Kiwi
Well-known member
What rewording is that? I have applied for a bull tag for my son this year.
Edit: just saw the change, can hunt antlerless with a bull tag.
Last edited:
Proposed 2022 WY Seasons and Regulation Changes
- Thread starter WyoDoug
- Start date
Edit: just saw the change, can hunt antlerless with a bull tag.
RobertD
Well-known member
Probably won't be a random draw for NRs on that hunt. The random portion is taken after the reg/special split and whether it's 3:1 or 2:2 there won't be enough for random in either side.
seeth07
Well-known member
wording used to be "any elk" and now it specifies that it must be a bull under the limitations of the license or an anterless.
We have a 25 deer tag unit near house;
3special NR
2reg nr
0 randoms
12 resident's
8 landowner tags
I believe this was numbers for 2021.
I dont know why we haven't went hard after whitetails! In previous post i declared war on them as they recover easier and are hurting muleys. And fix this landowner tag issue!
Carl 9.3x62
Well-known member
I'm not convinced killing more mature bucks is the answer to CWD, but I do like the idea of a limited later deer season in the Snowies. 25 per area might be a little high. Will be interesting to see what happens.
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
Perhaps one of the stronger points on that side of the argument. I’m really wrestling with this topic recently.
The landowner tags need to be restricted as some years in certain areas they take 100% of all the licenses. I think 30% should be a Cap. Otherwise everyone is going to just go buy a 160 acre parcel and enter into the NR draw for these late season licenses. NR get 20% of all deer licenses so if the 25 late season licenses they qualify for 5. If 5 NR landowners apply they would take them all. For resident it’s more complicated, if it’s a Gen area then you can’t apply for a limited license if at any point if the season it’s Gen but that rule is different for NR landowners whom if they don’t draw the limited license they can request a Gen license. I hope the TF can act on this as it’s rapidly spiraling out of control.
JM77
Well-known member
Are you really in favor of picking on what's left of the mature bucks during the rut?
Addicting
Well-known member
The Biologist did the work and came up with a plan. It is supported by the WY Wildlife Federation. Why not support science? Even if it turns out it doesn’t work, it’s still science and gives them more information for next years season setting. One year and 25 tags is not a herd death sentence. CWD is, to do nothing is, to work towards a resolution that other states found hope in…..does.
I find it funny everyone on here that condemns political management and ballot box initiatives. Comments about let the science do the work. When it does some of the same folks are up in arms. Can’t have it both ways folks.
Ooof.
Carl 9.3x62
Well-known member
Wouldn't even have to be during November. Make it the last couple weeks of October.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
Seems that term, science, gets thrown around pretty loosely these days. Just because a biologist, Dr., etc comes up with an idea does not define that idea as science. We just spent 2 years doing a lot of stuff that Dr's recommended that had little if any science behind it.
You may very well be right that one year and 25 tags is not a herd death sentence, but to say that CWD is a death sentence, is over-reach. Those against this plan are expressing their opinions. No different than what the bios are recommending is opinion, not fact. The bios is Wyo, IMO, largely do a good job. They are not 100% perfect, any more than anyone else is. To have push back on their hypothesis is part of what makes that whole science thing work.
Addicting
Well-known member
I don’t disagree with this. Those tags are a lody doddy everybody tag in the regular season. They haven’t been able to achieve the desired outcome. So let’s move it into a scenario where it might by shifting the dates and let’s conservatively test it.
Same deer herd but up in arms because the bucks they want harvested are more accessible.
Where is the uproar for the preexisting rut / migration hunts that some of these folks have participated in? I will do over there but my God it’s horrible that we are doing it here? Doesn’t hold water.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
A big part of the push back is that it will not be conservatively tested. In order for this idea to be tested, the buck numbers must be drastically reduced. If the thought is that mature bucks are doing the spreading, and you want to stop the spread then, you need to eliminate the mature bucks. The plan is knock down the mature buck level so significantly that you slow the spread of CWD. Yes they are Gen units and they have been able to stay that way even though they are hunted by many every year and a prevalence of CWD. I could easily see the end result of this plan being that these units are no longer Gen units and move to LQ, regardless of the outcome of CWD spread. Show me one Gen unit that went to LQ and then moved back to Gen at some point? Doesn't happen often if ever. Those that hunt these units have a lot of reason to push back on this plan.
More accessible doesn't touch it. Its a night and day difference. If I could hunt region G in November, I would be the greatest MD hunter that ever lived. As it is, I'm mediocre on a good day.
The uproar or lack there of is exactly what you said, those existing migration hunts are conservative. They are not designed to significantly knock down the mature buck demo. These proposed hunts are.
JM77
Well-known member
Did the work and came up with a plan? It would be nice if you knew what you were talking about. The bios met in the kitchen and tossed the spaghetti on the wall. This is what stuck. Explain why they are picking on areas that have a 15-20% prevalence rate, when the "scientists" stressed this kind of management should only be tried in areas with less than 5?
As far as WWF, that's a whole different story.
Addicting
Well-known member
Unit 128 has twice as many tags per unit of the 4 new Sheep Mountain seasons. I guess we have a different view on what conservative means.
If they really wanted to just knock the buck numbers down they would of left it general and just changed the season dates. Instead they added a LQ season with 25 tags to 4 units. To me it sounds like peer reviewed conservative controls in place to get to the goals the folks managing the herd think it needs.
Actually, I have taken the time to talk with them and feel comfortable in my understanding of it. If you feel you could do better feel free to publish a paper with your research and plan.
JM77
Well-known member
They need November to get the buck/doe ratios below 20/100. They even mentioned 6-8/100 is adequate. You want to be part of that, when in the past we were told 11-13/100 was bare minimum to properly breed the does?
I guess some think hunting those rut bucks would be fun. Most likely this is the reason that meeting didn't get out of control. Oh, but wait, they really didn't allow everyone to comment.
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
The sheer amount of spring-summer habitat that is represented in the 128 late hunt is enormous. Apples and oranges.
JM77
Well-known member
It's interesting how I used to see wasting deer dying off the road. I have quite the stack off deadheads from those days. But where I hunt there hasn't been a positive test on a deer since 2008. My grandson's last two deer in 2020 & 2021 were 6 & 7 respectively with negative CWD tests. Excellent buck/doe ratios too. I'm glad you feel comfortable, from where ever you live, on Wyoming killing off buck deer in the name of "science", when there really isn't a clear understanding of what's being dealt with.
Last edited:
Similar threads
