How do governor tags etc, really help the wildlife?

[4000fps]

So many seem so eager to pat some rich hunter on the back, because he bought an expensive Governor's tag, thus "helping wildlife by pumping money into the system."

How can a measly $50k or $250k combat piss poor managment from the state agency? I don't care if a Governor's tag raises $1 million dollars, the DOW curtails any effort groups like MDF and RMEF put into place.

I know groups like the MDF obviously need money to complete projects, but it is hard to think positive when the DOW does everything they can to erase those efforts.

Mule deer numbers have been declining for decades now, and I personally believe one day they will become endangered. How can money combat failing policy? The Colorado DOW for example, does not really care about the herd numbers, or herd health. As long as they are selling tags, and making money, they are happy.

One fatal flaw in the Colorado deer numbers system:

1. No mandatory check in for harvested animals. For example, in some states, like Nebraska, it is mandatory to check in your deer. You simply take it to a business that sells licenses, and they fill out a quick card, band the antlers, and you are on your way. This gives the Nebraska DNR factual harvest data, not statistical.

There are other problems with the DOW, and part of it is to be blamed on the hunters...If our goal is to bring back deer numbers, one would have to ask, why are we even hunting mulies at all? What would happen if they literally shut the season down for 2 years? Assuming most healthy does would have one fawn, and taking out factors like predation, winterkill etc, the herd in theory could double in merely two years.

Instead, in 2008, hunters "reportedly" killed 35,552 deer in Colorado. 9771 were does, and 712 were fawns. One less extreme option would be to be quit issuing doe tags! Over 10,000 does/fawns were killed, how is that going to help deer rebound? The DOW and others will argue "some units have a lot of does, and it negatively affects buck doe ratios." What exactly is a bad buck/doe ratio? How about shooting less bucks, wouldn't that also change the ratio? And who are we to determine what an ideal ratio is? It seems like nature was managing the herds just fine, before man started hunting them in great numbers. The fact is, humans are deer's number one predator.

Back in the 60's, and even into the 80's, muley hunting was great in Colorado. Talking to old timers, they would see hundreds of deer in a day of hunting. Has the landscape really changed that much, that we couldn't support more deer? Development of winter areas in some units (mostly the front range, and I70 corridor), certainly has had in impact, but why are numbers dwindling in more remote areas too? Why did it seem to coincide with the season change in 1986, when the hunting season structure changed (mainly due to the urging of the outfitters), which more than doubled the number of days deer were hunted compared to 1985 and prior?

The herds have not rebounded yet. But... we still have just as damaging structures in place. Why did they create a 4th buck season? It doesn't take a good hunter to realize shooting bucks during the rut is not as hard as hunting them 2nd season. Some of those bucks become just plain stupid, even walking down city streets in the middle of the day looking for does. Yet, we don't rifle hunt elk during the rut, and they are at "record numbers"...? We are still shooting does, still shooting fawns, and now hunting bucks even later into the year. Wouldn't correcting those things be easier than what is looming in the future, an all out closure on deer hunting?

I actually believe the anti-hunters may be on the verge of learning our secret... Our age old arguement that hunting is needed to control deer numbers is obviously flawed at this point. Hunters better hope the antis don't ever do their homework, and research the numbers, because that arguement is going to get blown out of the water. When that happens, what excuse do hunters have? This is not the great depression, nor is it a third world country. People are not starving. Most don't "need" to hunt to survive. And the families that do really depend on the meat, should be the most alarmed at the failing polices.

The liberals obviously still buy into the hype, because they pushed for wolf introduction. Fact, wolves control herd numbers. Get enough wolves into the mix, and you don't need hunters, and as a bonus people don't "need" guns. All the liberals and antis would have to do, is look at the numbers. Deer numbers haven't rebounded, yet we still hunt deer. What is going to happen when an anti with a little money and power figures this out? Trapping was always viewed in a negative manner by the liberals, and look what happened to it. The antis got organized, and got an anti-trapping amendment put up for vote on the Colorado ballot in 1996. Trapping has been banned ever since.

The mathematical ability to draw a deer tag in most units has left most hunters frustrated. It is now becoming obvious that the current preference point system is a mathematial failure. Too many people now sitting on high points, and it will take more than a lifetime before they get cycled through for a tag. What is the answer according the DOW? A more complicated draw system. Wouldn't it be better to fix the managment policies, to increase herd numbers? More animals, means more tags, which means shorter lines.

In my opinion, at the minimum, we need to get rid of doe/fawn tags, and get rid of the 4th season, that would be a start. People need to reallize, nothing is permanent. Hell, even only offering buck tags for Colorado's second season for a couple years would have an exponential positive effect on buck numbers. We also need to take the business aspect out of hunting. It is a shame that outfitters and landowners have more of a voice on policy, than the hunters that fund the whole agency through license fees. (Don't even get me started on guys like Barf Carter, guys like him want anemic tag numbers, because it puts more money in his pocket.) I guess the real question is, what do hunters want? I would assume they would want a chance to go buck hunting every 1-2 years like the old days. I would assume they would like the chance to shoot a mature animal. Here is a reality check, that is never going to happen on the current path. We have been listening to excuses for 20 years now, isn't it time to organize, and force a change?

 

[greysriver]

I don't have all day to read your post, but to answer the first part of your question, NO expensive tags do ZERO for wildlife, in fact wildlife coservation sees ZERO!! dollars for these tags.

The state puts a buget together every year based on previous years lisence purchases etc. of say 1 million dollars, if they sell a tag for 250k it does not make the buget got to 1.25M dollars, they take the 250k and use it on roads and other state projects. All it did was take a tag away from one of us everyday guys. The state gives a budget, and no matter how much more revenue comes in, they don't spend it on wildlife conservation. They have done a great job of convinsing people that this raises so much money for conservation, well it did raise a lot of money for the state (good thing), but it went for something else not wildlife conservation.

 

[jcmuleys]

I am with you on some of your points. I agree that Colorado DOW needs to adjust there system for checking in deer other than a phone survey. The DOW does put tons of money into projects each year to increase habitat. A measly 50k will treat about 125 acres of p/j. I know because i do alot of projects every year. They treat thousands of acres each year. So some Gov tag money does go toward habitat improvements. My issue is the DOW and the BLM and the Forest Service all need to work better together. Most of the issues that i see deal with over grazing of public lands thus decreasing the winter range for the wildlife. The DOW will spend 100,000 dollars on a habitat project on BLM land and the BLM will let a sheep farmer graze the area till there is nothing left.
Colorado needs to start a management buck hunt just like Utah did. We can kill mature bucks in Colorado each year right now, but we need to improve the genetics. I asked one biologist last year why they issued so many doe tags for one unit. And i was told that the buck to doe ratio was off so they were going to kill some does rather then try to manage for more bucks by limiting tags a bit. Some areas only have good bucks because 90% of the unit is tough to hunt.Another problem with CO is our human numbers are increasing and our hunter numbers are increasing. So as those numbers climb our deer numbers can't increase to meet the hunter number. There are many factors that control the increase of deer numbers. Winter range carrying capacity is limited in most units. We would have to reduce cattle and sheep grazing.
You can not compare elk and deer management they are to very different animals.
This is a great subject and more hunters need to care more about deer management. And do what they can to help. If there is a meeting in your area you need to go. Less than 10% of hunters infuence the DOW and wildlife commission. That number needs to be like 85 or 90%. We will line up to go to a show and see what the newest gear is but won't walk across the street to attend a meeting about our wildlife. The only way we can get any of it changed is to work together and get involved.
JC
Colorado Hunting Consultants LLC
www.cohunthelp.com

 

[4000fps]

Greysriver: I know my initial post was long, so to summarize, money won't fix our current state of hunting. Policy change is what is really needed.

I appreciate the input, and I aggree with your assesment.

 

[4000fps]

JC, thanks for the input. One thing that is confusing is, I thought the states have claimed hunter numbers are down every year. Seems like I have noticed the opposite though.

I think the DOW needs to address each issue separately. You cannot try and change everything, and hope something works. The easiest change is season structure, and harvest total.

Sadly enough, development of winter range is happening on private land, and how do you stop a rancher from cashing in, by selling to a developer? Golf courses, and a "get rich quick" attitude from landowners is a whole separate issue from poor management.

I might get flamed for this, but since the DOW/DNR is a government agency, they don't always hire on merit, and are strangled with red tape.

One example...I was greeted by two dipschits on a quad this hunting season, in a closed area. I called the DOW and they were closed (why be closed on a Saturday during hunting season?). So I then called the state patrol. Since it wasn't an "emergency" they transfered me to another dept. They too were closed. So then I called Operation Game Thief. They didn't answer. Finally I got ahold of the BLM on Monday, and they told me since the quad traveled all the way to Forest Service property (even though they originated on BLM) it now became a forest service issue! Talk about red tape! I learned that if you want to poach, do it after 5:00pm or on the weekend. Then just use a quad to get it out, but make sure you travel over BLM and Forest Service both! LOL

 

[bucktaxi]

The statement I agree with the most is killing no does and no fourth season. That would be the easiest thing to manage for the Gov. agency. Everything else requires more money and we know how that goes here in UT.

 

[jcmuleys]

I have been working with the local BLM and FS rangers and they passed a law last year that they can enforce laws on each others land. This year i took pictures of atv's and the ohv sticker that were on FS property and turned them in that is the best way to do it. We have one ranger that covers tons of land and can't be everywhere and cell service sucks in the hills. But by law the BLM can write wildlife tickets and the DOW can write BLM tickets.
I think that if your going to have a fourth season hunt it should be archery only or something like that. I have not seen a giant buck killed in the fourth season and don't think that the fourth season hurts us as bad as over 300 tags in the 3rd that will get to hunt one week later next year, that crap fries me! Does the DOW not have a brain sometimes. This is where we all have to say something.
I am speaking of Colorado.
This needs to be one of those 45-55 post threads but it won't.
JC

Colorado Hunting Consultants LLC
www.cohunthelp.com

 

[4000fps]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-09 AT 01:50PM (MST)[p]JC, the problem is, most hunters only care about their hunt, not what is best for the herd. They do not have the foresight to realize, what is best for the herd will equal what is best for them.

They simply see the fourth season as a chance to finally shoot a big buck. Why not increase herd health, so that every season offers the ability of shooting a big buck? And you wouldn't have to wait 10 years to do it!

I even had friends tell me they wish the DOW would get rid of the 4th season, but not until they and/or their relatives had a chance to hunt it! That is being selfish, obviously people seek immediate gratification. If policies were changed, it could have a dramatic change in as little as 2-3 years.

 

[nontypical]

One important aspect no one is mentioning here is loss of deer habitat.The habitat has changed so much in the last 20-30 years.We are now looking at more elk-oriented habitat than deer-oriented.Wildfires should be allowed to burn when possible.P/J encroachment is occuring in previous sagebrush habitat.Deer need sagebrush,not P/J.I could go on...there are many factors involved;it's not a quick fix situation where decreasing tags or opportunity will necessarily help the situation.4000fps,you are right on the money with what you are saying,and I agree with most of what you say;however,IMO,there are many more factors at play here.I am philosophically opposed to the high dollar auction tags,but my reason is that they favor the wealthy over the rest of us.Most who are in favor of those tags (IMO)are those who benefit from them.That being said,no amount of money can ever repair the harm that years of mismanagement have created.

 

[sageadvice]

Great thread!!

Seems that there was an awful bad winter in Colo a couple years back that changed things in many areas as well, No?

I'm in favor of "some" high dollar tags being sold though i'll never be able to take advantage of them. The money has to come from somewhere. Keep the high dollars guys in check, let the little guy get out and hunt, allow the biologists and informed game officials make adjustments to tags as they see the need.

Joey

 

[HiMtnHntr]

A few other issues to consider. One of these relates to atv's, which you guys discussed. The problem there deals with enforcement. The FS and BLM simply do not have the manpower do deal with atv abuse on public land. Neither does the DOW for that matter. Related to this, much of our good deer country is extremely excessable for these atvs. Making more areas off-limits to motorized vehicle is good in my opinion. Limiting access in one way or another helps ease the pressure on deer, improves habitat, and allows for a more enjoyable experience.

The second issue deals with the DOW's method of macro-managing units. Some units are managed the same way, 5 or more units at a time covering millions of acres. Many of these areas range from high alpine to low winter range and foothill country. The herd characteristics differ widely between these areas. Some areas have high deer densities, some low. Some areas have high hunter density, some low. Yet, they are managed the same way in terms of availablity of tags, etc . . .

A third issue deals with hunter density. In areas with spotty public land that offer many buck tags, hunters are funneled into the few public land areas to hunt, while the private land sees little pressure and more big bucks. Yet, these areas are managed the same way. I know the DOW manages some special areas, so why not do this more often? More privateland only tags perhaps, and special regulations or use permits for some of the better, but smaller, public land chunks so that hunters aren't accused to grabbing eachothers azzes while they attempt to hunt.

Another issue is the surveys the DOW conducts. They manage according to these surveys, so it's important to get a word in when these opportunities arise. In one particular area, I asked the bio why so many buck tags were still being issued, and he told me that the hunting public communicated the desire to be able the get a tag every year through survey. Evidently some hunters feel lonely on the hill.

 

[Avsman]

All I have to say is just like amendment 14 the experts at the DOW that are paid to be educated on how to manage the herds need to be the authority on managing the population and by eliminating COs spring bear hunt outlawing trapping and running bears with dogs it has really hurt all wildlife in the state. The first thing they need to do is open the spring bear hunt get the bear numbers back down, let us start trapping again, this fixes the coyote and bobcat issue killing does and fawns. I just wish it was that simple, it seems like in CO they are more worried about protecting the predators then they are the prey and they want to reintroduce the wolf, if we get wolves in our country they wont last long, they will starve to death because we are almost out of deer, the elk are moving north west and all the farmers and ranchers are selling for high dollar and moving out of town.
I am sitting on 3 pts for deer I looked at the odds and it looks like I can draw 3rd season in about another 3 5 years ago I was drawing a tag every other year, I never did harvest a buck and have had 4 tags I was always holding out for a hawg another problem with having such crappy draw odds when someone has 4-5-6 years into a tag on the last day they are going to shoot the next legal buck they see, having no point restrictions on buck especially in trophy units it just hurts the quality of the unit in the long run, I would be just as happy seeing a 3 or 4 point restriction as I would limiting tags for a few years.
Like 4000fps stated in his first post the reason we hunt has changed from when we settled this country more and more people are hunting now to just have the chance at a trophy animal, and waiting their turn is no big deal but when the odds get so outrageous that they cant draw a tag in a lifetime then its time to start managing more units for trophy animals, and for the meat hunters out there start shooting more elk the CDOW says there are too many.
I dont know the answers but I think getting together and having a meeting with people from all aspects of the issue we can come to a logical conclusion. Ranchers, Outfitters, Conservation organizations, Biologists, Chamber of Commerce, ect they all have their own needs but the most important one is the herds need to sustain a healthy number to insure their futures.
Great Post.