Mule Deer Management

BPKHunter

BPKHunter

Very Active Member
Messages
1,749
So many on here constantly think that the solution to the mule deer decline is simple:

SHOOT LESS DOES

KILL THE PREDATORS

SHOOT LESS SPIKES/FORKIES

Here is a link to a thread that has a link to a study done in Nevada that I think explains the complexity to the situation quite well. I would challenge all of you to read it thorougly and consider what it is saying.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID6/23108.html#10

FYI I think Nevada has employed many of the management plans you have advocated, especially in terms of limited tags, focus on more bucks, and limited doe tags.
 
If what NV said is true. Why after a bad winter kill where no habitat was lost, why can't ID get numbers to rebound in those area?


"Go hunt for meat at Wall Mart."
 
>If what NV said is true.
> Why after a bad
>winter kill where no habitat
>was lost, why can't ID
>get numbers to rebound in
>those area?
>
>
>"Go hunt for meat at Wall
>Mart."


Because the very next season its a general any buck/youth doe tag shoot out with limited numbers of surviving deer for a solid 2-3 weeks in easily accessable atv units. Just an observation.
 
>>If what NV said is true.
>> Why after a bad
>>winter kill where no habitat
>>was lost, why can't ID
>>get numbers to rebound in
>>those area?
>>
>>
>>"Go hunt for meat at Wall
>>Mart."
>
>
>Because the very next season its
>a general any buck/youth doe
>tag shoot out with limited
>numbers of surviving deer for
>a solid 2-3 weeks in
>easily accessable atv units. Just
>an observation.


So you also believe there's more to it than just good feed through out a mule deer's range. Hmmmmm funny how some people still can't figure that out.

"Go hunt for meat at Wall Mart."
 
>FYI I think Nevada has employed
>many of the management plans
>you have advocated, especially in
>terms of limited tags, focus
>on more bucks, and limited
>doe tags.

FYI Nevada's Deer populations are INCREASING (Elk and Antelope are at all time highs) largely due to their management plans!
Have you not seen their tag recomendations? Maybe you should read this.. http://www.ndow.org/about/news/pr/2012/April/2012_quota.shtm
You should really look at whats going on currently before you start taking little bits and peices from a 2004 report and try saying that it proves that conservative management plans have a negative affect on populations!

Now I don't think there is anything simple about turning around the mule deer decline, but I do think that alot of other states (Idaho especially) could learn from some of the things Nevada does right. Like...
1.Managing on a unit by unit basis (unlimited OTC for more than half the state is not managing anything)
2.Helping avoid deer vs. vechicle deaths. On hwy 93 from Wells NV to the Idaho line alone Nevada has put in several game overpass and underpass crossings that are proving to be very succesful for helping migrating deer.
3.Habitat improvement. Nevada has put in water "guzzlers" in many units across the state that have the forage but not the steady water supply to support more animals. And with the help of several groups they have reseeded thousands of acres that have burned recently
4.Predator control. I know BPK you stand beside the USHS and other liberal whack jobs that say predator control does not help anything (I guess coyotes, wolves, lions..ect dont eat game animals).
We will never be able to control the winters and the habitat lossed to human encrochment is a hard problem to stop but I am sure there are many more things that can be done to help turn things around in Idaho and other states. Just sitting on your hands and sticking with the status quo is not working.
 
Well said Moosey69, I couldnt agree more with you. Especially when half the state is OTC.Idaho F&G doesnt manage they just hope.
 
+1 Moosey, and HayZeus. Stop the 3 week general free for all young buck slaughter and you will see deer rebound much quicker. IMO
 
Apples to oranges. Nevada doesn't have (and has never had) near the herd numbers Idaho does.

Idaho doesn't have to be as conservative with tags as Nevada. This gets overlooked every time this argument crops up.







the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
Until we as hunters in Idaho are ready to put our money where our mouths are there won't be much of a change. We can complain that F&G doesn't do enough but they need data to make changes and they need funding to increase data. We could make more units draw only but that would have two negative effects. 1 F&G would lose money and end up doing less research and 2 The remaining general units would get pounded. The first step we need to take is to increase funding. Everyone complains about the lack of data available and how far off F&G is on estimated populations but when license and tag fees increase the same people have a meltdown and complain about the cost of a tag. Money talks and it will be hard to turn things around without it. If we were to compair the cost of a tag and license in the mid 80s with the cost of operations for F&G and use that ratio to make some adjustments today we may end up with the necessary ingredient to turn things around. Many of the population surveys are out dated but they lack the funding to do another one and they cant use the fact that Joe hunter says there's no deer left in that unit to set harvest limits.
 
>>FYI I think Nevada has employed
>>many of the management plans
>>you have advocated, especially in
>>terms of limited tags, focus
>>on more bucks, and limited
>>doe tags.
>
>FYI Nevada's Deer populations are INCREASING
>(Elk and Antelope are at
>all time highs) largely due
>to their management plans!
>Have you not seen their tag
>recomendations? Maybe you should read
>this.. http://www.ndow.org/about/news/pr/2012/April/2012_quota.shtm
>You should really look at whats
>going on currently before you
>start taking little bits and
>peices from a 2004 report
>and try saying that it
>proves that conservative management plans
>have a negative affect on
>populations!
>
>Now I don't think there is
>anything simple about turning around
>the mule deer decline, but
>I do think that alot
>of other states (Idaho especially)
>could learn from some of
>the things Nevada does right.
>Like...
>1.Managing on a unit by unit
>basis (unlimited OTC for more
>than half the state is
>not managing anything)
>2.Helping avoid deer vs. vechicle deaths.
>On hwy 93 from Wells
>NV to the Idaho line
>alone Nevada has put in
>several game overpass and
>underpass crossings that are proving
>to be very succesful for
>helping migrating deer.
>3.Habitat improvement. Nevada has put in
>water "guzzlers" in many units
>across the state that have
>the forage but not the
>steady water supply to support
>more animals. And with the
>help of several groups they
>have reseeded thousands of acres
>that have burned recently
>4.Predator control. I know BPK you
>stand beside the USHS and
>other liberal whack jobs that
>say predator control does not
>help anything (I guess coyotes,
>wolves, lions..ect dont eat game
>animals).
>We will never be able to
>control the winters and the
>habitat lossed to human encrochment
>is a hard problem to
>stop but I am sure
>there are many more things
>that can be done to
>help turn things around in
>Idaho and other states. Just
>sitting on your hands and
>sticking with the status quo
>is not working.


Moosey69,

I in no way said or even inferred "conservative management plans have a negative affect on populations!" I simply am pointing to complexity of the issue that the report from Nevada produced explains. It's not just one thing, "shoot less does", etc. that is often the argument here. I sure hope Nevada's plan is helping, as if we followed their plan(in regards to tags) everyone here would only get to hunt every few years. But, their own report says that despite maintaining very high buck:doe ratio's and limited hunter take, the deer are NOT responding as expected. Their words not mine. I for one actually agree with you that General hunts should have a cap, not unlike unit 73 use to, and hunters should have to pick their unit. But if you are trying to say that Nevada's herd is rebounding, that simply isn't the case, as their own numbers only reported a 2% statewide population increase each of the last two years with, as they reported, mild winters and wet springs. They too, as ALL western states are well off their all time high populations, at less than half.

Second, I have never supported any liberal groups and have been in support of all predator controls. When I posted here asking others, what they thought the 3 main factors affecting deer herds were: Predators were #3 on my list after weather and body condition. Predators were #2 on your list.

So let me spell it out so you can understand: My point is that there are a bunch of factors that combine together to make this mule deer problem COMPLEX and it isn't just one thing. Reading your old posts, don't you agree??

I am not saying more can't be done, not at all. I would like to get a concensus based on reasonable logic so we can take that to Fish and Game. I think this report hits the nail pretty square on the head, so I am pointing it out. If you are going to try and pick a personal fight get your damn facts straight!
 
Yes we know mr ALLCAPS it's so simple, just stop shooting the does and the herd will rebound.............

Did you even read what it had to say. It does a pretty good job explaining things. It's not so much a study as it is a compilation of all the factors that come together.
 
IT'S ALL GOOD BPK.. WE JUST HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON HOW TO GET THERE AND WHEN TO GET STARTED. I APPRECIATE YOU AND ALL THAT YOU DO , KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND KEEP BEATING THE DRUM. MAYBE SOMEDAY SOON WE WILL HAVE A HEALTHY POPULATION OF MULE DEER IN IDAHO. :)

NOW IS THE TIME TO REBUILD OUR BIG GAME HERDS
 
BPKHunter -

I have to agree with what you are saying 100%. The mule deer management efforts that IDFG face are very complex. It is never just one thing that contributes to big game herd declines. There are always a number of factors. Nevada's approach based on their surveys and reports seems to work for them. IDFG faces challenges, in part, because of the way the tag allocation for deer is set up and part of that particular challange is satisfying Idaho hunters, which will never happen as a whole. There is NO simple solution. There are certainly some things the IDFG could do in the tag allocation department to get started in the right direction, but that would just be a start. If there was a simple equation to this discussions like this wouldn't be necessary. Although I imagine some Idaho hunters would find something else to complain about.

It's been said time and time again on here, stop complaining and get involved in a worth while effort. We all need to help in whatever way we can in the management efforts, whether that be public forums, wildlife habitat rehabilitation, or donations that help IDFG move in the right direction.

I'm going to put on my Idaho Deer Alliance hat now - IDA is one organization that is trying to be one of those catalysts to promote Idaho deer herd management and habitat conservation. We need everyone's help to give input to IDFG and to help in their efforts to manage Idaho's deer herds. Collectively we can make a difference, but it takes more than just a few to make it happen. It's easy to sit behind a keyboard and type out your frustrations and give biased, and sometimes uneducated opinions, but more often that not that's where it ends. Some on here do put their money where their mouth is or volunteer their time and get involved, but others are more comfortable being "back-seat drivers". So I say come out and support our efforts and get involved to help make some sort of difference. We're not going to change IDFG, but hopefully we can have some influence by working with them, not against them.

So thanks BPKHunter for posting this information out here! I think the study was good and Idaho can learn from other states like Nevada and others on managing our big game herds more effectively.

MuleyCrazed
Idaho Deer Alliance
Meridian, Idaho
[email protected]
 
Idaho's so called management is a "F'n" JOKE!!!

There is simply no form of management at all. All the IDFG does well is creatively find ways to sell more tags for money. To destroy the "once" finest mule deer herd in the west!!! The managers of Idaho's mule deer should be lined up and shot for what they have done to this herd!!!

My all time favorite tags sales gimmick the IDFG did when they could not sell the nonresident deer licenses BECAUSE THE DEER ARE GONE! IS....sell them to the residents for the price of the NR tag. Simply a POACHERS FEE!!! That should tell you where the heart of IDFG is....

OH and by the way! I am from Idaho! Another thing, Idaho has a HUGE coyote problem!!! My best day of killing coyotes is over 15 personally! And with 4 friends we killed 26!! And yes, with absolute 100 percent certainty they kill deer I HAVE WATCHED IT WITH MY OWN EYE'S!!

Someone who jumps in with the IDFG and supports the problem being mainly habitat is a BLIND SHEEP! You have been BRAIN WASHED!!!!

Predators and TERRIBLE, I MEAN TERRIBLE!!! management are the two biggest problems in Idaho hands down!!!!
 
>Idaho's so called management is a
>"F'n" JOKE!!!
>
>There is simply no form of
>management at all. All
>the IDFG does well is
>creatively find ways to sell
>more tags for money. To
>destroy the "once" finest mule
>deer herd in the west!!!
> The managers of Idaho's
>mule deer should be lined
>up and shot for what
>they have done to this
>herd!!!
>
>My all time favorite tags sales
>gimmick the IDFG did when
>they could not sell the
>nonresident deer licenses BECAUSE THE
>DEER ARE GONE! IS....sell them
>to the residents for the
>price of the NR tag.
> Simply a POACHERS FEE!!!
> That should tell you
>where the heart of IDFG
>is....
>
>OH and by the way!
>I am from Idaho!
>Another thing, Idaho has a
>HUGE coyote problem!!! My
>best day of killing coyotes
>is over 15 personally!
>And with 4 friends we
>killed 26!! And yes,
>with absolute 100 percent certainty
>they kill deer I HAVE
>WATCHED IT WITH MY OWN
>EYE'S!!
>
>Someone who jumps in with the
>IDFG and supports the problem
>being mainly habitat is a
>BLIND SHEEP! You have
>been BRAIN WASHED!!!!
>
>Predators and TERRIBLE, I MEAN TERRIBLE!!!
>management are the two biggest
>problems in Idaho hands down!!!!
>

The predators have a bigger impact than just the raw numbers of animals they eat. For example, I was in a creek bottom last November while my brother was half a mile up the mountain. He radioed that he saw a wolf and then about 10 minutes later a doe came flying down the creek bed at breakneck speed, just spooked out of her mind. Nothing was following her but the point is she just burned up a lot of fat reserves at the beginning of winter. Same with coyotes, they chase the deer around and I've seen them bring'em down also. But some of these animals just end up as winter kill because they've burned up their fat reserves running from predators and then the weather gets blamed for their demise.

I think the biggest issue is wolves.
 
wolfhunter,

I can appreciate your frustration and your right to voice it, however, I know several folks at Fish and Game and your assessment (from my experience) is way off. These are good people trying to do the best they can with very limited resources (people and money) and a hunting public that will probably never be satisfied.

So point by point let's look at this ...

1. there is simply no form of management - that is an untrue statement. Go to the Fish and Game website and you will see the mule deer hunter study, the mule deer action plan and the mule deer intiative along with all kind of other stuff. You can agrue if it has been successful or not but to say there is no management is untrue.

2. to suggest killing the men and women of Fish and Game is really something, even if you really do believe it, you probably shouldn't be posting on a public forum.

3. to your point about the "poacher fee" - Fish and Game gets it operating budget from the sale of licenses and tags ... no general funds. I have no problem with them allowing residents to buy non-resident tags, if they don't sell out of them, if it means they have more money to do much need research, law enforcement and such. You obviously don't agree. But to take away funds and expect them to solve problems isn't realistic.

4. Good for you for getting after the coyotes ... btw Idaho Fish and Game recognizes the issue with predators and calls it out spefically in their MANAGEMENT PLAN.

5. Someone who jumps in with F&G and supports the problem being mainly habitat - I am interested in what your definition of mainly is? F&G, in their plan, lists numerous issues as contributing to the problem. You may be putting words in their mouth here or that just may be your interpetation of what their priorities are.

Criticizing other people is the easiest thing in the world to do ... just imagine what anyone who knows you could say about you or your family. Being constructive is one thing, but being judgemental and destructive something else.

As many folks have stated this is a very complex issue and there is no easy solution. Think about it ... predators, habitat, climate, hunting pressure, more access to land, road kill, politics and all of us hunters bitching and complaining about every move F&G makes ... who the hell would want that job. Talk about a no win situation.

Is the F&G perfect ... no ... far from it. Can they do better ... yes and I think they would admit that. Are they what you painted them to be ... no.

I am not trying to be rude when I say ... if you know all the answers then maybe you should go work for F&G and fix our problem. I'm sure F&G and every hunter in this state (me included) would be very thankful to you for saving our mule deer.
 
So for all you guys that still think it's ALL Fish and Games fault then what is your answer the what the report says is one of the key problems throughout the west, the fact that the plants the deer rely on basically are not near as productive as they were in the 60's-90's. If the herd can only be as productive as a the amount of feed available, then how do we fix making the feed more productive?

I'm gonna guess many did not actually read it....
 
Obviously everyone has different OPINIONS on the matter. However,since F&Gs job is to find out the problems, address them and fix it you cant deny its there fault. I always thought that was what the Dept. was established for. I believe there more worried about having a job next year than they are about our game herds. They need more $ and I think a fee increase could help out alot.
 
Most of the rednecks on here b%t*h because they are too lazy and never read any decent information provided as to why our herds are down. It's much simpler to say "shoot less does" isn't it?!

I personally would not mind an increase in tag/license fees so that the F&G has adequate funding to do their job and manage the herds. Currently I don't feel that they are doing what's in the best interest for the animals, but more so managing money. BUT you can't completely blame them for that. F&G employees are paid similar to teachers, which doesn't seem right now does it? Where would we be without knowledgeable teachers? There would be even more illiterate rednecks on this forum. Well, same goes as true with the F&G. We wouldn't be talking about something we all love to do on here because all of the animals would be long gone by now without management.

Long story short, I wouldn't think twice about paying $20 for my hunting license and $30 for my deer tag. That's chump change compared to what we spend on gear. But the F&G must listen to the residents as well.
 
As I read the Nevada report I cant help be see a pattern. The report is basically saying look at all these problems we have to face. Plants that have low occurrence of new growth due to fire, grazing global warming bla bla bla. We can't be held accountable for low numbers of deer. It is poor habitat to blame.

We have fawns that are too small so they are not surviving. But the problem of survival is due to so many factors that they cannot control that there is no use to even try. But habitat is the root of this problem too.

Then it goes on to say predators reducing populations is a ?hypothesis? that can not be proven. Then they say, Yes fur prices, and increased predator removal happened at the very same point that deer populations exploded the real reason was not predator removal it was probably summer rains and the alignment of the moon and stars that was the underlying reason.
Then the paper digs deep into the same old biologist ammo bucket. If you have enough quality habitat predators don't have an impact.

Then it goes on to say that reducing buck harvest and increasing the buck to doe ratio is actually bad for trophy bucks. Then it says genetics is all the reason bucks get big and biologists can't do anything about that. Then they draw the old habitat gun and start blazing away. Then they say the increased number of bucks that get together in buck pastures are over using the habitat. That ?could possibly? be causing increased competition in the ? high quality? forage leading to reduced body weights, also reducing antler growth.
Really? They are going to blame reduced trophy bucks on high buck to doe ratios? Really? They want proof forged in steel to point a finger at predators as a problem but they come up with this? Really?

I was surprised that they didn't blame elk for the problem. I was shocked to see data that actually points a finger somewhere else than elk pushing them out of the habitat. Of course they do blame habitat but I knew they would.

In summery they say Nevada never had a lot of deer to begin with. It was evil human encroachment into the natural order of things that produced a boom in mule deer populations. Over the years it was the humans that have altered things to produce what they want not what nature wants.

What I got out of this study was a lot of the same old thing. Biologists saying that the problems are too immense for them to do anything about. Also, Nevada has lots of deer and, the hunters should feel lucky because there is more deer now than the time before white men were there. They are also making a case to increase buck tags.

Yes I read the paper but I was not impressed. To me it was a bunch of whining about it is not their fault and don't hold them accountable for anything. Bla Bla Bla. Ron
 
Most rednecks won't read "decent information" Really, you call that decent information? I call it pointing blame at everything under the sun but themselves and predators.
They even blamed mule deer bucks for reducing trophy bucks. To you that was decent information?

You say your willing to spend more money to adequately fund F&G departments but in that paper what did Nevada say that they were going to do to solve the problems? What was the course of action that they are going to do that your extra money will help overcome the insurmountable odds. Cash will solve everything, right? What was the selling point? what are they going to do to make things better? And how is extra money going to provide the resources to make it all better?

Your saying teachers should be paid more? Your also saying everyone here are illiterate rednecks. The teachers are not responsible for those illiterate rednecks that they produced? How is paying a teacher more going to produce fewer rednecks? I know a elementary school PE teacher that makes 58,000 a year. He teaches dodge ball! If we pay him more will he produce fewer rednecks?

Increasing a persons pay does not necessarily increase the quality of their work. You sound like a Union kind of guy. Ron
 
HayZeus,

I agree with you that it is the F&Gs job, but if you really look at the way F&G is set up ... The Governor appoints the F&G Commisoners who in turn set the policies that F&G implement.

The rank and file folks at F&G do all the studies and enforcement, but the policies are set by the Commisson (and by the way of their appointment the Governor). I think this is where the science tends to get ignored for politics and we don't get the real changes we need.

I read all the heated debating that goes on here, but the one aspect of this that I think gets overlooked is the politics. Politicians know that they need to keep the masses happy and most folks on MM probably want quality hunting, but I would bet most hunters in ID want to ride their ATVs around and be able to shoot anything with 4 legs and fur (does,spikes, forkies ... whatever). So now you have a conflict ... as a politician who do you appease ... group A ... group B or do you try and strike a balance and then make noone happy?

I think if people really want to change things, you don't go after F&G you go after the Governor and Senate and you make it in their political interest to affect change in policy.

Here's some thing from the IDFG website ....

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission was created by public initiative in 1938. Commissioners are appointed by the Governor (no more than four may be from the same political party) for staggered four-year terms. Each commissioner is confirmed by the Idaho State Senate. In 1996, the Senate approved adding a seventh district to the existing six to meet the needs of Idaho's regions. The seven commissioners, each representing a different region of the state, are responsible for administering the fish and game policy of the state as described in state code section 36-103:

WILDLIFE PROPERTY OF STATE - PRESERVATION
(a) Wildlife Policy. All wildlife, including all wild animals, wild birds, and fish, within the state of Idaho, is hereby declared to be the property of the state of Idaho. It shall be preserved, protected, perpetuated, and managed. It shall be only captured or taken at such times or places, under such conditions, or by such means, or in such manner, as will preserve, protect, and perpetuate such wildlife, and provide for the citizens of this state and, as by law permitted to others, continued supplies of such wildlife for hunting, fishing and trapping.


To be appointed, commissioners must be a bona fide resident of the region from which they are appointed, and be well informed and interested in wildlife conservation and restoration. During their terms, commissioners may not hold any other elective or appointive office.

By law, commissioners must meet in January, April, July and October of each year. In recent years the complexity of wildlife and fisheries management has made it necessary to hold special sessions in addition to the quarterly meetings.

Major duties and responsibilities of the commission are to supervise the Department of Fish and Game; establish regulations and other needed controls on fishing, hunting, trapping and management of wildlife in line with the state's wildlife policy; approve department budgets for submission to the legislature; hold public hearings and make decisions on the management of the state's wildlife.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-03-12 AT 02:58PM (MST)[p]IDAHORON IS RIGHT !!!! THE NEVADA STUDY WAS PUT TOGETHER BY THE SAME TYPE THAT DID THE YELLOWSTONE STUDY. THE REASON FOR THE DECLINE OF ELK IN YELLOWSTONE WAS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE DROUGHT AND SEVERE WINTER...REALLY !!!!! NO MENTION OF THE WOLF BEING A PLAYER IN THE DECLINE....REALLY !!!! WHAT A JOKE...MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT !!!!

THE GOAL IN IDAHO SHOULD BE TO DOUBLE THE POPULATION OF MULE DEER IN MOST UNITS THROUGH OUT THE STATE. THEY ARE NOT MEETING HISTORICAL LEVELS . AND INCREASE THE AGE OF OUR BUCKS

SIMPLE FIX AND AN EASY START

1. STOP THE HARVEST OF THE ANTLERLESS

2. STOP THE HARVEST OF THE YEARLING BUCK

3. START AN AGGRESSIVE PREDATOR REDUCTION PROGRAM ( DOGS & CATS )

4. NO BUCK HUNTS AFTER HALLOWEEN

LIKE EVERYONE THIS IS JUST ANOTHER OPINION. RIGHT OR WRONG IT'S WHAT I BELIEVE .

JUST A REDNECK BEATING THE DRUM.......WRITE IN CAPS , IT'S AN EASIER READ......:)
 
YOU MIGHT BE A REDNECK IF.......

1. YOU DISAGREE WITH G&F ON ANYTHING....

2. YOU CANNOT FIND THE VALUE IN A 5 YEAR STUDY FOLLOWED UP BY ANOTHER 5 YEAR STUDY WHEN YOU ALREADY HAD THE ANSWERS BEFORE THE FIRST STUDY.....

3. YOU BELIEVE THAT THE FASTEST WAY TO GROW A HERD OF ANYTHING IS TO STOP WHACKING THE ONES HAVING THE BABIES. STUPID REDNECKS !!! THEY REALLY BELIEVE YOU CAN GROW A HERD BY PUTTING MORE BABIES ON THE GROUND.

4. IF YOU THINK DOGS AND CATS KILL UNGULATES.

5. IF YOU THINK PREDATORS ARE RELATED TO THE DECLINE AND LACK OF RECOVERY TO OUR UNGULATES....

ALL SMILES TODAY :) WRITE IN CAPS IT'S EASIER TO READ....
 
Consider that as the habitat continues to get older, the quality of forage goes down (less nutrition each year). As the quality of forage goes down so does the reproduction, in other words the Does stop having babies. It does no good to the Buck/Doe ratio to stockpile Does, especially when most of them aren't breeding. The few Fawns that are born will now have to compete with the surplus Does for the available forage. This produces a poor Buck/Doe ratio and age class structure.

The cycle of habitat succession is something we can't control, yet we like to think we can. Fish and Game departments in all western states put funds and manpower into trying to manipulate game herds by supplemental feeding, predator control, etc., and maybe shouldn't.

I would like to see that effort put into things we can control like tag allocation, wildlife underpasses/overpasses, human encroachment, etc. While this will not increase the herd it will help make a better hunting experience. Instead of seeing 23 baron Does to 2 mediocre Bucks, maybe we will be able to see 15 Does, 5 fawns, and 5 Bucks.

As said in a post above, Fish and Game departments in all western states have their hands tied by the commission. Just watch the NDOW commission meetings on YouTube and you will see the frustration the Biologists go through in doing their jobs.
 
MOST ANTLERLESS DEER THAT I SEE HAVE FAWNS WITH THEM UNLESS THE PREDATOR HAS GOTTEN THEM.

MOST UNITS IN IDAHO ARE A LONG WAYS FROM HAVING A SURPLUS OF BARON DOES.

I WOULD GUESS MOST UNITS IN ALL STATES OUT WEST ARE NOT SEEING A LARGE NUMBER OF BARON DOES. SEVERE WINTER HAS THAT EFFECT ON OLD BARON DOES. :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-04-12 AT 03:35PM (MST)[p]>wolfhunter,
>
>I can appreciate your frustration and
>your right to voice it,
>however, I know several folks
>at Fish and Game and
>your assessment (from my experience)
>is way off. These
>are good people trying to
>do the best they can
>with very limited resources (people
>and money) and a hunting
>public that will probably never
>be satisfied.
>
>So point by point let's look
>at this ...
>
>1. there is simply no
>form of management - that
>is an untrue statement.
>Go to the Fish and
>Game website and you will
>see the mule deer hunter
>study, the mule deer action
>plan and the mule deer
>intiative along with all kind
>of other stuff. You
>can agrue if it has
>been successful or not but
>to say there is no
>management is untrue.
>
>2. to suggest killing the
>men and women of Fish
>and Game is really something,
>even if you really do
>believe it, you probably shouldn't
>be posting on a public
>forum.
>
>3. to your point about
>the "poacher fee" - Fish
>and Game gets it operating
>budget from the sale of
>licenses and tags ... no
>general funds. I have
>no problem with them allowing
>residents to buy non-resident tags,
>if they don't sell out
>of them, if it means
>they have more money to
>do much need research, law
>enforcement and such. You
>obviously don't agree. But
>to take away funds and
>expect them to solve problems
>isn't realistic.
>
>4. Good for you for
>getting after the coyotes ...
>btw Idaho Fish and Game
>recognizes the issue with predators
>and calls it out spefically
>in their MANAGEMENT PLAN.
>
>5. Someone who jumps in
>with F&G and supports the
>problem being mainly habitat -
>I am interested in what
>your definition of mainly is?
> F&G, in their plan,
>lists numerous issues as contributing
>to the problem. You
>may be putting words in
>their mouth here or that
>just may be your interpetation
>of what their priorities are.
>
>
>Criticizing other people is the easiest
>thing in the world to
>do ... just imagine what
>anyone who knows you could
>say about you or your
>family. Being constructive is
>one thing, but being judgemental
>and destructive something else.
>
>As many folks have stated this
>is a very complex issue
>and there is no easy
>solution. Think about it
>... predators, habitat, climate, hunting
>pressure, more access to land,
>road kill, politics and all
>of us hunters bitching and
>complaining about every move F&G
>makes ... who the hell
>would want that job.
>Talk about a no win
>situation.
>
>Is the F&G perfect ... no
>... far from it.
>Can they do better ...
>yes and I think they
>would admit that. Are
>they what you painted them
>to be ... no.
>
>I am not trying to be
>rude when I say ...
>if you know all the
>answers then maybe you should
>go work for F&G and
>fix our problem. I'm
>sure F&G and every hunter
>in this state (me included)
>would be very thankful to
>you for saving our mule
>deer.

+1 on that idgator!!

MuleyCrazed
Idaho Deer Alliance
Meridian, Idaho
[email protected]
 
>IDA WHEN IS THE NEXT BANQUET,
>YOU GUYS ARE GREAT :)
>THANKS FOR ALL THAT YOU
>DO.

Thanks MULEY204! We are planning our next banquet for the end of March 2013, after the Sportsmen's Show. Should be a good one!

MuleyCrazed
Idaho Deer Alliance
Meridian, Idaho
[email protected]
 
>YOU MIGHT BE A REDNECK IF.......
>
>
>1. YOU DISAGREE WITH G&F ON
>ANYTHING....
>
>2. YOU CANNOT FIND THE VALUE
>IN A 5 YEAR STUDY
>FOLLOWED UP BY ANOTHER 5
>YEAR STUDY WHEN YOU ALREADY
>HAD THE ANSWERS BEFORE THE
>FIRST STUDY.....
>
>3. YOU BELIEVE THAT THE FASTEST
>WAY TO GROW A HERD
>OF ANYTHING IS TO STOP
>WHACKING THE ONES HAVING THE
>BABIES. STUPID REDNECKS !!! THEY
>REALLY BELIEVE YOU CAN GROW
>A HERD BY PUTTING MORE
>BABIES ON THE GROUND.
>
>4. IF YOU THINK DOGS AND
>CATS KILL UNGULATES.
>
>5. IF YOU THINK PREDATORS ARE
>RELATED TO THE DECLINE AND
>LACK OF RECOVERY TO OUR
>UNGULATES....
>

6. YOU DON"T KNOW WHERE THE CAPS LOCK BUTTON IS ON YOUR COMPUTER.
 
I think it is amazing there are some of you who are actually defending the management or lack of management of the Idaho Fish and Game. If some private business was in charge of managing a public resource like, "mule deer", and had done what the IDFG has done with "mule deer". Those private individuals would be in Prison!!

You want proof that habitat is not the major player in mule deer decline??? Example, you hunt the Idaho Wyoming border you can see clear, CRYSTAL I mean crystal clear differences in herd health depending on what side of the man made line you are on. Wyoming's mule deer are leap's and bounds better than Idaho's, THAT WAS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. Now thats not to say Wyoming is not having some of the same problems (AND IF WYOMING DOES NOT WAKE UP IT WILL LOOK LIKE IDAHO IN A FEW MORE YEARS). The fundamental difference is ONLY management. The deer commingle on the same winter grounds, fight the same winter battles, but live under different management. Hell truth be told the biggest bucks killed on some of the late hunts in Idaho are wyoming raised bucks.

To properly manage much of Idaho's mule deer area's we should do more than just limit "doe" harvest. If we were truly honest with ourselves we should not even be hunting herds with less than 20 bucks per 100 does. That is most of the state!!! Should that not be a clue that the last 20 years of Idaho mule deer management has been WRONG!! NO BODY IN THE IDFG WILL ADMIT THEY ARE WRONG!! MOVE ON AND FIX IT. THEY JUST CONTINUE TO SPIN, SPIN AND SPIN THE REAL TRUTH!!!

I love the IDFG slogan, "We manage for OPPORTUNITY", thats is code for "RAPE PILLAGE AND PLUNDER IDAHO'S MULE DEER" for the dollar and not be held accountable!!!

Sorry this post may not be politically correct but it NEEDS TO BE SAID!!! THE IDFG IS NOT DOING THEIR JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Wolfhunter,

This is a lot better post than your last one on this subject and I sincerely mean that. I knew you had some good points to make!

I will say, that I still think, everyone who wants to balme F&G is barking up the wrong tree here. F&G implements the policies handed down by the F&G Commission, the F&G Commissioners are appointed by the Governor (they are political appointees). The power to affect real change therefore rests with the Governor, as he is appointing the folks that are setting the polices and ultimately carrying out his agenda.

Does anyone really think that the Governor will give his blessing to the Commissioners to do what is really necessary and suffer the blow back of those actions? I mean if we are honest we are probably talking about ... shorting hunting seasons, ATV restriction far beyond what we have now, significantly fewer tags, more controlled hunts and less OTC, pick your weapon rules, stopping development on winter range and a whole host of other unpopular steps which people will be screaming bloody murder about when implemented.

If the biologists were running F&G, making the decision and F&G wasn't a political organization then I would bet our deer herds would be much better off. Unfortunately, they aren't and it's not, so here we are with solutions that try and appease everyone, but ultimately don't address the real problem(s).

So, how do we get our voices heard by the folks that can actually do something. We need to be active in letting the politicans know that the quality of our deer herds is an important issue that they must address or there will be political consequences. Also, we as hunters (at least those of us that think alike ... meaning we want quality deer hunting)need to ban together in groups like IDA (I'm not currently a member, but will be shortly)and use the power of our numbers to make sure our voices/concerns get heard and they understand that we will hold them accountable because this is the only way the politicians will allow F&G to do what's right for the deer in our state. Just my .02 cents.
 
I hope IDA can have better luck than the 100's of other group that have tried!!!! The IDFG are masters of deception. They let groups like IDA think they are getting traction and continue with status quo..... BEEN THERE DONE THAT!!!! DONATED $1000'S TO TRY AND HELP IN THE PAST!!!!!

This is why from the top down the IDFG management needs to be let go... They are failing miserably at their jobs. We do not need 40 full time biologists to tell us mule deer are in trouble. If they continue the next 20 years with their current strategies and lack of management Idaho mule deer will be GONE!!! EXTINCT!!! I HAVE SPENT HOURS DAYS MONTHS TALKING TO THESE IDFG CLOWNS AND THE REFUSE TO ADMIT THEIR FAILURES! THEY JUST SPIN THE TRUTH.... THEY WONDER WHY HUNTERS ARE THROWING IN THE TOWL IN IDAHO.

GOD HELP MULE DEER IN IDAHO....
 
WOLFHUNTER IS RIGHT !!!!!!!!! THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE HABITAT IT'S THE G & F.......THERE RUNNING THE MULE DEER RIGHT INTO THE GROUND.

THE MULE DEER IN IDAHO ARE NOT MEETING PROJECTED LEVELS

THE MULE DEER POPULATION IS HALF OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE IN MOST UNITS.

THE FIX IS EASY AND THE G & F HAVE THE ANSWERS, BUT THEY ARE PARALYZED

G & F NEEDS TO BITE THE BULLET AND DO WHATS RIGHT FOR THE MULE DEER

WRITE IN CAPS, IT'S AN EASIER READ :)

P. S. HEY IDA WHEN IS THE BANQUET ????
 
MULEY204/WOLFHUNTER,

I'M WRITING IN CAPS JUST FOR YOU (NOT YELLING AT ANYONE) :)

BY WHAT BOTH OF YOU ARE SAYING IN YOUR POSTS ABOVE YOU'RE PROVING MY POINT. THE RANK AND FILE F&G EMPLOYEES AREN'T THE PROBLEM, THEY DO GOOD WORK, BUT THEY CAN'T DO SQUAT WITHOUT THE DIRECTION BEING SET BY THE F&G COMMISSION. THE F&G COMMISSIONERS ARE POLITICAL APPOINTEES ... THERE IS NO WAY THEY WOULD SET POLICY THAT WOULD CAUSE ISSUES FOR THE PERSON THAT APPOINTED THEM (THAT PERSON IS THE GOVERNOR) AND LET'S FACE IT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR THE MULE DEER IN THIS STATE ISN'T GOING TO SIT WELL WITH EVERYONE. SO, MY POINT IS YOU HAVE TO GO OVER THE HEADS OF F&G EMPLOYEES, GO OVER THE HEADS OF THE F&G COMMISSIONER AND GO TO THE GOVERNOR.

YOU GUYS HAVE SAID PLAINLY, YOU'VE TALKED WITH F&G AND NOTHING GETS DONE ... IT'S NOT BECAUSE THEY LIKE SEEING THE MULE DEER NUMBERS DOWN OR THE HUNTING NOT AS GOOD AS IT USED TO BE. IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE RESTRAINED BY THE POLITICIANS.

TO PUT IT BLUNTLY ... UNTIL BUTCH OTTER THINKS THERE IS AN ISSUE AND UNTIL HE KNOWS THAT THE HUNTERS OF THIS STATE ARE PISSED HE ISN'T GOING TO DO ANYTHING EXCEPT BLAME THE WOLVES AND THIS ISSUES GOES FAR BEYOND JUST WOLVES! WE HAVE TO MAKE IT IN HIS POLITICAN INTEREST TO PUSH THE F&G COMMISSIONERS TO SET THE PROPER POLICIES FOR OUR DEER AND IN TURN THE F&G EMPLOYEES WILL IMPLEMENT IT.

HAVING SAID ALL THAT, TRYING TO GET POLITICIANS TO DO THE RIGHT THING WHEN THE RIGHT THING ISN'T POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT IS NOT GOING TO BE EASY, BUT IT STARTS BY LETTING THEM KNOW THER CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND BRINGING SOLUTIONS TO THE TABLE.
 
So I guess there is no reason to pay the "MANAGEMENT" to do nothing. Let's get rid of them! Maybe IDFG will not need to sell so many tags for animals that need a break or do not exist....
 
Couple questions:

Did the management that took GMC to bankruptcy get fired? Or was the downfall due to the economic environment?

Do we have the technology to reverse the aging process in plant communities?

Which western state doesn't have an overall declining mule deer herd?

Do we have a biologist for each big game species or are they all for mule deer only?

Wolfhunter,

You bring up a good point on your wyoming/idaho border example, I would like to hear more on that. i.e is it a draw zone on either side? This would be a good argument for the nevada border also. I would agree on more tag quotas statewide? It will improve the quality, but not stop the declining trend.
 
IDGATOR THANK YOU FOR WRITING IN CAPS :) MUCH EASIER READ...I AGREE WITH YOUR LAST COUPLE POSTS ALMOST 100% I AGREE WITH THE WOLFHUNTER AS WELL ...IF THE G & F AGREE THAT THE MULE DEER NUMBERS ARE WAY DOWN BUT ARE MEETING PROJECTED LEVELS , THEN MAYBE WE SHOULD GET RID OF THEM . OR IS THAT OL' BUTCH THAT IS SAYING THE POPULATION IS DANGEROUSLY LOW BUT WHERE MEETING ALL PROJECTED LEVELS. THE WHOLE THING MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT. I UNDERSTAND THAT MOST OF THIS IS BIGGER THAN THE G & F...BUT THE G & F HAVE ALOT TO DO WITH THE DECLINE AS WELL.
 
Well it must be a national conspiracy as every single western state has seen the same trend line......down.

Every other state forum has the same complaints about too much decline, too few mature bucks, and improper managment. Even the states like Nevada who have done so much.

If it is so central to OUR fish and game, then what is the deal with the other states???
 
True most western mule deer herds are not growing. BUT!! The Idaho Fish and Game wins the award for doing the worst job. HANDS DOWN!! YET THEY STILL SPIN THE TRUTHS.... IT SHOULD START TO SINK IN SOON (I HOPE)!! THE MULE DEER MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS IS NOT WORKING.... HOW MUCH EDUCATION DO THEY NEED TO SEE THEY ARE SCREWING IT UP!!!!!!!!!! IF YOU CAN'T SEE THAT YOUR B..L..I..N..D BLIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would be willing to bet if you put me in charge of restoring mule deer in Idaho I could get it done with out a masters degree in pass the buck. I would start with firing the top tear of the "Management" they are educated way beyond reality and OVER their own intelligence. With the money saved I would then implement the following; First thing that would get done, predators would be put in REAL check, poison used if necessary. Second the tags would go way down until our buck to doe ratios were over 35 per hundred. I would use real counting methods, not models from my desk. I would then take care of our winter ranges with controlled burns and sage treatment, bitter brush planting and so on (use some oil and gas money to help MAYBE EVEN HUNTERS COULD HELP!!!). I would send the 1000 yard shooters kicking rocks!! I might even make hunters use open sights. Put a little "hunt" back in the hunter. I sure as hell would not kill doe to improve buck to doe ratio's I MIGHT MAKE THE WARDENS DRIVE A TRUCK UNTIL IT HAS 150,000 MILES LIKE THE REST OF THE WORKING WORLD....

I may not have a lot of friends after implementing this and there would be a bunch of whining, but we would have a hell of a lot more mule deer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Wolfhunter,

So as the new 1 man Fish and Game commission, a few questions from the masses:

1. Since a huge portion of the quality wintering ground is under private control, primarily by ranchers, how do you intend to get their buy in. Remember, what cooperation we get now is in large part a result of COMPROMISE to their interests. You can't rehab what you can't access. You can't even do predator control on it if they won't let you.

2. How will you handle the Gov when he is deluged with complaints by hunters who have to sit home, as well as the pissed of landowners. Remember it is only a fraction of tag buyers that are MM'ers like us that even score their bucks. Don't forget all the industry that relies on the NR's to come here and hunt. It's not just tag sales at stake financially.

3. Lastly, how do you intend to fund your plans. Putting a REAL check on predators and doing those wintering ground treatments will be VERY expensive, especially when you won't be selling but half the tags you did prior to your dramatic new plan. Remember, Fish and Game doesn't get general fund dollars. Do you think the minority of trophy hunters that make up the masses will all pay 2x or 3x what they are now to make up the difference? Will you implement a BP system to try and build demand?

4. Just curious, after you fire all the elitest DFG employees with degrees, what is your plan to hire a new staff? Hard to do count every individual Deer, Elk, Antelope, Goat, Sheep, Wolf, Bear, Mountain Lion.....Chukar....Sage Grouse with no employees. What criteria will you use when hiring?

5. What kind of turnaround and timeline would you be willing to commit to. What size herd can we get to and when? MULEY204 seems to think we should be able to double the size of the herd, and you think we should be able to add 50%-100% more bucks in that herd, so I am thinking 4x more bucks running around than now.

So...
 
Okay, I will bite BPK....

Answers;

1. I have never met a rancher who would argue with someone wanting to control predators. Healthy habitat is good for ranching as well as for wildlife. Ranchers just want someone to work with them not just tell them they are the problem. I bet the rancher would have an idea how to grow a herd better than some of the so called experts. If a rancher was lacking some calf production he sure as hell would not recommend to shoot half of the herd!!! THIS IS WHY RANCHERS DO NOT WORK WELL WITH THE ELITE.....

2.The governor need to be told the truth. If we continue on the path we are on the deer are going to be in less numbers than the big horn sheep. When a tank of fuel costs $100 dollars, the gun a hunter brings to the mountains costs $2500-7500, the four wheeler cost $10,000, the 5th wheel cost $20,000 it might be time to buck up a little more for a properly managed resource. I agree under the current management Idaho has priced themselves out of a job!!! If we continue status quo no industry will survive.

3.Remember I will trim the fat paychecks off the top. How much was the budget last year 20 million??? I bet we could do a lot if we started from scratch. This is not about trophy hunting, this is about herd survival. You can not have sustainable herds of mule deer with single digit buck to doe numbers with predators running wild and the "management" selling UNLIMITED TAGS!!!!

4. It's not about the degree. It's about honor. Doing the job you were hired for... Doing what right for the herd, because it is RIGHT!!! Not politically correct. Not to make the bean counters happy! Because it is RIGHT!! If the elite is so clouded in education and bureaucracy they can not see they are failing at their hired position they should be fired. I would hire the person for the job that had healthy mule deer in mind not politics. I have met some personnel in the IDFG who had good idea's tried to get them implemented but got swatted from the top. The top wants it to be their way or no way. You need someone who spends more time with the deer than at the desk!!!

Are you familar with the current counting methods?? Count 5 multiply by X number even though you might have counted the only five deer in the unit.... It's a "F'N" joke!!

5. DOING YOUR JOB RIGHT HAS NO TIMELINE!!!!

BPK DO YOU LIVE IN IDAHO?? DID YOU LIVE IN IDAHO IN THE 70'S 80'S 90'S ???? DO YOU REALISE WHAT WE ARE LOSING??? DO YOU GET IT??? THIS PISS POOR MANAGEMENT IS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME. HAVE YOU EVER LOOKED AT THE TOP MULE DEER COLLECTIONS IN THE COUNTRY AND NOTICED SOME OF THE BIGGEST DEER EVER KILLED CAME FROM IDAHO. HAVE YOU SEEN MANY OF THOSE RUNNING AROUND LATELY??? NO!!! YOUR LUCKY TO FIND "A" BUCK!!!!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-12-12 AT 04:43PM (MST)[p]So I will take these one at at time so we don't have dictionary sized responses:

"1. I have never met a rancher who would argue with someone wanting to control predators. Healthy habitat is good for ranching as well as for wildlife. Ranchers just want someone to work with them not just tell them they are the problem. I bet the rancher would have an idea how to grow a herd better than some of the so called experts. If a rancher was lacking some calf production he sure as hell would not recommend to shoot half of the herd!!! THIS IS WHY RANCHERS DO NOT WORK WELL WITH THE ELITE....."

I do not doubt that hardly any rancher would complain about predator control. BUT, most ranchers want more feed for their cattle and less competition. They are part of the reason you see so many antlerless deer/elk tags near wintering grounds now. I don't blame the rancher, they are businessmen first and conservationists second. So if you plan to make major changes to their wintering ground land, then you may have to bargain with them on those depredation concerns they will have. Remember cattle eat grass, so if a rancher wants change it will be to produce more grass, with less concern about sage/bitterbrush. They would even resist changes they do not favor on the BLM they lease, even if it is public land. Remember, Fish and Game even has to play nice with both BLM and Forest Service as they don't control those lands either. You are assuming they will want to work with you, but I don't think your interests and theirs will be aligned near as much as you think. Matter of fact, they may even deny your access for predator control just to spite you if they aren't happy, because they can. Heck I know of a LOT of private lands that do not allow predator hunters on. SO IT AINT SO SIMPLE.

More to come...
 
WHAT YOU SHOULD SAY IS MORE SPIN TO COME... POOR OLD FISH AND GAME LET'S GIVE THEM A RAISE FOR SUCH A GOOD JOB FOR SO MANY YEARS.....CONTINUE!!!!

WHICH DEPT DO YOU WORK IN BPK????
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-12-12 AT 04:42PM (MST)[p]Response #2
"2.The governor need to be told the truth. If we continue on the path we are on the deer are going to be in less numbers than the big horn sheep. When a tank of fuel costs $100 dollars, the gun a hunter brings to the mountains costs $2500-7500, the four wheeler cost $10,000, the 5th wheel cost $20,000 it might be time to buck up a little more for a properly managed resource. I agree under the current management Idaho has priced themselves out of a job!!! If we continue status quo no industry will survive."

Well good luck with the truth. If the Governor is getting hassled by his buddies who can't hunt and the ranchers that don't want us growing more deer/elk to eat the feed he wants for his cattle/sheep, then what good is the truth going to do you? Again with no tags to hunt with, all that expensive equip and fuel will be unbought, and that again will really piss the governor off, and that is the truth. So, even with a valid point that better herds and better management will bring more dollars to Idaho, and make happier residents, that is fine, but you are fooling yourself if the politicians in this state are going to take to your approach, and the fact is that is part of the current fish and games frustration.

I am all for change and don't want the status quo, so I guess we agree on something.
 
>WHAT YOU SHOULD SAY IS MORE
>SPIN TO COME... POOR OLD
>FISH AND GAME LET'S GIVE
>THEM A RAISE FOR SUCH
>A GOOD JOB FOR SO
>MANY YEARS.....CONTINUE!!!!
>
>WHICH DEPT DO YOU WORK IN
>BPK????


Look, I didn't get personal, so step back and focus on the argument. You have it all figured out, so this is a great opportunity to convince all those that don't agree with you to your side. We have the leader of the one organization focused solely on Idaho deer as a regular reader, so lay out the path for him and answer my responses and shut me down.

BTW, Fish and Game employees work for the state so there salaries are public record. I still never get it when I hear about how greedy fish and game is, when these guys individually are not cashing in in any way.
 
>Do you work for the fish
>and game??? This sounds
>familiar???


No, but I have a very good friend who does. He works extremely hard, loves to hunt, and deserves a moticum of respect. I get nothing from fish and game to buy respect and I DO NOT AGREE with the status quo either, but we will get NO where with such totally negative attitudes.

We need a cohesive but reasonable platform to take to Fish and Game, the political establishment, and to the kind of folks who could fund projects. Your kind of bitterness about missing the past is simply unproductive.
 
Fair enough!!

Why not take the rancher out of the equation a focus on the areas in the state where most of the mule deer yearly cycle is public. Lets say Bear lake area. Most of the deer winter on public ground. There is a huge coyote problem, maybe let's use that as our pet project. We implement what I have laid out, we would have HUGE improvements!!

Go ahead and shoot that down BPK!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-12-12 AT 05:07PM (MST)[p]Response #3:

"3.Remember I will trim the fat paychecks off the top. How much was the budget last year 20 million??? I bet we could do a lot if we started from scratch. This is not about trophy hunting, this is about herd survival. You can not have sustainable herds of mule deer with single digit buck to doe numbers with predators running wild and the "management" selling UNLIMITED TAGS!!!!"

So I will agree that given the state of the herd the last few years we can absolutely limit tag numbers without overly limiting access, especially when it comes to antlerless. I also think we need to be more immedately reactive to changes in tags by unit, and with more transparent justification(ie based on winter survival, etc).

But as the new fish and game commision, which you so appointed yourself, you surely aren't going to fund all your expensive new plans by cutting salaries. CO's and biologists aren't making $80-$100k, even with their masters degrees. Even if you get a LOT more done, it won't be for less, but you will still have a hell of a lot more expense to cover. So again I ask, how? Think you can get the legislature to throw you some funding? NO. How about raising those tag prices, that worked pretty well a few years ago huh? I know you can sell the entire country on how great your plan is and get them to fund it NOW...good luck, especially in this economy.

Look the guys here on MM, who really love to hunt, will sacrifice, but as I have said 10 times already, we are the minority in deer tag buyers. Yes we will have to bite the bullet, but in baby steps, not by jumping off a damn cliff.....
 
It's because I have been watching the destruction for 20 years....My family homesteaded in Idaho a long time ago. We have seen this coming for awhile. Believe me I started out nice. I also got involved and tried to make a difference. All the while the destruction continues....

I am sure your friend is a good guy, but he can not be proud of what the IDFG has done.

BPK DO YOU LIVE IN IDAHO?? HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN IDAHO, IF YOU DO????
 
>Fair enough!!
>
>Why not take the rancher out
>of the equation a focus
>on the areas in the
>state where most of the
>mule deer yearly cycle is
>public. Lets say Bear
>lake area. Most of
>the deer winter on public
>ground. There is a
>huge coyote problem, maybe
>let's use that as our
>pet project. We implement
>what I have laid out,
>we would have HUGE improvements!!
>
>
>Go ahead and shoot that down
>BPK!!!


Perfect, so now I see a very reasonable solution. I like it for these reasons:

1. There is still a lot of debate on the impact of predators. I know some of you are absolutely positive, but understand if a large public agency spends a huge chunk of $$ on something that ends up fruitless, then we are sunk. This gives us a highly viable test area, especially if it is primarily private. I will take your word it is.

2. I agree that SE Idaho has some of the best genetics and was one of the most productive areas for a long time, so if we want to see if we can get back to the good days quickly, maybe this area is as good as any.

3. By limiting the area maybe we can even attract some donations from national organizations, etc to help fund the cost.

I do think that Fish and Game did do something similar to this with Wolves up north.
 
THE FIX IS SIMPLE

1. STOP WACKING THE ANTLERLESS

2. STOP WACKING THE YEARLING BUCK

3. NO BUCK HUNTS AFTER HALLOWEEN

4. START AN AGRESSIVE PREDATOR REMOVAL PROGRAM. CATS AND DOGS



GETTING THIS CHANGE PUT INTO THE REGS IS THE HARD PART.

THE GOAL IS TO DOUBLE THE MULE DEER POPULATION AND INCREASE THE AGE OF OUR BUCKS IN MOST UNITS IN IDAHO. :)
 
The best way to control predators in this state is to make sure foothold traps do not get banned like they have in other states. Use your predator killing passion to support Trapping, its the only efficient form of predator control. Better yet, run a trap line this season when the fur is prime and let us know how you do. As long as trapping is legal there is no reason IDFG should spend one cent towards predator control.
 
Charles Darwin is managing mule deer, not the IDFG.











the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-12 AT 07:16AM (MST)[p]+1,000 muley 204 !!

we ALL are going to make sacrifices to build the herd back. i am a native and hunted here 40 + years. we have to get away from everyone chasing their own agendas and trying to cut down there fellow hunters . as long as EVERYBODY and i mean EVERYBODY has to sacrifice opertunity i am all for doing what it takes to get things as good as we can. shorten seasons, no late rut hunts, ect

anybody who thinks the F & g are on the up and up have been assimilated. they are out for money, and to please the masses period end of debate. people are happy with them so long as they stock those discusting 7" white meat trout everywhere. cuts could be made albeit unpopular ones, to fund recovery efforts. but instead they just pay lip service and hold there hand out for all the money they can grab and print out the same old tired garbage regs with little change year after year.......my 2 pennies
 
Darwin's Theory....That sounds like one more justification for doing nothing. You must be voting for OBAMA TOO!!

I can't wait until Darwin-izm kicks in for the Stupid human problem we have everywhere theses days!!
 
From a NR's standpoint I agree with 206 but I would add to get rid of buying the 2nd tag at the NR rate. And I would make the waiting periods 3 years.
 
>Darwin's Theory....That sounds like one more
>justification for doing nothing.
>You must be voting for
>OBAMA TOO!!
>
>I can't wait until Darwin-izm kicks
>in for the Stupid human
>problem we have everywhere theses
>days!!


You're fukked when that happens chief...



the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
>From a NR's standpoint I agree
>with 206 but I would
>add to get rid of
>buying the 2nd tag at
>the NR rate. And I
>would make the waiting periods
>3 years.


Whats your problem with a second tag for NR money? You really think the bubbas are forking over three hundred plus to shoot one more doe or forky? I do not think that happens in any significant number. The second tag is a win-win for F&G and those who want to hunt a whitetail or extend their time in the field a bit.





the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-12 AT 03:06PM (MST)[p]GSJ

I think it is pretty clear who the wolf is, and who the sheep are....What is that gemstatejake that I hear from your a$$ is it BAAHAA..BAAHAA!! You must need someone to lead you around. Hopefully you have a little more resourcefulness than to follow the IDFG like the blind sheep that you must be...wake up DUDE!

I have met a few two tag holders in the feild. They whacked the 2 1/2 year old 170 class mule deer because he was the only kind good deer they could find in the unit, so they went and bought another NR tag to keep hunting and usually kill another deer because they spent the money. That is management alright. What a "F'N" joke. You would fit in well in Boise... Jake!! We will be lucky to have a deer left with brain hemorrhages like you!!
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-13-12
>AT 03:06?PM (MST)
>
>GSJ
>
>I think it is pretty clear
>who the wolf is, and
>who the sheep are....What is
>that gemstatejake that I hear
>from your a$$ is it
>BAAHAA..BAAHAA!! You
>must need someone to lead
>you around. Hopefully you
>have a little more resourcefulness
>than to follow the IDFG
>like the blind sheep that
>you must be...wake up DUDE!
>
>
>I have met a few two
>tag holders in the feild.
> They whacked the 2
>1/2 year old 170 class
>mule deer because he was
>the only kind good deer
>they could find in the
>unit, so they went and
>bought another NR tag to
>keep hunting and usually kill
>another deer because they spent
>the money. That is
>management alright. What a "F'N"
>joke. You would fit
>in well in Boise... Jake!!
>We will be lucky to
>have a deer left with
>brain hemorrhages like you!!



I'll bet you are a product of the same school district that produced dreamin'.

You're dumb as the day is long chief...



the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 
I will take that as a compliment coming from someone like you "JAKE" who supports the IDFG and the fine job of management they are doing... You have so much to be proud of. Seeing how your so fukking smart! What do you plan on telling the next generation?? When the only hunting the next generation can do is on a Cabelas video game!!


I realize speaking to the experts on MM is a complete waste of time. You may not like the way I voice my opinions, fine. I think it's time in our country you had better be willing to stand up for what you believe. I grew up mule deer hunting in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana, and have watched the slow destruction of a beautiful resource happen right in front of my own eye's. I am sick and tiered of sitting back and hoping the "educated ones" will do what is right. They the "educated ones" are failing miserably at their jobs. And it is time we hold them accountable. You may not believe what I am telling you, but hunters better wake the fuk up if you want to pass this on to the next generation. I have spent a bunch of time with "educated ones" the guy's who are suppose to be in charge, and if you define being smart being like them. I will gladly wear the title of dumb ass. They are so smart their STUPID!!! By god they can write a nice letter though........
 
I generally agree with what you say here. My opinion on the matter is that IDFG is fighting a battle they cant win no matter what they do. Larger forces than them or us are in play. Mule deer, I believe, are on their way out. For most of us I think the time is comeing when hunting mulies will be a "special" opportunity. One we do not get to participate in every year. I've pretty much already made that decision for myself.

One of the many, many, problems associated with the decline is that outside of a handful of people like guys on this board, NOBODY GIVES A $HIT. Have you ever tried talking about the state of mulies to a non-hunter? thier eyes just glaze over and they have no idea what you're saying nor do they care.

Occasionally a few well meaning individuals will get a foundation or club started with the intention of helping turn things around. As more people with differing agendas get involved, the whole thing turns to $hit. I point-blank distrust the bigger "conservation" groups and I think we all know the ones I'm reffering to.

This problem is massive and so multi-dimensional I don't think it will ever be overcome. In the end all we can really do is manage ourselves as we see fit.









the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".
 

Similar threads

D
Mule deer decline in Utah
Replies
37
Views
1k
ridgetops
ridgetops
ChocolateLabNut
New Mexico Mule Deer
Replies
11
Views
1k
Slick8
Slick8
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
6k
Vanilla
Vanilla

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Fantastic Bull Elk Score
IMG_0779.jpeg
2D5054E7-4022-42D2-A3C2-9495AA07707D.jpeg
3F10D0BB-AB15-4C50-B136-C44D1CBB3B8A.jpeg
IMG_3560_Fotor.jpg
001.JPG
IMG_2154.JPG
Fantastic Valles Caldera Bull
C9DC563D-1485-43A1-AF09-BAB2784226DB.jpeg
6x7c.jpg
6C1689DB-A127-41EE-B2CC-6399ACBD02D3.jpeg
95CB243F-E16A-4FFA-BCDB-480824A6BBF0.jpeg

Idaho Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Bearpaw Outfitters

Idaho Deer & Elk Allocation Tags, Plus Bear, Bison, Lion, Moose, Turkey and Montana Prairie Dogs.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, whitetail, bear, lion and wolf hunts and spend hundreds of hours scouting.

Jokers Wild Outdoors

Trophy elk, whitetail, mule deer, antelope, bear and moose hunts. 35k acres of private land.

Back
Top Bottom