AZ- How long before we hit Bottom?

[5guyshunting]

How will they ever come close to knowing success, unless everyone has to mandatory report. I am not advocating mandatory checks, but I see no other way if people want the stats even close.

[Xnt]

I had an elk tag in the White Mountains and I was quite pleased with the number and quality of bulls I saw. $0.02.

[208muley]

To those that don't like the way things are and I am one......... Get over it.....the azgfd is gonna do whatever they want with or without our input. Those that like the way things are don't have to do a thing and they will be spoon-fed the bs the dept gives them. They see legal animals and draw tags they are happy. Nothing will change their thinking and will support the dept. Those that want creative management to improve herd size and over all age structure it just not in the cards. The dept manages money and people....period... It is not the way it used to be but it is now.

 

I have been to meetings, I have tried to speak up about issues I am concerned with. If what I say isn't part of their agenda or in agreement with their mindset it falls on deaf ears. This dept. is not a democracy where they work for us, it is a dictatorship where they tell us how it is gonna go and we should just be happy that we have an "opportunity" to hunt.

 

This is how they manage: this came directly from a wm I know that is also a friend (campfires are very interesting at times) if they were to survey only 10 deer in a unit and 6 of them are bucks..... Tags will increase.... It's all about buck/doe bull/cow ratios. Overall population doesn't matter because they will never know the true number. A quote from him is one buck can breed 100 does... My question is what if that buck is a yearling buck? Is that healthy for the herd? I can go on for days on this subject but all I end up with is being more upset. I have never wanted the whole state to go to trophy management. I just want lots of animals out there with a healthy age class! Look at how some western states manage and use their benchmark. Colorado is a prime example of progressive and conservative management. When winter killed off a bunch, tags dropped dramatically! Conservative mgmt has helped to bring em back!! Drought, over harvest, predators, have decimated our herds over many years.....just like a bad winter did in Colorado in one year....... Will our dept make changes to protect OUR resource????? I doubt it... They need trucks and a buildings ferrets,wolves, frogs, spotted owls, goshawks, etc etc etc etc.....

 

Rant over... Have fun out there!

[mattys281]

I dont know much about wildlife management, but it seems to me like it must be a lose lose situation for the g&f pretty much every day. They increase tags to try to increase opportunity and foster new hunter recruitment = they're dummies that are ruining hunting. They lower tags to increase herd size or trophy quality = people start crying about never drawing a tag, your hunter retention plummets and forget about getting any newbies into the sport.

 

Glad I dont have to make those decisions.

[yotebuster]

I'm a NR who has hunted elk in 5 states. I keep coming back to AZ for some reason. You guys truly don't know how good you have it in AZ. If you look really close at the regs you'll notice that while some units have increasing tag numbers, others are going the opposite as well. Research your draw opportunities more, b1tch less.

My $0.02

[Snapshot]

I am all for sound conservation efforts. I am also for having a reasonable opportunity to hunt, but not at the expense of diminishing the quality experience by having too many hunters/hunts per unit. Sure, we can hike a couple miles off the beaten track to get away from most folks, but I don't want to be sitting in camp and have 20 or 30 OHV's ripping by all day. Even if that has nothing to do with conservation.

 

Example:

 

I started hunting in Unit 27 in 1979. It is my unit of choice. Rugged. Remote.Beautiful.

Back then they had 2 mule deer hunts. a 4 day October hunt, and a 10 day hunt that followed that. I think there were a few thousand tags available between the 2 hunts. As the Mule deer declined in that unit, so did the tags. And only one 7 day hunt is now available,( Not including the December hunt) with available tags going as low as 700 I think. The Whitetail have expanded in this unit, and G&F started a 7 day October hunt for them. The initial tag allotment was 250. That has increased to 600. The December whitetail hunt used to have 150 tags. It is now 40.

 

It was good conservation in lowering the tags for Mule deer. I am not sure about the Whitetail conservation. Seems sketchy to me, simply for the fact, that I can't see that unit supporting that many hunters for Whitetail, as Unit 27 does not have many roads, and the popular areas have hunters packed in like sardines in some spots. I don't know much about wildlife conservation when it comes to biological or statistical data, but something just seems to "Be off" with what G&F are doing with all these increases.

 

Same thing go's for the Unit 27 Bull hunts. With the Fire wiping out so much cover, and habitat why are tags increasing by 20% for the rifle hunt. I heard that elk numbers have been reduced some in that unit. But i don't know for sure.

 

IMO -there just needs to be a better blend of things.

[billrquimby]

"How long before we hit bottom?".....At precisely 8:45 a.m. on Wednesday the 12th of Never, if you are talking about our elk, deer, antelope, javelina, bear, lion, turkey, bison and bighorn. If you are talking about the loss of hunting itself, it won't happen in the short time I have left but it will be here sooner than you think. .......... Bill Quimby

 

[Coach]

We hit it a long time ago.

 

But there are still plenty of elk, coues, muleys, goulds, merriams, javis, 'yotes, lions, bears, bobcats, foxes, coatis, p-dogs, ducks, geese and quail to keep us busy if we hunt hard and know the seasons and laws.

 

Say what you want about AZ, but with almost the entire state designated public land, and with hunting seasons that literally span the whole year, there really isn't an argument that outdoorsmen and women don't have ample opportunity to get out and enjoy the state. That's not even scratching the surface of prospecting, 4-wheeling, canyoneering and other things you can do 365 days a year on millions of square acres of public land.

[trphyhntr]

What states have the best hunters:buck ratio? I'm guessing we have the worst in the country but I could be wrong. Product of living in a desert

[trphyhntr]

What states have the best hunters:buck ratio? I'm guessing we have the worst in the country but I could be wrong. Product of living in a desert

[ThomC]

What Bill says is true. The animals will always be around but, hunting as we know it may not be for long. The bighorn sheep on the Catalinas for example, many people are against putting them there because they think that hunters just want to shoot them. If a season was opened you will hear more screaming. Now the pope has said that animals have a soul and will be in heaven. This stuff is what you should be worried about. Plus the fact that this state, country, world has over reached its carrying capacity of people, unless you want to live like sardines.

[Diamondbackaz]

After nearly seven decades of hunting in Arizona, several truths have become evident to this old codger: One is that while wildlife management may still be an inexact science, it has come a long way from a century ago when it meant simply catching poachers, killing predators, creating refuges for game to “spill out of,” and protecting female animals and birds. Still another is that our state’s wildlife agency is not our enemy even though its mission is not and should not be to manage wildlife for a minority of trophy hunters. Oops. I almost forgot to mention that hunting and fishing are viewed as anachronisms by an increasingly larger number of voters every year and that we hunters and anglers too often are our own worst enemies. And, finally, we should be careful in what we wish for, because we just might get it. ---- Bill Quimby

Well said...

[Alpinebullwinkle]

I gave up hunting mule deer about 15 years ago in unit #27 because of the declining numbers as I would feel guilty shooting one. Instead have gone to coues hunting since they seem to have done better in that period due to the increase in predators since trapping has been banned and other negative impacts on top of it........ like wolves.

 

Elk hunting in unit #27 is now 50% the experience (and herd size) since the peak population of about 1999. Since the fire with 50% of the forest burned, increased visibility has resulted in increased gun hunt harvest rates. USFWS plans to add another +200 wolves to the equation which will certainly go a long way to reducing hunting privileges as we formerly enjoyed. Wish I could share a more positive outlook for all us hunters but the deck seems to be staked against us. Join and outdoor conservation group and let your voices be heard!!!!

[Flatlander]

I really don't know why I am posting this, no one will listen or care. Just after the Wallow Fire the WM for Unit 1 (Packer I believe was his screen name) saw a thread like this and posted a response. The reason tag numbers increased dramatically after the fire was to reduce the size of the herds supported on a now drastically reduced habitat. This would allow the forests to recover, regeneration to begin and browse to develop on the scorched earth. After 2-3 years of increased tag numbers, a downward adjustment would be made and herds could stabilize to match the new habitat.

 

This is similar to what was done in 3a/3c after it burned. It should be noted that once the forest began regrowth the # of huge bull sky rocketed, due in part to the quality of new feed and I am sure in part to increased visibility in much of the unit. So the fact that those units dont produce the number of 400" bulls every year anymore should not be a surprise.

 

Our wildlife are not managed perfectly, but things are not always as they seem. Anyway, I am sure this will fall on deaf ears, but atleast I spke up.

[Alpinebullwinkle]

I'll listen Flatlander.......and I highly value your opinion, even though I may not agree with everything. That also applied to Packer and his former posts. I was very proud of that WM taking the time and initiative to communicate with us outdoors enthusiasts on this forum, even though there were people like me that did not always agree with everything that he stated. I particularly took issue with him when he stated that he didn't think the wolf reintroduction program had much of an impact on our elk population in unit #27. Since I am mostly a year round resident of Alpine and probably spend more time in the woods than most people I know better than to poo poo the impact of that program on our elk herd. Unfortunately Packer no longer seems to be communicating with us on this forum, and I certainly miss his input.

 

With respect to the "scientific justification" to reduce elk herds after the fire I can say on behalf of unit #27 the habitat ended up one year later being the best I had seen in my +40 year experience in that unit. The aerial seeding post fire and the new aspen growth the following year are directly responsible for record horn quality the two years following the fire. Can't say that for this year as we had an extremely dry spring when horn growth was critical pre-monsoon season. Prior to the fire, we enjoyed viewing 20-36 beautiful bulls in the Alpine township on a daily basis. Since the fire this privilege no longer exists.....simply because there is better feed in the forest now and the town meadows are no longer valued for preferred nourishment by the bulls. We also have much less elk overall as I have previously pointed out.

 

My biggest concern aside from the wolf and predator impacts on herd dynamics is how the bulls have been slaughtered in the late gun hunt after Thanksgiving the last two years. Harvest rate has to have gone up significantly due to the better optics provided by the fire. Additionally I have heard many horror stories of hunters finding dead carcasses of untagged bulls left to waste at a rate never before heard of. Also the calving rate does not seem to have improved like you would expect post fire with improved nutrition in the forest. Again.......predator impact is the suspected explanation for that surprise IMHO. These are among many of the reasons why I am so concerned about our future elk hunting prospects for us and our grand kids.