A MATHEMATICAL QUESTION FOR THE KING NILLER???

elkassassin

elkassassin

Long Time Member
Messages
37,090
From What I Understand From What You've Been Boasting Niller?

When Somebody Shoots A Buck!

That Kills One Buck & One Buck Only According To Your Smarts In Biology?

So?

Let's Ask This:

When Somebody Shoots a Doe!

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

I Know There's Lots Of Variables!

Maybe JakeH Might Know The Number From Him Studying The DWR's Studies? (If They've Studied It?)

Maybe Somebody-Else Knows?

Like I Said!

I'm Looking For An Average!

I'm Not Trying To Ruffle Your Feathers Again Niller!

Just Wondering If All You PRO MM Biologists Have A Number You Can All Agree On?
 
elkassassin said:
From What I Understand From What You've Been Boasting Niller?

When Somebody Shoots A Buck!

That Kills One Buck & One Buck Only According To Your Smarts In Biology?

So?

Let's Ask This:

When Somebody Shoots a Doe!

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

I Know There's Lots Of Variables!

Maybe JakeH Might Know The Number From Him Studying The DWR's Studies? (If They've Studied It?)

Maybe Somebody-Else Knows?

Like I Said!

I'm Looking For An Average!

I'm Not Trying To Ruffle Your Feathers Again Niller!

Just Wondering If All You PRO MM Biologists Have A Number You Can All Agree On?
Click to expand...
The DEW is strong tonight.....
 
Ok cat here's a twist for consideration. I have no studies to back this up or prove a point but here it is. Posthunting seasons we have ruoghly 80% does and 20% bucks remaining. Does this mean that does are the prey 80% of the time? If we carried 30% bucks would that help save a few more fawn producing does? Does saving a few more pisscutters actually produce more fawns? This inquiring mind would like to know...
 
SirHuntsalot said:
Ok cat here's a twist for consideration. I have no studies to back this up or prove a point but here it is. Posthunting seasons we have ruoghly 80% does and 20% bucks remaining. Does this mean that does are the prey 80% of the time? If we carried 30% bucks would that help save a few more fawn producing does? Does saving a few more pisscutters actually produce more fawns? This inquiring mind would like to know...
Click to expand...
No
 
Fair Enough hossy!

To The Best Of My Recollection Here On MM over the years It Seemed Like Alot of People Said up around 6?

It Would Be a Study Almost Impossible To know For Sure with all The Variables Possible!

I Totally Agree With JakeH!

And SirHuntsalot:

No!

But It Sure Would Be Nice To See 'Some' Decent Genetics Left Come Rut Time!



hossblur said:
Bess. I'd say 5 seems like a fair number
Click to expand...
 
Keep Posting The Numbers!

About All We Can Do Is Have All The MM'ERS Post Their Numbers & Then Maybe We Can Average Them!
 
I don’t have any clue how many fawns a doe produces throughout their life on average. I’ve never read anything on this. I simply don’t know the answer to your question Whoopi.
 
Hey Niller?

Can You GUESSTIMATE It?

As Smart As You Are I Really Thought You'd Have A Number?

Vanilla said:
I don’t have any clue how many fawns a doe produces throughout their life on average. I’ve never read anything on this. I simply don’t know the answer to your question Whoopi.
Click to expand...
 
Whoop, smart people know to say “I don’t know” when they don’t know the answer. Smart people don’t make things up to try and appear smarter than they really are!

But your thread starter didn’t ask for a guesstimate, whereas you are now. I’ll guess 5.5 deer killed for every doe killed. I have no data or knowledge to back that up, it’s simply a wild Whoopi guess!
 
Fair Enough!

If You Or Anybody-else Finds A Study Or Numbers Post Em Up!

Vanilla said:
Whoop, smart people know to say “I don’t know” when they don’t know the answer. Smart people don’t make things up to try and appear smarter than they really are!

But your thread starter didn’t ask for a guesstimate, whereas you are now. I’ll guess 5.5 deer killed for every doe killed. I have no data or knowledge to back that up, it’s simply a wild Whoopi guess!
Click to expand...
 
One. Or eight. Depends on the area of course! There are areas where the deer are simply saturated and for decades have not been hunted, but the population remains relatively flat. In areas where the deer are not saturated, more does would lead to increased population.

I state this with full confidence considering the biology degree that I did not earn while studying something completely unrelated in college. But I did sleep at a Holiday Inn once.
 
We're Talkin DRATville!

HikeHunt61 said:
One. Or eight. Depends on the area of course! There are areas where the deer are simply saturated and for decades have not been hunted, but the population remains relatively flat. In areas where the deer are not saturated, more does would lead to increased population.

I state this with full confidence considering the biology degree that I did not earn while studying something completely unrelated in college. But I did sleep at a Holiday Inn once.
Click to expand...
 
this is from memory, but I believe the number is 6-7 on average. A cow elk was slightly higher at 8-9.

That was just the average number of fawns/calves that a healthy female would carry to term during their life no outside factors considered.

Again, memory so don’t quote me on it if someone finds the actual published study, but that’s what I remember being cited by division at one time or another
 
It is hundreds over the long run.
One doe has usually two fawns a year.
That doe lives maybe 5-8 yrs on average (my guess).
Probability suggests that 50% of the fawns are does.
Those fawns live 5-8 yrs and half of those fawns become does to be bred.
Now it repeats itself a third generation.
And a fourth, and again, and again…..
Look at your great great great great grandmas family tree and how many humans came from that ‘doe’?
 
MrShane said:
It is hundreds over the long run.
One doe has usually two fawns a year.
That doe lives maybe 5-8 yrs on average (my guess).
Probability suggests that 50% of the fawns are does.
Those fawns live 5-8 yrs and half of those fawns become does to be bred.
Now it repeats itself a third generation.
And a fourth, and again, and again…..
Look at your great great great great grandmas family tree and how many humans came from that ‘doe’?
Click to expand...
#doelivesmatter
 
It's Not Quite That Easy To Figure MrShane!

Deer Ain't People!:D

MrShane said:
It is hundreds over the long run.
One doe has usually two fawns a year.
That doe lives maybe 5-8 yrs on average (my guess).
Probability suggests that 50% of the fawns are does.
Those fawns live 5-8 yrs and half of those fawns become does to be bred.
Now it repeats itself a third generation.
And a fourth, and again, and again…..
Look at your great great great great grandmas family tree and how many humans came from that ‘doe’?
Click to expand...
 
Mr Shane got it right!

It's hundreds over time since the doe's offspring will undoubtedly have other does and they in turn will have other does too.

It's like the home owners on the bench touting that they don't hunt but the shear presence of their house on critical winter range kills, or prevents future births, of hundreds if not thousands of deer.

This might be too abstract for some but think about it for a minute and you'll understand what I'm pontificating about whether you agree or not.

Zeke
 
Absolutely if you take this down stream the number is actually infinity as long as mule deer continue to exist. As long as the species continues to exist, the number is never ending.

I assumed Whoopi was talking about the direct offspring of the doe that is killed, not ongoing numbers of offspring across multiple generations.
 
Well after a couple google searches I am obviously now a subject matter expert.

So. If you read the links provided. You can extrapolate that the average doe deer lives 9-11 years. Breeding starts at 1.5 years of age providing 1 fawn its first year, then usually providing 2 fawns per year there after for roughly 5-7 years. Again using the limited data I am providing (you can look at many other studies should you so choose), with average fawn mortality at 20% a doe will birth 13 fawns and on averages 10 should live.

I could not find any studies on the percentage of does/bucks birth rate but assuming that it’s 50/50 that means that doe would be the grandmother to an additional 100 fawns 50 of which would be does, and so on and so on.

www.nwf.org

Mule Deer | National Wildlife Federation

Learn facts about the mule deer’s habitat, diet, life history, and more.
www.nwf.org

Mule deer fawn and calf elk survival rates trending lower in Idaho

February numbers show 72% of fawns, 92% of calves still alive
www.gohunt.com www.gohunt.com

 
Where are all these twins with 60%+ survival rate.

The biggest considerations in all of this are local carrying capacity and buck/doe ratios, which would approximate likelihood of pregnancy. It doesn't matter how many does you don't shoot if they starve to death.
 
DBG3285 said:
So. If you read the links provided. You can extrapolate that the average doe deer lives 9-11 years. Breeding starts at 1.5 years of age providing 1 fawn its first year, then usually providing 2 fawns per year there after for roughly 5-7 years. Again using the limited data I am providing (you can look at many other studies should you so choose), with average fawn mortality at 20% a doe will birth 13 fawns and on averages 10 should live.
Click to expand...

My wild Whoopi guess of 5.5 was based upon a doe birthing 10-11 fawns in its life and 50% of them surviving on average.

Why did I select those numbers? No reason. Pulled them straight out of my rear end. It is surprising to me to see you found 80% survival on average in fawns on average. That feels very high to me, but again, I don’t have data to dispute it. Just assumptions on my end.
 
Hey Niller?

You Must SPEED-READ What I Post?

SLOW It Down!

And Let It Sink In!

I Said:

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

No!

I'm Not Mad At You!

Just Trying To Find Out What That Number Would Be?
 
In A Perfect World MrShane Would Be Right!

But There's Lots Of Variables!

Winter Kill!

Coyote Kill!

Lion Kill!

Road Kill!

Doe Shooters!

Disease!

The List Goes On & On!

Keep Postin What You Guys Feel is The Answer!
 
Vanilla said:
My wild Whoopi guess of 5.5 was based upon a doe birthing 10-11 fawns in its life and 50% of them surviving on average.

Why did I select those numbers? No reason. Pulled them straight out of my rear end. It is surprising to me to see you found 80% survival on average in fawns on average. That feels very high to me, but again, I don’t have data to dispute it. Just assumptions on my end.
Click to expand...
That survival number is fawns with tracking collars. Meaning they(someone) caught and collared said fawns. I'm comfortable drawing a few assumptions:

1) They don't catch and collar them in the first month of life
2) Any fawn that survives the collaring process(a lot don't), is hardier stock from get go

Given that, the survival rate of collared fawns should not be looked at as the survival rate of all live births; nor does it reflect on pregnancy rates either. 80% survival of collared fawns doesn't mean 80% of does have a fawn at their side come spring.
 
FYI in Utah the fawns that are collared are found with implants in the doe. When the fawn is born the biologist looks in the vicinity of the doe at that time to collar the fawn as close to birth as possible.

The collared does are re-captured in the late fall and among other things are preg checked. That is when the monitors are placed to know when they give birth and also verify pregnancy rates.

Feel free to make any assumptions you want. That doesn't change the actual data.

Yes the sample size may be relatively small but gets bigger every year as more are collared.
 
I would be surprised if the average doe lived longer than 5 or 6 years
I belive if a deer unit was left totally alone no hunting, no predator control and no assisted feeding, the bucks would outnumber the does. And therefore is the problem of carrying capacity.
That is why it is documented the pioneers said there was verry few deer in Utah and other western states.
All of this is just my opinions and yes I too just pulled it out of my rear end.
 
So middlefork?

You got some kinda Guesstimation on a Number?

middlefork said:
FYI in Utah the fawns that are collared are found with implants in the doe. When the fawn is born the biologist looks in the vicinity of the doe at that time to collar the fawn as close to birth as possible.

The collared does are re-captured in the late fall and among other things are preg checked. That is when the monitors are placed to know when they give birth and also verify pregnancy rates.

Feel free to make any assumptions you want. That doesn't change the actual data.

Yes the sample size may be relatively small but gets bigger every year as more are collared.
Click to expand...
 
Sure I can guess. What am I guessing at? Total fawns produced by a single doe or total deer produced by its progenitive?

I'll guess that at best that particular doe on average will produce 1.8 fawns on the ground at birth. And depending on many factors the survival rate for those fawns to reach 6 months is about 30-60%

So my question back to you is how do you up fawn survival?
Figure that out and it will solve pretty much everyone's problem.
 
We evaluated vaginal implant transmitters (VITs) as a technique for locating neonatal mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) fawns. We implanted VITs in 29 pregnant, wild female mule deer in March 2003 and in 20 pregnant, captive mule deer in March 2004. We found no wild fawns at the birth site using VITs. Only 12 of 19 VITs were dropped in beds, and none could be confirmed as birth sites. In contrast, captive does shed 17 of 19 VITs at the birth site during parturition. Two were shed prematurely, and signals of 2 VITs failed. Antenna length, depth of insertion, and length of vaginal canal had no effect on the likelihood of premature shedding. Using aerial telemetry, we detected implanted VITs from distances of up to 1.2 km and expelled VITs from up to 2 km away, whereas from the ground, signal range was <0.6 km. Labor during fawning lasted an average of 121 min, and the average fawn began standing 35 min and nursing 43 min after birth. Six of 17 of captive females left the birth site within 6 hr of parturition, and wild fawns moved up to 0.6 km from the birth site within 24 hr. During the first 5 days after birth, fawns nursed on average every 3.34 hr. We recommend when using VITs to locate neonatal mule deer fawns near the birth site, VIT signals should be monitored 2–3 times a day from within 0.5 km on ground or 2 km from the air.
 
That 30-60% survival rate past 6 months seems reasonable to me. Obviously a lot of variance based on conditions. The problem is us. We don't hunt enough predators, I'm not sure anyone poisons them anymore. Back in the "good old days" people poisoned trapped and hunted predators at rates no one does now. We also don't adjust seasons to account for uncontrollable environmental factors. Who's willing to shut a unit entirely to let it rebound after a bad winter or disease? And bottom line is there are just more hunters out there for more days with better equipment.
 
Cool! Maybe you should contact Professor Randy Larson at BYU to correlate the studies.

I'll certainly not get in the way of verifying data.
 
So it seems we are getting a little bit in the weeds here (not unusual) but now you seem to think hunting bucks is limiting the reproduction and survival of the herds.

I've not seen any information to indicate that.
 
middlefork said:
So it seems we are getting a little bit in the weeds here (not unusual) but now you seem to think hunting bucks is limiting the reproduction and survival of the herds.

I've not seen any information to indicate that.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that, necessarily, but there is definitely a necessary buck doe ratio to optimize herd survival. I was simply pointing of that a 80% survival rate on MD fawns in most places is ridiculous, and the flaws in assuming collared fawns survival is a good proxy for fawn mortality. Most of the deaths will happen well before you could collar what could be considered a random sample.
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
Same Randy Larson who acknowledged 71% and 78% survival in a netting experiment? That means 22% and 29% fatalities from collaring.
Click to expand...
Never said a 80% collared fawn survival equals a 80% fawn survival rate.
idahomuleyhunter said:
I'm suggesting if you think an 80% collared fawn survival rate equates to an 80% fawn survival rate you're an idiot.
Click to expand...
I'm certainly no expert but no I do not think there is an 80% survival rate. I believe I stated 30-60%.

Do you have better numbers?

At best can we agree that fawn survival is what will grow the herd?
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
That 30-60% survival rate past 6 months seems reasonable to me. Obviously a lot of variance based on conditions. The problem is us. We don't hunt enough predators, I'm not sure anyone poisons them anymore. Back in the "good old days" people poisoned trapped and hunted predators at rates no one does now. We also don't adjust seasons to account for uncontrollable environmental factors. Who's willing to shut a unit entirely to let it rebound after a bad winter or disease?
Click to expand...
I Can Tell You Who Is NOT Willing To Do That!

That'd Be The KING!

idahomuleyhunter said:
And bottom line is there are just more hunters out there for more days with better equipment.
Click to expand...
 
Hey mf!

I Did Say This A Couple of times now:

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

I Know!

It's A tough One With All The Variables!

middlefork said:
Sure I can guess. What am I guessing at? Total fawns produced by a single doe or total deer produced by its progenitive?

I'll guess that at best that particular doe on average will produce 1.8 fawns on the ground at birth. And depending on many factors the survival rate for those fawns to reach 6 months is about 30-60%

So my question back to you is how do you up fawn survival?
Figure that out and it will solve pretty much everyone's problem.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
elkassassin said:
Hey mf!

I Did Say This A Couple of times now:

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

I Know!

It's A tough One With Al The Variables!
Click to expand...
I have no idea. Who is they and where did they kill them?
I know I'm not the only one trying to follow your logic.

I'll ask this, why do you think any unit needs a complete shut down?

I'll say up it front it makes no sense to me.
 
middlefork said:
I have no idea. Who is they and where did they kill them?
I know I'm not the only one trying to follow your logic.

I'll ask this, why do you think any unit needs a complete shut down?

I'll say up it front it makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
Not saying it does. But I've seen units in Idaho get overhunted to the point they do get shut down. Or effectively so. And F&G refuses to modify regs outside their 2 year cycle. Whether shooting does is good or bad depends entirely on the location. If deer are starving to death on winter range for lack of forage then not shooting does didn't help much.
 
Idahomuleyhunter mentioned It!

I've Seen Units Hunted Down To Nothing in this State,So Bad The Units Had To Be Closed!

With Proper Management There Shouldn't Be any Areas/Units Closed!

Mention Cutting A Tag To The KING & He Goes Ballistic!





middlefork said:
I have no idea. Who is they and where did they kill them?
I know I'm not the only one trying to follow your logic.

I'll ask this, why do you think any unit needs a complete shut down?

I'll say up it front it makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
 
southernutahhunter said:
I watched the Pauns go to nearly no deer in the 80s then shut down for 5 years. When you have no deer buck or doe there is not a lot of options.
Click to expand...
How many doe's was they killing then? I don't know as I wasn't there, so that is a genuine question.

My guess is if they hunted it down to almost nothing they must have been killing a crap load of them.

Now compare that to now in Utah (not speaking for other states as I don't know there policy on doe hunts other than Colorado and they are absolutely insane with how many doe tags they hand out) but in Utah they give out very few doe tags, and the majority of the ones they do give out are in agricultural areas that have an excess that need removed.

So if they was shooting the doe's in excess back in the 80s then Utah has already done what bess is asking for, they shut down doe hunting in the majority of the state.
 
elkassassin said:
They SLAUGHTERED Does In This State For Way Too Many Years!

It's FUBAR!

Anybody Need Me To SPLAIN FUBAR?
Click to expand...
So they have made improvements???? I mean they have basically shut down doe hunting in this state at least on the mass scale that used to happen.

It's dang near impossible to shoot out a unit if you have already stopped killing doe's.
 
elkassassin said:
I'd Guess You Might Be Too Young To Remember When They Shot The Book Cliffs Out Jake?
Click to expand...
I never set foot in the bookcliffs till about 2000 when I was old enough to drive after they opened it back up so yeah, to young, and my family didn't do anything out there growing up.

That unit is still struggling but it's not because of hunting, and yes it is sad.
 
And I'm not gonna say they haven't over hunted units in the past, if they was issuing doe tags at the same rate as the buck tags they was killing a sh!t ton of deer. My argument is they are not shooting out units now, in Utah anyway.
 
elkassassin said:
2 Years ago They Were Parading 16"-18" 4 Points around Like They Were Trophies!

YES,SAD!
Click to expand...
Sadly my brother drew that year as well, it was pretty poor hunting, nothing like it used to be. But I think that was a combination of the early dates combined with the drought. The last two years has improved, but it's still not great.

That said they have cut buck tags way back from where they was 10 years ago.
 
elkassassin said:
Hey Niller?

You Must SPEED-READ What I Post?

SLOW It Down!

And Let It Sink In!

I Said:

On Average,How Many Deer Did They Just Kill In The Long Run?

No!

I'm Not Mad At You!

Just Trying To Find Out What That Number Would Be?
Click to expand...

Then my number is infinite. The number would never end.
 
So?

I'm Asking People Here On MM Who I Believe Are Some Of The Better/Best Hunters & Sportsmen anywhere around The West!

And What We Have So Far is As Low as 5 & as High as Infinity!

So It Looks Like Doe Survival Is One Of The Very Best Things We Could Try To Make Happen!

Which I've Preached All My Life!

I've Always Said:

If We've Got a Doe Issue!

Move Them Rather Than Slaughter Them!

Ya!

I Know It's Spendy To Do!

But A Deer Herd That's In Piss Poor Shape Ain't Gonna Make Anybody Any Money especially if He Keeps Going The Direction It's Been Going For The Last 50+ Years!

I Don't See Anybody in The Ranching/Farming Community Killing Off The Female Species Thinking Their Livelihoods are gonna continue to Prosper by Doing STUPID Sshhitt!
 
MrShane said:
It is hundreds over the long run.
One doe has usually two fawns a year.
That doe lives maybe 5-8 yrs on average (my guess).
Probability suggests that 50% of the fawns are does.
Those fawns live 5-8 yrs and half of those fawns become does to be bred.
Now it repeats itself a third generation.
And a fourth, and again, and again…..
Look at your great great great great grandmas family tree and how many humans came from that ‘doe’?
Click to expand...

The same amount came from that one "buck" as well...
 
Logistic Growth: When resources are limited, populations exhibit logistic growth. In logistic growth a population grows nearly exponentially at first when the population is small and resources are plentiful, but growth rate slows down as the population size nears limit of the environment and resources begin to be in short supply and finally stabilizes (zero population growth rate) at the maximum population size that can be supported by the environment (carrying capacity).

1682167435684.png


  • G = the population growth rate, it is a measure of the number of individuals added per time interval time.
  • r = the per capita rate of increase (the average contribution of each member in a population-to-population growth; per capita means “per person”).
  • N = is the population size, the number of individuals in the population at a particular time.
  • K = carrying capacity.

Source: Population Growth Models
 
roadrunner said:
Logistic Growth: When resources are limited, populations exhibit logistic growth. In logistic growth a population grows nearly exponentially at first when the population is small and resources are plentiful, but growth rate slows down as the population size nears limit of the environment and resources begin to be in short supply and finally stabilizes (zero population growth rate) at the maximum population size that can be supported by the environment (carrying capacity).

View attachment 108711

  • G = the population growth rate, it is a measure of the number of individuals added per time interval time.
  • r = the per capita rate of increase (the average contribution of each member in a population-to-population growth; per capita means “per person”).
  • N = is the population size, the number of individuals in the population at a particular time.
  • K = carrying capacity.

Source: Population Growth Models
Click to expand...
Math with letters is not welcome here. Read the audience dude ?
 
roadrunner said:
The same amount came from that one "buck" as well...
Click to expand...
Negative, while yes his offspring will continue on, it is not the same as losing a doe. You lose a buck, there is usually in a semi healthy herd another buck to take his place and breed the doe. You lose a doe and the line is dead, no more, naughta.

roadrunner said:
Doe hunts are an absolute must from time to time depending on the factors that have a direct impact on species survival.
Click to expand...
I did say most situations, yes they are needed at times, but in our current environment in the west if you are trying to grow herds which is the case in most of utah, then you shouldn't have doe hunts. And, doe hunts are pretty limited in this state.


roadrunner said:
Logistic Growth: When resources are limited, populations exhibit logistic growth. In logistic growth a population grows nearly exponentially at first when the population is small and resources are plentiful, but growth rate slows down as the population size nears limit of the environment and resources begin to be in short supply and finally stabilizes (zero population growth rate) at the maximum population size that can be supported by the environment (carrying capacity).

View attachment 108711

  • G = the population growth rate, it is a measure of the number of individuals added per time interval time.
  • r = the per capita rate of increase (the average contribution of each member in a population-to-population growth; per capita means “per person”).
  • N = is the population size, the number of individuals in the population at a particular time.
  • K = carrying capacity.

Source: Population Growth Models
Click to expand...

If our units are at carrying capacity but we are below our traditional population range, then maybe we need to work on why we are at carrying capacity. Which is being done all across the state funded in large part by conservation organizations doing habitat improvements. My hope is that a lot of the work that has been done over the last 15 years or so has not seen its potential, as it takes time to grow the habitat needed after the improvements have been made. It's a never ending battle.

Some areas though have lost vasts amount of habitat due to human encroachment and we are likely to never see the numbers back to what they was in the glory days.
 
JakeH said:
Negative, while yes his offspring will continue on, it is not the same as losing a doe. You lose a buck, there is usually in a semi healthy herd another buck to take his place and breed the doe. You lose a doe and the line is dead, no more, naughta.


I did say most situations, yes they are needed at times, but in our current environment in the west if you are trying to grow herds which is the case in most of utah, then you shouldn't have doe hunts. And, doe hunts are pretty limited in this state.




If our units are at carrying capacity but we are below our traditional population range, then maybe we need to work on why we are at carrying capacity. Which is being done all across the state funded in large part by conservation organizations doing habitat improvements. My hope is that a lot of the work that has been done over the last 15 years or so has not seen its potential, as it takes time to grow the habitat needed after the improvements have been made. It's a never ending battle.

Some areas though have lost vasts amount of habitat due to human encroachment and we are likely to never see the numbers back to what they was in the glory days.
Click to expand...

Wow - you really didn't like what I posted :ROFLMAO:

You said you'd never call for doe hunts.

Positive. Without that great great great grandpa "buck", great great great grandma "doe" would've died barren. And if great great great grandma "doe" died before "dropping" a first "fawn", great great great grandpa "buck" would've remarried.

The thread topic is to provide some math behind what happens to population when you shoot a buck. The equation takes that into consideration (see the source link). Not interested in analyzing it...
 
roadrunner said:
The thread topic is to provide some math behind what happens to population when you shoot a buck. The equation takes that into consideration (see the source link). Not interested in analyzing it...
Click to expand...
To preserve yet another example of true genius.

You can tell how dumb a thread is by who posts in it.
 
roadrunner said:
Positive. Without that great great great grandpa "buck", great great great grandma "doe" would've died barren. And if great great great grandma "doe" died before "dropping" a first "fawn", great great great grandpa "buck" would've remarried.
Click to expand...

This comment shows just an almost unbelievable lack of understanding of how these animal populations work. It’s good to be able to establish the new baseline for discussions, however. I thought Whoopi going for doe hunts on the Henry’s to save the bucks was the new baseline. Glad to have something else to prop ole Whoppi back up!
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

1918327_1411874855204_6369978_n.jpg
AF802A61-B027-43A4-BB5B-E79CE6A534F2.jpeg
IMG_2997 (1).jpg
E12FECDD-0138-4CF5-979A-767A4E0B13A6_1_201_a.jpeg
4680F36A-0212-4951-A60C-CE0A5FD01358_1_201_a.jpeg
8AA27A30-D6DB-4C76-BA23-16501F39B0CC.jpeg
2023unit44govtag.jpg
F11108CB-2CCB-4702-8AB9-9D17C64C91B9.jpeg
6C1689DB-A127-41EE-B2CC-6399ACBD02D3.jpeg
IMG_5891.jpeg
F2D3938E-A828-482E-B240-0D931F350AC5.jpeg
278C5E34-9587-4E27-A76B-4700141DBF92.jpeg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom