Bear RAC meetings

[wimpy]

I know we are all tired of RAC meetings and fighting about the best solutions for the deer herd, but if you believe, as I do, that the bears are as hard on the fawns as anything out there, then you need to be to the RAC meetings to voice your opinions about lowering the bear numbers. I posted this letter to my RAC committee members in the southeastern area:

To RAC Committee Members,
Thank you for making the tough decisions dealing with the deer hunt in the last RAC go-around.
Now, it's time already for another one, which deals with the bears. Reading the 12-year bear proposal, it states that:
?Smith (1983) radio-collared 54 newborn mule deer fawns on the La Sal Mountains. He found that fawn survival was 54% during the first month of life. Of the 22 fawns that died, predation was the cause of death for 16 (73%). Coyote (Canis latrans) and black bear predation accounted for most of these deaths, although he did not indicate how many were taken by which species.?

I believe that just a 14% increase in bear tags, with the deer herds hurting like they are, and the bear population increasing each year, is not a realistic number.
I would suggest dividing the San Juan unit into two units, a San Juan and an Elk Ridge unit, and really hitting the Elk Ridge unit hard to try to get that deer herd raised from 37% of objective.
Thanks,
Lloyd Nielson

 

[pumaguy]

If you actually look at the DWR's info the San Juan is proposed for a 27% increase. 37 into 2010 to 47 in 2011. Sounds like a pretty healthy increase to me. I think that that big of increase is plenty high Lloyd. If you also look at how tags have increased in the last 3 years statewide, I think we have already had some big increases, 2007 there were 262 tags statewide, in 2010 they were up to 372. They are proposing 419 for this year. That is a 60% increase in the last four years. Killing all the bears won't bring the deer back. It's time to stop blaming the bears and cougars for all the deer problems.

 

[B_BOP_A_LU_LU]

Right on pumaguy!

Sure they eat some Deer!

But We've got way more to worry about than how many Deer are ate by Bears!

God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!

I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!

 

[wimpy]

Pumaguy, I do respect your opinion. In my opinion, when the division comes down here and holds a special meeting, and in it admits that we have a bear problem, increasing the tags by ten permits is not even handling the number the bears increase by, let alone getting a hold on the problem.

As somebody else said on this site, history is on our side: when they managed predators as predators and had them way under control, the deer herd exploded in the '60s and '70s. When they started managing predators as a sport hunt, our deer herd started falling, and is still falling to date.

Lloyd Nielson

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

Bessy, would you please be quiet!!!! You're not helping me with my pursuit of a bear tag!;-) I'm sitting on 7 points! Let's double the tags for this year then I won't say another word!


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[Prism]

7? I think I'm only up to 12! But I'm just collecting them for a rainy day.

We're not quite up to Colorado numbers, but I see more and more bears every year in Utah.

So here's one for you. How does Colorado balance large bear numbers and quality deer hunting? I don't think I've ever hunted Colorado without seeing atleast one bear every couple of days.

I may just have to cash them in to help out a deer.

 

[AWHOLELOTTABULL]

For as much as we hunt CO we should be buying a bear tag with our deer tag! I run into bears every year I hunt too!


It's always an adventure!!!

 

[cantkillathing]

Prism, yes colorado has quality bucks, but overall deer numbers have been going down as well.

The state of Utah can increase bear tags by another 20%, the bear are not hurting in utah, and have steadily increased. The bear numbers on Lasal and Abajo/elkridge have doubled in the last 5 years.

 

[typical_hunter]

I agree with wimpy on this one we need to do something about the bears here are way out of control not even a good balance. increse the tags in the spring less fawns will be killed and it will work its self out over time.

________________
_Typical_Hunter_
________________

 

[Bikes]

It is time to get all the fuss over how we manage the buck harvest behind us and focus on improving conditions for the ?buck makers?- the doe herd which should be expanding in the absence of hunting. I am from the Utah south where we don't have serious home building or loss of winter range issues that impact deer. We can't change the weather which leaves predator control the only effective measure we can employ to increase the doe herd. I am retired and spend a lot of time in the field. I am also a fairly good lay biologist who has noticed signs of a serious coyote build up. Lots of coyote sign but the key indicator is an easily observable decline in the rabbit population over the past 5 years. I have also observed fewer fawns running with the does. I would like to see a major coyote reduction effort in at least one unit to measure it's effect upon the deer population.

 

[SuperSlam]

I for one don't think that the bears and Lions are at the top of the list for our predator problem. It was laid out very clear in the presentations during the WB meetings that coyotes are the number one cause we have to be concerned with. Unlike bears that can get food from plants and berries coyotes kill meet for food and they pray on the fawns.

Like the 5 year deer plan that was abandoned, let us leave the bear and lion management plans alone for a few years and concentrate on the coyotes and then we can see how this deer population play's out. IMO I consider a big boar or a big tom hunted and harvested as a big game animal equally a trophy as a big 180 class mule deer buck. So just like the division we had as hunters had on this deer decision there seems to be a division on the bear and lion thing too.