Utah Wildlife Forum banner
21 - 40 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
Regardless if they are lazy, scared, or understaffed and not compensated well, they still have a job to do. They also have the decision to change their career path. If they aren't getting paid enough, then why would they stay in that type of work? How many career paths have many of us changed up because of lack of compensation, disrespect, or just didn't like it?

Like Critter mentioned of nothing being done about the camp site and structures built. If they have the legal power and it is within their scope of job title, they had better start ticketing for these offenses and have the local sheriff department towing trailers.

From what I've seen from them is like backcountry said.... "educate and redirect" I guess they are school teachers instead of a tree cop?? I look at them as if they were "rent-O-cops". or want to bees. They want a badge, but don't want to get their hands dirty. Kinda like joining the Coast Guard instead of the Marines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,980 Posts
Increasingly seems like your posts are trolling. I'm out. Best of luck finding solutions by insulting them.

I'd suggest researching the old Iron County sheriff's political positions if you want to understand why many districts don't tow local's trailers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Not trolling at all. If you've reached out to Legislative individuals and get crickets, there seems to be an issue in the program. What it is....I have no idea. Maybe someone out there on the forum has an idea of what to do, or how to go about it? Need some sort of action!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Not trolling at all. If you've reached out to Legislative individuals and get crickets, there seems to be an issue in the program. What it is....I have no idea. Maybe someone out there on the forum has an idea of what to do, or how to go about it? Need some sort of action!
Backcountry had great points.

The anti DWR, FS, BLM employee rants on this forum not productive. Like any other group occasionally a Dan Love happens but 99% of them are good, honest, hard working people trying to do the job they are directed to follow and dealing with some real @#%holes. Including goofs whining about salt blocks and trail cams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Jumping back to the issue of baiting. I liked the DWR response about baiting negatively impacting wildlife behavior. When animals are already struggling with migration corridor impacts from humans, I think disallowing baiting for ungulates to be the right thing to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I don't disagree with most of the content of the posts. What I disagree with is the assumption they are lazy and don't fulfill whatever regional or district expectation is set (can be more discretionary than the code).
I think the same can be said for those who want to bait and hunt. I understand the logic. However, it's a subjective view to say baiting is not fair chase just because you don't approve of it, or it is not the culturally accepted means to hunt. Texas, OK, ID to a degree in the north panhandle, WA, and several other states allow baiting. Many more allow supplements. I don't think it's a fair assumption to call hunters who hunt that way lazy or fair chase. Having studied their habits, wallet spend, and demographics, they may be even more passionate about hunting than the mountain west and the western style of spot and stock. It wasn't my cup of tea, but it is theirs. My way isn't the way.

And to the OP, COs have a lot to do, with not enough time in the day to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,980 Posts
I agree on the subjectivity, Caddis8. "Fair chase" is an inherently subjective standard as are most hunting policies and laws. Heck, I can admit IF Utah didn't have struggling herds paired with increasing numbers of hunters I wouldn't even care that much. But given we do I'm for eliminating styles that intentionally manipulate the behavior of ungulates.

And to clarify, I didn't even lobby the state to change the law. It just happens to align well with my worldview.

Also to clarify, just because I don't believe a behavior matches the fair chase ethics doesn't mean it's lazy. Those aren't necessarily on the same line of analysis to me. I've seen some lazy hunting over the years but hauling in all that baiting equipment isn't one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,066 Posts
I agree on the subjectivity, Caddis8. "Fair chase" is an inherently subjective standard as are most hunting policies and laws. Heck, I can admit IF Utah didn't have struggling herds paired with increasing numbers of hunters I wouldn't even care that much. But given we do I'm for eliminating styles that intentionally manipulate the behavior of ungulates.

You mean, like using calls, urine scents, decoys, rattling, rubs and scrapes? Good for you! ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,980 Posts
Let's refine my statement.....tools that universally/generically manipulate behavior even when you aren't there. The ones you mention are temporary/transient influences.

But one could make a logical argument against the tools you listed. I don't use any of them myself. Maybe I was just lucky to choose a great unit as a novice though. Maybe my preferences will change over time. Maybe the first three years of getting into massive bulls with spot and stalk techniques was a fluke (no luck finding the unicorns).

Whatever the case, I'm not the only one who distinguishes between tools and sees nutritional supplements as problematic.

And we ban tools all the time for subjective reasons. Digital calls. Light devices. Weapon type. Just to name a few.

Reality is this is just the tip of the spear for changes. Our herds are struggling. Good money on the projection that herd sizes will slowly continue to shrink given sprawl, fractured habitat and climate change. Tools and techniques will be under greater scrutiny. And my wager is spot and stalk will be the standard for analysis as long as the ratio of hunters to animals so severely disadvantages opportunity.

Could be wrong. And my disappointment if enough hunters organize to reverse the ban will result in the same level of political involvement on my part...nil. I'll adapt and probably hunt the same way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,066 Posts
Let's refine my statement.....tools that universally/generically manipulate behavior even when you aren't there. The ones you mention are temporary/transient influences.

But one could make a logical argument against the tools you listed. I don't use any of them myself. Maybe I was just lucky to choose a great unit as a novice though. Maybe my preferences will change over time. Maybe the first three years of getting into massive bulls with spot and stalk techniques was a fluke (no luck finding the unicorns).

Whatever the case, I'm not the only one who distinguishes between tools and sees nutritional supplements as problematic.

And we ban tools all the time for subjective reasons. Digital calls. Light devices. Weapon type. Just to name a few.

Reality is this is just the tip of the spear for changes. Our herds are struggling. Good money on the projection that herd sizes will slowly continue to shrink given sprawl, fractured habitat and climate change. Tools and techniques will be under greater scrutiny. And my wager is spot and stalk will be the standard for analysis as long as the ratio of hunters to animals so severely disadvantages opportunity.

Could be wrong. And my disappointment if enough hunters organize to reverse the ban will result in the same level of political involvement on my part...nil. I'll adapt and probably hunt the same way.
I like your answer, but I don't!

You are fortunate in that you've found and near-perfected a hunting method/style that will get you through most of the changes that are apparently coming. My hat's off to you! I like that part of your answer.

But, as you indicated, this is only the beginning! These changes ( and yours) will eventually get to a point where even you will not be able to hunt the same way, if, in fact, you'll regularly hunt at all! You may be willing to sit at home and let all of this happen, but I'm not! My efforts may not stop any of it, but I won't go gently in the night. Especially if the changes are largely based on an ethical viewpoint I don't agree with. I (along with some others) have made my views known quite a few times at various DWR meetings, open houses, seminars, surveys, harvest reports, and visits to the DWR offices and I/we have made some differences. I would encourage you and others to do the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,980 Posts
I'm a novice who was attracted largely for a western spot and stalk experience. I truly think the unit I hunt has spoiled me from the experience standpoint, not the success side. But I'll probably only get to hunt it once in my life for a bull. I'll track em until then and enjoy the experience.

My mule deer hunting experience from a human impact standpoint is what largely influences my viewpoint on big game policy. The pressure on those animals is nuts and clearly unsustainable. And not just from hunters but all around. That's why I'm fine seeing more restrictions. But I'm just collecting points the last few years as hunting wasn't a real option. That may change or I might just hang up my big game hat unless we move to another state (Vanilla's promotions of other states is working 😁 ).

Best of luck even if it means the cards turn against my preferences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I'm a novice who was attracted largely for a western spot and stalk experience. I truly think the unit I hunt has spoiled me from the experience standpoint, not the success side. But I'll probably only get to hunt it once in my life for a bull. I'll track em until then and enjoy the experience.

The pressure on those animals is nuts and clearly unsustainable. And not just from hunters but all around. That's why I'm fine seeing more restrictions.
i'm not here to judge you but do want to point out that there would be less stress and modification of their behavior if people would quit "spotting and stalking" animals they do not intend to kill. there are laws that say your dog can't do it. i'm curious how that would look to a CO in the field. would it make a difference if it were a species you had no tag for and were just trying out your skills?

to play my own devil's advocate...are you providing a service to the wildlife that makes them better at avoiding the next guy, thus ensuring their survival?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,980 Posts
To be clear, the three elk hunting trips I've done all involved stalking herds I hoped to find a spike in. If I didn't have hope for that I would have gone elsewhere. And a CO wouldn't bat an eye as its what every unsuccessful hunter does each season. The only time I'm aware of unintentionally modifying elk behavior was when I accidentally stumbled into a meadow on my way to my scouted location. I misread a map and the elk went into the dark timber. They came back out two days later.

But if your point is novices should consider their influence then point taken. Its a lesson I learned quick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
But if your point is novices should consider their influence then point taken. Its a lesson I learned quick.
My point is to merely spark thoughtful conversation. I could go either way on it but I do wonder how all the practice callers in the LE units affect or educate the herds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
839 Posts
Are we seriously having a conversation that stalking animals we don’t intend to harvest has a negative impact on them? Holy balls 🙄 grow up people! A dog chasing wildlife and a human trying to get close is nowhere near the same thing.


the stupid chit “hunters” are choosing to get their panties in a wad over these days is absolutely incredible. Good thing they quit early and suck at hunting. Sharing the public resources with these clowns would be a disaster
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,038 Posts
Maybe I hunt with a camera??
Does that mean I can't stalk them.......
I would have just as much right as anyone with a weapon. Like MM said, it it getting to be a joke.

Oops.......I prob just hurt someone's feelings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
839 Posts
Maybe I hunt with a camera??
Does that mean I can't stalk them.......
I would have just as much right as anyone with a weapon. Like MM said, it it getting to be a joke.

Oops.......I prob just hurt someone's feelings.
It’s hard to even care if you hurt someone’s feelings these days, especially if they are in the “hunting crowd”. If their feelings are hurt, it’s probably truth on what you’re saying. I use to think it was the new flatbrim generation that was the problem. The last few months I’ve started to realize many from middle aged hunters that’s the real issue. Of all the crap I’ve seen someone get upset over, throwing out “stalking wildlife they don’t intend to kill” is at the top of the list. Then they go ahead and throw in “it’s illegal for dogs to do it” as point to back up their thoughts, like that’s even close to the same thing 🙄 if you’re in that camp of thought, do us all a favor. Stay home. Take up golf, bike riding, skiing, photography, etc. your complaints of no deer to be shot at, there’s too many hunters now or you didn’t get your any bull tag cuz you didn’t try to get one until 5:45 in the afternoon are getting really old. Hunting is supposed to be fun. These people and the chit they are bringing into is making really hard for everyone else to enjoy. People wonder why there’s so many conflicts on the mountain every year. It’s entitled guys who have the hand me my trophy mentality, pizzed off over everything they can think of, getting into business that’s none of theirs to be involved in anyways, but insist on doing so since they get out of the Subaru every morning looking to fight or be annoyed over everything they can.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
Are we seriously having a conversation that stalking animals we don’t intend to harvest has a negative impact on them? Holy balls 🙄 grow up people! A dog chasing wildlife and a human trying to get close is nowhere near the same thing.


the stupid chit “hunters” are choosing to get their panties in a wad over these days is absolutely incredible. Good thing they quit early and suck at hunting. Sharing the public resources with these clowns would be a disaster
Not an argument but rather to see who doesn't understand hypocrisy. Looks like we found you. For the record I don't give 2 chits what you do so long as it's legal. Weren't you the one trying to goad people with the outlandish ways to exploit the baiting law a few threads back?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
839 Posts
Not an argument but rather to see who doesn't understand hypocrisy. Looks like we found you. For the record I don't give 2 chits what you do so long as it's legal. Weren't you the one trying to goad people with the outlandish ways to exploit the baiting law a few threads back?
I was the one bringing to light loopholes in the new “law” that aren’t addressed in the statement released by the DWR. It wasn’t outlandish. They are valid issues that WILL be played and used by hunters until measures are taken to close them up. There’s loopholes in every law they have. Many are utilized until enough people complain and they get fixed. There’s still several that have been in play for 10+ years that haven’t been closed yet because not many people are aware of them. When more start doing it, it’ll be fixed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I was the one bringing to light loopholes in the new “law” that aren’t addressed in the statement released by the DWR. It wasn’t outlandish. They are valid issues that WILL be played and used by hunters until measures are taken to close them up. There’s loopholes in every law they have. Many are utilized until enough people complain and they get fixed. There’s still several that have been in play for 10+ years that haven’t been closed yet because not many people are aware of them. When more start doing it, it’ll be fixed.
If that's the case then maybe that would be described as thought provoking debate.

My point with these threads are that things aren't black and white. If people objectively look at laws or the reasoning behind them they should be able to pass the sniff test in that they are reasonable and have been applied appropriately. I don't give laws against hunting much leeway. The law is the law but it should make sense and not be arbitrary.
 
21 - 40 of 57 Posts
Top