Utah Division of Wildlife Resources 2024 Proposals with Dustin Wittwer

[robby denning]

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources 2024 Proposals with Dustin Wittwer

Robby & Dustin discuss proposed changes from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources for weapons, creating mule deer study units, and more.

www.rokslide.com

Get your public comments in well before the Nov 28 Wildlife Board Meeting

 

[S.Clancy]

The limited weapon stuff has me intrigued; archery is primitive (longbow or recurve), rifle open sights. I can get behind this 100%. Reducing tech and becoming more reliant on skills....that's my kinda hunt.

 

[realunlucky]

The limited weapon stuff has me intrigued; archery is primitive (longbow or recurve), rifle open sights. I can get behind this 100%. Reducing tech and becoming more reliant on skills....that's my kinda hunt.

You can challenge yourself that way within the current regulations if it's important to YOU.

Every deer tag in Utah is a draw tag, that means the state already controls the exact number of bucks that can be harvested every year.

Implementation of this on any unit just moves pressure to adjoining units, in general creating less opportunities for Utahs average hunter. I personally will not support any new regulations that do not increase opportunity on these general season units.

Also the test units picked is highly suspect and reducing hunter opportunities in units like pine valley that support a large percentage of Utahs tags seems a shift in the wrong direction for managing the increased wait times to draw a general season deer tag.

 

[MuleyFever]

Implementation of this on any unit just moves pressure to adjoining units, in general creating less opportunities for Utahs average hunter. I personally will not support any new regulations that do not increase opportunity on these general season units.

How is it creating less opportunities? Same number of tags means the same opportunity. The areas of opportunity just shift.

 

[willfrye027]

I wish DWR would have been more honest about what can be realistically expected from some of the proposals.

Bigger bucks and maybe some more bucks on the landscape is what you can hope for here. To say nothing of the actual effectiveness of an APR or shorter season..

Selfishly I would be totally up for the intense weapon restrictions. I have a recurve that I’ve killed deer with (haven’t shot it in a year), would go out an buy a traditional muzzleloader, and would get some iron sights on my centerfire. I love to see and hunt big bucks, and even if the odds of harvesting one are stacked against me. In my imagination some big deer would survive with intense weapon restrictions and I’d get to see/hunt them which would bring me more joy that actually shooting a medium sized 4pt.

I don’t have an illusions of these proposals “helping the herd”. Praying for more rain this season to do that.

 

[realunlucky]

How is it creating less opportunities? Same number of tags means the same opportunity. The areas of opportunity just shift.

So restricting archery to traditional only doesn’t reduce opportunity?

Even if they allocate the same number of permits it has reduced opportunity for the average hunter while increasing opportunities for a niche group.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[S.Clancy]

You can challenge yourself that way within the current regulations if it's important to YOU.

Every deer tag in Utah is a draw tag, that means the state already controls the exact number of bucks that can be harvested every year.

Implementation of this on any unit just moves pressure to adjoining units, in general creating less opportunities for Utahs average hunter. I personally will not support any new regulations that do not increase opportunity on these general season units.

Also the test units picked is highly suspect and reducing hunter opportunities in units like pine valley that support a large percentage of Utahs tags seems a shift in the wrong direction for managing the increased wait times to draw a general season deer tag.

It's the same amount of opportunity, it's opportunity with a lower success rate.

I don't live in UT, but I would love it if my home state (MT) started doing this.

 

[S.Clancy]

So restricting archery to traditional only doesn’t reduce opportunity?

Even if they allocate the same number of permits it has reduced opportunity for the average hunter while increasing opportunities for a niche group.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Everyone has an opportunity to shoot a trad bow or a rifle without sights.

I have no problem with a rollback in technology in hunting

 

[realunlucky]

I wish DWR would have been more honest about what can be realistically expected from some of the proposals.

Bigger bucks and maybe some more bucks on the landscape is what you can hope for here. To say nothing of the actual effectiveness of an APR or shorter season..

Selfishly I would be totally up for the intense weapon restrictions. I have a recurve that I’ve killed deer with (haven’t shot it in a year), would go out an buy a traditional muzzleloader, and would get some iron sights on my centerfire. I love to see and hunt big bucks, and even if the odds of harvesting one are stacked against me. In my imagination some big deer would survive with intense weapon restrictions and I’d get to see/hunt them which would bring me more joy that actually shooting a medium sized 4pt.

I don’t have an illusions of these proposals “helping the herd”. Praying for more rain this season to do that.

Exactly-- no matter which direction they go, I'm willing to buy new equipment to maximize my personal opportunity to hunt within the state.
On the other hand plenty of my family can't afford or it's not a priority enough to justify the extra expense to change. They will wait longer and grow less interested in hunting.

Who doesn't want to hunt bigger bucks in Utah? The question becomes what are we willing to trade for it? I'm unwilling to sacrifice the simple opportunity to draw a general tag for those who seek trophy animals.

Are they still harvesting amazing bucks under the current regulations? Yes they are, so if your not the guy doing it maybe it's time for more internal reflection instead of trying to make more bucks in the age class your looking for. If hunting mature deer isn't about the challenge, why do you do it?


Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[realunlucky]

Everyone has an opportunity to shoot a trad bow or a rifle without sights.

I have no problem with a rollback in technology in hunting

As with everything that's your personal preference and you can do it now without affecting those that have a different preference.

We are talking about limiting Utah general season, Utah already has limited entry tags to grow big bucks. Why aren't these trophy hunters hunting there? They can't get tags because opportunity has been reduced. So thier new plan is to reduce opportunity again on general seasons. History shows they'll be unhappy with those results too.

If it's not about creating more opportunity to hunt I won't support it.

Maybe if you had to wait every 3,4, or 5 years to hunt general deer your opinion would differ. I can draw a Montana general tag more often then my preferred Utah general deer tag.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[willfrye027]

Exactly-- no matter which direction they go, I'm willing to buy new equipment to maximize my personal opportunity to hunt within the state.
On the other hand plenty of my family can't afford or it's not a priority enough to justify the extra expense to change. They will wait longer and grow less interested in hunting.

Who doesn't want to hunt bigger bucks in Utah? The question becomes what are we willing to trade for it? I'm unwilling to sacrifice the simple opportunity to draw a general tag for those who seek trophy animals.

Are they still harvesting amazing bucks under the current regulations? Yes they are so if your not the guy doing it maybe it's time for internal reflection instead of trying to make more bucks in the age class your looking for. If hunting mature isn't about the challenge why do you do it?


Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Well said. Personally I don’t think the trophy hunting segment of the population should be the main drivers of policy. They might be the squeakiest wheels though..

 

[S.Clancy]

As with everything that's your personal preference and you can do it now without affecting those that have a different preference.

We are talking about limiting Utah general season, Utah already has limited entry tags to grow big bucks. Why aren't these trophy hunters hunting there? They can't get tags because opportunity has been reduced. So thier new plan is to reduce opportunity again on general seasons. History shows they'll be unhappy with those results too.

If it's not about creating more opportunity to hunt I won't support it.

Maybe if you had to wait every 3,4, or 5 years to hunt general deer your opinion would differ. I can draw a Montana general tag more often then my preferred Utah general deer tag.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

You're not removing opportunity. There is going to be the same number of tags. I imagine if harvest success drops (which it seems it would) they could give out more tags

 

[realunlucky]

You're not removing opportunity. There is going to be the same number of tags. I imagine if harvest success drops (which it seems it would) they could give out more tags

Will hunters lose the opportunity to hunt that unit with the standard definition of a hunting rifle? Yes
In its simplest form the new rules will impact the majority of tag holders that hunted that unit prior and they will lose out on tag opportunity unless they--
1- change equipment
2-change units

Whats the trade off? Nobody knows so you can assume if you want but I have zero faith in the wildlife board to step up and do the right thing.

As I've already stated, you can already choose to restrict yourself to those weapon types but that isn't enough I guess if everyone isn't impacted.

 

[realunlucky]

Utah already splits its tag allocation between- any weapon (rifle), muzzleloader, archery. It could simply shift those tag numbers from the most successful weapon type to the lest successful user groups without resorting to any new type tags. The reason the majority of tags go to any weapon category is that it encompasses the largest majority of Utah hunters.
Why would Utah hunters embrace a change that excludes all 3 current user groups?

 

[HighUintas]

Because the tech in hunting needs to be restricted. People would adapt, just like they have over the years with getting big ass scopes and the fastest new compound out there.

 

[realunlucky]

Because the tech in hunting needs to be restricted. People would adapt, just like they have over the years with getting big ass scopes and the fastest new compound out there.

They said the difference in success in removing scopes is 3 or 4% across the state? So we are talking a few less bucks harvested in each unit but increase the margin of error by going back to open sights.

Why does tech need to be restricted? Honest question here as the historical data of success rates hasn't increased that greatly. So what is the basis for recommending the change?

What are we willing to give up to have success plummet and tag numbers to drastically increase? If we make said changes is the way we ethically harvest animals impacted? For an example we could use spears and have tons of more tags. When the average hunter took to the field and just hit animals wherever they could: the image of hunting for the public at-large would not agree that is ethical choice.

I agree those that want to hunt will adapt. No matter the restrictions technology will push the boundaries into the gray areas to give people an advantage over others. Simply because that is where the money is.

 

[Sled]

Haven't looked at the proposal yet but I like the idea of shifting opportunities which could lead to increased opportunity down the road. One could get creative and rotate the rut opportunities by method of take instead of just giving it to the rifles every season. That would also shift how people apply and hopefully help clear out some points holders.

 

[S.Clancy]

They said the difference in success in removing scopes is 3 or 4% across the state? So we are talking a few less bucks harvested in each unit but increase the margin of error by going back to open sights.

Why does tech need to be restricted? Honest question here as the historical data of success rates hasn't increased that greatly. So what is the basis for recommending the change?

What are we willing to give up to have success plummet and tag numbers to drastically increase? If we make said changes is the way we ethically harvest animals impacted? For an example we could use spears and have tons of more tags. When the average hunter took to the field and just hit animals wherever they could: the image of hunting for the public at-large would not agree that is ethical choice.

I agree those that want to hunt will adapt. No matter the restrictions technology will push the boundaries into the gray areas to give people an advantage over others. Simply because that is where the money is.

3-4% over long timelines makes big differences.

Also, I'd bet the non-hunting public would view more primitive weapons as more sporting (aka better) than a rifle you can shoot a deer at a 1000 yards or a compound bow people are shooting 100+ yards

And, the definition of opportunity is a tag, or the total number of tags. You can't just start lumping opportunity into these different categories. Right now there is no opportunity to hunt deer with RPGs so the department is decreasing opportunities....

 

[realunlucky]

3-4% over long timelines makes big differences.

Also, I'd bet the non-hunting public would view more primitive weapons as more sporting (aka better) than a rifle you can shoot a deer at a 1000 yards or a compound bow people are shooting 100+ yards

And, the definition of opportunity is a tag, or the total number of tags. You can't just start lumping opportunity into these different categories. Right now there is no opportunity to hunt deer with RPGs so the department is decreasing opportunities....

I'll take that bet because spear throwing one of the most primitive weapon types was already tested in the arena of public opinion and failed. In fact, that single spear hunting event had a largely negative impact across hunting as whole.

Of 71600 deer permits issued removal of muzzle loader scopes could possibly impact 400 buck deer spread across 31 units. Of course, any weapon season follows muzzle loader so a percentage of those bucks would simply shift into the rifle season harvest statics. The impact of removing scopes is minuscule at best.

As western states populations grow and big game animals decline, the selfishness of hunters and the opportunity to hunt those remaining animals is the divide that will be hunting's single biggest enemy.

I'll fling arrows with a stick bow, or buy a badass flintlock if that what it takes to stay ahead of the competition. Hunting is a priority to me, but I'm not naive enough to believe that the majority of Utah hunters will follow suit. My kids will not hunt with 30lb traditional archery equipment, my old man isn't buying a new muzzleloader for the last few seasons he has left (he'd quit hunting first without a doubt) Is the exception for them to wait patiently on the side lines and just continue to fund the DWR?

Do nothing and nothing changes but focus solely on the few and the majority of support is lost.

 

[realunlucky]

There is still time to comment on the proposals before November 28th, no matter if your in favor or oppose these changes make your voice heard. https://wildlife.utah.gov/feedback.html