The reason i love option 2

[tstewy]

Option 2 is good fgr one thing and one thing only micro managing that is the begining and end.

1 Winter kill if there is a massive kill off like in 2007 how else do you adjust the tags match the amount of kill off in a specfic area. if you dont cut than you put way more pressure on the deer herd. There is not the same winter kill on the ss as there is 9 mile etc.

2 Loss of habitat it will ensure when there is a loss of habitat that all the hunters will not be pushed into a few select areas. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing way to many hunters in an area. Those who hunted three corners area last year on opening day can attest to that. By the way who ever thought of two opening days last year you need to go back to school.

Those are two pros of micro managing having said that her a some things that i think need done.

1 HWY fencing i would like to see as much money pored into this as anything else.

2 Predator control i think they need to have an increase in mt lion tags bear tags and more helicopter shoots. We as sportsman should also look at doing more prdator hunts look at the phesant and you will see the mule deers future.

3 Habitat what really can we do maybe someone can be a be a fire bug that might do some good but the truth is as our states pop grows habitat is going to continue to be lost. So what are some things that we can really do that will help.

Also the 18 buck per 100 does good idea but lets get some real numbers and start at like 15 and get good accurate counts of bucks and does.

 

[southslope82]

Amen to pretty much your whole post... I think that people should focus strictly on the Coyote before they blame cougars and bears. But a Mule Deer/ Other Big game website, What else could I expect. Try going to www.biggamehoundsmen.com and putting a post against Lions/Bears like that you might get a little different view. -just sayin- But option #2 I like out of the 3 by far. For all the reasons mentioned above

 

[tstewy]

I agree i think that there needs to be a big focus on coyotes first and the other second. I forgot to mention i think hwy mortality and predation are the two major reasons for decline i think habitat is a contributor but not the main factor.that also being said if we had more winter range there might not have been as bad as kill off in 07-08 winter so who the hell knows.

 

[justr_86]

sit back and look at the big picture.. Flying around and shooting coyotes isnt very cost effective, 3-4 dogs for a $5,000 flight? And they only fly around sheep herds, maybe a cattle herd while calving. option 2 doesnt do anything for what you said. The division already manages unit by unit not region by region. With option 2 all your doing is taking hunting opportunity away from people. Option 2 will not up deer numbers it WILL hurt them.

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

Hunters aren't the problem, but people with the PETA mind-frame will tell you this. Many MM users are blaming the deer herd on the amount of hunters in the field.

One post said "We rape and kill everything that is left."

Sounds like to me we have a lot of MM users that are PETA members.

Hunting ONLY bucks doesn't affect the overall health of the deer heard because there are plenty of bucks to breed the does.

 

[elkun]

all you no 2 guys. put up or shut up' no mater what happens at the board meeting. you guys dont put in for deer for the next 3 or 4 years.that means out of state too..hum..thought so.cutting the number of hunters is just what the anties work every day for. ..........

 

[brutus]

Just once id like to hear what theElitehornhunter and justr-86 think would actually help the deer herd instead of "waa,waa,waa i wont get to hunt every year and thats not fair we. Option 2 does nothing to help the herd".

Well wy dont you enlighten me and everyone that agrees with opt#2 to what it will do to hurt the health of the herd??

At least opt#2 actually applys the individual stats gathered to the specific units they were gathered from and not lumped in with 6 other units that have totally diff problems affecting they're deer population. HOW DOES THAT HURT???

 

[ELKOHOLIC]

I thought you did a good job of explaining your position tstewey. And then you have guys come on here and say it wont work instead of disputing the reasons you listed.

 

[Packout]

LAST EDITED ON Nov-21-10 AT 10:24AM (MST)[p]tstewy- You do understand the UDWR already manages unit by unit for the overall herds, right? So they can implement most of the strategies you laid out under the CURRENT Mule Deer Management Plan. Habitat, predator management, highway fencing, seasonal road closures, micro-struggling units, etc are all in the current Plan. The current proposal only deals with bucks and will do nothing to address most of your concerns.

Having issues with the UDWR's data will not go away with option 2.

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

The top two priorities for deer management in Utah SHOULD be:

1)Recruitment/retention of deer into the herd.

Recruitment comes from ONE source; does giving birth to healthy fawns that survive and reach adulthood.

Retention comes by having habitat in place that allows a maximum number of DOES to survive and give birth to fawns.

2)Recruitment/retention of deer hunters year in and year out.

Recruitment comes from allowing wishful deer hunters to, get this, HUNT! It is impossible to recruit new hunters into the mix if they can't obtain a permit on a regular basis.

Retention comes from allowing existing deer hunters to, get this, HUNT! How many people will stay interested in hunting and bring their children into the sport if they can't obtain a permit on a regular basis?

 

[justr_86]

I said it in the other "why I love option 2" post. But here goes again.

18-25/100 ratio is not healthy herd numbers. The bucks don't have fawns so all they do is take food away from pregnant does. In a hard winter there is less resource for them so we have a high winter kill year and we are not able to recover as fast if at all.

If your a cattle rancher how many bulls do you keep? Just enough to breed the heffers so you don't have more worthless mouths to feed. Right? Or is hay (winter feed) cheap enough you can afford to be reckless and kill the whole herd?

It says above the options on the dwr website that this does nothing to help deer numbers. Just changes the way you hunt your buck. I'm not willing to do the damage to hunting in utah.

Instead of cutting off hunting opportunity why don't we work on the things that are actually effecting deer numbers, no more bandaids!

1.Winter range, improve and give better access for the deer to have a fighting chance. Fences along highways with animal overpass's or underpass's to cut down roadkill and keep access to winter range for them.

2. Predator control would be great. Next to impossible. To suppress coyote populations we would have to kill 75% of all coyotes for 5 years to cut them back to where we could stay on top of it and then its still really tough! Lions are a little easier to get numbers down but without cooperation from houndsmen it will be tough if not impossible.

3. Elk, bigger animal that competes for a resource. Who wins that fight between the elk and deer? Deer are pushed higher into deeper snow or lower onto the highways or towns where they are killed for being "problem animals" or hit by a car. Deer are a smaller animal easier for lions and coyotes to kill so who gets eaten first?

The good ol days in the 60s are over. What's changed? Our elk herd was slim to none giving deer a better chance to survive a hard winter even with the 200k+ hunters in the field each fall. We had a lot better predator control, I wasn't around but the old timers say it was very very rare to see a lion track, never a lion and coyotes were something you heard off in the distance from time to time if you were lucky. We have a lot more houses/business's on prime winter range. We have more highways with 500 times more traffic. And we have more winter browse being taken out for agriculture and then when the deer show up they get shot and that needs to stop too.

I'm all for the wasatch extended archery, basin extended deer needs to go.

I feel all big game hunts should be over by oct 31st to keep harrassment down. The late cow and doe hunts should stop! Let them keep the fat reserves they have during and after the rut. They don't need to be chased or shot then.

Don't cut hunter opportunity out, if that happens we all lose! Manage for a healthy herd and the numbers and big bucks will follow!

 

[justr_86]

There's a big difference between Colorado and nevada vs Utah. They have a lot more winter range that is virtually untouched as compared to utah so they can sustain more animals. Utahs winter range is disappearing fast, so our herd numbers drop.

 

[brutus]

First off if a cattle operation was in the bull market they would want more bulls to sell because thats were they're revinue is generated. They would only keep enough cows around to make more bulls. Second, what makes you think colorado has a bunch of unused winter range, thats complete BS. Third you made my point for me about habitat being an overated issue and a very distant problem to predators. Nevada has a ton of winter range and they're not breaken any deer population records are they. The difference is they manage what they do have towards what sells and what people hunt BUCKS. When is the wildlife board going to hear your opt#4? Just curious cause i didnt hear it presented at my rac and after all you said we cant keep changin plans every year cause that hurts mule deer. It seems to me all you know is whats happening up north and your projecting those issues statewide. Just because northern is running out of winter range doesnt mean the southern part of the state is no matter what the educated idiots at the DWR say

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

LAST EDITED ON Nov-21-10 AT 02:05PM (MST)[p]"First off if a cattle operation was in the bull market they would want more bulls to sell because thats were they're revinue is generated. They would only keep enough cows around to make more bulls."

The Rancher would keep very few bulls because he would want to keep as many cows as he could that would give birth to more bull calves that he could sell. Having more bulls than is needed is just a waste of money.


"Just because northern is running out of winter range doesnt mean the southern part of the state is no matter what the educated idiots at the DWR say"

Then why isn't there more deer in the Southern Region if the winter range is so great. Where are all the fawns and does going?

 

[brutus]

Just curious if you've ever noticed youth hunting in nevada were its not if they see a 4 point its how big. That to me is what hooks the youth to hunting for life not hunting for years without seein a big buck to get your heart pumpin. they might hunt for a few years and get disinterested after the same old thing. Hide and watch, I got a suspicion thats what hooked most of us was the monster that got away and most kids growing up now prob wont experiance that.

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

Not true, I know of many hunters that their first buck was a 2 point, and they're still happily hunting now for many years.

 

[brutus]

and what are we trying to sell ie hunt, does or bucks?

 

[brutus]

Coyotes plain and simple not habitat. But we cant control them right so were does that leave us?

 

[justr_86]

Hey how bout a little sex ed brutus. Where do babies come from?

We are working for a healthy herd, and more deer with bigger bucks will follow. These are some steps to get there.

Your a walking contradiction.

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

If you want more bucks then you want more does giving birth to more fawns= MORE BUCKS.

Come on that part should be common sense to you.

 

[brutus]

I already spelled it out for you in your 10/100 ratio. Even if you increase your herd size to carrying capacity you'll have less bucks than you do know. Your still assuming that your DWR can grow Utahs deer herd. You got more faith in em than i do.

I'm done trying argue with you. I just hope sometime you decend into reality.

 

[TheElitehornhunter]

So why would having more bucks than is needed to breed all the does increase the herd a lot better?

Brutus serious question.......Do you know where fawns come from?

 

[justr_86]

+10 elite.

Brutus your argueing with yourself, your not bringing up any valid points. Or bringing up any solutions or telling me where number 2 is going to increase our deer herds. Have you even read the options. It is pretty clearly deleniated that there is no intention to change the herd numbers but simply to change the buck to doe ratio and the way bucks are hunted in the state.I think everyone would agree the the overall objective of the sportsmen is to increase the population numbers and as defined by the option definitions.....this is not tied to that objective in any way. An option 4 is an excellent idea and maybe collaboratively we can come up with one that is alligned with the real objective...our suffering herd.

 

[tstewy]

I understand points of both arguments. I personally feel that the dwr completly miss counts there herds and buck to doe ratio when they say the ss has 12 buck per 100 does maybe they are checking fawns for nuts or something. The reason i for micro is when they did have a 95% fawn loss and 75% yeraling loss in 07-08 winter they did nothing having that loss on the ss and not cutting tags is crazy i feel that if the dwr would not have screwed the pooch that winter we would not even be having this conversation. By the smaller units if an area has the following problem happen it will be in th open and easier to fix. But the whole 18-25 thing lets get serious try getting it to a real 15 first.
1 winter kill if we have a bad winter tags can be cut to ensure enough breeding bucks, i would like to see us have 12-15 2.5yr old bucks to bread i just dont trust a buck with milk on its lips to get it done.

2 Hwy mortality until we get this under control our herds will not grow. Howy many dead deer do you see from Fruitland to Roosevelt. i bet you the number of deer killed on 40 is pretty close to the amount killed by winter mortality.

3 predators can we use posin please that is the only cost effective way hell my grandpa used to be gov traper how may do we have now.I bet it is less than it was 60yrs ago when he trapped in the books.

4 Habitat we have pored a ton of money it lop and scatter etc chain out what ever etc i think we need to do controlled burns. Probly cheeper and not to give good advice but deer and elk love burns a year after they happen look at the areas in the books now that had the big burn.

5 accurate counting and harves stats they are bs now and that needs to change.

By micro managing in my mind you can adress these problems better on herd by herd basis which in a genral unit you can but it is alot harder the dwr lumps deer in stawberry with deer in the gorge 15 buck per 100 so lets count that as good and the same amount of tags need to be issued. but the deer herds each have diffrent strugles that is why i am for micro.

 

[justr_86]

Tyson, deer are managed by subunits now. Why was south slope vernal a 3 day hunt and the rest of the NE unit 5? Cutting tags is cutting opportunity which takes away support.

A bulk of the hunters hunt the same area year to year. Some jump ship but how many people know how to hunt every mtn on the ss effectively? They dont....

option 2 is not the answer, raising buck numbers is not the answer. Lets change the direction of our money and work on the stuff we obviously agree on, habitat, predators, roadkill.

Dont take away opportunity or we turn it even more into a money game or sport for the rich.

 

[brutus]

You are right everybody else is wrong. Oh Oh wait i forgot elite is also right too. No comprimise and opt#2 sucks and all other suggestions are not helping the herd.

Happy now?

 

[justr_86]

That's the smartest thing you have said all day!

 

[brutus]

Thought youd like that.

 

[justr_86]

Brutus, do you underatand the options? What are you looking for out of deer hunting in utah? How is option 2 going to make it better? How about you give some reasoning behind what your saying. Or are you just trying to stir the pot?

 

[smiths10]

But if there is no deer to hunt, that would loose recruiters as well.
Patience is an attribute to a good lifetime hunter. But if there no reward for your patience why bother.
I feel your pain, but option 2 is better than what DWR has been doing.

 

[brutus]

tryed that. didnt help. you dont listen or dont want to listen so i'll worry about it after the board votes. and yes i do understand the options thats why i want smaller units. better management

 

[justr_86]

Where? All your doing is trying to call elite and I out on what we think will help, I havent seen anything from you.

 

[brutus]

Read very carefully and slowly.

Already taking stats from micro-units dont throw in a heap of five and not control were anyone hunts. controling and making you hunt a specific unit will help divide up pressure and fend against over harvest of a specific unit. Still with me? Managing smaller units allows to control the isolated issues that impact that areas deer population. Because surprise beaver has a different priority level on highway mortality than southwest desert. Ive never seen a wild horse on beaver either. Yet, yet their are both managed as one ie the southern region. This seems to be were I lose you cause you seem to think they already manage them individualy.

You say you want an overall population growth. So do I, but i'm not confident our current DWR and their educated idiots (bought and paid for biologist's) have any idea how to grow a mule deer population. Coyotes IMO are the #1 problem with fawn recruitment not habitat. Thats why no matter how much great habitat there is deer populations continue to fall across the west. They're is more coyotes now than ever before. This is another disagreement we have.

You think to have a healthy deer herd we only need 8-10/100 average. I disagree with you and your biologists that say that. I dont know how you think a 1-2 year old has enough sheer bulk and fat reserves built up to breed does and chase other bucks off for 1-2 months and be able to survive the winter. You need mature bucks to be doing the breeding because they have the bulk and the fat build up to be able to handle this. I also dont think a 1-2 year old is ultimately mature enough to breed that many does, so you end up with second cycle does and later fawns that are more prown to winterkill.

Even if (and thats a big even) the DWR figures out how to build the doe population, with 8-10/100 you still wont have as many bucks to hunt as you currently have. Bucks are what people hunt and ultimatley higher buck/doe ratios offer more oppurtunity to hunt. Yes i "seriously know were bucks come from" and so long as carrying capacity allows and doe hunts are brought to a hault having a higher buck/doe ratio wont hurt a thing. Colorado has done alot better since they limited buck harvest and went to 25-30 bucks/100 does on average. If you dont beleive me just go hunt there one time and you'll see what im talking about. Why do think thats the hunt that was featured on roghin it outdoors. BTW colorado I believe doesnt issue doe tags unless that unit is over objective. cant say Utah does that.

We were given 3 options to choose from at my rac meeting. Never said they were perfect infact I would like to see the money that was spent on habitat be spent on predator control and i think you would see more results in fawn recruitment. But thats not even part of the options neither is doe hunts (hope you get this fired up come the antlerless racs) so i chose the best option for closely managing deer according to their specific problems in their specific area. Dont know whats so hard to understand about that. BTW that option is opt#2.

Sorry so long,but you asked for it and hopefully you read it carefully.

 

[theox]

deer hunting is not the same as ranching. first off its true you need less bullls to breed cows. we go for 1 bull to 15-20 cows,so 5-6 per 100 cows. however they are in a controlled enviroment. they are all put in a pasture say several thousand acres so that fewer bulls can find the cows to breed, in return needing far less bulls to do the work as if they were spread throughout millions of acres like deer are. second its nothjing like cattle ranching because the ranchers are selling there calf crop after they are weaned, ( well under a year old). where as deer hunting is taking out the bucks so if your down around 10 buks per one hundred does the chances all does will get bred is far less than if there were 18+ per 100 does. in return you should get a better fawn crop!

otion 2 micro managing is gonna help the deer herd out tremendously. look at new mex, colo,nev. it works! it allows you to manage your herd more precisely. i understand there will be a cut in tags but that is not gonna last forever. if the deer are managed more precise than the numbers can and will grow. those tags should come back up in the next several years.

the problem with utah is they're managing for the dollar intake not THE ANIMALS.

justr !!! you also said the dwr manges for unit to unit . that is false! sure they limited the amount of days that can be hunted on units like the monroe but they didnt limit the number of hunters that can, so i bet that did very little to get pressure off the deer on monroe for those 3 days. it also made it where hunter on the monroe unit would be less picky.

by regional hunting like they do now you cant control where hunters concentrate. so a unit thawt is over object or under object cant have tags cut or raisedd to help the PROBLEM!

i hunt in 3 or 4 diff herd units every year its gonna suck cause i wont be able to anymore but the deer herd is gonna be helped out big time so im not complaing. ill gladly chose one unit if i get to see a stronger deer herd.

 

[brutus]

Theres also a great article in the jan/feb 2010 Muley Crazy written by Dr.Charles Kay titled "The Kaibab Deer Incident" that talks about the effects of limited hunting and predator control in a given area. Plus other proven managment practices.

Less predators=more deer.

 

[brutus]

Also check out Dr. Charles Kay's "How to grow trophy mule deer" article also in Muley Crazy Nov/Dec 2008 issue. He talks about the effect of higher buck/doe ratio on overall health of immature bucks.BTW you can also google it as well.

 

[justr_86]

>Already taking stats from micro-units dont
>throw in a heap of
>five and not control were
>anyone hunts. controling and making
>you hunt a specific unit
>will help divide up pressure
>and fend against over harvest
>of a specific unit. Still
>with me? Managing smaller units
>allows to control the isolated
>issues that impact that areas
>deer population. Because surprise beaver
>has a different priority level
>on highway mortality than southwest
>desert. Ive never seen a
>wild horse on beaver either.
>Yet, yet their are both
>managed as one ie the
>southern region. This seems to
>be were I lose you
>cause you seem to think
>they already manage them individualy.

They are managed individually. Different sub units have different season lengths if ratio's are down. The amount of hunters is a small problem compared to WINTER RANGE and predators take problem number 2.

Where people have a problem making that connection is OVERALL numbers are down on almost every unit statewide. What I want to see happen is all of this happen in one swoop, give the deer a fighting chance on winter range, give access to more winter range, and improve the range we have. Deer are browsers and browse takes longer to grow than grass. All the while figuring out a better way to take care of predators.

Heres an example from your neck of the woods. From the circleville exit to cedar city (give or take a mile or 2) all the deer and elk from fishlake, boulders, cedar mtn etc winter in that area. But they are stuck on the east side of the freeway so they are at objective because thats all the winter range they have access to will handle. Why not build some under or overpass's for the deer to get across the freeway to get to the west side, the huge vast sagebrush flat and foothills can support A LOT more animals!

We have winter range that the animals dont have access to.


> You think to have a
>healthy deer herd we only
>need 8-10/100 average. I disagree
>with you and your biologists
>that say that. I dont
>know how you think a
>1-2 year old has enough
>sheer bulk and fat reserves
>built up to breed does
>and chase other bucks off
>for 1-2 months and be
>able to survive the winter.
>You need mature bucks to
>be doing the breeding because
>they have the bulk and
>the fat build up to
>be able to handle this.
>I also dont think a
>1-2 year old is ultimately
>mature enough to breed that
>many does, so you end
>up with second cycle does
>and later fawns that are
>more prown to winterkill.

I never said 8 I said 10 will do the job, you bring up a valid point of area they have to cover to a point. Deer rut in the same area every year so they make it to there and do their best.
10 is what is needed for optimum herd health w/o other issue thrown in so lets go for 15/100 that covers them on area looking for does and hunter harvest, more would be great when we get our herds established but until then the pregnant does and fawns need the food more. If we get access to improvements to our winter range we can have more deer but until then we stand to do permanent damage that will take years to recover by over grazing the winter range.


> Even if (and thats a
>big even) the DWR figures
>out how to build the
>doe population, with 8-10/100 you
>still wont have as many
>bucks to hunt as you
>currently have. Bucks are what
>people hunt and ultimatley higher
>buck/doe ratios offer more oppurtunity
>to hunt. Yes i "seriously
>know were bucks come from"
>and so long as carrying
>capacity allows and doe hunts
>are brought to a hault
>having a higher buck/doe ratio
>wont hurt a thing. Colorado
>has done alot better since
>they limited buck harvest and
>went to 25-30 bucks/100 does
>on average. If you dont
>beleive me just go hunt
>there one time and you'll
>see what im talking about.
>Why do think thats the
>hunt that was featured on
>roghin it outdoors. BTW colorado
>I believe doesnt issue doe
>tags unless that unit is
>over objective. cant say Utah
>does that.

I'm against doe hunts, always have been. Colorado has more/better winter range to support the higher numbers! Utah only issues doe tags if they are over objective for what the range will support or if they are "problem animals" which raises another problem in utah. I dont know if any other state pays landowners for damage animals do and if it gets bad enough they just shoot them. Just shooting them is getting to be the norm as its more cost effective. But we are killing our herd while they are on winter range and it needs to stop.


> We were given 3 options
>to choose from at my
>rac meeting. Never said they
>were perfect infact I would
>like to see the money
>that was spent on habitat
>be spent on predator control
>and i think you would
>see more results in fawn
>recruitment. But thats not even
>part of the options neither
>is doe hunts (hope you
>get this fired up come
>the antlerless racs) so i
>chose the best option for
>closely managing deer according to
>their specific problems in their
>specific area. Dont know whats
>so hard to understand about
>that. BTW that option is
>opt#2.
>
> Sorry so long,but you asked
>for it and hopefully you
>read it carefully.

Option 1 2 or 3 doesnt do anything to increase deer numbers all it does is change the way people are able to hunt. Which we all agree is the smallest problem we have. They do nothing to help the OVERALL HERD. It is not a step in the right direction, it does no good all it does is take away opportunity and support and that will be the end of hunting in utah. Until we address the problems we both stated above we will be heading in a downward spiral. These options are going in the wrong direction.

 

[justr_86]

Hell I will gladly donate my time to help build some fence along highways, Walk around with a chainsaw doing lop an scatters. And whatever else will help.

I already spend alot of time hunting coyotes usually killing between 15-25 dogs from aug-march. Along with trapping raccoons and skunk and fox to help the pheasants. In doing that I have some experience but there are alot of educated coyotes and fox and lots of farmers that wont let anybody hunt on their land making it really hard to do too much good. The indian land in northern utah is impossible to get access to hunt varmints on also.

 

[brutus]

like i said, tryed that ,didnt help! I'm not going to change your mind and your sure as hell not changin mine.