People really do win cool stuff here at King’s Outdoor World. Here is a video showing our Yamaha Grizzly 700 ATV winner from the contest we had at the Hunting and Conservation Expo back in January 2007. This video shows the winner, Brad Stocks, sitting on his new Yamaha Grizzly 700 FI ATV with the industry first power steering. This video is from the day that I dropped it off to Brad.
The unique thing about this ATV is that is it the only one dipped in our King’s Desert Shadow Camouflage right now, and we ended up giving it away through our Hunting Illustrated Magazine along with the great support from Yamaha. Congratulations Brad.
A beautiful set of 410 gross 7×9 elk sheds found in Utah March of 2007. These sheds have a 7×7 point typical frame with two extra points on the left side. Using an estimated 40-inch inside spread, the antlers have been rough scored at 410 gross B&C.
I just saw this official press release from the the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service about the recent decision to remove the grizzly bear from the list of threatened and endangered species. There is definitely a lot of activity going on regarding the wolf and grizzly bear right now. It will be interesting to see how the respective states handle the management of the Grizzly Bear and what hunting opportunities will be available and when. Here is the statement:
SUCCESSFUL RECOVERY EFFORTS BRING YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS OFF THE ENDANGERED LIST
After nearly disappearing three decades ago, grizzly bears are thriving in the Yellowstone ecosystem and no longer need the protection of the Endangered Species Act, Deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett announced today.
“The grizzly’s remarkable comeback is the result of years of intensive cooperative recovery efforts between federal and state agencies, conservation groups, and individuals,” Scarlett said. “There is simply no way to overstate what an amazing accomplishment this is. The grizzly is a large predator that requires a great deal of space, and conserving such animals is a challenge in today’s world. I believe all Americans should be proud that, as a nation, we had the will and the ability to protect and restore this symbol of the wild.”
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is removing the Yellowstone population of grizzly bears from its status as “threatened” on the U.S. list of threatened and endangered species. Four other grizzly populations in the lower 48 states have not yet recovered and will continue to be protected as threatened species under the Act.
Grizzly numbers in the Yellowstone ecosystem have increased from an estimated population of 136 to 312 when they were listed as threatened in 1975, to more than 500 bears today.
Yellowstone grizzlies will now be managed under a comprehensive conservation strategy developed by state and federal scientists and managers that includes intensive monitoring of Yellowstone bears, their food, and their habitat. The conservation strategy incorporates the best available science and allows state and federal agencies to adjust management in response to new scientific information or environmental and bear population changes. State and federal managers will continue to work cooperatively under this framework to manage and maintain healthy grizzly bear populations throughout the Greater Yellowstone area.
“This comprehensive conservation strategy, agreed to by all state and federal players involved in grizzly recovery, will ensure that the future of the bear remains bright,” Scarlett noted.
The Yellowstone grizzly bear was listed as a threatened species because of loss of habitat and high mortality resulting from conflicts with humans. An interagency scientific study team was formed in 1973, and over the years the Yellowstone grizzlies have become the most intensely studied bear population in the world. In the 1980’s a multi-agency team, the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC), was established. The IGBC managed bear mortality and habitat, worked to build public support, and helped develop adequate regulatory mechanisms for the bears. The IGBC includes the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, USDA Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, state wildlife agencies of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and Washington; and the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta. Universities and private organizations have contributed to the study and conservation of the Yellowstone grizzlies as well.
Since the early 1990s, the Yellowstone population has grown at a rate of 4 percent to 7 percent per year. Grizzly range in the Yellowstone Ecosystem has increased 48 percent since they were listed, and biologists have sighted bears more than 60 miles from what was once thought to be the outer limits of their range
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to delist grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem in November 2005. The proposal was reviewed at four open houses and two public hearings; more than 193,500 public comments were received.
Notification of the delisting of the Yellowstone population of grizzly bears will be published in the Federal Register in the near future. More information about today’s announcement can be found at http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm
Grizzly bears are generally larger and heavier than other bears. They can be distinguished from black bears by longer, curved claws, humped shoulders and a face that appears to be concave. A wide range of coloration from light brown to nearly black is common. The bear’s coat features longer guard hairs over a dense mat of underfur with tips that are usually silver or golden in color - hence the name “grizzly.” In the lower 48 states, the average weight of grizzly bears is generally 400 to 600 pounds for males and 250 to 350 pounds for females. They generally live to be approximately 25 years old, although some wild bears have lived over 35 years.
Grizzlies are opportunistic feeders and will consume almost any available food including living or dead mammals or fish, grasses, roots, bulbs, tubers and fungi. The distribution and abundance of these grizzly bear foods vary naturally among seasons and years.
Biologists believe the Yellowstone area grizzly population and other remaining grizzly bear populations in the lower 48 states and Canada are markedly separate from each other, with no evidence of interaction with other populations. There are approximately 1,100 to 1,200 grizzly bears in the lower 48 states, in five separate populations in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and Washington. In addition to the Yellowstone area, grizzlies also occur in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem, where grizzly populations are stable or increasing and number 400 to 500 bears; in the Selkirk ecosystem where there are 40 to 50 bears; in the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem, with 30 to 40 bears; and in the Northern Cascade ecosystem where there are approximately 5 bears.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the 95-million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System, which encompasses 547 national wildlife refuges, thousands of small wetlands and other special management areas. It also operates 69 national fish hatcheries, 64 fishery resources offices and 81 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and helps foreign and Native American tribal governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance program, which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state fish and wildlife agencies.
For those of you who attended the Hunting and Conservation Expo in Utah two months ago, you had a chance to see many of the record elk that came out of Utah in 2006. However, one record bull that was not there and not too many people have seen is the new Utah state record typical archery bull elk.
Aaron Cox arrowed this massive typical bull elk in Utah during the 2006 season. He got the bull officially scored on November 4, 2006 and was kind enough to stop by and show me his great elk shortly after it was scored. The official score is 404 5/8 gross and 391 0/8 net typical P&Y as a 6×7. If you can believe it, Aaron’s bull beat out the current archery state record by just 1/2-inch.
Here is a short video clip of this new state record bull elk the day it was officially scored. You can read the full story in the current issue (April/May 2007) of Hunting Illustrated Magazine which is on newsstands now. It will also be featured in the upcoming 2008 King’s Bull Elk Calendar. Congratulations Aaron!
Side Note:In the video clip, I mention that Aaron’s bull has 70-inches of mass. This is incorrect. After adding up the score sheet, the bull actually has just over 65-inches of mass. Just wanted to clarify that as I try and keep things accurate as possible when it comes to scores, etc.
How massive is 65-inches? Well, let me do some comparison. For those of you who picked up a copy of the current issue noticed that we included the whole score breakdown on all of our featured elk. We featured the world record typical muzzleloader bull scoring 412 7/8 net typical. We also featured a monster non-typical archery bull from New Mexico that went 403 7/8 net. Also included was the amazing score of John Shirk’s Pennsylvania bull that taped at 442 7/8 net B&C. Out of all of these bulls, Aaron Cox’s bull carried the most mass by a couple of inches. That is pretty impressive!
For those of you who have not picked up a copy of Hunting Illustrated, I suggest you give it a try. Our current issue is our “Best of 2006″ and is packed with stories on huge big game animals . Check it out on newsstands now or give us a call at 800-447-6897 to order…or even click here to order on-line.
What do you get? How about six issues a year packed full of stories, articles, editorials, cover stories, tips and more packed with colorful photography and design. All this for $24.95/year. Moreover, by signing up, you are also part of our King’s Outdoor World Club Membership which gives you a 10% discount on all of our products - from our ShadowCamo clothing and gear to our award winning King’s Calendars.
After doing a little digging on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service web site, I found this pdf document regarding the Gray Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountain District. Right now there is a lot of talk (or should we say “coming to blows”) about the soon-to-be-delisted wolf. However, what does that mean and what is the process and the thinking behind the delisting and the issues at hand. I have copied this document and posted it below. I think it is very interesting and felt it was worth passing along.
After reading this, some might wonder what is Wyoming’s issue with being accepted by the federal government? From what I have discovered, Wyoming’s governor is frustrated with the system and process of delisting. It is now clear that even after delisting, there is a grace period of five years that hunting and trapping will still not be allowed. Sure, certain cases where landowners and ranchers will be able to shoot a wolf under certain conditions will be allowed, but Wyoming is also worried about their big game herds. In addition to the grace period, you have to throw in the fact that the pro-wolf groups and organizations will be doing all they can to tie this thing up in court. How many years will that last, not to mention the cost to taxpayers? How many more wolves and breeding pairs will there be by then? What will the situation of the big game herds be like at that time? Wyoming is not wanting to sit around and accept the Federal Government’s plan and wants to do it more on their terms while there are still some elk herds left to manage. What will Wyoming’s fate be in the wolf delisting plan? I think we will soon find out.
The wolves of the the Great Western Lakes region were just delisted from the federal endangered species list.
Questions and Answers
Proposed Rule to Establish a Gray Wolf – Northern Rocky Mountain Distinct Population Segment and Remove from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species
The wolf population in the northern Rocky Mountains (NRM) has exceeded its numerical, distributional, and temporal recovery goals every year since 2002.Therefore, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing to establish and delist a northern Rocky Mountain wolf DPS that will include all of Montana Idaho, and Wyoming, the eastern third of Washington and Oregon, and a small corner of north-central Utah. The threats to the wolf population in the northern Rocky Mountain DPS have been reduced or eliminated as evidenced by the population exceeding the recovery goals. We intend to delist the entire DPS, if Wyoming has an approved regulatory framework by the time this proposal is finalized. However, if Wyoming does not have a Service-approved plan by then, the portion of northwestern Wyoming outside the national parks necessary to support the Wyoming segment of the NRM wolf population will remain listed. The remainder of Wyoming is largely unsuitable habitat and is not a significant portion of range for the northern Rocky Mountain wolf population. That area is not necessary to maintain the recovered population and will be delisted regardless of whether Wyoming has an approved plan. This proposal for the northern Rocky Mountains would not affect wolves in any other part of the United States.
1) Why is delisting being proposed at this time?
Answer: In late 2002,the wolf population achieved its recovery goal of at least 30 breeding pairs and more than 300 wolves well distributed among Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming for at least three consecutive years. It has exceeded it every year since. Currently, the wolf population in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming exceeds 89 breeding pairs and 1,243 wolves. All threats to the wolf population, except for the unregulated and potentially excessive levels of human-caused mortality allowed by Wyoming state law, have been resolved. With a recovered wolf population in the northern Rocky Mountains, and expectations that Wyoming will develop state law that can be approved, the Service is proposing to delist wolves in this DPS, because that population clearly no longer needs the protections of the Endangered Species Act. However, if Wyoming does not develop an approved regulatory framework for wolf management, the Service — consistent with the ESA —will move forward to delist wolves in Montana and Idaho, and those portions of Wyoming, Washington, Oregon and Utah within the northern Rocky Mountain DPS. Wolves would still be protected under the ESA in the significant portion of their range in northwestern Wyoming, outside the national parks.
2) What does Wyoming have to do to have an approved state law and wolf management plan?
Answer: Wyoming state law has to be changed to give Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WYGF) the legal authority to manage the wolf population above 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves in mid-winter, including maintaining some wolf breeding pairs in suitable habitat in northwestern Wyoming outside the National Parks. The current law and plan are not consistent and the large area of state predatory animal status would severely limit WYGF ’s ability to manage above the minimum number of wolf breeding pairs needed in northwestern Wyoming outside of the National Park Units.
3) Does this mean the U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service will require wolf packs to be maintained throughout all the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming?
Answer: The recovery goals only mandate that each state maintain at least 10 breeding pairs and at least 100 wolves per state, within the general area currently occupied by wolf packs. There are many parts of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming where once-historic wolf habitat has been so modified by human use that it can no longer support wolf packs. The state fish and game agencies will regulate human-caused mortality so that in many parts of those states wolf packs will never form. The Service fully recognizes that wolves cannot occupy their entire historic range, and supports limiting wolf distribution to suitable habitat as long as recovery is not threatened.
4) Why not wait till Wyoming has an approved plan before proposing that wolves be delisted?
Answer: The wolf population in Montana and Idaho has been fully recovered since 2002 and continues to grow. Those states have had approved state laws and wolf management plans since 2004 and have successfully managed the wolf population within their states under cooperative agreements with the Service since 2005. Management by those states, including options for public harvest, is the most effective mechanism to conserve the recovered wolf population into the future and to reduce conflicts with local residents. As of now, the Service has no approved wolf management plan for Wyoming. If, in the future, the State of Wyoming changed its state law regarding wolves and developed a wolf management plan that the Service could approve, wolves in all of Wyoming could be delisted. However, if Wyoming ’s regulatory framework plan cannot be approved consistent with the ESA, the Service will continue to move forward to delist the wolves in NRM DPS, including all of Montana and Idaho and parts of Washington, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming (excluding national parks and the significant portion of their range in northwest Wyoming), allowing for total state management in those areas.
5) How many wolves must the states manage for if they are to be delisted?
Answer: Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming must each manage for at least 10 breeding pairs and at least 100 wolves in mid-winter so the NRM wolf population never falls below 30 breeding pairs and 300 wolves. If the wolf population ever dropped below that level, wolves could be relisted under the Service ’s emergency listing authorities.
6) What happens to wolves outside the NRM wolf DPS if it is delisted?
Answer: This proposal will not affect any wolves outside of the proposed northern Rocky Mountain wolf DPS. Wolves are listed by their location. Therefore, any wolf outside the northern Rocky Mountain wolf DPS would remain listed as they are currently. For example, if a wolf was found in Colorado, it would still be listed as endangered.
7) Who makes the final decision whether Wyoming ’s regulatory framework can be approved or if wolves can be delisted?
Answer: The Director of the U.S. Fish in Wildlife Service makes the final decision based on requirements of the ESA.
8) Is there any federal oversight once wolves were delisted?
Answer: Some, but it is very limited. Once a species is delisted the states or respective tribes have sole management responsibility. But, the ESA has many safeguards to ensure that states will maintain a recovered wolf population for the foreseeable future. For example, the Act mandates monitoring of the wolf population for at least 5 years after delisting to ensure it remains above recovery levels and any threats do not return to a level that would jeopardize the wolf population. Annual reports and our analysis of these reports will be posted on our website during that period. In addition, should the wolf population become threatened or endangered again it could be relisted.
9)What is tribal involvement after wolves are delisted?
Answer: The Nez Perce Tribe led wolf management efforts in Idaho under a cooperative agreement with the Service from 1995 to 2005 and did an outstanding job. The tribe and the state of Idaho signed a cooperative agreement in 2005 to maintain the tribe ’s involvement in wolf management. Tribes will have sole management responsibility on tribal lands if wolves are delisted. The states and tribes will address any
tribal treaty right issues on public lands, such as harvest, just as they currently do for other resident wildlife species.
10) How will livestock and wolf conflicts be handled if wolves are delisted?
Answer: The Service, tribes, and state fish and game agencies in Montana and Idaho and USDA Wildlife Services currently work together to investigate and respond to reports of suspected wolf damage to livestock. The states and tribes have signed cooperative management agreements with USDA Wildlife Services to assist them with wolf management. If wolves are delisted, the states and tribes will continue working with USDA to investigate and manage wolf/livestock conflict. The states have laws to protect private property from damage caused by wildlife. Under those laws, landowners and grazing permittees will be able to shoot wolves attacking or molesting their domestic animals, just as they now can shoot resident black bears or mountain lions that are seen attacking or harassing their livestock.
11) Will delisting the northern Rocky Mountain wolf DPS mean that wolves can be hunted?
Answer: Wolves will always be fully protected in National Parks, such as Yellowstone and Glacier. However, when wolf populations are above 15 breeding pairs per state, the State fish and game agencies will likely propose public hunting seasons to help manage wolf numbers and wolf pack distribution. The Service fully supports regulated public harvest programs as important tools to help manage wildlife populations.
12) Can the states manage wolves?
Answer: Yes. It is important to remember that the only reason wolf recovery was even possible was that the state fish and wildlife agencies and sportsmen restored wolf prey, including elk, deer and moose. The states have professional fish and wildlife organizations with hundreds of employees, including biologists, wardens, researchers, educators, and managers who have done an incredible job of restoring and managing wildlife in their states. The states of Montana and Idaho have been managing wolves in their states since 2004 under cooperative agreements with the Service and they have done an outstanding job. The Service is confident they’ll do the same for wolves once they are delisted. In the unlikely event that the States fail to manage wolves under the terms of the management plans, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can relist wolves under the ESA.
13) Who is paying for all of this?
Answer: While listed under the ESA, the federal government has paid most of the costs for wolf restoration and management from its annual appropriations from Congress for endangered species recovery. In 2005, about $2 million was spent on wolf management in the Northern Rockies, mostly for cooperative agreements with the states of Idaho and Montana. Once wolves are delisted, states will begin to fund some of the cost of wolf management through other funding sources, including other types of federal funding.
14) Who will pay livestock compensation if wolves are delisted?
Answer: Since 1987,Defenders of Wildlife has paid nearly $700,000 for livestock and herding and guarding animals killed by wolves in the northern Rocky mountains. However, it is uncertain if that private compensation program will continue if wolves are delisted. Therefore, the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, as well as adjacent states anticipate that state-administered compensation programs will complement or take the place of the Defenders program after delisting.
15) How would the states that have portions of their states outside the proposed DPS be affected?
Answer: Wolves outside the DPS would remain listed as endangered (as before). If control actions were needed, the Service is looking into using Section 6 agreements to turn wolf management over to those adjacent states if they have Service-approved wolf management plans. That state management could involve lethal and nonlethal control of problem wolves. The Service is asking for public comment on this idea in this delisting proposal. At this time there are no criteria established for how those state and tribal plans will be approved but once we review the public comment we hope to quickly develop those criteria and guidelines.
16) Will those States in the proposed delisting area all need to have Service-approved wolf management plans before delisting can occur?
Answer: No. The significant portion of the range for the northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolves is Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Service-approved wolf management plans are needed only for these three states.
17) How long could it be before the northern Rocky Mountain wolf population is delisted?
Answer: This type of listing action requires public review and comment. This proposal has a 60-day comment period. Depending on the numbers and complexity of public comment, the subsequent analysis and publishing of a final delisting action often takes up to one year. However, the Service considers this a high priority and will attempt to finalize the proposal before 2008.
18) Will there be litigation over this proposal?
Answer: A proposed rule is not a final agency action and is therefore not subject to judicial review. However, as wolf issues are so symbolic and emotional that no matter what the final decision, legal action is expected. The Service will make its final decision based on sound science, public comment and review, and our best interpretation of the law.
19) Will the Service let states shoot as many wolves as they want?
Answer: The Service’s responsibility is to recover a species and then ensure it will not become threatened again. Just as states manage other resident wildlife —such as black bears or elk —they will decide how many wolves above the minimum recovery levels they will manage. In the highly unlikely event that wolf populations ever fell below those levels, they could be relisted.
Interior Department Announces Delisting of Western Great Lakes Wolves
The US Fish and Wildlife Service officially removed the western Great Lakes population of gray wolves from the federal endangered species list on Monday March 12, 2007. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined the species in the western Great Lakes region is recovered, and the agency has removed gray wolves in this region from protection under the federal Endangered Species Act.
The Service’s removal of the gray wolf from the endangered and threatened species list applies to the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment. This area includes the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan as well as parts of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. The DPS includes all the areas currently occupied by wolf packs in Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin, as well as nearby areas in these states in which wolf packs may become established in the future. The DPS also includes surrounding areas into which wolves may disperse but are not likely to establish packs.
Rebounding from a few hundred wolves in Minnesota in the 1970s when listed as endangered, the region’s gray wolf population now numbers about 4,000 and occupies large portions of Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. Wolf numbers in the three states have exceeded the numerical recovery criteria established in the species’ Recovery Plan for several years. In Minnesota, the population is estimated at 3,020. The estimated wolf population in Wisconsin is 465, and about 434 wolves are believed to inhabit Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, with an additional 30 wolves on Isle Royale.
The Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin Departments of Natural Resources have developed plans to guide wolf management actions in the future. The Service reviewed these plans and found they established a sufficient basis for long-term wolf management. Issues such as protective regulations, control of problem animals, possible hunting and trapping seasons, as well as long-term health of the wolf population, will be governed by the appropriate state or tribe.
However, the Service will monitor wolf populations in the Western Great Lakes DPS for a minimum of five years to ensure that delisting was not done prematurely. It won’t be until after this time period, and the USFWS confirms the wolves have not decline dramatically and are stable, will the states be allowed to fully manage the wolves via hunting, etc. according to their approved management plans.
The removal of Great Lakes’ wolves from the federal list of threatened and endangered species is not expected to go unchallenged by animal rights groups.
Ron Refsnider, Midwest Region endangered species listing coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Minneapolis, said four groups — the Humane Society of the United States, the Animal Protection Institute, Help Our Wolves Live, and the Minnesota Wolf Alliance — submitted a 60-day notice of their intent to sue Feb. 12.
On March 6, the Friends of Animals and Their Environment also sent a letter. Refsnider said since it came from the same attorney and has the same language, he expected the five groups would all be included on one lawsuit.
“They can file for an immediate injunction right now, and to be honest, I’m surprised they haven’t by now,” Refsnider said late Friday. “I didn’t think they would want the delisting to even take effect.”
Refsnider, who is preparing for an eventual lawsuit, said such suits are very costly to taxpayers.
“If the government loses, we have to pay attorney fees for the group that sues us,” Refsnider said. “But when we win, it’s extremely rare that we are awarded any of our costs. So (the animal rights groups) have nothing to lose.”
I have had some people ask me about a possible new law in Utah that restricts shed hunting until May first. I have found some information from the Utah DWR web site about a new law passed for northern Utah.
A committee comprised of sportsmen, people from the agricultural community, and state and federal wildlife officials have determined that helping more fawns survive the winter is one of the first steps to increasing deer populations in Northern Utah. Based on the group’s recommendations, all five of Utah’s Regional Advisory Councils and the Utah Wildlife Board voted to restrict the collection of shed antlers in Northern Utah this year.
Collection Allowed After May 1
The collection of shed antlers is allowed from May 1, 2007 through Jan. 31, 2008. (that means no shed pickup from Jan 1 through April 30th)
When the season opens on May 1, please remember that you must obey all state and federal off-road vehicle rules. You must also respect the rights of private property owners.
Also remember that it’s illegal to pick up antlers or horns that are still attached to the skull plate of a dead animal.
For more information about Utah’s shed antler gathering regulations, call the nearest Division of Wildlife Resources office or the DWR’s Salt Lake City office at (801) 538-4700.
Hunting Illustrated Best of 2006 Preview: 300-inch Cactus Buck!
One of our favorite issues of the year, our annual “Best of” issue, is here. We gather together some of the best and biggest big game animals taken from the previous year and compile them into one jam packed issue. Here is a quick summary of some of the great things you will find in our new issue of Hunting Illustrated hitting newsstands by March 15th. If you don’t have it coming to your door yet, give us a call and get signed up now at 800-447-6897 or on-line here.
Summary:
Cover Story - Best of 2006
300-Inch Cactus Buck - Arnold Sandoval with his awesome Neveda mule deer unofficially scoring 306 5/8 gross
World Record Muzzleloader Elk - Doug Degelbeck’s beautiful 6×6 scoring 417 7/8 gross and 412 7/8 net B&C
Sonoran Dream - Johnny Grimes hunting Mexico and came home with a huge 216 typical mule deer
Utah State Record Typical Archery Elk - Aaron Cox was hunting non-guided and knocked down a new record scoring 404 5/8 gross and 391 net typical P&Y
New #7 All-time elk from Pennsylvania - Not where you would think, but John Shirk drew a coveted lottery tag from his home state of PA and shot one of the biggest bull elk in the world scoring 457 gross and 442 7/8 net non-typical B&C
Record archery bull from New Mexico - Not knowing just how big an elk he got, hunter Jeff Sillivent ended up with a huge 414 gross, 403 7/8 net non-typical bull
Utah State Record Mountain Goat - Craig Rippen was hunting eastern Utah and now holds the new record goat scoring 54 2/8 B&C
Plus much more:
ATV Test - Bombardier Can Am Outlander 800 test
North of the Border - 419 Caribou
Mule Deer - 196 Utah typical buck
Elk - We’re Talkin’ Big Bulls - The Elk of 2006
Predators - Calling All Bears
Shooting - Leupold’s VX-L
Corporate Interview - Sportsman’s Warehouse
ShadowCamo Featured Story - Potential Idaho State Record Archery Whitetail Deer
Mule Deer Watch - Speed Kills
Nuge Factor - Ted Nugent Keeps It Fun
Dueling Duo - How Young is Too Young
Ask Mr. Mule Deer - Ask the Expert
Fresh Sign - Latest News and Insights
Sound Off - The Good, Bad, and the Ugly (your comments)
