doing that attacking could be used.
(Full disclosure:. I've never met slam. I'm not s member of MDF)

For a long time I've known that MM gets watched by the pros(outfitters, industry types, special interests), as well as DWR, WB, and legislators. Despite the assinine dismissals, Brian has created a place where ideas get exchanged, topics get hashed out, etc. Not everyone is home in their mommies basement being keyboard warriors.( My mom doesn't have a basement,)

Accidentally. During the bait campaign, it became pretty apparent there was lots of listening and paying attention to this site. Even more so on cams. This site was exposing the hypocrisy, and blowing holes in narratives that otherwise would have been fed the WB from dishonest brokers.

So, as the scope debate heated up, myself, and others, started to poke the usual suspects, but also found a bunch of others. The more we poked, the more they exposed themselves. What started as bullchit "it doesn't build the herds" narratives(which is somewhat true although it will save some bucks, and add to quality of those saved), got destroyed. Truth came out. Once the ballistic warriors and gun "dorks" waded in, I knew we had turned the corner and were now showing the WB what ACTUALLY is going on.

I don't know how the vote will go. I'm hoping back to where it should have stayed, open sites with 1x available for the seeing impaired guys. I'd preferred Idaho rules, but, maybe down the road.

What I do know, is how much exposure was out there of what the ACTUAL issues with scopes are. How bad the reliance on tech has become. How commonplace pushing envelopes has become. Counteracting the obvious lie of "it doesn't build herds" was done here.

Amy leaving kind of exposed what a few of us have known for a long time. They, the DWR, is paying attention to this forum. They are very aware of what goes on here. As are legislators, and special interests.

So, now that the day of reckoning is here, I want to say thanks to all the guys that thought they were "owning" myself, and a few others. Dudes that "destroyed" us. Your help was extremely valuable. Thank you for helping to put the focus where it needed to be. The vote may go against me(us) anyway, but at least it will be based on honest knowledge and not bullshit.
 
Hossy
Dont talk about keyboard warriors. You’re one of the kings of the keyboard (on this site) for the most posts. Hypocrite statement.

And please don’t talk about those that opposed the scope removals info as fuel to prove “ your” agenda.

A lot of facts were brought to the table - from each side on this issue.
You of course will always bring your “knows”
Your comments lead me to believe that you are the “self appointed leader” of an election -and you have just addressed your fellow voters waiting for the outcome.

Amy said it best in her last statement “You argue because you care”

A simple thank you to everyone involved (without the scrutiny) would have been in order.
 
And As Soon As You Realize And Maybe You Have?

We Can Start Working On TECHNOLOGY On Other Weapon Types!

And Yes,I Know They've Already Done A Little!

But Was It Enough?

GAWD I Hope I'll Be Selling My Smokepole Scope For NIGHTFORCE Price?

I'll Be Offering It To You First Hossy!

Then To Niller!

Then To hawky!

And I Hope You're Not Disappointed When You Receive It!



hossblur said:
It's been a STUPID long time arguing about something that never should have happened to begin with.

Hopefully, by this afternoon the optics on muzzys will be gone. And hopefully we can proceed into elimination of other tech on other platforms because it's needed.

We've become to efficient as it stands in killing deer, and the stuff just around the corner, be it nano tech, AI, or quantum computing, needs to be stopped before it starts in hunting.

I am no one. I'm not connected. I don't have a business in the hunting industry. But, I make a few calls, drop a few notes. When this issue hit the public, and slam was getting brutally, dishonestly, and savagely attacked, for volunteering his time, and communicating in this forum it took me not long to see that the folks doing that attacking could be used.
(Full disclosure:. I've never met slam. I'm not s member of MDF)

For a long time I've known that MM gets watched by the pros(outfitters, industry types, special interests), as well as DWR, WB, and legislators. Despite the assinine dismissals, Brian has created a place where ideas get exchanged, topics get hashed out, etc. Not everyone is home in their mommies basement being keyboard warriors.( My mom doesn't have a basement,)

Accidentally. During the bait campaign, it became pretty apparent there was lots of listening and paying attention to this site. Even more so on cams. This site was exposing the hypocrisy, and blowing holes in narratives that otherwise would have been fed the WB from dishonest brokers.

So, as the scope debate heated up, myself, and others, started to poke the usual suspects, but also found a bunch of others. The more we poked, the more they exposed themselves. What started as bullchit "it doesn't build the herds" narratives(which is somewhat true although it will save some bucks, and add to quality of those saved), got destroyed. Truth came out. Once the ballistic warriors and gun "dorks" waded in, I knew we had turned the corner and were now showing the WB what ACTUALLY is going on.

I don't know how the vote will go. I'm hoping back to where it should have stayed, open sites with 1x available for the seeing impaired guys. I'd preferred Idaho rules, but, maybe down the road.

What I do know, is how much exposure was out there of what the ACTUAL issues with scopes are. How bad the reliance on tech has become. How commonplace pushing envelopes has become. Counteracting the obvious lie of "it doesn't build herds" was done here.

Amy leaving kind of exposed what a few of us have known for a long time. They, the DWR, is paying attention to this forum. They are very aware of what goes on here. As are legislators, and special interests.

So, now that the day of reckoning is here, I want to say thanks to all the guys that thought they were "owning" myself, and a few others. Dudes that "destroyed" us. Your help was extremely valuable. Thank you for helping to put the focus where it needed to be. The vote may go against me(us) anyway, but at least it will be based on honest knowledge and not bullshit.
Click to expand...
 
Ballistic said:
Hossy
Dont talk about keyboard warriors. You’re one of the kings of the keyboard (on this site) for the most posts. Hypocrite statement.

And please don’t talk about those that opposed the scope removals info as fuel to prove “ your” agenda.

A lot of facts were brought to the table - from each side on this issue.
You of course will always bring your “knows”
Your comments lead me to believe that you are the “self appointed leader” of an election -and you have just addressed your fellow voters waiting for the outcome.

Amy said it best in her last statement “You argue because you care”

A simple thank you to everyone involved (without the scrutiny) would have been in order.
Click to expand...


You did exactly what I hoped someone would do. You were invaluable.

Thanks
 
elkassassin said:
And As Soon As You Realize And Maybe You Have?

We Can Start Working On TECHNOLOGY On Other Weapon Types!

And Yes,I Know They've Already Done A Little!

But Was It Enough?

GAWD I Hope I'll Be Selling My Smokepole Scope For NIGHTFORCE Price?

I'll Be Offering It To You First Hossy!

Then To Niller!

Then To hawky!

And I Hope You're Not Disappointed When You Receive It!
Click to expand...
How about 8 am tomorrow?

You eat an elephant one bite at a time
 
Like I have said before in many post.
It all boils down to what we WANT or what we NEED.

2015 apparently someone wanted scopes on Muzzleloader. I know I sure didn't.( it was fine the way it was and it sure the hell wasn't broke)
We went decades without needing them.

That said.
Technology definitely need to be addressed all the way across the board. Muzzleloaders is absolutely a good starting point. Getting scopes either removed or going back to the old way.
 
I Eat Nothing!

Just Figured If You Wanna Buy The NIGHTFORCE You Think I Have On My SmokePole I'll Let You Have First Chance At It At NIGHTFORCE Pricing!

Don't Be Disappointed When You Receive It!

I'll Change Absolutely Nothing!

With The Exception Of Setting One Gun Down & Using One Of My Other Pre-Scoped SmokePoles!







hossblur said:
How about 8 am tomorrow?

You eat an elephant one bite at a time
Click to expand...
 
Anyone who thinks they know what way the WB will go today with their vote is up in the night. That group has proven time and time again that they don't give a crap about data or public input. They will vote the way they want to, and we will all have to live with whatever the decision is.

Should be very interesting to see what happens for sure!
 
elkhunterUT said:
Anyone who thinks they know what way the WB will go today with their vote is up in the night. That group has proven time and time again that they don't give a crap about data or public input. They will vote the way they want to, and we will all have to live with whatever the decision is.

Should be very interesting to see what happens for sure!
Click to expand...
I think what you have to understand is, they are hunters as well.

They see a lot of what's going not only on social media but out in the field as well. So just because they don't see it our way don't mean anything.
Also there is a lot of behind the scenes stuff that play on there decisions that me or you don't know about.

This is not about who is right or who is wrong here its about what's best.
 
Tried to listen while working. Never heard a verdict on scopes? Also, what units are going to antler restrictions?
 
They went to break for lunch. People are saying only 2.5% more people killed animals with scopes I call BS on that now the last few years as well as quality is going to go way down with scope removal. Will it save the mule deer herd, no but it's the starting right direction.
 
And just like that, we are back to pre-2016 regs on muzzleloaders.

1x and red dot okay. Above that is prohibited.

I do not agree with this action, but it's now time to move on and actually get to work on things that will help hunters in the long run, like helping our deer herd!
 
Vanilla said:
And just like that, we are back to pre-2016 regs on muzzleloaders.

1x and red dot okay. Above that is prohibited.

I do not agree with this action, but it's now time to move on and actually get to work on things that will help hunters in the long run, like helping our deer herd!
Click to expand...


Still bound by a plan from years ago.

Since then we've had record drought, and record winter.

Variable swings so extreme that any "data" is useless in a long term plan.

If it's not sit tight and cut tags, we don't do anything.

20% of the units experimenting is too radical.
 
I’m sooooo grateful the muzzleloaders were restricted. With virtually no measurable difference in success rates since 2015 and literally thousands more bucks getting slaughtered on the any weapon hunt annually - you guys really did the herd a lot of good yesterday. That is laughable.

Maybe it’s time we actually focus on something that will grow the herd.
 
Exactly What I Said!

All I Can Figure Is Somebody Didn't Like The Success Rate Of The SmokePolers Getting That Close To The LongRangers Success Rate?

Let's Say It Helps A Little?

Who's It Helping!

You Already Said It Silentstalker!

Somebody Will Be Quick To Tell Us It's Not About Saving Deer!

Maybe It's Just About Past Time We Do Something To Help Grow The Deer Herd?

Silentstalker said:
I’m sooooo grateful the muzzleloaders were restricted. With virtually no measurable difference in success rates since 2015 and literally thousands more bucks getting slaughtered on the any weapon hunt annually - you guys really did the herd a lot of good yesterday. That is laughable.

Maybe it’s time we actually focus on something that will grow the herd.
Click to expand...
 
Silentstalker said:
I’m sooooo grateful the muzzleloaders were restricted. With virtually no measurable difference in success rates since 2015 and literally thousands more bucks getting slaughtered on the any weapon hunt annually - you guys really did the herd a lot of good yesterday. That is laughable.

Maybe it’s time we actually focus on something that will grow the herd.
Click to expand...
elkassassin said:
Exactly What I Said!

All I Can Figure Is Somebody Didn't Like The Success Rate Of The SmokePolers Getting That Close To The LongRangers Success Rate?

Let's Say It Helps A Little?

Who's It Helping!

You Already Said It Silentstalker!

Somebody Will Be Quick To Tell Us It's Not About Saving Deer!

Maybe It's Just About Past Time We Do Something To Help Grow The Deer Herd?
Click to expand...

If it did not give you better success why does it matter if they made the rule 1 power or open sites?
I have not read one person that has pushed the idea about limiting scopes to one power has said one word about "herd growth"
I am starting to wonder if all you guys that keep repeating "it won't improve herd growth" is either ignorant or ignorant.
 
notdonhunting said:
If it did not give you better success why does it matter if they made the rule 1 power or open sites?
I have not read one person that has pushed the idea about limiting scopes to one power has said one word about "herd growth"
I am starting to wonder if all you guys that keep repeating "it won't improve herd growth" is either ignorant or ignorant.
Click to expand...
I have been screaming herd growth. I will change anything I have if it will help our mule deer or elk herd.

This was not about herd management or anything but a group of people who didn’t like scopes on muzzys.

The public was not in favor of it. The studies showed no reason for it. The RACs did not support it overall and yet here we are.

One group of hunters taking away something from another group.

Don’t worry about me, I will still kill what I plan to. That is not the point.

If this had anything to do with herd growth or raising buck numbers there would have been major changes to the any weapon hunt.

This was completely 100% social which is BS.
 
Silentstalker said:
I have been screaming herd growth. I will change anything I have if it will help our mule deer or elk herd.

This was not about herd management or anything but a group of people who didn’t like scopes on muzzys.

The public was not in favor of it. The studies showed no reason for it. The RACs did not support it overall and yet here we are.

One group of hunters taking away something from another group.

Don’t worry about me, I will still kill what I plan to. That is not the point.

If this had anything to do with herd growth or raising buck numbers there would have been major changes to the any weapon hunt.

This was completely 100% social which is BS.
Click to expand...

Everyone that pushed for the removing multi-power scopes said it was not about herd growth.
It is only ignorant thinkers like yourself that keeps saying that, so don't point fingers at the ones that have said all along it is about distinguishing what a muzeloader should be.

Again I ask if a multi-power scope vs no scope does not make a difference in success then why does it matter?

I can answer why it matters to me. It matters to me because back before 2016 the hunters that enjoyed muzeloader hunting could draw out at better odds than rifle hunters (same herd unit). After 2016 there was a great increase of guys that wanted to take advantage of using multi- power scopes, making muzeloader hunt odds alot worse.
I might be wrong and the increase came from new hunters but I doubt that, new hunters generally start out with rifles.
I suppose Time will tell if the odds get better for muzeloader hunting.

There is no definitive proof that the public was in favor of multi-power scopes.
 
Hey notdon?

You Saying 60-62% of Hunters/People Were Not Against The TAKE?

I'm Not Against The Take If It Woulda Been An Equal Take Across The Board Of Weapon Types!

I've Said Many Times:

TAKE ALL TECHNOLOGY ON ALL WEAPONS!

Should We Not Take The Rifle Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

Should We Not Take The Archery Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

If We As Hunters Are Even Part Way Gonna Try & Help The Herds Out,All The BS TECHNOLOGY Needs Attention,Not Just Singling One Type Out!

But In Your Eyes It's Only About: I Might Get A Tag Now & Every Year!

notdonhunting said:
Everyone that pushed for the removing multi-power scopes said it was not about herd growth.
It is only ignorant thinkers like yourself that keeps saying that, so don't point fingers at the ones that have said all along it is about distinguishing what a muzeloader should be.

Again I ask if a multi-power scope vs no scope does not make a difference in success then why does it matter?

I can answer why it matters to me. It matters to me because back before 2016 the hunters that enjoyed muzeloader hunting could draw out at better odds than rifle hunters (same herd unit). After 2016 there was a great increase of guys that wanted to take advantage of using multi- power scopes, making muzeloader hunt odds alot worse.
I might be wrong and the increase came from new hunters but I doubt that, new hunters generally start out with rifles.
I suppose Time will tell if the odds get better for muzeloader hunting.

There is no definitive proof that the public was in favor of multi-power scopes.
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
Hey notdon?

You Saying 60-62% of Hunters/People Were Not Against The TAKE?

I'm Not Against The Take If It Woulda Been An Equal Take Across The Board Of Weapon Types!

I've Said Many Times:

TAKE ALL TECHNOLOGY ON ALL WEAPONS!

Should We Not Take The Rifle Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

Should We Not Take The Archery Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

If We As Hunters Are Even Part Way Gonna Try & Help The Herds Out,All The BS TECHNOLOGY Needs Attention,Not Just Singling One Type Out!

But In Your Eyes It's Only About: I Might Get A Tag Now & Every Year!
Click to expand...

First off I like the post bess.
I believe most guys on MM agree with you that the weapons (archery and rifles) need to be limited.
The difference is archery and rifles did not have a new rule 7 years ago that allowed this technology to blow up.
If the tech committee did say let's cut the technology on rifles comparable to muzzleloaders, At what point are you going to go back in history and say this is the point of technology we will allow for rifles.
How about archery we talking about Fred Bears archery equipment or are we talking before that.
The technology committee might address archery and rifles but they will have to address where do we draw the line, not as clear cut as muzzleloaders.

Yes I am selfish I want a tag as often as I can draw out that is why I do the Dedicated Hunter.
 
Hear me out. Pro scope guys be saying that scopes don't matter to success rates then we should probably remove them from the Any Legal Weapon hunts and we will kill just as many deer but save ourselves some money when it comes to buying optics!

Money is tight, think about it guys, you can take that Nightforce off and sell it on Ebay, hand that money to your wife (or husband I guess) and be able to afford groceries this month!

Honestly this is really about the children, yours will now be able to afford school clothes and when it comes time to buy your kid a rifle you don't need to buy a scope so really this just helps grow the sport!

Same could be said about range finders and binoculars and spotting scopes. If they don't help us kill deer then let's save some $ and just not allow them. My wife is on board with this!

#ban_stuff_feed_children!
 
You have to live the arguing out of both sides of their mouths.

"It won't do anything". then "it will just mean more deer get slaughtered on rifle hunt"

Both cannot be true at the same time.



"The majority didn't want it". then " we need to keep politics out of it"

So which is it? Are we doing management on polls?


I've yet to read Bess, Silent Stalker, ballistic, or anyone explain how having scopes "grows more deer". Or how them being put on wasn't a social issue. Or what data they used to do so. Or how many more kids hunt because of them. Or how many fewer animals were wounded after.

They made a mistake in 16, proven by the explosion in tech since then.

I still believe they will need to address ignition. Getting rid of 209. That's an easier enforcement than powder.
 
elkassassin said:
Hey notdon?

You Saying 60-62% of Hunters/People Were Not Against The TAKE?

I'm Not Against The Take If It Woulda Been An Equal Take Across The Board Of Weapon Types!

I've Said Many Times:

TAKE ALL TECHNOLOGY ON ALL WEAPONS!

Should We Not Take The Rifle Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

Should We Not Take The Archery Hunt Back To What It Once Was?

If We As Hunters Are Even Part Way Gonna Try & Help The Herds Out,All The BS TECHNOLOGY Needs Attention,Not Just Singling One Type Out!

But In Your Eyes It's Only About: I Might Get A Tag Now & Every Year!
Click to expand...


Rifles back "to what it once was" is a muzzloader
 
This was 100% social and nothing more. This was one group of hunters taking away from another group. No one wins in that situation.

You think your odds will improve back to what they were in 2015? Good luck with that. That is a heck of a reason to take away opportunity. Your a selfish SOB.

I like using a scope. That is my answer. I killed no more or less deer with it. I kill deer and elk every year. That’s not going to change.

And hossblowhard - yes. We do have definitive evidence that the public was against it. The data from the DWR provided that. So did the RAC mtgs where the majority were against it. The data from the harvest statistics showed there was no measurable increase from 2015 to today.

There was no reason for this change. Prior to 2 days ago a guy could wear tanned coyote hides for camo and hunt with his hawken, another guy could pack around a front stuffer with a 1x scope on it, and another guy could pack around a state of the art muzzy with a 6-20 scope and it didn’t hurt a thing.

My argument is that we should be growing the herd. If we had more deer your precious draw odds would go down and you could draw more frequently.

We should not be wasting time forcing our will upon others who like hunting differently than we do. We just wasted a full years worth of RAC cycle and nothing was done outside of reporting to help our herd.
 
"data" isn't polling.

What was the DATA used to put them on?

2.5% more kills(based on shaky as hell data). You have to assume not one dedicated hunter killed with a muzzy to use just muzzleloader data.

Now yes, I know "that's nothing", but what it is, IS DATA SHOWING INCREASE IN TAKE.


I agree. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE FORCED OTHERS TO CHANGE BECAUSE WE DONT HUNT LIKE THEY DO. That started in 16. For NON BIOLOGICAL, NON WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT reasons, scopes got put on.

I'll gladly apologize if you want to post up your 2015 comments about using data, growing herds, social reasons.

Otherwise you are just a selfish SOB
 
And even further.

If the committee would have addressed archery first, instead of muzzys, not a damn one of ya would have said ****.

There wouldn't be the "make it fair", the "social", the "lose kids", the " grow deer" bullshit because archery regs don't AFFECT YOU.

You wouldn't be protesting the archery guy not being able to use his tech he spent money on.

Your not bitching because of wasted time, or social issues, your bitching because you dumped money on a scope and/or a LR muzzy set up.

If you kill either way Silent, then it don't mean **** to you. Your bitching and whining show otherwise.

THE TECH COMMITEE JOB IS TO ADDRESS TECH, it's not a mule deer committee. They have ENTIRELY DIFFERENT JOBS.
 
I see nothing selfish about liking to use a scope. If liking to use a scope is selfish then I accept.

But, fighting against scopes because you don’t like them is selfish as hell. In 2015 the DWR provided data that everyone signed off on that it would not affect the herd. Funny how their data stood correct.

The “data” you’re disputing is all we have to go off of and what the DWR uses every stinking year. You may not like their data but you cannot dispute it with anything other than your feelings.

Earlier you asked where I proved using scopes grows the herd. Answer: it doesn’t. Bucks don’t grow herds. You’re making my point. We should only be trying to fix a herd in a dire situation. If we had a healthy herd we wouldn’t be fighting over how we shoot them.

I’m done pounding my head against a brick wall. I have accepted the change.

Can we get back to talking about how to help our herds?
 
hossblur said:
And even further.

If the committee would have addressed archery first, instead of muzzys, not a damn one of ya would have said ****.

There wouldn't be the "make it fair", the "social", the "lose kids", the " grow deer" bullshit because IT DOIRSNT AFFECT YOU.

Your not bitching because of wasted time, or social issues, your bitching because you dumped money on a scope and/or a LR muzzy set up.
Click to expand...
I will reply to this tho. I am a die hard archery hunter. I enjoy using a muzzy as a back up. If they atta k archery you can be damn sure I will be screaming from the roof tops - unless they show a help to our herds as the basis of the change.

I am not bitching about the money if a scope either. I sold mine the day this passed. I actually made money on the deal. This has nothing to do with money.

This is completely about the Sh&$ Show of a system we have hear in Utah. We can’t go one RAC cycle without changing what we did last time. That’s probably the biggest contributor to me hunting out of state multiple times a year. This state and its management is a complete joke.
 
I don’t have an issue with the ML scope change proposal.

As far as reverting centerfire rifles back to open sights because that’s the way it was, buffalo hunters in the 1880’s had scope sighted rifles and used them to great effect.

How far back are we going?
 
I don't need or deserve any kudos, I just did what I felt was right. And although I went against my committees recommendations, I must have saw it the same way the WB did, it was only right under the circumstances which we all know were not ideal.
And quite honestly, I think the WB already had an idea of where they wanted us to be in the end, the TC was just part of the process.

I did my best to keep this forum informed after each meeting and I volunteered my butt to get handed to me every day for the past 11 months.

I want to make something very clear.

To my knowledge, and as far as the TC is concerned, there are no further meetings to discuss rangefinders, turrets, silencers, compound bows, etc, etc.
Those are social media rumors by disgruntled people.

I am however in full support of restrictions on spotlighting during hunting seasons, same dates as cameras and flying, but I don't believe this would be a TC item for discussion.

Now......let's figure out how to grow some dang deer 🦌 😁
 
Last edited:
The Battle for Helm’s Deep is over!

The Battle for Middle Earth is about to begin!!!

I was proud of the WB the other night. They saw thru the flimsy arguments of the pro scope side and rebuffed them one by one.

Let’s move forward.

Which is it going to be? Electronic rangefinders or riflescope magnification?

I will start the bidding at no more than 14X.

Coincidentally, that is what is sitting on top of my 270 at the moment. Should I be shopping for a 3 by 9? Anything above 16X has to go
 
ELKOHOLIC said:
I hunt with all three weapons. It blows my mind that you idiots think this will fix everything. If you want to see more big bucks lets go back to recurves and lever action 30-30's also. Think of all the big bucks you would see! I understand this wouldn't be in your best interest though.
Click to expand...
"Idiots"??
Who said this fixes anything?
It wasn't meant to "fix" anything.
It was meant to keep a particular hunting experience somewhat what it was meant to be in it's beginning.

You're a little late for this party.......
 
schoolhousegrizz said:
In my opinion muzzleloaders should have never had variable power scopes on them in the first place. I believe we're the only state in the west that did it. Now it's back to where it should be for a primitive weapon hunt.

Fire away.
Click to expand...

I think most would agree with you. It seems like yesterday that we decided to go down this road though!

Honest question though. Wasn't archery meant to be more of a primitive hunt also? Most big buck I watch drop on the archery hunt, not with the muzzleloader.

It's not because we have better hunters than we did back in the 80's when people were flipping sticks in the direction of deer. It a direct result of technology. I know, I know, It's an inconvenient truth. Same goes for rifle technology! Go ahead and flame away. lol

ps. I would have been fine with not changing the scope law back in 16.
 
slamdunk said:
I don't need or deserve any kudos, I just did what I felt was right and although I went against my committees recommendations, I must have saw it the same way the WB did, it was only right under the circumstances which we all know were not ideal.

I did my best to keep this forum informed after each meeting and I volunteered my butt to get handed to me every day for the past 11 months.

I want to make something very clear.

To my knowledge, and as far as the TC is concerned, there are no further meetings to discuss rangefinders, turrets, silencers, compound bows, etc, etc.
Those are social media rumors by disgruntled people.

I am however in full support of restrictions on spotlighting during hunting seasons, same dates as cameras and flying, but I don't believe this would be a TC item for discussion.

Now......let's figure out how to grow some dang deer 🦌 😁
Click to expand...
Thank you for your efforts slam. I appreciate your time and passion.

And yes Hoss I know it covers all species and that changes nothing as to the topic in my opinion.

Now, let’s grow our deer and elk herds asap.
 
ELKOHOLIC said:
I think most would agree with you. It seems like yesterday that we decided to go down this road though!

Honest question though. Wasn't archery meant to be more of a primitive hunt also? Most big buck I watch drop on the archery hunt, not with the muzzleloader.

It's not because we have better hunters than we did back in the 80's when people were flipping sticks in the direction of deer. It a direct result of technology. I know, I know, It's an inconvenient truth. Same goes for rifle technology! Go ahead and flame away. lol

ps. I would have been fine with not changing the scope law back in 16.
Click to expand...
You're correct that bows have upgraded quite a bit as well. With that said, it is much much harder to kill a mature animal or any animal with a bow. The success rates will show you that in spades. Maybe on some of these limited entry units the best bucks get taken with a bow but they are nowhere near as efficient as a muzzleloader.
 
ELKOHOLIC said:
I think most would agree with you. It seems like yesterday that we decided to go down this road though!

Honest question though. Wasn't archery meant to be more of a primitive hunt also? Most big buck I watch drop on the archery hunt, not with the muzzleloader.

It's not because we have better hunters than we did back in the 80's when people were flipping sticks in the direction of deer. It a direct result of technology. I know, I know, It's an inconvenient truth. Same goes for rifle technology! Go ahead and flame away. lol

ps. I would have been fine with not changing the scope law back in 16.
Click to expand...

Your still talking an inside 100yrd weapon for 99% of hunters. The increases now are measured in feet not hundreds of yards.

My youngest picked up my muzzy, CVA Accura 3x9;Konus scope, and had zero issues his first time shooting it, hit clay pigeons at 200yrds first time he shot it.

With his CVA optima, same loads, open sights, front sight covers the pigeon.

My guess is at 300yrds, it would cover the deer.

Yes, I know, it's an obvious lie, without a scope, kids don't hunt.🙄
 
Last edited:
Are we going to continue hearing all these lame excuses even after it's been finalized?
Wound loss, eyesight, data, etc, etc

I wonder if these guys screaming the loudest realize this is exactly what made the WB put the nail in the coffin?

You're telling the world you can't kill without a scope.

We saw this exact scenario with cameras....

It's over, it's done.....move on!
 
The guys screaming loudest didn't realize we wanted them screaming to expose the bullshit.

Kids quitting hunting because they don't have a scope. 🙄🙄

I did enjoy the "I believe there's just as much wounding just at longer distances" from WB, pretty much crushed that.

Dudes that can't see good. Guns bought under a scope rules that need to be drilled for sights
The only two valid reasons to oppose, and the 2 that got addressed.



Btw. Because we don't use names here, the jackass that is posting the tech committee contact info all over social media, IS AN ASS. If your threatening COMMITEE people, your an Azzhole.

Slam is old, shed hunter is fat, Bryce is short, all fair game, but the implied threats, or threats are bullshit
 
hossblur said:
The guys screaming loudest didn't realize we wanted them screaming to expose the bullshit.

Kids quitting hunting because they don't have a scope. 🙄🙄

I did enjoy the "I believe there's just as much wounding just at longer distances" from WB, pretty much crushed that.

Dudes that can't see good. Guns bought under a scope rules that need to be drilled for sights
The only two valid reasons to oppose, and the 2 that got addressed.



Btw. Because we don't use names here, the jackass that is posting the tech committee contact info all over social media, IS AN ASS. If your threatening COMMITEE people, your an Azzhole.

Slam is old, shed hunter is fat, Bryce is short, all fair game, but the implied threats, or threats are bullshit
Click to expand...
I was actually hoping for a physical threat since we have power of attorney from the state.
 
Silentstalker said:
I will reply to this tho. I am a die hard archery hunter. I enjoy using a muzzy as a back up. If they atta k archery you can be damn sure I will be screaming from the roof tops - unless they show a help to our herds as the basis of the change.

I am not bitching about the money if a scope either. I sold mine the day this passed. I actually made money on the deal. This has nothing to do with money.

This is completely about the Sh&$ Show of a system we have hear in Utah. We can’t go one RAC cycle without changing what we did last time. That’s probably the biggest contributor to me hunting out of state multiple times a year. This state and its management is a complete joke.
Click to expand...
I've got a long range Muzzy I'm okay with the proposal. You've got to start somewhere it's not going to hurt the deer herd. people keep saying it's not going to help but it's not going to hurt.
 
I Can't Help But Think Hossy Either Already Owns Or Will Own A LongRanger In The Near Future!

HE'S A FULL BLOWN OPPORTUNIST!

I'd Laugh About The Time He Snuck About 7 Grand Out That Ms Hossy Didn't Know About To Get One & Have That Thing DE-F'N-TECHNOLOGIED Within A Year Or Two After Buying It!

Yas!

Take Rifles Back To 300-400 Yard Guns That They Once Were!

Somebody above Mentioned MAX Power Of 16X,WAFJ!
 
elkassassin said:
I Can't Help But Think Hossy Either Already Owns Or Will Own A LongRanger In The Near Future!

HE'S A FULL BLOWN OPPORTUNIST!

I'd Laugh About The Time He Snuck About 7 Grand Out That Ms Hossy Didn't Know About To Get One & Have That Thing DE-F'N-TECHNOLOGIED Within A Year Or Two After Buying It!

Yas!

Take Rifles Back To 300-400 Yard Guns That They Once Were!

Somebody above Mentioned MAX Power Of 16X,WAFJ!
Click to expand...


Pay attention.

I own a CVA accura2 that has a cheap Konus scope shooting 100grains of pyrodex and 245 gr powerbelts.

Boys own CVA optima.

Oldest but a Cabela's 3x9 on it

Youngest didn't want to waste his money on a scope

Both shoot same loads

I also have a Thompson New Englander that I bought at Kmart in 1992.

I'm not buying anymore muzzies.
 
Further mine

Browning a bolt 30-06, Leupold vari x 3x,9 from both 1990

Youngest

Ruger American 7-08. 4-12 Bushnell(discontinued bargain cave)


Oldest Browning x bolt 300 win. 6x20 vortex(discontinued bargain cave)

Happy?

Bow is a bear BR 33, 65 lb. Easton arrows, 125gr montecs

Pretty high tech ain't i
 
Might Be A CHEAP KONUS Scope But That BITTCH Is Coming Off!

That Or You're Breaking The K-Mart Special Out!

I'll Bet your Son That Didn't Buy A NIGHTFORCE Is Laughing Now!:D




hossblur said:
Pay attention.

I own a CVA accura2 that has a cheap Konus scope shooting 100grains of pyrodex and 245 gr powerbelts.

Boys own CVA optima.

Oldest but a Cabela's 3x9 on it

Youngest didn't want to waste his money on a scope

Both shoot same loads

I also have a Thompson New Englander that I bought at Kmart in 1992.

I'm not buying anymore muzzies.
Click to expand...
 
We're forgetting the reason for the "ALW" hunt, it means "Any Legal Weapon" from air guns to 50BMG.

The archery and muzzleloader hunts were created for low success and additional opportunities to "hunt" versus "kill".

Let's figure out how to grow some "deer" and quit focusing on saving "bucks".

Does create more bucks.
 
slamdunk said:
We're forgetting the reason for the "ALW" hunt, it means "Any Legal Weapon" from air guns to 50BMG.

The archery and muzzleloader hunts were created for low success and additional opportunities to "hunt" versus "kill".

Let's figure out how to grow some "deer" and quit focusing on saving "bucks". I've Been Saying That For How Long Now?

Does create more bucks.
Click to expand...
It's past Time!
 
Ya!

I know!

I Use To Give Colorado Alot Of Credit For Managing Mule Deer Better Than Utah!

But When They Started 4TH Season Late Tags That Put A REAL Hurt On Quality Bucks!

Then They Blame The CWD!

Always Got A Book Full Of BS Excuses!

Ya There's Some CWD Out There!

But To Slaughter Deer Just Because They MIGHT Have CWD?



slamdunk said:
The entire west is feeling the same declines, this isn't just a Utah thang.
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
Ya!

I know!

I Use To Give Colorado Alot Of Credit For Managing Mule Deer Better Than Utah!

But When They Started 4TH Season Late Tags That Put A REAL Hurt On Quality Bucks!

Then They Blame The CWD!

Always Got A Book Full Of BS Excuses!

Ya There's Some CWD Out There!

But To Slaughter Deer Just Because They MIGHT Have CWD?
Click to expand...
The Cortez hunts aren't what they used to be
 
slamdunk said:
We're forgetting the reason for the "ALW" hunt, it means "Any Legal Weapon" from air guns to 50BMG.

The archery and muzzleloader hunts were created for low success and additional opportunities to "hunt" versus "kill".

Let's figure out how to grow some "deer" and quit focusing on saving "bucks".

Does create more bucks.
Click to expand...
But, the ‘extra opportunity’ was you could hunt archery or muzzy for about $10 in addition to rifle hunting to fill one tag, in the same year.
You can’t compare then to now on that topic.
 
Silentstalker said:
Thank you for your efforts slam. I appreciate your time and passion.

And yes Hoss I know it covers all species and that changes nothing as to the topic in my opinion.

Now, let’s grow our deer and elk herds asap.
Click to expand...
When growing our Elk herd we are helping stunt the Deer herd.
Both species can survive together, but both cannot thrive together.
 
My “feeling” is that the success rate may not change that much, but less trophy bucks will be killed without scopes. Do I have data to support that? No, but IMO those older, smarter bucks are less likely to be found at less than 200 yards.

I think everyone will agree that quality is down all over. Could it be that long range muzzleloaders (and 800+ yr centerfire rifles) are part of the reason?
 
txhunter58 said:
I think everyone will agree that quality is down all over. Could it be that long range muzzleloaders (and 800+ yr centerfire rifles) are part of the reason?
Click to expand...

We all know that nobody has ever killed a big buck with a bow…so yeah, must just be muzzy and rifle hunters.

All joking aside, I think we are better, more dedicated hunters as a whole today than had ever existed as well. My dad never looked at a map a single time for deer hunting when I was growing up. And he certainly didn’t have GPS tech readily available at his finger tips. That’s just one example outside of weaponry that has made hunting easier and more accessible for all of us. There are others.
 
So you didn’t disagree with my premise, specifically the harvest of mature trophy animals.

It’s not just winters and predators and habitat that has reduced QUALITY. What is it that I hear about the book cliffs: “you will see lots of 150-160 class bucks”. And why is the quality in the Henry’s down?

We have to be able to admit that our ever increasing technology is part of the big picture.
 
Last edited:
I honestly think that the future of big game hunting is elk, not mule deer in the western states. Most other species melt like snowflakes, but elk populations are almost impossible to keep in check.

That being said, I prefer to hunt deer and am just as frustrated as everyone else with the quality and quantity issues. 🙃
 
hossblur said:
Further mine

Browning a bolt 30-06, Leupold vari x 3x,9 from both 1990

Youngest

Ruger American 7-08. 4-12 Bushnell(discontinued bargain cave)


Oldest Browning x bolt 300 win. 6x20 vortex(discontinued bargain cave)

Happy?

Bow is a bear BR 33, 65 lb. Easton arrows, 125gr montecs

Pretty high tech ain't i
Click to expand...
I used to shoot that same bow, my brother has it now. We both really like it.
 
schoolhousegrizz said:
In my opinion muzzleloaders should have never had variable power scopes on them in the first place. I believe we're the only state in the west that did it. Now it's back to where it should be for a primitive weapon hunt.

Fire away.
Click to expand...
Wyoming, Montana, Arizona, and New Mexico allow hunts with muzzleloaders including scopes with amplification.

For me this means using my two different muzzleloaders in different states.
 
txhunter58 said:
So you didn’t disagree with my premise, specifically the harvest of mature trophy animals.

It’s not just winters and predators and habitat that has reduced QUALITY. What is it that I hear about the book cliffs: “you will see lots of 150-160 class bucks”. And why is the quality in the Henry’s down?

We have to be able to admit that our ever increasing technology is part of the big picture.
Click to expand...
The quality in the bookcliffs and the Henry's can both mostly be attributed to other factors other than hunting, especially on the Henry's. Both have had spiraling herd numbers caused mostly by the things you listed. (Winters, predators, habitat, i will add prolonged DROUGHT as i belive that has been the main driver for both of those herds) both are very limited in how many animals are killed by hunters. So while there is an argument to be made about hunters reducing quality on an eviscerated herd. The overall reason for the reduced quality is mostly attributed to the other factors.
 
JakeH said:
The quality in the bookcliffs and the Henry's can both mostly be attributed to other factors other than hunting, especially on the Henry's. Both have had spiraling herd numbers caused mostly by the things you listed. (Winters, predators, habitat, i will add prolonged DROUGHT as i belive that has been the main driver for both of those herds) both are very limited in how many animals are killed by hunters. So while there is an argument to be made about hunters reducing quality on an eviscerated herd. The overall reason for the reduced quality is mostly attributed to the other factors.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
We can't expect to maintain the quality we are annualy cropping off the top if we can't recruit from the bottom.
 
Vanilla said:
not fully, but figured I’d point out the error in singling out weapons.
Click to expand...
Agreed. There is no question that technology on all fronts helps us be more successful whether that is in simply filling our tag or getting a trophy.

The question is: where do we draw the line?. We pretty much agree that helicopters and drones are a bridge too far. But those aren’t the only things.

In the long run, it’s either limit tech or tags.

Yes, yes we need to grow more deer too!
 
JakeH said:
The quality in the bookcliffs and the Henry's can both mostly be attributed to other factors other than hunting, especially on the Henry's. Both have had spiraling herd numbers caused mostly by the things you listed. (Winters, predators, habitat, i will add prolonged DROUGHT as i belive that has been the main driver for both of those herds) both are very limited in how many animals are killed by hunters. So while there is an argument to be made about hunters reducing quality on an eviscerated herd. The overall reason for the reduced quality is mostly attributed to the other factors.
Click to expand...
Sticking with quality only, are you saying that the statement that you will see a lot of young and middle-aged bucks in both the Henry’s and the book cliffs is not accurate.? if that is a true statement, then sounds to me like there is a quality problem, not a quantity problem. We bucks are concerned at least. If I’m inaccurate, then I’ve been given bad information.
 
You see nowhere near what you used to see on the book cliffs. It had been a drastically sinking ship since around 2010.

It is a quantity problem out there and on almost every unit in the state.

The Henry’s is a unit I can’t comment on. Haven’t been down there since the year they opened it back up.
 
Same Shitt Just About Statewide!

QUANTITY Keeps Going Down!

So Hows The QUALITY Not Gonna Follow?

90% Of Hunters Are Gonna Pop A Buck If They Can!

Each Year That Size Of Buck Gets Smaller!

Here The HELL We Are!
 
Last edited:
So Hossy?

Your Son That Didn't Put A Scope On His SmokePole?

Did He Let You Know How Much Smarter He Was Than You & Your Other Son?
 
slamdunk said:
I don't need or deserve any kudos, I just did what I felt was right. And although I went against my committees recommendations, I must have saw it the same way the WB did, it was only right under the circumstances which we all know were not ideal.
And quite honestly, I think the WB already had an idea of where they wanted us to be in the end, the TC was just part of the process.
Click to expand...
Slam, question for you about the process of the TC... You say that the WB already had an idea of where they wanted the TC to land. That leads to my question... when the TC first met, was there direction from the WB (or other groups/individuals) to specifically look at specific items like scopes on muzzies, or did the TC have the absolute freedom to discuss anything that could be classified as emerging tech and chose to look at arrow/bolt length and scopes on muzzies? If there was direction from the WB or others, was it accompanied by guidance or was the TC given an open slate to work with?

Again, not an attack of any kind. I am honestly curious how process took shape from the start. I think others would find it informative as well.
 
mtmuley said:
Montana doesn't. mtmuley
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update. I was incorrect in my earlier post. MT and NM do not allow amplified scopes on muzzleloaders during muzzleloader specific hunts. It appears NM made the change for 2023 hunts. AZ and WY still allow the technology.
 
Simpleton said:
Slam, question for you about the process of the TC... You say that the WB already had an idea of where they wanted the TC to land. That leads to my question... when the TC first met, was there direction from the WB (or other groups/individuals) to specifically look at specific items like scopes on muzzies, or did the TC have the absolute freedom to discuss anything that could be classified as emerging tech and chose to look at arrow/bolt length and scopes on muzzies? If there was direction from the WB or others, was it accompanied by guidance or was the TC given an open slate to work with?

Again, not an attack of any kind. I am honestly curious how process took shape from the start. I think others would find it informative as well.
Click to expand...
In our opening meeting, we were told that the WB asked for a TC to be assembled as a group to strictly look at both current and emerging technologies.

Having said that, there was already like minded individuals knowing that crazy technology is hitting our markets.

Yes, we had and still have full reign of whatever we feel needs to be looked at.
No one specifically "told" us to look at muzzleloader scopes, all three weapons were on our docket to discuss and changes were implemented.

These items aren't necessary aimed at "fixing" deer herds, they are mostly aimed at lowering the human advantages over our game.

There are a lot of emerging tech items about to hit our hunting world, several are already being used in military applications but tend to wind up on sporting goods shelves.
 
My cousin has been playing with these thermal binoculars from Rich guys. Pulsar merger binos. He says they're a game changer in the dark
 
txhunter58 said:
Sticking with quality only, are you saying that the statement that you will see a lot of young and middle-aged bucks in both the Henry’s and the book cliffs is not accurate.? if that is a true statement, then sounds to me like there is a quality problem, not a quantity problem. We bucks are concerned at least. If I’m inaccurate, then I’ve been given bad information.
Click to expand...
I really can't speak to the Henry's on a personal level, I've never set foot out there. But I did research it last year lookedvat all the data the dwr puts out, the entire hard decreased by around 40% in just a few years, even though they was only giving out around 50-70 buck tags unit wide. That correlated pretty close with the perceived decrease in quality.

As far as the bookcliffs is concerned, I do know that unit very well, and I can tell you the overall deer numbers are a fraction of what they was 15-20 years ago. You are not seeing a lot of deer, let alone a lot of "quality" bucks. Also the Genetics in the books makes it harder to find quality bucks as a large portionof them will never be even a 160 buck.

I will say this, if someone told you that you will find a ton of 150-160 bucks you was lied too. 22-24 inch 3 and 4 points you can find a fair number of. Quality does seem to be on a slight increase the last couple years, but the overall numbers are still way way down.

So like I said, to me to the lower quality has more been affected by an overall decreased deer herd, but it may be amplified by "over hunting" of top end deer. But I doubt that has had a significant impact.

Both units have seen a large % of tags cut, and justifiably so. And neither unit has had a single doe tag issued in 25 years.

My point is, technology would not be an issue if we could fix the true issues with the herd and grow the population. Taking scopes off of muzzleloaders is not going to have any effect on the quality of the herds, hell I seriously doubt Taking them off rifles would either. There are still giant bucks killed every year all across the west and in every kind of hunt unit there is. A fair bit of them are killed with archery equipment.
 
slamdunk said:
In our opening meeting, we were told that the WB asked for a TC to be assembled as a group to strictly look at both current and emerging technologies.

Having said that, there was already like minded individuals knowing that crazy technology is hitting our markets.

Yes, we had and still have full reign of whatever we feel needs to be looked at.
No one specifically "told" us to look at muzzleloader scopes, all three weapons were on our docket to discuss and changes were implemented.

These items aren't necessary aimed at "fixing" deer herds, they are mostly aimed at lowering the human advantages over our game.

There are a lot of emerging tech items about to hit our hunting world, several are already being used in military applications but tend to wind up on sporting goods shelves.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response Slam. I am glad to hear that there wasn't outside influence directing the TC to target specific things. In my opinion, that would be a bad look for the WB to "pass the buck" onto the TC to take the lumps from the public, while they were actually the drivers of the proposal. I must have misinterpreted your prior post where you said that the WB had a place they wanted the recommendation on scopes to land. To me it came across as them having a larger role in directly what the TC looked at. I guess I just don't quite understand how, prior to the proposal, the WB would have had a place they wanted the TC land (on the muzzleloader scopes, or any proposal) if they didn't already know that was a topic that your group would be making a recommendation on.

Again, thanks for the response and pulling back the curtain a bit for us to understand how the process and proposal took shape.
 
JakeH said:
I really can't speak to the Henry's on a personal level, I've never set foot out there. But I did research it last year lookedvat all the data the dwr puts out, the entire hard decreased by around 40% in just a few years, even though they was only giving out around 50-70 buck tags unit wide. That correlated pretty close with the perceived decrease in quality.

As far as the bookcliffs is concerned, I do know that unit very well, and I can tell you the overall deer numbers are a fraction of what they was 15-20 years ago. You are not seeing a lot of deer, let alone a lot of "quality" bucks. Also the Genetics in the books makes it harder to find quality bucks as a large portionof them will never be even a 160 buck.

I will say this, if someone told you that you will find a ton of 150-160 bucks you was lied too. 22-24 inch 3 and 4 points you can find a fair number of. Quality does seem to be on a slight increase the last couple years, but the overall numbers are still way way down.

So like I said, to me to the lower quality has more been affected by an overall decreased deer herd, but it may be amplified by "over hunting" of top end deer. But I doubt that has had a significant impact.

Both units have seen a large % of tags cut, and justifiably so. And neither unit has had a single doe tag issued in 25 years.

My point is, technology would not be an issue if we could fix the true issues with the herd and grow the population. Taking scopes off of muzzleloaders is not going to have any effect on the quality of the herds, hell I seriously doubt Taking them off rifles would either. There are still giant bucks killed every year all across the west and in every kind of hunt unit there is. A fair bit of them are killed with archery equipment.
Click to expand...
Technology is the ONLY reason those few trophy bucks are being killed and you know it.
And with technology comes illegal practices to find these animals and get them harvested.
Cameras, bait, infrared, drones, planes, copters, 25 paid spotters, etc, etc.....whatever it takes.

Just as I have preached numerous times...."as quality diminishes, technology will escalate".
That is a fact.

You just stated it well about the BC's.
The quality has disappeared, but those two best bucks WILL get found and killed.

The Henry's top end is skimmed every year because of money and technology, Oak Creek is seeing it now as well.
The ONLY reason the Paunsaugunt is still thriving it's it's flat terrain, those bucks just aren't as visible and they move constantly.

I am not against trophy hunting, but we have got to look at the bigger issues of recruitment and replenishment.

Saving Does is key, let's figure that sh!t out asap.
 
Simpleton said:
Thanks for the response Slam. I am glad to hear that there wasn't outside influence directing the TC to target specific things. In my opinion, that would be a bad look for the WB to "pass the buck" onto the TC to take the lumps from the public, while they were actually the drivers of the proposal. I must have misinterpreted your prior post where you said that the WB had a place they wanted the recommendation on scopes to land. To me it came across as them having a larger role in directly what the TC looked at. I guess I just don't quite understand how, prior to the proposal, the WB would have had a place they wanted the TC land (on the muzzleloader scopes, or any proposal) if they didn't already know that was a topic that your group would be making a recommendation on.

Again, thanks for the response and pulling back the curtain a bit for us to understand how the process and proposal took shape.
Click to expand...
I don't want to try smokescreening, there's no doubt the top end saw a need for technology to be looked at, but it needed to be ran through the processes put into place before it becomes law.

The MZ trends have been noticed by all of us, the fuse just needed to be lit because it really wasn't a "job" the existing committees were created for.
Tech is blowing up, therfore the need for a group to stay on top of it was formed.
 

Similar threads

R
Vernon private land help
Replies
49
Views
1k
devobrodie
devobrodie
shedneck
Thank You, Utah.
Replies
8
Views
1k
elkassassin
elkassassin
Bux n Dux
2024 General Deer reports
Replies
42
Views
3k
Ticks N Tines
Ticks N Tines

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Big Utah Bull
081A317D-827F-4CD8-8ADC-6BD4C216DFFC.jpeg
20120BCA-EF0A-4F42-BB40-D07BB4FE52A7.jpeg
img-5756.jpeg
F1F9643C-910F-4FC8-B01E-813248053678.jpeg
7790C9CA-5AA9-4E13-8FD7-AD2A07E8A0F8.jpeg
Super Wide Cheater Buck
96F49153-F79A-4E0D-906E-22ED799B162D.jpeg
1A1975B9-AF82-44F7-B437-ED80AD1B7677.jpeg
20230619_235508.jpg
image0.jpeg
IMG_6624.jpeg
Bearpaw Outfitters

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

Wild West Outfitters

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

J & J Outfitters

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

Shane Scott Outfitting

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

Utah Big Game Outfitters

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

Apex Outfitters

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

Urge 2 Hunt

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

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

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

Lickity Split Outfitters

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

Back
Top Bottom