Wyoming Range Mule Deer Study

H

highfastflyer

Very Active Member
Messages
1,555
The Outstanding research and study done by University of Wyoming and funded by multiple foundations are to be commended. The head research Professor is an energetic and great communicator Dr. Kevin Monteith. He gives a presentation anyone who is interested in Mule deer research, hunting or curious about the Wyoming Range will find fascinating. This recent report given at the Wyoming Game and Gish Commission meeting on Jan. 18, 2018 is very informative and worth your time. Proceed to about the 1 hour and 55 minute mark, it lasts about 30 minutes. The whole meeting is worthwhile and lots happening currently with new proposals on limiting crossbows and new technologies and possible new Grizzly bear hunts in Wyoming. Check it out I highly recommend it. The Wyoming Range is in serious trouble but there is a glimmer of hope if we can keep elk populations heavily hunted and improve the range conditions and predator control. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HzvMirbLNMU
 
I agree that the research is very informative and very valuable. I do not agree that the Wyoming Range is in serious trouble. There are issues for sure and definitely room for improvement but as a whole this area is managed well. More than a glimmer of hope for this area.
 
Watch the 2hr 40min mark. It sounds like the fawns born this spring 2018 will have the potential to achieve huge buck status. This based upon the does amount of body fat when the fawn is born sets the babies trajectory for life (a bucks ability to achieve huge antlers). Going into this winter 2017 deer had a record amount of body fat (in western WY). Therefore, the fawns from this spring may have the potential to grow record antlers in 2023.
 
Found the info very interesting!! But disappointed in the turn out. From all the hunters in the hills chasing muleys I think more would have been there. Guess I'll turn into the commissioner video. Thanks for the link.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-18 AT 09:36AM (MST)[p]Thanks for the link. Some really interesting research that I think needs to continue for several more years.

The information on elk browsing the same diet as deer and how a doe's health affect their offspring's entire life growth potential was enlightening.

One piece I question is the theory that the WY Range deer came into better shape into the 2017/2018 winter because of the die off (less summer range competition). Seems to me that there's a lot of summer range country/food in that country; I think more data/monitoring years is needed to prove up this theory - hope they continue to fund this study.
 
I'd like to hear more about that too. I just don't see summer range competition. The summer range would support a huge herd. It's the winter range that seems to be the limiting variable.
 
From the meeting I attending the thoughts behind the herd being in better condition going into this winter was due to the following issues, 1)less summer range competition, 2)better summer range forage condition due to high snow fall the prior winter, 3)high number of still born and low birth weight fawns that died due to predation quickly after birth allowed the does to put on more body fat since they were not lactating and 4)"surfing the green wave". This was the tendency of the deer to slowly work their way up the mountain as the spring and summer progresses staying just below the snow line. The thought behind why this was a factor in 2017 was the much slower recession of the snowline because of the high snow fall. It allowed for deer to spend more time in some country that in other years they might pass through more quickly due to less snow cover. It was acknowledged that this last one needed more research. IIRC the scientist that presented in Pinedale would be doing this research over the next few years.
 
This was a good video. It confirms the Wyoming mule deer population was hit hard by the winter of 2016. Looks like the genetics are also permanantly affected in the deer born from that experience. However, in 2012 we should see some big bucks when the deer coming from this last years healthy crop begin to mature.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
I have no idea how you get that genetics were permanently affected by any winter. To the contrary at the meeting I was at it was said and repeated more than once the genetics in that heard are great and of course 1 of 3 thing it takes to make a great trophy buck. The other 2 being feed and age... So how is it you got out of that genetics were permanently altered because of a bad winter. I am sure glad the past bad winters did NOT alter the genetics....
 
Tknez, it is a well documented fact that poor nutrition in any biological organism has lasting Genetic effects upon several generations. Studies on mice show malnourished mothers who give birth have low birth weight and genetic disorders such as epilepsy, diabetes and brain, heart and muscle disorders. You can also research them Biology term Epigenetics which proves the environment and what our parents did have lasting Genetic effects for up to several generations. The Wyoming winter was so bad in 2017 that the fawns born that year are severely stunted and yes they will have genetic defects but hopefully we can have some more mild winters like this one. The competition for feed by domesticated cattle and sheep and an over objective elk herd on both summer and winter range along with increased predators and poor range conditions mostly due to long term drought and too many hunters are depleting this herd for the long term, now under our watch, sad to see it.
 
HFF,

What you stated is not consistent with what the Dr. presented to the Commissioners. Did you watch that portion?
 
HFF I don't know about the studies you are speaking of, but as mule creek states above that is in direct contrast to what was spoke of at the meetings.
 
Maybe we are saying the same thing just in different ways. At 2:37 Dr. Moneteith states that NUTRITION is the driving force of large antlers. He also said around 2:29 that Nutrition was poor in 2016 and Summer Ranges were poor and they observed significant increases in fawn mortality from 2014-2017. The herd may have reached its capacity due to poor summer and winter range nutrition. The highlight was what few does survived in Dec. 2017 they had significant increases in body fat some of the fattest deer he has ever observed. Regarding genetics it is a well documented fact that poor nutrition and malnourishment have genetic implications lasting several generations in almost any biological organism. I recommend you look at the Biological terms of Epigenetics which are well documented displaying how genetics are affected by the environment. One example of an epigenetic change in eukaryotic biology is the process of cellular differentiation. During morphogenesis, totipotent stem cells become the various pluripotent cell lines of the embryo, which in turn become fully differentiated cells. In other words, as a single fertilized egg cell ? the zygote ? continues to divide, the resulting daughter cells change into all the different cell types in an organism, including neurons, muscle cells, epithelium, endothelium of blood vessels, etc., by activating some genes while inhibiting the expression of others. Essentially what we might see if we continue to have drought range conditions and malnourishment the Wyoming range deer herd is doomed due to genetic defects and poor survival and poor fawn recruitment. To further add to how genetics is impacted by poor nutrition this study displayed how mice born under poor nutritional conditions had lasting liver, organ and muscle genetic defects. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140501123447.htm
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-18 AT 08:14AM (MST)[p]Tknez, watch the video again.

I watched the entire video.

At one point he states in 2022 we should see some great antlers.

He states they have documented that the deer stay smaller when born from mothers who are extremely stressed. However, he also shows a graph showing the mothers that survived have a genetic tendency, or a physical location, that cause them to go into winter with a ... if I remember right ... 17% higher than normal fat reserve. They have documented proof that this results in better genetic capacity in the offspring.

If you cant find it in the video or you cant understand it then just stop commenting. It was really obvious. He had cute pictures of fawns and lil graphs and exact numbers so it should be glaringly obvious.

Its ok bud, we all run a lil slow sometimes. Next time watch the video before jumping out there into traffic.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
Haha I didn't have to watch the video I was there live sparky.

Didn't you take your ball and decided to go cry on other sights and boycott this one because you were getting to picked on?

And by the way Einstein... You are right there were great deer in the Wyoming range in 2012 as there has been in every year I have been up there for the past 30 or so years, but I really don't think anything in the video you watched so closely refers to how great the deer were back then. Again maybe I missed something that you caught with your eagle eyes...

To the other poster very interesting post. I am sure you are right to some degree and that does make sense.. I would think that all the weather patterns we have had over the years (drought and horrible winters, ) would have already knocked the genes out of the herd if in fact that was going to happen. It hasn't as of yet so I am inclined to believe this last winter will not either.

This was not the first bad winter we have ever had and the 92 winter was right up there with it and still great genetics have been roaming those mountains as long as anyone can remember.

On a good note I was up in the big piney area just a few days ago and there was literally as much snow on the winter range as there would be in August. The deer are having a great winter so far this year!
 
Tknez, that meeting was a snoozefest. I wouldn't blame ya if ya fell asleep for part of it. His presentation was great, I love analytical info, and I still found it hard to pay attention with a coke in my hand. I was a bum in the post above.

Here is a quick explanation of what I should have written. He said basically this. A deer that is under stress in the womb, and humans as well, will be born with a lower genetic capability. Our genetics have a range of capabilities in each person. What we eat, do, exercise, etc...has an impact on that. If mom is on heroin or if mom doesn't get vitamin D or whatever then the deer won't EVER shake it. He just doesnt have the code to grow.

Ya, good catch on 2012, I changed it to 2022. I guess I am stuck in the past. Sheesh. You are right... there were good bucks in 2012 :) . I meant 2022.

2022 should be good since the does that came in 2017 had a huge increase in fat reserve. I ought to consider not putting in for G and getting it in 2022. If he is right, and I think he is, the bucks born this spring will be noticeably bigger in 2022 or 2023

I should delete the above post I was too ornery. I shouldn't post before breakfast.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
>Watch the 2hr 40min mark. It
>sounds like the fawns born
>this spring 2018 will have
>the potential to achieve huge
>buck status. This based upon
>the does amount of body
>fat when the fawn is
>born sets the babies trajectory
>for life (a bucks ability
>to achieve huge antlers). Going
>into this winter 2017 deer
>had a record amount of
>body fat (in western WY).
>Therefore, the fawns from this
>spring may have the potential
>to grow record antlers in
>2023.

Albeit im sure it helps. But I'm guessing there are a 1000 other factors between now and 2023 that will determine a bucks antler size. But a good healthy start can't hurt.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-18 AT 12:31PM (MST)[p]The conditions while a deer is in the womb and environmental factors after they are born can affect their potential, but it doesn't necessarily change their genetics. Because of the bad conditions they just don't reach their genetic potential. If a deer is born after a hard winter and is adversely affected (fawns of 2017) then they won't have the same potential as they would have had if they would have been born after a easy winter (fawns of 2018), BUT the fawns from 2017 still have the good genetic potential, they just won't reach it because of the environmental factors. If those 2017 fawns grow up, they will continue to pass on good genes to future deer in the area and if winter conditions are good, you will see those deer reach the original genetic potential that wasn't reached by their "parents" because of environmental factors.

I hope that makes sense. The genes don't change, just the ability to reach that genetic potential changes depending on environmental conditions.

And that's not to say that consistently bad conditions can't eventually affect genetics, but we are talking about one bad winter here. The winters before and after the 16-17 winter have been easy. 16-17 was the first really bad winter in a while and one bad winter doesn't ruin genetics.
 
Idaho you said it exactly how I wish I could have above. What you wrote makes perfect sense to me and is the way I think it will play out now and has in the past.

Great post
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-18
>AT 12:31?PM (MST)
>
>The conditions while a deer is
>in the womb and environmental
>factors after they are born
>can affect their potential, but
>it doesn't necessarily change their
>genetics. Because of the bad
>conditions they just don't reach
>their genetic potential. If a
>deer is born after a
>hard winter and is adversely
>affected (fawns of 2017) then
>they won't have the same
>potential as they would have
>had if they would have
>been born after a easy
>winter (fawns of 2018), BUT
>the fawns from 2017 still
>have the good genetic potential,
>they just won't reach it
>because of the environmental factors.
>If those 2017 fawns grow
>up, they will continue to
>pass on good genes to
>future deer in the area
>and if winter conditions are
>good, you will see those
>deer reach the original genetic
>potential that wasn't reached by
>their "parents" because of environmental
>factors.
>
>I hope that makes sense. The
>genes don't change, just the
>ability to reach that genetic
>potential changes depending on environmental
>conditions.
>
>And that's not to say that
>consistently bad conditions can't eventually
>affect genetics, but we are
>talking about one bad winter
>here. The winters before and
>after the 16-17 winter have
>been easy. 16-17 was the
>first really bad winter in
>a while and one bad
>winter doesn't ruin genetics.

That is what I meant. They genetics do not change. But, their ability to reach their full genetic potential does.


"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
>I'm glad science Trumps NTO's opinion![font
>face="verdana" color="green"]
>Jake Swensen


NTO's opinion was based on population. They are saying:

a. The population is hurting.

Science is simply stating:

b. the genetic ability is still there.

A does not = B

The population came back in spite of the huge worry about climate change.

The population came back in spite of the manic worry about oil and gas.

The population came back in spite of long range weaponry.

The population came back in spite of unlimited resident tags.

We will see if the population will come back again. The genetics are there and their potential is awesome given the fat reserves and light winter of 2017 2018. Everyone on this site and everywhere in the west is hoping it will come back. If it doesnt changes will need to be made to resident tags. So, we have 36 months and we will know what needs to be done. Now we just wait.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
>>I'm glad science Trumps NTO's opinion![font
>>face="verdana" color="green"]
>>Jake Swensen
>
>
>NTO's opinion was based on population.
> They are saying:
>
>a. The population is hurting.
>
>Science is simply stating:
>
>b. the genetic ability is still
>there.
>
>A does not = B
>
>The population came back in spite
>of the huge worry about
>climate change.
>
>The population came back in spite
>of the manic worry about
>oil and gas.
>
>The population came back in spite
>of long range weaponry.
>
>The population came back in spite
>of unlimited resident tags.
>
>We will see if the population
>will come back again.
>The genetics are there and
>their potential is awesome given
>the fat reserves and light
>winter of 2017 2018.
> Everyone on this site
>and everywhere in the west
>is hoping it will come
>back. If it doesnt
>changes will need to be
>made to resident tags.
>So, we have 36 months
>and we will know what
>needs to be done.
>Now we just wait.
>
>"The penalty good men pay for
>indifference to public affairs is
>to be ruled by evil
>men." - Plato

The population has not returned to PRE-development (O & G) levels. It has fluctuated and stabilized in recent years, but the loss of that segment historically using the Mesa Anticline has been well documented.
 
The population two years ago was its best in over 20 years. It has hit the Wyoming F&G population objective....then we had winter in 2017

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
 
I sat at the meeting and heard all the research. It gives you a warm a fuzzy feeling, however that's all it is is research. The Wyoming Game and fish are great at doing studies and research. They identify problems but don't put the boots on the ground to make changes. They pound there chests and brag about all the neat stuff they have learned. Bottom line is what are they doing to build the heard back up. They stated that they are having trouble reaching their objective in mule deer populations on the Wyoming range. They studied the crap out of the mule deer for several years. They identified all kinds of possible reason's for there decline. The last thing they said was we will change the objective to a lower number of mule deer so they can meet there objective.. Admitting they will never meet there original numbers. Game and Fish does not have the money and or resources to build the heard back. They depend on other agencies like the USFS and BLM to provide the manpower.
 
>We will see if the population
>will come back again.
>The genetics are there and
>their potential is awesome given
>the fat reserves and light
>winter of 2017 2018.
> Everyone on this site
>and everywhere in the west
>is hoping it will come
>back. If it doesnt
>changes will need to be
>made to resident tags.
>So, we have 36 months
>and we will know what
>needs to be done.
>Now we just wait.
>
>"The penalty good men pay for
>indifference to public affairs is
>to be ruled by evil
>men." - Plato

Well said.
 

Similar threads

J
Mule Deer and CWD
Replies
45
Views
1k
HIcountryman
HIcountryman

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

733A7F70-7736-4D54-B6BC-4E30DB17FE67.jpeg
150186DE-CA34-4764-9989-8135BC089631.jpeg
Huge Muley
6B08DF8F-91F7-47A4-8911-8635E96C0901.jpeg
1A61E8BA-ECA8-4ADD-AA18-9580019A818A.jpeg
A332F146-5945-4D2E-ACF6-9FE9C1789E4D.jpeg
IMG_3692.jpg
20230122_180041.jpg
1644170343208.png
Resized_20220930_085603(1) (1).jpeg
Big Texas Muley
20201225_220610.jpg
Back
Top Bottom