Preachers of No Tag Cuts

B

BowHuntr

Active Member
Messages
276
I have a question for all the people who are against tag cuts, because they claim it will do nothing for the deer population.

Question is....

Do you guys believe in the accuracy of the population statistics the UDWR generates in this state? Do you think that counting deer, post-season, in 7 areas throughout the entire state is really acheiving the most accurate population statistics possible?

You must, if you are claiming that tag cuts will do nothing for the population.

In any population mangagement there is a point, or "threshold" when harvest can have a direct impact on survival rates. In other words, harvest is no longer considered compensatory (deer would have died anyway).

Also, if harvest rates are not being managed in proportion to "actual" herd numbers, the result could be an insufficient number of mature bucks to breed all receptive does...which would reduce the fawn crop and potentially impact the population as a whole.

Over the last few years, there are more and more sportsmen, former dwr biologists, and biologists from federal agencies speaking out against the UDWR's mule deer population statistics throughout many areas in the state. How can they effectively manage harvest rates, the number of hunters afield, etc...when they are not doing enough to gather more accurate population data? Will the accuracy ever be 100%? No, simply due to the nature of managing a wild population...but it can be leaps and bounds from where it is now.

Plain and simple...The UDWR IS NOT doing enough when it comes to deer inventories, to effectively manage our herds in this state.

When a management plan is structed around a lack of sufficient inaccurate, un-reliable, population data...any claim made about deer numbers or effects on populations becomes inaccurate and un-reliable itself.

The people I have talked to who are in favor of option #2 are in favor because it would force the following:

Upgraded deer inventories = stronger indication of actual deer numbers, age-classes, fawn-to-doe, and buck-to-doe ratios.

Upgraded harvest data = stronger, more reliable numbers of buck harvest data

This would equate to enhanced data analyses, which would help gain a better understanding about the numbers and dynamics of our deer herds in this state.

WHICH...could possibly lead to tag cuts, thus lost opportunity, because it's in the best interest of the population.



BowHuntr
 
5236deadhorse1.jpg


Really?
 
Not really a dead horse! Just one that most hunters are passionate about. Guess we'll all see this week!

+1 on the original post.

There are not enough deer in Utah...FOR REAL.
 
Dead horse? Not hardly Aaron!!! I hope for our sakes it's never a "Dead Horse" or we as sportsmen and women are not doing our part.

GREAT POST and just about covers why I like option #2. But just like I've said before and you so eloquently put, in order for any proposal to work in the future the DWR is going to have to step up their accountability and improve methods in which they gather actual deer numbers. Otherwise, ya, I gues you could call it "beating a dead horse".

It's always an adventure!!!
 
awholetlotabull why dont you and all your no 2 guys not put in for deer for the next 5 years.if your 40% did that we woulnt have to cut tags. so put up or shut up'. thats what i thought,,,,,
 
elkun - as a matter of fact, I buy a license every year and apply for a tag but I haven't hunted that tag in 5 years! There! I put up so now why don't YOU shut up! You don't know me or how I hunt or who I hunt with. We'll just clump you with the other personal attack low lifes on here. Uh huh, that's what i thought . . . :D


It's always an adventure!!!
 
I think they should just shut the whole thing down for a couple years get a good hard count on what they really have then manage tags acoordingly to just keep throwing stuff at numbers no one believes in including themselves seems like a no win deal to me im fron So.Utah originally and remember the good old days dont expect them back but we should get something better than what we got now what would it hurt to miss a couple years of hunting if it payed off and put things more stable hell i remember when you could only hunt elk every other year wasnt the end of the world families could still plan there hunts maybe we should try it with deer after a two year layoff and give them time to come up with a decent management plan otherwise same old bs jmo
 
He sure does, you should pay attention you may learn something.

Nv, the last thing we should ever consider doing is completely shutting the hunt down. If you did that the anti's would funnel so much money into the state to fight the re-opening. That's exactly the step they would want us to take. Not wise IMO.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-30-10 AT 05:02PM (MST)[p]I agree we need to see more tag cuts, actually I think we need a bigger cut than 13,000. That is just a personal preference, cause I would like to see more bucks and more of those bucks mature.

HOWEVER, I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH THE ORIGINAL POST. Cutting buck tags Will Not grow the population. You mentioned the threshold, well where is that? What is the threshold? I agree that eventually there will be a threshold, but deer have been studied enough that we know about where that threshold is. You may not like the DWR, but that doesn't mean that their numbers are all wrong. It does not mean that the threshold you talk about is not the #'s that the DWR has itterated. Growing the deer population really has nothing to do with cutting buck tags. Our statewide buck/doe has remained above that threshold. Is our deer population as large as it was 20 years ago? No, but cutting buck tags is not going to help the population grow. That has been explained many times at the RAC's and is basic wildlife biology.

Again, I would like to see larger tag cuts, but that is because I would like to see a greater proportion of bucks in the population and a greater proportion of buks in the older age class.

Really, the 3 options on the table before the RAC's and the Board has nothing to do with the health of the population, they are more proposals for the social aspect of hunting. The DWR is still attempting to try and reach a balance between those of us that want proportionately more bucks in the population and bigger bucks, and those people that would like to hunt every year and don't care about the number or size of bucks. This is not realy a biological issue, but rather a social issue. You got to admit, that it is a pretty hard thing for the DWR, the RAC's, and the Board to do, to try and balance that.
 
Rackster,

I never said that cutting back tags will instantly grow the population.

I proposed a question for all the people saying that cutting tags will do nothing for the population. Suggesting that they must believe every mule deer statistic regarding population dynamics, generated by the DWR. If so, all our sub-populations are perfectly healthy and harvest is having no impact on survival.

Population management instructs that in a healthy, self-sustaining, properly managed deer herd cutting buck tags will not grow populations.

Where you run into trouble, is when the population statistics you project as well as the herd dynamics are FAR from being accurate.

We've seen the DWR's system be faulty with the Parker Antelope herd. There are A LOT of people speaking out against numbers they feel are no where close to being accurate, regarding mule deer throughout the state.

If in fact there are areas throughout the state where acutal deer statistics are not close to accurate with what the DWR projects them to be...then closer examination (enhanced inventories/statistics) are needed to determine if harvest, in these specific areas, is having a direct impact on survival. If so,then tag cuts are required for the sake of that specific population.

BowHuntr
 
Cutting tags will not grow the herd. That will just leave less people to kill the same amount of deer!!! You might save a FEW bucks, but if we have more deer (DOES) then the problem will take care of itself.
More does= more fawns
more fawns= more does and bucks

WE NEED TO FIGURE A WAY TO GET MORE DOES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE BUCKS WILL COME.

IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME.

Build the herd, the bucks will come!!

CUT CUT CUT is not the answer, unless you are talking about doe tags.
 
Here is the problem as I see it with cutting tags. I start thinking about the book cliffs. It was shut down and was to return as a general hunting area. Well it opens up and people see lots of bucks and they don't want to open it back up. Fast forward to the past couple of years. There are 4 point bucks around the corner of every turn, and even though it is a "non-trophy unit" people get bent out of shape when they don't see a grundle of 30" bucks.

I fear this is the same trail we will head down with these new options. Before we know it there will be less then 40,000 tags state wide which sounds like a bum deal for the majority of Utah deer hunters.

alpinebowman

>>>---shots that are true pass right through--->
 
If a cattleman wants to make a good living he has to have as many calves as possible every year. He wants to have lots of momma cows that are having calves that survive that he can take to auction. He makes sure he has a handfull of good bulls that can get his cows bred, but he doesn't want any more bulls than he has to have to get the job done. He has a limited amount of pasture and it is expensive to feed hay in the winter. He can only carry so many cows every year, so he has to find a way to make his herd as productive as possible so he can make some $$$.

Trying to grow a deer herd isn't much different than trying to make a living with cows. You need to make sure you have enough bucks around to get all the does bred, but you don't want a ton of bucks taking up your limited pasture (habitat). You do want to have a lot of does getting bred and having babies every year.

Whether you agree with the DWR's population estimates or not, deer populations in Utah don't seem to be growing. However, buck harvest isn't whats keeping the deer population from growing. Limiting buck harvest will produce more and bigger bucks, but it won't grow more deer. If you want bigger deer than by all means ask for tag cuts, but don't try to justify it as a method to grow more deer or "save the deer herd".

Carrying capacity is defined as the number of animals that an area can sustainably support. It appears that the deer population in UT has hit carrying capacity. There may be units with oodles of winter range, plenty of summer range,etc., but a unit is only as good a it's weakest link. If the unit has too many predators, too much roadkill, not enough transition habitat, etc, then that unit won't hold more deer until something changes increasing the carrying capacity. Sportsmen and the DWR have spent millions trying to increase the carrying capacity for deer in UT. So far, nothing seem have produced the results most of us want. Hopefully some of the habitat work, predator control, etc. can start paying off soon. But for now, our deer population seems to be stagnant and I don't think killing bucks is what is holding back our population.

By the way, the DWR currently does manage deer on a unit by unit basis. Deer are classified, predators management plans are written, and habitat projects are are conducted on a unit by unit basis. Harvest data is collected on a unit by unit basis. The only thing the DWR doesn't do on a unit by unit basis is buck hunting. To argue that unit by unit hunting will allow the DWR to "manage" better or have better data for management isn't accurate.



Dax

There is no such thing as a sure thing in trophy mule deer hunting.
 
AMEN DAXTER! Good post!

I am also thinking about the impact of shed hunters on the herd. I do like to go shed hunting but not like alot of people do. I wont chase deer in the snow blah blah blah. But, with all the other guys out there, could this have an affect on the does carring fawns in the belly that are getting pushed, even just a little bit, and make the doe use more energy for herself and less for the fawn to become healthier and stronger at birth?

Just a thought.

Sorry about any spelling errors, I am not an english major. I know some guys get bent out of shape for spelling.
 
Deer/Elk get pushed around everyday in winter or summer with Traffic/Predators/weather/people/feed/etc.
I don't think shed hunting will be at the top of that list. IMO

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
 
in winter any'thing that makes a deer use its energy is bad. shed hunting would be on that list. ask any biologist.
 
Let's not kid ourselves guys:

Everyone disguises their passion for killing a 200" buck behind the "I'm concerned about the biological condition of the herd" mask.

I'll let ya'll battle it out with the exact numbers (I'm sure there are some livestockmen in here somewhere), but consider this question:

In a livestock population, one that is easily controllable, from numbers to loss to feed/water/cover, would it be biologically sound to have a cow:bull ration higher than 1:25?

For those of you not familiar with herd management please refer to this link http://animalscience.tamu.edu/images/pdf/beef/beef-bull-mgmt.pdf

It's a study published by Texas A&M.

In it you will see that rations of 1:50 were actually as, if not more productive. You will also find in the reading that breeding members of a herd became significantly less productive as they age( decreasing movility, sperm count, etc.) and should be replaced by younger breeders.

Robiland and Dax are right on the money. Males don't have offspring. Period. End of story.

With regards to the DWR's efforts to count every deer in the the State of Utah. . . . . . these guys (and gals) make 35k a year and have wives and families just like everyone else. They are on call seven days a week and there are less than 20 in the entire state (including COs and wildlife biologists). How many man hours do you think it would require to count every deer in the state of Utah accurately?

Last but not least, in the end, the recommendations published by the wildlife biologists are seldom followed as they are presented, ie. political pressure, wildlife pressure, and RAC's. Believe it or not, everyone on these boards and everyone at every RAC meeting, wildlife board meeting, etc. has more influence over the future of our deer herd than any DWR biologist ever dreamed of having.

So let's be honest with ourselves here. Does the majority want to hunt deer every year or does the majority want to get a chance to kill a "trophy" deer every fifth year? If it's the latter try not to pretend you are primarily concerned with the biological well being of the mule deer in Utah. (stir stir stir)
 
+10000

Dax, and Indian

Too many guys here seem to think that cutting tags is the only answer.



respect my authorita
 
I think there needs to be an increase in preditor control. Coyote and bobcats are hard on does and fawns. Lions are hard on the big bucks that are by them self and easy to kill after the rut. Having county trappers or gov trappers could help alot in this problem. There out all the time and when thats all you do you have more time to keep everything checked and up to par with laws. The check laws make it hard for the normal person to hunt preditors. This is what we have in Casper Wy, where I live and it works. All though we have a great trapper that knows how to kill preditors.
 
Daxter, I agree with you. The problem is a lot of units don't have a "couple good bulls". I know I will be told otherwise and I know how many it supposedly takes to breed, but that's my opinion.
 
DAX wrote - "By the way, the DWR currently does manage deer on a unit by unit basis. Deer are classified, predators management plans are written, and habitat projects are are conducted on a unit by unit basis. Harvest data is collected on a unit by unit basis. The only thing the DWR doesn't do on a unit by unit basis is buck hunting. To argue that unit by unit hunting will allow the DWR to "manage" better or have better data for management isn't accurate."

Correct me if I'm wrong DAX, but as stated by Anis at the WB board meeting yesterday, the DWR gets their numbers, not from physical counts, but by computer generated models based on 7 different areas (not units) in the state using harvest numbers obtained from check stations, harvest surveys, etc. So, saying they already "manage" (and I use that term loosely) on a unit basis alread,y isn't entirely true is it? They base their habitat carrying capacity and permit numbers off of the W.A.G. theory using ONLY 7 different areas of the state. I would really like to know which areas these are. That's an awful small portion to be basing long term decisions on for the entire deer herd in Utah.




It's always an adventure!!!
 
Maybe you misunderstood Anis, but that isn't how it's done.

The DWR collects classification data on a unit by unit basis in every unit in the state every year. This is when biologists get the fawn-to-doe and buck-to-doe ratios. Through the telephone survey hunter harvest data is also collected on a unit by unit basis. This data which is collected every year is put into a model along with estimates of deer survival. In the past, these survival estimates were based on historic research.

Starting last winter, the DWR put radio collars on hundreds of does and fawns across 7 units in the state to get more current data on survival. Now that the DWR has radio collars on does and fawns they can get a much better survival estimate each year based on real deer in the state, not numbers from historic research. A study like this is huge, time consuming, and really expensive, so the DWR is only doing it on a handful of units that are hopefully representative of other units in the state. I would guess that these are the 7 units Anis talked about. While not perfect, this data has to be better than survival estimates based on historic research.

The buck-to-doe and fawn-to-doe ratios, harvest survey data, and survival estimates are put into a fairly complicated computer-based mathematical population model and a population estimate is calculated for each individual unit in the state (in a couple cases two adjacent units are combined for modeling).

I don't see how managing buck hunting on a unit by unit basis will make population management easier or better. That being said, it will make it easier to manage for increased trophy quality, especially in areas that chronically suffer. Hunters that draw tags may see proportionally more bucks, and better buck quality. With that being the goal of this change to hunt structure, I think it will be at least marginally successful. I still don't think it will translate into the kind of increases in quality that sportsmen are expecting. And, I still assert that saying this change will make it easier to grow deer populations isn't accurate.

However, I guess all I can do now is roll with it, and hope it produces some bigger bucks and fun hunts in the future. I think a lot of guys didn't quite know what they were asking for, or exactly why they were asking for it.

Dax

There is no such thing as a sure thing in trophy mule deer hunting.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-10 AT 09:08PM (MST)[p]DAX - I appreciate the answer. I learned more in your couple of paragraphs than I have in several meetings with the DWR. Do you ever let anybody come ride along with you?

Just so you know, someone stood up and asked the specific question to Anis, "how do you do your counts?" His exact words were "we don't do physical counts anymore". Then he mentioned "several different units" and left it at that. A lot of room for misinterpretation.

Again, thanks for that explanation. And I'm serious about riding along one day if you're up to it. Prism will vouch for me. I'm really not that bad of a guy.:D



It's always an adventure!!!
 
I hope it helps. I post here on MM as a sportsman, just another guy that loves mule deer. I don't claim to be the worlds leading expert or the authority, but do think I sometimes add a different perspective that not a lot of guys have. I am not always right, and I have plenty of personal opinions when it comes to mule deer hunting and management.

If you are going to be in the basin send me a PM and we'll go for a ride. Here is a pic I took tonight while I was out. I really enjoy this time of year.

P1030098-1.jpg


Dax

There is no such thing as a sure thing in trophy mule deer hunting.
 

Similar threads

F
1.8 Satisfaction rate for Thousand Lakes
Replies
34
Views
2k
SS!
SS!
C
Wasatch thoughts
2
Replies
193
Views
5k
elkassassin
elkassassin
M
JCR, statistics, counts, objectives and harvest reports
Replies
33
Views
2k
mightyhunter
M

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

51D4D72F-7DD6-49EE-9D61-8DF0892AF43C.jpeg
48E2E92C-2E03-4748-8803-4DD8A7FCFAA0.jpeg
Screenshot_20201006-091043_Gallery.jpg
aaa-buck-6.jpg
20171027_094003.jpeg
IMG_8625.jpeg
1113201335_HDR.jpg
3.jpg
IMG_0255.jpeg
C58CA0EA-37AF-4D31-8ABC-DF535D7811B0.jpeg
20191102_083307.jpg
20220919_080641.jpg
Back
Top Bottom