CO hunter numbers.

[Newtosavage]

Hunters are such an inefficient management tool that I'm not sure the juice is worth the squeeze - i.e. "finer control over impacts" but I'm not an elk biologist either.

 

[Scooter90254]

Hunters are such an inefficient management tool that I'm not sure the juice is worth the squeeze - i.e. "finer control over impacts" but I'm not an elk biologist either.

That’s not true. Hunters are the most efficient management tool. How many tools do you have that also drive their own revenue.

The mismanagement of the plan. Like mentioned above the problem is Elk hunting is growing and there’s too much flexibility in OTC tags. Let’s all go to unit 36 and hunt the big burn.

 

[vanish]

Hunters are such an inefficient management tool that I'm not sure the juice is worth the squeeze - i.e. "finer control over impacts" but I'm not an elk biologist either.

That’s not true. Hunters are the most efficient management tool. How many tools do you have that also drive their own revenue.

The mismanagement of the plan. Like mentioned above the problem is Elk hunting is growing and there’s too much flexibility in OTC tags. Let’s all go to unit 36 and hunt the big burn.

CPW does consider archery an inefficient management tool. I will agree with Newtosavage on that.

However, Scooter's second point is where it becomes irrelevant - when you have thousands of archers heading to the same areas, even a 10% success rate starts having a significant impact.

 

[Newtosavage]

Hunters are the most efficient management tool.

How many tools do you have that also drive their own revenue.

That's a nice story, but it's not reality, as reported every year by actual biologists. But it sounds good and it's the line us hunters have been fed for 80 years. We like it because it allows us to pat ourselves on the back. But efficient, we are not.

Efficient is expert marksmen with suppressors in wintering grounds.

We pay a lot of money for tags because we are an expensive, inefficient population management tool. We're paying for the stocking, opportunity to recreate and the enforcement of regulations.

 

[[email protected]]

I really can’t wait until September when they decide how deep they are going to break it off in us so people can find something new to complain and fight about....

 

[Scooter90254]

That's a nice story, but it's not reality, as reported every year by actual biologists. But it sounds good and it's the line us hunters have been fed for 80 years. We like it because it allows us to pat ourselves on the back. But efficient, we are not.

Efficient is expert marksmen with suppressors in wintering grounds.

We pay a lot of money for tags because we are an expensive, inefficient population management tool. We're paying for the stocking, opportunity to recreate and the enforcement of regulations.

I honestly hate to turn this into a bickering match but when you attack hunting as a whole I feel it's a duty to respond to your ignorant statement.
The North American Model of Wildlife Management has absolutely proven to be the best most efficient successful model out there. It is one of this country's biggest successes. We have abundant diverse wildlife and hunting absolutely plays a vital role in that.

A sharp shooter does nothing for conservation and is a very expensive, short term management tool for wildlife control.

 

[ChrisAU]

If hunting isn't a management tool then why do those same biologists set hunter limits in certain units and spend a ton of time altering those numbers up and down every year...

 

[MuleyFever]

I honestly hate to turn this into a bickering match but when you attack hunting as a whole I feel it's a duty to respond to your ignorant statement.
The North American Model of Wildlife Management has absolutely proven to be the best most efficient successful model out there. It is one of this country's biggest successes. We have abundant diverse wildlife and hunting absolutely plays a vital role in that.

A sharp shooter does nothing for conservation and is a very expensive, short term management tool for wildlife control.

You guys aren't even on the same page. The NA model of wildlife management has nothing to do with the efficiency of hunters. His statement was not ignorant at all, it is a fact. A success rate in the teens is very inefficient. Hunters are inefficient. Now, that may be because we are held back by rules but its still a fact. Like he said, if the goal is just to remove animals there are many more efficient ways to do it than hunting, including shooters on winter grounds.

If you think about it the model may work due to the inefficiency of hunters. If everyone was successful what would tag numbers and populations look like? How much money would be taken in for conservation if they could only sell 100 tags to take 100 animals rather than the 300 or whatever they sell now to take those 100 animals?

Who said hunting was not a management tool?

 

[txhunter581]

Exactly Muleyfever!
You guys are like the blind men all feeling different parts of the elephant so their description is accurate but they are talking about different things. Hunting IS a very effective tool for game management when you factor in the success rates WHATEVER they happen to be.

 

[Newtosavage]

You guys aren't even on the same page. The NA model of wildlife management has nothing to do with the efficiency of hunters. His statement was not ignorant at all, it is a fact. A success rate in the teens is very inefficient. Hunters are inefficient. Now, that may be because we are held back by rules but its still a fact. Like he said, if the goal is just to remove animals there are many more efficient ways to do it than hunting, including shooters on winter grounds.

If you think about it the model may work due to the inefficiency of hunters. If everyone was successful what would tag numbers and populations look like? How much money would be taken in for conservation if they could only sell 100 tags to take 100 animals rather than the 300 or whatever they sell now to take those 100 animals?

Who said hunting was not a management tool?

Thank you MuleyFever. You understood what I meant with my post.

Nobody - including me - said hunting was not a management tool and I certainly didn't "attack" hunters. I've only been at this since the 70's myself. I'm well versed on the NA model of wildlife management, and I'm honest about the facts - which is that hunters are very inefficient. And that - as MuleyFever points out - is why we enjoy the numbers of game we do these days.

I grew up mostly in East Texas where I learned that the most efficient way to harvest deer was with a spotlight and a .22. LOL Is that hunting? Nope.

 

[trophyhill]

I doubt it would do much for point creep if they went all limited. We'd still all be applying for the top tier units as a first choice and lesser units 2nd or 3rd and hope they are undersubscribed....

 

[mwebs]

Reintroduce wolves! Very effective management tool, then you can start reducing NR tags! Wait why hasn't IDFG gotten that memo?!

 

[sndmn11]

I think he was talking about the efficiency in terms of monetary cost to the government, not time or effort "cost".

A sharp shooter does nothing for conservation and is a very expensive, short term management tool for wildlife control.