Utah Wildlife Forum banner

1 - 20 of 214 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,174 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I saw this on another forum and decided to 'poach' it and get some feedback from folks. This is from Don Peay, founder of SFW, lets stick to the pros/cons of the idea, not make it a slam SFW fest please:
The DWR is going to review deer managment plans in 2008 for 2009-2015.

Here is an idea i would like some feedback on.

If 30% of the customers want black shoes, and 70% want white shoes, would stores supply 90 Black shoes ?

Taking a step back, what if the state surveyed all of Utah's deer hutners and asked them this question.

If Utah made two different kinds of deer hunts, pick which one you would want. Type A will be managed for 15-12 bucks per 100 Does post season. Type B will be managed for 35 bucks post season. If you pick a unit within Type A, you can probably hunt most every year. If you apply for a unit in type B, you will draw a tag every 4 years or so. If you apply for Units in A, you can NOT apply for hunts in Units B. And Vice Versa.

Then, if 60% of the hunters want Units Type A, the 60 percent of Utahs deer units are managed for 15-20. And 40% want type B, 40% are managed for 35. The main key would be to try and manage the product produced, with the desire of the customers.

Right now in Utah, about 10% of the units are managed for higher quality and 90% are managed for general season. This is NOT A good match for what Utah deer hunters want. Some want more opportunity, some want more quality. Neither one is right, it is a simple matter of personal preference.

The other major isssue under Utah's Current System is that everyone can put in for the super quality, thus making the drawing odds very long. When the hunter wanting higher quality doesn't draw, they don't hunt. When the causual hunter doesn't draw, they are happy hunting lower quality units, maybe not happier, but tolerant.

Under the future System, you would have to pick Type A or Type B, and stick with that choice for say a five year period.

This approach does not discriminate based on money, but asks hunters to choose what they really want. However, in fairness to the DWR, if Type B units require a 3/4 reduction in the number of hunters, the price for that unit would probably have to triple - go from $40 to $120 or so.

What are the thoughts on this approach ?

The second questoin then becomes, which units go into Type A, and Type B. The answer should proably be a fair distribution of Units A and B geographically throughout the state.
I like it, in fact I would love to see the elk managed under a similar plan as well.

PRO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts
I think it sounds pretty good!

One unit I have been thinking about a lot lately and I have discussed with a bunch of friends is we would like to see the Pahvant go to LE Deer tag, just like Henry and Pauns........I think within just a few short years you would see the Pahvant surpass the Pauns for huge bucks coming off.............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
993 Posts
Well I am not sure how I feel about it. Like with I 400 I do not want to not hunt each year, but yet I can not drive to other areas farther away to hunt. I would want the areas I hunt to fall into the A category not the b. If I wanted the B cat I would put in for the draws or do the DH where ican not take deer every year. To me it seams like a plan by trophy hunters to get bigger bucks. That is cool, but why should I give up my hunts for them and vise versa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
507 Posts
So why should I have to give up my trophy hunting for general season hunters? When you have anterless hunts to choice from why do you need a hunt for bucks if you not a trophy hunter?

Weatherby, why not have a split where both type of hunters can get what they want? I would give up some years of hunting in order to get a chance at a bigger buck more often.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
123 Posts
This thread is going to get messy! :p

I dont really like the thought of having to pay 120 some odd dollars to hunt in an area I have been hunting all my life.
I dont really care if there are 32" monsters in there or not.
Right now there is plenty of respectable deer where I go.
At first glance I am not a fan of this proposal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
993 Posts
So why should I have to give up my trophy hunting for general season hunters?
You should that I agree. No one should have to give up anything, but we both know that is not how it is going to be.

Weatherby, why not have a split where both type of hunters can get what they want? I would give up some years of hunting in order to get a chance at a bigger buck more often.
Why spilt things at all? Both hunters can get what they want now. This year I have seen 6 or more 30" plus bucks all with in 30 min of the front. The big bucks are in other places besides the premium units. So I do not understand. I hunt with guys that are nothing but trophy hunters yet they have not and will not ever put in for deer drawings. The reason is they can and do find there trophies most years. Do I thropy hunt no but does not mean I do not want to kill big bucks. We already have to make enough choices just to hunt so why make more? Like I said I am not sure how I feel about the idea just yet. Need more time and info to make up my mind.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
123 Posts
utfireman said:
So why should I have to give up my trophy hunting for general season hunters? When you have anterless hunts to choice from why do you need a hunt for bucks if you not a trophy hunter?

Weatherby, why not have a split where both type of hunters can get what they want? I would give up some years of hunting in order to get a chance at a bigger buck more often.
It isn't all that easy to draw an antlerless tag either, They have greatly reduced the number of doe tags given out over the last 5 years.
I dont think this is any compensation for a loss of hunting oppurtunity
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,218 Posts
They increased the antlerless tags this year
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
359 Posts
Yall better take a seat, its about to get real ugly in here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

















I just might head up to Don's house with some KY and my membership fee to join SFW!!!! Just that little bit of info and I am ready to sign up. Its time hunters start paying to help increase the quality of our deer herds. I could go on but am curious to see where this thread goes.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
123 Posts
coyoteslayer said:
They increased the antlerless tags this year
I would love more doe tags, That is good news.
Is that for the 2008 season? The numbers for 2007 were less than the year before.
Do you know how many they added and where did you find out?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
123 Posts
Isn't the average draw period for alot of LE units averaging about 4-5 years anyway?
I know this isn't true for some like the pauns or henry's but it seems that most were not much over at least five years on the trophy units.
Plus with all the CWMU's it can't be that bad to draw a trophy type unit tag in Utah for a resident at least.
Im no numbers guy or a pro but it doesn't seem that bad in Utah for a chance at a trophy buck.
Heck look at all the bad boys harvested this year that you see here and on muleymadness etc..
I'm thinking Utahs trophy bucks are doing fairly well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,174 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
wileywapati said:
This idea blows. Just more Horn Hugger retoric!!
Please explain how your definition of hunting is more 'valid' and should be the only one that matters. I see this as a compromise where you can have areas managed for the type of huntinig you prefer, and the "Horn Huggers" can have areas managed their way. Why does that "blow"?

PRO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
812 Posts
proutdoors said:
wileywapati said:
This idea blows. Just more Horn Hugger retoric!!
Please explain how your definition of hunting is more 'valid' and should be the only one that matters. I see this as a compromise where you can have areas managed for the type of huntinig you prefer, and the "Horn Huggers" can have areas managed their way. Why does that "blow"?

PRO
i think that the only thing that could possibly blow about this is that the area that i hunt and hold dear to me might be classified as a place that does not best fit my hunting style. how would they divide up what areas would be managed for what type of hunting? i just do not want to find a new place to hunt if the pahvant is not the best fit for me in this system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Well I have to agree with Pro, the deer arent doing unbelievably well, why not fix the problem, let the guys who hunt horns, the guys dont, each have their own area. I know there is alot of guys who hunt the first few days looking for a toad, on the last day settle on a 2 point. Some people say they are getting there moneys worth , some just want to fill the freezer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Pro . . . I know you asked that this not be a SFW slam-fest, but I have seen too many Don-sponsored "solutions" that are for the benefit of his special interest friends and clearly to the detriment of the average Joe to fully separate the idea from its proponent.

I think this is a bad idea . . . both for my personal hunting preferences and for the good of hunting in general. Think of how many people you know who got so frustrated when the DWR started dividing the state into regions and they could no longer draw a tag for their traditional area . . . or could no longer hunt with their families because half drew out in one region and the others in a different region . . . that they gave up hunting altogether.

What we need right now is to increase the number of individuals who are involved in hunting, support hunting, and help advance wildlife management conservation initiatives. It seems to me that this is going to do just the opposite. It will further limit hunting opportunities for all and will drive more hunting supporters from the sport because it will arbitrarily cut up the existing general deer boundaries to fit Don's preferences, and will displace a great many hunters from their traditional areas because their "style" doesn't fit the designated style for their hunting area.

I don't consider myself a trophy hunter . . . but I definitely do try to go after the big guys. I don't feel compelled to harvest a deer every year, but there is no question that I anxiously wait all year for the chance to be out chasing them and could not go four years without hunting just for an easy score on a large buck once every five years. My love is for the time spent out in the hills, enjoying the chase, savoring the experience and piling up the memories. A hard earned worthy harvest is nice . . . but definitely secondary to the overall experience. Life's too short to spend 80% of it on the sidelines waiting for a chance to play.

As several others on the forum have mentioned, there are big bucks out there on every unit. You don't hear the average Joe trophy hunter complaining that there aren't any big bucks because he understands that he has to work hard for a big muley buck. Moreover, he knows that if he puts in his time and works his tail off, his opportunity will eventually come -- regardless of whether he is on a public land or a limited entry unit.

It seems to me, what Don wants to create are more tags for limited entry units . . . and therefore more guaranteed guiding fees for him, and more private hunting reserve opportunities for his friends. I don't know why the rest of us should limit our hunting opportunities to help accomplish those special interest goals.

I don't begrudge Don working for his own interests, but I clearly don't think this is in the long term best interest of hunters and hunting in Utah.

My two cents . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,174 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
It seems to me, what Don wants to create are more tags for limited entry units . . . and therefore more guaranteed guiding fees for him, and more private hunting reserve opportunities for his friends. I don't know why the rest of us should limit our hunting opportunities to help accomplish those special interest goals.
Don does NOT guide, so he recieves no guide fees. SFW has had a survey up on their site asking about this subject, 500+ in favor of it, 100 opposed. This does NOT soound like it is a "Don Peay" driven issue. He is merely getting feedback on an issue members of SFW say are important to them. You ask, "I don't know why the rest of us should limit our hunting opportunities to help accomplish those special interest goals." So, we should just manage to your 'special interests'? :?

PRO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,218 Posts
So what is the best solution for our deer herds? Most of the money spent on habitat isnt the general season areas because they arent as big of an interest and we only manage deer for quantity and they even fail at that. LE units make more money so more interest is focused on LE units like the Paunsgant, Henrys, Book Cliffs etc. We should be managing our deer better and looking at ways to make our general season better for hunting in the future. We can't continue to kill 70 to 80% of our yearling bucks every year.

If the DWR decided to micromanage units like other states then people wont get to hunt their favorite hunting spots every year and fewer tags will be issued so fewer hunters will get to hunt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,066 Posts
At first glance I liked it. But, the more I think about it the less I like it. I worry that this is a proposal that is just to make people money off something that exists now but requires effort to find and harvest. There are many hogs taken every year on general units and they are found through hard work and "hunting". Increasing the trophy units will not make any more money for the DWR unless they raise everyones tag price to pay for "trophy hunters" units beyond what it actually cost them to maintain. That would not even be fair IMO, if trophy hunters want the units they should pay for most of cost involved. Notice i did not say all because other "regular" hunters would also benefit.

So who is going to benefit from this? The dear? Because the herds will be healthier or larger. (Antler size only) Or the trophy hunters? And if we produce units that manufacture deer as legendary as the bulls that are being taken on some of utah units than that attracts the hunters who need guides or special services. And this is what I think is behind this idea and other driven by antler size instead of the health of the herd, or it range land.
 
1 - 20 of 214 Posts
Top