Southern RAC meeting???
- Thread starter shotgun1
- Start date
K
klbzdad
Guest
DeLoss Christenson would be the mathematician you are inquiring about. He's also the father of Muley73. I'm sure he went around the state and did his own ACTUAL COUNT to come up with those numbers. And by state, I mean the state of Loa, Utah.
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
Muley_73
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,788
LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13 AT 01:39PM (MST)[p]LOL. His numbers come from using the current calculation methods that the DWR uses. Im sure he would be happy to explain it to you. If you use the methods the Division currently uses and plug in the numbers that they claimed at that time that is where the # comes from. So guess we decide if the numbers were wrong then are they wrong now?
Not sure where the Loa,UT came in from????
Not sure where the Loa,UT came in from????
K
klbzdad
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13 AT 02:16PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13 AT 02:15?PM (MST)
>LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13
>AT 01:39?PM (MST)
>
>LOL. His numbers come from
>using the current calculation methods
>that the DWR uses.
>Im sure he would be
>happy to explain it to
>you. If you use
>the methods the Division currently
>uses and plug in the
>numbers that they claimed at
>that time that is where
>the # comes from.
>So guess we decide if
>the numbers were wrong then
>are they wrong now?
>
Comical. He should know better. On second thought, he knows what he's doing. Trying to continue to vilify the division no matter what method they are using to determine populations. Why doesn't he personally fund an actual physical count on your beloved Pauns? Because it would be a waste of money? Yup. The divisions numbers aren't perfect, admittedly, but they continue to improve over the methods used in 1993. We are NEVER going to see "the good ol' day" mule deer numbers again. And once the true "average joe" become alienated because opportunity is taken away, the demand for those precious King's Tags will diminish and then who's going to manage the public trust? We, average hunters, account for more of the division's funding that all 200 tags combined. Keep raising tag prices, eliminating opportunity, and making those who do their best to manage game AND public expectations and I will be one who will find another place to spend my hard earned money and will also stop doing the hard work in the field that now benefits wildlife. If we stop showing up to do projects funded by any org, then what?
As far as numbers and counts go:
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/Methods_for_Monitoring_Mule_Deer_Populations.pdf
But you'll say its propaganda from the top wildlife biologists in the western hemisphere. I tend to think they are smarter than most of us.
http://www.amazon.com/Mule-Deer-Conservation-Management-Strategies/dp/0974241504
Best $40.00 you could possibly spend. Oh, and who do you suppose funded most of the projects from USU? Hmmmmm
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/online version/muledeerinthewest/countingtheherds.html
Again, propaganda from smarter people than you and I.....
https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog...e+Conservation+Management+and+Analysis+Portal
This should be of interest to you if you're willing to dive into it. I have, its telling.
Finally, some more reading for you. Should keep you occupied and honestly, I'm not trying to change your mind. Instead, trying to show you that Fur, Feather, and Fin Cops and biologists aren't stupid and aren't out to screw hunters and sportsmen.
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com...n States and Provinces Deer and Elk Workshop/
>Not sure where the Loa,UT came
>in from????
I was under the impression that Loa was ground zero for the roots of SFW and Friends of the Pauns. Thus, its own entity and wildlife capital of the Southern Region. Or some would want to believe. I could be wrong though.
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
>LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13
>AT 01:39?PM (MST)
>
>LOL. His numbers come from
>using the current calculation methods
>that the DWR uses.
>Im sure he would be
>happy to explain it to
>you. If you use
>the methods the Division currently
>uses and plug in the
>numbers that they claimed at
>that time that is where
>the # comes from.
>So guess we decide if
>the numbers were wrong then
>are they wrong now?
>
Comical. He should know better. On second thought, he knows what he's doing. Trying to continue to vilify the division no matter what method they are using to determine populations. Why doesn't he personally fund an actual physical count on your beloved Pauns? Because it would be a waste of money? Yup. The divisions numbers aren't perfect, admittedly, but they continue to improve over the methods used in 1993. We are NEVER going to see "the good ol' day" mule deer numbers again. And once the true "average joe" become alienated because opportunity is taken away, the demand for those precious King's Tags will diminish and then who's going to manage the public trust? We, average hunters, account for more of the division's funding that all 200 tags combined. Keep raising tag prices, eliminating opportunity, and making those who do their best to manage game AND public expectations and I will be one who will find another place to spend my hard earned money and will also stop doing the hard work in the field that now benefits wildlife. If we stop showing up to do projects funded by any org, then what?
As far as numbers and counts go:
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/Methods_for_Monitoring_Mule_Deer_Populations.pdf
But you'll say its propaganda from the top wildlife biologists in the western hemisphere. I tend to think they are smarter than most of us.
http://www.amazon.com/Mule-Deer-Conservation-Management-Strategies/dp/0974241504
Best $40.00 you could possibly spend. Oh, and who do you suppose funded most of the projects from USU? Hmmmmm
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/online version/muledeerinthewest/countingtheherds.html
Again, propaganda from smarter people than you and I.....
https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog...e+Conservation+Management+and+Analysis+Portal
This should be of interest to you if you're willing to dive into it. I have, its telling.
Finally, some more reading for you. Should keep you occupied and honestly, I'm not trying to change your mind. Instead, trying to show you that Fur, Feather, and Fin Cops and biologists aren't stupid and aren't out to screw hunters and sportsmen.
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com...n States and Provinces Deer and Elk Workshop/
>Not sure where the Loa,UT came
>in from????
I was under the impression that Loa was ground zero for the roots of SFW and Friends of the Pauns. Thus, its own entity and wildlife capital of the Southern Region. Or some would want to believe. I could be wrong though.
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
T
TheElitehornhunter
Guest
Deloss, pulled those numbers out of his own A$$. The deer population wasn't anywhere near 1.2 million. I blame the education system on the lack of intelligences for Deloss. Lets see we also had a huge winter kill in 1992 and 1993, but I guess Deloss doesn't remember this from his short term memory loss.
PleaseDear
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 10,451
DC is a stand-up guy.
If all he has is the 'numbers provided by the DWR' then he is spot on with his number of deer presentation.
Yeh--I know he comes across as the 'Neutral Voice for $FW' on many RAC/Wildlife Board presentations....but I truely believe he is an honest guy.
Robb
If all he has is the 'numbers provided by the DWR' then he is spot on with his number of deer presentation.
Yeh--I know he comes across as the 'Neutral Voice for $FW' on many RAC/Wildlife Board presentations....but I truely believe he is an honest guy.
Robb
huntinfanatic
Active Member
- Messages
- 778
I was at the RAC meeting and personally enjoyed listening to Deloss' speech directed at RAC member Clair Woodbury. The impression I get from Clair is that he doesn't care if there is only one deer left in the state as long as everyone gets a tag every year.
2lumpy
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 8,030
LAST EDITED ON Apr-11-13 AT 11:48PM (MST)[p]Source of Information:
Utah Annual Big Game Report 2011 Page 12 and Page 46
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/annual_reports/11_bg_report.pdf
Estimated Buck Percentage Buck Harvest
Year Population Harvest vs Estimated Population
1983 286,100 18,929 15.11%
2010 1,247,361 82,552 15.11%
1995 240,000 24,763 9.69%
This may explain why people that have spent 50 years in the field hunting and observing mule deer keep saying there are hardly any deer left. If you are younger that 40 years old and have only spend the last 20 years watching mule deer, you can't understand why us old jerks keep complaining about the loss of the resource. By 1993 the State had lost over a million of the high point of 1,247,361 deer. So the most deer anyone that started watching mule deer after 1993 has seen is 318,000, which was in 2012, according to the 2013 UDWR's declaration in the April 9th RAC meeting in Beaver.
For many years, sportsmen have been told the reason for the huge decline in mule deer in 1993 (to 240,000 +/-) was due to a very severe winter. This is true but like so many things folks do when they are trying to win an argument or justify their behavior, it is only partially accurate. The whole truth is this: the 1993 winter was severe, especially in northern Utah ie. The Wasatch and on north to the Idaho border. From Nephi south, the winter was more typical, cold and wet but nothing like it was in the north. Apparently large numbers of deer in the northern part of the State died due to privation and starvation. However, if you could review the old Utah Big Board minutes (but I don't believe those minutes are available through the UDWR, I wish they were) you would see that sportsmen from Central and particularly from South East and South West Utah were complaining to the Board in 1991 and 1992 that our deer herds were declining rapidly and were calling for some kind of action to stop the decline. This was before the winter of 93. If you can get a hold of UDWR antlerless harvest numbers from 1985 through 1992 you will see why some of these southern deer herds were rapidly declining in numbers. You have to remember that southern Utah sportsmen pushed for and got a five year antler restriction hunt for a few of the lowest buck doe ratio units in 1984 and the local UDWR agents opposed the Board?s decision to do that. Those agents were quick to remind sportsmen that ?there is more than one way to increase buck doe ratios? (which was the issue of concern in 1983, not deer numbers, as it is today) and the record shows how many antlerless tags were recommended and then issued our UDWR agents, between the years 1985 and 1992. When the winter of 1993 killed a large number of deer in northern Utah and all hell broke loose and brought about the now ?infamous? gathering of 10,000 +/- sportsmen on the steps of the Capital, and subsequent the changing of the guard at the UDWR headquarters, the agency explained the loss of deer and the corresponding reduction of tags and hunter opportunity via the end of unlimited over the counter sale of tags to a limited number of some 97,000 as being caused by an unusually harsh winter and the majority of sportsmen accepted it as fact, when in reality, the deer herds in southern Utah had been decimated 2 or 8 years prior to the winter of 93. If you are only 40 years old, how would you know any of the reasons that this old data has very real explanations behind it. If someone that attended the meetings and participated in the discussions doesn't explain, in public meeting etc., current sportsmen are left to sort out the present without a comprehensive knowledge of the past, which explains, to some degree, why we are were we are today. Those are the ?big picture? reason for the huge drop in deer number from the 1992 and 1993, as Page 45 of the Utah Annual Big Game Report 2011 shows.
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/annual_reports/11_bg_report.pdf
As you look at and consider the chart on Page 45 and you will see the line going nearly straight down from 1992 and 1993, you might ask yourself, ?what would that line look like if it went back to 1983?, 9 years earlier?, when 82,552 bucks were killed. Do you think there might be a reason why, other data in the report goes back as far as 1925 but the estimated deer population data stops at 1992. Look at the next page, Page 12, tons of data back to 1925. With all that hunter harvest data, do suppose they can't estimate total deer number prior to 1992? Of course they can and you can rest assured the number would be much, much large than most young folks will believe. The ?buck harvest to total deer population? is a very reliable ratio and way of determining the total number of deer in the State, this according to UDWR?s Anis Aoude in the December Wildlife Board meeting a couple of years ago. These are not my numbers nor are they my math, the ratios and estimates come right off the pages you can freely read on this report. All you need to do is use the UDWR?s published data, and apply their ratios. Could the ratios be off a little one way or the other? Sure, for example, look at the ratio for 1995, it's at 9.69%. Had I used that ratio the 1983 population would have been estimated at 82,552 (bucks killed in 83) times .0969 for an estimate or 799,928 total deer. Or, the 2005 ratio at 14.72% times 82,552 for an estimate of 1,215,165, again, over 1.2 million in 83 using the 2005 ratio. Yes, it's not a perfect estimate but there is something that is abundantly clear, which is my point, whether you use the most generous ratio or the worst ratio the fact remains, since 1983 we have lost most of our Utah mule deer. The folks who are insulted by my statement of 1.2 million deer would be just as insulted had I used the more generous ratio that projects a total 799,928 deer.
It also might help explain, to some degree at least, why the younger sportsmen like yourself, under 40, have such a difficult time understanding why some older sportsmen continue to complain about how few deer there are, and why they we want to reduce hunting pressure until we get a large number of these deer herds increased in total numbers.
More deer meant more opportunity in 1983 and it will mean more opportunity again, when we get these herds recruiting more fawns and growing more bucks.
I apologize for sounding like I'm in a panic at the RAC meetings, it's very difficult to make a comprehensive comment, with adequate background, so the RAC members can understand why I'm making the comment or request that I'm making, in three minutes. Some guys can, I can't, so I'm always trying to puke out 20 minutes of logic in 3 minutes. Try it sometime, see how you come across. For example, you say I said there were 1.2 million deer in 1993, in my hast I may have said 1993 but I intended to say ?in 1983 there were 1.2 million deer?, which is what I still believe I said, I guess it's on the sound recording so if you want to listen to the replay of the meeting you could prove me wrong, been wrong before, I'll survive.
I am going to regret responding to your inquire here and I promise you I hate attend RAC meetings as much or more than you detest my being there. I have, over the last 10 years beg my friends to ?leave me out of it?. They will not leave me alone! I love mule deer and mule deer hunting, I hate fighting my sportsmen friends and hunting associates. I hate it that you think poorly of me for they things I do and the comments I make at these damn RAC/WB meetings. After 38 years of these hostilities, I'm 65 years old, I'm tired and I want to be left to enjoy the few years I have left enjoying the good things in life, not this kind of gut wrench.
I spent 2 and half years explaining myself in this mule deer forum, who I am, where I came from, why I believe what I believe, the people I support, why I support them, in enough length to make everyone vomit. There is no need to go over it again, again, if you really are curious or would care to understand why my insulted friends speak poorly of me, do a simple search for 2lumpy and start reading. Pack a lunch, because the 1000 posts cover more then some forum members have written in their 10,000 posts. Like I said, there is no need to go over it again, again. Total waste of time for all of us.
I wish I could say this is the last response you'll hear from me, that is my intent, like I said, I'm tired of it and wish all of you, friends and those of you who may not be so much, please ?leave me out of it? so far as these public hearing and meeting are concerned. Paul, if you happen to read this, it in means everyone. No more! Please. I'll raise some pheasants, help kids go fishing, attend the banquets, make my small donations from time to time, do what I can in the field but I'm asking you publicly, please do not call me and ask me to attend any more of these damnable public meetings.
Thanks.
Best Regards,
DC
Utah Annual Big Game Report 2011 Page 12 and Page 46
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/annual_reports/11_bg_report.pdf
Estimated Buck Percentage Buck Harvest
Year Population Harvest vs Estimated Population
1983 286,100 18,929 15.11%
2010 1,247,361 82,552 15.11%
1995 240,000 24,763 9.69%
This may explain why people that have spent 50 years in the field hunting and observing mule deer keep saying there are hardly any deer left. If you are younger that 40 years old and have only spend the last 20 years watching mule deer, you can't understand why us old jerks keep complaining about the loss of the resource. By 1993 the State had lost over a million of the high point of 1,247,361 deer. So the most deer anyone that started watching mule deer after 1993 has seen is 318,000, which was in 2012, according to the 2013 UDWR's declaration in the April 9th RAC meeting in Beaver.
For many years, sportsmen have been told the reason for the huge decline in mule deer in 1993 (to 240,000 +/-) was due to a very severe winter. This is true but like so many things folks do when they are trying to win an argument or justify their behavior, it is only partially accurate. The whole truth is this: the 1993 winter was severe, especially in northern Utah ie. The Wasatch and on north to the Idaho border. From Nephi south, the winter was more typical, cold and wet but nothing like it was in the north. Apparently large numbers of deer in the northern part of the State died due to privation and starvation. However, if you could review the old Utah Big Board minutes (but I don't believe those minutes are available through the UDWR, I wish they were) you would see that sportsmen from Central and particularly from South East and South West Utah were complaining to the Board in 1991 and 1992 that our deer herds were declining rapidly and were calling for some kind of action to stop the decline. This was before the winter of 93. If you can get a hold of UDWR antlerless harvest numbers from 1985 through 1992 you will see why some of these southern deer herds were rapidly declining in numbers. You have to remember that southern Utah sportsmen pushed for and got a five year antler restriction hunt for a few of the lowest buck doe ratio units in 1984 and the local UDWR agents opposed the Board?s decision to do that. Those agents were quick to remind sportsmen that ?there is more than one way to increase buck doe ratios? (which was the issue of concern in 1983, not deer numbers, as it is today) and the record shows how many antlerless tags were recommended and then issued our UDWR agents, between the years 1985 and 1992. When the winter of 1993 killed a large number of deer in northern Utah and all hell broke loose and brought about the now ?infamous? gathering of 10,000 +/- sportsmen on the steps of the Capital, and subsequent the changing of the guard at the UDWR headquarters, the agency explained the loss of deer and the corresponding reduction of tags and hunter opportunity via the end of unlimited over the counter sale of tags to a limited number of some 97,000 as being caused by an unusually harsh winter and the majority of sportsmen accepted it as fact, when in reality, the deer herds in southern Utah had been decimated 2 or 8 years prior to the winter of 93. If you are only 40 years old, how would you know any of the reasons that this old data has very real explanations behind it. If someone that attended the meetings and participated in the discussions doesn't explain, in public meeting etc., current sportsmen are left to sort out the present without a comprehensive knowledge of the past, which explains, to some degree, why we are were we are today. Those are the ?big picture? reason for the huge drop in deer number from the 1992 and 1993, as Page 45 of the Utah Annual Big Game Report 2011 shows.
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/annual_reports/11_bg_report.pdf
As you look at and consider the chart on Page 45 and you will see the line going nearly straight down from 1992 and 1993, you might ask yourself, ?what would that line look like if it went back to 1983?, 9 years earlier?, when 82,552 bucks were killed. Do you think there might be a reason why, other data in the report goes back as far as 1925 but the estimated deer population data stops at 1992. Look at the next page, Page 12, tons of data back to 1925. With all that hunter harvest data, do suppose they can't estimate total deer number prior to 1992? Of course they can and you can rest assured the number would be much, much large than most young folks will believe. The ?buck harvest to total deer population? is a very reliable ratio and way of determining the total number of deer in the State, this according to UDWR?s Anis Aoude in the December Wildlife Board meeting a couple of years ago. These are not my numbers nor are they my math, the ratios and estimates come right off the pages you can freely read on this report. All you need to do is use the UDWR?s published data, and apply their ratios. Could the ratios be off a little one way or the other? Sure, for example, look at the ratio for 1995, it's at 9.69%. Had I used that ratio the 1983 population would have been estimated at 82,552 (bucks killed in 83) times .0969 for an estimate or 799,928 total deer. Or, the 2005 ratio at 14.72% times 82,552 for an estimate of 1,215,165, again, over 1.2 million in 83 using the 2005 ratio. Yes, it's not a perfect estimate but there is something that is abundantly clear, which is my point, whether you use the most generous ratio or the worst ratio the fact remains, since 1983 we have lost most of our Utah mule deer. The folks who are insulted by my statement of 1.2 million deer would be just as insulted had I used the more generous ratio that projects a total 799,928 deer.
It also might help explain, to some degree at least, why the younger sportsmen like yourself, under 40, have such a difficult time understanding why some older sportsmen continue to complain about how few deer there are, and why they we want to reduce hunting pressure until we get a large number of these deer herds increased in total numbers.
More deer meant more opportunity in 1983 and it will mean more opportunity again, when we get these herds recruiting more fawns and growing more bucks.
I apologize for sounding like I'm in a panic at the RAC meetings, it's very difficult to make a comprehensive comment, with adequate background, so the RAC members can understand why I'm making the comment or request that I'm making, in three minutes. Some guys can, I can't, so I'm always trying to puke out 20 minutes of logic in 3 minutes. Try it sometime, see how you come across. For example, you say I said there were 1.2 million deer in 1993, in my hast I may have said 1993 but I intended to say ?in 1983 there were 1.2 million deer?, which is what I still believe I said, I guess it's on the sound recording so if you want to listen to the replay of the meeting you could prove me wrong, been wrong before, I'll survive.
I am going to regret responding to your inquire here and I promise you I hate attend RAC meetings as much or more than you detest my being there. I have, over the last 10 years beg my friends to ?leave me out of it?. They will not leave me alone! I love mule deer and mule deer hunting, I hate fighting my sportsmen friends and hunting associates. I hate it that you think poorly of me for they things I do and the comments I make at these damn RAC/WB meetings. After 38 years of these hostilities, I'm 65 years old, I'm tired and I want to be left to enjoy the few years I have left enjoying the good things in life, not this kind of gut wrench.
I spent 2 and half years explaining myself in this mule deer forum, who I am, where I came from, why I believe what I believe, the people I support, why I support them, in enough length to make everyone vomit. There is no need to go over it again, again, if you really are curious or would care to understand why my insulted friends speak poorly of me, do a simple search for 2lumpy and start reading. Pack a lunch, because the 1000 posts cover more then some forum members have written in their 10,000 posts. Like I said, there is no need to go over it again, again. Total waste of time for all of us.
I wish I could say this is the last response you'll hear from me, that is my intent, like I said, I'm tired of it and wish all of you, friends and those of you who may not be so much, please ?leave me out of it? so far as these public hearing and meeting are concerned. Paul, if you happen to read this, it in means everyone. No more! Please. I'll raise some pheasants, help kids go fishing, attend the banquets, make my small donations from time to time, do what I can in the field but I'm asking you publicly, please do not call me and ask me to attend any more of these damnable public meetings.
Thanks.
Best Regards,
DC
K
klbzdad
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Apr-12-13 AT 01:12AM (MST)[p]DC,
Although critical of methods and the math, I appreciate your passion and love for deer in Utah. For what its worth, I would suggest that a more polite approach to Anis and other biologists will garner more productive results than telling them they are stupid. Probably not your intent, but that is the appearance at least at the meetings.
Also, math beyond actual records is speculative and that is exactly what many say is faulty about how the division counts animals today. Arguing speculation with speculation,despite your conviction that there were 1.2 million deer once upon a time, doesn't make a sensible argument. To think the division wouldn't rather be selling tags to hunt a healthy population of 500,000 deer in Utah isn't sensible either.
Thank you for your response. Takes a man to stand up to criticism and that deserves respect. Therefore I for one will honor your wishes out of respect. Best of luck.
Shawn
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
Although critical of methods and the math, I appreciate your passion and love for deer in Utah. For what its worth, I would suggest that a more polite approach to Anis and other biologists will garner more productive results than telling them they are stupid. Probably not your intent, but that is the appearance at least at the meetings.
Also, math beyond actual records is speculative and that is exactly what many say is faulty about how the division counts animals today. Arguing speculation with speculation,despite your conviction that there were 1.2 million deer once upon a time, doesn't make a sensible argument. To think the division wouldn't rather be selling tags to hunt a healthy population of 500,000 deer in Utah isn't sensible either.
Thank you for your response. Takes a man to stand up to criticism and that deserves respect. Therefore I for one will honor your wishes out of respect. Best of luck.
Shawn
"There is no reason why I have to tolerate your stupidity if you are unwilling to tolerate mine." ME
elkassassin
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 37,352
Keep Giving them Hell Lumpy!
40+ Years & Counting on a Poorly Managed Deer Herd in TARDville!
We know what it could be!
We know what it is today!
It Ain't gonna Change with all the Greed Involved!
I've Hunted all my Life for the One Special Buck that goes on the Wall!
Still don't have Him & probably never will!
I'll keep PISSCUTTIN along with 97,000 other TARDS knowing that a TARDville Buck that lives past the Ripe Ole Age of 4 is almost Impossible these days!
The Dew I had for Breakfast wasn't Bad so I had one more for Dessert!
40+ Years & Counting on a Poorly Managed Deer Herd in TARDville!
We know what it could be!
We know what it is today!
It Ain't gonna Change with all the Greed Involved!
I've Hunted all my Life for the One Special Buck that goes on the Wall!
Still don't have Him & probably never will!
I'll keep PISSCUTTIN along with 97,000 other TARDS knowing that a TARDville Buck that lives past the Ripe Ole Age of 4 is almost Impossible these days!
The Dew I had for Breakfast wasn't Bad so I had one more for Dessert!
swbuckmaster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 5,004
+100
DC
who farted?
DC
who farted?
Way to go DC!
I'm 10 years younger than you. But I remember.The DWR is hoping the people our age will go away! They want to brainwash these young guys into beliving we won't be able to have 500,000 plus m deer again. You are right , if it was a million plus or 700k plus. We are not close to those #'s. And if the dwr can convince this young generation that we can't, then we won't. If they convince the young we can't, then they are off the hook and won't be obligated to produce .
There are just as many acers of winter range on the east side of the manti as there were in the 50's. Just shitty habitat, since the sagebrush has died off. Fix the range fix the deer. Fix the fawn doe ratios fixes the deer herd.
Yea there are some places lost forever like the wasatch front for example. So explaine why the Manti, Nine Mile, Blues, and every other rural area can't be recoverd.
If you never saw the big herds, and you agree with the dwr that we can't re establish herds in most areas. You are part of the problem. Your selling your dads and kids down the road!
I'm 10 years younger than you. But I remember.The DWR is hoping the people our age will go away! They want to brainwash these young guys into beliving we won't be able to have 500,000 plus m deer again. You are right , if it was a million plus or 700k plus. We are not close to those #'s. And if the dwr can convince this young generation that we can't, then we won't. If they convince the young we can't, then they are off the hook and won't be obligated to produce .
There are just as many acers of winter range on the east side of the manti as there were in the 50's. Just shitty habitat, since the sagebrush has died off. Fix the range fix the deer. Fix the fawn doe ratios fixes the deer herd.
Yea there are some places lost forever like the wasatch front for example. So explaine why the Manti, Nine Mile, Blues, and every other rural area can't be recoverd.
If you never saw the big herds, and you agree with the dwr that we can't re establish herds in most areas. You are part of the problem. Your selling your dads and kids down the road!
elkfromabove
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,122
LAST EDITED ON Apr-12-13 AT 08:15PM (MST)[p]>I was at the RAC meeting
>and personally enjoyed listening to
>Deloss' speech directed at RAC
>member Clair Woodbury. The impression
>I get from Clair is
>that he doesn't care if
>there is only one deer
>left in the state as
>long as everyone gets a
>tag every year.
And I did not enjoy Deloss' speech BECAUSE it was directed at Clair. Clair is an "at large" rep and he represents the general public regardless of his personal views and DWR surveys show overwhelmingly that the general public would rather have a tag every year than wait 3 or 4 years just to get a trophy. Whether you or Deloss (or I) agree with that or not, Clair was doing what he agreed to do (and he said so) and should not have been targeted for doing it. Whether his figures are right or wrong, the tactics Deloss uses will backfire every time because they just create an underdog and everyone likes the underdog, with a few exceptions obviously.
>and personally enjoyed listening to
>Deloss' speech directed at RAC
>member Clair Woodbury. The impression
>I get from Clair is
>that he doesn't care if
>there is only one deer
>left in the state as
>long as everyone gets a
>tag every year.
And I did not enjoy Deloss' speech BECAUSE it was directed at Clair. Clair is an "at large" rep and he represents the general public regardless of his personal views and DWR surveys show overwhelmingly that the general public would rather have a tag every year than wait 3 or 4 years just to get a trophy. Whether you or Deloss (or I) agree with that or not, Clair was doing what he agreed to do (and he said so) and should not have been targeted for doing it. Whether his figures are right or wrong, the tactics Deloss uses will backfire every time because they just create an underdog and everyone likes the underdog, with a few exceptions obviously.
elkassassin
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 37,352
So?
Everybody wants a PISSCUTTER Tag!
And they want a PISSCUTTER Tag every year!
This is easy Arithmetic!
Too Many TARDS & not enough PISSCUTTERS!
QUOTE From Most TARDS:
I didn't even see a PISSCUTTER,but BY GAWD I had a PISSCUTTER Tag & really Enjoyed being part of the PUMPKIN Patch!
The Dew I had for Breakfast wasn't Bad so I had one more for Dessert!
Everybody wants a PISSCUTTER Tag!
And they want a PISSCUTTER Tag every year!
This is easy Arithmetic!
Too Many TARDS & not enough PISSCUTTERS!
QUOTE From Most TARDS:
I didn't even see a PISSCUTTER,but BY GAWD I had a PISSCUTTER Tag & really Enjoyed being part of the PUMPKIN Patch!
The Dew I had for Breakfast wasn't Bad so I had one more for Dessert!
huntinfanatic
Active Member
- Messages
- 778
The only issue I had with Clair was the fact the he didnt seem to care about anything except for issuing as many tags as possible for every species possible regardless of herd health. That would be great if everyone could have whatever tag they desired every year but the truth of the matter is that is not possible if we want to keep the resources around for our children and grandchilren to enjoy in the future. That was Deloss' point. At some point we have to do whats best for the herds not just making sure everyone gets to hunt every year. But of course that is just my opinion, not that it matters.
elkfromabove
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,122
LAST EDITED ON Apr-12-13 AT 09:12PM (MST)[p]>EFA,
>I thought we wanted biology based
>managment. I WANT lots
>of things .....including a deer
>tag every year. However
>that's just not how the
>world works.
We do, but what does killing excess bucks have to do with it and why are you targeting me for giving you general survey results? It's the 70% or so that want to hunt every year you need to convince how the world works. Maybe you should team up with someone who uses PISSCUTTER/TARD tactics to convince them. That oughts work! I know it worked on this old geezer who spent 15 years working with some great special needs kids (Down syndrome, spina bifida, autistic, ceribral palsy, etc.) 2 hours per day, 4 days per week during school, teaching them to swim and drown-proofing them. You better get on it, it's gonna take a while.
>I thought we wanted biology based
>managment. I WANT lots
>of things .....including a deer
>tag every year. However
>that's just not how the
>world works.
We do, but what does killing excess bucks have to do with it and why are you targeting me for giving you general survey results? It's the 70% or so that want to hunt every year you need to convince how the world works. Maybe you should team up with someone who uses PISSCUTTER/TARD tactics to convince them. That oughts work! I know it worked on this old geezer who spent 15 years working with some great special needs kids (Down syndrome, spina bifida, autistic, ceribral palsy, etc.) 2 hours per day, 4 days per week during school, teaching them to swim and drown-proofing them. You better get on it, it's gonna take a while.
