Which do you choose?

[WapitiTalk1]

OK, for the sake this ultra scientific census, here are your two choices. We'll say you have the opportunity to hunt any two weeks of September in an area/state of your choice (OTC tags). Would you (or do you) hunt:

A. An extremely tough area (alder choked, up and down on almost every hunt, minimal trail access into the various hunt areas, limited shooting distances due to said thickness of the vegetation, and a fair share of predators (large kitties, wolves, perhaps brown bears). Area A has a lot of decent bulls (250+ but not many over 300) that are very vocal during the rut, from distances and particularly up close, resulting in almost daily encounters with singing elk, and, minimal hunting pressure.

B. A much easier to hunt area (better access trails, quite a bit of elevation change but predominately more open with timber stands, not much 10 foot brush, less predators). Area B has some record bulls (300+) but gets significant hunting pressure and the elk are not that vocal unless you're sitting on top of them, posing a threat. It is not uncommon to come across other hunters, up to ten, in the various areas you hunt while back in the bush during your two week hunt.

What do you cats say?

[Swede]

I would have to scout them. The attributes you describe don't mean much to me. The area I hunt is more like area B , but with few record book animals. I would rather hunt a few bulls in an area I know than a lot more and not know the specific land area and what the animals do.

[WapitiTalk1]

Sound wisdom Swede. Knowing an area intimately is paramount for recurrent success. Who else has some thoughts on the two area types/scenarios described?

[cnelk]

RJ
I would have to see/know some other factors about the areas that I use to determine if I hunt it.

2 weeks is a long time to spend in one area, especially with hunting pressure

2 weeks is a long time to spend in an area with tough hunting situations

[bnsafe]

when I was younger I would have said A, hands down no brainer. now that im a little older I would prob lean towards B. I hate pressure though, so, if I had a C I would choose a area with less elk, smaller bulls, but less pressure. also the grizzlies are a deal breaker for me. I don't make a good snack

[JohnFitzgerald]

RJ
I would have to see/know some other factors about the areas that I use to determine if I hunt it.

2 weeks is a long time to spend in one area, especially with hunting pressure

2 weeks is a long time to spend in an area with tough hunting situations

+1

[otcWill]

How much land we talkin? If there's room to roam then I would always choose A. I will do anything to avoid other hunters. They kill my zen

[Trumkin the Dwarf]

Do I have a second cow tag in my pocket? If so, I'd hunt area A until I punched the cow tag, then I'd go to area B and swing for the fences on a trophy bull.
Otherwise? I'd just hunt area A.

[tdiesel]

I will do anything to avoid other hunters. They kill my zen

+1
I would rather hunt 250 class bulls and not see another hunter than hunt 350 class bulls with hunters everywhere. I would probably choose A and if I had two full weeks to hunt I could probably talk myself into holding out for one of those few 300 class bulls. Atleast thats what i'll claim till I have a small bull standing 30 yards broadside. I get the fred eichler twitch and may just shoot it. If its that remote you'll probably find some of those old bulls and have many more encounters. All that adds to the experience

[ElkNut1]

#-1

ElkNut1

[elkmtngear]

Area A sounds like more my speed. I need more (unpressured) elk per acre to make a kill...and if they are vocal, that's a bonus!

[Lefty]

Which ever area has fewer guys messin around during the season.
Ad not on the wet side of the Cascade ranges
Good hunters, fine, But a couple nimrods racing ATV's , bugling in the open skyline
Pulling into the area at shooting time

[Swede]

[quote="cnelk"]

2 weeks is a long time to spend in one area, especially with hunting pressure.

Two weeks is hardly more than a good start. I spent 5 weeks out this year. After 2 weeks I am just settling into a routine, and have the realization I am on my on.

[cnelk]

Swede,
You situation is an anomaly.

2 full weeks is a long time to hunt elk. Most are committed for a week.

I have hunted the entire 4 weeks only one time.
It was an experience that I wont forget.
Maybe I will do it again sometime

But yes, you are correct.
In a new area, 2 weeks a hunter is just getting to know the terrain and patterns of the animals.
Not to mention the patterns of the other hunters.

But 2 weeks is all RJ gave us...

[Swede]

cnelk: You are correct. A lot of my experiences are an anomaly. I believe staying out 5 weeks is different for me than most people. I am totally at home there.

[BRazz]

Without any more information, I take option A. Pressure plays a bigger role where I hunt than many other factors.

[ORG]

which ever has the most elk

[Relentlessly Unforgiving]

"A" would be my choice! As a new elk hunter I need more time with the elk and less time with other hunters! This year we were out backpacking for 14 days and were able to get into them frequently! I hope grizzlies were not part of the mentioned "critters"!