Paunsaugunt cactus buck study

elkfromabove · Sep 3, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-03-16 AT 02:09PM (MST)[p]The UDWR asked for, and got from the Wildlife Board, some one-time (supposedly) permits (10) on the Pauns for a study regarding the unusual number of cactus bucks on that unit. 10 people in the depredation pool will each pay $80 and be accompanied by a UDWR employee or Alton CWMU personnel to shoot a cactus buck and provide samples (blood, tissue, lymph, stomach contents, sperm, etc.) for a study as to the cause of the phenomena per genetics, habitat, disease, nutrition, or what-have-you. No waiting periods or points are involved and the hunter gets to keep the deer sans the samples. The results, if they can be identified, should be interesting. Maybe Lonetree will have the last laugh (or I told you so) afterall. Or maybe we'll find some unintended consequences of trophy management. Or maybe not!

In any case, I, for one am looking forward to the study.

Edited: I found it interesting to learn that those cactus bucks are NOT counted as part of the buck to doe ratios, or in the case of the Pauns and Henrys, as part of the percentage of bucks over 4 years old.

fin little · Sep 4, 2016

Seems like the better option would be to ad 10 permits to the management hunt and make cactus bucks legal on that hunt. They have to check the deer in on that hunt. It could of moved some more people through the bonus point log jam. Accompanied by Alton CWMU personal, I get tired of certain private interests running the Paunsaugunt.

elktaker · Sep 4, 2016

>Seems like the better option would
>be to ad 10 permits
>to the management hunt and
>make cactus bucks legal on
>that hunt. They have to
>check the deer in on
>that hunt. It could of
>moved some more people through
>the bonus point log jam.
>Accompanied by Alton CWMU personal,
>I get tired of certain
>private interests running the Paunsaugunt.
>

Sound like the DWR wants to select the bucks for the study.

And would you shoot a cactus buck instead of a big management deer?

Muley_73 · Sep 4, 2016

Fin,
I agree 100%! I've always thought the cactus bucks should me included in the managment hunts. And yes I think cactus bucks would be targeted and taken on the managment hunt.

Bill_in_MI · Sep 4, 2016

I was happy to shoot mine on the next to the last day of the LE rifle hunt last year.

Saw quite a few during the hunt too...

dillon · Sep 4, 2016

Sign me up! I have seen some absolute monster cactus bucks on the Heaton CWMU. I doubt they are planning on letting these 10 hunters kill the big boys, but even a smaller cactus buck would be a great trophy.

Dillon
www.dillonhoyt.com

fin little · Sep 4, 2016

That would be the reason for the hand holding, god forbid a management hunter kills a cactus buck worth money.

Zeke · Sep 6, 2016

The "study" sounds interesting and the results might be surprising to some or all of us. I'll be watching for it.

I have a tag there this year but mine is the standard old variety so I can go ahead and shoot a nice slick 2 point with my muzzleloader.

Zeke

elkfromabove · Sep 6, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-06-16 AT 08:41PM (MST)[p]The bucks will indeed be selected by the DWR/Alton personnel, but I have no idea if the size of the antlers will be part of the criteria. All Shannon said was they need enough samples to do the study. Those bucks seem to be concentrated in several canyons/areas and my guess is that they'll take samples from different areas.

Those bucks may not be part of the management buck program, but they certainly are legal for the LE hunt. Trophies are in the eye of the beholder/hunter and one of those on the wall would attract as much or more attention than a "normal" one.

As for the "study", I'm particularly happy to see it. On the Mule Deer Committee, I tried (3 different times) to get them to include a section on nutrition to no avail, but maybe this study will delve into that and maybe we'll find some deficiencies or toxins that are causing the deformed antlers.

In any case, it will indeed be interesting.

hossblur · Sep 7, 2016

Do we really need this "study"? Who is funding it? Why? Declining deer numbers, CWD, and THIS is important? So if they find a nutritional link, then what? We spend money to irradicate it? You couldn't simply ask for samples? Or set up check stations? It had to be more tags? This is another in a long list of "studies" that might answer curiousity questions, but in the long run, accomplish nothing other than waste money, waste resources.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

elkfromabove · Sep 7, 2016

>Do we really need this "study"?
> Who is funding it?
> Why? Declining deer numbers,
>CWD, and THIS is important?
> So if they find
>a nutritional link, then what?
> We spend money to
>irradicate it? You couldn't
>simply ask for samples?
>Or set up check stations?
> It had to be
>more tags? This is
>another in a long list
>of "studies" that might answer
>curiousity questions, but in the
>long run, accomplish nothing other
>than waste money, waste resources.
>
>
The answer to most of your questions is: "trophy management". The focus is on the antlers and cactus bucks don't generate enough money on a Premium Limited Entry Unit to warrant their existence and they may be passing some genes onto the next generation. OR they may be sterile or impotent and are using up resources that a "good" trophy buck could use. In either case, they are nothing more than weeds that need to be eliminated. That's why "we" "need" this "study".

Who's paying for it? Who always ends up paying for it, directly or indirectly? Ten permits at $80 each equals the gas money the DWR spends to send their employees there, but the salaries, benefits, truck payments, equipment, lab work, etc. comes from you and me either through our licenses, permits or application fees OR in the form of Conservation or Expo tags taken from the public draw pools.

Robiland · Sep 7, 2016

>Fin,
>I agree 100%! I've always thought
>the cactus bucks should me
>included in the managment hunts.
> And yes I think
>cactus bucks would be targeted
>and taken on the managment
>hunt.

HOLY SMOKES, I agree with '73 on this one. Cactus bucks need to be targeted with the management hunts. Simple as that. I am also wanting to see the results of the study. I hope to be hunting down there in the next few years with my 11 points.

Vanilla · Sep 7, 2016

Regardless of the motivation for the study, shouldn't we want to know? Burying our collective heads in the sand when we believe their might be a problem doesn't seem like a good idea for any issue, including wildlife.

How does one get on this list? I've never done depredation pools.

YBO · Sep 8, 2016

If I don't find a 200" buck during my Pauns rifl hunt, I'll find one of those freaks and give the DFW the needed info. I've always been perplexed and intrigued by the supposed stags that chase/breed does and cast their antlers. Extremely interesting.

Hammnit · Sep 8, 2016

I had an archery tag back in '08. We saw 5 cactus bucks in 14 days of hunting and scouting, plus a dead one taken by a hunter. Most were up on top by Tropic reservoir. I'd only seen a couple in my whole life before that trip. I've always wondered why so many on one unit.

One of the bucks we saw was the infamous Black Magic, which was really cool to see.

hossblur · Sep 8, 2016

>Regardless of the motivation for the
>study, shouldn't we want to
>know? Burying our collective heads
>in the sand when we
>believe their might be a
>problem doesn't seem like a
>good idea for any issue,
>including wildlife.
>
>How does one get on this
>list? I've never done depredation
>pools.

I guess I am missing the "problem". The cactus heads on this unit aren't anything new. The pauns is still one of the better deer units in the country. Seems like the money, effort, and time would be much better spent on things that ARE a problem. Plus, I couldn't help but notice that a CWMU is involved. Unlike government(DWR) and as a buisness owner, buisnesses don't do things to lose money. Not sure what the angle is, or could be. But my spidey sense is tingling on this one.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

elkfromabove · Sep 9, 2016

LAST EDITED ON Sep-09-16 AT 09:53AM (MST)[p]>>Regardless of the motivation for the
>>study, shouldn't we want to
>>know? Burying our collective heads
>>in the sand when we
>>believe their might be a
>>problem doesn't seem like a
>>good idea for any issue,
>>including wildlife.
>>
>>How does one get on this
>>list? I've never done depredation
>>pools.
>
>I guess I am missing the
>"problem". The cactus heads
>on this unit aren't anything
>new. The pauns is
>still one of the better
>deer units in the country.
> Seems like the money,
>effort, and time would be
>much better spent on things
>that ARE a problem.
>Plus, I couldn't help but
>notice that a CWMU is
>involved. Unlike government(DWR) and
>as a buisness owner, buisnesses
>don't do things to lose
>money. Not sure what
>the angle is, or could
>be. But my spidey
>sense is tingling on this
>one.
>
>
>"The only thing that stops a
>bad guy with a gun
>is a good guy with
>a gun"

I think my prior post describes the "problem". There are "weeds" on that unit that are taking up resources that could better be used by "money" bucks. And my guess is that they are now increasing. When a DWR employee finds 20 of them in one canyon as stated, that's a canyon full of useless bucks that isn't going to be hunted with habitat that's being wasted. Think of them as depredation animals. They're eating up the profits. I said in my OP that the 10 permits are supposed to be a one time deal, but if they can justify issuing more permits to cull these freaks, then they'll gladly do it.

The angle: it's the bottom line, $$$$$$$$.

hossblur · Sep 14, 2016

I agree $$$$$$$$$$$$$$, but then thats the outfitters problem. If he/they want to fund a study good on them, but it aint the DWR job to make the outfitter more profitable. And thus, after a bunch of scientific theory on this post, we get to the real reason, $$$$$$$$$$. Again, deer problems state wide, DWR has no buisness burning money for this.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"