PDA

View Full Version : Colorado Unit 70, 4th Season



Elkhunter96
01-12-2013, 08:51 AM
Anyone hunted it before? I have done some Internet and magazine searches on it, but would really like some personal thoughts or experiences....

Thanks

packer58
01-12-2013, 08:31 PM
Here's a couple pics from unit 70 3rd season in 2009, we had an awesome time. Lots of deer with 170" - 180" potential.50915092

Fink
01-13-2013, 03:43 PM
Dayum, that is a pile of meat in that first pic. Nice job!

Colorado Cowboy
01-13-2013, 04:21 PM
It's less than 100 miles from my place...........but takes about 5 pts to draw 4th season. I'll probably draw it next season.

Elkhunter96
01-13-2013, 05:15 PM
I am sitting on 4 pts, trying to narrow down the decision on to wait or try for another unit I may be able to draw like 53 3rd season. I worry about point creep on 70 since there are not a lot of 4th season tags.

Colorado Cowboy
01-13-2013, 05:42 PM
Your right about 4th season tags. I watch it pretty close and it has been this way for a couple of years, but you never know.

BruinPoint
01-14-2013, 08:26 PM
Lots of deer with 170" - 180" potential.50915092

What do you mean by 170-180 "Potential"? Did you guys kill anything over 170"?

The truth about Unit 70 is that over 1,100 bucks are killed every year by state hunters and another unknown number of bucks go down outside the regular seasons on "Brunot Hunts". The state's last population estimate for the entire DAU-24 area is 22,700 deer (GMU 70, 71, 711) If half of those deer are in 70 and the pre-season buck to doe ratio is 30:100 then at least 1/3 of the entire male segment of the male population is harvested every year. Point being, the "age" part of the trophy equation is missing in 70. Just my opinion.

Last week's agreement between the State and the Utes may indicate changes in state issued tag numbers in 70 and other Brunot affected units in coming years; just the fact that a Memorandum of Understanding was needed tells me that there's an issue.

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagename=GovHickenlooper%2FCBONLayout&cid=1251638318221&pagename=CBONWrapper
http://www.cortezjournal.com/storyimage/CJ/20130111/NEWS01/130119956/AR/0/AR-130119956.jpg&ExactW=620
http://ocs.fortlewis.edu/forestPlan/roundtable/brunotAgreement.pdf

Elkhunter96
01-14-2013, 09:00 PM
That is very good info, gives me a better understanding of the area. Thanks BruinPoint. Very valid points

packer58
01-14-2013, 09:21 PM
What do you mean by 170-180 "Potential"? Did you guys kill anything over 170"

BruinPoint, I re-read my post and probably what i should have said was........during the hunt "3rd season" we saw plenty of deer every day. Most of the bucks we saw were between small forkys up to the 22 to 25 inch class. We didn't kill anything over 170" but one guy in our group passed on a high 160 low 170's type buck on the second day. IMO, a guy has a real shot at a 170" to 180" type buck during 4th season, especially if the area gets some weather.

Colorado Cowboy
01-15-2013, 06:41 AM
For those of you wanting to hunt in SW Colorado (and those who have in the past too), you should read the attachments in BruinPoint's post. It was very suprising to me how this decision came down. I knew that the Utes had some hunting rights that were outside the states framework, but this really could have a detrimental effect on all game and I guess fish too. It does not effect private land in that they have not entry rights, but everything elso is on the table. Pretty sad day for us big game hunters , especially for residents of this area. This treaty signed in the 1870s should be honored BUT there should be limits on the numbers of animals they can take, just like the rest of us who are not Utes. Their record of protecting game on their reservations gives you an idea of what we might see in the future. One thing for sure is if G & F sticks to their harvest goals, tag availability will have to go down!

Ridgerunner
01-15-2013, 07:51 AM
Same thing here in Washington and the tribes have ruined some areas by the massive amount of bucks and bulls they have killed. Makes me sick.

BKC
01-15-2013, 02:17 PM
This area has some of the best big buck hunting in the state. I agree with CC, the treaty needs to be honored. I think that the tribe has some ulterior motives. Maybe they plan on trying to sell some of these hunts in some way? If you like your high country hunting get use to bumping into a few more people than normal. I wonder if the local DOW officer will have any authority over these tagholders? On the Ute mountain res., they have quite the reputation for ignoring local laws. I can't imagine this having any good outcome!

BruinPoint
01-15-2013, 03:42 PM
This isn't a new thing, there have been Southern Ute tribal hunters exercising their rights under the Brunot Agreement for at least several years. If I understand last week's proceedings correctly, the new agreement applies to the Ute Mountain Ute tribe who now wishes to do the same. They have clearly defined bag limits and seasonal closures to follow, but I'm not sure on the specifics of either or how it's being monitored. A Ute acquaintance of mine told me there was an effort within the tribe to keep from ruffling any feathers while hunting off the rez. The few anecdotes I've heard have been fairly positive, other than the hunters cherry picking trophy bucks in December.

I'm not trying to stir the pot here, just sharing what I know.

ColoradoV
01-19-2013, 09:39 AM
Yea it is not a new thing and the Ute tribal members have been getting big bucks for years.

These bucks they hunt are not for the most part resident bucks and anyone can get a shot at them in the early season. Anyone ccan hunt either archery or muzzy in 70, 71, 74, 75, 751, 77, or 78 you can hunt the bucks before they migrate to the winter grounds.

That is a lot of high country but fair to say that it holds the best population of big mule deer in Colorado right now.