NR TAKE

E

eldorado

Long Time Member
Messages
8,636
As a NR, I like the establishment of 29 units. The key to their
success will be if each unit can be managed smartly and profess-
ionally. By each unit maintaining its own sustainable buck: doe
ratio, fawn: doe ratio, buck: fawn ratio, age class/ structure
diversity, and the habitat to support and sustain healthy and
viable herds, you set up IMO a better system to manage both hun-
ter and deer numbers.
The changes proposed will require time before hunters begin to
see better results in both the numbers of deer, and more import-
antly, in the quality of deer in each unit.
The question is, are hunters willing to be patient and wait for
Utah's general deer seasons to improve?

ELDORADO
 
As a Ut resident, knowing the management history, I will soon spend more time hunting as a NR elsewhere


I'll tell you who it was . . . it was that D@MN Sasquatch!
 
kawboy, the success of this proposal will be in how smartly
and professionally the UDWR manages each unit. We can hope
for the best, but changes needed to be made to the state's
abysmal general deer seasons. Let's give it a chance.

ELDORADO
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-10 AT 04:30PM (MST)[p]I see what your saying, yes it can work. However, utah has not had a great history with follow through. Things need to be managed for overall herd health. Good bucks will come, but the herd health is the most important thing. I agree with you. However, Just limiting hunters is only the tip of the iceberg. We need to focus on a bunch of other things. I would hate to see the deer hunt turn into what elk hunting is. I hope the best, however I am preparing for the worst. I have no choice but to give this a chance. I have never hunted a limited hunt in my life. And I am getting close to 30. I have been very patient, and tried to do my part. More often than not I have tag soup at the end of each deer hunt. But I want to have a chance to HUNT each year. Not wait. I don't have all the answers, I am as frustrated as everyone else. I really hope this one works. . But I am running out of faith.


I'll tell you who it was . . . it was that D@MN Sasquatch!
 
Eldorado

The buck to doe ratio is not an issue in 26 if the 29 units. 26 units are at 15+ bucks per 100 does, so growing more bucks will have zero positive impact on the deer herd health. But it will make more bucks.

That is the only difference micro managing will have.

All of the habitat and predator work is being done.

How many bucks have fawns a year?


Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
fishon, I believe that the number of bucks and fawns that
survive into the next year is important and their numbers
overall say much about the health and viability of that
herd.

ELDORADO
 
Utah has double the amount of bucks it needs for its current deer population. So tell me again how saving bucks is gonna grow more deer and help the herd and save fawns?

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
fishon, apparently you would rather piss and moan about
my post. That's your right. I, however gave my opinion
about being in favor of the UDWR establishing 29 units,
which I believe will go a long way in helping restore the
health and viability of the state's deer herds and in turn
the quality of hunting.

ELDORADO
 
And you are entitled to that opinion, but all it will do is improve the buck numbers.

That is not an opinion that is a fact based on numerous studies from several Western States.

I am not pissing and moaning about your post I am letting you know that growing more bucks will not fix the problem Utah has.

FYI, as a resident of Utah and someone who ran the MDF for several years I have a pretty good feel for what won't work with Utah's problem.



Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Fair enough. What would you suggest the UDWR do to help
both the state's deer herds and deer hunting?

ELDORADO
 
To start they need an accurate count of the deer population. (this is bucks, does and fawns).

They need an accurate count of the lion population.

They need to know what effect elk are having on deer.

They need to remove 5 times as many coyotes.

They need to find out if their is a correlation between Utah's deer decline and livestock (sheep and cattle) grazing decline on public land.

Answer those 4 questions and kill 5 times as many coyotes and you will have enough deer and bucks for EVERYONE to be happy, and pleased with the opportunity to hunt and the quality of the bucks hunted.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
>As a Ut resident, knowing the
>management history, I will soon
>spend more time hunting as
>a NR elsewhere
>
>
>I'll tell you who it was
>. . . it was
>that D@MN Sasquatch!


ha right on the nose
 
Wait I think know the answer.

10/100 buck/doe, more habitat, unlimited tags for deer, and regionwide deer hunting and being able to harvest 1 deer every 10 years if you want a 4 point. We can't have quality cause all of our does are starving to death while the bucks are eating everything in sight and leaving none of the food for anything else. It only takes 10 bucks per 100 does to biologically breed them all so we cant afford to have any surplus of bucks to hunt cause does have fawns not bucks.

How's that?

Oh wait kill all the elk too.
 
So?

It took nearly 40 years to figure out we need a bigger Deer Herd?

I'll bet it takes another 40 years to improve it from where it is today!

So tell me Tony?

The Lions have been drastically hunted down in the Book Cliffs for several years now with Quotas not being filled on several years!

Lion numbers are down in that Unit Tony!

The Deer Herd ain't all that good out there!

Looks like you're wakin up & not just blaming the Elk?

It'd be nice to see the average age of a Buck make it past the ripe old age of 4 but you know that sshit ain't happening!

I see you finally mentioned Coyotes as one of the problems,it's about time!

I like killin Coyotes as much as anybody,but FYI,you'll never hunt em down enough to fix the problem!

Gonna take some Poison!

God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
Bop

I didn't say kill the lions I said get a count on them.

I have always preached killing coyotes.

Coyotes kill more deer in Utah a year than do hunters.

Lions kill more deer in Utah than do hunters.

And coyotes and lions kill more does and fawns than they do bucks.

We need to save does and fawns so them 15 bucks per 100 does can have some good old country fun.

Again, how many fawns to bucks have a year?

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
fishon!

I've seen this Buck to Doe Ratio for many years!

I've said this for years & been laughed at for many years:

Shouldn't we be checking Fawn to Doe Ratio Survival?

Remember,I'm not a brainwashed Biologist!



God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
You mean like I suggested in my early post?

Yes, we need those numbers. I don't know anyone killing fawns but I know lots of coyotes and lions do.

Give me real numbers before you cut out hunters and their dollars when they only kill bucks.....

Lots of things to address that will grow a heard yet we only addressed the one that will grow bucks. Now that is very puzzling to me.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
>To start they need an accurate
>count of the deer population.
>(this is bucks, does and
>fawns).
>
>They need an accurate count of
>the lion population.
>
>They need to know what effect
>elk are having on deer.
>
>
>They need to remove 5 times
>as many coyotes.
>
>They need to find out if
>their is a correlation between
>Utah's deer decline and livestock
>(sheep and cattle) grazing decline
>on public land.
>
>Answer those 4 questions and kill
>5 times as many coyotes
>and you will have enough
>deer and bucks for EVERYONE
>to be happy, and pleased
>with the opportunity to hunt
>and the quality of the
>bucks hunted.
>
>Tony Abbott
>www.myfreehunts.com
>The next buck to have a
>fawn will be the
>1st.


Tony,
the only solution you give in this post is kill more coyotes.
If we answered your 4 questions, then What?
So we find out how many lions are out there, then what?
Kill more of them? I hope that's what youre saying.
So we find out elk have an adverse effect on deer populations.
then What? Harvest more elk? I hope that's what youre saying.
So we find out there is a correlation between low deer numbers and reduction in cattle grazing. Then What? Lobby for more public land grazing? I hope that's what youre saying.
So we get an accurate count of the deer population. Then What?
Habitat projects? I hope that's what youre saying.
I'm making alot of assumptions here about what youre saying but you never really said it. Please tell us what we do with the answers to your 4 questions.
 
Then we would have a place to start rather then the blindfolded throwing darts at a jigsaw puzzle that is not put together approach.

I want answers so we can come up with the right solutions.

We already know the results on a deer herd population and health by cutting hunters. We have been doing that for 16 years in Utah and it has not helped 1 bit.

Now why don't we try something that I believe will.

Problem is no one wants the answers, they just want to do something.

That is the worst reason to do something. You don't do something just to say you did. You do something that is sound and has merit.

Spend the next 2-3 years finding out the answers to my 4 questions and it will give you the solution to fixing Utah's deer herds.

But if we just cut 13,000 tags and hunt on a 29 unit basis then I already know what we will get.

Less hunters that we will never get back
Higher license fee's
less matching funds
less tax revenue to our state
less money in the Utah economy
less kids recruited into hunting
a handful of more BUCKS
And 1 bad winter away from losing the handful of bucks you saved.


You don't need to be a biologist to know any of this.

We need doe's to have fawns and those fawns to survive.

Lions
Coyotes
Elk
Habitat

All of these directly compete and kill does and fawns either by eating them or displacing them or starving them to death from lack of GOOD feed.

last time I checked we don't kill fawns and only handful of doe's.

Give me the answers I ask for and I can tell you how to fix the deer herd. Because if those are not the major problems outside of highways then I will be the 1st guy to stand up and say we can't fix the herd so cut the tags in half and hunt every 8 years.

Now someone else have a better idea?




Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
fishon, I am curious to how many more studies are needed on
deer-- elk interactions, deer-- domestic stock interactions,
deer-- predator interactions, or deer-- habitat interactions,
before the info. learned is finally applied in the field.
It's seems I have been reading about these studies and others
for many years now, some which have been printed in the MDF
Magazine.
I think there is enough info. out there that we can agree to
finally apply in the field. Some are already in practice like
habitat reclamation and predator control. The problem perhaps
lies in the time, cost, and PR to promote and sustain some of
these studies and their conclusions.
IMO, we need to move beyond studies already done and results
already arrived and begin the actual work of helping the UDWR
to better manage the state's deer herds.
This would certainly include an intensive program to control
predation, especially by coyotes, on fawns. Another program
is to harvest more elk, especially cows when biologically nec
essary. Harvesting less does in areas impacted with low herd
numbers should be standard practice by the UDWR.
These are some of the more obvious measures that should be in
practice now in the field and should not have to require "re-
inventing the wheel" with studies and conclusions already de-
rived.
You are correct in your assessment of what needs to be done by
the UDWR, like better head counts of deer, but to include stud-
ies already done where most of the results are already in prac-
tice, is IMO simply wasteful and unhelpful. Only time will tell
if the changes proposed by the UDWR, in conjunction hopefully
with many of your observations, will in the end help the plight
of your state's deer herds.

ELDORADO
 
"hanful of Does" MY ASS!!!

MDF shoulda stood up years ago on these DOE SHOOTER hunts!



God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
I still don't understand some of you Utah guy's. You all seem to want this Mule deer thing fixed, but want them to fix a problem without giving anything up. Utah's 970000 tags is Utah's problem. I grew up hunting Utah, and there are not 15 bucks per 100 does in most units, maybe half that!

NVMDF
 
I agree NVMDF!

Buck to Doe ratio ain't a big deal as long as we have a decent Ratio!

My question for fishon is:

Of the Utah Buck To Doe Ratio,how many Bucks past age 3-4 are left alive after the hunts in General Regions?

No we don't need to manage Our Herd for strictly Trophies but by GAWD it'd be nice to see a few Bucks reach their potential,yes I'm talking up around 6-8 years old!

This is what's SAD,With PISSCUTTER Genetics of today,some of these in-bred Bucks could live to age 10 & they'd still be JUNK!



God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
>To start they need an accurate
>count of the deer population.
>(this is bucks, does and
>fawns).
>
>They need an accurate count of
>the lion population.
>
>They need to know what effect
>elk are having on deer.
>
>
>They need to remove 5 times
>as many coyotes.
>
>They need to find out if
>their is a correlation between
>Utah's deer decline and livestock
>(sheep and cattle) grazing decline
>on public land.
>
>Answer those 4 questions and kill
>5 times as many coyotes
>and you will have enough
>deer and bucks for EVERYONE
>to be happy, and pleased
>with the opportunity to hunt
>and the quality of the
>bucks hunted.
>
>Tony Abbott
>www.myfreehunts.com
>The next buck to have a
>fawn will be the
>1st.

+1 Tony. I will add to that, the need to somehow effectively educate the public on deer highway mortality on winter ranges. We need to figure out a way to educate the public to pay more attention while driving through winter range.



It's always an adventure!!!
 
B-BOP=A-CRY+BABY-
If you want the deer age class get to 6-8 years, you just as well turn Utah into the Henry Mountains state and only give 1000 tags out for the entire state wide. Good Luck with that.

I agree 100% with fishon. I vote Fishon for Pres. Of Wildlife Board. At least he understands that throwing darts at a jigsaw puzzle in the dark and blindfolded, turned in circles for 10 minutes till he pukes, wont solve the deer herd problem. GET ANSWERS 1st before you do stupid things.

Thanks fishon (TONY)for your hard work and Desire!
 
Tony is at it again, just cannot quit trying to lobby for all people to have a tag.

I will tell you why more bucks will create more deer. I have been on every mountain in Southern Utah and you cannot find enough bucks to breed all of the does. I know you believe all the numbers they throw out, but most of us who get out and walk in the hills can tell you that we do not have 15 bucks per 100 does, we do not have 10 bucks per 100 does but far less than that. So by creating more bucks per 100 does we are creating a chance to get all does bred, which will create more deer, unless they continue to have more doe hunts to drop the deer herd even more. So yes, cutting more tags will save more bucks, which will give us a better buck to does ratio, which will inturn create more deer.
 
Tony,
You say you want answers to your 4 questions so that you can come up with the right solutions.
But you still don't tell us your solutions.
I'm beginning to think you don't want to state your solutions here for political reasons? Don't want to be nailed down on anything yet?
So, I'm going to give you what we all know are the answers to your 4 questions and you give us your 4 solutions.
1. deer population is way too low.
2. There are way too many lions in Utah and they are killing way too many deer.
3. There is a direct correlation between too many elk in Utah and low deer numbers.
4. There is a direct correlation between reduced grazing and deer numbers.
and I agree we need to kill way more coyotes.
I anxiously await your solutions to the answers to your questions.
 
I am glad you all appear to have a passion for Mule deer.

It is funny how some of you go about your posts.

If we have to many lions shouldn't we now how many we have and how they are distributed to know how many to remove and from where?

There is no study that says the impact elk have on deer other then they displace them at times. Shouldn't we know what that means and how many can co-exist before you start wiping them out on a given range or unit?

Show me the study that shows how removing most of the cattle and sheep from our summer ranges has impacted deer. I have yet to see that study.

No, I am not for giving everyone a deer tag every year if it is not healthy for the deer herd. But I am also not willing to kick hunters out when it will have no positive impact for the deer herd.

Keep in mind I spend as much time if not more than all of you in the field every year. I see the amount of deer and fawns and bucks. I believe the 15 bucks to 100 does is really close. I have spent the last 3 weeks watching several different groups of doe's being courted by several bucks, and some of those bucks were actually 4 points and 5+ years old. And the buck to doe ratio was higher than 15 to 100

If you don't believe the buck to doe ratios then we need to get someone out their counting them that you believe, the problem is when the answers are not what you want you will simply look elsewhere and believe they are wrong.

The 4 things I am asking for are not known. SO to put together a plan based on assumption rather than real numbers is irresponsible and careless.

I have fought against doe hunts for years and to some extent have been successful is getting them reduced.

FYI, Arizona was recommending 1,500 doe tags on the Kaibab one year while I ran the MDf and we got it reduced to 100 tags.

It is not as easy as some of you think and reducing buck harvest is the LEAST effective method to grow a healthy deer herd.

It will grow more bucks but that is not what we need. Just look at the Henry Mountains and all the other Limited entry units that have great buck to doe ratios but are still lacking in deer population. Why is that? Hell the Wasatch extended unit has tons of bucks, but that unit is not over objective.

Guys it is simple to see that cutting and reducing hunters is not the answer. If it was we would be over objective on all of Utah's Limited Entry deer units.

So what am I doing for deer? I am trying to get real numbers to deal with. Once we have the real numbers then we can make a real plan and we will know if we can have 30,000 hunters or 130,000 hunters.

We need money for studies and predator control and habitat and fencing, yet you want to cut out revenue.

It makes no sense to me.

What we need are facts, not knee jerk un-biologically backed self serving decisions so we can say "see, we did something". Doing "something" is not what we need. We need to do the right things.

again

Lions kill more deer than hunters
Coyotes kill more deer than hunters
And they both kill fawns and doe's that have a greater impact on the herd than killing bucks.

I know I sound like a broken record but so do all of you. This is about doing it right, not just doing "something".

So go ahead and ##### on here about me wanting to give tags to everyone but know that I am actually working on things to get answers and money to make a difference.

Happy Holiday's






Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
funney how many of you that'have lifetime tags were so in favor of no 2. want more bucks . stop all hunts for big game' that are after nov 1'
 
well this is like pulling teeth.
Still no solutions listed from Tony.
let's study this some ##### to death.
you asked the 4 questions which tells me you have opinions on the matter.
so just for fun, tell us what you feel the answers to your 4 questions are.
then give us your solutions.
I have'nt once mentioned buck tags in any of my posts on this thread. I'm trying to get you to tell us your answers to your questions and give us your solutions. Even if they are just your opinion.
 
Tony you must have counted your buck to doe ratio in a much better region than I have. You have just shown us all why units will be much better. More hunters can be put in the areas you saw 15 bucks per 100 does. Less hunters should be placed in areas that have fewer bucks. The in these southern areas are rapidly decreasing, no bucks to breed the does, and hardly any mature bucks at all.
 
You can't give solutions if you don't know the REAL problems. We need REAL numbers all across the board.

My opinion does not matter until it is based on something solid. Just like none of yours matter unless they are based on something solid.

Give me those solid and I will tell you how to fix them.

Speculation is what got us into the mess we currently are. Lets not speculate ourselves into any worse of a situation.

So, what are you guys doing for the situation?



Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Central Region Curtis, along the over inhabited Wasatch front where winter range is minimal and over crowding is an issue.

In fact right out my back door is one of the several places.

Just because you don't see them does not make it science.

Show me the facts Curtis that those doe's are not being breed. If that is the case then lets find out if it's because their are not enough bucks or if its because they are lesbians.

We need to find out the problem before you can fix it.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Less tags, means less bucks killed which means more bucks per 100 does in southern utah. This will help our deer herd. Fighting to get all doe hunts stopped, one was just stopped on the Panguitch Lake unit. Trying to form committees that will focus on each unit and make sure we are not over hunting it. All of these will help our deer herd grow in southern utah, not sure what you need to do in your units where there are 15 bucks per 100 does, put more hunters in those areas should help!!!
 
You are right it may not be science, but it is common sense when you see group after group of does with no buck in them. Maybe I am wrong, in thinking that some of these groups just are not ever getting a buck in with them as I see the same thing trip after trip. I do know that keeping the same amount of hunters in the field will just wipe out our buck herds in southern utah. With smaller units, and better counts maybe we can get the right number of hunters in the field that will not completly distroy the buck herd. If we do this and it does not increase the deer population then I am wrong, but continuing to do the same is not right as we can all see.
 
Tony, Have you been seeing alot of late season fawns in the areas that you kick around in. Fawns that have spots while there are fawns that all ready have totally lost there spots.

Would you agree that this is a sign that there is not enough bucks to service said herd?

I have been seeing that alot the last couple of years in my area and I am in an area that is supposed to be at 15 per 100 or even better.

Do you think a late season set of fawns becoming the norm would
hurt a herd?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-10 AT 01:06PM (MST)[p]fishon, so are you saying that the UDWR needs to sit back
and do more studies before anything can be done? The UDWR
has had years to conduct studies and with those conducted
by other western states, that a broad based understanding
of the decline in mule deer numbers would have been devel-
oped and their recommendations put into effect.
I simply fail to understand your concluding thought when
their is IMO enough generic info. to put into practice to
promote and sustain mule deer numbers. To continue to in-
sist on the perfect study to finally unlock the mystery of
low mule deer numbers may never come or may be to slow in
coming. The state's deer herds are in need of help now and
changes need to be made. These changes can be modified as
time goes by to reflect the success or lack of success of
some of these changes. But, IMO the time has come to make
changes in the way Utah manages it's deer herds.

ELDORADO
 
So because you did not see a buck it means they were not bred? That is a big assumption to make without facts.

Why don't we spend ten thousand dollars and in February go catch some of the doe's and check if they are pregnant? Then we will know if what you are saying is a fact and if that is the case than lets make more bucks.



Taking out 13,000 hunters over 29 units is an average of
448 hunters per unit which is about 112 bucks per unit or 3,248 statewide.

Do you think 112 bucks spread out over a unit will make a big difference? Or do you think the next year more bucks will be killed? And how many will get hit on the freeway, eaten by a predator, poached by a moron or die from a bad winter?

Also the way I understand it is they are only cutting tags out of the units that are under 18 bucks per 100 doe's, according to DWR numbers most of the Southern Units are at or above that, so few TAGS will be cut in those areas so few bucks will be saved. And if tags cut it will only be a handful so you will notice no difference.

Here is what you should be demanding and what you should be trying to raise money for. And something I would help you do.

Capture 100 different doe's from areas down their in February 2011 and see if they are pregnant. If 80% of them are then we know that is not the problem. If 50%-79% are then we need to put a lot of time and money into finding out why and we need to do it now, and if less then 50% are pregnant then we need to not hunt another buck in those areas until bucks increase and we doe's get pregnant.

This will not effect the current option 2 plan because it will not go into place until 2012. ALso this study may give you the FACTS you claim to cut even more tags out if we need to.

SO my question is, Will this not give you the answer to your claim that doe's are not being bred? Also I know there is lots of money out their to pay for this study if you go about it right.

Lets find out if doe's are being bred or not. ANd if they are not I am willing to lead the charge to get them bred, but if they are, then are you willing to keep the same amount of hunters?


Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Blain

Great question and point

It is funny you bring this up. I have noticed ZERO fawns with spots the last 3 weeks. In fact last night we had a group of 16 deer in my backyard. (I live at the base of Maple Mountain).

There was 3 bucks 6 fawns and 7 doe's. My 8 year old daughter asked me last night why none of them had spots like on Bambi.

Now that is an isolated group of deer with almost 1 fawn per doe and 1 buck per 2 doe's. That does not mean it is the normal but it is a group that has to be considered.

Yes the bucks were small. 2 two points and 1 three point. But the big bucks are gonna be a little less likely to be in my back yard and 4:30 in the afternoon.

If doe's not getting bred is the problem then lets fix it, but we need to know if that is the problem 1st. It takes a 60% recruitment of fawns through the 1st year to keep a deer population stable.

What I am seeing is right now is over 90% of doe's have fawns. Now lets see what that is after the winter.




Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
i agree we need to make changes to how we manage DEER, not just bucks. But we need to do the RIGHT thing not just SOMETHING for the sake of doing it.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
>Blain
>
>Great question and point
>
>It is funny you bring this
>up. I have noticed ZERO
>fawns with spots the last
>3 weeks. In fact last
>night we had a group
>of 16 deer in my
>backyard. (I live at the
>base of Maple Mountain).
>
>There was 3 bucks 6 fawns
>and 7 doe's. My 8
>year old daughter asked me
>last night why none of
>them had spots like on
>Bambi.
>
>Now that is an isolated group
>of deer with almost 1
>fawn per doe and 1
>buck per 2 doe's. That
>does not mean it is
>the normal but it is
>a group that has to
>be considered.
>
>Yes the bucks were small. 2
>two points and 1 three
>point. But the big bucks
>are gonna be a little
>less likely to be in
>my back yard and 4:30
>in the afternoon.
>
>If doe's not getting bred is
>the problem then lets fix
>it, but we need to
>know if that is the
>problem 1st. It takes a
>60% recruitment of fawns through
>the 1st year to keep
>a deer population stable.
>
>What I am seeing is
>right now is over 90%
>of doe's have fawns. Now
>lets see what that is
>after the winter.
>
>
>
>
>Tony Abbott
>www.myfreehunts.com
>The next buck to have a
>fawn will be the
>1st.


Tony, I thought I was asking a legitimate question. Did not think your response would be facetious and defensive.

So I take it that you do not see a correlation between a second set of fawns and lack of bucks. If you want to try again.
Thanks
 
As much as Tony and I disagree about the 29 unit issue, he's right with the issues he listed. There are no studies done on them except the elk displacement of deer. Colorado has a study that talks about increasing elk numbers in relationship to decreasing deer numbers but it's really vague. There were no specific results stated other than what Tony said. They have "noticed a decline in deer numbers in relationship with large increases in elk populations". IMO the DWR has made some stabs at managing deer herds over the last decade, but they need to be a lot more accurate in how they do things. Just "doing something" to do it doesn't cut it anymore. As hunters, we should be demanding these types of studies and accuracy.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
We need to shut the hunt down in southern utah for at least one year--- and make the DWR show us their count, I have never seen them in the field counting, so where are they counting on Beaver Mt. unit---their are no bucks and very few doe,s-- so show me if they are their, take me out and show me the DEER, it called put up or shut up---THEIR NO DEER
 
Tony
With all your passion we sure could have used your help to get some of the underacheiving units into predator management the past few years. but those cougar RACs just dont have the sex appeal of the deer. Besides if a guy isn't careful he runs the risk of getting his a$$ beat when he's the only one in the room telling biologists and houndsmen that because the manti is at 52% it must be in predator management so a few more lions can be killed and the wildlife services can be directed to gun down a few more coyotes on the fawning grounds. Then after the Wildlife Board agrees it turns out the bioligist is the one who wants to kick my a$$ more than the houndsmen.
I know the counts in the Central region going on right now are coming in at less then 15 bucks per hundred does. We do not have the time to sit back leave things the way they were and study your all important 4 questions. We are losing more youth now because of lack of deer and bucks on the general hunts then cutting tags and unit size will do. If you don't have a product you shouldn't be sellin it.
 
That is the problem Tony we do not have time and money to go try all of these tests you want to conduct. Simple truth is that in other states, Nevada, Colorado and Arizona the smaller units have produced more bucks. I have not checked into if it has produced more deer, but I bet the majority of the hunters right now would rather be hunting in these states then they would in Utah. No I would not want you to keep all the hunters you want if the does are getting bred, all that would do is continue to decrease what we have left of the bucks, at least maybe we can have a few bucks running around even if it takes forever to figure out what is wrong with the deer herd. I agree with perkins that the hunt should be closed until they can get the 29 units counted properly and if you have more than 15 bucks per 100 does in your area you should get more hunters. We do not want more hunters because we do not have deer bucks or does.
 
Went out with a DWR biologist last week to help do deer counts in the Central region (Nebo unit) ended up approx. 150 total deer. 80 does 60 fawns and 8 bucks Bucks - 2 spikes illegal to kill (less than 5 inches) 2 - two points 3- three points 1- 18" 4x4. They were doing the breeding in each of the groups of animals. The biologist told me that the buck doe ratio is down on the unit.
If I remember correctly option 2 requires every unit to be managed for minimum 18/100.

My question to Tony is this-- IF-- a unit is only 50- 60% of carrying capacity, does the argument that, more bucks on the unit will have an adverse effect on the survival of fawns hold true ? Does it really matter whether the increase in deer numbers is a buck or a doe if there is more than ample habitat to support it. Until we are able to increase the number of does and fawns on a unit, what is wrong with allowing additional bucks to utilize the habitat as we work to increase survival and retention rates of does and fawns. Certainly the doe/fawn ratio is more critical to the success of incresing herd numbers. Part of that is doing what we can to make sure that does are bred during their first estrus cycle, thus helping the fawn to have nearly an additional month of growth going into the winter. Valerius Geist says that having an ample supply of bigger more mature bucks in the population will actually enhance the growth of deer numbers because of impregnating does in their first cycle and passing on the genetics that enhance a fawns ability to survive winter and avoid predators. He further stated that does WILL choose to breed with bucks that have the most impressive antlers because it is a sign of genetic superiority-- part of the natural selection for species survival.
 
I gave a legitimate answer to a legitimate question. From what I have seen I am seeing good buck to doe ratios and great fawn to doe ratios.

I have not seen any fawns with spots. Now if you have then that is another issue. I can only deal with what I see. Yes younger fawns are not as good as older fawns but they are still fawns which is better than none. And sometimes a doe does not come into heat the 1st of November, those doe's need to be bred when the come into heat/ You and I can't make them come into heat earlier.

The things I am asking for do not change the 29 unit rule that just passed that won'r even go into effect until 2012.


We can know for 100% fact if the doe's are getting bred and at what rate and what time of the year.

We can know this within the next few months and it would give us a great place to start.

I want more hunters if the herd can sustain it because the future of hunting requires we recruit new hunters.

So cutting 13,000 could have a big negative impact on the future of hunting yet the upside of it is minimal at most. That is what all the states study's show.

My passion and resources are going to and will continue going towards what I believe is right, not what you guys want.

I would expect the same out of you guys. But where is the harm in starting with a study in 2 months that will tell us with 100% accuracy if our doe's are being bred and at what percent they are being bred?


What is wrong with that?

I don't believe you guys want what I want. I believe you want more bucks even at the expense of hunters even when every study and unit I can read and study shows that it does not increase the health of a herd if the herd has ample bucks to bred.

Why don't we find out if there are ample bucks and if they are breeding? Are you guys against that?

Here is the deal, 29 units and 13,000 tags were passed not by the majority and not for biological reasons. They were passed to grow more bucks by the vocal few. That is a 100% fact.

I really don't care if you have 5 regions or 29 units or 100 sub-units. The fact is cutting the tags won't get us more healthy deer. All it will get us is more bucks.

So you guys cut hunters out and micro manage bucks and don't address the real issues and in 5 years when the deer are the same or worse and we have lost millions in revenue and thousands of hunters then what will you do?

Cut 40,000 more tags? This is an old old story. We have been losing and cutting buck hunters out consistently since 1985 and it has not helped our deer herd. That is a fact.

We have lost or cut 170,000 buck hunters out in the last 25 years and we are still losing deer. Why has it not worked?

Colorado has the same problem. They have more bucks but their deer are still declining and they have drastically cut hunters. The facts are there but none of you want to see them.

Nevada's population sucks as well. So does Wyoming and Arizona. The micro manage and cut hunters so where are all the deer?

I do want to thank any of you that do more than post on this site and complain. I am grateful even if we differ on our opinion. To the rest of you that just complain, I have nothing more for you.

Good luck int the efforts you are trying.

Happy Holiday's







Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
>You are right it may not
>be science, but it is
>common sense when you see
>group after group of does
>with no buck in them.
> Maybe I am wrong,
>in thinking that some of
>these groups just are not
>ever getting a buck in
>with them as I see
>the same thing trip after
>trip. I do know that
>keeping the same amount of
>hunters in the field will
>just wipe out our buck
>herds in southern utah.
>With smaller units, and better
>counts maybe we can get
>the right number of hunters
>in the field that will
>not completly distroy the buck
>herd. If we do
>this and it does not
>increase the deer population then
>I am wrong, but continuing
>to do the same is
>not right as we can
>all see.

So you didn't see the bucks but that doesnt mean they aren't there. I would be willing to bet the old buck was resting not to far off. He probably had a wild night breeding those does that you saw that he needed a rest because he knew that tonight would be another good night.
 
>We need to shut the hunt
>down in southern utah for
>at least one year--- and
>make the DWR show us
>their count, I have never
>seen them in the field
>counting, so where are they
>counting on Beaver Mt. unit---their
>are no bucks and very
>few doe,s-- so show me
>if they are their, take
>me out and show me
>the DEER, it called put
>up or shut up---THEIR NO
>DEER
'
You will find under option 2 that more people will be hunting the Southern part of the state than anywhere else in the state.
 
Nebo - I live in Elk Ridge. I was just wondering where you did your counts? I went for a horseback ride the other day on "P" mountain. I counted (not 100% accurate) 160 deer from the orchards back to Four Bay. There were 7 bucks and only one of them was over a 3 year old. I'm sure there are another 50 (at least) living in the orchards and never leaving. I would concur that the Nebo is hurting. That would be an excellent unit to do a deer/elk study. Both elk and deer are really struggling on that unit.

EHH - according to the option 2 nay-sayers, that's not entirely true. The tags for the southern units will remain the same because they are at or above objective, and the other units will have the 13,000 tag cuts because they are bellow objective. How does that send an increase in hunters to the Southern units? If I have my way (which I never do), there will be no tag cuts and the units that are under objective will have tags pulled and placed in units where the deer are at or above objective. Now the Southern boys may see an increase in hunters in some of their units if that happens but the way everyone sees option 2 now, you won't see any increase in hunter numbers. Now, you may see an increase in hunters applying for Southern tags, but that's another issue.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
Tony wrote
"I don't believe you guys want what I want. I believe you want more bucks even at the expense of hunters even when every study and unit I can read and study shows that it does not increase the health of a herd if the herd has ample bucks to bred.

Why don't we find out if there are ample bucks and if they are breeding? Are you guys against that?

Here is the deal, 29 units and 13,000 tags were passed not by the majority and not for biological reasons. They were passed to grow more bucks by the vocal few. That is a 100% fact."

I'm going to try and refrain from arguing with you because it does no good. I agree with you that it would be nice to see a study done on how many does are getting bred. If you can get that done I have just the place for you. I will admit it if I'm wrong and I would hope you would too. From what I have read I also believe you need mature bucks in your buck to doe ratio. Not just x amount per 100 does. What is your opinion on yearling bucks doing all the breeding?
 
GOOD GAWD!!!

In the last 38 years we couldn't do any studies until now?

Still wonderin where the brains are behind the Doe Hunts?



is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
Most of What I have seen and read states that mature bucks are better for breeding but not the deciding factor on the health of a herd.

Now if the younger bucks are breeding in the 1st cycle then the impact of no or fewer mature bucks is minimal at most.

The problem would be if because there are few big bucks the doe's are not getting bred until the 2nd cycle thus making fawns younger and the trickle down effect of that.

Then that would be a major problem.

But much like a 14 year old boy a 2 year old buck can breed successfully.

It would be nice to see a study done on how many doe's are getting bred? Did you really say that?

NO, it is essential that we know how many doe's are being bred so we know where to start.


Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
When ranchers and sheepmen with the help of REAL gov trappers and poison took out the bulk of the coyotes and lions there was mule deer everywere in all western states. When they took poison away deer numbers begain to drop.

The old timers I talk with say the reason the deer numbers are low is because the DWR managed em to death. After see'n the process that the DWR and some people want to take to make a d@mn decision I agree with em. Those people back then were dooers these people now want to wait and see on every little thing. Thats why were where we are at now! At least the wildlife board had a majority of dooers on it! I'm tired of waitin and seein,while are deer herd go's to pot.
 
Tony...If I said I was seriously willing to give you 10 grand tomorrow to support this study would it happen....I am dead serious...Question 2 if we find that 70% are preganant then why is the base herd not increasing? Everyone has to remember this is GENERAL season...I really think supporters do not realize that especially in S Ut you probabally will only get a tag every 3 years, if not more. More bucks will definately help, very little, but is NOT the answer. MORE does and fawns are the answer...We KNOW that the "deer counts" are not even close to factual...the reason everyone is pissed is cause there are very few deer statewide and there is ample habitat for more deer in 90 percent of the state lets get MORE DEER PERIOD...Tony lets get it done, but once we KNOW what we already know as sportsmen, how the hell do we get Utah to put the money where it needs to be PREDATOR CONTROL, and I mean aggresively and not just pissing around.
 
Tony,

I don't think that we can get an accurate count of the deer.. Take the South west desert Unit, no way to ever be able to count the amount of deer on that unit. And just because of the size of the unit the DWR will give way to many tags on it based on the size of the unit. I agree with all your questions and would love to have the answers to them all, but I believe that there is no way in hell you will ever get the answers to all of them... Do you honestly believe the DWR's count on the deer heard. I have flown in a helicopter many times and there is no way you are going to be able to count the deer accurately. We rely on ratios way to much. just because there are 100 deer in one canyon doesn't mean there are 100 in the next. Do you believe that the DWR would ever spend the amount of money to count the deer accurately. At over $700 bucks an hour, no way... My uncle is a gov trapper and he flew for 7 hours the other day and killed two coyotes, those two coyotes are very exspensive coyotes...I agree 100% we need to kill more coyotes, but we need to make the bountys worth enough, that it is worth the regular Joe to go out and start setting traps and killing more coyotes..Oh wait but if the regular Joe's go out and kill coyotes, it will take away government jobs. We can't do that we might be saving some money.... To many chiefs and not enough indians...
I hope we can reduce the # of coyotes, but I think the only way to do it is to get the poison out again....
I believe in most areas especially the southern region that there is plenty of Habitat for the deer, yes I believe we always need to improve habitat and make more.

But the Southwest desert unit has plenty of habitat and very few deer. The only thing that is killing the deer is Hunters and predators. The heard is certainly not increasing because the predators are killing the does and fawns. This is the only reason we are not getting more deer on this unit...

I appreciate the time you put into mule deer and I aplaud your efforts, good luck in the future and Happy Holidays.
 
hey Tony you gonna be at the RAC tomorrow and maybe help get the trap check rule liberated a bit? Its pretty obvious the DWR doesn't want it done even with them knowing that trappers are taking more coyotes then any other method and if they had a day or 2 more between checks they will take even more.
 
fishon!

For the Millionth f'n time!

Are you listening?

A 2 Point doing some of the breeding ain't a bad thing if:

The 2 Point is packing decent Genetics!

Problem is:

We see alot of PISSCUTTIN Junk Genetic Packin Dinks doing alot of the Breeding that would be total ass JUNK even if he lived to be 12 years old,his Dad was a Spkike &his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike &
his Dad was a Spkike,Yup,that's a Quality Herd Buck you got there doing the breeding!

You'd best count the Fawns when they hit the ground and then count the Fawns again the following Spring!

Waste a bunch of Money on a Study if you want but them Coyotes are cleaning house!


God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
 
I will not be at the rac, I have radio.

And yes, I believe we could get that study done to see what percentage of doe's are being bred if we had the money.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
The DWR say's their deer in southern Utah, but where are they, show us the count. Their are doe's out their that are not being bred, if their were more bucks to go around, that would make more fawns and more bucks and more does. sothern Utah is hurting for deer ( BUCKS & DOE'S ) and if the DWR will do it right they will cut the tags where they need to be cut and maybe it will be a lot more than 13,000 and quit spending all this money on senseless study and use common sense and spend it on PREDATOR CONTROL and remember it takes a buck & doe to make a fawn.
 
Your right perkins, if the count is done right they will find that they need to cut even more tags. The deer herd is in very poor shape, both bucks and does. Do not claim Southern utah is in good shape with bucks, those numbers are not right, hard for me to believe southwest unit has 29 bucks per 100 does if that is the case we should all want that unit.
 
your right----I need Tony to tell me where the deer are in southern region and what unit they are in, so I can go see them.
I want DWR to show me and other sportsman the count in the units in southern Utah.
 
AWLB asked-Nebo - I live in Elk Ridge. I was just wondering where you did your counts? I went for a horseback ride the other day on "P" mountain. I counted (not 100% accurate) 160 deer from the orchards back to Four Bay. There were 7 bucks and only one of them was over a 3 year old. I'm sure there are another 50 (at least) living in the orchards and never leaving. I would concur that the Nebo is hurting. That would be an excellent unit to do a deer/elk study. Both elk and deer are really struggling on that unit.

Counts were done west and south of FT Green (XL canyon to Ft. Green) I went to the same place last year and we counted just over 300 deer with about 12 bucks. Alot less deer there this time. Never seen any mature (4yr+) bucks. Saw a small yearling 2 year old in the act. Not very encouraging.
Nebo is not doing well but has produced some monsters every couple years. If we could get the predators reduced substantionally it would recover and grow quickly. The elk numbers are horrible because by the DWR'own admission they have overharvested it for cow elk. There may be some sparks fly at the RAC when we discuss the antlerless addendum if they don't follow through with the promise Anis made that if we agreed to go to statewide spike elk hunting, then antlerless elk tags would be decreased. I guess we will see.
 
The number looks great because there isnt a lot of deer on the SWD. The Southern Units are just fine right now.
 
you keep saying the southern units are fine, but their not----what about the Mt. Dutton, Panguitch Lake, Beaver Mt., Monroe, their are NO DEER, BUCKS or DOE'S or FAWNS, on these units, we have been out looking. So now tell me where are the deer in these units /
 
10240912561-1-1.jpg


Hahaha Perkins do I need to take you for a drive?
 
Hope you feel good hornhunter, you just killed the last good buck on the Dutton, a friend just got back from their and said over 4 days saw a total of 9 deer only 2 bucks, but that does make it a good buck to doe ratio.
 
He did, hunted their with his boys on a late elk hunt and just did not see much at all in the way of deer. I hope it is better than what he said, but I am hearing the same thing from everyone who goes out in southern utah, we had to close a doe hunt for lack of deer.
 
Well, I don't what your buddy is doing wrong, but I saw a lot of deer during the rifle hunt.
 
Good for you, and with all the people on here who agree there is not any deer, you should be glad we are going to units or you would have everyone on mt. dutton to hunt, you may have just tipped your hand for next year before it takes place
 
Yeah the traffic will be crazy huh?

"Where are you all heading?"

"To the Dutton because there is big bucks."

"Awesome, well I hope you like hiking"

"HUH?"

I'm not worried, I only saw a few hunters.
 
I hope you continue to find big bucks out there, but on the areas I have looked in Panguitch Lake and Beaver the numbers are way down, I got this info from a friend of mine and he does get off the main roads and hunts. The only person he said who saw any deer on Dutton was a little short guy who bragged to everyone he saw about lots of deer on Dutton, hope that does not hurt your area next year before the unit hunting begins.
 
My buddy was hunting the Beaver unit this year and he saw a lot of decent bucks. He took a 4x3 25 inches wide. I will try to post his pictures too.

Did this short little fat guy live in Antimony?
 
Lets just say he like to talk a big talk. I hunted hard on the Beaver and worst I have ever seen it, also been up after the hunt and not much to be seen. Would you ever consider taking me on the Dutton and showing me what you are seeing.
 
Sure, I'm not selfish, but you better bring a good pair of hiking boots.
 
Not a problem, then i can take you out on the Beaver and show you what i have been seeing. I will have some time over christmas so let me know when is good for you.
 
The days of hunting every year on huge tracts of land are coming
to an end in Utah. Whether good or bad, a way of life will be end-
ing, requiring the patience and the willingness of the citizens of
Utah to accept and eventually adjust to a new reality.
In time, I believe that most hunters will eventually support and
even embrace wholeheartedly these anticipated changes.

ELDORADO
 
>The days of hunting every year
>on huge tracts of land
>are coming
>to an unnecessary end in Utah. Whether
>good or bad, a way
>of life will be end-
>
>ing, requiring the patience and the
>willingness of the citizens of
>
>Utah to accept and eventually adjust
>to a new reality.
>In time, I believe that most
>hunters will eventually be eliminated and
>even embrace wholeheartedly that democracy has failed.
>
>
>ELDORADO


There were a few typos, I corrected them. Hope you don't mind........
 
I guess some of you will never be able to accept the
changes that are coming in how the state manages it's
deer herds.


ELDORADO
 
>I guess some of you will
>never be able to accept
>the
>changes that are coming in how
>the state manages it's
>deer herds.
>
>
>ELDORADO

I would accept any change that were beneficial to deer and democratic in regards to the public. These changes represent neither.

SO I DO NOT ACCEPT!
 
I'd actually implement change that stands to grow more deer. By now, we should all know what those limiting factors are. Then I'd look to reduce harvest while maintaining opportunity by issuing more primitive weapon tags, instead of pulling tags off of the shelf.

Secondly, I have a huge distrust in the agenda behind unit management. I'd be willing to wager that this is the first of many tag cuts under the guise of improving deer numbers that equate to nothing more than restricting opportunity for trophy animals. There is no doubt in my mind that there are a handful of guys with big influence salivating at the thought of managing Utah deer like they do our elk. The opportunity to hunt replaced by big coin potential.
 
... read somewhere that removing dominant toms in a given home range would create room for two or more immature males to move into the same range because being subordinate they tolerate each other for a much longer period of time thus putting more predation on deer. Do any of you think this is a factor in the management of the lion/deer population? Maybe kill more females and younger males and let the King Mufasa?s live.

Maybe these sort of things could be the focus when your left without a tag come deer season. It doesn't sound fun to be a UT deer hunter but CO is not too far away
 
You're right it takes 1 doe and 1 buck to make a fawn and that same buck can make a fawn with about 10-15 other doe's at the same time. Just like 1 Bull can have 10-15 cows and knock them up as well.

You guys mention how there are no deer down South and you actually mention units you go on that there are no deer.

Don't you find it interesting that all those units have been managed for trophy elk and now there are more elk than deer?

Don't you think someone should find out how much of an impact those elk are having on the deer? Or do you not really want to know how bad the LAND CARP are killing deer?

If the doe's are not getting bred then lets prove it. I have said if the doe's are not getting bred for lack of bucks I will be the 1st person to cut buck hunters out.

Wouldn't any sportsman that really cares for our deer herd support and help pay for a study that can be done over a couple of weeks time to find out for sure how many doe's are getting bred?

It seems to me I gave you Southern boy's a very good option to finding out if your theory is true yet none of you want to do it. Why is that? Are you afraid it will show you that 80%+ are pregnant?

C'mon boys lets do the study this February and find out if you are right. If you are then I will be on here and everywhere else saying we need more bucks and cut tags to save our herds. But when it shows they are pregnant are you fellas willing to look at other options?

Isn't this study worth doing?



Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Good Idea Fishon, but I say now that we have units, lets take a unit and try different things like cut tags way back or three 4 big time predator control and see which units do best. We have some flexiblity to do that with smaller units and still be able to track the progress.
 
Do they have the resources? I don't disagree with trying different things in different units, but why couldn't these trials bee done under the current plan?
 
Hopefully by smaller units, things will be more accurate. I don't know about you, but the current count cannot be correct. If we have smaller units maybe we can manage deer herd, bucks and does better and in turn when we try something it will be easier to see progress if any. Also be able to better control hunter pressure in areas, as regions would be hard to control hunter pressure
 
I would be very supportive of that on a trial basis to see what happens.

Take a couple units and greatly restrict tag numbers.

Take a couple units and get rid of all the elk.

Take a couple units and get rid of all the predators.

Take a few units and only allow Archery.

Take a few units and leave them the same.

Take a few units and make them youth only.

Take a few units and graze them heavily.

Keep in mind these study's should be done state wide so we have a feel for all the effects in the different habitats that these ideas may have.

There are a million things we should be doing if we really want to fix deer.

What are we willing to sacrifice? And then are we willing to live with the results and manage accordingly?

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
>Hopefully by smaller units, things will
>be more accurate. I
>don't know about you, but
>the current count cannot be
>correct. If we have
>smaller units maybe we can
>manage deer herd, bucks and
>does better and in turn
>when we try something it
>will be easier to see
>progress if any. Also
>be able to better control
>hunter pressure in areas, as
>regions would be hard to
>control hunter pressure


They've been counting, doing studies and all of the above on a unit basis (More than 29) for many years. I don't see unit hunter management assisting with this. Buck harvest can be controlled a bit more, though they have already implemented triggers that will allow them to manage hunter numbers in units with low buck to doe ratios.

I'm not following the logic behind micro-managing buck hunters and doing such trials. Am I missing something?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-10 AT 09:38AM (MST)[p]I agree, though I think we have a good idea on the units of very limited tag numbers (Book cliffs, Henry's etc.). These are all thought out and calculated items. The problem with the current change in regards to those things is that a blanket was thrown on everything with no refinement, no calculation etc. It's simply "Let's get the buck to doe ratio to 18-25/100". There's no deer management involved with this nonsense, which is why I am adamantly against it. It brings us no closer to solving any of these issues or answering any of these questions. We already know that cutting tags and localizing hunters will save a few bucks.
 
>I would be very supportive of
>that on a trial basis
>to see what happens.
>
>Take a couple units and greatly
>restrict tag numbers.
>
>Take a couple units and get
>rid of all the elk.
>
>
>Take a couple units and get
>rid of all the predators.
>
>
>Take a few units and only
>allow Archery.
>
>Take a few units and leave
>them the same.
>
>Take a few units and make
>them youth only.
>
>Take a few units and graze
>them heavily.
>
>Keep in mind these study's should
>be done state wide so
>we have a feel for
>all the effects in the
>different habitats that these ideas
>may have.
>
>There are a million things we
>should be doing if we
>really want to fix deer.
>
>
>What are we willing to sacrifice?
>And then are we willing
>to live with the results
>and manage accordingly

I think those are great ideas and should be part of the new mule deer plan going forward. I would love to see the results of those studys and take each of the positives out of every study and implement them into each of the unit's.

Then at least we just wouldnt be taking a biologists word for everything. We'd have results to back claims from all sides.

You never know, if their were that many options in units such as archery only units, youth only units, and limited tag units maybe everybody would find something they liked. Maybe
 
Brutus

All I have ever wanted is to find the problems, fix the problems and then make more deer and opportunity for everyone whether that is more hunting and/or trophy hunting.

So when are you Southern Boys gonna bang on the DWR to do exactly that.

Problem we have is now that the 29 units are in place I have a BAD BAD feeling nothing else will be done. And I base that off of history.

Unfortunately we will lose 13,000 hunters and gain no ground on the deer if we don't fix the REAL problems.

Tony Abbott
www.myfreehunts.com
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
I have been a southern boy for 68 years and we ran cattle on Mt Dutton and Beaver Mt and when are you Northern and Central boys going to liston, in June and July we see how many fawn their is and how many doe's with out fawns their is and in the wilderness it takes more Bulls to cows to get them all bred and it takes more bucks to doe's to get them all bred, so lets give it a try and have more bucks, and see how it will work. will you agree to that ?
 
Fishon,

When the DWR pick up road kill deer. Often they look at fat reserves, and check pregnancy rates.

They could easily get data on number of does that are pregnant from road kills, that would give them an idea on the percentage of does being bred.

This research in different areas would be valuable. It maybe done?
 
Fishon, I truly think smaller units will aid in fixing the problems facing individual herds across the state. I would of been for smaller units even if their were no tag cuts associated with the option. I really think thats were the majority of the dissagreement lies. I still question were the DWR came up with 13000 but I can only assume they knew that they were overallocating tags to begain with. We have dissagreements on what buck/doe ratios should be and the constant battering of smaller units but I agree with lots of your points on were the problems lie with our herd. Trust me when I say the southern racs are almost always full of questions and different ideas to the DWR to fix the deer herd. It just seemed like we always got wiped out by the northern end of the state when it went to the state board except this year.

Again I think if opt #2 was put forth without tag cuts for bucks and just focused on herd growth in smaller units it would have been voted for as much or more in the southern rac. The big thing was the smaller units not tag cuts.
 

Similar threads

M
JCR, statistics, counts, objectives and harvest reports
Replies
33
Views
2k
mightyhunter
M
M
Cody Region Meetings 2024
Replies
12
Views
734
nfh
nfh
liecabucks
Seeking Wyo points partner.
2
Replies
155
Views
7k
TKMulePacker
TKMulePacker

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

front.JPG
59B44BC3-6036-4F2B-AE31-4220DC760CBC.jpeg
IMG_5420.jpeg
Screenshot_20230903-225245_Gallery.jpg
349849A7-F969-4947-94B7-9E81A6E2F09D.jpeg
Buda 2023-2.jpg
story pic. 6 - Copy (2).jpg
IMG_2331 (1) - Copy.JPG
side.JPG
C8B56A23-E521-4121-BA7B-702C37A1C7A1.jpeg
IMG_0789.jpeg
fullsizeoutput_3fdc.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom