A story of what can be.

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
8,859
Last weekend I was invited to a property I had never seen before. I took my kids there for a turkey hunt.

I have been on more ranches that I can count and remember. I have seen dozens that were intensively managed for deer.

I have never seen management like this. It was mind blowing. Yes we are talking about whitetail. Yes we are talking about private property. But in all honesty even I had no clue a piece of land could be managed to this level with this much result.

The project started 10 years ago. The property was a solid piece of scrub brush. The goal was to manage for native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. The amount of edge is mind blowing. The place comfortably supports one deer per four acres. They shot eighty deer off of it last year. They have available water every 50 acres. And giant bucks! Many are dying of old age and buck to buck conflicts.

The reason I am giving yall this info is because there is more to big game management than shoot/don't shoot. Once people quit making excuses that benefit no deer and no people, except lazy DWR employees, amazing things can happen.
 
Another difference is private high fenced land sells inches to high dollar clients. And everything can be controlled by the landowners, except weather.
Public ground is managed for multiple use (sometimes conflicting), have a whole array of problems, and many different levels of hunter expectations. Besides, have you ever seen any government agency work effectively and efficiently?
 
Comparing a high fenced ranch with 12 wells or tanks every section and with high revenue raising paid hunting seems like comparing apples to peanut butter. I've wintered in Texas this year and seen the feeders that the deer live around most of the winter not sure that's a workable wildlife model in the west. Maybe you should think about giving up taxidermy and putting that wildlife management degree you have to use.
 
And now the excuses start.

Are yall happy with your big game resources just swirling down the bowl and knowing it's likely none of your grandkids will be hunters?
 
All of you folks may be right, regarding cost, high fence, low fence, work ability, high dollar clients, etc. probably are right. However, as some of you mentioned regarding, “government agency work effectively and efficiently”, In the last 40 years I’ve seen very little success in maintaining much less increase hunting species populations on public lands. All I’ve seen are declines in everything but wild sheep, elk, and turkey……. because they’ve fought for those three species. The rest of upland game is nearly gone, except in South Dakota, where they care about it. I see little if any successful public land success on the other species……. except on private property. South Africa has done it, with all the bull sh!t it’s been through, in the last 40 years……… but we’re not going to.

I’ll say it again, to young hunters, build your hunting life style around private land hunting, if you want the life style. If you get lucky and some miracle comes along and turns the last 40 years around, good for you but if not, your stuck with the reality of the trending answer to sport hunting. Plan ahead and put yourself in the best position you can to ensure a future generation of the lifestyle.

Glad to see more and more private hunting operations come on the seen, they are the future. Unfortunately.
 
I get it, proper habit, food, water, highly controlled predation can sustain a bunch of critters. Yet in a real world system of limited dollars, unless it's Ukraine, the wildlife in the free world doesn't hold a snowballs chance in heII of that sort of carrying capacity. But I get it. We see this with new fisheries too until one of the resources goes caput.
 
I'd rather golf than pretend to "hunt" an intensively managed zoo.
Most likely the same attitude the bison hunter and the market hunter had as well Buzz. You do you…….. obviously. I don’t hunt pheasant farms either. Just saying where she’s headed.
 
Most likely the same attitude the bison hunter and the market hunter had as well Buzz. You do you…….. obviously. I don’t hunt pheasant farms either. Just saying where she’s headed.
Won't get there in my lifetime, thankfully.

Dont really care one way or another about exotics, circus animals in Texas, ditch parrots, etc.

Native wildlife, different story.
 
What I find interesting is all the assumptions yall have made to not like a success story.

The entire point of the project was to take land back to a native state. There's no cattle. They aren't selling inches of antler. In fact they aren't selling anything.

For the man that owns it and paying for it it's all about giving, not taking.

My point with this post was to show if you work hard to restore habitat favorable for game you can't imagine how good it can get.
 
And now the excuses start.

Are yall happy with your big game resources just swirling down the bowl and knowing it's likely none of your grandkids will be hunters?
yeah, on your end they do.

it’s at this point you realize how much of a difference locked gates, no trespassing and high fences are from all access passes and chit wildlife management from chit state agencies are and how stupid you sound thinking you’ll ever have even close to the same results even if you tried the same approach on both scenarios.

Btw great attempt at a “flex” of being a privileged and great hunter when all you did was confirm that the ways through your hunting success IS behind locked gates and high fences.
 
Last edited:
yeah, on your end they do.

it’s at this point you realize how much of a difference locked gates, no trespassing and high fences are from all access passes and chit wildlife management from chit state agencies are and how stupid you sound thinking you’ll ever have even close to the same results even if you tried the same approach on both scenarios.

Btw great attempt at a “flex” of being a privileged and great hunter when all you did was confirm that the ways through your hunting success IS behind locked gates and high fences.


Do you think it is grown up behavior to attack the messenger who tells you things can get better if we quit with the excuses and actually start doing what needs to be done?

What does that say about you?

By the way the turkey hunting was fantastic. They really don't care about fences.
 
All of you folks may be right, regarding cost, high fence, low fence, work ability, high dollar clients, etc. probably are right. However, as some of you mentioned regarding, “government agency work effectively and efficiently”, In the last 40 years I’ve seen very little success in maintaining much less increase hunting species populations on public lands. All I’ve seen are declines in everything but wild sheep, elk, and turkey……. because they’ve fought for those three species. The rest of upland game is nearly gone, except in South Dakota, where they care about it. I see little if any successful public land success on the other species……. except on private property. South Africa has done it, with all the bull sh!t it’s been through, in the last 40 years……… but we’re not going to.

I’ll say it again, to young hunters, build your hunting life style around private land hunting, if you want the life style. If you get lucky and some miracle comes along and turns the last 40 years around, good for you but if not, your stuck with the reality of the trending answer to sport hunting. Plan ahead and put yourself in the best position you can to ensure a future generation of the lifestyle.

Glad to see more and more private hunting operations come on the seen, they are the future. Unfortunately.

Could just raise cows and sheep, if you get all excited about shooting g animals behind a fence
 
Do you think it is grown up behavior to attack the messenger who tells you things can get better if we quit with the excuses and actually start doing what needs to be done?

What does that say about you?

By the way the turkey hunting was fantastic. They really don't care about fences.
If anyone knows anything about attacking others, it’s definitely you. Also very grown up behavior to immediately play the victim when the roles are reversed.

No, but they sure do love those corn feeders.

What does that say about you?!? 🙄
 
What I find interesting is all the assumptions yall have made to not like a success story.
no, what's interesting is that you think you can ignore the huge difference in a fenced in property in texas and say all of Montana and still be like "see guy's, this heres hows its dun!!"

i can appreciate the enthusiasm but me thinks you need to get out of texas more...
 
no, what's interesting is that you think you can ignore the huge difference in a fenced in property in texas and say all of Montana and still be like "see guy's, this heres hows its dun!!"

i can appreciate the enthusiasm but me thinks you need to get out of texas more...
Then you need to go back and read the original post. I recognize the differences.

But I don't recognize that the differences mean much better management can't be done.

People have been force fed the excuses for decades of why you have to accept a lucky wildlife experience that is stuck in a downward spiral. So much now that the people have allgiven up and aggressively parrot the excuses.

YOU CAN HAVE BETTER WILDLIFE!
 
If anyone knows anything about attacking others, it’s definitely you. Also very grown up behavior to immediately play the victim when the roles are reversed.

No, but they sure do love those corn feeders.

What does that say about you?!? 🙄
You are still stuck on stuff I never said. You are incorporating some other alternate reality to what was written here.

You don't just drink sand, you hate people that tell you that water is available. 🤣
 
You are still stuck on stuff I never said. You are incorporating some other alternate reality to what was written here.

You don't just drink sand, you hate people that tell you that water is available. 🤣
Texas. Private land. Locked gates. Glorious hunting.

It doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines here to figure out there’s corn in this magical equation of yours
 
Texas. Private land. Locked gates. Glorious hunting.

It doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines here to figure out there’s corn in this magical equation of yours
Sevier Valley is full of corn, the corn is full of mule deer, no high fences. Never seen a high fence around an alfalfa field in Sevier Valley either. Numerous CWMU ranches in Sevier Valley….. no high fences, elk by the hundreds……….. Just say’en.

No high fence and there are here 6 months out of the year…….. only there used to a hundred, now there’s twenty.



Direct your criticism at the problem at the State you live in and quite worrying about what Texas does to providing big game hunting for its sportsmen.

You got some thing to say…… send your text to “Justin Shirley”. [email protected]

Don’t worry…… he asked for the job.

IMG_3903.jpeg



IMG_4927.jpeg
IMG_4395.jpeg
 
Correct! Anyone can behind a high fence and locked gate!

I’m shocked you are just now figuring this out. And are treating it like you’ve just figured out how to save all endangered species.
Anyone can have it on public ground.

What are you scared of?
 
Texas. Private land. Locked gates. Glorious hunting.

It doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines here to figure out there’s corn in this magical equation of yours
You mean between the lines we're I said this place is about native plant restoration.?????

You are ignoring everything that was said above because you are afraid of wildlife management.
 
One time I was on public land with no habitat improvement and we had thousands of caribou come filtering by. There was water evrrywhere. The end.

What about duck hunting? Were you able to find water on public land with water everywhere?
 
Sevier Valley is full of corn, the corn is full of mule deer, no high fences. Never seen a high fence around an alfalfa field in Sevier Valley either. Numerous CWMU ranches in Sevier Valley….. no high fences, elk by the hundreds……….. Just say’en.

No high fence and there are here 6 months out of the year…….. only there used to a hundred, now there’s twenty.





Direct your criticism at the problem at the State you live in and quite worrying about what Texas does to providing big game hunting for its sportsmen.

You got some thing to say…… send your text to “Justin Shirley”. [email protected]

Don’t worry…… he asked for the job.

View attachment 140530


View attachment 140543View attachment 140558


Does that CWMU allow year round access? Sxs? Snow shoes, skis, snowboards? Snowmobiles? Dog walking, target shooting? 4x4 access, mountain biking, hiking, gold panning, Rick crawling, bird watching or any of the hundreds of other things that public land does, year round?

Most likely, they graze their livestock on public so they can save their feed as a magnate.

So sure. If you lock **** up, things can happen.

Now how does the DWR "manage" for all the things it has zero control over?
 
You're right! Turkeys don't pay much attention to fences, except they may get on the top of one to gobble. But those two aren't gonna gobble anywhere! They're beauties! Nice going!

This seems like to a good place to get back on track!



Except for the lazy DWR employees remark (I've never met one of those.) and the water (Utah is the second driest state in the nation.), I gotta go with Tristate on this one. Yes, we're in a very different situation than they are in Texas, but the point he's trying to make is we have to work on the habitat more than the tag numbers whether we live or hunt in Utah or Texas (or anywhere else)! The mule deer herds are in trouble all over the west and killing more (or fewer) bucks is not the answer. So, what is? What is common to ALL western (and eastern) states, at nearly every elevation, kind of soil, climate and terrain. Of course, you know what I'm talking about. It's Cheatgrass! I've discovered 20 ways this weed cheats wildlife, but here's one I missed, it reduces carbon sequestration both above the ground and below the ground. I'll let you read the article, but one thing you need to notice is the potential number of plants per square meter. That translates into nearly 12,000 plants per square yard. That's a lot of plants soaking up the water before it gets to the sagebrush roots (or any other roots). To me, it just doesn't make sense to try to plant or re-plant an area that hasn't been treated for cheatgrass. So what can you do about it? I don't have time to put up a bunch of links so just Google that question online and you'll find plenty of ideas. Find some you like and follow through. And have some fun and safe hunts!

 
You're right! Turkeys don't pay much attention to fences, except they may get on the top of one to gobble. But those two aren't gonna gobble anywhere! They're beauties! Nice going!

This seems like to a good place to get back on track!



Except for the lazy DWR employees remark (I've never met one of those.) and the water (Utah is the second driest state in the nation.), I gotta go with Tristate on this one. Yes, we're in a very different situation than they are in Texas, but the point he's trying to make is we have to work on the habitat more than the tag numbers whether we live or hunt in Utah or Texas (or anywhere else)! The mule deer herds are in trouble all over the west and killing more (or fewer) bucks is not the answer. So, what is? What is common to ALL western (and eastern) states, at nearly every elevation, kind of soil, climate and terrain. Of course, you know what I'm talking about. It's Cheatgrass! I've discovered 20 ways this weed cheats wildlife, but here's one I missed, it reduces carbon sequestration both above the ground and below the ground. I'll let you read the article, but one thing you need to notice is the potential number of plants per square meter. That translates into nearly 12,000 plants per square yard. That's a lot of plants soaking up the water before it gets to the sagebrush roots (or any other roots). To me, it just doesn't make sense to try to plant or re-plant an area that hasn't been treated for cheatgrass. So what can you do about it? I don't have time to put up a bunch of links so just Google that question online and you'll find plenty of ideas. Find some you like and follow through. And have some fun and safe hunts!

This was one of the best posts I have read on this site in awhile.

Cheatgrass control is also one of the issues that Jims is working on and posting information here on and yet most of the time his posts are received with scepticism and animosity. I think we need to spend more time listening and researching the difficulties public land animals are experiencing in the west. We the need to become more active in insisting the DWR implement these policies. I believe cheatgrass control has got to be a big part of managing the wildlife over much of the west including my own state which has a problem with cheatgrass.
 
This was one of the best posts I have read on this site in awhile.

Cheatgrass control is also one of the issues that Jims is working on and posting information here on and yet most of the time his posts are received with scepticism and animosity. I think we need to spend more time listening and researching the difficulties public land animals are experiencing in the west. We the need to become more active in insisting the DWR implement these policies. I believe cheatgrass control has got to be a big part of managing the wildlife over much of the west including my own state which has a problem with cheatgrass.
So very true. Every word of it. However the wildlife bureaucracies can and will kick your butt to hell and back if you put any significant effort into “insisting” they do anything they don’t want to do.

Been there, done that…….
 
So very true. Every word of it. However the wildlife bureaucracies can and will kick your butt to hell and back if you put any significant effort into “insisting” they do anything they don’t want to do.

Been there, done that…….
Passive aggressive laziness on the part of government agencies. It's real 🤣🤣🤣
 
Last weekend I was invited to a property I had never seen before. I took my kids there for a turkey hunt.

I have been on more ranches that I can count and remember. I have seen dozens that were intensively managed for deer.

I have never seen management like this. It was mind blowing. Yes we are talking about whitetail. Yes we are talking about private property. But in all honesty even I had no clue a piece of land could be managed to this level with this much result.

The project started 10 years ago. The property was a solid piece of scrub brush. The goal was to manage for native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. The amount of edge is mind blowing. The place comfortably supports one deer per four acres. They shot eighty deer off of it last year. They have available water every 50 acres. And giant bucks! Many are dying of old age and buck to buck conflicts.

The reason I am giving yall this info is because there is more to big game management than shoot/don't shoot. Once people quit making excuses that benefit no deer and no people, except lazy DWR employees, amazing things can happen.
well you can't compare public land to private. the government only cares about revenue. that goes for any government agency. the government doesn't do complex solutions, they only do easy fixes......like sell more tags.
 
well you can't compare public land to private. the government only cares about revenue. that goes for any government agency. the government doesn't do complex solutions, they only do easy fixes......like sell more tags.
You can and great things can be done. The government doesn't rule over you.
 
well you can't compare public land to private. the government only cares about revenue. that goes for any government agency. the government doesn't do complex solutions, they only do easy fixes......like sell more tags.
Any government agency? Only cares about revenue? Easy fixes? I guess you think the best way to get their cooperation is to insult them first, huh? As far as I know, the DWR is the only state agency that is required to help pay their own way and they do that by selling tags. But they are also audited by the federal government as well as the state government so they have to account for every dollar they take in and spend.


 
As a fanboy of Wade Lemon I'm sure Tri is eager to point out non government folks will do anything to cut corners and make a profit
 
Tristate, the problem is monster muley guys would rather take away opportunities than created opportunities.
How so?

For both halves of this statement.

Opportunity by its own definition is NOT going to help the deer. Opportunity in this conversation can only mean more hunters or more season or both. How does this help?

What Opportunity would you create that helps the mule deer herd that ANY hunters could possibly oppose?
 
Any government agency? Only cares about revenue? Easy fixes? I guess you think the best way to get their cooperation is to insult them first, huh? As far as I know, the DWR is the only state agency that is required to help pay their own way and they do that by selling tags. But they are also audited by the federal government as well as the state government so they have to account for every dollar they take in and spend.


Yes, I would say EVERY government agency only cares about funding. Not every government worker but every agency. They are ALL top heavy. More bureaucracy created to help the top of the agency to do less.

Do you feel there is enough money and manpower spent on habitat improvements?

Law enforcement?

What happens when someone can't or worse won't do their job in any government agency? Are they fired? Nope...they get help. So that eats more money.

If a supervisor has 5 employees and 3 are duds and he can't get things done? Create more jobs. Which means more waste. Needs MORE revenue.

There are great programs that do great things in government agencies but there are insanely far more that are money pits that do zero and cost huge amounts of the agency funding.

As long as this bureaucracy exists in government agencies then ALL that the agency will care about is money.

Edited to add...just because a they are audited and have to show expenditures in detail does not mean they are using the money wisely or for its proper purpose. They are being audited by....another government agency. There is zero accountability.
 
Last edited:
You can and great things can be done. The government doesn't rule over you.
This makes no sense to me. And I'm trying...

The government does rule over all of us in this example.

As eel wrote you can't just go out and start working to improve habitat without their approval. I would guess that even if you were hand pulling cheatgrass by the blade you could be breaking some law.

Please expound on this statement...
 
real question . does anyone here think the "government" actually cares at all about the trophy quality of any animal out there?

all of us here look at this issue at about 6 inches in front of our nose and scream "there's no big bucks here to hunt any more" and i imagine if you polled 99.99 percent of any federal or state agency from the DMV on up they would say "there's a deer standing right there in the field, what's the problem?"
 
Yes, I would say EVERY government agency only cares about funding. Not every government worker but every agency. They are ALL top heavy. More bureaucracy created to help the top of the agency to do less.

Do you feel there is enough money and manpower spent on habitat improvements?

Law enforcement?

What happens when someone can't or worse won't do their job in any government agency? Are they fired? Nope...they get help. So that eats more money.

If a supervisor has 5 employees and 3 are duds and he can't get things done? Create more jobs. Which means more waste. Needs MORE revenue.

There are great programs that do great things in government agencies but there are insanely far more that are money pits that do zero and cost huge amounts of the agency funding.

As long as this bureaucracy exists in government agencies then ALL that the agency will care about is money.

Edited to add...just because a they are audited and have to show expenditures in detail does not mean they are using the money wisely or for its proper purpose. They are being audited by....another government agency. There is zero accountability.
So, who would you rather have managing wildlife?

Edited-That's a question anyone of you can answer.
 
Last edited:
This makes no sense to me. And I'm trying...

The government does rule over all of us in this example.

As eel wrote you can't just go out and start working to improve habitat without their approval. I would guess that even if you were hand pulling cheatgrass by the blade you could be breaking some law.

Please expound on this statement...
There are processes in place to replace officials which make the decisions that effect wildlife. Some are appointed some are elected. Either way you have a pathway, sometimes multiple, to let them know what's important to you.
 
There are processes in place to replace officials which make the decisions that effect wildlife. Some are appointed some are elected. Either way you have a pathway, sometimes multiple, to let them know what's important to you.
With this country being ran by large liberal cities we have seen how this has worked out.
 
There are processes in place to replace officials which make the decisions that effect wildlife. Some are appointed some are elected. Either way you have a pathway, sometimes multiple, to let them know what's important to you.
I'm sorry but if this is your answer to a real problem then you clearly do not understand how that process works.

Pick any state YOU want and tell me how you would elect the right person to change the priority of expenditures in favor of habitat.

Even if that person exists they cannot just DO what you claim. Then throw in the difficulty of getting that person in office.

Most of the folks making the decision on where and how the money is spent are either appointed or just plain Ole employed into the position. They are never gonna pick habitat over being unappointed...
 
Most of the folks making the decision on where and how the money is spent are either appointed or just plain Ole employed into the position. They are never gonna pick habitat over being unappointed.
if they use to be a boy, but now there not a boy no more. i know that's good
 
Trust me I would love it if government fish and wildlife agencies would step up and manage wildlife.
I take it from your statement that that goes for EVERY other government agency as well?
I'm sorry but if this is your answer to a real problem then you clearly do not understand how that process works.

Pick any state YOU want and tell me how you would elect the right person to change the priority of expenditures in favor of habitat.

Even if that person exists they cannot just DO what you claim. Then throw in the difficulty of getting that person in office.

Most of the folks making the decision on where and how the money is spent are either appointed or just plain Ole employed into the position. They are never gonna pick habitat over being unappointed...
So, there's no hope that we'll ever see the wildlife managed properly?
 
I take it from your statement that that goes for EVERY other government agency as well?

So, there's no hope that we'll ever see the wildlife managed properly?
I have to be honest I'm not sure I understand your first question for sure but I will give it a go.

Mostly yes it goes for them all. I think they all do some good and maybe even the best that they can being the flawed entity that they are. Some seem to have it right for a while CO for example. Whether by design or by accident. But then they seem to lose sight of the real objective. Like CO for example. I'm sorry if that doesn't answer your question, I'm trying. And of course this is just my opinion.

I unlike many think there is hope but I just think we haven't seen a path that we are willing to accept. Such as maybe big cuts in hunting or hard closures on building in wintering areas.

I also think we are too dismissive of ideas that seem to work in some areas but are failures in others. Such as antler restrictions. There are people who pound their fist and swear they NEVER work but there are areas where I saw them work personally. Then there is transplanting. Many say it NEVER works while pounding their fist. But reality is it has worked. It's just isolated cases (Santa Rosa island) but it can work.

The fist pounders need to learn that your LOUDER opinion isn't always right.

I would like to reiterate there are fabulous individuals working for our deer and their habitat. They work hard. They deserve respect and thanks. But they are extremely bound by bureaucracy.
 
I have LONG SAID.
1: Build a high fence around Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, and Nevada!
2: Kill all of the grass and replace it with bitter brush.
3: build water sources every 1 mile
4: Stop all activities not related to hunting
5: Allow a bid system for entry. 1/2 for photography and 1/2 for hunting.
It is simple really!
 
I have to be honest I'm not sure I understand your first question for sure but I will give it a go.

Mostly yes it goes for them all. I think they all do some good and maybe even the best that they can being the flawed entity that they are. Some seem to have it right for a while CO for example. Whether by design or by accident. But then they seem to lose sight of the real objective. Like CO for example. I'm sorry if that doesn't answer your question, I'm trying. And of course this is just my opinion.

I unlike many think there is hope but I just think we haven't seen a path that we are willing to accept. Such as maybe big cuts in hunting or hard closures on building in wintering areas.

I also think we are too dismissive of ideas that seem to work in some areas but are failures in others. Such as antler restrictions. There are people who pound their fist and swear they NEVER work but there are areas where I saw them work personally. Then there is transplanting. Many say it NEVER works while pounding their fist. But reality is it has worked. It's just isolated cases (Santa Rosa island) but it can work.

The fist pounders need to learn that your LOUDER opinion isn't always right.

I would like to reiterate there are fabulous individuals working for our deer and their habitat. They work hard. They deserve respect and thanks. But they are extremely bound by bureaucracy.
huntingdad4: I appreciate your opinions and agree with nearly everything you are saying. I also appreciate TriState’s frustrations and his view of the world. I think you two would find you have much more in common when it comes to wildlife management and our current bureaucratic governing system than either of you believe.

Both of you have my upmost respect.
 
huntingdad4: I appreciate your opinions and agree with nearly everything you are saying. I also appreciate TriState’s frustrations and his view of the world. I think you two would find you have much more in common when it comes to wildlife management and our current bureaucratic governing system than either of you believe.

Both of you have my upmost respect.
Thanks. I agree. I see where Tri is coming from on this thread. He and elkfromabove both are saying things here that I agree with in principle. We can't just quit and throw our hands in the air. But we have to be honest with ourselves about how steep the climb is.

Your respect is appreciated as I have always respected your opinion on this site.
 
You're right! Turkeys don't pay much attention to fences, except they may get on the top of one to gobble. But those two aren't gonna gobble anywhere! They're beauties! Nice going!

This seems like to a good place to get back on track!



Except for the lazy DWR employees remark (I've never met one of those.) and the water (Utah is the second driest state in the nation.), I gotta go with Tristate on this one. Yes, we're in a very different situation than they are in Texas, but the point he's trying to make is we have to work on the habitat more than the tag numbers whether we live or hunt in Utah or Texas (or anywhere else)! The mule deer herds are in trouble all over the west and killing more (or fewer) bucks is not the answer. So, what is? What is common to ALL western (and eastern) states, at nearly every elevation, kind of soil, climate and terrain. Of course, you know what I'm talking about. It's Cheatgrass! I've discovered 20 ways this weed cheats wildlife, but here's one I missed, it reduces carbon sequestration both above the ground and below the ground. I'll let you read the article, but one thing you need to notice is the potential number of plants per square meter. That translates into nearly 12,000 plants per square yard. That's a lot of plants soaking up the water before it gets to the sagebrush roots (or any other roots). To me, it just doesn't make sense to try to plant or re-plant an area that hasn't been treated for cheatgrass. So what can you do about it? I don't have time to put up a bunch of links so just Google that question online and you'll find plenty of ideas. Find some you like and follow through. And have some fun and safe hunts!

Good luck getting anyone on this site to read that. It's too loooooong!
 
I'm sorry but if this is your answer to a real problem then you clearly do not understand how that process works.

Pick any state YOU want and tell me how you would elect the right person to change the priority of expenditures in favor of habitat.

Even if that person exists they cannot just DO what you claim. Then throw in the difficulty of getting that person in office.

Most of the folks making the decision on where and how the money is spent are either appointed or just plain Ole employed into the position. They are never gonna pick habitat over being unappointed...
I know how it works. Plus there are usually ways to change policies which surprise people.

Appointed people can be removed and replaced by other appointed people. Policies can be enacted by elected officials also. I believe Utah has done that a couple of times lately.
 
I know how it works. Plus there are usually ways to change policies which surprise people.

Appointed people can be removed and replaced by other appointed people. Policies can be enacted by elected officials also. I believe Utah has done that a couple of times lately.
Hard hard work, but, yes it can be done and it does happen. Most of us do not have energy and the fire.
 
And now the excuses start.

Are yall happy with your big game resources just swirling down the bowl and knowing it's likely none of your grandkids will be hunters?
Sounds like they will pass a bill to fine gun owners $500-1000, whose gun is stolen.

And they are working on more that will tax gun owners for every gun owned.

Imagine they will ban or tax hunting.

My grandkids hopefully will be lucky enough to know your kids maybe and go to one of those fancy Texas ranches cause they won’t be able to hunt here.
 
I have to be honest I'm not sure I understand your first question for sure but I will give it a go.

Mostly yes it goes for them all. I think they all do some good and maybe even the best that they can being the flawed entity that they are. Some seem to have it right for a while CO for example. Whether by design or by accident. But then they seem to lose sight of the real objective. Like CO for example. I'm sorry if that doesn't answer your question, I'm trying. And of course this is just my opinion.

I unlike many think there is hope but I just think we haven't seen a path that we are willing to accept. Such as maybe big cuts in hunting or hard closures on building in wintering areas.

I also think we are too dismissive of ideas that seem to work in some areas but are failures in others. Such as antler restrictions. There are people who pound their fist and swear they NEVER work but there are areas where I saw them work personally. Then there is transplanting. Many say it NEVER works while pounding their fist. But reality is it has worked. It's just isolated cases (Santa Rosa island) but it can work.

The fist pounders need to learn that your LOUDER opinion isn't always right.

I would like to reiterate there are fabulous individuals working for our deer and their habitat. They work hard. They deserve respect and thanks. But they are extremely bound by bureaucracy.
You answered my first question very adequately. I understand where you are coming from. I just don't agree with your assessment of the DWR. Since this is a wildlife forum, I won't address what the rest of the government agencies do. I'll only address the issues of the DWR and Utah's protected wildlife from what I know from LOTS of reading and some experience.

For me, the Parowan Front deer transplant many years ago was a BIG eye-opener. As UWC's Southern Region Rep I was involved from the planning to the end (and even beyond). That's where I first met Brock and though we didn't have a lot of personal conversations, I knew he knew a whole lot about mule deer. And I know he was eager to learn more. I think he asked about as many questions as I did.

Though I no longer have my notes or reports, I was at every session over the 3 year period we transplanted and I did weekly/monthly reports on this forum (and the other) for a year or two after the transplanting. The objective was to remove deer from the Parowan Front because they were eating themselves out of house and home, so to speak. The DWR, FS, BLM, NRCS and UWC just wanted to increase the doe hunt numbers because deer transplants were not successful enough to spend the time and money on them. But SFW was also involved and they wanted the transplants. In the end we all agreed to have the transplants under the condition that SFW would entirely pay for them. I won't go into any details, but after two 50 doe sessions per year for 3 years and 52/53 reports a year or so later. we ended up with more deer on the Parowan Front and fewer deer east of Holden where they were released than we had when we started. And it ONLY cost SFW/us about $300,000 ($1000 per captured doe). That's why the DWR is reluctant to continue transplanting deer except from risky hunting areas.

As for the other ideas, we've been there and done that, many times more than once and the numbers/results don't match the objectives, especially in the long run. And most of those ideas haven't worked in other western state either. Every year, the western states (and Canada & Mexico)_send representatives (in our case Wildlife Board Members) to the WAFWA Mule Deer Working Group where they get the latest data on all of these ideas and so far, there haven't been many success stories about your proposals.

Now having said that, if you still think they will work, then we have a system where YOU can express your opinion and it's one of the best public friendly systems around, RAC's and WILDLIFE BOARD. You'll get your 3 minutes just like SFW. AND if your ideas are sound in the 5 criteria needed to implement them (Biology, Legal, Financial, Logistical, Social) and if there are enough of you willing to speak out, then you will have a chance of making a Change. Better yet, apply for one of openings in those groups as they become open where you can make a difference.

Well, I'm through with this hijacked thread. I have other things to do. I wish you well in the draw!
 
Last edited:
You answered my first question very adequately. I understand where you are coming from. I just don't agree with your assessment of the DWR. Since this is a wildlife forum, I won't address what the rest of the government agencies do. I'll only address the issues of the DWR and Utah's protected wildlife from what I know from LOTS of reading and some experience.

For me, the Parowan Front deer transplant many years ago was a BIG eye-opener. As UWC's Southern Region Rep I was involved from the planning to the end (and even beyond). That's where I first met Brock and though we didn't have a lot of personal conversations, I knew he knew a whole lot about mule deer. And I know he was eager to learn more. I think he asked about as many questions as I did.

Though I no longer have my notes or reports, I was at every session over the 3 year period we transplanted and I did weekly/monthly reports on this forum (and the other) for a year or two after the transplanting. The objective was to remove deer from the Parowan Front because they were eating themselves out of house and home, so to speak. The DWR, FS, BLM, NRCS and UWC just wanted to increase the doe hunt numbers because deer transplants were not successful enough to spend the time and money on them. But SFW was also involved and they wanted the transplants. In the end we all agreed to have the transplants under the condition that SFW would entirely pay for them. I won't go into any details, but after two 50 doe sessions per year for 3 years and 52/53 reports a year or so later. we ended up with deer on the Parowan Front and fewer deer east of Holden where they were released than we had when we started. And it ONLY cost SFW/us about $300,000 ($1000 per captured doe). That's why the DWR is reluctant to continue transplanting deer except from risky hunting areas.

As for the other ideas, we've been there and done that, many times more than once and the numbers/results don't match the objectives, especially in the long run. And most of those ideas haven't worked in other western state either. Every year, the western states (and Canada & Mexico)_send representatives (in our case Wildlife Board Members) to the WAFWA Mule Deer Working Group where they get the latest data on all of these ideas and so far, there haven't been many success stories about your proposals.

Now having said that, if you still think they will work, then we have a system where YOU can express your opinion and it's one of the best public friendly systems around, RAC's and WILDLIFE BOARD. You'll get your 3 minutes just like SFW. AND if your ideas are sound in the 5 criteria needed to implement them (Biology, Legal, Financial, Logistical, Social) and if there are enough of you willing to speak out, then you will have a chance of making a Change. Better yet, apply for one of openings in those groups as they become open where you can make a difference.

Well, I'm through with this hijacked thread. I have other things to do. I wish you well in the draw!
Cool... I remember the reports on how transplants don't work. Thanks for your time in working with mule deer herd improvements in.... Utah.

I agree with your assessment of cheatgrass.

I'm not from Utah so I won't be joining any of those things... even though I know the General forum here is actually Utah north.

There are exceptions to all of the rules of deer management. I lived through one of them hunting CA northeastern X zones from the early eighties to now and saw first hand that 3 point or better antler restrictions worked. It had its flaws but it worked.

Santa rosa Island never grew a mule deer until it was transplanted from the Kaibab.

My opinion of most of the transplant efforts have been to move deer from town herds to areas that deer range a bit more. Could be they are wired wrong for the move. Doesn't matter we'll never know. Because the experts have given up on deer transplants.
 
Cool... I remember the reports on how transplants don't work. Thanks for your time in working with mule deer herd improvements in.... Utah.

I agree with your assessment of cheatgrass.

I'm not from Utah so I won't be joining any of those things... even though I know the General forum here is actually Utah north.

There are exceptions to all of the rules of deer management. I lived through one of them hunting CA northeastern X zones from the early eighties to now and saw first hand that 3 point or better antler restrictions worked. It had its flaws but it worked.

Santa rosa Island never grew a mule deer until it was transplanted from the Kaibab.

My opinion of most of the transplant efforts have been to move deer from town herds to areas that deer range a bit more. Could be they are wired wrong for the move. Doesn't matter we'll never know. Because the experts have given up on deer transplants.
I couldn't sleep and I can't work on some of my guns because removing pins to do the bluing on the parts is too noisy for the rest of the family.

While I probably can't address your experience with the 3-point rule, I can say that maybe you only saw it in the short run, not
the long run. When you target 3+ point bucks, you are not only targeting the biggest current bucks, you are targeting the twolings that have the most potential to be trophies, and that won't show up for a generation or two or three.

However, on the Santa Rosa Island transplant, you are comparing avocados to grapefruit. Since you followed my reports, you undoubtedly remember what happened to some of the transplanted deer.
1- Many of them simply turned around and headed back to the only home they knew. Per their collars, we know that some of them made it and some didn't. The Santa Rosa deer couldn't do that! They HAD to stay.
2-Then we know that the resident Pahvant deer did not welcome the newcomers and pushed them away to be on their own in a strange neighborhood where the coyotes and cougars picked them off or they were hit by cars or got sick or got lost. The Santa Rosa deer had no resident deer to contend with and no coyotes or cougars either. The largest mammal is a fox.
3-Many of the Parowan deer were subordinate deer in the matriarchal pecking order and they had no "Big Mamma" to tell them what to do or where to go for food, water, shelter or safety because "Big Mamma" wasn't transplanted. And even if "Big Momma" was transplanted, she didn't know where things were either. The Santa Rosa deer HAD to establish their own pecking order and find their own way around.
4-Moving Parowan deer to the Pahvant didn't disrupt their digestive system because the same vegetation exists in both places. Moving Kaibab deer to Santa Rosa is another story. I don't know how many deer were lost in that transplant, but those that survived were the cream of the crop and their offspring were/are very well established.

Most of the proposals I hear are short-term and don't bring the long-term results expected. And most of them are socially motived, not biologically. As the saying goes, "You can't fool Mother Nature:.,
 
I agree. Not apples to apples on the Santa Rosa deer. I still believe there are other scenarios where there could be limited success. I am very understanding of the fact that I may be wrong. I just believe that what was good for Santa Rosa deer was not good for that Parowan deer but may be good for deer elsewhere.

Antler restrictions are not good long term, I would mostly agree with that. But for building numbers of bucks in low buck to doe ratio areas it could help. In some areas it could help for longer.

I just feel like every door you close is a closed door...opportunity lost. Parowan deer proved they were Parowan deer. Idaho deer may not react the same. They are not all wired the same, quit trying to manage them all the same.

I'm sure some guy somewhere tried cheatgrass abatement and now will pound his fist to the end of time it will NEVER work. Don't be that guy..

It will take a lot of changes to help the deer stay steady let alone flourish. If some small change helps even in the least....why not?

It's gonna take some outside of the box stuff too.
 
Also mother nature gets fooled all of the time. Look no further than Chinook salmon and steelhead. They are transplanted to new streams all of the time. With high success.

They need to look at the stream the pull the strain from. Short river or long. Fall run spring run. All the same species but different answers for transplanting.

Kinda like I'm suggesting the case may be for Mule deer.

Game managers decide all of the time, even in these lean times for mule deer to shoot does. Why not try to transplant some. We may find that super herd that is receptive to transplant. Sure it's a waste of meat if it doesn't work but at this point dead deer are dead deer??
 
Any government agency? Only cares about revenue? Easy fixes? I guess you think the best way to get their cooperation is to insult them first, huh? As far as I know, the DWR is the only state agency that is required to help pay their own way and they do that by selling tags. But they are also audited by the federal government as well as the state government so they have to account for every dollar they take in and spend.


so you're saying that the government auditing the government is an effective check and balance? government doesn't solve problems, they create them.
 
Migrating deer go where "Big Mama" takes them as fawns. If they are taken out of their core home area, confusion reigns. Then when you have the local deer pushing them out, it just makes matters worse. Of course they will try to go home; just like a dog that got lost or stolen would do. They have much larger brains than a fish does.

I remember reading elkfromabove's posts about the relocation efforts they were doing. It was fascinating. Many of the deer that died cause of death was "unknown". Since the known causes of death were almost 50% predation, it stands to reason that around 50% of "unknown" deaths were also predator related. They were confused; had no idea where they were or where they should go. Easy pickin's for predators.

That operation pretty much showed me that translocating deer doesn't work. Even though at the time I thought it was a great idea and agreed with what they were doing. An exercise in futility. A very expensive one.
 
so you're saying that the government auditing the government is an effective check and balance? government doesn't solve problems, they create them.
Yes, that's what I'm saying! The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has to account to the Dept of Interior for the Pittman-Robertson funds sent to each state and that's done by an audit of money, conservation projects, number of licenses/permits, state size and population. Read the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Services and then tell me what problems they are creating.
 
I agree. Not apples to apples on the Santa Rosa deer. I still believe there are other scenarios where there could be limited success. I am very understanding of the fact that I may be wrong. I just believe that what was good for Santa Rosa deer was not good for that Parowan deer but may be good for deer elsewhere.

Antler restrictions are not good long term, I would mostly agree with that. But for building numbers of bucks in low buck to doe ratio areas it could help. In some areas it could help for longer.

I just feel like every door you close is a closed door...opportunity lost. Parowan deer proved they were Parowan deer. Idaho deer may not react the same. They are not all wired the same, quit trying to manage them all the same.

I'm sure some guy somewhere tried cheatgrass abatement and now will pound his fist to the end of time it will NEVER work. Don't be that guy..

It will take a lot of changes to help the deer stay steady let alone flourish. If some small change helps even in the least....why not?

It's gonna take some outside of the box stuff too.
Why not? We could never afford in time or money to make all the "small" changes in all the separate areas that may need it to stay steady let alone flourish.

As far as the idea of trying to manage all areas the same, we haven't been doing since at least 1982 with the Range Trend Studies. Each unit has been studied and managed per the data found in the sites which are monitored every 5 years per the 5 regions which we still have. (FYI, the 30 units we have now are just hunting units, not managing units.)

I'm sure there is one (or more) guys pounding their fists about cheatgrass abatement not working, but fortunately DWR doesn't throw their data out in order to try it his way. If his ideas are sound in the 5 criteria stated earlier, DWR may add that to their current data, but they won't disregard what they know already works.

Well, it's time to blue some barrels/gun parts. I'll get on later.
 
Also mother nature gets fooled all of the time. Look no further than Chinook salmon and steelhead. They are transplanted to new streams all of the time. With high success.

They need to look at the stream the pull the strain from. Short river or long. Fall run spring run. All the same species but different answers for transplanting.

Kinda like I'm suggesting the case may be for Mule deer.

Game managers decide all of the time, even in these lean times for mule deer to shoot does. Why not try to transplant some. We may find that super herd that is receptive to transplant. Sure it's a waste of meat if it doesn't work but at this point dead deer are dead deer??

Thing you need to remember most if not all of these conservation efforts are funded by a conservation organizations (you name the conservation org) and we are talking tens of thousand most likely hundreds of thousands.
No conservation org is going to fund a program that has failed multiple times. Especially after the Parowan transplant was so extensive, it leaves verry little to question.
Thanks elkfromabove, I thoroughly enjoyed the information you contributed to Monster Muleys, I always looked forward to your posts.
 
The safest bet for me is we talk to as many old timers that still remember what the winter and summer range looked like in the 1950's and try to collect as many pictures of what the winter and summer range looked like in the 1950's and then try and revitalize as much of the winter and summer range as you can to what it was in the 1950's . Another thing is try and allow these deer to migrate as safely as possible from summer to winter range.
Tall order but that is what I would try and accomplish' if I had 3 wishes.
 
The safest bet for me is we talk to as many old timers that still remember what the winter and summer range looked like in the 1950's and try to collect as many pictures of what the winter and summer range looked like in the 1950's and then try and revitalize as much of the winter and summer range as you can to what it was in the 1950's . Another thing is try and allow these deer to migrate as safely as possible from summer to winter range.
Tall order but that is what I would try and accomplish' if I had 3 wishes.
This would be great. I don't believe it has been tried in practice

A major shift in predator control would help as well. But I think since it has been done in the past and viewed as a failure, not by most hunters but managers, it won't happen.
 
This would be great. I don't believe it has been tried in practice

A major shift in predator control would help as well. But I think since it has been done in the past and viewed as a failure, not by most hunters but managers, it won't happen.
It is not that big game managers think predator control is not affective it is more about the social implications that come from aggressive program of controlling predators.
Utah coyotes have a $50 bounty and mountain lions are open season all you need is a annual hunting license. You can kill as many lions as want and you can hunt them with dogs, spot & stalk, call them in, or trap them.
 
So, who would you rather have managing wildlife?

Edited-That's a question anyone of you can answer.
Trump. He would have THE BEST DEER, everyone would talk about his deer, they would say wow, “he has great deer, they are the best” Now Joe. Oh Joe’s deer are no good… horrible deer. All the people say his deer are no good… it’s a shame really.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom