Fix to the Mule Deer Buck to Doe Ratios on General Units

[Broadside_Shot]

This might sound a little Radical but....

Lets take things into our own hands. If the deer herd needs help then lets help them. Its very simple

Everyone put in for the tag that they usually do (Archery, Muzzy, Rifle, Antlerless, etc.)

This way the Division gets there money but when it comes time for you to hunt just get together with everyone else and have a BBQ and throw your tags in the fire. Lets call it a Fireside.

If there are a 100,000 tags available for bucks and the normal success rates are 40% across the board then 40,000 Bucks get killed each year. If you can convince half of those people to participate in the Fireside then we save 20,000 bucks in one year without any money lost.

Do the same for Antlerless and you save a bunch of does.

In one year you could probably increse each unit by 10 bucks more per 100 does.

Do this every 5 years and the deer numbers are back up.

It's should be nothing for a Sportsman to donate 35 Dollars to help save the deer.

I saw this happen on the Book Cliffs. They closed it down for two years and the Buck to Doe ratio went from 2/100 t0 50/100

Just a thought.

 

[DR_DEATH]

LAST EDITED ON Sep-29-10 AT 02:31PM (MST)[p]Go ahead and do it. No one is stopping you.

I did it last year as a dedicated hunter except for the burning of the tag. I turned it back into the DWR. I think it's a good idea to improve the deer herds but will not work for everyone. You might get a few thousand people to do it, but no way on earth are you going to get 75000-100000.

 

[travishunter3006]

this should make for a good lond winded post...

kind of a cool concept. but nobody will do it. everyone wants the chance to hunt, so i'd throw my tag in the fire then go get another one reprinted from the division, pay my ten bucks to do so and sneek out while everyone else was BBQ'ing. great concept but the idea of the whole thing is not to stop hunting.

 

[Broadside_Shot]

I don't want to stop hunting. We could go hunt elk that year, maybe help the bull to cow ratio out that the division says theres a problem with. That is why they brought spike tags on all the units about isn't. Don't deer an elk compete against each other. I just thought people could sacrifice one year for the sake of the deer numbers, I mean the herd is in trouble right?

 

[justr_86]

How about hunt for a mature buck and if you don't get one then you can burn it if you want or have tag soup.

 

[Broadside_Shot]

Wouldn't this be a great time for the general public and all the Sportsmans groups to work together for one purpose and not fight each other all the time. Archery hunters working with Rifle hunters, Trophy hunters working with meat hunters.

This would be a perfect time for "Hunters" to work together for the deer with little sacrifice. With all of the Sportsman Groups and there reps in each region, they could easily get their, voice heard to everyone. I know not everyone would participate, some people just don't care but most of us really do care.

One person doing it does no good you need everyone.

 

[Deerlove]

Here's a grand idea, how about the utah sportsman groups give the money generated on the expo in hit the ground for habitat. . They are given 200 tags for the convention but are required to give back ZERO. You heard correct ZERO!!!

 

[Broadside_Shot]

>How about hunt for a mature
>buck and if you don't
>get one then you can
>burn it if you want
>or have tag soup.
>

This isn't about trophy deer it is about raising the numbers of deer. If you don't kill a doe one year there a good chance she will have twins the next. If you can save 5,000 does then you can have maybe 10,000 deer the next year.

I think the trophy thing takes care of itself. The more deer means more bucks, which means a better chance more bucks will make it to a mature age.

 

[Broadside_Shot]

>Here's a grand idea, how about
>the utah sportsman groups give
>the money generated on the
>expo in hit the ground
>for habitat. . They
>are given 200 tags for
>the convention but are required
>to give back ZERO.
>You heard correct ZERO!!!


Thay may help a few deer in some select areas but I'm talking the entire state deer numbers can change. We can do this without anyone losing money except for $35 out of our own pockets

 

[knoxville471]

i'm a firm believer in the 4-point or better units they don't have any numbers or proof to back up the results of doing this just spent alot of time in units that have had 4 or better for 3-4 years then they have a 3 point or better. I have seen good bucks year after year. Ya still get to hunt and alot of hunters eat tag soup and all the little dumb bucks sitting on the trail have some time to get a few years under they're belt just my.02

 

[utaz]

I'm from out of state and I donate $270 + dollars for my tag every year(don't remember the exact dollar amount.) That is roughly 7 residents fees and I haven't shot one for 3 years...so I've donated the fees of 21 residents. I look at my tag as an access right to hunt beuitful country, with the potential of killing a nice deer. I've passed up on lots of average sized deer...just looking for a bigger one, but also I just like stomping around in areas that I grew up in with a rifle and my kids.

I liked what one said about about passing up the smaller ones and eating your tag....but I also understand that if you need the meat a smaller deer definitely can taste better, or you haven't ever shot one or someone in your party would like their first opportunity. I completely understand..I'm glad I got my first two point when young and I've been addicted ever since.

It's harder and harder to get tags in states and I'm one that feels that a reduction in tags isn't always needed....it just needs to be someone smarter then me to make some tough decisions, shorten the hunt, make some more regional decisions, smaller units, add 3 point or better units in some areas, pick weeks that might be associated with a full moon, increase tag fees during hard hit winters and reduce number of permits for that year a lone...Every 10 years it seems we loose a good percentage of the deer due to hard winters and urbanization on winter ranges complicate it even more. Tough decisions need to be made for our kids to experience what we were able to experience before.

I also think harder punishments on poaching should definately be considered.

Sometimes what works in the Southern Region may not work as well in the Northern. If you've hunted outside of Utah you can understand what a litte extra thought can do to units.

Utaz

 

[travishunter3006]

there are so many problems that throwing our tags away really wont help.

 

[Broadside_Shot]

I'm just looking at it from a stand point of not killing the deer for one year.

We all have seen what it has done to the ratios on units like the Henrys, Book Cliffs and Vernon when they didn't kill deer.

This has nothing to do with Trophy potential, I think the trophy is in the eye of the beholder. It is just a quick way of increasing numbers.

In every DWR meeting I have attended everyone talks about increasing the deer numbers, so heres and option.

I'm just afraid that there are too many people that just like to complain about things that they would never put there money where their mouth is.

 

[Sir_Huntsalot]

How about turning your unused tag back in and receive a preference point for the next years draw? You get to hunt but if you choose not to harvest, you should be able to draw the region of your choice the next year. If you harvest a trophy or a meat buck then you take your chances in the draw the following year. Instead of tag soup you get to hunt the next year. Some of us have to get something for our money spent on a tag. Most of us would think twice on a lesser trophy just to fill a tag. Lets hear your thoughts.

 

[middlefork]

I've been supporting this proposal since 1999. I buy a tag every year and the last time I punched one was 1999.

In that time I have spent upwards of twenty days a year hunting. It does not seem to make a difference. Now everybody wants to limit tag numbers to reduce the harvest. Don't you think that the people that stay in the game will be the more dedicated hunters? With perhaps better skills than than the ones that drop out. Less pressure seems to equate to less nervous game and a higher success ratio to me.

Yes and one hunter may not make a difference. But how do you eat an elephant?

 

[justr_86]

Your accomplishing the same thing if people hunt for a mature buck. Not everyone will kill one and let's the smaller immature bucks grow bringing ratios in line.