Record low deer checked logan canyon 2011

[cache]

Well now I'm done blasting roosters I would like to see what peoples feelings are on this. I know its a month late and I'm sure its old news to most but I found this to be very alarming.Last year we had a three day in my neck of the woods.And truthfully with the bad weather it ended up being more of a one day hunt. I would be willing assume that 2010 was a record low harvest in the cache unit. Everyone couldn't wait to hunt the following season."There will be bucks everywhere" "I can't wait for next year" "They finally wised up and shut the hunt down practicaly, next year will be the year"I would here these type of comments thrown around almost on a daily basis.
Exactly one year later logan canyon checked the least amount deer in history!
The first thing that entered my mind after i read this in the Herald Journal were the 2012 tag cuts impoosed by the adoption of option 2.
These tag cuts where implimented because "we need more bucks, we're just shooting all the bucks out, I can't find a descent buck" ect. and ect.
I would hope that these facts would open some eyes of people whom think that our problem with our mule deer is as simple as us hunters "shooting them out"
I would like to hear how you guys out there who have been in favor of these tag cuts and think that they are the answer feel about this issue.

 

[ridgetops]

I think cutting tags is just one piece of the puzzle and it's been missing for several years now. The DWR and many sportsman groups have been working hard on improving habitat, building deer crossings on highways and controlling preditors. Now it's time to cut tags in the units that need it.

 

[littlejoe]

The Cache unit is so pathetic that I went to football games rather than hunting as I had just as good a chance of getting a buck at the games as 99% of the hunters. I am a lifetime license holder and have not even opened the envelope with the tag in it for years. Just as soon go horse riding in the spring and fall and not worry about getting shot by an angry hunter that has not seen anything. But on a positive note since there are not deer there are turkeys everywhere.

 

[one_dryboot]

Didn't you read the DWR explanation of why the hunt was bad? It said " hunters are not seeing or killing deer this year because of the warm temps causing the deer to stay in the high country" thats why it was at a record low. And next year it will read " hunters are not seeing or killing any deer this year because of the big snow storm that blew in before the hunt causing all the deer to stay in the high country where there not huntable"

 

[middlefork]

Well I certainly heard more shooting opening weekend than I have in the last few years. Even saw a few more bucks.

Maybe everybody's getting to be a **** poor shot with nothing to shoot at lately.

As far as option 2 helping it's not going to do squat on the Cache except close it down completely to hunting. My .02

 

[brutus]

Cutting tags wont hurt but nobody in the dwr or the wildlife board says that is the only thing that is impacting the deer, infact I dont get why some people that are against tag cuts think that is the only thing that is changing? Hell the dwr had predator management, highway mortality, habitat issues, and rising elk herds over hunting pressure. but the fact is over hunting on top of these things isnt good for them. I really dont think highway mortality is ever gonna change nor is predator management with all the restrictions so one of the only things that can be controlled IMO is buck numbers. Plus if everyone wants more does then why doesnt the dwr quit issueing doe tags in utah?

 

[justr_86]

The only doe hunt on a general unit in utah is in vernal for public safety reasons where you can't hunt with a rifle.. And extended archery areas...

Yes there are some on LE units also.

Brutus, the more I read your posts the more you sound like a treehugger. You support any tag cut or smaller boundary to hunt. It doesn't help bring back the herd, it doesn't help... Deer can only reproduce so fast, a herd won't bounce right back the next year after a bad winter it takes a few years. We need fawn recruitment, how does hunting bucks effect recruitment? Go for a drive, we are not killing every buck on the mtn....

 

[cache]

Brutus
I think you missed my point. My point is even after the three day hunt and an old time low number of killed bucks during the rifle season in 2010. This year logan canyon checked the least amount of bucks than ever before. If what you are saying about cutting tags and saving bucks is the answer then how the hell can you justify limitaing tags when you look at this senario because I know that we didn't kill very many bucks in the cache last year and look where that got us one year later an all time low number of bucks checked! Limiting buck tags in the northern part of the state is nothing but B.S! I've seen the studys and have talked to our biologists and our does are getting bred bottom line.


Thanks for all the feedback guys its nice to see I'm not the only one whom feels this way.

BTW I love hunting Big mule deer in the cache I wouldn't trade it for any other hunt in the world. I've never even earned 1 bonus point applying for limited entery deer here in Utah. For omeone to say they would rather play video games than go hunting blows my mind but thats up to you. The challenge is great to find good mature bucks in a general unit but I really think thats what I like best about it and somehow me and my hunting partner do it year in and year out.I just get sick of hearing how there are now good bucks anymore.They are there it just takes alot of work to find them. I know a handful of hunting parties up here that take if very serious and they seem to have a picture or two to show after every season.

 

[Downrange]

Does are getting bred, the biologists said. I call BS on that one. We should all know by now not to believe the DWR. Piss poor management the last 20 yrs is why our herds have tanked. We have no fawn recruitment because many does are not getting bred. We cannot keep doing what we are doing with tag numbers it is not working. We have to start some where and tag cuts will help. We just can't try it for a year and say yep it didn't work. We have to try tag cuts for at least 6 to 10 years to see if it will work or not. We give more buck tags in this state at 97,000 then the state of Colorado and they have twice as many deer as we do. Doesn't seem to logical to me on that one. 30 units with tags cut will work we just have to give it a chance. I think we should cut tags to 50,000 across the whole state and double the price of the tag so the dwr gets their money and do this for 5 years and see if it helps. Something has to change we can't keep doing what we are doing now its not working. Just my opinion. The hunting was the worst i have ever seen in the last 20 years and I don't know if the pahvant will ever come back it was as bad as the monroe.

 

[justr_86]

Colorado has twice the amount of winter range that we do...

 

[BowHuntr]

The DWR uses models. So for anyone to say that they are 100% accurate in making the claim that every doe on the mountain is being bred, and that the majority of them are being bred 1st cycle is lying.

The way I look at it and what makes sense to me, if you have a deer population in and area...lets say cache for example...and that population continues to decrease in numbers in consecutive years...you cannot continue to issue the same amount of tags. In theory there is a THRESHOLD, that once a population decreases to a certain point, harvest can begin to have a direct effect on survival rates. In other words...harvest is no longer taking out animals that would have died anyway. PEOPLE OVERLOOK THIS WAY TOO OFTEN IMO.

Look at what Colorado did after their hellacious winter a couple years ago. Cut tags drastically, because the winter wiped out a large majority of the deer herd. There is no way they could continue to issue the same amount of tags...have hunters kill what few bucks are left...thus putting a damper on survival rates, effecting potential population growth.

By no means is cutting tags the sole answer to our problems, but it is indeed a tool that needs to be utilized. Like everyone else has mentioned...predators, highway mortality, habitat issues, competition for space and resources with growing elk herds...these all play a site specific role throughout different areas in the state. Each area (unit) has different needs...you cannot manage the state with a blanket management style. It has done the deer herds disservice for way too long imo.

BowHuntr

 

[Coyote_chaser]

I agree 100%. I drove out through some hayfields and some winter range during thanksgiving in Cedar City. I saw a few hundred does, and maybe 10 bucks. There was one giant running around we never saw, and saw a few 160-170 ish class bucks. No way in Hell those does are getting bred, which means late fawns from a second rut. Which means lower fawn survival. You need mature bucks to do the breeding, and when there are only 5 per 300 does you are gonna have issues. I was watching a yearling 2 point tending three does, oh great. We need mature animals, we cant keep issuing tens of thousands of tags and pounding every two point on the mtn and expect anything to change.

 

[cache]

I've talked to our biolist about needing mature bucks to do the breeding. He told me that there is not one study in any western state that shows that we need mature bucks to do the breeding. If you or anyone else has proof that mature bucks breed better that post it up. Any claim that younger bucks don't get it done or get it done much later in the cycle for now is nothing but speculation and nothing more untill such a study arises and proves other wise.Untill then I'll believe the studies I have seen.

 

[cache]

BTW I'm reffering to the cache unit.I claim no knoledge of any of the southern units. As far as the cache does getting bred I never said 100% Over 80% yes. All of this info is available just talk to your local wildlife biologist. I did last year and he ran me through the models right there on his lap top.The data went back several years. He answered all of my questions.Thats the way I like to do things this way I get it straight from the horses mouth and not some he said she said B.S

 

[Blanding_Boy]

Cache--you make a valid point. While there are no specific studies specifically determining age of mule deer buck breeding does matters. DOES NOT MEAN IT's not TRUE. Its a theory (theories are tested and proven or dis proven every day) that has yet to be tested and due to its complexities likely never could except under a controlled setting. Yearling bucks can and do breed does--happens all the time they are physically capable to do so just as you were when you were 11-13 years old.

The question of, does it matter still needs to be researched IMO.

Here's a few questions to ponder, feel free to give your opinion....
1-Does having the vast majority (let's say 80%) of your does being bred by yearling bucks matter to the overall health and fitness of a local population?

2-Why did millions of years of evolution drive them (the ungulate females) that way (to breed with the biggest, most dominate, most fit buck in the population) if it was not important to the fitness of the population?

3-If the biggest buck is a yearling buck and it/they are doing the bulk of the breeding will that have any long term negative effects on a given population?

Lastly....
4-Does it matter what genetic traits are passed on from the buck do the doe?

I welcome your thoughts..

Thanks

Todd Black

Visit our YouTube page
http://www.youtube.com/user/bulls4bto?feature=mhum

 

[IHuntNUtah]

I spend the entire rifle deer hunt every year and this year I spent a lot of the archery and muzzleloader deer hunts on the cache unit. In my opinion the short hunt did help. I can say I saw more bucks and a lot more 2+ year old deer. The rifle hunt being where I noticed the biggest difference because I hunt it every year. We had 9 tags in our camp this year and 5 were filled. 4 of which had atleast 4 on one side. 8/9 hunters shot at a deer, the only one that didnt was my father who could have shot but could care less, he would rather see my sisters shoot em. Yes, all 3 of my sisters shot at deer. We didnt shoot at any deer until wednesday. We did only see 3 one year old bucks which is down but I blame that on the winter kill, it was bad on the east side of the cache. I think the opener this year was tough, lots of hunters, as usual, and deer seemed to be stuck in the pines. Just my opinion.

 

[Ticks N Tines]

The Cache hunt this year was actually really good. Several people I know harvested bucks and there were a few real nice ones as well. I think the deer could come back strong on the cache if we just could get some mild winters and less coyotes on the winter range.

 

[BowHuntr]

Todd,

What are your thoughts on the modeling the division uses, the figures they produce, and how those figures compare to what sportsmen are claiming to actually see, or most cases not see, in the field?

It seems like the divisions population number that their model spits out year after year doesn't change much, if any. At least over the past 5 years or so. How can that be?

BowHuntr

 

[Blanding_Boy]

Justin--

I sent you a lengthily email. Its just that, its a model. Models are as good as the data that goes into them go generate an outcome.

Todd Black

Visit our YouTube page
http://www.youtube.com/user/bulls4bto?feature=mhum

 

[grizzly]

I haven't seen this years model, and here is why.

A few years ago (2003?) I sat down with a biologist to go over the Cache herd numbers and when we put a pencil to their model, this is what we got... (I can't remember the numbers, so these are merely examples, but the outcome was the same).

20,000 deer (their official estimate)
1,700 bucks (extrapolated using their buck:doe ratio)
6,000 buck hunters (their official estimate)
30% success rate (their official estimate)
1,800 bucks killed (extrapolated by using their official hunter numbers and success rate)

I asked him point-blank, "So your official numbers say hunters killed every single buck, not one got away?" He looked at me with a deer-in-the-headlights look and said, "Well, these are only estimates."

They were so worried about publishing high herd numbers, buck:doe ratios, hunter numbers, and hunter success rates that nobody put a pencil to it and found it was impossible.

I haven't paid attention to their numbers since, because they don't have a clue what they are talking about.

Grizzly

 

[BowHuntr]

Wow! That's scary. Accurate deer number estimates are not easy to achieve, but we can definitely do better than what's currently being done.

 

[hossblur]

Todd,

Good questions/points,

I would point out that genetics and age/size have nothing to do with each other (beside the obvious). The genetics that 2 point passes on are the same as they would be if he was a four point. The reason that in nature the females go with the biggest and baddest are varied, but for the most part it is 1. protection 2. Proof of genetic superiority. That 2 point isn't fully mature, therefore he could have a genetic flaw(no trophy hunters that doesn't involve horn growth). He could kick inferior offspring, weak offspring, etc.. The older buck is proof of "whats in the pudding" Deer are mammals, the genetics I tried to pass as an 18yr old(constantly) are the same as they are now.

Interesting in all this talk of Logan and N. Utah in general there hasn't been a mention of the CWMU's. Hunters in general do have an effect on deer numbers. HOWEVER, when the hunters are so concentrated on a few areas due to the OVERABUNDANCE of CWMU's which have locked up most of N. Utah leaving little or no open hunting areas there is dramatic effect due to hunting. I do realize that it is private property, however I can't help but wonder even 10 years ago how much of this ground allowed hunters(not contractors and trigger men) which helped spread the pressure out.

Doe hunts. The problem the state of UTAH has is LOW DEER NUMBERS!!! If you have 10 deer and 5 are bucks you have a 50% buck/doe ratio. BIG DAMN DEAL, you still only have 10 deer. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR DOE KILLING AFTER THE RUT!! Every doe that is killed after breeding season is AT LEAST 2 deer being killed. Not to mention the waste of precious energy spent on breeding said doe with no outcome. ANY CLOWN talking about MANAGEMENT in Utah by killing does is an IDIOT!! You "manage" deer on units that are at full carrying capacity. WE ARE AT LEAST 200,00 deer short of that, we don't need to "mangage" we need every buck breeding every doe and praying for triplets. They can talk about killing does(whitetail) back east because they are overun by deer. We aren't even close to that.

Last. I think tag management is valid. HOWEVER, you can't split the state into small units for micromangagement, then not micromanage. Seasons, tags, lengths, etc. SHOULD be different for every unit, otherwise your not managing anything!




When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[Deerlove]

Good points Hoss I know theres a doe hunt going on right now near bearlake. Why?

 

[treedagain]

CWMU's have made a definate negative impact on the deer hunting in Northern UT....less access + more concentrated harvest of the available mature bucks...

 

[Blanding_Boy]

Treed...

your statements could not be more further from the truth---in fact, it is laughable and made my day thanks!

"CWMU's have made a definate negative impact on the deer hunting in Northern UT....less access + more concentrated harvest of the available mature bucks"...

Please expound....
How does 'less access' make a negative impact? How does having fewer hunters per acre/fewer hunter days have a negative impact?

Please explain 'more concentrated harvest on mature bucks' What are you comparing it to, where is your data that you are basing this statement on? So are you saying all the mature bucks are on private lands?

How can CWMUs (private lands in general) who harvest at a lower rate, have 3 times (at a minimum--have the data to show it too) the buck to doe ratios on adjacent public lands be having a negative impact on the deer herd in the NR and this case on the cache?

On the contrary, i will go out and say if it wasn't for private lands in general in the NR we likely wouldn't even have a deer herd to hunt. CWMUs who feed deer during bad winters, private land that in the NR provide 80% of the winter range habitat and they are the ones having a negative impact on deer? Really?

BRILLIANT statement on your behalf brother! If you are going to make intelligent statements like this, you ought to at least back them up..... patiently waiting for the data...




Todd Black

Visit our YouTube page
http://www.youtube.com/user/bulls4bto?feature=mhum

 

[sanjuankid]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-24-11 AT 05:54PM (MST)[p]...

 

[elkun]

todd. .you are so. never mind its x mas,,,happy hollidays,,,

 

[timothymarks]

How do you figure we are 200,000 deer short of carrying capacity? Where is this abundant winter range available during a tough winter

 

[Tree]

>Good points Hoss I know theres
>a doe hunt going on
>right now near bearlake.
>Why?

If it's the doe hunt on the east side near south Eden, it's because there are a ton of deer that come into the small (3) 40 acres parcels. I managed this piece for bow hunters last year and the amount of deer on these pieces is crazy. We counted over 150 deer on 80 acres one evening. I more or less was scheduling hunters to keep pressure on the deer every day so the person leasing the land could get his alfalfa and oats cut. He was flaming mad. The deer would literally follow his tractor and eat swaths of alfalfa from the wind rows he had just cut.

Now, the deer population in surrounding areas are a different story, but this particular small area is crawling with deer.

The division gives these tags out to try to off set damages to his crops, but after talking to the farmer at length, it doesn't sound like the money comes close to offsetting the cost of damages.

Sure wish transplanting were equitable.

http://unitedwildlifecooperative.org

 

[Tree]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-25-11 AT 01:28PM (MST)[p]>How do you figure we are
>200,000 deer short of carrying
>capacity? Where is this abundant
>winter range available during a
>tough winter

+1. I think range condition is an often overlooked component in relation to potential deer numbers. For example; even in areas that look like prime winter range, the sage may be too short to be above the snow line, or too old to be used effectively by deer or a host of other factors that aren't easily defined or noticed by most.

Finicky critters.

http://unitedwildlifecooperative.org

 

[swbuckmaster]

Reccord low deer numbers checked in on the cash? Cant be! The division says there are more deer on the cash then in the bookcliffs on their latest deer count. Twice as many deer in fact!

 

[katorade]

We were stopped in the Cache Unit, just below Franklin Basin turn off and we did not see them set up at all at the base of the canyon, maybe that could be why they saw less deer, unless they moved locations.

 

[hossblur]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-25-11
>AT 01:28?PM (MST)
>
>>How do you figure we are
>>200,000 deer short of carrying
>>capacity? Where is this abundant
>>winter range available during a
>>tough winter
>
>+1. I think range condition is
>an often overlooked component in
>relation to potential deer numbers.
>For example; even in areas
>that look like prime winter
>range, the sage may be
>too short to be above
>the snow line, or too
>old to be used effectively
>by deer or a host
>of other factors that aren't
>easily defined or noticed by
>most.
>
>Finicky critters.
>
>http://unitedwildlifecooperative.org


Ogden Valley is more developed, Agreed. Logan, more populated, no doubt. Did I miss the massive development of the Uintahs? The west desert? I hunt S.E., Manti hasn't expanded east if at all. There is no I-15 through Sanpete. The winter range hasn't changed for 100 years, PLUS with the addition of irrigation, there even growing corn now, yet NO DEER!!. If we get off the wasatch front, Utah hasn't EXPLODED in Urbaniztion. Where are the deer?? Why aren't we worried about bull/cow ratios? Because the elk are expanding. How does the DWR put out this story, then have doe hunts(PREGNANT DOES) around the area?
I understand "problem" deer, but why is he growing those crops on winter range and complaining about deer? At some point isn't a bad idea, a bad idea? People on the benches with "problem" deer, isn't that pretty much your fault?
I have read that in the heyday of deer hunting in Utah there were roughly 450,000 deer. I believe we are somewhere near 150-175k today. Yes I believe we can support another 200k or roughly 350k. That would take into account the wasatch front urbanization. Fly over Utah, the wasatch front is a tiny little dot, compared to the state. Yes there are other factors, but WE LOOSE WAY TO MANY DOES just to predators, highways, etc. to be killing them in the name of "management"


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[hossblur]

>Treed...
>
>your statements could not be more
>further from the truth---in fact,
>it is laughable and made
>my day thanks!
>
>"CWMU's have made a definate negative
>impact on the deer hunting
>in Northern UT....less access +
>more concentrated harvest of the
>available mature bucks"...
>
>Please expound....
>How does 'less access' make a
>negative impact? How does
>having fewer hunters per acre/fewer
>hunter days have a negative
>impact?
>
>Please explain 'more concentrated harvest on
>mature bucks' What are
>you comparing it to, where
>is your data that you
>are basing this statement on?
> So are you saying
>all the mature bucks are
>on private lands?
>
>How can CWMUs (private lands in
>general) who harvest at a
>lower rate, have 3 times
>(at a minimum--have the data
>to show it too) the
>buck to doe ratios on
>adjacent public lands be having
>a negative impact on the
>deer herd in the NR
>and this case on the
>cache?
>
>On the contrary, i will go
>out and say if it
>wasn't for private lands in
>general in the NR we
>likely wouldn't even have a
>deer herd to hunt. CWMUs
>who feed deer during bad
>winters, private land that in
>the NR provide 80% of
>the winter range habitat and
>they are the ones having
>a negative impact on deer?
> Really?
>
>BRILLIANT statement on your behalf brother!
> If you are going
>to make intelligent statements like
>this, you ought to at
>least back them up.....
> patiently waiting for the
>data...
>
>
>
>
>Todd Black
>
>Visit our YouTube page
>http://www.youtube.com/user/bulls4bto?feature=mhum

BS!! Short of DESERET, which CWMU feeds?? Most of them don't have winter range. Where are the deer in Ogden valley coming from if the surrounding CWMUs are deer "Utopia"? I was up by Florence Creek, and Ensign this week, didn't see a lot of deer. Did see them down the canyon near coalville.

Yes Todd, if you take 1000 acres, with 100 hunters on it, then close off 90 of the acres, those 100 hunters have a huge impact of that 10 acres. I know you have a finacial stake in your position, so you'll never admit to it, but CWMU's have hurt N. Utah, and the commercializtion of hunting crushed hunting in general.
The results of the 2008 mule deer survey prove it. Over 70% of hunters in utah are access, experience hunters, yet we loose access constantly because that 70% can't lobby(bribe) to get what they want.
Curious, the S. unit has far fewer CWMU's, as does the S.E., N utah is mostly CWMU. Why does n. utah blow? Why is it the problem child in the state if the CWMU's have been such a benefit to the herds in the north? Todd if there was any proof to the benefit of CWMU's to the herds or hunters in utah they would be legendary.

Why is South Dakota the PLACE for pheasants? Because they have birds, and they have TONS OF WALK IN ACCESS and cater, not to the few, but the many, which results in millions of dollars that is reinvested into more birds and more access. The CWUM program in Utah is the exact opposite, which is why there is less deer, less money for them, and fewer hunters. Proof is in the pudding, if the CWMU was such a success, it won't take you on Monster Muleys trying to defend them. I don't see a lot about anyone in S. Dakaota having to defend their PUBLIC management of pheasants.


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[Tree]

>The winter range hasn't changed
>for 100 years,


Winter range hasn't changed in a hundred years? I have to guess this is a typo.


http://unitedwildlifecooperative.org

 

[hossblur]

No, not a typo, pretty much a fact. I just saw a post on another website about the DWR's projeted herd numbers. Deer numbers expected to be shown as down 25% on average across the board. On the Manti, they are down 50%. In the last two years did the winter range get cut in half? Are there 50% more cats in two years? Was there a 50% increase in highway deaths? Was there a 50% urban expansion? NOOOOOOOO!! But there are tons(i plan on finding a actual number from the DWR) of doe tags. Tons of depredation on deer. Why would anyone with a brain, on a unit that is down 50% in deer numbers consider killing a single doe? Especially after the rut, then your killing 2-3. Doe killing is a managment tool used back east on whitail because whitetail pop. has exploded. Are we there?

Yes, another 200,000 deer. Hell in just two years WE LOST A QUARTER OF OUR HERD! Should we replace them, or just keep DREAMING of a day when we have ONLY 30", perfect 4x4's?

WE DON'T KILL HEN PHEASANTS, CHUKARS, GROUSE. WE DON'T KILL SOWS, ESPECIALLY WITH CUBS. WE DON'T FISH SALMON ON THEIR BEDS. WE HAVE LIMITS ON KILLING FEMALES IN NEARLY EVERY SPECIES WE ARE TRYING TO INCREASE. QUIT KILLING DOES!!!


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[Tree]

When you say "down", are you talking compared to last year? Ten years ago? Or are you referring to how far below objective each unit is? The big game estimate reports I have seen are showing about the same number of deer statewide as last year. Up in a few units, down in others. Though population estimates are more or less for the public. It's virtually impossible to count mule deer. Their population estimates are simply based on current trends and historic population estimates.

The number of statewide doe tags is about 2000 if I recall correctly, most are depredation and/or mitigation tags. I agree, we shouldn't be killing any does in under capacity areas. Objective and capacity are quite different.

What about smaller areas where they are over objective and are causing human conflict? Really the only alternative is transplants. Do you have opinions on transplanting muleys?

Maybe I'm not following what you are getting at.




http://unitedwildlifecooperative.org

 

[hossblur]

At carrying capacity? Pretty much covers the state. I would venture a guess that we kill WAY more than 2000 does after you figure in tags, depredation, so called "trouble" deer. Add to that mix the ammount killed on the highways, predators, etc, and pretty soon its not hard to figure out how the herd is on the slide. I can't control winter, predators(to some extent), and highways, but those 2000 does, in the 6 or so years that they are sexually able produce AT LEAST 1 fawn per year(twins in some cases) meaning in a 6 year period, 6 deer. 2000 does x 1 fawn x 6 years = 12,000 deer. There are NO counts in the state of Utah that suggest the deer herd is increasing, or at carrying capacity.


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[fireballer16]

My family did alright up there. Six dead, 4 18-24" four points, 1 25" three point, and a little sink of a two. So much water this year, deer were scattered.