Killing our future.

[fishon]

Shouldn't removing hunters from the field be the last action taken to try and fix a deer herd? Now I am not against it if it is needed but consider what I wrote below.

What is really happening is we are removing hunters and their offspring, and these are people and families that we will NEVER get back, and people that will become disengaged in the process of hunting and that passed down heritage.

The long term effect of this is much more catastrophic then shooting a few to many bucks or hunting a couple days to long.

The big picture of things is we NEED ALL the hunters and sportsmen we can get to help fight the main issue which is the Right to keep and bare arms and the right to hunt and fish on public land.

We sit here a squabble over antler size and area demographics, so the answer is to punish our own?

Deer herds and buck numbers will ultimately be determined by mother nature. We can't control her we can only try and prepare for the hand she deals us, but we can involve the masses which can effect policy and procedure.

So why doesn't everyone take a deep breath and sit back and look at what is really important.

Understand that we could have 50 bucks per 100 doe's but if we lost most of the hunters getting to that point then the hunters left will likely lose the ability and right to hunt those bucks or won't be able to afford it.

We should be doing EVERYTHING possible to retain and recruit hunters rather than turn them away and kick them out.

I said before that 5 regions or 29 units or 100 sub-units makes no difference to me. Hunt them how you want but shouldn't we be doing things like.......

Shifting to less successful hunting methods? (weapon type)
Create opportunity for kids?
Move hunt dates to less successful times?
Kill more predators?
Feed more deer?
Transplant deer?

These are things that will save more bucks than removing hunters.



Removing the hunter is more detrimental long term and in the big picture than anything else we could possible do. We are going to look back in 20 years and realize that we have lost something we will never get back.

We have lost the future generations to carry on the fight that we are all so passionate about.

Any of you that don't see this I question your motives top to bottom.

We need hunters and lots of them or the big bucks you hope to grow by cutting them out will never be hunted by anyone other than the rich and the property owner.

We need hunters to march the capital, vote for policy, offset the anti's and donate their money for the cause.

If someone is removed form hunting why would they care to take a stand or donate their time, money and efforts?

How many of you will write the check or spend the energy to fight for hunting if you are never gonna be able to hunt or hunt every now and again?

None of you will. We need people and we need them in a big way.

Show me how we are gonna retain and recruit people and I will show you how we are gonna build a healthy deer herd.

But remove hunters and their voice and their dollars and I will show you how hunting public land will be a thing of the past.

Happy Holiday's to ALL of you and a Merry Christmas.




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

 

[Team_UNC]

cliff notes please


Team_UNC

 

[JustMuleys]

Tony, you have a PM.

Shifting to less successful hunting methods? (weapon type)
Create opportunity for kids?
Move hunt dates to less successful times?
Kill more predators?
Feed more deer?
Transplant deer?

I think Chaining and reseeding select PJ stands, like they did in the 60's, needs to be put on that list.

 

[brutus]

If we had 50 bucks per 100 does i'm pretty sure we wouldnt have to worry about finding people to hunt em.

I'm glad you can predict the future and know exactly what is going to happen if this or that happens. So just save the suspence and lets hear when the appocolipse is coming.

Sorry i'm just bored today and have nothing better to do. So this is kinda fun.

 

[piper]

fishon-I understand what you are trying to say, but don't you think the quality of the hunting experience has a lot to do with the retainment of young hunters? Look at how the number of big game draw applicants increases in Nevada every year.We all see things differently because of our experiences, and my opinion is a little different than yours on this, but there are some statistics than go along with what Im saying. anyway, have a great christmas

 

[bowhunt]

Just cutting 13,000 tags out of the system is in my opinion NOT the answer.

I do feel that we could kill less bucks and have a better overall herd. I am not convinced that the number of bucks and the quality of bucks we have, are getting the job done most effectevily
(refer to Mr. Blacks article)

HOWEVER:

Let's do something about it, that keep opportunity high, and helps grow deer.

Ideas:
-Move Hunt dates.
-Increase primitive weapon hunts on some units and reduce harvest rates.
-Give a point for not filling a tag.
-Let's use these 29 units to be creative and start fixing something.

We can do better than: CUT 13k tags.

 

[tagsoup]

> fishon-I understand what you are
>trying to say, but don't
>you think the quality of
>the hunting experience has a
>lot to do with the
>retainment of young hunters?
>Look at how the number
>of big game draw applicants
>increases in Nevada every year.We
>all see things differently because
>of our experiences, and my
>opinion is a little different
>than yours on this, but
>there are some statistics than
>go along with what Im
>saying. anyway, have
>a great christmas

I totally agree. There are lot's of ways to go hunting with out a nine day deer tag in your pocket. (Or what a lot of people call a nine day permit to go on a armed camping trip.) I have put in grouse camp with family and friends many times. With the main reason being that we were tired of seeing so many people during deer season that it made it not fun to go deer hunting. Grouse camp is just one way to have fun and get kids involved with hunting. Another good way is to get kids involved is by taking them turkey or predator hunting. Kids love to see that you can call game in. Or how about go camping and do some shooting.

I think a big reason that kids quit hunting is that its not fun for them. And if im not having fun on a nine day general season hunt, I doubt that many kids our either.

 

[Sidehill]

Tagsoup tell ya what lets compromise you go grouse or turkey hunting and I will go deer hunting!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[eldorado]

fishon, I have no issue with the debate going on now on
how best to manage the state's declining deer herds. I,
however do have an issue with your blanket judgment of
those sportsmen who think differently as having question-
able motives. I have long wanted the best for mule deer
and will always do so. My motives are sincere and honest.
I have no wish to question your motives as I believe that
you do want what's best for the state's deer herds as I do.
We simply disagree on how to go about it, but that does not
make either one of us insincere or our motives dubious.

ELDORADO

 

[fishon]

Of course Chaining and reseeding should be done but that is not my point. If you want more BUCKS today for Breeding or hunting or taking pictures of then there are simple ways to do it without cutting out hunters.


That is all I am saying. The Wildlife Board and the handful of people pushing to cut tags did not look at any other option to save bucks and those other options would be more effective with no loss in revenue.

That is my problem with what happened.

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

 

[hornkiller]

When its taking people 2-3 years to draw a general deer tag i really dont see how we are loosing hunters. Even if they give up better for the people that still want to hunt!

 

[GntShedz]

As far as im concerned. Yes we do need to shut down the hunting of mule deer in many areas. Its the quickest way to rebound period. Do i think it needs to be shutdown all the way, NO. I think a very strick limited draw would be ample until an actual true healthy herd is developed. As far as we need all the sportsman we can get is the biggest bunch of b.s. ive heard passed around the internet. More sportsmans is a small portion of the reason we are without deer in areas, not to mention its also a good portion of the reason hunting is a rich mans sport anymore.. The information age ( websites like this ) have an impact as well. because people get on here and run thier gums so to speak on areas or ample game. (ex: hey bro send me a message i will help ya out; i dont really care if you take the rest of utah.. ) The demand is way larger than the supply and this is why we are having this conversation. The hunting of big game is threatened more by piss poor management by state agencies that are run by accountants, rather than any anti hunting group. And dont forget we are americans, if so called "antihunters" won the epic battle that has been told thru internet folklore for the past decade, we are the ones with guns, stand up and fight for what you believe in. Yes i know mnt lion hunting and black bear hunting was outlawed in california and new jersey, that just tells me they have too many spineless ppl or it needed to be done for reasons unknown to me. sorry to those of you that do have spines and are from there.

 

[woodruffhunter]

Tony:

I'm sure 99% of the people on here get your point, no matter how many times you express it.

I think the hardest thing for you to understand is that the majority on this board disagree with you.

Have a Merry Christmas with your family.

 

[hoytme]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-24-10 AT 04:49PM (MST)[p]http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/Mule%20Deer%20Changes.pdf

Page 29 of 30 talks about the impacts of deer herds with harvest of bucks.

"Buck only seasons generally have little on mule deer populations because the remaining bucks breed all the reproductively active does. Wide buck:doe ratios and an abundance of younger males may delay the timing of breeding, but there is NO evidence this significantly affects the reproductive rates of does or the number of fawns that survive to adulthood in a mule deer population."

I encourage ALL to read this and some of the numerous studies that back this assertion.

"Manage wildlife WITH hunters, not FOR hunters."

 

[cannonball]

Tony,

I really don't think you get the vision. I had a person, in high places, in the corporate world who once told me, when you have a struggling operation, change is good even if it's bad. I never understood that philosophy, but this comes as close as I have seen to making me see the light.

You can talk until your blue in the face with other options, but it's obvious that Utah Division of Wildlife Resource never got the vision either.

Maybe, just maybe - with 13000 less deer hunters and 29 units someone will pay attention. Why do you kill doe off of the Pauns. or anywhere for that matter of fact. It makes my blood boil to think of the mis-management of our deer herd. Yes, I think a lot has to do with elk and yes, I think a lot has to do with our range being re-planted for elk and not deer. Of course coyotes, lions, long seasons have a bearing, but someone needed a good slap in the face to wake them up. Buck to doe ratios who cares - - it's the total number of deer that counts - - to a point that is.

That being said - - things will be looking up, you can count on it. The deer herd are on the increase!!!

 

[mevertsen]

I am one that thinks the quality of the experience is the most important thing. My dad and I will set up a big camp for 9 or so days of hunting even if only one of us has a tag. The other doesn't need a tag for us to have a good time.

You talk about ways to get kids interested in hunting.

How about they get a 15 or more day hunt, and make sure every kid gets a tag. Take that number of youth tags out of the general pool. So - if a unit only has 500 tags - and there are 400 kids - then only make 100 tags available to the rest of the hunters. As adults, we can see the big picture and realize that there are too many people and too much demand for everyone to be able to hunt every year, and be able to kill something.

That is something that will (should) be brought into the kids as they grow up and go on a few successful hunts. How about the adults making a sacrafice for the next generation.

There is also bird hunting, rabbit hunting, trapping, predator calling, camping, shooting popcans and balloons, and a matrix of other things that can be done to keep kids interested in the outdoors.

Besides - how do you expect to keep kids interested in hunting with only a 9 day season - and realistically only being able to hunt 4 of those days anyway? Keeping kids interested in the outdoors/hunting should be a year round committment for the adults in their life - if that is what is important to them.

Just my thoughts.

Marcial

 

[bucktaxi]

Good post Tony, and i agree with what you're saying. I agree with the other poster about chaining P/J. A landowner I know in CO has recently done so and the state had prison inmates clear the deadfall off his land to promote more brush. Win/win wouldn't you say??

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

JustMuleys & fishon?

You guys surely have heard the DWR say that after many years of chaining/railing Juniper & PJ tree's down they've decided that ain't the answer!

I read where they claim the June/Cheat Grass sucks nearly all the moisture out of the ground so quick hardly anything else would grow after the area was chained!

Now I'm no Biologist,but fishon should know about this study by now?

Their theory now is to cut them trees down,I've cut quite a few down for Dedicated Hunter Hours!

Maybe in 40 years they'll decide cutting them down ain't the answer either?



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!

 

[desertdeer]

i agree that moving hunt dates and increasing primitive weapons hunts would be much better than cutting tags but i think if we lose rifle hunters we lose hunters period. lets go one step at a time.
step one. stop guessing, speculating and fighting amongst ourselves.
step two. count the frickin deer
step three. make a plan and modify it as needed, not years later when a major overhaul is needed
step four. happily ever after

 

[JustMuleys]

BBOP,
Sure I have heard that Chaining is not the answer. I have also heard predator reduction isn't the answer either. What is the answer?
I am sure there are a whole wad of people, in 7 or 8 western states, that would love to know.

I bet alot of people on this website, that are over 40, would agree there were more deer in the 60's, 70's and 80's, than there is now.

I do know that in the 60's and early 70's, chaining large tract's of P/J was a common practice. I also know they were great places to hunt. Full of Bitterbrush, Mountain Mahogany, etc. Maybe chopping trees down accomplishes the same thing, I don't know.

I do know that, in the 60's thru the mid 80's, alot of states had much more aggressive predator controls.

One more thing...Doesn't it seem like there are more deer hit on highways than there used to be? Do you think it is because the forage along side the roads have become more appealing than out in the range? Or maybe the range has become so degraded, they have to travel further distances to get adequate amounts of foods? Or is it just because there are more cars on the highways?

If deer have optimal nutrition, and fewer predators, what else is there to keep them from increasing in numbers?



Merry Christmas.

 

[theox]

i think if people quit hunting becuse they have to wait an extra year for a tag they are not true hunters anyway. there are plenty of hunts if you dont draw a deer tag. there are spike elk hunts open bull hunts, turkey, dove, rabbit,coyote,grouse, just to name a few. the tags are there and if you just love hunting you can hunt something and make it fun. deer are my passion along with elk, AND if i need to only hunt a turkey and some doves for a year or two and only get to tag along on hunts and it helps the herds out for the future of hunting i am more than happy too.

ill tell ya i have almost as much fun tagging along with other people that have tags as hunting myself. of course i would rather have the tag but if i can tag along with a buddy its still a great time and im part of the hunt. i've helped a few buddies and family members on some fun hunts and i can say i got just as adrenaline pumped as if i was the one holding the gun. honeslty how many of you have tagged along on a hunt when you werent the one with the tag? i bet everyone of you has, and everyone of you had a great time.

so i for one think our current system sucks and something needs to happen maybe this is and maybe this is not the answer but... if we stick to it for a good few years we will know and if its wrong we can try another moethod.

i honestly dont think 13000 tags will be cut anyway, and for that long of a period .and if they are my hope and guess is its only gonna need to be cut for a couple years til we get herds balanced properly.

i see alot of you whingn and moaning but no one suggesting any other ways of fixing things, except hunter recruitment blah blah blah get the youth involved. well i can tell you more hunters definently does not equal more deer

 

[tagsoup]

>Tagsoup tell ya what lets compromise
>you go grouse or turkey
>hunting and I will go
>deer hunting!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sidehill,
While your at home wishing you had a deer tag. I will be out hunting. Lot's of ways to hunt if you really want to hunt.
Merry Christmas

 

[1970]

I haven't posted very often but I read these almost everyday. I have to agree with Fishon, and I know a lot of other people who do as well (almost everyone I have spoken to). Keep posting fishon, you make more sense than almost everyone on here. Also, I see just as many bucks now as I did 5 years ago and even 10 years ago. I don't use a fourwheeler, I use my own two feet(maybe that is my problem).

 

[fishon]

Lynn

The deer herds are not increasing in Utah or Colorado or Arizona or Nevada or anywhere in the west. And Cutting tags will increase BUCKS whicin turn will decrease the fawn productivity. (That is a Colorado Study);

Things are not looking up for our deer, they are looking down, as well as down for hunters, opportunity and recruitment.

All the data is there that shows that cutting the hunters will have no impact on the health of a herd only the number of bucks.

Those are not my facts those are EVERY Western states facts.

Keep believing in the pie dream of less hunters is better for the herds fellas and I will keep fighting to fix the DEER herds.



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

 

[cannonball]

Tony, I know what you are saying and I resisted the break down of units for years, but nothing was getting done. Drastic measures need be taken, and we have known about it for several years. Buck to Doe ratio - HA. Everyone says we can't blame the DWR for the loss of our deer herd, but in the past what was their answer to improving buck to ratio - kill the does. Next, what was their answer to having more experience for the hunter - increase the elk herds. Next, what was their answer to improving habitat - improve the feed for elk, not deer, elk. Next, what was their answer for improving hunting experience - go state-wide archery and I could talk about predator control, etc, etc, but I won't. My view for years, as seem to be yours, of the decline of the deer herd in the west, is simply elk. I have taken much ridicule over the years for that view with stupid statements like, "What do you think, elk eat deer?". I think there is room out there for so many animals and I also think five to ten buck deer equates to one bull elk in our hunting grounds. If I'm right, which do you think the best hunting experience to the most people. I agree with you on most of what you have to say, but Utah DWR and hunters needed some shock treatment to improve this situation - Now they have it. I don't look at it as a loss of 13,000 permits, I look at it as a new beginning.

One other thing, I sometimes get the opinion that you have an underlying agenda and that you would really like to see archery take everything. I hope that's not the case. There are a lot of gun hunters out there who may or may not archery hunt who are getting mighty raw from the organized archery leadership's gimme attitude.

 

[oakbrush]

Tony,

I have kept quiet on your posts about not wanting to reduce tags, but you are trying to manage deer on feeling and emotion. That won't work. Feelings about traditon, heritage, etc. is why it has taken Utah so long to try to save the deer herds.

I know what it boils down to for you. It is your kids. You want them to have the childhood deer hunts with family like you had. But you can't try to shape muledeer policy with these feelings. Technology age is here and your kids already have to deal with homework on a laptop, Xbox, internet on your phone, etc. It is already different for them. Times have changed, and the sooner you accept it and focus your fight for the deer and not for tradition, the better off your kids future hunting will be.

I don't like it either, but you need to accept change or you will be left behind. Maybe you should fight more for youth tags and special seasons for the kids etc. Change is happening. I like your passion, but maybe you need to change the focus of your fight.

Saying that less hunters won't help the deer is an argument that most hunters, biologist just wont believe. Less tags has worked to help deer in most places it has been used. That is a fact.

I feel your pain though, that is for sure.

Oakbrush

 

[brutus]

fishon, talk about cherry picking studys.Geezus that "Colorado survey" was a one year study and is bs and you know it. Their were far more factors relating to decline of fawn numbers in that survey than buck numbers being high. If you could get one biologist to suggest that raising the buck/doe ratio alone directly leads to lower fawn recruitment as a result and no other factors would change that i'd buy what your sellin. But we both know that is not the case.

Sometimes I question why such a fit over 3 more bucks per hundred does? Is it the tag cuts alone or is it cause you feel scorned that your voice didnt drown everyone elses out. It sure seems like your reaching just as far as you can to find any loophole or biologist that spit something out at one point in time to suggest that unlimited hunting is the answer.

Sometimes you make great points that make great sense but when you say stuff like "more bucks will just harass does more through the winter" or "if we have more bucks it will cause the predator population to explode" it makes me wonder what your really up too. Cause stuff like that is just plain crazy.

 

[piper]

Maybe the deer herds will be "fixed" when there is a little more natural buck to doe ratio, and when there are more mature bucks in the mix. For the most part, deer herd growth is going to be whats it going to be, you should take care of and appreciate what there is. The deer herds of the 40s 50s and 60s will never come about again, it was a one time thing, and its over. Drastic changes occured when hundred of thousands of non native cattle and millions of old world sheep came upon the scene. ( 3.8 million sheep at the turn of the century in Utah). The forage base has been changing ever since, we now have invasive plants, a dry, hotter climate, subdivisions, highway mortality, migration paths blocked, and dozens of other things we don't even realize are going on. On the hunting end you have greatly increasing technology, things like 90 yard bow shots, 200 yard muzzleloader kills and thousand yard rifles, and of course all the mobility of the ATV revolution. In my opinion, the option that was approved really seems pretty mild in light of the current and generally sad deer hunting situation.

 

[ELKOHOLIC]

Tony, more bucks means less fawns? Are you implying that we are at carrying capacity? When I here people say they are going to quit hunting it is because they are sick of not seeing anything, but I guess that don't fit your agenda Tony.

 

[fishon]

The study was a Colorado study done for over 15+ years. And it states that when they had more bucks they also saw a decrease in fawn recruitment.

That is not my study that is the study of the best deer herd in the west.....



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

 

[Aaron84]

No offense tonybut all your post to me are like this

 

[Hooner]

Tony,
Thanks for all of the excitment the last month. Instead of fighting the change why don't you try and make the best of it. You seem to have a group of people that agree with your ideas. If you are going to spend so much time and energy why don't you go somewhere with it. If you are truly worried about the deer herd why don't you figure out a way to help us get moreaccurate deer counts so we know what we actually have in this state.
Why don't you figure out a way to help the biologist manage the deer in each unit. You get on this site and go on and on and on. Seriously people resent you for starting a new thread every day that tried to prove that your ideas are right and the wildlife board and rac committes are wrong. Seriously get over it and do something constructive.
Just my two cents. I doubt anything that is ay holds any weight with you but you can't falt me for trying.

 

[stillhunterman]

Not to worry Hooner, we are in the midst of doing just what you are asking. By the way, it was worth a fair bit less than two cents....and nope, can't fault you for trying.

 

[Aaron84]

Oh im sure you are good for you saving our deer herds yay!!!

 

[stillhunterman]

No prob Aaron84, our pleasure!!!

 

[Aaron84]

Im being serious thank you. I come off as a smart ass on here but my intentions are good.

 

[Hooner]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-28-10 AT 10:40PM (MST)[p] What do you mean by OUR PLEASURE. You trying to tell me that you have a grand skeem that is going to save our deer herds and now that Option two was passed you are so mad you are going to share the great idea with all of us hunters in the state of Utah? Just wandering.

 

[Muley_73]

Tony,
Like I told you in the WB meeting. We both want the same thing. A future for our children and THEIR children.

Pheasants are still the most hunted upland game bird in the state of Utah. But it scares me to death that we are going to run our deer the way of the pheasant in this state. Yes every year some roosters breed the hens and yes we sell tags and yes some even shoot birds. But is that really the future that you want for our children and their children. It is surely not the future I want and I shoot more pheasants than most I know!

This crap that the SFW is the only one pushing this and we are all just soldiers for them is a LIE! It is doing no good for any sportsmen! You were in positions to make a difference for years. More so than any of us. Now you come here and point the future of hunting lost on US? That really does blow me away! I know I have NOT done enough to this point and shame on ME for not being more involved until now. My dad taught me better and I knew better! So please lets all try to look at some positives in this situation and move foward!

Step 1 is always the hardest!

 

[Sidehill]

Muley 73,
I believe that whole heartedly we all want the same outcome for our deer herds. The only thing is some see the world threw a different pair of glass's be it right or wrong!

I notice that you refer to pheasant hunting alot. I to enjoy to pheasant hunt it is a great adrenaline rush to have a big rooster flush from under your feet or to watch the dog go on point.

You refer to pheasants's so let me refer to Elk. Do you want to see our Utah general season deer hunt follow the same path as our elk hunt? In some regard's it is a huge success! In other regard's it is a huge failure! I guess it all depends how you look at it. If you can or want to spend 10 to 15 grand a year on a tag I would say it is the ultimate. If you can't or won't spend 10 to 15 grand a year and have to wait to draw that tag that takes 10 to 16 years for a chance at a decent area or bull I would say it is a huge failure! yes we sale general season tags yes some people actually shoot a spike. Is this the sort of opportunity you want for your kids? would you say that this is the sort of opportunity that the majority Utah sportsman want for there children? I would think not! based on what I am hearing day in and day out.

Like I have said before there has got to be a balance! While I believe some fight for 29 units for the right reason's I personally think it was passed for all the wrong reason's and this is what scare's me to death.

No good will come from this until the voice of the majority is herd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not believe that we should move forward with this until the voice of the majority is taken seriously whether it be 29 units or 129 units !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Option 2 will not grow more deer it will create more bucks for fewer hunters that is a fact!

73 do you feel that our current RAC and Wildlife Board system is sound?

Do you feel there is way to much political influence in the outcome of of the WB decisions affecting management strategies both biologically and social?

What is your opinion?

Respectfully, Sidehill

 

[stillhunterman]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-28-10
>AT 10:40?PM (MST)
>
> What do
>you mean by OUR PLEASURE.
>You trying to tell me
>that you have a grand
>skeem that is going to
>save our deer herds and
>now that Option two was
>passed you are so mad
>you are going to share
>the great idea with all
>of us hunters in the
>state of Utah? Just wandering.
>


"Our Pleasure" means just what it says, and the "Our" part is the majority of hunters in this state. Most of us want the same thing, you and I both understand that: We want the health of our deer herds to be priority, and we want the management of such done with the best biological information that can be had, not by social agenda's and massive political pressures (although that is probably how changes will come anyway) by a select group.

Most that take the time to understand the MANY problems facing our Mule Deer in the west know that there are a myriad of issues that relegate themselves to the detriment of our deer, and many of those issues are very expensive and difficult to deal with, if they can be at all. What we DON'T need is another problem heaped on the pile (see above). Should the bastardized option 2 that was passed stay in effect, then we should do everything we can to make sure the proper methods of management are accomplished to help the herds not the hunters, and they should be done biologically, not for social/political obscenities.

With that being said, I guess we will just have to fight fire with fire, and give our all in doing so... just sayin'

 

[tinenut]

Muley_73, + 1, agree 100%

Sidehill, and what was your chance to kill a mature bull draw odds or dollars 30 years ago? I am sure there is way more opportunity now to get a spike, and my grand kids are totally happy with that. I know what you are saying, but I do not know the answers. Sometimes I think we have pushed our resources to the limit. There is way more people in the hills than I ever remember, there is always some hunt going on, plus ATV jamboree, camping, fishing, horse riding, hiking, scouting, shed hunters, arrow head hunters, whatever. It is all good people are out enjoying the outdoors, but it has to be hard on the wildlife. Maybe that it why I see more deer in the fields than in the mountain.

 

[WORKNMAN]

If people like paying for Utah Deer tags and putting up the other costs to go hunting Deer that are not even there, Hammer down. Shifting hunt dates.....didn't the DWR already move the Muzzleloader Deer hunt out of November to a less successful time frame...September!!!

 

[deerbedead]

I know this thread is getting quite long and full of b.s. but I'm throwing down a paragraph or two just cause I'm bored.

Tony,
You say we lost 13,000 hunters. I say we didn't. Every one of them will be applying for a point in the drawing. A good percentage of the hunters that would quit if they didn't draw will draw out for a tag this year. There will be many hardcore hunters that will be sitting out because grandma drew her tag. Did we lose a hunter though? I don't think so.

It has been proven time and time again that cutting hunter numbers increases deer populations. Why do we have to argue that fact? You keep bringing out studies of how it doesn't work, and saying that Colorado studies prove otherwise. If Colorado doesn't think cutting tags helps build herds, then why the hell did they cut tags on areas that winter killed? Please explain that one to me.

DeerBeDead

 

[eldorado]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-29-10 AT 06:05PM (MST)[p]If Colorado is doing such a marginal job at managing it's deer
herds as some have suggested, then why is the state the envy
of so many mule deer hunters? Could it be that the CDOW got
it right to begin with by cutting deer tags and micromanaging
their deer herds among other solutions?

ELDORADO

 

[stillhunterman]

Colorado is only the envy of the antler hunters, which is all fine and good. Could it be that they cut their tag numbers to manage BUCKS and not the deer herds?

 

[eldorado]

Yet, the deer herds in Colorado seem to be doing better
than those in Utah. So, Colorado must be doing something
right.

ELDORADO

 

[DaBigBucks]

A couple things:

1- Since when is more bucks and less hunters a bad thing. I bet 99% of hunters would like to see more bucks and less hunters. I think that is the majority.


2- If some people quit hunting because they dont draw a tag or hunt every year, they are not ( i repeat, they are not) going to be the ones fighting for hunting in the future. If people like that want to quit, for heavens sake, who cares.........

3- Hunter reqruitment and better deer management will never go together, so give it up.........

4- Utah and colorado are different, so quit comparing the two...........

 

[WORKNMAN]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-29-10
>AT 06:05?PM (MST)
>
>If Colorado is doing such a
>marginal job at managing it's
>deer
>herds as some have suggested, then
>why is the state the
>envy
>of so many mule deer hunters?
>Could it be that the
>CDOW got
>it right to begin with by
>cutting deer tags and micromanaging
>
>their deer herds among other solutions?
>
>
>ELDORADO
>
>

+1 ELDORADO

 

[fishon]

That is a simple question to answer that was addressed in the same study that showed increase buck population had a negative effect on fawn recruitment and productivity.

It said that the hunters were pleased with the increase in bucks seen and the size.

I have not nor will I argue that point. In fact that proves my point. To most of you it is about seeing bucks and bigger bucks not the overall condition of the herd. That is where we differ.

Colorado's study clearly proved that.

So just admit like Colorado's hunters did that it is about the number of bucks and size of bucks not about what it best for the overall herd health.

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

 

[piper]

I honestly can't see how killing nearly every large antlered buck helps the herd? A buck that could produce a 30 inch rack at three and a half, is usually dead at Two and a half, thats really good for passing the genes.