Utah LE bull elk hunts need to change.

[cantkillathing]

The reality is that elk hunting in Utah is becoming a OIL hunt but there is a way to fix the problem so that its not taking 27 years to draw a tag. That is we need to restructure the way they are hunted. I am one that was all about big bulls and fighting for big bulls but not realizing that this meant sacrificing never being able to hunt them. As I have gotten older and my kids are becomeing adults my thoughts have changed, I would much rather hunt, and have the chance to harvest an animal than to wait 25+ years. I believe there is a way to accomplish both, having big bulls and having more opportunity to hunt. The seasons need to change and the amount of days to hunt need to change. If I was king for the day and was looking after the peasants of the world this is how I would do this.
1. Shorter hunting seasons
2. more tags
3. No rut hunt
4. No trail cameras
5, tweek waiting period
6. No archery cow/spike hunts only because they will coincide with the LE tags and sometimes will ruin a LE hunt.

Here is how it would look. A first archery season that is 2 weeks long, then a second archery season that is 2 weeks long.
No Rifle Rut hunt, no hunt in most of the rut. 5 day muzzy hunt at end of the Rut, 2nd 5 day Muzzy hunt. Late 5 day rifle hunt, and a 2nd late rifle hunt.
Give out 3 times the amount of tags than we have been. With the idea that if you dont harvest a bull you dont have a waiting period, this will allow hunters to still be selective in trying to harvest mature bulls.
By doing this you would have a potential to hunt LE like 5 or 6 times in your
By getting rid of Trail cameras we would have higher potential of seeing bigger than ever bulls, mainly because nobody will ever know about some of them until they actually lay eyes on them.

I know everyone has their ideas, but I do think something needs to change? I just like to hunt, I dont really care if I harvest a bull or not, just getting out there with the dream that potentially I could kill a great animal is thrill enough.

Also maybe in Utah for our GS deer hunts we should start implementing a waiting period if you harvest an animal then maybe people wont shoot yearlings they would hold out. for a mature animal. This would be another great conversation to have.

 

[dgwoody]

I think pulling rifle hunts out of the rut would do a lot of good, but it would never pass with the RAC system.

 

[travishunter3006]

Lol. Trail cams can’t kill elk.

 

[cantkillathing]

Lol. Trail cams can’t kill elk.

They dont kill elk, but once they are on camera its a matter of time they are found. There has been a lot of bulls that would never have been known about if it wasnt for trail cameras. Thats why I believe we would end up finding bigger bulls in the long run, because you would only see them if you are out and about glassing and digging them up, trail cameras only let you know they are in the area and you have proof, if nobody had those pictures nobody would ever know.

 

[Bux n Dux]

So you want to essentially cater to trophy hunting in a different way, while telling the GS OTC hunters to suck it. Very sportsman like and considering of you.

 

[Bux n Dux]

They dont kill elk, but once they are on camera its a matter of time they are found. There has been a lot of bulls that would never have been known about if it wasnt for trail cameras. Thats why I believe we would end up finding bigger bulls in the long run, because you would only see them if you are out and about glassing and digging them up, trail cameras only let you know they are in the area and you have proof, if nobody had those pictures nobody would ever know.

That’s the biggest lie I’ve heard this week. You think the outfitters paying guys to live on the mountain all summer to follow animals are less effective than trail cams? What about when you have 14 different guys covering a unit every day of the hunt with a hunter in a centralized location waiting for word from a spotter that they’ve located a shooter? Trail cams are more effective than that?

What world do you live in ?

 

[cantkillathing]

So you want to essentially cater to trophy hunting in a different way, while telling the GS OTC hunters to suck it. Very sportsman like and considering of you.

no trying to allow more opportunity to hunt bull elk in utah, I donts see how it is telling anyone that is OTC to suck it. I want to hunt these animals not wait 27 years to hunt them. Maybe explain your thoughts better so I can understand what you are implying.

 

[Bux n Dux]

no trying to allow more opportunity to hunt bull elk in utah, I donts see how it is telling anyone that is OTC to suck it. I want to hunt these animals not wait 27 years to hunt them. Maybe explain your thoughts better so I can understand what you are implying.

You’re gonna magically pull 32k+ bull elk tags annually out of your azz and still have big bulls left over after the hunts? Eliminating OTC tags would put that many hunters every year on the side lines every year. How many additional tags would that potentially create for big bull LE opportunities? 5k at best? Get real. You can hunt LE elk every 10 years if you decide that’s what you want to do. Waiting 27 years for a tag is a CHOICE, not a requirement. Half that wait and you could have an incredible hunt. Half that wait and you could have the opportunity to chase LE elk.

The choice is yours. But trading 32k+ OTC tags for an additional 5k LE bull tags isn’t even close to a fair trade for guys who just want the opportunity to go hunting every year

 

[JPickett]

i like the no archery because it would ruin a LE hunt. LOL, how transparent to not being about opportunity

 

[cantkillathing]

You’re gonna magically pull 32k+ bull elk tags annually out of your azz and still have big bulls left over after the hunts? Eliminating OTC tags would put that many hunters every year on the side lines every year. How many additional tags would that potentially create for big bull LE opportunities? 5k at best? Get real. You can hunt LE elk every 10 years if you decide that’s what you want to do. Waiting 27 years for a tag is a CHOICE, not a requirement. Half that wait and you could have an incredible hunt. Half that wait and you could have the opportunity to chase LE elk.

The choice is yours. But trading 32k+ OTC tags for an additional 5k LE bull tags isn’t even close to a fair trade for guys who just want the opportunity to go hunting every year

I dont see anywhere where I said get rid of the OTC tags except the archery but I am fine if spike/ cow archery tags stay, go drink your coffee and relax a little.

 

[cantkillathing]

i like the no archery because it would ruin a LE hunt. LOL, how transparent to not being about opportunity

Thats the only hunt that would be affected in a way, the spike/cow archery hunt, taking this and having the ability to hunt more bulls rather than spikes, but I am fine if they still had both, as long as people knew there was a spike hunt going on with their bull tag.

 

[BLooDTRaCKeR]

Bux n Dux likes his trail cameras….just an observation ?

 

[Deerlove]

The reality is that elk hunting in Utah is becoming a OIL hunt but there is a way to fix the problem so that its not taking 27 years to draw a tag. That is we need to restructure the way they are hunted. I am one that was all about big bulls and fighting for big bulls but not realizing that this meant sacrificing never being able to hunt them. As I have gotten older and my kids are becomeing adults my thoughts have changed, I would much rather hunt, and have the chance to harvest an animal than to wait 25+ years. I believe there is a way to accomplish both, having big bulls and having more opportunity to hunt. The seasons need to change and the amount of days to hunt need to change. If I was king for the day and was looking after the peasants of the world this is how I would do this.
1. Shorter hunting seasons
2. more tags
3. No rut hunt
4. No trail cameras
5, tweek waiting period
6. No archery cow/spike hunts only because they will coincide with the LE tags and sometimes will ruin a LE hunt.

Here is how it would look. A first archery season that is 2 weeks long, then a second archery season that is 2 weeks long.
No Rifle Rut hunt, no hunt in most of the rut. 5 day muzzy hunt at end of the Rut, 2nd 5 day Muzzy hunt. Late 5 day rifle hunt, and a 2nd late rifle hunt.
Give out 3 times the amount of tags than we have been. With the idea that if you dont harvest a bull you dont have a waiting period, this will allow hunters to still be selective in trying to harvest mature bulls.
By doing this you would have a potential to hunt LE like 5 or 6 times in your
By getting rid of Trail cameras we would have higher potential of seeing bigger than ever bulls, mainly because nobody will ever know about some of them until they actually lay eyes on them.

I know everyone has their ideas, but I do think something needs to change? I just like to hunt, I dont really care if I harvest a bull or not, just getting out there with the dream that potentially I could kill a great animal is thrill enough.

Also maybe in Utah for our GS deer hunts we should start implementing a waiting period if you harvest an animal then maybe people wont shoot yearlings they would hold out. for a mature animal. This would be another great conversation to have.

No spike hunting? Those 17k tags will sure help the pt creep. SMH ps I don't hunt spikes.

 

[cantkillathing]

No spike hunting? Those 17k tags will sure help the pt creep. SMH ps I don't hunt spikes.

I was only talking about the archery, not the rifle, or muzzy spike hunts, this seems to be throwing people off, I am only talking about changing LE units not any OTC tags, but the archery, but again fine with keeping archery spike/cow tags if that would be a big issue. The only reason is I put it in there is because that is the only OTC tag that seems to conflict with LE hunts.

 

[Bux n Dux]

I was only talking about the archery, not the rifle, or muzzy spike hunts, this seems to be throwing people off, I am only talking about changing LE units not any OTC tags, but the archery, but again fine with keeping archery spike/cow tags if that would be a big issue. The only reason is I put it in there is because that is the only OTC tag that seems to conflict with LE hunts.

What about muzzy deer hunters hunting the same dates as the LE muzzy elk? Or the mid LE rifle hunters hunting the same dates as the general spike hunt? Lots of hunts over lap. Why are you targeting the archery guys? Of all the groups out there, they should be singled out and restricted last

 

[cantkillathing]

What about muzzy deer hunters hunting the same dates as the LE muzzy elk? Or the mid LE rifle hunters hunting the same dates as the general spike hunt? Lots of hunts over lap. Why are you targeting the archery guys? Of all the groups out there, they should be singled out and restricted last

I’m starting to think you are not reading everything just looking for something to be pissed at. You are a hard person to please. Maybe read everything then come up with something.

 

[Zim]

It’s not rocket science. Milking the low harvest archery seasons for as many participants as possible would drain points and shorten the waits across the board. States have been doing this since the first modern hunting seasons were legalized. But that makes too much sense and does not cater to the wealth tag buyers who want a harvest for their dollars. Nothing will ever change in Utah. The situation is similar to deer seasons in the SE US, MI & TN. Once you give gun hunters the rut you’ll never get it back. Their lobby is too big. That’s why all their archery hunters pile into IL during the rut. Politicians manage game these days, not DNR’s. And Utah leads the West when it comes to corrupt wildlife politicians. Good luck convincing a corrupt politician to write up common sense legislation without lining his pocket with coin.

 

[DeerHunter53]

It’s not rocket science. Milking the low harvest archery seasons for as many participants as possible would drain points and shorten the waits across the board. States have been doing this since the first modern hunting seasons were legalized. But that makes too much sense and does not cater to the wealth tag buyers who want a harvest for their dollars. Nothing will ever change in Utah. The situation is similar to deer seasons in the SE US, MI & TN. Once you give gun hunters the rut you’ll never get it back. Their lobby is too big. That’s why all their archery hunters pile into IL during the rut. Politicians manage game these days, not DNR’s. And Utah leads the West when it comes to corrupt wildlife politicians. Good luck convincing a corrupt politician to write up common sense legislation without lining his pocket with coin.

I don't think Utah leads the way for corruption in the F&G look at California the Governor has his Dad leading the charge on no lion hunting shutting down fishing boats that have fished for years and now they are out of compliance.
I can go on and on but I believe every state in the West right now is under fire from corruption, over hunting, seasons that last for months. It's not exactly the same but similar in many ways

 

[Zim]

I don't think Utah leads the way for corruption in the F&G look at California the Governor has his Dad leading the charge on no lion hunting shutting down fishing boats that have fished for years and now they are out of compliance.
I can go on and on but I believe every state in the West right now is under fire from corruption, over hunting, seasons that last for months. It's not exactly the same but similar in many ways

Quite sure the Utah governor has that beat with his support of SFW’s brazen Expo contract hijacking a few years ago. Truly pathetic politics at its finest. Just can’t get much worse than that.

 

[travishunter3006]

They dont kill elk, but once they are on camera its a matter of time they are found. There has been a lot of bulls that would never have been known about if it wasnt for trail cameras. Thats why I believe we would end up finding bigger bulls in the long run, because you would only see them if you are out and about glassing and digging them up, trail cameras only let you know they are in the area and you have proof, if nobody had those pictures nobody would ever know.

You are 100% wrong. Did a trail cam touch you as a child?

 

[tallelkchaser]

The reality is that elk hunting in Utah is becoming a OIL hunt but there is a way to fix the problem so that its not taking 27 years to draw a tag. That is we need to restructure the way they are hunted. I am one that was all about big bulls and fighting for big bulls but not realizing that this meant sacrificing never being able to hunt them. As I have gotten older and my kids are becomeing adults my thoughts have changed, I would much rather hunt, and have the chance to harvest an animal than to wait 25+ years. I believe there is a way to accomplish both, having big bulls and having more opportunity to hunt. The seasons need to change and the amount of days to hunt need to change. If I was king for the day and was looking after the peasants of the world this is how I would do this.
1. Shorter hunting seasons
2. more tags
3. No rut hunt
4. No trail cameras
5, tweek waiting period
6. No archery cow/spike hunts only because they will coincide with the LE tags and sometimes will ruin a LE hunt.

Here is how it would look. A first archery season that is 2 weeks long, then a second archery season that is 2 weeks long.
No Rifle Rut hunt, no hunt in most of the rut. 5 day muzzy hunt at end of the Rut, 2nd 5 day Muzzy hunt. Late 5 day rifle hunt, and a 2nd late rifle hunt.
Give out 3 times the amount of tags than we have been. With the idea that if you dont harvest a bull you dont have a waiting period, this will allow hunters to still be selective in trying to harvest mature bulls.
By doing this you would have a potential to hunt LE like 5 or 6 times in your
By getting rid of Trail cameras we would have higher potential of seeing bigger than ever bulls, mainly because nobody will ever know about some of them until they actually lay eyes on them.

I know everyone has their ideas, but I do think something needs to change? I just like to hunt, I dont really care if I harvest a bull or not, just getting out there with the dream that potentially I could kill a great animal is thrill enough.

Also maybe in Utah for our GS deer hunts we should start implementing a waiting period if you harvest an animal then maybe people wont shoot yearlings they would hold out. for a mature animal. This would be another great conversation to have.

I agree that something needs to change here in Utah but unfortunately I don’t see anything changing this much. More archery opportunities and more primitive weapon hunts would be great IMO. Lower success rates would allow for more people to be afield. Also agree with removing the rifle hunt from the rut- it would be nice to see archers given more of a chance here. Would also think some more consideration around wounding animals would be nice - essentially if there is blood your tag is punched even if the animal is not recovered. Would be hard to enforce but would hopefully have people consider their shot selection beforehand. Appreciate the newer initiatives on technology as well that have come up. Just my opinion, thanks for sharing your thoughts and ideas.

 

[AkBenjo]

Im not a Utah person, in fact I have never even hunted in Utah so I cannot comment on the majority of ideas the original poster put forth. That being said I do agree something needs to change, and not just in Utah. Being a math guy I have studied point creep for many years and my son having just turned 3 years old it is a very realistic scenario that he could start accumulating points as soon as they are available for him and never have a chance of drawing a premier tag. I don’t know what exactly is the best route to go but I do know something different needs to happen.

Ben

 

[Dangbig]

I agree that something needs to change here in Utah but unfortunately I don’t see anything changing this much. More archery opportunities and more primitive weapon hunts would be great IMO. Lower success rates would allow for more people to be afield. Also agree with removing the rifle hunt from the rut- it would be nice to see archers given more of a chance here. Would also think some more consideration around wounding animals would be nice - essentially if there is blood your tag is punched even if the animal is not recovered. Would be hard to enforce but would hopefully have people consider their shot selection beforehand. Appreciate the newer initiatives on technology as well that have come up. Just my opinion, thanks for sharing your thoughts and ideas.

Archers already have the longest seasons why do they need more seasons

 

[highfastflyer]

Im not a Utah person, in fact I have never even hunted in Utah so I cannot comment on the majority of ideas the original poster put forth. That being said I do agree something needs to change, and not just in Utah. Being a math guy I have studied point creep for many years and my son having just turned 3 years old it is a very realistic scenario that he could start accumulating points as soon as they are available for him and never have a chance of drawing a premier tag. I don’t know what exactly is the best route to go but I do know something different needs to happen.

Ben

In the year 2070.

 

[txhunter58]

I think you could double the number of LE bull tags without affecting the trophy potential much

I can’t remember at this moment if there are any “management” ek tags like there are in deer. If not, there should be. 5 point or less tags. 5 points can be real trophies.

 

[tallelkchaser]

Archers already have the longest seasons why do they need more seasons

I was more thinking if things were to change. It would be nice to balance out the least successful weapon types with the more opportune hunting times. Rifle in the rut doesn’t make sense to me as we combine the most efficient weapon type during the easiest hunting time. If you changed things around, more people could get out and the elk herds would likely remain in a similar state.

 

[Dangbig]

I think you could double the number of LE bull tags without affecting the trophy potential much

I can’t remember at this moment if there are any “management” ek tags like there are in deer. If not, there should be. 5 point or less tags. 5 points can be real trophies.

Some of the best bulls are 5s

 

[Dangbig]

I was more thinking if things were to change. It would be nice to balance out the least successful weapon types with the more opportune hunting times. Rifle in the rut doesn’t make sense to me as we combine the most efficient weapon type during the easiest hunting time. If you changed things around, more people could get out and the elk herds would likely remain in a similar state.

Don’t change seasons just up the primitive tag numbers problem solved

 

[Dangbig]

I think you could double the number of LE bull tags without affecting the trophy potential much

I can’t remember at this moment if there are any “management” ek tags like there are in deer. If not, there should be. 5 point or less tags. 5 points can be real trophies.

Big 5s are cool not a horrible idea

 

[Zim]

I was more thinking if things were to change. It would be nice to balance out the least successful weapon types with the more opportune hunting times. Rifle in the rut doesn’t make sense to me as we combine the most efficient weapon type during the easiest hunting time. If you changed things around, more people could get out and the elk herds would likely remain in a similar state.

Yup. Combining rifles with the rut by far and away makes the biggest impact of any management policy. As an archer, it’s the first thing I look to avoid in any state, any species, any time. Generally punishes quality and limits opportunity. And makes absolutely no sense.

 

[tracker12]

You either have more opportunities to hunt or more opportunities to hunt trophy/mature animals. It really comes down to those 2 choices. I have been fortunate to draw a premium elk tag in CO, WY and in UT on the Fishlake. Would love to hunt again in theses States but will only do it if I get lucky on a random. It is crazy how many auction tags UT gives out.

 

[BrowningRage]

Manage "trophy" units for younger age "trophies". 5 year olds, not 9 year olds. No bull should hit 400", 350" bulls should be top tier. Increased LE tag numbers can get us there. The model we adopted 30 years ago requires it.

Though sucky- pick the kind of hunt you want because you can only "put in for" or buy one tag. Trophy LE, General Season, Spike, or Cow hunts- but you can't do more than one. Again, the model Utah adopted 30 years ago will force this hand. We can't have our cake and eat it too anymore.

One more, tongue-in-cheek suggestion... How about one unit be designated as the Auction Unit. All LE elk tags that are auctioned and such will be for that unit only. Then we stock it with big bulls every year. 450"-550" bulls only. Let the rich hunt 'The King's Forest'.

These are sad, hard suggestions that may not even help. What I know... the DNR restricts opportunity in order to grow unnaturally large elk to sell to the highest bidder. I don't care for it...

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

Seriously, change the season dates and weapon, give out more tags, stop with the nonsense. Who cares if Elk numbers and quality drop a little, maybe it will help our deer numbers.

 

[tallelkchaser]

Here would be my first shot at an idea and by no means so I think this is a perfect solution just searching for win win opportunities.
Rules I would like to see established for this consideration - more traditional muzzleloader with 1x or no optics. Trail cams end prior to season start dates. Wounded animals are a filled tag. No overly advantageous archery tackle.

All hunts are 7 days starting and ending on a Saturday so people can have 2 weekends.
Season 1
Muzzy 1st week of September
Season 2
Archery- 3rd week of September
Season 3
Rifle - 1st week of October
Season 4
Late rifle 1st week of November

I think other hunts like deer could work around this as well without too much hassle.

 

[elkantlers]

There is not one thing that can be done that will allow a person to hunt the Wasatch, Manti, SJ, Dutton, Pahvant, or any other LE elk unit in Utah every few years. Not even every 10 years. The fact of the matter is there are too many people wanting too few tags. The will never be enough elk to go around and there will always be more people each year applying for those few tags.
Adjusting seasons around is about as good as pissing on a forest fire. it's easier to kill elk now than it's ever been, doesn't matter what time of year it is.

 

[txhunter58]

But we can get closer to every 10 years than every 20-25 years. Maybe someone can hunt 2-3 times in their life instead of once.

I agree that we should shoot for 340-350s instead of 400s. You can at least double the tags and still get to there. That wouldnt even have to lower the tag prices, so double the money for the agency

 

[notdonhunting]

Seriously, change the season dates and weapon, give out more tags, stop with the nonsense. Who cares if Elk numbers and quality drop a little, maybe it will help our deer numbers.

You took every word right out of my mouth.
Could not agree with anyone more!

 

[elkassassin]

If You Boys Think There Are Alot Of 400" Bulls left in this State You Might Wanna Check it out in Person!

GEEZUS!

But we can get closer to every 10 years than every 20-25 years. Maybe someone can hunt 2-3 times in their life instead of once.

I agree that we should shoot for 340-350s instead of 400s. You can at least double the tags and still get to there. That wouldnt even have to lower the tag prices, so double the money for the agency

 

[elkantlers]

Last year there were 620 new applicants for the Manti early any weapon elk hunt. With 136 total permits available it will take 4.5 years just to get through that zero-point group. That means at least 4 years of point creep when this group gets to the top.
Even if you triple permit numbers there is still going to be point creep and the elk will be shot out.
I would rather hunt a quality bull in Utah once or twice in my life and hunt general season every year than to hunt a raghorn dink on a LE unit three times in my life.

Same argument can be made for deer units.

 

[elkassassin]

Yup!

Last year there were 620 new applicants for the Manti early any weapon elk hunt. With 136 total permits available it will take 4.5 years just to get through that zero-point group. That means at least 4 years of point creep when this group gets to the top.
Even if you triple permit numbers there is still going to be point creep and the elk will be shot out.
I would rather hunt a quality bull in Utah once or twice in my life and hunt general season every year than to hunt a raghorn dink on a LE unit three times in my life.

Same argument can be made for deer units.

 

[BrowningRage]

If You Boys Think There Are Alot Of 400" Bulls left in this State You Might Wanna Check it out in Person!

GEEZUS!

Its not about how many 400" bulls the DWR actually achieves in growing, its the restrictions on hunting they impose TRYING to grow them... your comment makes the model look even worse because they try and let bulls get to be 8 and 9 years old, but they still don't get as many 400" bulls as they hope...

 

[BrowningRage]

Last year there were 620 new applicants for the Manti early any weapon elk hunt. With 136 total permits available it will take 4.5 years just to get through that zero-point group. That means at least 4 years of point creep when this group gets to the top.
Even if you triple permit numbers there is still going to be point creep and the elk will be shot out.
I would rather hunt a quality bull in Utah once or twice in my life and hunt general season every year than to hunt a raghorn dink on a LE unit three times in my life.

Same argument can be made for deer units.

Well, congratulations, you are happy with the elk management in Utah because they already do exactly what you want.

 

[txhunter58]

Last year there were 620 new applicants for the Manti early any weapon elk hunt. With 136 total permits available it will take 4.5 years just to get through that zero-point group. That means at least 4 years of point creep when this group gets to the top.
Even if you triple permit numbers there is still going to be point creep and the elk will be shot out.
I would rather hunt a quality bull in Utah once or twice in my life and hunt general season every year than to hunt a raghorn dink on a LE unit three times in my life.

Same argument can be made for deer

There were 685 bulls killed last year in the Manti (all seasons). Average age was 6.3 years (goal is 5-6 yrs).

There are aprox 11,500 elk in the Manti. They estimate aprox 1170 mature bulls. So doubling the harvest would kill all of those.

So my suggestion to double tags doesn’t hold water. Changing seasons, and thereby lowering success rates would be the only way.

 

[tracker12]

I had no idea they issued that many tags for one unit.

 

[elkantlers]

Manti all public hunts
R NR
Archery 119 12
Early 136 13
Muzzy 73 7
Mid 28 3
Late 110 12
Multi 14 2
-------------
480 + 49 = 529

There were 685 bulls killed last year in the Manti (all seasons). Average age was 6.3 years (goal is 5-6 yrs).

There are aprox 11,500 elk in the Manti. They estimate aprox 1170 mature bulls. So doubling the harvest would kill all of those.

So my suggestion to double tags doesn’t hold water. Changing seasons, and thereby lowering success rates would be the only way.

How do you get 685 killed? 129% success rate is pretty good

 

[txhunter58]

https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/annual_reports/big_game/19_bg_report.pdf

Is what this report says for latest year reported. 2019

 

[elkantlers]

https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/annual_reports/big_game/19_bg_report.pdf

Is what this report says for latest year reported. 2019

That includes Spikes.

 

[txhunter58]

But the 1170 should be an estimate of “mature bulls”. That is estimated at 13/ 100 cows.

 

[elkassassin]

And If You Got Your Way All The Units Would Be Shot Down to PISSCUTTER Class within 2 Years & Still BAWLING That Not Everybody in the State Got To Hunt Them!

Its not about how many 400" bulls the DWR actually achieves in growing, its the restrictions on hunting they impose TRYING to grow them... your comment makes the model look even worse because they try and let bulls get to be 8 and 9 years old, but they still don't get as many 400" bulls as they hope...

 

[cantkillathing]

Bess, I dont want to kill all the big bulls, but by taking rifle hunt out of rut and changing seasons and tag allocations, and amount of time to hunt will give way more opportunity.

 

[elkassassin]

Ya!

I Was Replying to BrowningRage!

You Ain't Getting A Bull Bigger Than Your Wife's Bull cant!

(((RAZZIN Ya!)))

Bess, I dont want to kill all the big bulls, but by taking rifle hunt out of rut and changing seasons and tag allocations, and amount of time to hunt will give way more opportunity.

 

[Deerlove]

There is not one thing that can be done that will allow a person to hunt the Wasatch, Manti, SJ, Dutton, Pahvant, or any other LE elk unit in Utah every few years. Not even every 10 years. The fact of the matter is there are too many people wanting too few tags. The will never be enough elk to go around and there will always be more people each year applying for those few tags.
Adjusting seasons around is about as good as pissing on a forest fire. it's easier to kill elk now than it's ever been, doesn't matter what time of year it is.

So if it's just as easy lets change the dates.

 

[elkantlers]

So if it's just as easy lets change the dates.

Sticking with Manti elk,
the Early rifle (mid Sept) is 78% successful.
the Mid season ( mid Oct) is 78%
the Late (mid Nov) is 82%.
the Muzzy (late Sept) is 80%
The only hunt that isn't high success is archery, which is to be expected. it's 33%

What season do you want to change and what are the new dates?
How would the success rates go down?
Seems like elk are getting killed at a pretty consistent rate during all dates.

 

[Deerlove]

Well if my math is correct, 33 is less than 78?

 

[elkantlers]

Well if my math is correct, 33 is less than 78?

^^^^^what does that have to do with changing dates?

My point is that changing dates will do absolutely nothing. we're already hunting them August to November. I guess we can add a December bull hunt.

 

[highfastflyer]

Go back to traditional recurve bows for ALL seasons and you could probably never exceed a 10% success rate like we had back in the 70s. It’s a joke that Muzzleloaders are called primitive firearms. You could issue 3000 tags and still only harvest 300 bulls with traditional archery equipment using no technology enhancements allowed.

 

[tallelkchaser]

Sticking with Manti elk,
the Early rifle (mid Sept) is 78% successful.
the Mid season ( mid Oct) is 78%
the Late (mid Nov) is 82%.
the Muzzy (late Sept) is 80%
The only hunt that isn't high success is archery, which is to be expected. it's 33%

What season do you want to change and what are the new dates?
How would the success rates go down?
Seems like elk are getting killed at a pretty consistent rate during all dates.

Thank you for pulling this information. I think the thought would be to move the rifle out of the rut into a October timeframe- looks like those have similar harvest rates, wonder about age of animal though. Remove single shot rifles from use and go to a more traditional muzzleloader option - in turn increase tags there. You could also move that to a pre rut timeframe as that currently hits the tail end of peak rut. Increase archery tags and move that to mid September. So rifle tags would likely remain the same and you would increase on the more primitive weapon types. Just some thoughts, it would likely be a 15-30% tag increase potentially?

 

[Delta]

There is no fix. Limited resource, with population explosion = enjoy your OIL hunt. The OTC tags will soon be draw, just like the deer draw.

 

[elkantlers]

Here's the deal. The majority of people don't want more restrictions. They like compound bows and modern muzzleloaders and shooting 700 yards with their rifle.
I really could care less if they change things up. I just don't believe for one second that any change is going to make one bit of difference in point creep.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

There is no fix. Limited resource, with population explosion = enjoy your OIL hunt. The OTC tags will soon be draw, just like the deer draw.

If they made drastic changes it would indeed slow down point creep. I know this is super extreme, but if every tag was a recurve bow tag only. They could give 7 times the amount of tags and have less harvest and end or change point creep forever. I am not saying that is what they should do but it would definitely put a stop to point creep as we know it.

 

[BrowningRage]

And If You Got Your Way All The Units Would Be Shot Down to PISSCUTTER Class within 2 Years & Still BAWLING That Not Everybody in the State Got To Hunt Them!

No, not true. If I 'got my way', we'd have increased opportunity at quality bulls. You and I differ on what a quality bull is apparently. How much does the DWR restrict opportunity in order to try and grow record bulls..? And I don't mean just B&C record, I mean trying to grow new state records, or new world records. Ill agree to disagree with you, because I'm not okay with that plan...

 

[Airborne]

Harvest rates are similar through most rifle/muzzy seasons, moving the rifle hunt out of the rut is a red herring and won't help kill less elk in any meaningful way.

If folks want more opportunity on the LE hunts without shooting them out we need to limit harvest. Weapon restrictions are the only real answer and it's easy:

#1: Bows strings have to be pulled back by fingers, no releases. You can use your wiz-bang compound but your fingers have to be in contact with the string. This turns a 120 yd compound into a 50 yard bow pretty quick and takes mucho practice

#2: All current any weapon hunts and muzzy hunts turn into open sight, flintlock muzzleloader hunts, no sabot, no powder pellets, all patched round ball, all flintlock.

There ya go--problem solved, you could hunt LE elk every few years with these rules. Ain't gonna happen though--guys like their fancy toys more than actually hunting.

 

[Bux n Dux]

If they made drastic changes it would indeed slow down point creep. I know this is super extreme, but if every tag was a recurve bow tag only. They could give 7 times the amount of tags and have less harvest and end or change point creep forever. I am not saying that is what they should do but it would definitely put a stop to point creep as we know it.

No, it wouldn’t. If you gave out 7x the amount of archery tags if only recurves were legal, you kill more animals than you do now. People would figure out really fast how to be proficient enough with that bow to kill consistently. The problem would be, lots of younger age class animals would be the victim of that plan and you’d never see a “trophy” bull on the LE units again. Killers will kill. Doesn’t matter the weapon. All you’re gonna do is kill younger animals and discourage many guys from every thinking about archery hunts in the future. Which is fine with me, there’s too many as it is now. But in the grand scheme of things, It’s probably not a good idea.

 

[Airborne]

Bux n Dux makes good points and maybe killers will kill and the harvest rate would be more than I envision with the flintlock idea.

I would love for the DWR to try this out on a unit to get some data--just for a few years. See how low the harvest rate gets and work backwards into tags issued.

Aside from some pretty major changes (like my flintlock idea), I doubt reshuffling the current deck we have is going to improve draw odds at any real level. Too many people and not enough resource

 

[elkantlers]

The truth is that more elk would be killed with recurves and flintlock with round balls than we are killing now. The difference is that most of the killed elk would not be found. They would just go off and die with an arrow or ball in the guts.

 

[Dangbig]

Harvest rates are similar through most rifle/muzzy seasons, moving the rifle hunt out of the rut is a red herring and won't help kill less elk in any meaningful way.

If folks want more opportunity on the LE hunts without shooting them out we need to limit harvest. Weapon restrictions are the only real answer and it's easy:

#1: Bows strings have to be pulled back by fingers, no releases. You can use your wiz-bang compound but your fingers have to be in contact with the string. This turns a 120 yd compound into a 50 yard bow pretty quick and takes mucho practice

#2: All current any weapon hunts and muzzy hunts turn into open sight, flintlock muzzleloader hunts, no sabot, no powder pellets, all patched round ball, all flintlock.

There ya go--problem solved, you could hunt LE elk every few years with these rules. Ain't gonna happen though--guys like their fancy toys more than actually hunting.

Going to round balls would leave wounded elk in the field worse than now for sure.

 

[Airborne]

I don't buy the whole recurves and flintlocks wound more critters claim. Just because a weapon system is not as lethal beyond it's optimum range doesn't mean that folks wound more with it. Every weapon has the range beyond which it is deadly, why does a flintlock at 200 yards differ from a 300 RUM at 1,200 yards. Both are marginal shots with a high chance for wounding a critter. If ya think about it that argument doesn't make sense. The same argument was made against all archery equipment 50 years ago. I don't believe it to be a good argument.

 

[tallelkchaser]

Bux n Dux makes good points and maybe killers will kill and the harvest rate would be more than I envision with the flintlock idea.

I would love for the DWR to try this out on a unit to get some data--just for a few years. See how low the harvest rate gets and work backwards into tags issued.

Aside from some pretty major changes (like my flintlock idea), I doubt reshuffling the current deck we have is going to improve draw odds at any real level. Too many people and not enough resource

As far as trying something there are a few units this year that have an archery hunt from sept 1-30 then a HAMS hunt from oct 1-nov 15. Those season dates are pretty long but it does take some of these suggestions and puts them into the field. It will be interesting to see the harvest rates next year on these. That said, they aren’t the best units but it could give some data on this. Can’t remember if this was in place this past season or not, but would be interesting to see and compare.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

No, it wouldn’t. If you gave out 7x the amount of archery tags if only recurves were legal, you kill more animals than you do now. People would figure out really fast how to be proficient enough with that bow to kill consistently. The problem would be, lots of younger age class animals would be the victim of that plan and you’d never see a “trophy” bull on the LE units again. Killers will kill. Doesn’t matter the weapon. All you’re gonna do is kill younger animals and discourage many guys from every thinking about archery hunts in the future. Which is fine with me, there’s too many as it is now. But in the grand scheme of things, It’s probably not a good idea.

It most certainly matters the weapon. Maybe certain Killers would kill regardless. But let's be honest, how many of those are out there? Being proficient with a recurve bow means you're deadly out to 40 yards being proficient with a long range rifle means you're deadly to a thousand. Common sense tells you success rates would drastically drop. Success rates would be drastically lower than they are now, guaranteed. The effectiveness of a rifle compared to a recurve is not even comparable. Serious question and I'm not trying to be condescending, have you ever bow hunted? If you have you know it's nothing like a rifle hunt. Maybe at this point we just agree to disagree.

 

[Bux n Dux]

It most certainly matters the weapon. Maybe certain Killers would kill regardless. But let's be honest, how many of those are out there? Being proficient with a recurve bow means you're deadly out to 40 yards being proficient with a long range rifle means you're deadly to a thousand. Common sense tells you success rates would drastically drop. Success rates would be drastically lower than they are now, guaranteed. The effectiveness of a rifle compared to a recurve is not even comparable. Serious question and I'm not trying to be condescending, have you ever bow hunted? If you have you know it's nothing like a rifle hunt. Maybe at this point we just agree to disagree.

the comment I quoted from you, specifically talked about archery hunters. Im not talking about rifles, so don’t change the subject. I’ve been bowhunting 20+ years. Taken many animals with archery equipment. I can for certain tell you, that todays “recurves” and longbows, carbon arrows, broadheads, feathers/vanes, strings, even gloves or finger tabs, are leaps and bounds above what compounds and similar equipment was like in the 80s and even early 90s. Guys were stacking up animals with those bows back then. You are a fool if you think guys wouldn’t stack up animals with recurves if that’s what they were forced to use today. It might take a couple years for them to figure it out, but they would and success rates would hold steady through the years. Especially at your “7x” the amount of archery tags given annually.

None of what’s been proposed in this thread does anything to create more wildlife. All that’s been suggested just creates the illusion that we would have trophy animals galore by limiting our weapons and tactics. Kinda hard to have that, if we don’t create more mothers to produce them and habitat and areas to support them. But keep day dreaming. That’s about all we will have left in 50 years, regardless of our weapon restrictions that we willingly want to impose on ourselves.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

the comment I quoted from you, specifically talked about archery hunters. Im not talking about rifles, so don’t change the subject. I’ve been bowhunting 20+ years. Taken many animals with archery equipment. I can for certain tell you, that todays “recurves” and longbows, carbon arrows, broadheads, feathers/vanes, strings, even gloves or finger tabs, are leaps and bounds above what compounds and similar equipment was like in the 80s and even early 90s. Guys were stacking up animals with those bows back then. You are a fool if you think guys wouldn’t stack up animals with recurves if that’s what they were forced to use today. It might take a couple years for them to figure it out, but they would and success rates would hold steady through the years. Especially at your “7x” the amount of archery tags given annually.

None of what’s been proposed in this thread does anything to create more wildlife. All that’s been suggested just creates the illusion that we would have trophy animals galore by limiting our weapons and tactics. Kinda hard to have that, if we don’t create more mothers to produce them and habitat and areas to support them. But keep day dreaming. That’s about all we will have left in 50 years, regardless of our weapon restrictions that we willingly want to impose on ourselves.

If you reread the post you will see that I said EVERY tag is a recurve bow tag. Every means rifle, muzzle, and bow. So I didn't change the subject at all, perhaps you assumed that I meant archery tags? Of course if they only changed archery tags to recurve archery tags it wouldn't be that huge of a change. Why do you think I said it would be super extreme and I don't I think they should actually do it? Here is your answer, because I meant every single weapon changed to a recurve bow. So now that you understand the question are you telling me if every (muzzleloader rifle and archery tags) single tag in the state was an archery recurve bow tag success rates wouldn't drop? Here is a repost of my initial post. It is verbatim. You can see that I said every tag.

If they made drastic changes it would indeed slow down point creep. I know this is super extreme, but if every tag was a recurve bow tag only. They could give 7 times the amount of tags and have less harvest and end or change point creep forever. I am not saying that is what they should do but it would definitely put a stop to point creep as we know it.

 

[Dangbig]

I don't buy the whole recurves and flintlocks wound more critters claim. Just because a weapon system is not as lethal beyond it's optimum range doesn't mean that folks wound more with it. Every weapon has the range beyond which it is deadly, why does a flintlock at 200 yards differ from a 300 RUM at 1,200 yards. Both are marginal shots with a high chance for wounding a critter. If ya think about it that argument doesn't make sense. The same argument was made against all archery equipment 50 years ago. I don't believe it to be a good argument.

Have you used lead balls on animals?
Yes they will kill but they don’t bleed and people will not try to track them.
200 is really long for a flintlock ?

 

[elkassassin]

Wait Till Niller Gets on Here & Tells You About His Whitworth!

 

[Bux n Dux]

If you reread the post you will see that I said EVERY tag is a recurve bow tag. Every means rifle, muzzle, and bow. So I didn't change the subject at all, perhaps you assumed that I meant archery tags? Of course if they only changed archery tags to recurve archery tags it wouldn't be that huge of a change. Why do you think I said it would be super extreme and I don't I think they should actually do it? Here is your answer, because I meant every single weapon changed to a recurve bow. So now that you understand the question are you telling me if every (muzzleloader rifle and archery tags) single tag in the state was an archery recurve bow tag success rates wouldn't drop? Here is a repost of my initial post. It is verbatim. You can see that I said every tag.

If they made drastic changes it would indeed slow down point creep. I know this is super extreme, but if every tag was a recurve bow tag only. They could give 7 times the amount of tags and have less harvest and end or change point creep forever. I am not saying that is what they should do but it would definitely put a stop to point creep as we know it.

If you had 700k+ archers in utah annually and that’s all, yeah you’d still success rates that would shock you. Many people are lazy when given the opportunity and still able to succeed at all types of aspects in life. Take that away and make any type of success hard earned, it’s surprising how many people suddenly become capable of things previously impossible.

Like i said, it might take a couple years for people to figure out what works and what doesn’t, but after time, it’ll come back. Remember that the human race on earth not only survived, but thrived in many areas for thousands of years with weapons and tools far worse than what even our most “primitive” weapons are today.

To make your suggestion work, you’ll need to take it farther and eliminate access. ATVs, horses, trucks, ebikes, etc… you make it foot access only combined with very primitive weapons, then you’ll make some progress. But again, all that does is benefit the males for many species. It doesn’t put any more wildlife on the ground at all, which is what I thought the ultimate goal was as hunters, but it appears to be just more antler on the landscape is what these guys are wanting.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

If you had 700k+ archers in utah annually and that’s all, yeah you’d still success rates that would shock you. Many people are lazy when given the opportunity and still able to succeed at all types of aspects in life. Take that away and make any type of success hard earned, it’s surprising how many people suddenly become capable of things previously impossible.

Like i said, it might take a couple years for people to figure out what works and what doesn’t, but after time, it’ll come back. Remember that the human race on earth not only survived, but thrived in many areas for thousands of years with weapons and tools far worse than what even our most “primitive” weapons are today.

To make your suggestion work, you’ll need to take it farther and eliminate access. ATVs, horses, trucks, ebikes, etc… you make it foot access only combined with very primitive weapons, then you’ll make some progress. But again, all that does is benefit the males for many species. It doesn’t put any more wildlife on the ground at all, which is what I thought the ultimate goal was as hunters, but it appears to be just more antler on the landscape is what these guys are wanting.

I understand what you're saying. Good luck to you in the draws! thanks for the debate.

 

[Cam@strawberry]

I’m pretty passionate about this subject. Have thought a lot about it. If I was God of the elk plan in this state it would look like this

The cache, wasatch, manti, nebo, NS 3 corners and open bull would all be combined into one OTC unit with these caveats

1. 5 point or better

2. You can hunt the OTC OR LE not both. Pick your side. This would effectively fix point creep alone. Guys with 10+ points will stick with LE and less are gonna choose to just hunt.

3. Mandatory harvest report. How in the age of cell phones, Wi-Fi, and apps we haven’t made this happen in this state is laughable. It’s easy information for the state and they just don’t want it I guess.

4. OTC waiting periods. Archery none. Muzz 1 year. Rifle 2 years. Additional year if you harvest

5. Muzz moves to archery dates and ends first Friday in September, archery gets September and rifle remains the same.

With a system similar to the existing general season and assuming an overall success of 15-25% or so with the pressure to hunt primitive weapons, the OTC could have upwards of 50-70k permits that would mean 10,000~ bulls harvested on a population of around 55k animals.

The LE guys keep enough units in central and Southern Utah to be happy about what they have to spend their investment of years on, and we get the bottom half of the point pool out and moving thru a general season hunt that at worst let’s you have a tag every 4 years.

If wishes were fishes though.

 

[elkhunterUT]

I’m pretty passionate about this subject. Have thought a lot about it. If I was God of the elk plan in this state it would look like this

The cache, wasatch, manti, nebo, NS 3 corners and open bull would all be combined into one OTC unit with these caveats

1. 5 point or better

2. You can hunt the OTC OR LE not both. Pick your side. This would effectively fix point creep alone. Guys with 10+ points will stick with LE and less are gonna choose to just hunt.

3. Mandatory harvest report. How in the age of cell phones, Wi-Fi, and apps we haven’t made this happen in this state is laughable. It’s easy information for the state and they just don’t want it I guess.

4. OTC waiting periods. Archery none. Muzz 1 year. Rifle 2 years. Additional year if you harvest

5. Muzz moves to archery dates and ends first Friday in September, archery gets September and rifle remains the same.

With a system similar to the existing general season and assuming an overall success of 15-25% or so with the pressure to hunt primitive weapons, the OTC could have upwards of 50-70k permits that would mean 10,000~ bulls harvested on a population of around 55k animals.

The LE guys keep enough units in central and Southern Utah to be happy about what they have to spend their investment of years on, and we get the bottom half of the point pool out and moving thru a general season hunt that at worst let’s you have a tag every 4 years.

If wishes were fishes though.

I really like this approach with a couple of questions/caveats:

1. I think the OTC harvest success rate will be higher than 15-25% for muzzy and rifle hunters, especially on the LE units turned OTC (Wasatch, Manti, Nebo, etc.) Of the 50-70K OTC permits, I assume you would allocate those to the different weapon types based on harvest success to try and get it as close to that 15-25% number as possible? Doing that and changing the dates for weapon types as outlined below will help.

2. I think the OTC dates should be approximately as follows Archery: September 1-30; Muzzy: 1st Saturday in October for 7 days; Rifle: Late hunt first Saturday in November for 5 days

Everything else I am in agreement on, especially the MANDATORY harvest report (successful or not) and stopping the killing of every spike in Utah.

 

[BRETTPSU]

My .02 Kinda a mix between Arizona, CO and NM.

1st archery sept 1st to the 9th (sat to sat) 70% of current tags

2nd archery sept 16th to the 24th (sat to sat) 40% of current tags

3rd muzzy Oct 1st to the 9th (sat to sat) if they put some range limiting restrictions on them add 20-30% more tags. If not cut tags 10%

4th rifle Oct 16th to the 24th (sat to sat) no sure how many to increase. 20%? Depends on success rates

5th rifle Nov 1st to the 9th (sat to sat) again not sure how many to increase. 20% Depends on success rates

6th late archery Nov 16th to the 24th (sat to sat) low success and fair amount of tags to keep point holders hunting

Do like arizona does and rotate a few early rifle or muzzy hunts for high point holders

Success rates should fall some for muzzy and rifle

Total of archery kills would remain close to the same with shortened seasons.

The late archery could help the guys with less than 10 points and success rates would be pretty low.

 

[JPickett]

No points = no point creep. Kinda surprised I haven’t seen that in this thread yet. Maybe I missed it.

May Idaho never change there system

 

[elkassassin]

'Their' JP!

But Don't Call Me a JACKASS!

No points = no point creep. Kinda surprised I haven’t seen that in this thread yet. Maybe I missed it.

May Idaho never change there system

 

[highfastflyer]

I’m pretty passionate about this subject. Have thought a lot about it. If I was God of the elk plan in this state it would look like this

The cache, wasatch, manti, nebo, NS 3 corners and open bull would all be combined into one OTC unit with these caveats

1. 5 point or better

2. You can hunt the OTC OR LE not both. Pick your side. This would effectively fix point creep alone. Guys with 10+ points will stick with LE and less are gonna choose to just hunt.

3. Mandatory harvest report. How in the age of cell phones, Wi-Fi, and apps we haven’t made this happen in this state is laughable. It’s easy information for the state and they just don’t want it I guess.

4. OTC waiting periods. Archery none. Muzz 1 year. Rifle 2 years. Additional year if you harvest

5. Muzz moves to archery dates and ends first Friday in September, archery gets September and rifle remains the same.

With a system similar to the existing general season and assuming an overall success of 15-25% or so with the pressure to hunt primitive weapons, the OTC could have upwards of 50-70k permits that would mean 10,000~ bulls harvested on a population of around 55k animals.

The LE guys keep enough units in central and Southern Utah to be happy about what they have to spend their investment of years on, and we get the bottom half of the point pool out and moving thru a general season hunt that at worst let’s you have a tag every 4 years.

If wishes were fishes though.

You’d kill off every big bull remaining and harvest rates won’t be 15-25%, they will be more like the historic 80% until there’s no 5 points left within 2-3 years. Keep thinking, that won’t work….

 

[Bluehair]

CO did some of the stuff on this list. Fixed everything.

 

[Cam@strawberry]

You’d kill off every big bull remaining and harvest rates won’t be 15-25%, they will be more like the historic 80% until there’s no 5 points left within 2-3 years. Keep thinking, that won’t work….

With any change there’s a period of boom bust. Ya, the first few years would see a slaughter in some places, but the flip to that is the open bull would be relatively unscathed. Finding the base line takes time.

I figured 10% for archery success
25% for muzz and 35% for rifle. That’s 23% average.

Something’s got to give.

 

[Elkslayer2015]

If you want to add more tags it's pretty simple the hunt needs to be harder period..

The average hunters afield days for archery is 11 to 12 with 35% or so Success rate

The average Hunters afield days for Early rifle rut hunt is 5 and the average success around 80%.

The average hunters afield for Muzzleloader is around 5 days with 65%.

So lets make it harder here is a solution....

#1 Archery double the tags because it's the lowest success and make it a 10 day hunt.


#2 Move the Muzzleloader hunt to a 5 day hunt and have it over lap the last 5 days of the archery hunt..

3# Move the early rifle hunt into the rifle spike hunt that will make it harder and we could add more tags here because the success rate will drop.

4# mandatory harvest survey on how many spikes are getting harvested if you don't take the survey you don't get a tag period.

 

[gundog2]

I don’t think the LE elk system is broke. There are a wide diversity of hunts, including some that are fairly easy to draw and some that are world class. Everyone has a chance to draw, but you can still wait your way to a sure chance of drawing in some units. You also have opportunity for general season elk hunts. I don’t really see the problem. I think we could eliminate GS hunts to create more LE hunts and maybe even add cow elk tags into the LE hunts so that people will use points on on any first choice hunt, but I doubt that we are ready for that yet.

 

[Bux n Dux]

I don’t think the LE elk system is broke. There are a wide diversity of hunts, including some that are fairly easy to draw and some that are world class. Everyone has a chance to draw, but you can still wait your way to a sure chance of drawing in some units. You also have opportunity for general season elk hunts. I don’t really see the problem. I think we could eliminate GS hunts to create more LE hunts and maybe even add cow elk tags into the LE hunts so that people will use points on on any first choice hunt, but I doubt that we are ready for that yet.

Entitlement. That’s the problem. Everyone feels entitled to the limited resource. Sitting at 0 points or 25 points, everyone thinks they are more deserving than anyone else of the tags available every year.

 

[highfastflyer]

With any change there’s a period of boom bust. Ya, the first few years would see a slaughter in some places, but the flip to that is the open bull would be relatively unscathed. Finding the base line takes time.

I figured 10% for archery success
25% for muzz and 35% for rifle. That’s 23% average.

Something’s got to give.

Wyoming extensively used APR (Antler point restrictions). They typically take a unit and put it in a 4 point APR for mule deer about 4 years on then 4-5 years off. Every time it comes off the first season after it’s removed is a boom season. Then the next 3-4 years the unit suffers from low buck to doe ratios and all the big bucks shot out. History repeats itself. You can’t increase rifle hunters without dramatically decreasing the resource.

 

[hossblur]

There's not a snowballs chance in hell the LE rifle hint moves out of the rut. That special interest group that runs things ($fw) has to keep the money men happy.

simple, easy ways to fix point creep.

1. Don't have points. Straight lotto, same odds for all.

Fixed.

We spend way to much time and effort trying to come up with schemes to fix a scheme.

 

[highfastflyer]

There's not a snowballs chance in hell the LE rifle hint moves out of the rut. That special interest group that runs things ($fw) has to keep the money men happy.

simple, easy ways to fix point creep.

1. Don't have points. Straight lotto, same odds for all.

Fixed.

We spend way to much time and effort trying to come up with schemes to fix a scheme.

You’d be fighting the State directly through the DWR if you proposed such a drastic cut in funding. Those bonus points they receive are about 1/3 of all their revenue. That would require them increasing all license sales by 100%. I don’t think the sportsmen are willing to pay for all that much of a drastic increase. I think Idaho is one of the few states still without a bonus/preference point scheme but it’s amazing they haven’t gone down that path regarding all the revenue they are potentially losing.

 

[hossblur]

You’d be fighting the State directly through the DWR if you proposed such a drastic cut in funding. Those bonus points they receive are about 1/3 of all their revenue. That would require them increasing all license sales by 100%. I don’t think the sportsmen are willing to pay for all that much of a drastic increase. I think Idaho is one of the few states still without a bonus/preference point scheme but it’s amazing they haven’t gone down that path regarding all the revenue they are potentially losing.

There would be little to no difference. There would still be an app fee. NR rules still the same.

 

[txhunter58]

One simple change would immediately have a dramatic positive impact for NRs:

Make us put in for only one hunt, just like residents.

We got screwed when they made the change to allow us to “apply” for all species. Our odds went to crap overnight.

Easy fix: we are allowed to apply for only one hunt (and our odds immediately double or more) but still allow us the apply for points on other species.

Win/win. Our odds go up but they get all the same revenue.

In reality, we are only applying for one hunt anyway. We can only draw one tag. Let me repeat that. We can only draw one tag!! If you pull a deer tag (first draw) you are OUT of all other drawings.

 

[hossblur]

One simple change would immediately have a dramatic positive impact for NRs:

Make us put in for only one hunt, just like residents.

We got screwed when they made the change to allow us to “apply” for all species. Our odds went to crap overnight.

Easy fix: we are allowed to apply for only one hunt (and our odds immediately double or more) but still allow us the apply for points on other species.

Win/win. Our odds go up but they get all the same revenue.

In reality, we are only applying for one hunt anyway. We can only draw one tag. Let me repeat that. We can only draw one tag!! If you pull a deer tag (first draw) you are OUT of all other drawings.

Unfortunately, G&F departments in the west figured out that they can SCREW non residents, and there isn't much they can do about it.

It's too bad, it's become an "arms race". Each state uses what another state does to justify its own actions.

Ideally there would be some type of compact or agreement to price NR tags somewhat reasonable across the board. While it's great that Utah funds out dwr by screwing NR, when a Utah guy goes to Wyoming, he gets bent over. Then Wyoming guy gets bent over in Idaho.

NR should pay much more than R, but the current prices, are just outrageous.

 

[txhunter58]

Since a Utah NR LE is a once in a Lifetime event, doesn’t really matter what the tag costs. It’s places like Colorado that bend us over every year.

 

[Dangbig]

I’m pretty passionate about this subject. Have thought a lot about it. If I was God of the elk plan in this state it would look like this

The cache, wasatch, manti, nebo, NS 3 corners and open bull would all be combined into one OTC unit with these caveats

1. 5 point or better

2. You can hunt the OTC OR LE not both. Pick your side. This would effectively fix point creep alone. Guys with 10+ points will stick with LE and less are gonna choose to just hunt.

3. Mandatory harvest report. How in the age of cell phones, Wi-Fi, and apps we haven’t made this happen in this state is laughable. It’s easy information for the state and they just don’t want it I guess.

4. OTC waiting periods. Archery none. Muzz 1 year. Rifle 2 years. Additional year if you harvest

5. Muzz moves to archery dates and ends first Friday in September, archery gets September and rifle remains the same.

With a system similar to the existing general season and assuming an overall success of 15-25% or so with the pressure to hunt primitive weapons, the OTC could have upwards of 50-70k permits that would mean 10,000~ bulls harvested on a population of around 55k animals.

The LE guys keep enough units in central and Southern Utah to be happy about what they have to spend their investment of years on, and we get the bottom half of the point pool out and moving thru a general season hunt that at worst let’s you have a tag every 4 years.

If wishes were fishes though.

This would be better than shooting spikes

 

[highfastflyer]

Since a Utah NR LE is a once in a Lifetime event, doesn’t really matter what the tag costs. It’s places like Colorado that bend us over every year.

Speak for yourself, I buy a worthless Utah hunting license just to be able to apply every year then I also have to pay all the NR bonus point fees, talk about getting bent over but that’s how the rules were set in place so if you don’t like it, don’t participate. Sad.

 

[highfastflyer]

One simple change would immediately have a dramatic positive impact for NRs:

Make us put in for only one hunt, just like residents.

We got screwed when they made the change to allow us to “apply” for all species. Our odds went to crap overnight.

Easy fix: we are allowed to apply for only one hunt (and our odds immediately double or more) but still allow us the apply for points on other species.

Win/win. Our odds go up but they get all the same revenue.

In reality, we are only applying for one hunt anyway. We can only draw one tag. Let me repeat that. We can only draw one tag!! If you pull a deer tag (first draw) you are OUT of all other drawings.

It’s not a win for them as they want all that bonus point money they would lose if you only apply for one species. It was money that drive the change in the first place. Get as much and squeeze those NR as much as you can, every point they buy is big bucks in the Utah DWR coffer.

 

[highfastflyer]

There would be little to no difference. There would still be an app fee. NR rules still the same.

You discount the Massive revenue forcing all NR to buy a worthless hunting license and all those bonus points they sell. A HUGE cash cow they would lose. Never going to happen to get rid of that Golden Goose……

 

[txhunter58]

It’s not a win for them as they want all that bonus point money they would lose if you only apply for one species. It was money that drive the change in the first place. Get as much and squeeze those NR as much as you can, every point they buy is big bucks in the Utah DWR coffer.

You misread my post. I would like to only be able to apply for one TAG. They can still let us apply for all the additional species bonus points they want to and charge us the same thing they are charging now. And we would buy them so we don’t fall behind.

So they make the same money as they do now, but our odds for the one species tag we apply for are greatly improved.

 

[txhunter58]

Example:

10,000 people currently apply for elk, deer and antelope. So, under the current system, I am competing against 10,000 applicants for each of those species.

If they made the change I propose, let’s say 5000 apply for deer, 4000 apply for elk and 1000 apply for antelope. My odds of drawing an elk tag more than doubled.

But I still apply for my bonus point for deer and antelope for the future after I draw an elk tag, so they still make the same money.

 

[highfastflyer]

You misread my post. I would like to only be able to apply for one TAG. They can still let us apply for all the additional species bonus points they want to and charge us the same thing they are charging now. And we would buy them so we don’t fall behind.

So they make the same money as they do now, but our odds for the one species tag we apply for are greatly improved.

If you want to merely improve odds then NOT being able to apply for multiple species bonus points would improve drawing odds at a much faster rate. If you draw a limited quota elk tag you can apply the very next year for a deer or an antelope or whichever, that just increases the odds, making it far more difficult to draw. Going back to the old system of one species only like residents have would increase odds far quicker than your proposal but at a Huge cost to the DWR. I don’t see either proposals gaining any traction as NR have very little influence on Utah state policies.