LAST EDITED ON May-10-15 AT 12:29PM (MST)[p]
This is a continuation on the "one big X zone" thread but I wanted to share a conversation I had with the "Deer Program Coordinator" listed in the CDFW post. First of all, this proposal is real and you all need to check this out http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/hunting/deer/
My curiosity got the best out of me so I called the number listed and he (Stuart Itoga) was kind enough to call me back. Again, he did inform me that this proposal was indeed true, however he was clear to point out that this was just the first draft proposal and that nothing was set in stone. You can take that any way you want.
Here are the talking points:
(#1)I asked about the rumor of combining all of the X zones. He said that it does not propose that they combine ALL of the X zones, BUT...they are looking at the possibility of combining "some" zones. This is for ALL zones, not just the X zones. One reason for this is that their studies have shown that some deer, living in different zones, are spending their summers and winters in the same "general" areas. My comment to that was: That may be true but some of those zones are managed for older aged bucks and then some seem to be managed for more opportunity. His answer: Yes but, as per the recent hunter survey, the majority of people have indicated that more opportunity is more important than older/larger bucks.
(#2) He also commented on one thing that is very hard for many of us to give in to. He said, "we will never see the deer population come back to the glory days of the 60's!" He explained that we need to remember that things have changed dramatically since those days and that the tools needed to go back to those management practices are long gone. First...fire suppression practices are nowhere near the way it used to be and, now that so many people have moved into the fringes or forest itself...they simply cannot let the fires go like they would like. Second...the social and economic environment around logging has reduced logging to a little more than a crawl in this state. Third, you have the "voter" mandated ban on mountain lions, and also the restrictions on hounds for the bear hunts. Even some of the coyote hunts are coming under fire now too.
He was very clear to point out one particular thing that is a direct threat to ALL of us hunters. The environmentalists in this state are MUCH better funded and MUCH more organized and MUCH better represented when gathering input and at most meetings. He indicated that at almost all meetings there is a core group representing us hunters and, while they are very passionate about how they feel, the environmental/conservation groups are almost always better represented and more prepared with data. He made one comment that stuck with me..."You must realize that we sold 180,000 tags last year in a state with 40 million people, which makes hunters a tiny minority!"
(#3) Although the drought is getting all of the attention at this time?the weather patterns in general are much different.
(#4) He did make a comment that I wish he had explained better and that was. ?The deer herds are always going to be here, but we are looking more towards conservation practices than management practices.? I will admit...this comment concerns me.
In short...he said the proposal of changing to 10 DCU plans is real but just a proposal and still evolving. We may end up with 5, 10, 15, 30 or nothing. But again, the plan we have now was put in place in 1976...and MANY things have changed since then. Last, I asked...if things do change, how far out are we looking? He said..."Two to three years."
I believe change is coming?but what exactly that might be is still undecided. Whether or not you agree/disagree with this, please remember that I am just passing on what I was told!
One question I have: If they do combine some zones, how would they allocate tags and avoid overcrowding?
This is a continuation on the "one big X zone" thread but I wanted to share a conversation I had with the "Deer Program Coordinator" listed in the CDFW post. First of all, this proposal is real and you all need to check this out http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/hunting/deer/
My curiosity got the best out of me so I called the number listed and he (Stuart Itoga) was kind enough to call me back. Again, he did inform me that this proposal was indeed true, however he was clear to point out that this was just the first draft proposal and that nothing was set in stone. You can take that any way you want.
Here are the talking points:
(#1)I asked about the rumor of combining all of the X zones. He said that it does not propose that they combine ALL of the X zones, BUT...they are looking at the possibility of combining "some" zones. This is for ALL zones, not just the X zones. One reason for this is that their studies have shown that some deer, living in different zones, are spending their summers and winters in the same "general" areas. My comment to that was: That may be true but some of those zones are managed for older aged bucks and then some seem to be managed for more opportunity. His answer: Yes but, as per the recent hunter survey, the majority of people have indicated that more opportunity is more important than older/larger bucks.
(#2) He also commented on one thing that is very hard for many of us to give in to. He said, "we will never see the deer population come back to the glory days of the 60's!" He explained that we need to remember that things have changed dramatically since those days and that the tools needed to go back to those management practices are long gone. First...fire suppression practices are nowhere near the way it used to be and, now that so many people have moved into the fringes or forest itself...they simply cannot let the fires go like they would like. Second...the social and economic environment around logging has reduced logging to a little more than a crawl in this state. Third, you have the "voter" mandated ban on mountain lions, and also the restrictions on hounds for the bear hunts. Even some of the coyote hunts are coming under fire now too.
He was very clear to point out one particular thing that is a direct threat to ALL of us hunters. The environmentalists in this state are MUCH better funded and MUCH more organized and MUCH better represented when gathering input and at most meetings. He indicated that at almost all meetings there is a core group representing us hunters and, while they are very passionate about how they feel, the environmental/conservation groups are almost always better represented and more prepared with data. He made one comment that stuck with me..."You must realize that we sold 180,000 tags last year in a state with 40 million people, which makes hunters a tiny minority!"
(#3) Although the drought is getting all of the attention at this time?the weather patterns in general are much different.
(#4) He did make a comment that I wish he had explained better and that was. ?The deer herds are always going to be here, but we are looking more towards conservation practices than management practices.? I will admit...this comment concerns me.
In short...he said the proposal of changing to 10 DCU plans is real but just a proposal and still evolving. We may end up with 5, 10, 15, 30 or nothing. But again, the plan we have now was put in place in 1976...and MANY things have changed since then. Last, I asked...if things do change, how far out are we looking? He said..."Two to three years."
I believe change is coming?but what exactly that might be is still undecided. Whether or not you agree/disagree with this, please remember that I am just passing on what I was told!
One question I have: If they do combine some zones, how would they allocate tags and avoid overcrowding?
. The percentages given were similar to what you just posted, Deerdon - 10/15%. But what I do know is that the success rates have not changed significantly, statewide, since I hunted out there 30 years ago. They were lousy in the two-tag zones then, and they still are. The herd size is smaller, of course, but they issue proportionally fewer tags. That tells me that the two-tag deal means nothing to the population size. It is not a factor.
