Splitting deer licenses, Wildlife Task Force can't see the forest for the trees

[jm77]

The Wildlife Task Force, with relatively little discussion and no insight from 'on the ground' wildlife managers, voted to recommend that mule and whitetail deer be managed with a completely different set of licenses. In other words, there would be no more "deer" license. There would be mule deer only tags and whitetail only tags. There are several reasons this would be detrimental to management and drawing odds.

First, every sportsperson could apply for both limited quota(LQ) mule deer and LQ whitetail. Obviously, this would make drawing a LQ or NR region mule deer tag that much harder to draw and tank the odds to draw LQ type 3 whitetail tags.

Second, if you don't draw an LQ tag, you could purchase a general
license(resident) for each species. With the ability to hunt both deer separately, it's obvious mule deer buck numbers statewide could take a pounding. Do mule deer in Wyoming need any more pressure? Many hunters now hold out for a good mule deer and hunt whitetail in November or kill a whitetail during the antlered season for their deer. It is obvious not much thought went into this idea, given the reasoning was to better manage each species, when just the opposite could happen. Imagine the Black Hills in November if every resident hunter could buy a general whitetail tag to hunt there after killing a mule deer somewhere else.

Third, if a hunter chooses to buy a general for just one species, they could not shoot the other species during "deer" season. It would suck if you saw a nice whitetail and only had a mule deer tag. It seems G&F upper management is looking for a way to get every deer hunter to buy two tags. Meanwhile G&F employees on the ground do not support this idea in general.

Fourth, no state I can find manages deer any different than Wyoming does now; a deer license governed by regulation for season and take.

This idea is now going through the process in the interim session of the Travel, Rec and Wildlife Committee. The draft is 23LSO-0009 and will be discussed on Aug 30th in the afternoon. There has been one meeting already and sportsman spoke out against the idea and made significant headway with the legislators to kill the idea. I am attaching the emails of the committee members that are meeting next week in Thermopolis. It is important for sportsman either to attend and comment, or make phone calls if you know a member or send emails to each legislator. One more showing of public opposition and the committee will most likely not sponsor the legislation. If they do sponsor, killing this bill in Cheyenne will be tougher.
Get involved, show up, call or write.
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

 

[Zeke]

Oh my he!!. Are they coming up with a solution without a problem?
The unintended consequences of this would be horrific!!!!

Zeke

 

[nfh]

Thanks for highlighting the key points. Emails to be sent shortly

 

[elks96]

I sent my email about 3 hours ago...

 

[elks96]

Oh my he!!. Are they coming up with a solution without a problem?
The unintended consequences of this would be horrific!!!!

Zeke

Funny my opening paragraph said this was a great example of an solution needing a problem...

 

[Conrad8899]

Just finished my emails this need to get shut down for sure... Thanks for sharing jm77

 

[SureShot]

None of those concerns may end up being true. They could easily make it so you have to pick one or the other species for both the draw and the general season tags.

From a herd management issue, this gives them much more control.

 

[mulecreek]

From a herd management issue, this gives them much more control.

How?

 

[elks96]

None of those concerns may end up being true. They could easily make it so you have to pick one or the other species for both the draw and the general season tags.

From a herd management issue, this gives them much more control.

Explain this? What will they accomplish with this set up that they can not already accomplish with the current set up? If they do force you to decide there is one thing for certain demand for mule deer tags will increase and opportunity will decrease...

 

[jm77]

None of those concerns may end up being true. They could easily make it so you have to pick one or the other species for both the draw and the general season tags.

And that would pretty be much the way it is now. The main difference is it works better as it is, allowing the hunter to opt to take a whitetail later in the season, rather than be required by the tag to kill a mule deer on that general tag.

Bottom line, with wildlife managers opposed to this and not allowed to voice their opinion, the TF took it upon themselves to simply do something because it sounded good.

 

[nontypical]

Still a couple days left to contact your legislators on the committee.

Git 'er done

 

[jims]

I would think status quo is pretty popular with Wyo res?

I would agree that offering mule deer tags separate and in addition to whitetail tags would just place more pressure on Wyo's ailing mule deer population. It seems wise to possibly limit hunters to either a mule deer or whitetail with their tag. Once either buck is shot that's the end of their hunt. Obviously shooting more whitetails would likely benefit mule deer. Each whitetail shot would mean 1 more mule deer still breathing. Also, shooting more mule deer will only likely improve things for whitetails.

 

[nontypical]

Seriously...it only takes 20 minutes to write an email.

Coincidentally, that's very close to the amount of time it takes to make a post on MonsterMuleys.com!!

 

[DH56]

Email sent. Thanks for the info.

 

[tracker12]

I think your Third point describes what they are trying to do. Manage the Whitetail and Mule deer separately which makes sense IMHO.

 

[jm77]

I think your Third point describes what they are trying to do. Manage the Whitetail and Mule deer separately which makes sense IMHO.

Meanwhile the TF doesn't manage anything. G&F bios and management coordinators don't want this.

 

[elks96]

I think your Third point describes what they are trying to do. Manage the Whitetail and Mule deer separately which makes sense IMHO.

Haha. We already manage both separately… Just because they share a tag does not mean they are managed anywhere the same.

Explain what having separate tags would do for management that current tags system can not accomplish?

 

[tracker12]

Haha. We already manage both separately… Just because they share a tag does not mean they are managed anywhere the same.

Explain what having separate tags would do for management that current tags system can not accomplish?

They can control the harvest by species.

 

[elks96]

They can control the harvest by species.

Which can be done under this system. They simply adjust the seasons to reflect an increase or decrease in one species available season.

If they want to increase harvest on mule deer they can extend the season, drop point requirements, allow for either sex harvest, etc. If they want to decrease mule deer harvest they can decrease season length, increase antler point requirement, all can easily increase and decrease harvest.

Same is true for white tail. The tag is absolutely not the factor that determines the harvest. It is season structure/regulations that are based on area specific criteria...

So to that point how would 2 separate tags achieve anything that they can not achieve with the current setup?

 

[SureShot]

Why don't they just sell you a tag that's good for elk, deer, moose, sheep, goats, wolves or antelope?

 

[elks96]

If anyone has any studies in this area, I would be interested to learn what sort of pressure restrictive management/harvest processes have on species/hunting that may not be present in a system for less restrictive practices?

So how I came to this... I feel the more you limit a hunters opportunity via regulation, there is a diminishing return... IE if I get a general deer tag every year and have the option to shoot either species, am I more likely or less likely to fill my tag? If I you take away my freedom, what additional pressure does that create for me to fill my tag?

I may only take 1 buck every 4 years on my general tag as I did not find the "ONE". But on the flip side if I am limited in opportunity and only get a tag every 3 years, I am much more likely to shoot a buck of lesser quality because it will be 2 more years before I get the chance?

Thoughts?

 

[nontypical]

Which can be done under this system. They simply adjust the seasons to reflect an increase or decrease in one species available season.

If they want to increase harvest on mule deer they can extend the season, drop point requirements, allow for either sex harvest, etc. If they want to decrease mule deer harvest they can decrease season length, increase antler point requirement, all can easily increase and decrease harvest.

Same is true for white tail. The tag is absolutely not the factor that determines the harvest. It is season structure/regulations that are based on area specific criteria...

So to that point how would 2 separate tags achieve anything that they can not achieve with the current setup?

I would add that G&F currently specifies any difference between one species and the other for harvest in any unit that they want. All this would do is add more crap for G&F to have to deal with. Totally ridiculous idea that has absolutely zero management worth. A solution looking for a problem.

 

[jm77]

Great news today from the TRW Committee. Deer split doesn't get consideration, so the bill dies!

 

[DoubleDropMuley]

Great news today from the TRW Committee. Deer split doesn't get consideration, so the bill dies!

Thanks for updates ??

 

[Conrad8899]

Great news today from the TRW Committee. Deer split doesn't get consideration, so the bill dies!

Great news thanks for sharing this info.... Would like to think they got hammered with emails and that's what swayed the TRW Committee...

 

[wytex]

Now on to waiting periods, yuck !!!

 

[jm77]

Great news thanks for sharing this info.... Would like to think they got hammered with emails and that's what swayed the TRW Committee...

The emails did it. One legislator remarked that he had not received one positive comment in his emails. Getting involved matters!