Wyoming Elk Permits - Overselling to cover losses

[Gutshot007]

Wyoming -Come one , come all ! Rolling out the red carpet and welome wagon for the NR'S. Send cash . we love you ! Nothing like a change of heart when there is budget concerns . Lol

 

[BRTreedogs]

I know we talking about Wyoming.

But in Oregon of gotten the impression Elk on your place is a cash cow it almost appears the land owners are setting up/ milking both sides of the coin.
They attract the elk, dont let anyone on, then ask for cash.

Them the F&G reduced public land tags to try and keep the elk on public.

Seems like anyone that is not a land owner is lose lose.

 

[Tick]

WYFG does a pretty good job managing wildlife populations with the complex issues involved. I don't believe they would increase elk tags to recover financial loss from the deer/lope tag reductions. Several logical reasons mentioned above and probably many more not mentioned. Meeting population objectives and considering hunt quality is a difficult balance.

 

[Jethro]

Weren't most, if not all, of those elk quota increases already proposed on the 3/15/23 draft?

 

[BRTreedogs]

Man if they would just legalize corner crossing.
Probably solve all this

 

[Brontosaurus]

Uh elk are doing great here. It honestly feels a little overrun with elk. I wouldn't mind lowering the elk numbers a little to make sure deer antelope make it out ok. WGFD has a pretty good handle on things and as others have stated we are over objective. As for quality... go deep!

 

[bdan68]

Weren't most, if not all, of those elk quota increases already proposed on the 3/15/23 draft?

Yes

 

[Laramie]

Weren't most, if not all, of those elk quota increases already proposed on the 3/15/23 draft?

They knew the massive cuts to antelope were coming so a lot of them were proposed at that time. And now it has snowed for another month straight with below zero temps for a lot of it so they decide to add a few more elk tags? Makes complete sense to me

 

[Bull_n_heat]

I have looked at many of the areas I am familiar with. Elk have been "over objective" for years in most areas. Objective, unfortunately, is an ever fluctuating number that accounts for landowner tolerance more than carrying capacity of the land.

Please don't misunderstand, I don't think they are going to kill too many elk in most of the areas. I think they are going to raise hunting pressure significantly which will hurt the quality of hunts. A few areas may see a quality downgrade because of overharvest of mature bulls but in general, these increases are just going to result in more unsuccessful hunters imo.

I certainly agree with you here. Just increasing elk tags numbers without other changes to season structure has the potential to decrease harvest. Balancing quality with issuing more tags is a delicate line to dance. That's why they put a lot of their cow hunts later than the bull hunts to hopefully put elk on the ground and not mess up anyone's long awaited bull hunts.

To the point of G&F increasing tags to recoup money, I'd have to push back. Game and Fish makes enough money on preference points alone to mostly cover their costs. They don't need to dork with tag allocations to fund any of their programs.

 

[wasatchcomm]

im no biologist,, but I see elk in all the places big bucks should be,, had a heard of 50 or so elk come in a drainage I was scouting last august,, right at dark,, next morning all the deer that were there were gone,, I personally want a lot of elk and a lot of deer,, but id rather them be healthy.
I do think the elk are taking feed/range from the deer in the wyoming range specifically,, I saw elk at every elevation last season,, again I love elk but I do think when fish and game are increasing antler less opportunities they are sayin they have to many elk for the carrying capacity of the land in that unit
the way to do this is by offering tags for the cows,, thats how you control population,, ive seen a lot of dead antelope and deer this spring, no dead elk...
I hope fish and game are not in it for the revenue,, at our town hall they said they dont feed deer and antelope based on experiences,, not because it costs to much,, Gov. was at that town hall,, I think all were very sincere.

 

[Jaden Bales]

I'm quite okay with us keeping the pressure on the elk in Wyoming where we're over-objective. There were a lot of elk in my deer spots all year long in low-country relatively desert/cedar hills and I'd just rather they not compete for space with an already struggling mule deer herd, let alone on top of the butt-kicker winter.

Took this attached burry photo from the road of a bull elk feeding between two bedded deer on the only feed available a couple of weeks ago near Kemmerer.

Stay tuned to this page for some great research coming out about how they compete with deer and really aren't great neighbors - sometimes eating deer forage (especially on years like this) but mostly for space when it comes to fawning season.

Deer-Elk Ecology Research Project | Monteith Shop

monteithshop.org

 

[Laramie]

I understand the deer vs elk argument. I saw a lot of elk down low last year in private long before there was snow. This definitely displaces deer. However, they weren't there due to overpopulation. They were there to avoid hunting pressure up high on the national forest. This is my opinion but it is shared by many biologists I know.

 

[Bull_n_heat]

I understand the deer vs elk argument. I saw a lot of elk down low last year in private long before there was snow. This definitely displaces deer. However, they weren't there due to overpopulation. They were there to avoid hunting pressure up high on the national forest. This is my opinion but it is shared by many biologists I know.

This is very true. Elk are remarkably good at not getting killed by hunters and seem to figure out pretty quickly where the shootin' stops. I agree that in some places (particularly small parcels), they just run down the hill to private to get away and come back a lot slower than they ran down. To your point of more tags not equaling more harvest, this is definitely a challenge.

 

[Jaden Bales]

I think the WGFD is getting creative with how to kill elk with the various types of licenses they can offer, like the Chapter 34 auxiliary licenses and using new sub-areas for times of the year to combat what you're talking about. All the sub-units and dates they have proposed with the 104 type 7 elk tag are a good example.

I took part in the Chapter 34 Auxiliary hunt near Lander this winter. Killed an elk in the calving pasture behind my house in late February. They eliminated 25 type 6 tags here and replaced them with Chapter 34 and killed significantly more elk (38 versus an average of 10 or 12 on the type 6) as a result.

No doubt, they're addressing the pressure issue in places where it's warranted, albeit slower than we'd like to see. I think this is one place we should support WGFD's direction.

As a deer guy myself, I'm going to try and make sure I take at least 2 elk a year in my deer spots from here on out. I think it's important.

 

[wasatchcomm]

I agree with taking elk in the deer spots,, the unit I was hunting deer in I saw elk everywhere, and no people hunting them,, only saw deer hunters on the ridges,, I think mostly non residents,, I actually went back and shot a bull a few weeks after I got my deer. no hunters then either...its obvious this unit has a healthy over objective herd based on the season dates game and fish have given the unit compared to neighboring units. I may go back and hunt it again, this fall.

 

[Laramie]

I think the WGFD is getting creative with how to kill elk with the various types of licenses they can offer, like the Chapter 34 auxiliary licenses and using new sub-areas for times of the year to combat what you're talking about. All the sub-units and dates they have proposed with the 104 type 7 elk tag are a good example.

I took part in the Chapter 34 Auxiliary hunt near Lander this winter. Killed an elk in the calving pasture behind my house in late February. They eliminated 25 type 6 tags here and replaced them with Chapter 34 and killed significantly more elk (38 versus an average of 10 or 12 on the type 6) as a result.

No doubt, they're addressing the pressure issue in places where it's warranted, albeit slower than we'd like to see. I think this is one place we should support WGFD's direction.

As a deer guy myself, I'm going to try and make sure I take at least 2 elk a year in my deer spots from here on out. I think it's important.

Good points and I agree in those instances. I do think your situation is an exception though as most of the over objective areas are private heavy and controlled by landowners trying to make an extra dollar. For the record, I don't blame them- just is what it is.

I definitely agree that creativity should be supported by the WG&F. That has been missing forever really. I would love to see better landowner incentives for allowing cow harvest so they are more likely to allow hunters in the places that really need it.

 

[Jaden Bales]

Good points and I agree in those instances. I do think your situation is an exception though as most of the over objective areas are private heavy and controlled by landowners trying to make an extra dollar. For the record, I don't blame them- just is what it is.

I definitely agree that creativity should be supported by the WG&F. That has been missing forever really. I would love to see better landowner incentives for allowing cow harvest so they are more likely to allow hunters in the places that really need it.

Boy, we certainly can agree there. It's a real pickle on the east side of the state.

 

[wytx]

I proposed giving folks with full price licenses in the over objective areas a free reduced price cow tag, or at least the ability to buy one without a drawing.
Give those with access the chance to help.

 

[Andrew12gauge]

As stated repeatedly above a lot of herds have way too many elk. The problem is that more tags doesn’t equate to more elk harvested, the herds with too many elk tend to have a lot of private land mixed in where the elk post up.

The Laramie peak unit for example, they cant shoot enough elk every year, something else needs to be done to expand hunting access to these private lands.

Also speaking as a biologist…..if only there were some type of native predator that had a tendency to force elk to move around and break up the mega herds, while harvesting some themselves…..if only….guess we’ll just have to deal with 20k elk parking themselves on ag lands and having farmers bitch that theyre eating all the alfalfa.

You can’t be serious about the predator thing. I remember when elk lived in the mountains and not the ag fields year around, that was before the mountains were full of wolves. Don’t get me wrong I’m not anti wolf but to suggest that wolves would somehow keep elk off of private ag lands is ludicrous


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FlareBlitz91]

You can’t be serious about the predator thing. I remember when elk lived in the mountains and not the ag fields year around, that was before the mountains were full of wolves. Don’t get me wrong I’m not anti wolf but to suggest that wolves would somehow keep elk off of private ag lands is ludicrous


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s because theres just more elk. Which I like but sadly due to habitat loss/fragmentation there’s only so much winter range to go around.