Strange Observation in Idaho

[kicker338]

^^^This is the same I’ve heard from several reputable sources. I will point out that it isn’t the season that stunk. It is the countless years of resident and non resident overharvest, harsh winters and an abundance of predation. The game is getting hit from every possible angle and aren’t going to sustain if something doesn’t change. I’ve seen it first hand in Idaho for years. At the present rate nobody will be hunting Idaho in the future if changes aren’t made. Let’s stop arguing over tags, opportunity and money and think about sustaining game herds for once.

Don't think it's an over harvest as the fish and game at least here in Idaho keep a pretty close watch on that. The forest is getting so over grown it's ridicules, I mentioned this in a thread in the gen. section here. I talked to the gal who runs the burnibg program for NTH. Idaho and she said we need a ton more burnibg but they get their hands tied at every corner. She said they did aburn north or Kellogg and the locals around there blew up about it, claimed it would destroy they elk hunting there. When the brush gets so thick you can't crawl threw it almost no animal benefits. Nature knows what is best and fires are needed. The good old gov. thinks they know more than nature so out go the fires and the woods just gets worse and worse. The predator situation is something els. Bears and lions take a good part of the calves which fish and game like to point out but mention adult elk kills and they start changing the subject. Wolves are tearing the snot out of the adult elk, I can tell you the yr. that wolves started showing up in the units I like to hunt. First people started seeing wolves sightings then the cow seasons started getting shorter, then went away all together. I talked to an old boy who doesn't hunt but spends a lot of time with the trail groomers for the snowmobiles, he said you can't believe the number of wolf elk kills they shove over the bank. Of corse the fish and game don't want to talk about this, sad state of affairs isn't it.

 

[BullElk]

So, a week or so ago Idaho wasn't even on my radar for a 2018 OTC fall back option. That is, until this thread that's been popping up all week. My decision to take a closer look at ID is not to be spiteful in any way. I can understand the frustration the OP feels. But, before this thread started I had no idea of all the opportunity, the amount of public land and reasonably priced OOS tags ID had to offer, so yeah now it is definitely on my list.

With all the attention this thread is bringing to OOS OTC in ID, I'm sure there are only about 5k other OOS guys like me that are now thinking the same thing.

Just sayin'...

Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

that's funny right there and is exactly what I stated earlier. welcome to idaho

 

[Fullfan]

Looks like this yr. was the first time in several yrs, that Idaho has sold out on non resident tags. But and a big BUT, I can't wait till the harvest results are in. If what a warden told me a wk. ago turns out to be true there might be a lot of non resident tags not sold next yr. In a nut shell he said the season stunk. Said he checked a ton of resident and non's camps this yr. and the majority by far had zero elk harvested. Looks like the wolves had an exultant harvest last winter.

Sorry to tell you but the nonresident elk tags have sold out for the past 4 years. Last year it was in Aug and this year it was July.

 

[KurtR]

No they haven't 4 of us bought ours in September for the Mcall unit.

 

[Ryan2782]

Nonresident elk and deer tags sold out for 2017 | Idaho Fish and Game

IDFG stating they haven't sold out since 2008 on NR tags. I had people from Wisconsin buy their tags in middle of September when they arrived for archery elk every year, they have never sold out that early in July or August. IDFG also did not discount NR tags to residents for a second tag this year because they predicted selling out this year. I'm not sure how they get their information or how they judge it, but they were right.

Also according to IDFG, for this years harvest with check stations and calling in reporting on tags, elk harvesting is tracking to the same as last year, and deer is down, due to the majority of deer is smaller spikes and two points which there are not as many around because of last years winter.

Early harvest data shows deer down and elk tracking similar to last year | Idaho Fish and Game

 

[Joe Schmo]

Looks like this yr. was the first time in several yrs, that Idaho has sold out on non resident tags. But and a big BUT, I can't wait till the harvest results are in. If what a warden told me a wk. ago turns out to be true there might be a lot of non resident tags not sold next yr. In a nut shell he said the season stunk. Said he checked a ton of resident and non's camps this yr. and the majority by far had zero elk harvested. Looks like the wolves had an exultant harvest last winter.

Must not be any wolves in the salmon zone then. Our quest for 3.5 year old bucks came up empty but we sure found bulls o' plenty!!

 

[PF_JM]

I've driven to Idaho for the last two years for archery elk and honestly, if it wasn't for having a very good friend from the military there I wouldn't even bother with the drive. There aren't that many elk to be had and the ones that are left are small and barely respond to calling due to the extreme amount of hunters calling to them all the time. Idaho may offer opportunity but if you have no other reason to go than you want to kill something, find a better spot. Way overrated and getting worse based on the amount of hunters there, resident and non.

 

[Ross]

Been fun reading this thread. All the elk in Idaho are dead. I've hunted Idaho since 1980 and have paid out of state for almost 3 decades. Many things have changed the biggest being the 365 day a year predator that has been introduced. 2003 was the first year you could buy an extra tag as they were not selling out. I have bought an extra every year offered. There were many years they did not sell out especially when market went south. Yes in places you may see more hunters but just like on my watershed hunt I could see many people where it was steep and you would work hard to go back up they said nooooo way. Few went down more than half way. You can still find places with limited competition and good numbers of elk. 2003-2009 were tremendous then yes things did go down somewhat. I will gladly keep paying my out of state price and know I can find elk. Good luck to those who go to Idaho yes it may not be easy but it can still be good.

 

[338edge]

I live in Oregon and the elk hunting pretty much sucks unless you have private land. I will be coming to Idaho in the near future.

Elk hunting in Oregon is great. I've killed a bull for 19 consecutive years. If I don't draw for an eastern oregon tag I buy an over the counter tag for the west side of the state.

Thanks Corey Vance

 

[Fullfan]

Sorry fellas should have mentioned that it was the Salmon zone non resident B tags that sell out fast. And there are wolves there..

 

[Idahohillboy]

I've read some interesting ideas lately on reducing pressure in general tag units that I think merit some discussion. One, in particular, involves the addition of OTC tags in controlled units (outside the controlled hunt season, of course), but with tight restrictions on weapons and OHV use.

It seems to me that the issue is two-fold: 1) Crowded trail heads, campgrounds and canyons, and 2) Heavy pressure on the game animals. The above would alleviate the crowding issue by spreading the hunters across more units, and would likely have a marginal impact on the health of herds in those units, due to the reduced efficacy of the hunting equipment.

Trad-archery only mule deer tag in a trophy unit, anyone?

Love this idea.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[wannakillabigbull]

I've read some interesting ideas lately on reducing pressure in general tag units that I think merit some discussion. One, in particular, involves the addition of OTC tags in controlled units (outside the controlled hunt season, of course), but with tight restrictions on weapons and OHV use.

It seems to me that the issue is two-fold: 1) Crowded trail heads, campgrounds and canyons, and 2) Heavy pressure on the game animals. The above would alleviate the crowding issue by spreading the hunters across more units, and would likely have a marginal impact on the health of herds in those units, due to the reduced efficacy of the hunting equipment.

Trad-archery only mule deer tag in a trophy unit, anyone?

I would love that idea as well. But I do know that game wardens (at least the ones that work with my buddy in Colorado) don't like the idea of increasing tags for primitive weapons. The wounding loss (by which I mean animals hunters fatally wound but don't recover) is usually much higher and that can make it harder to manage the herds. I wonder if that's the opinion of all game wardens?

 

[RAHC]

Most people on here are not wildlife biologist or managers. When you talk to either they will tell you the only way to improve hunting is to decrease tag numbers. I propose and unlimited controlled hunt for every unit in Idaho and to correspond deer hunting the same way Elk hunting is managed by zones. I like that we have over the counter tags but I think we need to make people pick in the area and stick with it. When it comes to regular controlled hunts I believe only choosing one species per application period would increase the chance of drawing a hunt and thin out the general hunting crowd. Idaho will never turn their back on out of state revenue so someway we need to manage the people

 

[David Gough]

Most people on here are not wildlife biologist or managers. When you talk to either they will tell you the only way to improve hunting is to decrease tag numbers. I propose and unlimited controlled hunt for every unit in Idaho and to correspond deer hunting the same way Elk hunting is managed by zones. I like that we have over the counter tags but I think we need to make people pick in the area and stick with it. When it comes to regular controlled hunts I believe only choosing one species per application period would increase the chance of drawing a hunt and thin out the general hunting crowd. Idaho will never turn their back on out of state revenue so someway we need to manage the people

I think you could keep tags OTC, first come first serve. Have a capped quota for each unit or zone for mule deer and elk for residents and non-residents. Biologists think a unit or area can handle the harvest from X amount of tags, so put X amount of tags out there.

 

[Joe Schmo]

I've driven to Idaho for the last two years for archery elk and honestly, if it wasn't for having a very good friend from the military there I wouldn't even bother with the drive. There aren't that many elk to be had and the ones that are left are small and barely respond to calling due to the extreme amount of hunters calling to them all the time. Idaho may offer opportunity but if you have no other reason to go than you want to kill something, find a better spot. Way overrated and getting worse based on the amount of hunters there, resident and non.

Amen brotha!!

 

[Joe Schmo]

Most people on here are not wildlife biologist or managers. When you talk to either they will tell you the only way to improve hunting is to decrease tag numbers. I propose and unlimited controlled hunt for every unit in Idaho and to correspond deer hunting the same way Elk hunting is managed by zones. I like that we have over the counter tags but I think we need to make people pick in the area and stick with it. When it comes to regular controlled hunts I believe only choosing one species per application period would increase the chance of drawing a hunt and thin out the general hunting crowd. Idaho will never turn their back on out of state revenue so someway we need to manage the people

I like it, kinda. However if it's all about limiting the numbers of tag/hunters/harvest...shouldn't the tag numbers be limited in every unit, not unlimited??
A. I'm planning on drawing a buncha tags in a buncha states next year so I'll probably be too busy with goats, sheep and orynxs to buy a tag in da ho.
B. If that doesn't work out I'll play any game that Idaho puts on the table
C. They do a hell of a job with public surveys and public input as far as I'm concerned

 

[David Gough]

I like it, kinda. However if it's all about limiting the numbers of tag/hunters/harvest...shouldn't the tag numbers be limited in every unit, not unlimited??
A. I'm planning on drawing a buncha tags in a buncha states next year so I'll probably be too busy with goats, sheep and orynxs to buy a tag in da ho.
B. If that doesn't work out I'll play any game that Idaho puts on the table
C. They do a hell of a job with public surveys and public input as far as I'm concerned

That was the point I was trying to make. Some residents would have a rude wake up call when they weren't guaranteed a deer tag the night before season though.

 

[bigdesert10]

I would love that idea as well. But I do know that game wardens (at least the ones that work with my buddy in Colorado) don't like the idea of increasing tags for primitive weapons. The wounding loss (by which I mean animals hunters fatally wound but don't recover) is usually much higher and that can make it harder to manage the herds. I wonder if that's the opinion of all game wardens?

Do they have any actual evidence of that, though, or is it just an assumption with some anecdotal evidence? Do meatheads taking bow shots at 100 yards really wound more animals than meatheads taking 600 yard rifle shots?

 

[bigdesert10]

Most people on here are not wildlife biologist or managers. When you talk to either they will tell you the only way to improve hunting is to decrease tag numbers. I propose and unlimited controlled hunt for every unit in Idaho and to correspond deer hunting the same way Elk hunting is managed by zones. I like that we have over the counter tags but I think we need to make people pick in the area and stick with it. When it comes to regular controlled hunts I believe only choosing one species per application period would increase the chance of drawing a hunt and thin out the general hunting crowd. Idaho will never turn their back on out of state revenue so someway we need to manage the people

I feel like the reduced tag count solution is kind of a cop out, though. Certainly at a certain point, i.e. after some sort of catastrophic event, that might be in order, but I think these other solutions merit some consideration. I would prefer to see them restrict aids and equipment long before they trim down tag sales. I know it was controversial, but I liked at least having the conversation about trail cams and where the limits ought to be on that type of equipment.

I think we also have to figure out what we actually want. Do we just want good opportunity and sustainable herds? Or do we want IDFG to act like curators on a private ranch and artificially "farm" trophy class animals for the lucky few who draw a tag, like certain other states? I'm for opportunity, personally - even if that means I never shoot another "booner". I'm probably in the minority though.

 

[wannakillabigbull]

Do they have any actual evidence of that, though, or is it just an assumption with some anecdotal evidence? Do meatheads taking bow shots at 100 yards really wound more animals than meatheads taking 600 yard rifle shots?

That's a good question, and one I don't know the answer to. But it was certainly their opinion and they were adamant about it. They told me it was one of the main reasons why there are much fewer archery tags vs rifle tags for draw units in pretty much every state.