Antlerless Panguitch Deer and Plateau Pronghorn

[Hoof_Hearted]

Hi guys, due to work and family committments I'm only going to be heading out on the last weekend of the season to try and notch a couple freezer filler tags. I have the Plateau doe goat tag and Panguitch Cottonwood doe muley tag.

I've spoken with the biologists for the units and I've spent a little bit of time in the Loa area before so have a pretty good gameplan (in theory), but was curious if anyone else has had these tags in the past, or if you've been in the area and have any suggestions. Any info is much appreciated.

I'm coming up from AZ, so I'd be more than happy to swap some good Coues deer info if anyone is interested. PM me if you desire.

Thanks, and Merry Early Christmas!

-Luke

 

[Dikndirt]

P.M. sent

 

[soutahhunter]

To bad they think they need to kill off more does. I bet predators and winter to enough of that. But what do I know

 

[elkfromabove]

>To bad they think they need
>to kill off more does.
> I bet predators and
>winter to enough of that.
> But what do I
>know

That would be my question also! What do you know?

 

[klbzdad]

^^this^^

"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[Muley_73]

As opposed the ever knowledgable UWC FORUM PATROL! Lmao!!!! You guys are alway good for a laugh!

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13 AT 11:22AM (MST)[p]>As opposed the ever knowledgable UWC
>FORUM PATROL! Lmao!!!! You guys
>are alway good for a
>laugh!


You forgot the 2 Southern Region DWR biologists, the NRCS District Conservationist, the 2 BLM personell, and the 3 SFW Reps who were on the original Parowan Front range ride and who all agreed that removing 250 does (150 antlerless permits and 100 transplanted) wasn't near enough, but that's all we could do economically and politically.

And it seems that if predators and winter were enough to control all the herds, we wouldn't be having to shoot or transplant the females.

But, then what do we know?

 

[Muley_73]

No Lee I didn't forget them. None of them chimed in on the forum. Thus my comment was directed the way it was.

 

[klbzdad]

>As opposed the ever knowledgable UWC
>FORUM PATROL! Lmao!!!! You guys
>are alway good for a
>laugh!


Says the sfw forum paTROLL.....you weren't there Cody, all you know is what you've been fed. As usual.


"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[Muley_73]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13 AT 12:12PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13 AT 12:12?PM (MST)

I haven't been fed an ounce that was merely a personal comment. And is that how we are validating now? Whether a person is there or not? Hellll you guys rarely make it to any meetings. That's the ones you even know about.

 

[elkfromabove]

>No Lee I didn't forget them.
> None of them chimed
>in on the forum.
>Thus my comment was directed
>the way it was.
>

So you're attempting to discredit the Southern Region UWC leadership for simply asking a poster on this forum to verify or explain his remark? You'd rather we didn't say anything and let his assumptions slide by as the truth? Or is it you don't want us on the forum at all?

This is a public forum that allows anyone an opportunity (within the guidelines) to express their knowledge, opinions and experiences relating to wildlife (specifically big game on this sub-forum) and, since we're a wildlife cooperative, that's one of the things we do to reach the public. Some of the others who were on the Parowan Front range ride aren't allowed to post on this or any other public forum because of their positions with government agencies, but that doesn't mean they didn't concur with the numbers or the doe hunts. And as to why SFW isn't posting on this forum, that's something you'll have to ask them!

And FWIW, both Shawn and I have done a LOT of additional studying since the range ride regarding mule deer management, transplants, habitat, predators, deer crossings, etc. specific to this issue. Additionally, we all are learning a lot from the BYU translocation study, but since we're not quite 1/3 into it, the final results aren't in. Maybe we will end up eliminating ALL doe deer and antelope hunts by reverting to 100% transplanting, but the Southern Region UWC leadership doesn't see it that way as yet. In any case, predators and winterkill haven't been the answer in the past and aren't likely to be the answer in the future.

 

[elkfromabove]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13
>AT 12:12?PM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13
>AT 12:12?PM (MST)
>
>I haven't been fed an ounce
>that was merely a personal
>comment. And is that
>how we are validating now?
> Whether a person is
>there or not? Hellll
>you guys rarely make it
>to any meetings.
>That's the ones you even
>know about.

So, does that mean we don't even have to attend any of those "meetings", especially the ones we don't know about, in order to have a valid opinion? Or, does that apply only to you and those who agree with you?

 

[Muley_73]

Attend if you like. That's what they are for. Like I said Lee I made a personal comment. You tied it to something else. Had nothing to do with anything other than me chuckling.

 

[klbzdad]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13
>AT 12:12?PM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-13
>AT 12:12?PM (MST)
>
>I haven't been fed an ounce
>that was merely a personal
>comment. And is that
>how we are validating now?
> Whether a person is
>there or not? Hellll
>you guys rarely make it
>to any meetings.
>That's the ones you even
>know about.

Okay. You busted us. We never attend any meetings. Both Lee and I were on that range ride on the Parowan Front. I don't recall you being there to know what transpired or was discussed so your chuckle comment on this thread can only be based on what was in your rubber coated spoon when it was popped into your mouth. And thanks for validating that there are in fact meetings that take place that we, the general public, don't know about. A little too late, but thanks anyway. Have a great week, Cody.

To the OP, great tag and I had friends who drew and were successful. In fact, of the five people who put in, they all drew and all harvested opening morning. More mouths need to be removed from that winter range before the habitat itself can begin to heal and support large numbers again. That's a fact, jack!


"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[Muley_73]

Never said you were not involved in this meeting or range rides. I was not involved at all on this one. My chuckling is based on your comments not anything to do with the actual hunt. I hope the hunt benefits the overall herd. And hope those with the tags enjoyed and had a great time.

 

[soutahhunter]

So what you are saying is that killing more female deer does not reduce the deer herd, just like I have heard in past meetings that increasing more hunters does not reduce the deer heard or that increasing the amount of days you hunt does not reduce the deer heard or that killing more bucks does not reduce the deer heard. Some things don't need to be studied, but are common sense. If we shoot 250 deer, we have 250 less deer at a time I would think we are trying to bring deer numbers back. Tags are not drawn for until spring counts are conducted. Why have spring counts if winter and predators do not affect the deer heard?

 

[klbzdad]

>So what you are saying is
>that killing more female deer
>does not reduce the deer
>herd, just like I have
>heard in past meetings that
>increasing more hunters does not
>reduce the deer heard or
>that increasing the amount of
>days you hunt does not
>reduce the deer heard or
>that killing more bucks does
>not reduce the deer heard.
> Some things don't need
>to be studied, but are
>common sense. If we
>shoot 250 deer, we have
>250 less deer at a
>time I would think we
>are trying to bring deer
>numbers back. Tags are
>not drawn for until spring
>counts are conducted. Why
>have spring counts if winter
>and predators do not affect
>the deer heard?


Spring happens AFTER winter. Thus, Spring counts.

In regards to culling the herd. Go on a range ride and look at this particular winter range. Its hurting and hurting bad while within a mile is plenty of other winter range being unused. Deer don't read maps or guidebooks so we can't regulate nature via "instruction". Pivots are not adequate and new water sources have been deemed a waste of money along this winter range. That said, if we don't spend the next few years removed mouths from that range to relieve some of the pressure on the habitat, it will be irretrievable. Chaining is not viable right now because of the sheer number of does, fawns, and bucks that winter along the Parowan Front. So, if we see a summer fire anywhere on that range that accounts for a very large share of the Panguitch Lake deer population, that herd will be devastated and we won't see a quick recovery.

Less mouths will allow the sage and other winter forage to grow to sustainable and ABUNDANT levels needed for a good holding capacity which will benefit the unit and surrounding units like SW and Beaver. Taking a doe will merely hold population patterns while taking the number of them needed to help the overall population is critical but very unpopular. Numbers are stagnant statewide with some units doing better and others really sucking wind. This particular hunt and the Plateau research being done are critical in eventually increasing the population numbers. Hope that makes sense. PM either myself or elkfromabove if you need science, statistics, or names of folks to talk to. We're happy to help.


"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[soutahhunter]

I fully understand that spring comes AFTER winter and that is what I am saying, you do not have an idea of how many winter kill and predator kill there has been until you do spring counts. Does a really harsh winter kill more deer than a mild winter? From earlier posts it sounds like there should be even more deer killed off each year. So from what I am hearing the amount of deer in this area cannot survive the winter because of lack of habitat in the area and they are not smart enough to change location, yet when we have a dry summer and no water are in the ponds they do have the ability to find another water location. I would think they would have this same ability to find other feeding locations during the winter months.

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-13 AT 01:29PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-13 AT 10:24?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-13 AT 10:20?AM (MST)

>I fully understand that spring comes
>AFTER winter and that is
>what I am saying, you
>do not have an idea
>of how many winter kill
>and predator kill there has
>been until you do spring
>counts. Does a
>really harsh winter kill more
>deer than a mild winter?
> From earlier posts it
>sounds like there should be
>even more deer killed off
>each year. So from
>what I am hearing the
>amount of deer in this
>area cannot survive the winter
>because of lack of habitat
>in the area and they
>are not smart enough to
>change location, yet when we
>have a dry summer and
>no water are in the
>ponds they do have the
>ability to find another water
>location. I would think
>they would have this same
>ability to find other feeding
>locations during the winter months.
>

Mule deer may have the ABILITY to find other feeding locations, but they don't have the INCLINATION. They are creatures of habit and they're also homebodies big time, so they don't naturally explore or wander around. That's why, unlike most ungulates, they are not naturally expanding their range. In Utah, the moose are gradually moving south, the elk are moving everywhere, whitetails are moving in from Idaho, Wyoming and probably Colorado, and pronghorn are moving into forested areas, but mule deer range is shrinking. They don't adapt well to the changes nature and man are throwing at them. That's just the way they are, for better or worse! This behavior is similar to the pronghorn's refusal to jump fences. Pronghorn have the ability to easily jump over a fence to get to food, but will actually starve to death if they can't crawl under it.

A dry pond in the summer MAY temporarily force mule deer to find new water, but they can get most (or all) of the water they need from the summer forage they eat, so it isn't something that we can count on. Also, any new water they may find usually doesn't imprint from one summer to the next and since it takes several generations for habits to be established in a herd, that new water is soon forgotten.

Also, keep in mind that the attraction in the winter isn't so much the water itself as it is the new growth the water produces. To get the Parowan Front deer to move to new winter feeding areas, we'd have to totally dry up or fence Cottonwood Creek, Willow Creek, Little Creek, Red Creek, Parowan Creek and Summit Creek and I don't know how many springs, wells, guzzlers and irrigation systems which are the current draws for winter forage, thus damaged areas. Bottom line: 500-600 does need to be removed in order for this winter range to begin to recover! 250 each year won't do it!

Sorry for the long drawn-out answer, but mule deer are very complex animals to figure out and manage and we currently have a limited amount of time, knowledge, skills, money and politics to get this particular herd on track before it crashes, let alone all the other deer herds in the state.

 

[soutahhunter]

elk

Thanks for your answer, so what you are telling me is that the state has a goal to increase the deer herd, but you are saying we have to decrease the herd in order to provide more habitat. If this is true and we need to decrease the herd, why are the same number of tags given out in the unit saying we still have the same number of deer. Don't you think all things should be reduced until the problem is solved?

 

[klbzdad]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-20-13 AT 07:37AM (MST)[p]>elk
>
>Thanks for your answer, so what
>you are telling me is
>that the state has a
>goal to increase the deer
>herd, but you are saying
>we have to decrease the
>herd in order to provide
>more habitat. If this is
>true and we need to
>decrease the herd, why are
>the same number of tags
>given out in the unit
>saying we still have the
>same number of deer.
>Don't you think all things
>should be reduced until the
>problem is solved?

There isn't one herd in Utah. The wintering herd on the Parowan front disperse across the unit, some stay within a mile, and other may even travel as far as the Beaver unit to the North. So, the culling of this particular population doesn't correlate with the rest of the state's population of deer. Mild winters do allow populations to increase slightly but if not managed properly for the winter range holding capacity every year, increasing the population would ultimately be detrimental to that population. The winter range in this case is way over capacity for the habitat to handle and very degraded. In fact, should we see a fire across this area or particularly hard freeze hit this population of deer, the unit as a whole will suffer greatly and tags for the region will be cut too.

So to answer your last question, Lee will chime in too especially if I'm off base, we need MORE animals removed from that winter range because the range needs fewer mouths in order to refurbish itself. To accomplish that, we need MORE tags for does and stable general season and LE tags for the unit in order to allow that range to improve. Once that happens and the capacity for that range increases, more animals can winter there which will increase counts and either offer more opportunity for more hunters or at minimum stabilize the tag numbers for the unit as a whole so that no tags need be cut. I hope this makes enough sense. Its been a long week and I'm wore out. Lee?


"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[elkfromabove]

>elk
>
>Thanks for your answer, so what
>you are telling me is
>that the state has a
>goal to increase the deer
>herd, but you are saying
>we have to decrease the
>herd in order to provide
>more habitat. If this is
>true and we need to
>decrease the herd, why are
>the same number of tags
>given out in the unit
>saying we still have the
>same number of deer.
>Don't you think all things
>should be reduced until the
>problem is solved?

Issuing the same number of doe tags on this unit is strictly political. That's the number that have been issued since 2008 and the DWR reps (and the SFW reps) on last year's range ride told us that that's all they thought would get through the RAC's and Wildlife Board process per the public and sportsmen's groups outcry. But when Shawn asked what number should be removed each year for the next few years if we didn't have to worry about politics, we were told by the DWR that the number should be 500-600. We were also told that the 150 is just the number of fawns recruited each year into the Parowan Front wintering portion of the herd. In other words, the 150 doesn't even slow the rate of degradation, let alone stop or reverse it. We're just kicking the can down the road, but the original soup can is now a 5 gallon bucket and will become a 55 gallon drum (or worse) if we keep going.

The SFW financed 102 doe transplant was welcome and may slow the rate a little, but coupled with the hunts, it's only 1/2 the number of mouths that biologically need to removed to get that range where it needs to be in the time it needs to get there.

I know it sounds like an oxymoron that in order to increase this herd, we have to remove more deer, but the long term goals need to take precedence over the short term (yearly) goals. You've got to prune and thin your fruit trees in order to get a bigger, healthier crop for a longer period of time.

 

[Wahweap]

I cant argue with the sage/browse situation out there. It is chewed pretty hard especially next to the water. Just curious EFA if some removal of Pinyon/ Juniper/reseeding is in the near future? Or is the doe hunt just going to be the standard practice?

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13 AT 04:08AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-13 AT 10:16?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-13 AT 09:33?PM (MST)

>I cant argue with the sage/browse
>situation out there. It is
>chewed pretty hard especially next
>to the water. Just curious
>EFA if some removal of
>Pinyon/ Juniper/reseeding is in the
>near future? Or is the
>doe hunt just going to
>be the standard practice?

We did talk about that and we know there has been some work done in the past (chaining, plowing, some P&J lop and scatter) and they also talked about a recently developed mechanical method of planting bitterbrush seeds which have to be planted 1 to 2 inches deep which they are considering, but the sagebrush/cheatgrass issue is a real problem and since it's BLM land and there is some cattle grazing issues AND those damn required environmental impact studies are slowing things down, it's pretty much the doe hunts right now. However, I'll visit with the DWR and BLM folks on Monday to see if anything else is in the works and I'll let you know.

Edited: I forgot to mention that they are also planning another January 100 doe transplant, but since they fired last years helicopter capture team (Dragonfly) and haven't yet found another one, the dates are still up in the air, so to speak! Also, I'm not sure how the Utah Prairie Dog federal laws would effect any habitat improvements, so I'll ask about that too!

 

[klbzdad]

This will also be an opportunity to let cattelmen dollars come along and help for once too! As Lee stated, there are grazing permits issued there but they are only for a short time and some not even worth paying for at this time. The BLM had done some kind of channel thinning of the junipers on a northwest face of the mountain in hopes that it would help guide the deer and few elk on that winter range down to untouched forage. Unfortunately, an aggressive species of cactus has become the barrier for not only wildlife, but livestock. Its important we all understand the importance of this winter range to unit 28. It is critical winter range that could end up irreparable if we don't do the right thing. It is hard to completely understand why taking mouths will help increase them but that is what needs to happen.

Thanks EFA for so eloquently explaining the situation out there.

"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[Gator]

This Doe hunt in Cottonwood has been happening for HOW many years,(ALOT) And still they aren't any closer to a solution on how to keep the herd in check and find enough feed to stop the harmful affects of overgrazing. Maybe some of that wintering area where they don't travel to and use should be put into farm land feed plots and water guzzlers and then they will travel there and use the those plots and the surrounding land and that would spread the wintering grounds out more to handle the expanding herd.
Maybe try this first, Put a Stack of good alfalfa bales about 2 miles out from the last point of wintering land they are using right now, then as they move to it, move it another 2 miles until they are in the land that they don't normally use. IT A IDEA maybe good, maybe Bad.
I do know they will travel a long ways for good food.

Maybe you if build it they will come.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13 AT 10:40AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13 AT 10:38?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13 AT 10:35?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13 AT 10:34?AM (MST)

>This Doe hunt in Cottonwood has
>been happening for HOW many
>years,(ALOT) And still they aren't
>any closer to a solution
>on how to keep the
>herd in check and find
>enough feed to stop the
>harmful affects of overgrazing. Maybe
>some of that wintering area
>where they don't travel to
>and use should be put
>into farm land feed plots
>and water guzzlers and then
>they will travel there and
>use the those plots and
>the surrounding land and that
>would spread the wintering grounds
>out more to handle the
>expanding herd.
>Maybe try this first, Put a
>Stack of good alfalfa bales
>about 2 miles out from
>the last point of wintering
>land they are using right
>now, then as they move
>to it, move it another
>2 miles until they are
>in the land that they
>don't normally use. IT A
>IDEA maybe good, maybe Bad.
>
>I do know they will travel
>a long ways for good
>food.
>
>Maybe you if build it they
>will come.
>
>"I have found if you go
>the extra mile it's Never
>crowded".
>>

While some of your ideas sound good and may even work, the politics (and some biology) wouldn't allow them to be tried. Most of this land is either BLM or private land with a few areas of State land and NFS thrown in and the logistics and finances of allowing it to be farmed is prohibitive. Biologically, the deer don't do very well eating baled alfalfa. If there were some economical way of baling or pelletizing sagebrush, bitterbrush, mountain mahogany, etc. then we might have better success, but as it is now, winter feeding mule deer is risky at best. And, as I indicted earlier, they aren't likely to move if they don't have to regardless of the quality of the forage and water source.

As for the hunts of the past, I'm not sure about the hunts before 1998 because I don't have the antlerless proclamations before then and I haven't taken the time to research it. However in 1998 there were 100 tags, 1999 - 200 tags, and in 2000 - 300 tags. We were trying to get to the 500 or 600 needed, but because of the public outcry, in 2001 there were only 100 tags and in 2002 there were only 50 and then there were no hunts at all for the next 5 years. Which brings us to 2008 where we begin a string of 150 tags per year to the present. The reason we haven't made any progress with this area is because we've never taken the number of deer off the range that we need, thus we are where we are today. And it will only get worse because we can't keep up with the damage, let alone improve it.

Edited: My real concern is that this situation isn't unique and that there are other areas that are crashing.

 

[Wahweap]

Thanks for the feedback. At least some things are being thought out. I do know its a long 3-5 year nepa process for the BLM and I think there is only one section of state land ( not sure if they have all the nepa hoops to jump through)just north of cottonwood creek. 640 acres isn't a lot but that would be awesome start for the state to get a little more tree covered ground opened up on the parowan front close to cottonwood.Thanks again.

 

[deerslayer88]

Leave the deer alone, more does = more bucks just saying. Get rid of the cows and sheep.

 

[Wahweap]

Rperkins agreed many more deer then but a lot less pinyon and juniper forest dominating the landscape. Any photo series of southern utah shows a much more open stand of pinyon juniper forest in the fifties and sixties then today. You don't need pictures just walk through some of that thick stuff and there's plenty of evidence there was once a lot of browse within the stand. Now just a choked out stand with decadent/dead browse remaining. Jmho we could use a lot less trees and need a lot more browse especially on winter range.

 

[elkfromabove]

Great ideas! Now all we have to do is convince the federal BLM office that Utah's mule deer are more important then the money they receive from grazing rights AND then convince the Federal Environmental Protection Agency that the natural encroachment of pinyon and juniper isn't good for raising big antlered bucks.

 

[deerslayer88]

Its so true, I mean all those cows an sheep do is tear up the land scape. They over graze and then go back to the ranches. Honestly we should switch the industry to mule deer farms and get rid of the beef.

 

[rperkins]

Just remember once you kill these deer they are gone for good, their are units that could use these deer.

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-23-13 AT 06:22PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-13
>AT 04:08?AM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-13
>AT 10:16?PM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-13
>AT 09:33?PM (MST)
>
>>I cant argue with the sage/browse
>>situation out there. It is
>>chewed pretty hard especially next
>>to the water. Just curious
>>EFA if some removal of
>>Pinyon/ Juniper/reseeding is in the
>>near future? Or is the
>>doe hunt just going to
>>be the standard practice?
>
>We did talk about that and
>we know there has been
>some work done in the
>past (chaining, plowing, some P&J
>lop and scatter) and they
>also talked about a recently
>developed mechanical method of planting
>bitterbrush seeds which have to
>be planted 1 to 2
>inches deep which they are
>considering, but the sagebrush/cheatgrass issue
>is a real problem and
>since it's BLM land and
>there is some cattle grazing
>issues AND those damn required
>environmental impact studies are slowing
>things down, it's pretty much
>the doe hunts right now.
>However, I'll visit with the
>DWR and BLM folks on
>Monday to see if anything
>else is in the works
>and I'll let you know.
>
>
>Edited: I forgot to mention that
>they are also planning another
>January 100 doe transplant, but
>since they fired last years
>helicopter capture team (Dragonfly) and
>haven't yet found another one,
>the dates are still up
>in the air, so to
>speak! Also, I'm not sure
>how the Utah Prairie Dog
>federal laws would effect any
>habitat improvements, so I'll ask
>about that too!

I didn't get to the BLM today, but the DWR hasn't yet found a replacement for Dragonfly, so the transplant dates are still unknown. However, they do have an ongoing Parowan Front bitterbrush seed planting project being done on an individual basis mostly by Dedicated Hunters. All you have to do is contact Blaine at the Southern Region Office and he will give you the planting tool, a can full of seeds, a map, a time frame schedule and the necessary instructions for 8 hours of planting. He won't be back in the office until after Christmas and you can contact him then. And remember, ANYONE can volunteer.

Also, comparing today's area, habitat, and herd with the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's is not being realistic. In 1950, the human population of Iron County 9,642, but it grew to 46,163 in 2010 and has now taken over the majority of the original winter range. Also, the I-15 freeway wasn't built until 1970 and had very little if any deer-proof fencing, so the deer were able to get to their established winter range during that time. They now have less than 1/2 of that so it's not likely we'll ever reach those herd numbers again, but that doesn't mean we should allow this herd to continue to crash. If we decide to transplant those 500-600 deer rather than harvest them, then be prepared to pay for it!

 

[rperkins]

The sportman is willing to donate their time, and pay more for a hunting permit. Instead of harvest them, lets find away of getting them more winter range or moving them to another unit. Mt. Dutton could take all 600, it down in deer and lots of feed on the 89 side.

 

[soutahhunter]

I agree rperkins, lets try to move these deer to areas where there is some feed rather than just say we need to kill them. If our goal is to increase the deer population this seems to a better option. I see many other places that have great winter habitat and only a few deer in those areas.

 

[Gator]

Why are those area's short of deer numbers, Hard winter, over hunting, or some other reason, Because if you transplant deer there with out knowing the reason, they will go the same way as the deer before them did. Need to know why the deer are in short numbers there first.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]

 

[rperkins]

Over hunded, Not enough bucks, Not enough does, lack of management, Good winter feed. I could go on and on.

 

[rperkins]

sorry misspell hunted and to many "CATS".

 

[klbzdad]

>Why are those area's short of
>deer numbers, Hard winter, over
>hunting, or some other reason,
>Because if you transplant deer
>there with out knowing the
>reason, they will go the
>same way as the deer
>before them did. Need to
>know why the deer are
>in short numbers there first.

There's plenty of places to put mule deer. Unfortunately, they don't read maps, they are creatures of habit and specific diet, and transplants are not cost/benefit productive. Plus there is such a myriad of factors involved that you can't just pick one up and put it where you think its going to thrive. Does NOT work that way and never will with mule deer.

The winter range needs mouths removed on the Panguitch / Parowan Front winter range. Talk to people who have been there. Talk to people who MANAGE the range and animals there. Go on a range ride yourself. Hell, drive out there this weekend and take a peak. There's a BLM installed research paddock showing the effects of regular grazing, limiting small game and cattle, limiting deer, and then limiting all livestock and wildlife from grazing. What the range should look like is about right in the middle but looks like crap and if that range burns, doesn't recover, or is otherwise damaged beyond repair by even those deer and cattle that rely on it we will not see a recovery there in our lifetime and the next several generations if at all. So, instead of once again saying that we are trying to grow the DEER HERD in Utah, do the work and understand there are many different herdS in Utah and research transplants/translocations before suggesting we're just trying to kill does.

Happy New Year!

>"I have found if you go
>the extra mile it's Never
>crowded".
>>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>>the MM green signature club.[font/]


"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[elkfromabove]

FWIW, Parowan Front deer transplant, Round #2 is now scheduled for next Saturday and Sunday (Jan 11 & 12) at the Parowan Airport beginning at 8:00 am. each morning. You're invited to come and help, but call the Southern Region DWR Office first to verify. 435-865-6100 and talk to Jason, Riley or Teresa.

 

[elkassassin]

>sorry misspell hunted and to many
>"CATS".

I Guess if there was only One CAT left in TARDville it'd be Too Many?

Guess you Guys don't Have any Poachers & Coyotes in your Neck of the Woods?

There shouldn't be one GAWD-DAMNED Doe Killed anywhere in this State!

They Kill a 50 pound Kitten these Days they Parade it around like they've took a Real Trophy!

The only Praise they'd get is if they Drove through Myton!

Don't Blame the other 50 Reasons Mule Deer are not doing Well!

Blame the Lions!












[font color="red"]From My Smokin Cherry Red Hot Barrel & My Dead Cold Hands I Shall go down Fighting for American Pride & Rights!
I Know I'm Out Numbered by Pusssies & Brainwashed Democrats that'll Throw Their Hands in the air & I know I can't Lick the U.S. Military by Myself when they Turn on us but I'll make
you one Guarantee,They'll be Enduring a Situation where I Hope to Hell All Americans become True Americans once again & Stand up for their Rights!

 

[rperkins]

klbzdad, if you kill 600 doe's and each one had a fawn thats 1200 deer killed, I have seen this Panguitch range ( we ran cattle their ) and this summer it will grow back and next winter the deer will be back and this will happen year after year. I am from the old school when we knew how to manage and grow deer, to keep our herds up and have plenty of feed for our cattle. Sorry I don't agree with you.

 

[soutahhunter]

To add to that rperkins, I think the mule deer is smart enough to move to a place that has feed. I have not seen a deer just stand in an area and die because of lack of habitat. If that is the case why shoot them they will die on their own.

 

[noluck]

Let me throw out an idea to see how many holes it has.
What about high fencing highway 20. A big percentage of the deer wintering there are coming from the Beaver Range, if HWY 20 was high fenced on the North side of the hwy it would keep the Beaver deer from wintering on that area. There is plenty of winter range between Beaver and HWY 20 that is not being utilized. The deer could be forced to start using this area instead of migrating. There may be some problems the first year or two with deer on the fence, but long run why wouldn't this be a good idea?
This may not solve the problem, but it would save the does getting shot that are coming from the Beaver range.

 

[rperkins]

that a start (fence)--I want to throw this out to some of you young guy that has never seen a big herd of deer, when I was growing up their would be around 300 to 400 head of deer move through our fields every winter moving to their winter range and thats just a part of the herd going north towards cirleville and more deer moving towards U 20 and Beaver and it was something to see.

 

[klbzdad]

>that a start (fence)--I want to
>throw this out to some
>of you young guy that
>has never seen a big
>herd of deer, when I
>was growing up their would
>be around 300 to 400
>head of deer move through
>our fields every winter moving
>to their winter range and
>thats just a part of
>the herd going north towards
>cirleville and more deer moving
>towards U 20 and Beaver
>and it was something to
>see.

I've seen large herds before including the couple THOUSAND that are on that range right now! Mule deer don't reason through feed and habitat issues. Mule deer aren't taught to eat somewhere else on deer at a time, its generational because of their nack for being creatures of habit. Read Dr. Austin's book on mule deer. Explains a bunch.

There are only a few deer that "migrate" to the Parowan Front from the Beaver range. And the range is so similar along the east side of the freeway that they don't need to go so far south. Biologists addressed that question already. Smarter people than all of us here have surveyed, counted and observed the migrations and trends of this particular herd of mule deer. Disagree with me all you want, the people who manage that range and manage the deer are the ones who convinced all of us that deer have to be removed from the range. The BLM has already limited grazing to next to nothing there to try and help. Also, they accounted for potential fawn loss, that is part of the recovery of this range.

Those same biologists and game managers will be there for the transplant capture this weekend, will you be there? How about you ask the same questions and give the same suggestions directly to them? I'll be there. And I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict there will be another 150 plus doe tags issued for the range this year. Knowledge is more liberating than emotionally reminiscing over what used to be. See ya Saturday!!!



"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[soutahhunter]

My question is Why are we shooting the does off the areas that do not have habitat. Wont they die because of lack of feed anyway? When you say shooting 150 is not enough, it sounds like many more will die because the feed will not be there for them and they will not be smart enough to move on, so many more will die which sounds like your objective in the first place.

 

[elkfromabove]

>My question is Why are we
>shooting the does off the
>areas that do not have
>habitat. Wont they die
>because of lack of feed
>anyway? When you say
>shooting 150 is not enough,
>it sounds like many more
>will die because the feed
>will not be there for
>them and they will not
>be smart enough to move
>on, so many more will
>die which sounds like your
>objective in the first place.
>

Well, under your scenerio you can either just let them die from starvation (or factors relating to it) and feed the coyotes, ravens and magpies or you can harvest them and put the carcasses to good use and make money and provide more hunting opportunities (youth?) in the process. Which would you choose?

 

[soutahhunter]

I am not sure my scenario has been tried to see if the deer might just be smart enough to find new habitat on their own

 

[rperkins]

HELL LETS JUST KILL THE WHOLE HERD OFF, then we dont have to worry about the deer any more, boy I bet its fun to walk up and shoot a doe in the head, they are just skin and bone, the way you talk, you must need to save your job, you should be their you work for them.

 

[klbzdad]

>HELL LETS JUST KILL THE WHOLE
>HERD OFF, then we dont
>have to worry about the
>deer any more, boy I
>bet its fun to walk
>up and shoot a doe
>in the head, they are
>just skin and bone, the
>way you talk, you must
>need to save your job,
>you should be their you
>work for them.

Mr. Perkins,

I don't work for DWR or the state of Utah. I do, however, encourage you to spend a few hours this Saturday at the Parawan Airport learning from people who do why this range is important and what is going on with it rather than suggest we are just trying to kill the whole "herd" off. This is one small hard that makes up the total population in Utah but is critical to the unit. If we don't do something about this critical winter range and we loose the range, we will not only loose opportunity to see and hunt deer on unit 28, but we the next few generations will miss out as well. Hopefully we get to see you this Saturday. That would be great!



"When you are dead, you don't know that
you are dead. It is difficult only for the
others. It is the same when you are
stupid"

 

[elkfromabove]

>I am not sure my scenario
>has been tried to see
>if the deer might just
>be smart enough to find
>new habitat on their own
>

Yes, it has been "tried"! In fact, that's what's been happening on the Parowan Front for the last 8 to 10 years. That's why we're at the point we are. It isn't a matter of mule deer being "smart" or not. It's a matter of mule deer being mule deer. They simply won't/don't search for new places just to feed. They feed in the same areas where they always feed. The best way I can describe their mentality is to compare them to pronghorn that won't jump a fence even though they are perfectly capable of doing so. Pronghorn will indeed starve to death with a grain or alfalfa field or pasture on the other side of a fence if they can't crawl under it. No one knows why, but that's the way it is with them.

The only way to get mule deer to move to new feeding areas is to somehow force them to do it, and even then it takes a generation or two to make it natural. We would have to build and maintain miles of 6 foot fences and move them every 10 to 15 years in order to keep the winter ranges where they need to be. Or we can transplant them 100 miles away as we are doing now and hope enough of them survive to merit the costs in terms of money, time, safety, and work. But transplanting enough of them (500 each year for the next 3 to 5 years and about 150 a year after that) to make a difference would be quite an undertaking and not something we could afford, especially if we had to do that everywhere the winter range is being depleted.

 

[elkfromabove]

>Mr. Perkins,
>
>I don't work for DWR or
>the state of Utah.
>I do, however, encourage you
>to spend a few hours
>this Saturday at the Parawan
>Airport learning from people who
>do why this range is
>important and what is going
>on with it rather than
>suggest we are just trying
>to kill the whole "herd"
>off. This is one
>small hard that makes up
>the total population in Utah
>but is critical to the
>unit. If we don't
>do something about this critical
>winter range and we loose
>the range, we will not
>only loose opportunity to see
>and hunt deer on unit
>28, but we the next
>few generations will miss out
>as well. Hopefully we
>get to see you this
>Saturday. That would be
>great!

Shawn, and everyone else!

IT'S NOW ON FOR MONDAY AND TUESDAY!!! Because of the snow up north which is slowing down all of the transplant projects, the Parowan Front deer transplant has been moved (thus far) to Monday and Tuesday, the 13th and 14th, same place and time, Parowan Airport, 8:00 each morning. There may be even further notices, so stay tuned. We hope some of you can still make it, but there is nothing we can do about it. You can't fly helicopters in bad weather!
Lee (UWC)

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-09-14 AT 05:13AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-09-14 AT 05:04?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Jan-09-14 AT 04:59?AM (MST)

From DWR's 2001 DEER HERD UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN:

"There are fourteen range trend sites on the Panguitch Lake Unit. The most recent trend data gathered on these sites was in 1998. On the five studies located on severe deer winter range, all showed stable soil trends and a down or slightly downward trend in the browse component. Two of the five sites on severe winter range showed a downward trend in herbaceous understory. All of the five areas have a significant cheatgrass problem. Normal winter range studies on the east side of the unit (Three Creeks and Panguitch) show stable trends for soil, browse, and herbaceous understory. Transition range studies in Bear Valley and Buckskin Valley have stable soils, but browse and herbaceous understory is on a downward trend in Buckskin Valley. The five summer range sites show stable or increasing trends for soil, browse, and herbaceous understory.

Many of the study sites show pinyon-juniper or spruce-fir encroachment. Cheatgrass invasion is also a problem on several of the winter range areas. Winter range is a limiting factor on the west side of the Panguitch Lake Unit where most of the deer winter. Winter range has been lost to agricultural development, freeway construction, fence construction, and real estate development. The availability of winter habitat on the west side of the unit is estimated to be reduced by 80% during severe winters. Habitat improvement and protection on critical winter range should be a priority."

So, what should we do to "protect" this west winter range? We need to remove some of the deer (does) causing the damage. And what DID we do? 2002 @ 50 tags, 2003 @ 0 tags, 2004 @ 0 tags, 2005 @ 0 tags, 2006 @ 0 tags, 2007 @ 0 tags. In the 6 years following this report we killed 50 does, but added about 750 (150 per year) more to cause more damage.

And why didn't we remove more. Because of outcry from the public, mostly sportsmen who didn't want to shoot any more does. In 2008 the DWR decided to at least remove the original 150 yearly recruited deer in spite of the outcry. And that's where it has been since then. In the meantime, the 750 deer overload has become about 1,000 and the range damage has continued it's downward trend. The can we started kicking down the road is now a 5 gallon bucket!