Benifit of Management Hunts

proutdoors said:

WOW! Good response. Since this is going south real fast, I will resist typing anything further on this. Have a good day wyo2ut, your maturity and wisdom today is astounding!

Click to expand...

Spare me your hypocrisy...it is ok for you to "take jabs" but when I do I am being immature? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

The funny thing about management tags and what has been done with our elk management is that you complain when more tags are being given out...isn't this exactly what our herds need? Don't we need to shoot more elk on these units? Won't even "slight" increases as the DWR has been purposefully recommending help?

The funny thing is that you have repeatedly said that the DWR can't give out enough tags to reach objectives because the public won't allow it, so we should come up with a new plan--like I400--to find a way of getting the numbers back down to meet objectives. Yet, every time the DWR does give out more tags and even when the DWR does recommend new ways of giving out more tags, you and the public complain. I find this exceptionally ironic. Are you truly concerned about the herd health, or are you more concerned with your own agenda? It seems to me that you should applaud any increase in tags because it will ONLY help alleviate the problems you have identified--1) bull/cow ratios 2) low draw odds. And, the DWR is supposed to--at least according to you :roll:--listen to the public first BEFORE following biological needs...isn't that what you have said in other threads?

Out of curiosity, what do you think will be different with your plan? Why will the public suddenly embrace this plan...as you seem to think :roll: ? Also, out of curiosity, have you ever asked any of the region/unit managers why they do NOT recommend giving out more tags?

wyoming2utah said:

proutdoors said:

WOW! Good response. Since this is going south real fast, I will resist typing anything further on this. Have a good day wyo2ut, your maturity and wisdom today is astounding!

Click to expand...

Spare me your hypocrisy...it is ok for you to "take jabs" but when I do I am being immature? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

The funny thing about management tags and what has been done with our elk management is that you complain when more tags are being given out...isn't this exactly what our herds need? Don't we need to shoot more elk on these units? Won't even "slight" increases as the DWR has been purposefully recommending help?

The funny thing is that you have repeatedly said that the DWR can't give out enough tags to reach objectives because the public won't allow it, so we should come up with a new plan--like I400--to find a way of getting the numbers back down to meet objectives. Yet, every time the DWR does give out more tags and even when the DWR does recommend new ways of giving out more tags, you and the public complain. I find this exceptionally ironic. Are you truly concerned about the herd health, or are you more concerned with your own agenda? It seems to me that you should applaud any increase in tags because it will ONLY help alleviate the problems you have identified--1) bull/cow ratios 2) low draw odds. And, the DWR is supposed to--at least according to you :roll:--listen to the public first BEFORE following biological needs...isn't that what you have said in other threads?

Out of curiosity, what do you think will be different with your plan? Why will the public suddenly embrace this plan...as you seem to think :roll: ? Also, out of curiosity, have you ever asked any of the region/unit managers why they do NOT recommend giving out more tags?

Click to expand...

Not sure why, but I'll answer your post.

1)I don't dislike the management tags because of it adding more tags, it is because of how they are doing it and with the number of tags issue don the San Juan it won't lower the bull/cow ratio by any measurable amount. My point is the plan recommended by the elk committee, IMHO would have helped more than what was implemented.

2)Again, where have I complained about increases in tag numbers? What I see is bull/cow ratios getting worse by the year, odds of drawing worse by the year, harvest age averages staying/cllimbing above objectives every year. I have NEVER opposed tag increasements, to assert otherwise is a lie!

3)I never implied that the entire 'public' would/will suddenly embrace I400. I do believe however that more people will like it than hate it. You feel differently, go figure. As to satisfy your 'curiousity', I HAVE asked the region/unit managers and their bosses why they do NOT recommend giving out more tags, in fact I asked Anis(their boss) that very question last night. I got the same answer from EVERY one of them. In short, the EMP dictates what direction the DWR MUST manage the herds toward. They also have to deal with the politics involved in tag increases, and in the end, the Wildlife Board decides how many tags to issue, NOT the DWR, and the DWR feels if they ask for too high of increases they may get none, so they feel going in with lower numbers improves the odds of getting SOME increases. You mistake, intentionally I believe, my stance on the tag numbers. I am 100% in favor of issuing more tags on most, if not all LE units(even 'my' LE unit). I am completely in favor of utilizing the great resource we have in the elk here in Utah. I believe there are several issues that can be 'tweaked' to improve this. Just because I think the ball was dropped into the muck on the 'management tag' does NOT mean I oppose tag increases to lower the bull/cow ratios, I had direct input into what was recommended by the elk committee to INCREASE tags on these 4 LE units. It just means I think they implemented a seriously flawed tag. How is that opposing tag increases? Nonsensical!

PRO

proutdoors said:

Not sure why, but I'll answer your post.

1)I don't dislike the management tags because of it adding more tags, it is because of how they are doing it and with the number of tags issue don the San Juan it won't lower the bull/cow ratio by any measurable amount. My point is the plan recommended by the elk committee, IMHO would have helped more than what was implemented.

2)Again, where have I complained about increases in tag numbers? What I see is bull/cow ratios getting worse by the year, odds of drawing worse by the year, harvest age averages staying/cllimbing above objectives every year. I have NEVER opposed tag increasements, to assert otherwise is a lie!

3)I never implied that the entire 'public' would/will suddenly embrace I400. I do believe however that more people will like it than hate it. You feel differently, go figure. As to satisfy your 'curiousity', I HAVE asked the region/unit managers and their bosses why they do NOT recommend giving out more tags, in fact I asked Anis(their boss) that very question last night. I got the same answer from EVERY one of them. In short, the EMP dictates what direction the DWR MUST manage the herds toward. They also have to deal with the politics involved in tag increases, and in the end, the Wildlife Board decides how many tags to issue, NOT the DWR, and the DWR feels if they ask for too high of increases they may get none, so they feel going in with lower numbers improves the odds of getting SOME increases. You mistake, intentionally I believe, my stance on the tag numbers. I am 100% in favor of issuing more tags on most, if not all LE units(even 'my' LE unit). I am completely in favor of utilizing the great resource we have in the elk here in Utah. I believe there are several issues that can be 'tweaked' to improve this. Just because I think the ball was dropped into the muck on the 'management tag' does NOT mean I oppose tag increases to lower the bull/cow ratios, I had direct input into what was recommended by the elk committee to INCREASE tags on these 4 LE units. It just means I think they implemented a seriously flawed tag. How is that opposing tag increases? Nonsensical!

Click to expand...

I knew you would respond...you can't help it!

1) Explain...what is it about the "how" that you don't like. Why wasn't the plan the elk commitee implemented?

2) I guess I interpret your responses--like the one in this thread about the "intentions" and "results"--as a complaint. I didn't say that you opposed tag increases; I said that you complain about what we do get. I believe you should be very supportive in public about these increases and then condone an even larger increase. I believe that any tag increase will help...and will have a positive effect. You have stated that this minimal increase will "have no effect". I disagree.

You seem to "complain" that we don't change everything all at once in one breath; then, in another breath, you explain how the DWR can't issue the number of tags they want. I find this ironic.

You mentioned that the DWR "must" manage herds in accordance to objectives in the EMP. Doesn't this mean that the DWR "must" give out more and more LE tags until herd units reach objectives? If this is true, aren't we already on the right track?

3) So, does this mean that you feel if you ask the wildlife board for more tags with I400, a change in point systems on some units, etc...that you have a higher change of getting an increase in tags than the DWR? Why is the management tag "seriously flawed"? If enough tags are given, won't these tags accomplish their purpose?