Wyoming long range hunting debate

Nice of you to come out and say that all you care about is driving away other hunters.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”
Don’t put words in my mouth.

No, you couldn’t be more wrong. I care about wildlife, and if less hunters (because it’s perceived as hard, not because of loss of opportunity) are in the field or less hunter lethality helps wildlife, I’m all for it.
 
Then when they come for the public land those people will be the people who don’t really care and if it sells it sells. Won’t affect them one bit. Won’t have to worry about barriers you won’t have any where to hunt.
Not buying it.
 
Don’t put words in my mouth.

No, you couldn’t be more wrong. I care about wildlife, and if less hunters (because it’s perceived as hard, not because of loss of opportunity) are in the field or less hunter lethality helps wildlife, I’m all for it.

My care for wildlife mandates killing them in the most efficient manner possible that leads to the highest chance of recovery and consumption of the meat. I want maximum lethality once the shot is fired. For that reason, I limit my shots on animals to 300 yards. I’m building a 1000-yard range on my farm so I can find my real limitations and practice, but the odds of me ever shooting at a game animal more than 500-yards away are basically non-existent.

I don’t think a range restriction is very feasible or enforceable. But, if it must be done, I agree with you that it is best done via weapon restrictions.

The suggestions to limit seasons to straight wall, muzzleloader, archery, no optics, etc. all cut against my first point. Yes, they limit maximum range, but they also have lower chances of recovery and higher wounding rates.

Traditionally, in most states which have them, the reasons for restrictions to archery, muzzleloader, straight wall, shotgun, etc. have to do with visibility and safety (maximum range, not maximum effective range). They all originally stemmed from “know your target and what lies beyond it”, not attempts to limit lethality.

But, for all my opposition to weapon limitations, I would accept them if they were accompanied by a removal of cow and doe tags in any population that wasn’t meeting a very healthy recruitment metric.

I like to see the efficient harvesting of most of the superfluous males before winter. I don’t care if that means they don’t have great racks. Can’t eat antlers. And having more animals in the long run is far better for the herd than having more bucks or bulls make it to 8 years old. But, if a buck or bull gets wounded and goes off to rot, it’s far less harm (and possibly some good) to the population as a whole, than if a female does.

It really irritates me how many western states have complaints about recruitment and health of populations, but continue to allow harvesting of female animals. Because apparently hunters would flip out if they lost the opportunity to fill the freezer with a cow or doe.

Proper management of these resources is going to require that someone make the decision not to allow cow or doe tags. If they do that, then I would be in favor of lethality limitations.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”
 
Yep I get that. Honestly I think most of us would want to see what happens if we took a couple of late MD rut hunts and just took the scopes off, maybe made it a straight was cartridge or muzzy. I’m not advocating making all units or all rifle hunts archery or anything like that.
Why have late mule deer rut hunts?
 
Why have late mule deer rut hunts?
Have you ever hunted a late MD rut hunt? They are a ton of fun! Same reason why hunting elk in Sept is a ton of fun! But yes the animals are more visible/ more vulnerable cause they are distracted.

if those go away it will just force more guys into less seasons pressure will be more concentrated, but like we talked about before. Moving season dates is a way to make it more difficult. But like some said, will that just make hunters give up?

If I was king in Co, I would move muzzle loader from Sept and replace 1st rifle elk with muzzleloader, man when the rut is late that is an easy freaking season to kill a bull in…
 
True, if those go away it will just force more guys into less seasons pressure will be more concentrated, but like we talked about before. Moving season dates is a way to make it more difficult. But like some said, will that just make hunters give up?
Maybe, but if the goal is to help the herds why are we hunting bucks during their most vulnerable time?

SDHNTR wants it to be more difficult, so why not make the seasons during arguably one of the most difficult times of year to hunt them? That would maybe lead to less hunters out in the field in years to come because “it’s too hard”.

Why are we only talking about rifle? Doesn’t archery generally have a higher wounding rate? Limit archers to 20 yards?

Just spitballing here…How about we say no optics, you must spot game with your eyes? That would make it more difficult.
 
Those people at the local reí will throw hunter under the bus with out a second thought. How’s that wolf or spring bear thing working out in Colorado those rei people really helped.
True, but that’s a different argument. You were claiming that if we didn’t have anyone hunting, we wouldn’t have anyone to protect against public land sales/access.
 
Those people at the local reí will throw hunter under the bus with out a second thought. How’s that wolf or spring bear thing working out in Colorado those rei people really helped.
I wonder what the anti-hunter crowd would do with the info that game numbers are getting so low that hunters are trying to find ways to kill less animals because they are too efficient. I’m sure that wouldn’t be twisted into some national anti-hunting agenda to end more hunting opportunities.
 
SDHNTR wants it to be more difficult, so why not make the seasons during arguably one of the most difficult times of year to hunt them? That would maybe lead to less hunters out in the field in years to come because “it’s too hard”.
Generally speaking, that is currently what happens in most states. General tags, or easy to draw rifle hunts usually occur in October, when deer are hard horned, yet reclusive, brushed up and not yet rut dumb.

Regardless of weapon, rut hunts/tags should absolutely be very limited, but especially with modern rifles. That’s just stacking shit on top of shit.

I don’t think anyone is saying that judicious management of season dates isn’t important. That absolutely needs to occur, and for the most part, I think it does. But what we need to do is go yet one step further and either limit lethality or limit opportunity. I’m only willing to agree to one of those choices.
 
True, but that’s a different argument. You were claiming that if we didn’t have anyone hunting, we wouldn’t have anyone to protect against public land sales/access.
I didn’t say anyone I said all the people you hate hunting on public land other than you. You want public land but don’t really want public land unless you have the public land to your self. There are more and more people who as long as places like yellow stone exist they don’t really care about the rest. Your very bitter about anyone hunting out west you make that clear regularly.
 
Maybe, but if the goal is to help the herds why are we hunting bucks during their most vulnerable time?

SDHNTR wants it to be more difficult, so why not make the seasons during arguably one of the most difficult times of year to hunt them? That would maybe lead to less hunters out in the field in years to come because “it’s too hard”.

Why are we only talking about rifle? Doesn’t archery generally have a higher wounding rate? Limit archers to 20 yards?

Just spitballing here…How about we say no optics, you must spot game with your eyes? That would make it more difficult.
Sure man I’m not against it. Wounding rates are tough, I’m not sure if we have real data on that. There probably are more wounded animals during archery, but is it meaningfully different than the guys herd shooting elk at 8-900 yards and wounding 4-5 at a time?

I am actually not for any arbitrary range requirement. Not sure why that is getting brought up it’s silly and will never be able to be enforced. It is easier to enforce an iron sight only, muzzleloader only, archery only type season. I have only ever been checked or seen a warden on a road/ trail head. I have called them when I watched guys wound multiple elk on 2 different occasions during first rifle and they were so busy the never got anyone out there. Yes I have said before people will still be stupid with whatever they have in their hands, but you hope* most won’t!

But I’m not against making it harder on us. It would probably bottom out the top end optics market haha but sure. Why not.
 
I didn’t say anyone I said all the people you hate hunting on public land other than you. You want public land but don’t really want public land unless you have the public land to your self. There are more and more people who as long as places like yellow stone exist they don’t really care about the rest. Your very bitter about anyone hunting out west you make that clear regularly.
Again, untrue. You are putting incorrect words in my mouth. That is not what I want. Of course no one likes crowds, but I’m fine with sharing the field with other hard-working and respectful hunters. But considering the simple matter of sustainability, we cannot allow all those hunters to use unrestricted weapons capable of easily killing at a half dozen football fields.
 
Again, untrue. You are putting incorrect words in my mouth. That is not what I want. Of course no one likes crowds, but I’m fine with sharing the field with other hard-working and respectful hunters. But considering the simple matter of sustainability, we cannot allow all those hunters to use weapons capable of easily killing at a half dozen football fields.
Correct me if I’m wrong but you are from San Diego? Right so totally reliant on public land hunting, I am from Colorado, completely reliant on public land hunting. No one wants massive crowds that is silly. Seems like most guys on this site have some western public land hunting experience. Not sure why folks would be opposed to handicapping themselves if it meant giving the game an edge to potentially get older and more mature maybe, while keeping opportunities the same or possibly increasing opportunities? Flyjunky do you live out west? I know Q is from back east and Kurt R is from Kansas if I’m not mistaken, wouldn’t you want more tags to be issued even if it’s an extra 5-10 per unit? That adds up quick out west when you are waiting in line, if the only caveat is you have to carry a slightly less efficient weapon?
 
Generally speaking, that is currently what happens in most states. General tags, or easy to draw rifle hunts usually occur in October, when deer are hard horned, yet reclusive, brushed up and not yet rut dumb.

Regardless of weapon, rut hunts/tags should absolutely be very limited, but especially with modern rifles.

I don’t think anyone is saying that judicious management of season dates isn’t important. That absolutely needs to occur, and for the most part, I think it does. But what we need to do is go yet one step further and either limit lethality or limit opportunity. I’m only willing to agree to one of those choices.
So why not make things difficult and say no optics of any kind, no rut hunts of any kind, and no cow/doe hunts in units that are struggling? All hunting taking place during the toughest times of year for each weapon?

What about we close a unit/s on a rotational basis to give those animals a break for a year? Yes, some opportunity would be lost but we are trying to help animals recover, correct?
 
Correct me if I’m wrong but you are from San Diego? Right so totally reliant on public land hunting, I am from Colorado, completely reliant on public land hunting. No one wants massive crowds that is silly. Seems like most guys on this site have some western public land hunting experience. Not sure why folks would be opposed to handicapping themselves if it meant giving the game an edge to potentially get older and more mature maybe, while keeping opportunities the same or possibly increasing opportunities? Flyjunky do you live out west? I know Q is from back east and Kurt R is from Kansas if I’m not mistaken, wouldn’t you want more tags to be issued even if it’s an extra 5-10 per unit? That adds up quick out west when you are waiting in line, if the only caveat is you have to carry a slightly less efficient weapon?
I’m from South Dakota. Honest answer if I can’t go with the rifle I want to use I’m really not that interested in elk hunting any more . I can hunt mule deer every year here if I want to so I will never do that out of state. At this point I would spend my money on a guide in Arkansas to shoot mallards in the timber with my dog when season is over here vs an elk tag. If rifles are killing to many animals cut the tag numbers or the days. Wardens can barley catch poachers how are they going to enforce regulations on what rifles or equipment can be used.
 
So why not make things difficult and say no optics of any kind, no rut hunts of any kind, and no cow/doe hunts in units that are struggling? All hunting taking place during the toughest times of year for each weapon?

What about we close a unit/s on a rotational basis to give those animals a break for a year? Yes, some opportunity would be lost but we are trying to help animals recover, correct?
Once again if things are that bleak I am not against that. They do that for wildfires/ really bad winters, it does create a back log/ force a lot of guys into other areas, thousands of deer and elk tags were cut after the bad winter the guys that hunted those units didn’t give up they just went to other units. I’m all about trying to keep opportunity alive vs totally shutting stuff down. If the demand wasn’t there… I think a rotational rest system might work wonders for a place… but with super high demand not sure it would work super well anymore these days
 
Correct me if I’m wrong but you are from San Diego? Right so totally reliant on public land hunting, I am from Colorado, completely reliant on public land hunting. No one wants massive crowds that is silly. Seems like most guys on this site have some western public land hunting experience. Not sure why folks would be opposed to handicapping themselves if it meant giving the game an edge to potentially get older and more mature maybe, while keeping opportunities the same or possibly increasing opportunities? Flyjunky do you live out west? I know Q is from back east and Kurt R is from Kansas if I’m not mistaken, wouldn’t you want more tags to be issued even if it’s an extra 5-10 per unit? That adds up quick out west when you are waiting in line, if the only caveat is you have to carry a slightly less efficient weapon?
Yep, I live in Oregon and have hunted the public lands of the west since I’ve been old enough to carry a gun, over 40 years.

Honestly, I don’t think restrictions will make one bit of difference. The same people taking unethical shots will do it with whatever weapon they have in their hands and “less accurate” weapons seems counter productive. As mentioned, restrictions mean nothing if they can’t/won’t be enforced. We can’t even get a handle on poaching, which I’ve heard in some states rivals legal take. Where’s all this money and manpower going to come from? Could those dollars and manpower be put to better use?

I’m not sure what the answer is but I know that restrictions without MAJOR changes to the real drivers of abundance is a short term, superficial fix. Unfortunately, I’m not sure we, as a society, have the will, desire, or ability to fix the major problems. Like someone said in this thread…those problems are hard and as our population grows it will only get harder. I know people don’t want to hear it but we ARE going to have to sacrifice opportunity if we want future generations to hunt. We can either think of doing that now while the population is where it’s at or later when there are even less animals to build upon.

Sorry to be so pessimistic but duct tape and band-aids aren’t the answers. It’s ironic that nobody wants to give up opportunity to kill a deer in order to save a deer. Hell, many people will hunt multiple states to kill multiple animals and then talk about not wanting to lose opportunity or low numbers of animals…I’m including myself in that.
 
Back
Top