Nsmith163
FNG
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2020
- Messages
- 24
We all know the story--hunter recruitment increasing across the west at the same time as predator populations, causing stress to elk and deer populations resulting in declining herds. In many states, political forces are preventing effective predator management, so states are reducing elk and deer hunting opportunities (whether it's effective or not is another story) to slow the declining populations. As a result, many OTC hunting opportunities are now becoming draw tags, and in many states point creep is making draw tags increasingly more difficult to draw.
All this raises a question--can new approaches to hunting regulations save OTC opportunities while simultaneously improving herd numbers and/or hunt quality? Personally, I think it is possible, but raises a question of what would you give up to save OTC opportunities. Specifically, would you give up your "modern" advantages in order to preserve OTC hunts?
By "modern" advantages I do not mean trail cameras, OnX, etc. I mean, would you hunt with only traditional equipment (stick bow and/or open breach, open sight muzzleloader) if this meant you could hunt elk/deer OTC every year?
I think this would likely have multiple impacts. First, hunter numbers would decrease, as hunting with traditional equipment may be magnitudes more difficult. Second, success would also decrease, as it would be harder to bring elk/deer into your effective range. Third, populations and/or quality would improve because fewer hunters and lower success rates could mean more animals and/or better bull/cow ratios and/or better bull/buck quality. Fourth, it could have a positive effect on how the public views hunting.
I want to hear folks' thoughts on this specific issue--would you hunt with a stick bow and/or muzzleloader if that was what would allow OTC opportunities to remain?
For the record, I shoot a Prime CT5 and am building my first "extended" range rifle. But, I think I would hunt trad if it meant I could hunt elk every year in areas with better hunt quality.
All this raises a question--can new approaches to hunting regulations save OTC opportunities while simultaneously improving herd numbers and/or hunt quality? Personally, I think it is possible, but raises a question of what would you give up to save OTC opportunities. Specifically, would you give up your "modern" advantages in order to preserve OTC hunts?
By "modern" advantages I do not mean trail cameras, OnX, etc. I mean, would you hunt with only traditional equipment (stick bow and/or open breach, open sight muzzleloader) if this meant you could hunt elk/deer OTC every year?
I think this would likely have multiple impacts. First, hunter numbers would decrease, as hunting with traditional equipment may be magnitudes more difficult. Second, success would also decrease, as it would be harder to bring elk/deer into your effective range. Third, populations and/or quality would improve because fewer hunters and lower success rates could mean more animals and/or better bull/cow ratios and/or better bull/buck quality. Fourth, it could have a positive effect on how the public views hunting.
I want to hear folks' thoughts on this specific issue--would you hunt with a stick bow and/or muzzleloader if that was what would allow OTC opportunities to remain?
For the record, I shoot a Prime CT5 and am building my first "extended" range rifle. But, I think I would hunt trad if it meant I could hunt elk every year in areas with better hunt quality.