Idaho Cuts Deer Tags Due To Harsh Winter

[TOPGUN]

Updated Idaho Fish and Game information on mule deer population status and over-winter survival shows high fawn mortality in some areas of southern Idaho.

Overall, over-winter fawn survival among 15 study areas is the lowest since we began monitoring; 69 percent of radio-collared fawns had died by April 30. Mule deer fawn survival was lowest in the McCall-Weiser, at 9 percent, and the Island Park, at 18 percent, areas.

Because of the below normal over-winter survival of mule deer in some areas of Idaho, the commission approved the following reductions to tag numbers set in the 2011 big game hunting seasons and rules booklet and the Landowner Appreciation Program brochure:

Hunt Type - Hunt Number - Hunt Area - Unit(s) - Proposed Change
?Controlled - 1039 - 60-1 - 60, 60A, 62A - Reduce tags from 50 to 25 (buck only).
?Controlled - 1040 - 62 - 62 - Reduce tags from 30 to 15 (buck only).
?Controlled - 1042 - 67 - 67 - Reduce tags from 40 to 20 (buck only).
?Controlled - 1047 - 22 - 22 - Reduce tags from 350 to 150 (antlerless hunt).
?Controlled - 1049 - 31 - 31 - Reduce tags from 350 to 150 (antlerless hunt).
?Controlled - 1050 - 32 - 32 - Reduce tags from 450 to 225 (antlerless hunt).
?Controlled - 1051 - 32A - 32A - Reduce tags from 450 to 225 (antlerless hunt).
?Controlled - 1062 - 60-1 - 60, 60A, 62A - Reduce tags from 50 to 0 (antlerless hunt).
?Controlled - 1063 - 60-2 - 60, 61, 62A - Reduce tags from 400 to 40 (either-sex hunt).
?Controlled - 1064 - 62 - 62 - Reduce tags from 100 to 10 (either-sex hunt).
?Controlled - 1066 - 67 - 67 - Reduce tags from 75 to 20 (either-sex hunt).
?Controlled - 1088 - 64 - 64, 65 - Reduce tags from 50 to 10 (either-sex hunt).


?LAP - TBD - 22 - 22 - Reduce tags from 35 to 15 (antlerless hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 31 - 31 - Reduce tags from 35 to 15 (antlerless hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 32 - 32 - Reduce tags from 45 to 23 (antlerless hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 32A - 32A - Reduce tags from 45 to 23 (antlerless hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 60-1 - 60, 60A, 62 - Reduce tags from 5 to 0 (antlerless hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 60-2 - 60, 61, 62A - Reduce tags from 40 to 4 (either-sex hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 62 - 62 - Reduce tags from 10 to 1 (either-sex hunt).
?LAP - TBD - 67 - 67 - Reduce tags from 8 to 2 (either-sex hunt).
.
Idaho

 

[biggameballer]

Idaho is still giving out way to many antlerless tags!!

 

[Moosey69]

Idaho is still doing so many things wrong! The majority of the state is managed as unlimited OTC, even in some of the most historically great mule deer areas. Idaho has some great genetics in a lot of OTC areas and every year a few bucks make it to maturity, but unlimited OTC tags is no way to manage a majority of the state.

 

[springbear]

Depends on what it is you are managing for moosey...

Have you ever looked at the results from those surveys about hunter or sportsman "wants" that F&G does? It is obvious that the ability to hunt every year is more important than hunting every other or every few years for a better chance at a "trophy" buck...

 

[Idahoron]

Well we can look at it another way.
We all know that Idaho does have some good bucks still. But we also know that even two points are counted as bucks in the buck to doe ratios. The problem I see with counting on two points to breed is they are not as successful as an older, more MATURE, or as you say "trophy" bucks. By managing for our normal two point slaughter and over harvest in most units especially the OTC units, our breeding bucks are too young. Areas with truly low buck to doe ratios are seeing the does being bred on into December instead of November. This delays birthing and we end up with smaller fawns going into winter. Think about it how many of us see fawns with spots in September and even October? I know I have seen some. Well these smaller fawns just don't have the mass to survive a winter.
Yes people like to hunt every year I do too. But what is it doing to our herds? We have to get our adult buck numbers up. It is my opinion that fawn survival depends on Idaho having more "trophy" bucks as you call them. Ron

 

[UtahArcher77]

With that logic, places like the Book Cliffs and Henry's in Utah would be booming, but yet they continue to slide down hill. Is it possible that too many "Mature" bucks is also detrimental to fawn recruitment? The post cited 91% fawn mortality in one area. I am pretty confident that 91% of the fawns were not born too late. Mother Nature was the killer there, not the lack of "Mature" bucks.

 

[Cohntr62]

>Well we can look at it
>another way.
>We all know that Idaho does
>have some good bucks still.
>But we also know that
>even two points are counted
>as bucks in the buck
>to doe ratios. The problem
>I see with counting on
>two points to breed is
>they are not as successful
>as an older, more MATURE,
>or as you say "trophy"
>bucks. By managing for our
>normal two point slaughter and
>over harvest in most units
>especially the OTC units, our
>breeding bucks are too young.
>Areas with truly low buck
>to doe ratios are seeing
>the does being bred on
>into December instead of November.
>This delays birthing and we
>end up with smaller fawns
>going into winter. Think about
>it how many of us
>see fawns with spots in
>September and even October? I
>know I have seen some.
>Well these smaller fawns just
>don't have the mass to
>survive a winter.
>Yes people like to hunt every
>year I do too. But
>what is it doing to
>our herds? We have to
>get our adult buck numbers
>up. It is my opinion
>that fawn survival depends on
>Idaho having more "trophy" bucks
>as you call them.
>Ron


A fawn loses it's spots when it gets it's winter coat which always seems to be mid-September. The difference between a late-born fawn and normal ones is usually about 2 weeks, but in some instances can be a month. I agree that a month difference in age could make that fawn more susceptible to winter-kill.

 

[springbear]

IDron, I think you might have read a little to much into my use of the "trophy". I used it only to say that a trophy qualification is up to the individule hunter.

Besides that, I can't argue with a thing you said. I think it is a valid point, and does indeed have some research backing it. I know there is plenty of similar studies with elk, and it seems likely that Mule Deer would be similar.

UtahArcher, unless there are SOO many "mature" bucks on the bookclifs that they are actually over carriing capacity; and out compeating the young of the year for food, then I don't see how there could be any coorelation.

 

[beavis14]

the forky horn hunts don't work. there were far far more b &c entries in the owyhees BEFORE the forkey horn b.s.. if i don't get my muley tag i put in for i will take two tags to hunt whitetail. been doing this for a while now. the otc hunts aren't 10 % of what they used to be in the 80's & 90's. i refuse to climb everest to shoot a 120 class 4x4

 

[Moosey69]

Springbear I have never said it should be restricted so much that you would only be able to hunt every few years. And I would never say that because I want to be able to hunt with my family every year and I dont think it would have to be that restricted to improve the health of our herds.
I am talking about managing each area, be it a general OTC or a controlled hunt unit on an area by area basis. If you hunt Idaho you know that some of the OTC areas with good genetics can be an absolute zoo. The pressure in some of those areas needs to be spread out through out the state. F&G has tried closing roads and blocking vehicle access in some areas, but that only stops the honest folks and is not the overall answer. Each OTC area should have a limit to the amount of tags issued.
A lot of guys I know go every year and slam the first legal buck they see (normally a spike or 2pt), then buy a non-resident general tag looking for something better until the last few days and then shoot the next legal buck they see. So it should be no surpise that I am always amazed at how many dry does I am seeing in the last decade.
With the wolves, increased human population, habitat loss, vehicle colisions, mis-management ect... if we don't do something about it now some day soon it may be that we can only hunt every few years, and it for sure won't be on a "Trophy" hunt.

 

[TOPGUN]

I know this is not on deer and is also not in the area where we are talking about, but I thought I would do a c/p of this article I just read on another site about the northeast part of Montana so anyone thinking about a goat hunt out that way in the near future can make an informed decision. It looks real bad for at least the antelope up there!


Winter Impacts on Pronghorn Antelope Will Affect Some Hunting Quotas


GLASGOW, Mont. ? One impact of the severe winter of 2010-11 in northeastern Montana will be reduced numbers of pronghorn antelope that can be pursued this fall in some Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) Region 6 hunting districts, state biologists say.

?The past winter ranked as one of the most severe on record and included an incredible nine feet of snow in the Glasgow area,? said FWP wildlife biologist Kelvin Johnson. ?Severe winter conditions started in mid-November and extended through April in many areas. The hardest-hit big game species in Region 6 were pronghorn antelope, which have to migrate to survive when the snow gets too deep. Due to a wide variety of factors, many of them could not keep moving south to get out of the harsh weather and they simply died.?

An ongoing research study of pronghorn habitat selection and migration focused in FWP Region 6 and the Canadian province of Saskatchewan showed that last winter started a full month earlier than normal. Concurrently, many animals started to move south then to minimize exposure to extreme conditions.

?Traditional winter range located along the Milk River Valley was completely covered by snow, and very little forage was available,? Johnson said. ?Antelope began relying on haystacks but they suffered high rates of mortality there, in part because they're not adapted to digest that type of food. At least 200 pronghorn carcasses were found at one particular haystack alone.?

Johnson noted that the migrating pronghorn used county roads, highways and railroad tracks as travel corridors. Survey flights flown this spring confirmed that approximately 1,000 pronghorns were killed by trains in FWP Region 6. The animals often got crowded together on and along the tracks because they were unable to travel elsewhere in the deeply drifted snow.

Large herds of pronghorns also trekked across the frozen surface of Fort Peck Reservoir, and FWP Region 7 wildlife biologist Ashley Beyer said 2,500 to 3,000 of the animals are now stranded on the reservoir?s remote southern shoreline from the mouth of the Musselshell River east to Snow Creek. The animals are unable to get back to their traditional summering grounds now that the ice has melted. Johnson said many of these animals likely would have returned to Hunting Districts 670 and 630, which have experienced the most severe reductions in pronghorn numbers.

?Hundreds of antelope have also been observed stranded on the south side of the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge near UL Bend during the past few weeks, and they're trying to migrate across the reservoir,? added University of Calgary doctorial candidate Andrew Jakes, one of the leaders of the international study. ?Collaborators were able to document interesting behaviors in these groups, and in the observed cases groups swam approximately one-third of the way across but then turned back around with only the lead does successfully making it to the north banks of the reservoir.?

?As the snow has melted, the carcasses of hundreds of pronghorn antelope that had been trying to winter along their traditional winter range along the Milk River Valley have appeared,? Johnson added. ?Most of the local winter range that typically works for them was not available this year, and it is evident that the vast majority of animals that tried to stick it out died. It appears that if the antelope didn't migrate far enough south to the Missouri River Breaks or across Fort Peck Reservoir, they didn't make it.?

Johnson said these losses will have major impacts on how FWP manages antelope this year, and major reductions in pronghorn licenses should be expected in HDs 670 and 630 because populations must again be rebuilt. Final hunting quota numbers will be decided in coming weeks.

?Not all is lost, however,? Johnson said. ?In 2010, we had some of the best habitat conditions ever recorded in the summer and fall, and our antelope went into winter in the best body conditions possible. For the pronghorn that survived the past winter and soon will be dropping their fawns, there should be plenty of good habitat to live in again this summer. The record snowfall and persistent spring rains have made forage abundant almost everywhere.?

 

[destroyer350]

>With that logic, places like the
>Book Cliffs and Henry's in
>Utah would be booming, but
>yet they continue to slide
>down hill. Is it
>possible that too many "Mature"
>bucks is also detrimental to
>fawn recruitment? The post
>cited 91% fawn mortality in
>one area. I am pretty
>confident that 91% of the
>fawns were not born too
>late. Mother Nature was
>the killer there, not the
>lack of "Mature" bucks.

I don't agree at all that "Mature" bucks are deterimental to fawn recruitment, not in this sense or any other. But in this case winter is the cause, so having any late hunts buck or doe makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, in fact having unlimited OTC hunts make even less sense until deer have a chance to recover in units where deer numbers sucked anyway!!!

So in your senerio the Heneries and Books aren't working, I'll guarentee OTC for 4 months aren't working either. (By the way I'll trade you tags!!)

 

[GSJ]

IDFG did the right thing by capping tags in those areas. Good on 'em.






the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".

 

[BPKHunter]

LAST EDITED ON May-25-11 AT 05:57PM (MST)[p]I'm not so sure that the focus on "doe" hunts is that valid. I read the biologists report regarding Unit 45. Basically it says the theory there is to provide ample "antlerless" opportunities so that the herd is in line with the habitat's carrying capacity. The buck:doe ratio there is very high, which would be expected given the lack of any general hunt and limited buck tags. So they focus on keeping the doe numbers in "check".

In comparison to a limited trophy unit like 45, an OTC unit like 39 is where I hear the complaints about too many doe hunts. Yet, I have seen NO research to support that the unit can handle more population. I hear complaints about early season hunters who can't find enough deer, but come the first good snow and THOUSANDS come out of the timber and crowd the wintering grounds. There is NO extra capacity so why focus on more deer so that the carrying capacity is stretched. There are plenty of fawns born each year, the buck fawns just don't get to live past 1.5.

I don't see that there are many under-hunted OTC area's where the deer are better in either quantity or quality that we could use to "spread it around". So bottom line we get back to Trophy V. Opportunity. I am more interested in the latter, but the surveys say the gen pop wants it equal. I can't blame F&G for trying to give the public what they want.

We will never have MORE habitat, unless we institute capital punishment for stupidity and the population recedes. So the argument will not change and the the complaints will remain the same.

It's hard to compare different states because some just have better habitat, no matter how it's managed.

Just my opinion.....

 

[Moosey69]

So BPK you think that the declines over the last 10-15-20 years were inevitable and we and Fish and Game should just sit on our hands and do nothing!
"Yet, I have seen NO research to support that the unit can handle more population."
Have you seen one to the contrary? I have not either. To argue that most or even some of the OTC areas are at or near maximum carring capacity is ridiculous. Now some controlled hunt areas like 45 may very well be, but I dont see too many folks arguing that we should be cutting tags in 45.

"We will never have MORE habitat" So once again you say sit back and continue to let vital winter ground get turned into subdivisions. And why would F&G and sportsmans groups even bother trying to reseed and plant after burns or stop and turn back the spread of cheat grasses and other invasive weeds and some of the P&J thats spreading in the southern part of the state. We can improve and expand habitat, but it takes some work.

"It's hard to compare different states
because some just have better
habitat, no matter how it's
managed."
Its hard not to when you see how just over a decade ago Colorado was managed mostly on OTC units (like ID now) and just a short time after changing to managing on a unit by unit basis the Deer hunting improved drastically even in some areas that non-residents can draw every year and residents can as a second choice.
Or Nevada with a higher human population, a lower Deer population, and in my opinion not as great of habitat as Idaho, residents can still get drawn every year for a good archery hunt or an early season rifle in a good area all while trying for some of the harder to draw tags in the draw.
And there is some big controversy in Nevada now because this year their wildlife commision reduced the deer tag quotas almost across the board even though population estimates are up this spring. Which right or wrong there Idaho would never consider doing to its "cash cow" that I am afraid one day may get milked dry.
Just my opinion....

 

[GSJ]

Moosey you should check this thread out:

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID32/2320.html

Sometimes we only think the grass is greener.

F&G takes a step towards what you guys have been asking them to do and instead of giving them credit you ask for more restrictions. Wow, who would have predicted that?......

Better be careful what you wish for, someday you might get it.







the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".

 

[destroyer350]

Most of these hunts in eastern Idaho are late hunts, and the reduction is my oppinion is welcomed. And I realize that people have already applied for some of these hunts, so zeroing out all the permits wouldn't be right. But with that said, next year they should go alot farther with reductions on "LATE" hunts in these units, with unlimited either sex youth tags already,kids get their chance, so harvesting deer on the winter range makes little sense when they need time to recover.

Pick your weapon lets everybody have their opportunity!