LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-15 AT 04:32PM (MST)[p]My research is no better that yours or anyone else's. This is just a perpetual argument. It will never be won, by anyone, regardless of the information shared, or not. Frankly I'm fed up with it and wish I could find another interest.
Regarding your question:
Are the DWR personnel counting what they consider 10%, 30%, or what? Or is it just age and gender classification? What the heck is it? Does anyone know?
I would suggest you re-read Teresa Griffin's e-mail to elkfromabove again. She pretty much spelled it out for you.
She said,
- ?Biologists go to as many areas as possible to classify deer and record everything we see.? I HAVE NOT IDEA IF THIS IS 100% ACCURATE, OR IF THE BIOLOGISTS COUNT DEER UNTIL THEY AND THIER SUPERVISOR BELIEVE THEY HAVE COUNTED ENOUGH, TO HAVE WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS A STATISTICALLY VALID FIELD SAMPLE. (IF THE WEATHER PERMITS I SUPPOSE THEY COULD COUNT MORE, IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANOTHER TASK CALLING THEM OFF THE COUNT.)
- ?We classify a minimum of a certain number which makes for a statistically significant sample size per unit. (Usually a minimum of 400, but up to thousands per unit)?. THEY MAKE A JUDGEMENT CALL BASED ON WHAT SOME BIOLOGICAL PROFESSOR HAS DETERMINED IS A SOUND STATISTICAL NUMBER, BASE ON SOME SET OF CRITERIA REGARDING, CALCULATED POPULATIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, GEOGRAPHICAL REALITIES, AND MATHEMATICAL FORMULAS THEY TRUST TO BE RELIABLE.
- ?From the data collected, we equate the number of bucks per 100 does, fawns per 100 does, and we record each buck's points.? THEY BASICALLY BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN CALCULATE MATHEMATCIALLY, THE ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF DEER ON A UNIT BY GATHERING A STATISTICAL VALID SAMPLE SIZE, FROM THE SAMPLE THEY SEPARATE THE DOES, THE FAWNS, THE BUCKS AND THE ANTLER SIZE (POINTS) OF THE BUCKS IN THAT SAMPLE SIZE, FACTOR IN THE NUMBER OF HUNTERS, THE NUMBER OF BUCKS THEY HARVESTED, THE NUMBER OF POINTS ON EACH BUCK HARVESTED (TO DETERMINE IF THE BUCK WAS A YEARLING, OR AN OLDER THAN A YEARLING BUCK), WTIH THAT DATA THEY CAN DO "SOMETHING LIKE THIS":
SAY WE HAD 1000 HUNTERS ON THE UNIT. THOSE HUNTERS KILLED 420 BUCK DEER. 360 OF THOSE DEER WERE YEARLINGS (THIS COMES FROM THE HARVEST SURVEY'S THEY CONDUCT AFTER THE HUNT). DURING THE CLASSIFICATION DATA COLLECTION LET'S SAY THEY COUNTED 500 DEER ON THE UNIT (FIGURING THAT WAS A STATISTICAL VALID NUMBER). IN THAT COUNT THERE WERE 280 DOES, 170 FAWNS AND 50 BUCKS (A BUCK/DOE RATIO OF 17.85 AND A FAWN/DOE RATIO OF 60.7 . WITH THAT SET OF DATA AND RATIOS THEY GO TO THE NEXT STEP, WHICH IS:
-?Population size is from using the data plus harvest data, winter severity and a number of other factors?. THEY FEED THE ABOVE DATE, FROM THEIR COUNTS, AND THE BUCK HARVEST INFORMATION, INTO THE MATH FORMULA (DONE ON A COMPUTER) WHICH INCLUDES FACTORS THAT ADD OR INCREASE THE FACTORS BASED ON THE PAST WEATHER CONDITIONS, NATURAL MORTALITY, PREDATION, DIEASE, NON-NATURAL MORTALITY SUCH AS ROAD KILLS, ETC. AND THE FORMULA GENERATES AN ESTIMATED POPULATION SIZE. THEY THEN AVERAGE IT OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS TO MEASURE THE TREND, UP OR DOWN.
-?Based on unit deer plans that define how each unit is managed and depending on where the 3 year average of buck to 100 does is, permit recommendations should go up or down. If the 3 year average b:d ratio is 22 on a unit, per the plan, DWR must recommend increasing permits to come into compliance with the plan. If the 3 year average b:d ratio on a unit is 14, DWR must recommend a decrease in permits.? THE DWR IS BOUND BY EACH UNIT PLAN. THEY WILL RECOMMEND MORE OR LESS TAGS BASED ON THE PLAN REQUIREMENT (COME HELL OR HIGH WATER, IF THEY WANT TO), WHICH IS A BUCK DOE RATIO, AND THAT BUCK DOE RATIO COMES DIRECTLY OFF THE COUNTS THEY MAKE IN THE FALL, AFTER THE HUNT IS OVER.
BUT........DON'T FORGET, THEY ARE BOUND BY THE PLAN BUT THE DWR HAD FINAL SAY ON WHAT THE PLAN RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD IS. THEY WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE IT?S OUR PLAN OR THE WILDLIFE BOARD PLAN??..WELL??NOT SO MUCH, IT?S THE DWR?S PLAN, WITH OUR INPUT AND THE WILDLIFE BOARDS APPROVAL OR NOT. IT?S A KNOW FACT THAT THE WILDLIFE BOARD SUPPORTS THE DWR RECOMMENDATIONS, AS THEY SHOULD, IF THE DWR IS DOING WHAT IT SHOULD BE DOING. THE SAME AS ANY BOARD THAT SETS POLICY FOR ANY ORG. BE IT GOV. OR PRIVATE SECTOR. A BOARD ONLY MAKE MAJOR CHANGES IF A ORG IS NOT RESPONDING TO THE WILL OF THE SHAREHOLDER AND THE BOARD MEMBERS. SO DON?T FORGET, THEY DWR IS BOUND BY THE PLAN BUT IT?S PRIMARILY THEIR PLAN.
HERE IS HOW IT WORKS, BASED ON MY OBSERVATION: THE SPORTSMEN AND OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS GIVE THEIR INPUT AND VOTE ON WHAT THEY WANT IN THE PLAN, WITH INPUT FROM THE DWR BUT IN THE END THE DWR RECOMMEND WHAT THEY WANT IN THE PLAN AND THE WILDLIFE BOARD EITHER SUPPORTS THE DWR'S PLAN OR CHANGES IT TO THEIR LIKING. THE BOARD TAKES INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AT LARGE AT THE RAC MEETING BEFORE THEY MAKE THEIR FINAL DECISION. ONCE THEY DO, THE DWR WILL RECOMMEND MORE OR LESS TAGS, BASE ON THE BUCK DOE RATIO, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THERE ARE 50 DEER ON THE UNIT OR 50,000 DEER ON THE UNIT. THE BUCK DOE RATIO, FROM THE FALL DWR COUNTS IS WHAT DETERMINES A CHANGE IN THE NUMBER OF TAGS ISSUES ON THE UNIT, WE THEY UP OR BE THEY DOWN.
SO.................THE OVER ALL POPULATION OF DEER ON THE UNIT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHAT EVER TO DO WITH WHETHER THERE IS AN INCREASE OR A DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF TAGS. SO LIKE I JUST SAID, IF YOU HAVE 50 DEER ON A UNIT AND THE PLAN CALLS FOR A 15 BUCK PER HUNDRED DOE RATIO AND THE DWR FALL COUNT COMES IN WITH 18 BUCK/100 DOE, AND IT THAT PUTS THE 3 YEAR AVERAGE AT 17 BUCK PER 100, THEY ARE BOUND TO AS REQUEST AN INCREASE IN TAGS. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT IF THE PLAN CALLS FOR 5000 DEER ON THE UNIT AND THERE ARE ONLY 50? BECAUSE THERE IS NO CALL IN ANY PLAN TO FOR A COORILATION WITH THE BUCK DOE RATIO THE POPULAITON OBJECTIVE. AND, THEY BELIEVE KILLING THE BUCKS HAS NOTHING WHAT EVER TO DO WITH INCREASING THE OVER ALL POPULATION OF THE HERD, SO LONG AS MOST ALL THE DOES ARE BRED IN NOVEMBER EARLY DECEMBER. SO IF THE RATIO IS HIGH, MORE TAGS, IF IT?S LOW, LESS, SIMPLE AS THAT. POPULATION NUMBERS ARE NOT PART OF THAT PARTICULAR DECISION MAKING PROCEDURE.
SPORTSMEN SCREAM THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ISSUING MORE TAGS IF THE POPULATION IS DOWN. THERE IS NO CONCERN OF BUCK HARVEST VS AN UNDERPOPULATION. IT'S NEVER CONSIDERED AND IT NEVER WILL BE. BECAUSE BUCK DON'T GIVE BIRTH. (COURSE, I?VE NEVER KNOWN A DOE TO FAWN WITH OUT A BUCK BUT WHAT THE HELL DO I KNOW?)
IF YOU WANT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DEER ON A UNIT, YOU FIRST NEED TO READ THE UNIT 5 YEAR DEER PLAN. IF THAT PLAN CALLS FOR 7,500 TOTAL DEER, AS IT DOES ON THE MONROE, AND WE ARE, BASED ON THE FORMULA MENTIONED ABOVE, OVER 7,500 DEER ON THE UNIT, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO CALL FOR MORE ANTLERLESS TAGS, IF IT'S UNDER 7,500 THEY WON'T (IN THEORY) (DEPREDATION TRUMPS ALL THE PLANS, BY STATE STATUE).
SO.............BUCK TAGS AND DEER POPULATIONS, (OVER OBJECTIVE OR UNDER) ARE ENTIRELY SEPARATE DECISIONS AND ARE NEVER AND WILL NEVER BE JOINED, IN ANY DECISION MAKING PROCESS, UNDER THE PRESENT SYSTEM.
SO FAR AS THE BEAVER AND THE MONROE ARE CONCERNED..............HANG ON YOU YOUR HAT, THE MONROE PLAN CALLS FOR (THE OLD ONE AND THE NEW ONE THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW) 7,500 TOTAL DEER ON THE UNIT. THE MONROE IS IN FACT, BASED ON THE 5 YEAR PLAN, (LIKE IT OR NOT) OVER-OBJECTIVE THAT RIGHT NOW, BASED ON THE ACCEPTED FORMULA USED TO ESTIMATE DEER NUMBERS. NOT OVER OBJECTIVE BASED ON YOUR AND MY MEMORY OR OUR PRESENT DESIRE BUT BASED ON WHO EVER DECIDED THE MONROE SHOULD HAVE AN OBJECTIVE OF 7,500., AND???..MY GUESS IS, THAT IS NUMBER DWR TOLD THE LAST COMMITTEE THE UNIT SHOULD HAVE. SO THAT IS WHAT THE 2008 COMMITTEE ACCEPTED AND THE WILDLIFE BOARD APPROVED. SO??.WE ARE STUCK WITH IT, UNLESS YOU WANT TO UNLEASE HELL AND ALL IT?S DEVILS TO GET IT INCREASED? RIGHT NOW I DON?T BELIEVE THE SOUTH RAC OR THE WILDLIFE BOARD WOULD DO IT, EVEN IF HELL WAS UNLEASED, SO GET OVER IT. THE STARS ARE NOT IN LINE.
APPARENTLY THE BEAVER AND A NUMBER OF OTHER UNITS ARE, ACCORDING TO THE 5 YEAR UNIT PLAN, OVER OBJECTIVE AS WELL. THESE PLANS HAVE CONSEQUENCES NOW DAYS.
WILL THERE BE ANTLERLESS TAGS RECOMMENDED ON THESE UNITS THIS YEAR, COME TIME FOR ANTLERLESS DRAWS. YOU CAN BET YOUR OLE HINNEY ON IT, DWR IS BOUND.
COOL, HUH?
HERE'S ANOTHER BIT OF INFORMATION, NOT A SINGLE SPORTSMEN OR SPORTSMEN'S ORGANIZATION, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AS RECOMMENDED THE WE INCREASE THE POPULATION OBJECTIVES ON THESE UNITS, SO WE COULD, IF WE WANTED TO, INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DEER ON THEM. AND YOU CAN BET YOUR SWEET BACK SIDE THAT NO ONE IS GOING TO AND EITHER IS THE DWR.
WHY? NO ONE GIVE AS A RATS ASS ABOUT DEER ANY MORE. IF THEY DID THEY'D BE ON INCREASING THE UNIT OBJECTIVES ON THESE UNITS, THIS LIKE STINK ON THE CESSPOOL. IF I'M WRONG, SHOW ME A SINGLE RECOMMENDATION ON THIS FORUM OR ANY WHERE ELSE WERE ANYBODY IS EVENT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE FIVE YEAR UNIT PLAN DEER HERD OBJECTIVES. THE ONLY COMMENTS I SEE OR HEAR ARE PEOPLE COMPLAINING OVER MORE OR LESS BUCK TAGS. IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE DWR, IF THEY WANT MORE BUCKS, WOULD BE RECOMMENDING HIGHER POPULATION OBJECTIVES ON THESE UNITS. THEY'RE GREAT AT RECOMMENDING WHAT THEY ARE BOUND TO, MAYBE NOT SO GOOD AT RECOMMENDING WHAT THEY SHOULD BE DOING. I'VE SAID FOR YEARS, THEY SHOULD BE LEADING US, GUIDING US, HELPING US, CARING THE BANNER FOR MORE DEER. WHAT ARE YOU HEARING. SILENCE. THE DWR'S SILENCE AND THE PUBLIC'S SILENCE IS DEFEATING.
-?We get paid the same wage regardless of permit numbers. Buying ammunition across the nation brings us more money than permits through Pittman-Robertson dollars?. DON'T KID YOURSELF, THEY PARLEY WHAT THEY CAN, JUST LIKE WE ALL DO.
I THOUGHT THAT PITTMAN-ROB. WAS BASED ON LICENSE SALES TOO BUT MAYBE NOT.
-?If they could unilaterally manage deer, I would anticipate seeing far fewer permits. But we are mandated to follow our deer plans and make recommendations accordingly?. WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY WOULD DO, IF THERE WERE NO MANDATES. TERESA'S GUESS IS AS GOOD AS YOURS OR MINE.
Teresa, and all the other folks at DWR are a nice people, I like them. It's the culture there that's jumped the track, many, many years ago, no one or two individuals are to blame. It's the system and the culture that's grown up out of the system.
Somewhere, 40 or 50 years age the sportsmen and the agency got out of sync, maybe it was back when sportsmen first wanted to end either sex hunting and the division didn't. We went to the legislature and forced it. Maybe that was the beginning, I didn't know, but some where, some time ago, the thing came unhinged and it keeps getting worse.
I am going to take a new path, at least for me. I'll just set out on the back porch and howl but I've attend my last meeting, written my last letter. I emptied my clip during the State Five Year Mule Deer Plan, I've go nothing new to offer or suggest, they heard it all. It's over, fini, done. No more. No longer my concern.
I've done what I thought was right for mule deer for the last 40 years, it's someone else turn now.
DC