License to Shed Hunt

[TREE ‘EM]

Links to this study has been posted and discussed extensively on Rokslide recently so I assumed it was a known topic. Here is a link:

Hiking trails are a path to destruction for Colorado elk - High Country News

Recreationalists in Vail are having a devastating impact on the local herd.

www.hcn.org

That’s an article, not a study.

Your quote about a cow being disturbed 10 times resulting in 100% calf mortality is pure speculation, not fact. Read the part of the story where it says “models”.

My oldest son lives near Estes Park in wintering grounds. Neither of us have found anything other than predator kill calves.

 

[Poser]

That’s an article, not a study.

Your quote about a cow being disturbed 10 times resulting in 100% calf mortality is pure speculation, not fact. Read the part of the story where it says “models”.

My oldest son lives near Estes Park in wintering grounds. Neither of us have found anything other than predator kill calves.

Ok, so I posted the first link I found referencing the study. Guilty as charged.

Also, your conclusions are not scientific either, just the observations of two people, and, without a collar study, you have no way of knowing that the observed predation wasn’t correlated with human impacts. I post a link to article about a study and you immediately discredit it by countering with the observations of 2 people with no possible allowance for correlation. How is that a tenable counter argument?

 

[Phaseolus]

I’ve had a heck of a time copying a link to the actual study, it’s a pdf. Here is the name of the study, you can google it and if your computer skills are better than mine perhaps you will link it. Apparently Journalist’s aren’t aware they should publish the name of the study as well. I wouldn’t take one study as “The Facts”. Hopefully more work will be done on this.

REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF ELK FOLLOWING DISTURBANCE BY HUMANS DURING CALVING SEASON
GREGORYE. PHILLIPS,' of and Wildlife Colorado State Department Fishery Biology,
A. WILLIAM ALLDREDGE, of and Wildlife Colorado State Department Fishery Biology,
FortCollins,CO 80523, USA University,
FortCollins,CO 80523, USA

 

[Poser]

 

[Jauwater]

I agree and proposed exactly that as an alternative to licenses earlier in this thread.

I agree as well. I believe it would be just as effective, and easier for law enforcement to enforce that law. You see someone where they shouldn't be, ticket em. Rather then having to track down the person's to check licensing / permits whatever. Less litigation. I'm sure it doesn't rub everybody the same, but that'd be a whole lot better then going down the other road, IMO.

Sent from my moto g(7) optimo maxx(XT1955DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Wapiti406]

I agree as well. I believe it would be just as effective, and easier for law enforcement to enforce that law. You see someone where they shouldn't be, ticket em. Rather then having to track down the person's to check licensing / permits whatever. Less litigation. I'm sure it doesn't rub everybody the same, but that'd be a whole lot better then going down the other road, IMO.

Sent from my moto g(7) optimo maxx(XT1955DL) using Tapatalk

How exactly do you purpose defining where a person should or should not be, and what dates are people allowed to access these places? I’m not sure if you realize this or not but elk don’t just winter on one specific hillside in a mountain range, it’s a pretty vast area. Would you be in favor of banning people from using a vast majority of public lands from February to say June? That all people, not just people looking to kick up a shed, trappers, bear hunters, hikers, bikers, fisherman, photographers, campers and every other type of recreationalist should be ticketed for being in a closed area? Or do you only want to ban people that are specifically looking for sheds? You do understand that to give a person a ticket a LEO would have to "track down" the perpetrator and check some form of ID to give a citation, right?

Banning people outright doesn’t even work on the few wildlife management areas in Montana. I can’t imagine how poorly banning people from every place an elk would likely be during the spring on forest service would go.

 

[Phaseolus]

Thanks, Poseur

 

[Jauwater]

How exactly do you purpose defining where a person should or should not be, and what dates are people allowed to access these places? I’m not sure if you realize this or not but elk don’t just winter on one specific hillside in a mountain range, it’s a pretty vast area. Would you be in favor of banning people from using a vast majority of public lands from February to say June? That all people, not just people looking to kick up a shed, trappers, bear hunters, hikers, bikers, fisherman, photographers, campers and every other type of recreationalist should be ticketed for being in a closed area? Or do you only want to ban people that are specifically looking for sheds? You do understand that to give a person a ticket a LEO would have to "track down" the perpetrator and check some form of ID to give a citation, right?

Banning people outright doesn’t even work on the few wildlife management areas in Montana. I can’t imagine how poorly banning people from every place an elk would likely be during the spring on forest service would go.

I personally would rather leave it alone, and not close any area or force anyone to have a license for shed hunting. I personally think it's ridiculous. But in the spirit of the thread, I think closing certain areas that are heavily targeted, and easily accessed for this sort of thing is a better option. Just because you force someone to get a license doesn't mean they will, and just because you close an area doesn't mean they'll stay out. I don't think either option will be that effective. But like I said earlier, I believe if you give them an inch they will take a mile, in reference to government. And sure, they could close down every access point to nature for everybody as well, but I don't think that'd be the case. I think they'd rather make the money where they see it could be made, and continue down the road of all other outdoor activities using the same premise as shed hunting. I'm just reacting to the ideas proposed. I'd rather live in / like the wild west then debate these, what I consider, ridiculous ideas of government control on the outdoors.

Sent from my moto g(7) optimo maxx(XT1955DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Poser]

How exactly do you purpose defining where a person should or should not be, and what dates are people allowed to access these places? I’m not sure if you realize this or not but elk don’t just winter on one specific hillside in a mountain range, it’s a pretty vast area. Would you be in favor of banning people from using a vast majority of public lands from February to say June? That all people, not just people looking to kick up a shed, trappers, bear hunters, hikers, bikers, fisherman, photographers, campers and every other type of recreationalist should be ticketed for being in a closed area? Or do you only want to ban people that are specifically looking for sheds? You do understand that to give a person a ticket a LEO would have to "track down" the perpetrator and check some form of ID to give a citation, right?

Banning people outright doesn’t even work on the few wildlife management areas in Montana. I can’t imagine how poorly banning people from every place an elk would likely be during the spring on forest service would go.

We have quite a few seasonal wildlife area closures around Durango. They close between Nov 15 and dec 1 thru April 15 and 39th with the option for extension. Since the Town was developed on traditional wintering grounds (valley with lots of sun), many of the surrounding hills immediately bordering town are closed to all human traffic: hikers, bikers, skiers, snow showers etc. Some of the areas are open to small game hunters, but most are closed to all users. I’ve gone rabbit hunting in one of the semi open areas before and spooked so many mule deer everywhere I went that I felt guilty and haven’t been back. At least one popular trail has an open hours between 10 and 2 but closed the rest of the time. In other cases, chains are put across trailheads with signage and FS gates shut and locked. I’ve heard rumors of aggressive ticketing by BLM and CPW in at least one popular location.

A couple of these locations are popular bedding areas for elk and they feed in the valley (private land) at night. One area is a migration corridor that skirts Town. It does seem to be effective at least in terms of animals piling up in these areas and using them. If you go in just after opening in the spring, there are tracks everywhere. I couldn’t say how many acres this is total.

 

[T3clay]

^ that's the best option right there .... No point of restricting shed hunters when hikers bikers tree huggers snowmobilers and snow boarders are all over the place....

 

[kiddogy]

Way to oversimplify the problem. The problem is not the act of picking up antlers, it’s the sheer amount of people who are obsessed with collecting antlers, track herds to collect them the moment they hit the ground, move in tight on them, sometimes purposely bumping the herd to get elk out of the way so they can collect the antlers on the ground. There is going to be a certain amount of indirect pressure in areas that are not closed, but what we are talking here is direct pressure.

it's a wash in Idaho . if the shed hunters don't stress them the wolves do. don't pretend to care about the stress on them till the wolves are gone

 

[rob86jeep]

And now we're on wolves...

Makes me laugh how hunting conversations always end up on wolves.

 

[Poser]

And now we're on wolves...

Makes me laugh how hunting conversations always end up on wolves.

Maybe we should institute a “earn a shed” program where a hunter has to kill a wolf to pick up an antler

 

[isItFallYet]

That doesn't address any of the problems with the current state of "shed" hunting.

People want sheds for whatever the reason.

People have "GOT" to go early to beat everyone and pick up the good ones. Just going to have a quick "look" around. No big deal animals are just using this area to try and survive until spring, but it's so convenient and easy to "look" so many animals wintering in this small area.

Then when no sheds are found--well shit if we just keep coming back and keep stomping around this area surely we'll find a good one.

Then holy hell I found one but I just have to match it up and it doesn't really hurt to stomp around a little bit more.

Other guys come later and only find boot prints---Well shit I'll just have to go earlier next year and beat the other guys here.

Meanwhile animals are stressing out with all the coming and going of the small horde of antler lovers.

That’s why a hunting license pays for it. You want some antlers? Pay the same that hunters (conservationalists) pay for. You can hunt antlers or you can hunt antlers with a freezer full of meat for the same price!

 

[kiddogy]

That’s why a hunting license pays for it. You want some antlers? Pay the same that hunters (conservationalists) pay for. You can hunt antlers or you can hunt antlers with a freezer full of meat for the same price!

and after a couple years we can even do better by making folks choose between sheds or meat. and a few years later we can just do away with both. seriously , if we are gonna get silly ,there is no end to the silliness we could implement.

 

[Ross]

Being a shed hunter for 2+ decades and hunter for 4+ decades most shed hunters like most hunters do nothing that would stress and ultimately kill a buck or bull. If a license was required which is plain silly I would buy it. In places where animals congregate and are easily stressed in large numbers due to mixed variables then a season would appear appropriate. In standard national forests no a season is not needed nor do They see enough shed hunters to do anything to them, the reason wolves come up is people with enough experience of what they do in the backcountry come winter, think about it pack of 5 wolves running around all day looking for thinks to play with versus a slow moving one day a week shed hunter on snowshoes often. 7 weeks and the fun starts🏔🏔Odin is ready this year

 

[beginner]

I feel there are too many license required already here in Cal. I saw only 8 deer here in 11 days of hunting and then they send me an email saying how much they appreciate me hunting so that they can use my $80 dollars to manage the herds here. Seems they are more concerned with protecting the predators. Does any other state charge their hunters $80 for a license and tag for 1 deer?

 

[S.Clancy]

Being a shed hunter for 2+ decades and hunter for 4+ decades most shed hunters like most hunters do nothing that would stress and ultimately kill a buck or bull. If a license was required which is plain silly I would buy it. In places where animals congregate and are easily stressed in large numbers due to mixed variables then a season would appear appropriate. In standard national forests no a season is not needed nor do They see enough shed hunters to do anything to them, the reason wolves come up is people with enough experience of what they do in the backcountry come winter, think about it pack of 5 wolves running around all day looking for thinks to play with versus a slow moving one day a week shed hunter on snowshoes often. 7 weeks and the fun starts🏔🏔Odin is ready this yearView attachment 135890View attachment 135890View attachment 135893View attachment 135887View attachment 135888View attachment 135892

My God do you have your shed spots figured out, thats some serious bone.

 

[Ross]

Thank you decades of walking lines for sheds and killing bullsMany fine days with my boys and friends a few more just because it reminds me of why I go to the gym so often