Tonto

Better believe it, 22 looks worse than the moon. All burned to shoot. Matter fact, you can trail every critter from here right across 23 and onto the pristine Res. People here have been glueing old sheds on their farm animals just so we locals will have something with horns to shoot. Tonto That unit 45 is lookin better all the time.

DesertBull, Your killin me! Good artist would be Homer Sanders of Sanders Custom Signs. He lives in Rye. Like to BS, but his work really kicks butt. I've a few of his drawings on the wall right next to some Tim Cox's and it fits. He should be in the book. Tonto

I had a bunch of chalks lining a side walk and a planter. They looked pretty cool, but unfortunately someone decided they would look better at their house. Sorry son of a gun didn't even use our gate, jumped the fence, leaving a size 13 foot print in the mud. We looked all over the place for them, still SOL. A guy would have to be one sorry MF'er to brag on horns that they didn't even find themselves. Still fires me up, please excuse my language. Tonto

Acorns are pretty good up here this year. Saw some Apaches gathering some on Friday. The storms are making the trees drop them a little early. But I too, think you still find some bears on the pears, especially the transition zones.

WooHoo! Wife and I both drew a 22 Whitetail tag. Top that off with my very own 5A Archery Bull Tag! Stoked is an understatement! Tonto

Good topic Treestandman, and if it is alright with CHD, I've got a reply. This year I found whitetail sheds in places I have frequently hunted for quail most of my life and only seen muleys all these years. At first I figured the willow fire had forced them to expand their range, but then I found chalks as well. Besides predators pressure, I really think coues will move with the quality and quantity of browse. What range in miles, depends on the country I think, we've been seeing coues down low on Roosevelt, not related to the Willow fire at all. To me, that's historically muley habitat. I'm no wildlife biologist, but that's my 2 cents.

Bowsniper, Way back when, there was fire and no white man. Add white man and take away fire, you'll get to where we are today. Now we have it so messed up, you can't just add fire and get the same results. Too many roads, structures, huge accumulations of fuels. Long story short, I think it was the natural fire regime that was most important in keeping most of the plant communities in check, along with migratory (short duration, intense) grazing. Removing public lands grazing is not the answer. Tonto

Bowsniper, I am going to call hogwash on your last two posts. You had to see it coming! Where do you think them cows in the feedlots come from. Public land raised beef go to feed lots the same as private land raised beef. You statistics are misleading. The $1.30/AU on public lands can not be compared to what an AU is worth on private land. Sure ranchers pay alot more to graze a private lease than a public lands lease, but with a private lease, the operation is almost a hands off deal for the leassee. Not so on public land leases. The government may spend that millions of dollars on their range and forest lands grazing programs, but I'll bet most of it is in the dang court room fighting frivilous law suits defending their management decisions. Ask a honest federal resource manager what they spend most of their time doing and where at. Drastic improvement for the range if you remove cattle. That's a real good one. It has been proven time and again that if there is any improvemnt at all, that it is short lived and then drastic decline takes over. You think cattle degrade wildlife habitat, I'll agree but only when they are improperly managed. If elk are so dang great, why do tax payer monies go to projects like elk exclosures around aspen thickets and riparian areas. A large percent of the time, an elk will graze or browse a plant that had been previously grazed or browsed by another herbivore rather than hitting a plant that hasn't been grazed or browsed in years. They go after the new growth, not the wolfy big tall grasses. Public lands are mandated by Federal Law to be managed for multiple use. One of those uses is the removal of a renewable natural resource (forage). I'm not saying that you have to like cows, but you should recognize them as an economical and effective tool for managing our public lands. Tonto

I'll make sure and tell them my thoughts. This is nutty. Maybe a hunter could be eligible for an early tag in these units after and only after they had killed a lion and half a dozen coyotes in that same unit the year prior to getting a deer tag. Not sure that would help the population enough to justify another hunt. I agree that the numbers couldn't handle an early hunt without cutting permits in the quality late hunt. Might even see over the counter archery tags go to the draw, so they could limit that hunt to. Bad deal! Tonto

Good job Treestandman and congrats on having a kid on the way. I sent you a PM. Tonto

Heck, Jason, maybe go postal on the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club for starters. Nah, just kidding, I can't recommend that, but it might wake some of them asinine fellers up! I know I don't do enough, but I try to write my State Politicians as often as I can, and I always try to tell people what I think based on scientific fact, not myth or emotions. Knowing the issues is good, and provides for productive arguements. One of the most important things I think anyone can do is vote. Tonto

These Greenpeace idiots really get me fired up. Trust me folks, these SOB's are not our friends or do they represent what is best for us or the land. They want to take away water rights, some of which are 100 years old that supports our local economies. Grazing, when practiced right can do unimaginable improvements for species diversity, and overall ecosystem health. Yet they call it a "Major Threat". What the heck do they think happens when they stop timber harvesting? Rodeo-Chediski should be encouraging them to support logging, it is not a "short term resource", it is a renewable natural resource as is grass and browse. OK, I've said my part, by the way it snowing like crazy here. Tonto

Jason- To be sure, the article is bad news and based on pure BS. Josh is being to nice by calling them nutcases. Sounds like another angle at getting the Wildlands Program up and running. Tonto

I don't think you can beat a Honda, check out the Foreman and the Rancher. The best all around, I think! Tonto

Josh, I could only get the 1st link to open. Nice buck! Tonto

Amanda, I think you did another good job with the find the deer pics. The doe in the oak tree and the last pic kicked my butt. Thanks for this site and all the work you put into it! It helps keep me going. Tonto

We've already got the wolves here. What does a line on a map mean to a wolf? For that matter a barbed wire fence? Them wolves cross the National border when they want to and they dang sure will leave the Blue when they want to also. When we get them wolves and bears officially reintroduced, I guarantee there will be more access restrictions all over the State, firearms and bows will be collecting dust and hunting (of anykind) will be phased out. I want to be able to hunt for a lot longer, not tell stories about how good it was way back when people were allowed to hunt on public lands. Man has sure screwed alot of things up over the years, but that doesn't mean we have to follow suit. Tonto

Bowsniper, your ears ought to be burnin. Talk about opening a can of worms. About the only thing I can agree with you on is having priority on the health of the resource (habitat). I don't see how reintroducing grizzlies and wolves would increase diversity. I know I don't have all the answers but the problem is a lot bigger than removing livestock and reintroducing large predators. Tonto

Had good succes using a cheap varmit call. High point up and call aggressively, and keep calling even when you think you've had enough. Them bears will beeline right to you.

Good Job Gabe! Keep it up!

Treestandman1, Yeah, I've heard it means stupid. It isn't my name it's where I live.

If a animal comes from a good gene pool, they have those genes their entire life, right? Seems to me that a buck doesn't have to be a toad to pass on good horn growth genes, as long as he can service does without getting his butt kicked by ol Grandpa. On the subject of having some type of minimum antler size, I really hate the idea. If your having to make sure a buck is at least a forky before you can shoot it, what is going on with that deer population in that area. That little buck is next year's buck, or even the year after that. Some kids first buck maybe. That is my opinion, and I respect your right to disagree. Management that is driven by revenue (seeing more and more of) is likely to lead to poor buck to doe ratios, and to deer populations with mostly young bucks. I think that the minimun antler size rule is a response to shoddy management. Watch and see what happens to the hunter success rates when a hunt changes from any antlered deer to any antlered deer fork horn or better. If they don't change the number of permits issued, that success percentage goes down some, the management agency makes the same amount of money, and there is a good chance the deer population suffers. Keep on Keepin ON! Tonto