I have a question for all the people who are against tag cuts, because they claim it will do nothing for the deer population.
Question is....
Do you guys believe in the accuracy of the population statistics the UDWR generates in this state? Do you think that counting deer, post-season, in 7 areas throughout the entire state is really acheiving the most accurate population statistics possible?
You must, if you are claiming that tag cuts will do nothing for the population.
In any population mangagement there is a point, or "threshold" when harvest can have a direct impact on survival rates. In other words, harvest is no longer considered compensatory (deer would have died anyway).
Also, if harvest rates are not being managed in proportion to "actual" herd numbers, the result could be an insufficient number of mature bucks to breed all receptive does...which would reduce the fawn crop and potentially impact the population as a whole.
Over the last few years, there are more and more sportsmen, former dwr biologists, and biologists from federal agencies speaking out against the UDWR's mule deer population statistics throughout many areas in the state. How can they effectively manage harvest rates, the number of hunters afield, etc...when they are not doing enough to gather more accurate population data? Will the accuracy ever be 100%? No, simply due to the nature of managing a wild population...but it can be leaps and bounds from where it is now.
Plain and simple...The UDWR IS NOT doing enough when it comes to deer inventories, to effectively manage our herds in this state.
When a management plan is structed around a lack of sufficient inaccurate, un-reliable, population data...any claim made about deer numbers or effects on populations becomes inaccurate and un-reliable itself.
The people I have talked to who are in favor of option #2 are in favor because it would force the following:
Upgraded deer inventories = stronger indication of actual deer numbers, age-classes, fawn-to-doe, and buck-to-doe ratios.
Upgraded harvest data = stronger, more reliable numbers of buck harvest data
This would equate to enhanced data analyses, which would help gain a better understanding about the numbers and dynamics of our deer herds in this state.
WHICH...could possibly lead to tag cuts, thus lost opportunity, because it's in the best interest of the population.
BowHuntr
Question is....
Do you guys believe in the accuracy of the population statistics the UDWR generates in this state? Do you think that counting deer, post-season, in 7 areas throughout the entire state is really acheiving the most accurate population statistics possible?
You must, if you are claiming that tag cuts will do nothing for the population.
In any population mangagement there is a point, or "threshold" when harvest can have a direct impact on survival rates. In other words, harvest is no longer considered compensatory (deer would have died anyway).
Also, if harvest rates are not being managed in proportion to "actual" herd numbers, the result could be an insufficient number of mature bucks to breed all receptive does...which would reduce the fawn crop and potentially impact the population as a whole.
Over the last few years, there are more and more sportsmen, former dwr biologists, and biologists from federal agencies speaking out against the UDWR's mule deer population statistics throughout many areas in the state. How can they effectively manage harvest rates, the number of hunters afield, etc...when they are not doing enough to gather more accurate population data? Will the accuracy ever be 100%? No, simply due to the nature of managing a wild population...but it can be leaps and bounds from where it is now.
Plain and simple...The UDWR IS NOT doing enough when it comes to deer inventories, to effectively manage our herds in this state.
When a management plan is structed around a lack of sufficient inaccurate, un-reliable, population data...any claim made about deer numbers or effects on populations becomes inaccurate and un-reliable itself.
The people I have talked to who are in favor of option #2 are in favor because it would force the following:
Upgraded deer inventories = stronger indication of actual deer numbers, age-classes, fawn-to-doe, and buck-to-doe ratios.
Upgraded harvest data = stronger, more reliable numbers of buck harvest data
This would equate to enhanced data analyses, which would help gain a better understanding about the numbers and dynamics of our deer herds in this state.
WHICH...could possibly lead to tag cuts, thus lost opportunity, because it's in the best interest of the population.
BowHuntr