DWR replies to "does utah have a problem?"

D

deserteagle500

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Sep-20-07 AT 01:08PM (MST)[p]this was the letter that i recieved back from a very repectful gentleman with the DWR. i was glad to be able to write and revise my first post and collect more accurate thoughts. i really enjoy his explanation of management and his take on it.

the only thing i am still sceptical on is: if we reduce the number of muley tags (and i don't mean by a drastic measure) but reducing them by 5-6000 over ther whole state, how would that make hunting end? that is my last question.



relpy from DWR:


Mr Kearl, I am glad to address your concerns with regard to deer hunting in Utah. You have made some good points and some that may have stemmed more from frustration than any factual basis. The Utah Division of Wildlife puts more resources into mule deer management than you give us credit for. Some great bucks get harvested every year on general season public land units. You have accused the division of lining its pockets with elk proceeds. Limited entry elk permit revenue is minuscule when compared with our general season deer hunt permit revenue. We have so few limited entry elk tags in comparison. We are one of the smallest wildlife agencies in the west and we operate on a very tight budget. The perception that we are getting rich of any wildlife species is a false one. The main reason that we do not have more deer in the state is not hunting but the lack of quality deer range. We are currently in our fourth year of a habitat initiative to improve mule deer habitat. Through this program we have spent multiple millions of dollars to improving mule deer habitat. No other state in the west can claim that. Most hunters seem to think that the health of the deer herd can be improved by hunting fewer bucks. Nothing can be further from the truth. Every buck that survives the deer hunt will compete with fawn rearing doe on winter range. I agree with you, if we decrease the number of tags we would have more and bigger bucks but that is not necessarily a good thing when looking on a population level. Decreasing the number of tags would also mean fewer people can hunt. This will eventually lead to the end of our hunting culture. Young people have so many things competing for their time these days if we do not provide them with continuous opportunities to hunt they will lose interest and drop out of hunting altogether. The future of our sports depends on providing opportunity to hunt not a big buck every 2 to 5 years. Those hunters that are only interested in getting a big buck have that opportunity on our limited entry units. Those that want to get out and hunt can do that too. Colorado has cut their buck tags in half to achieve what you call quality. Some of their units are not much better than our general season units. Their herds are no healthier and they continue to struggle with slow growing deer herds. Colorado has many more elk than Utah and most of the displaced deer hunters still have an opportunity to hunt elk. Utah only has few elk, if we displace deer hunters we just loose those hunters. In closing I would like to thank you for providing us your comments. I urge you to think about this issue not just with a short term solution to a big buck problem but a long term solution to maintaining our hunting culture and heritage. In the end the UDWR will do what the public wants be it god bad or indifferent. Anis AoudeBig Game CoordinatorUtah Division of Wildlife ResourcesPO Box 146301Sal Lake City, Utah 84114801-231-2568 (cell)801-538-4777 (office)801-538-4709 (Fax)










beat this
 
Just to let you know Anis is not a lady. He is one of the top DWR officials over game management. I meet him at the I400 meeting he attended. Anis I a very intelligent man and every one should know he is on our side. I know he is pulling for quality for all and given more than 5 or 6 years the DWR management plans have a great chance of success. It is letters like this that show you how great of a guy he is. Everyone should meet him given a chance and he will be happy to spend time talking with you. He is open to all ideas and has great info for or against those ideas.

alpinebowman

>>>---shots that are true pass right through--->
 
alpinebowman,

thanks for the gender correction here. i updated and fixed that problem.




beat this
 
Some very valid points but the few sentences listed below concerning CO are flat out untrue. This is the mentality that is driving our dwr.

>Some of their units are not much better than our general >season units. Their herds are no healthier and they continue >to struggle with slow growing deer herds.

The real truth is some of CO's 0-1 point areas are far better in quality than Utah's best limited entry units.

Mike
 
Your saying that a 0-1 point CO area is better then say The Henry's? I don't believe that for a minute. The Henry's is one of the most sought after Deer Tags anywhere, as is the Paunsagaunt. Now if you would say it's better then the Vernon and possibly the Books then I may agree with that one.
 
>Your saying that a 0-1 point
>CO area is better then
>say The Henry's? I
>don't believe that for a
>minute. The Henry's is
>one of the most sought
>after Deer Tags anywhere, as
>is the Paunsagaunt. Now
>if you would say it's
>better then the Vernon and
>possibly the Books then I
>may agree with that one.
>

+1

Andy

-----------------------------------------------
http://www.trophyblogger.com/Andymansavage
 
Anis is a hunters biologist, an asset to hunters. The UDWR has some great biologists and if the State would pay them a little more we would have even more.

-------------------------
www.sagebasin.com
-------------------------
 
Thanks for the return mail. Sounds like this guy does care and took the time to write such a lengthy response. Also thanks for posting it here.

buck1.gif


Later, Brandon
 
I'm satisfied with his response, and I agree with what he said about Colorado as well. Notice he said SOME of their units... Cant hardly argue about specific units without more information.
 
Just like to second what Anis said. I met Anis 5 years ago while working the deer check station in Santaquin. I have worked the station for the last 5 years and Anis has been there at least one of the three days we are open each year, sometimes two day. He has great knowledge of Utah deer herds and is very concerned about the deer herds.

Mark
 
I hope everyone paid attention to what the man said is the greatest problem with the Deer herd.

HABITAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It's the same problem in all the States that have Mule Deer!
The biggest land owner of Mule Deer habitat does very little or nothing to improve the situation.

I guess the habitat around the beltway is just Fine!!
Later
Foghorn
 
I think this is a great post. Desert asked for opinions on his initial letter, no doubt revised it, and then sent it to the UDWR.

I congratulate the DWR for responding. Taking time to respond shows he at leasts cares about hunters concerns. Furthermore, he brought up some great points.

Its hard to argue that loss of habitat is the #1 continuing demise of Mule Deer.

Great job to both parties.
 
Yes, its this kind of dialogue that keeps us all moving in a similar direction and with a greater understanding of what our expectations should be...and how we can work together for improving things where and when we can.

Nice job to all contributors here.
 
so after all of my irratating comlaints, its blamed on rural sprawl? lol

here in northern utah i used to hunt around the trapper's loop area, but due to some expensive subdivisions, i had to stop. it kills me to hear some of the guys talk about how they used to hunt pheasants and ducks where my house is. and the million others too.

i guess the only thing we can do is stop living in houses. thats the only soultion! lol.






beat this
 
Im sorry boys but I do not agree with the dwr on that one. The habitat out here in the basin has not changed at all to speak of. It is too many tags that are sold, to many predators, to many cars hitting deer on the highway and for sure to many doe tags. Shooting a doe can not be fun to any one. If you need to kill something go shoot rabbits. Just cross the border into Colorado east of Vernal and you can see the differance, big time. If there are not to many tags then why not open the bookcliffs to everyone. Boy you would see a differance big time on our deer herd down there. I dont buy into the dwr stance that our sport would end if we cut tags. People are begging for permits to hunt. I think the way it is run now is why the young kids are not interested. If all a young kid can see is a lttle two point for 5 to 6 trips out in the hills, (and that is if he is lucky,) no wonder they loose interest in hunting. There is nothing on public land to hunt that is why the young find something else to do. You cant manage our deer herds by the big regions the state trys to do. Just like the north east region. Ther might be a few deer up in Rock creek but there are not any in anthro. So tell me how they manage that. They need to break the units up into smaller areas. If like say anthro or dry gulch doesnt have any deer then close that area or make that area a archery only unit for a few years to get the herd built back up. They need smaller units, with different types of weapon restrictions.
 
Drymountain - it sounds like you drive the roads too much. If you get in the back country there are decent bucks to be taken. They might not be state records but thats what the limited tags are for. I agree with much of what the DWR said in there letter. I think the area that primarily concerns me is predators. I think there are far more predators than many realize and when you have that many cats out there, they take their toll on the deer herds.
 
a mature lion kills on average a deer per week. one lion does mother nature's part of keeping the numbers in check, but an excess of them just desimates the herd.



beat this
 
From the previous post it appears that maybe Anis and Tooele are one and the same????????????

S

If you want to have a political impact then you need to certainly approach this, especially the wording, in much different manner. Again, when you say that they are failing that is only one point of view. In their view they:
1. Provide trophy hunters with several draw units
2. Provide 85,000 opportunities to hunt better than any other state. People must be happy cause they keep buying the product my friend (supply and demand)
3. Since I have been hunting I have heard family friends whine about the F & G and why they are doing it wrong and this is how they should do it. Same guys whined about the BYU, Utah coaches, couch coaches. The F&G has set up RAC meetings for people that want to be more than a couch coach. So go to them. There you may have an impact. Meet with the F & G, do something proactive.
4. The fact that you can sit in your chair and email them some aggressively toned poorly worded letter, in my opinion justifies throwing it in the garbage.

5. The problem is that you want more trophy units, you could give a damn about management as long as there are bigger bucks. Again, unfortunately as I have been proactive as of late, this appears to be the minority of the hunters. The rest of the planet wants an opportunity to enjoy the outdoors with their family and friends and maybe get some meat. If the buck is a 2 point they don't care.

6. So the F & G I agree could do a better job, but balance is the key and that includes opportunity.

T
 
I can see how the whole "habitat" thing makes sense, But Drymountain makes alot of sense too. Especially the part about the DWR saying our sport would end if they cut tag numbers. Major BS, I quit hunting because of too many people. I did get of the road too and hiked my ass off.
 
>I can see how the whole
>"habitat" thing makes sense, But
>Drymountain makes alot of sense
>too. Especially the part about
>the DWR saying our sport
>would end if they cut
>tag numbers. Major BS, I
>quit hunting because of too
>many people. I did get
>of the road too and
>hiked my ass off.









i agree with you. my entire family and extended family, save ma uncle, his son, my dad and my two brothers and me, are the only ones left hunting. all of the others quit. they figured that they could go camping anytime of the year. i say that if i'm going to pay the money for a deer tag, i'm going to shoot a deer.
beat this
 
Well said Drymountain.

I also disagree with the statement that if we cut tags we will lose those hunters forever. Heck just look at the draw odds for elk in Utah. There are thousands of hunters who are willing to wait 20 years to draw a tag. We sure haven't lost them. People who just want to hunt something will have the oppurtunity.While I don't doubt that habitat is an issue, I'm tired of hearing that if we fix the habitat everything else will fall in place. Horse hockey! I guess the Henrys,Pauns,Book Cliffs,Vernon all mysteriously have good habitat.hmmm...or could it be that they limit tags in those areas.
Cut tags (at least a little) and Micromanage.

Mike
 
exactly cabinfever. we aren't asking for them to cut all the tags in utah to 20,000 a year. we're not looking for a drastic cut, but maybe a 10,000 tag cut. make it so the draw actaully means something to those hunting units other than the southern. i don't understand why there is a draw if there are always left over tags.




beat this
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom