Tag Allocations... Mule Deer

[OCHO]

Can someone tell me how the number of tags is determined in this state?? I see the new regs came out with outrageous numbers of deer tags and I am dumbfounded by this. I guess I was mistaken that the amount of hunters, animals harvested and quality voted on harvest reports in conjunction with animal population would determing all of this. However it seams that we just enjoy random numbers from the sky or numbers from a recent Hot Lotto Pick?

I do not want to beat a dead horse here but I just went on a deer hunt I have loved for many years and it has become very poor in deer population, just like the majority of the units in this state. I just cannot comprehend how some units deserve 2000 tags in one year? And I really am tired of the "OPPORTUNITY HUNT" cause thats is a stretch at best! How some units are crawling with game wardens and some have not seen one in years. Seriously sad how Muley's are now headed down the magical days of the bison! Sorry for the &itch but man its sad!

 

[cantgetdrawn]

There is no doubt that the mule deer population is continuing to decrease. I do take issue with the consensus that its because the G&F dept. is issuing too many tags. There is no doubt that over issuing tags affects the buck-to-doe ratio, but it's doubtful that it significantly affects the overall population.

All you have to do is look back 15 years or so. The G&F first went to draw hunts in the northern part of the state then about 5 years latter it went to draw in the southern part of the state. Afterward there was no noticeable increase in the deer population. I grew up hunting unit 38 which was a sea of orange during the day and the forest looked like a small city at night. I really thought after it went to draw the numbers would improve, they didn't. In my experience all it did was discourage certain people from hunting, lowering the potential number of total hunters in our ranks.

So if you are looking for the culprit responsible for the mule deer decline I really think you have to look elsewhere. Drought, predators etc. Personally I think the decline in agricultural activity in the 90's combined with drought and the swiping of windmills for different types of pumps which can be easily turned off when livestock is no longer using them is the main reason. That decline in agricultural activity also reduced the number of people shooting predators.

 

[NMPaul]

Both are good posts.

I dont think anyone believes that cutting back tags is going to solve ALL the problems,but, why exasperate the problems by dumping thousands of tags into units that have 15% success.

Predator control, adding year around water sources, and reducing tags would all help.

Give everyone that draws a tag, a mountain lion tag as well.

 

[OCHO]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-14 AT 09:09PM (MST)[p]I agree but isn't part of managing knowing whats allowable to be taken? I know there is no proper deer quota but do u think 800 deer tags in 34 or 600 in 32 is even in the vacinity of sanity?

I do agree that there needs to be an overall effort on many levels. But I do know that several states take note of what human/hunting pressure does to animals...

The thing is look at elk and barbary sheep! These things eat and drink the same things... But yet seam to be climbing in numbers yearly. Some of these units have wayyy too many elk and so why don't we have an elk hunt with over 200 tags? That is max for any unit I believe.

Predators are definetly huge and I and many will continue to work on managing this situation!

I did find me and my buddy discussing how ironically when there was no draw it actually seamed better because people bounced around and almost seamed to sustain and manage itself. I don't know the answer but I do know that there seams to be no one true happening to save and increase deer here in NM and its alarming.

I wish I ran into and drinker that was MDF and not RMEF all the time and I wish that half the habbitat drinkers I have run acorss actuallly worked.

As stated by some... We should not be paying $70 for a smelly roadant Javi when deer is $40!

I just don't see a method to the madness on managing the animals here. We set tag numbers on what basis? The seasons havent finish and harvest reports arent in and the numbers are the relatively the same... Don't we have biologist?

 

[cantgetdrawn]

I understand the frustration. My biggest problem with the cutting of tags and raising the price is that in my own experience it seems to discourage potential hunters. I'm always running into people who I know used to hunt that have just given up, not because of lack of game, but difficulty in getting a license. Heck getting out and having a 15% chance at bagging a small buck is still better than not hunting.

Elk and Barbary sheep strive in their prospective habitats and seem less reliant on non-natural habitat improvements. I may be wrong but its the only logical conclusion I can come up with as to their increases at the same time deer decline.

Other states still have OTC hunts and locals can just go out and buy a license to hunt either elk and/or deer, we no longer have the luxury. Just the combination of the automated system and the $15 general hunting requirement coincided with about 10,000 fewer resident applications. I am not sure those where the only factors but I think you would be hard pressed to find another reasons for the drop in applications. I think the numbers rebounded this year but it still emphasizes my point.

I am fairly certain that with fewer tags I will have a better chance at killing a big buck, but it will come at the cost of fewer hunters out there. I doubt however that decreasing tags will curtail the decline in the overall population. So I don't see having a better chance at a big buck being worth the negative consequences of having fewer hunters in our ranks.

 

[NMPaul]

cantgetdrawn, typically if someone is so apathetic about hunting, 15% success will not stoke their interest in hunting.

It is the responsibility of other hunters to get young hunters involved. There are lots of parents that may put in for their kids and then drive around a unit for one or two days hoping to get their kid a shot at a deer. That is most likely not going to be a successfull trip in most of these units any more.

What is worse? Not being able to draw a tag? (for a kid in NM they can hunt something every single year with youth tags and youth encouragement tags).
Or drawing a tag and not seeing anything?

Actually OCHO, there were 2920 tags available for unit 34, and that is before the unlimited amount of private landowner tags. Unit 34 is around 15% success with some of the hunts lower and some higher slightly.

Lowering tags will not stop the decline of the deer population most likely, but, it will slow it down.

Predators need to eat if we do not kill them first (and we do not seem to be doing that good of job of it). If most of the bucks are killed off, their option is to eat does and fawns.

Also there is an argument that if does are bred quickly and during a tighter time period, then they will not be dropping fawns over such a long time period as well. Dropping fawns over a long time period, makes the overall group of fawns more vulnerable to predators, because, there are 3 week fawns available to the same predators over a longer period of time.

There is no upside to killing most of the bucks each year.

 

[crazeymaez]

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID34/5172.html

Yeah its got to do alot with druought,And alot of other factors
But at least you got a tag and got to go.Antelope are also hurting.But like you said theres lots of guys that would love to have that tag.So as long as game &fish can sell them,Guess what tag numbers wont drop.

 

[crazeymaez]

On a side note In the new prolamation On the letter from the Intern Game Commissioner.

"Our highly qualified biologist use the best science to manage the states wildlife."

 

[jbone]

OK....so my daughter had youth tag for deer in 13, and I had an archery tag in 16. In 13, I saw 0 deer, and my friend saw 4 does. We hunted that area hard. In 16, we saw 18 deer (between Sept. and Jan.) with 3 being bucks....only 1 was OK with the other 2 being legal.

I think the deer population problem is a cumulative effect of (1) too many deer tags, (2) too many predators, and (3) drought (both watering and food sources).

In my opinion, G&F needs to dramatically cut the # of tags and increase the costs to make up for operational expenses. Yes, deer prices would "probably be sky high" for some, but for those really wanting to hunt, they would pay it. G&F also need to do some studies (maybe jointly with BLM, National Forest service, and State Land agencies) to determine how to increase the populations by knowing what really is the biggest factor with their decline. G&F also needs to go to a bounty system for lions....do not think it would help with coyotes....maybe.

As for drought conditions, all land agencies (federal and state) that allow leasing of their lands (regardless of who - ranchers, mining, agriculture, etc.) must require habitat improvement projects as well as any and all water holes (for domestic animals) to be maintained throughout the year with no exception. This is easier said than done - especially since you would need some sort of enforcement system.

Again, this is just my opinion....but I will tell you this....I do not see it getting better anytime soon.



JBone

 

[jbone]

1 thing that I forgot to add on my previous post....there was a comment made about hunting and not seeing anything versus not being able to hunt.

This is first hand experience, my 11 year old daughter got her hunter safety in the spring of last year. She was so excited about hunting. She wanted to be put into the draw for all species. She drew oryx and deer tags. She nailed an oryx but saw no deer this year.

I asked her for this next year what she wanted to hunt. Her response - not deer.

I ask you - would you want to give up your precious vacation time that you have accrued throughout the year for a long shot of a deer hunt???? Or, would you rather use your vacation time on a hunt where you can at least see game????



JBone

 

[OCHO]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-14-14 AT 08:21AM (MST)[p]I understand all comments listed... However, still wondering how we are determining the amount of tags allocated for an area? And how that number is affected each year. I do not think tag veriations will be a fix all cure. However, it at least to shows signs of management methods if we at least consider every years tag number based on all factor. Such as dought, number animals harvested, disease and so on. Where as now I am in the dark as how those tags come about?

So, that being said Paul I agree its a bit mind blowing that there are 2900+ tags in 34. Just wish I could see how some areas are figured to support that. Ok, so there is the "opportunity hunt" but is there an "opportunity type hunts" for all species and areas?

I personally do not have the satisfaction of hey at least I got to go. Because there are soo many other animals to go OTC that can provide the same satisfaction of hunting and being outdoors. Bear, Ibex, Barbs, Turkey, Yotes all viable for purchase and hunt with no draw.

Thanks for the input all!

 

[OCHO]

>1 thing that I forgot to
>add on my previous post....there
>was a comment made about
>hunting and not seeing anything
>versus not being able to
>hunt.
>
>This is first hand experience, my
>11 year old daughter got
>her hunter safety in the
>spring of last year.
>She was so excited about
>hunting. She wanted to
>be put into the draw
>for all species. She
>drew oryx and deer tags.
> She nailed an oryx
>but saw no deer this
>year.
>
>I asked her for this next
>year what she wanted to
>hunt. Her response -
>not deer.
>
>I ask you - would you
>want to give up your
>precious vacation time that you
>have accrued throughout the year
>for a long shot of
>a deer hunt???? Or,
>would you rather use your
>vacation time on a hunt
>where you can at least
>see game????
>
>
>
>JBone


Man JBone you are soo dead on with this! We took our kids to the 16's and same thing... Kids were bummed out major and now really have the same thought about deer. Felt horrible despite this just being reality.

 

[NMPaul]

I think we all want the same thing.


Great point. Javelina is a $60 tag and Deer are $42.
Splain that????

In theory, some units should be managed for opportunity and some for age class.

That being said, if deer numbers are spiraling, satisfaction rating is spiraling it does not matter if it is a unit managed for opportunity or not.

G&F should be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Raise the prices on tags, to make up for the cuts in tags.

Lets not look back 10 years from now and ask why G&F was putting 3000 tags in unit 34 when we no longer have a huntable deer herd.

Good point was made about agriculture. Most cases that does help the deer numbers.

 

[NMCOG]

Its difficult to understand but in government it is never as simple as cutting tags. At the State Game Commission meeting this past Thursday the NMDGF opened the Big Game Rules for Javelina, Oryx, Ibex, Barbary Sheep, Turkey, Migratory Bird, Deer, Elk, Pronghorn, and Big Horn Sheep(in that order).

The current rule expires March 2015 and the rule is good for 4 years. They will be re-developing the rule (i.e. regs.) for these species over the course of 2014 and implement the changes for hunting season 2015 and the following 4 years. NMDGF has now opened the public comment phase on each of these rules. Voice your opinion at http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/documents/documents/ProposalComments.htm.

The more specific you are the better. NMDGF will begin with Javelina proposals in March with the final changes being made in May. The Deer proposals will not come out until June or Aug (with final in Nov) so you basically have between now and then to recommend your changes to the regs.

 

[huntswnm]

Guess I will throw in my $0.02, just in the off chance that someone from G&F may actually check in on these conversations from time to time and take into consideration comments and thoughts of those of us who are actually out there experiencing the bounty that is provided to us by the G&F's "highly qualified biologists" (insert sarcastic tone here)

I don't think that one can say that too many tags, the drought or predators is taking it's toll on mule deer numbers more than the other. I believe they are all equally responsible and all need to be addressed.

First off tag numbers. Yes they need to be reduced. As stated above, the fact that a Javelina tag is almost double that of deer is mind boggling. If G&F can sell every single Javelina tag every year at those prices then they can at least reduce deer tags by 1/3, raise the price and still sell every single tag. I, personally, do not buy the argument of higher tag prices will hinder those new comers to hunting. What hinders new comers to hunting is drawing a tag with the expectation of seeing deer, finding none and getting discouraged. As the gentlemen earlier told the story of his daughter not wanting to hunt deer, I myself had the exact same thing happen. As soon as my daughter got her hunters safety she drew a youth deer tag here in the SW portion of the state two years in a row. In the 2 years we saw 1 buck. This year she did not want to hunt deer again. As a father I try to take her out and teach her things and show her that hunting is not all about the kill, but lets be realistic, that only goes so far. I would pay double the price for a tag where she has an opportunity to see more than 1 buck after a total of 15 days of hunting over 2 years.

As far as the drought, you cant make mother nature do anything she doesn't want to do. However, there are things we can do to help out the herd during dry times. How many water sources do you know of out there that due to neglect and vandalism no longer work? I think a lot of existing infrastructure can be rebuilt and kept up with would do a lot of good. Of course it all comes down to $$. I was President of our local NWTF chapter for several years and helped put some $$ on the ground in the way of rock headers and dirt tank maintenance but what was the most frustrating was all of the red tape we had to wade through dealing with the Forest Service in order to get jobs done. Along with drought is the habitat in general out there. I drew the Burro Mountain archery tag this year, which is basically my back yard. Most of that area is so overgrown and dense that I wonder how anything can get around in there. Seems to me that as the drought progresses the shrub like vegetation takes over. With more roots in the ground that has to have a significant impact on the amount of water available in the ground. I have also found more and more Coues deer through the years. Places I hunted 20+ years ago that was 99% mule deer and 1% Coues is more now like 75% Coues and 25% Mule deer. Why the flip flop in numbers? For one I don't think the mule deer are as adapted to the thick cover that has been developing recently. Second, there are less Coues tags given out and they are a more wary animal and usually wont stick around to long once seen.

Last is predators. With fur prices seemingly on the rebound I see more and more people getting back into coyote calling and even see an increase in trapping. The average person can go out and call a coyote, and with a little homework can set a trap to catch fox and bobcat. Mountain lions on the other hand are a different story. I think it is great that G&F opened the lion season up year round and gives you 2 tags, but the average person will probably never have the chance to shoot a lion by chance. Everyone knows that dogs are about the only reliable way to consistently get onto lions, but the number of people out there with good dogs is decreasing. Not many people have the time or the lifestyle opportunity to keep up a good pack of dogs. I found 4 different sets of lion tracks in 5 days of hunting on my deer hunt this year. Even though I have a lion tag in my pocket, the chance of me just running into one and getting of shot is slim. I am not one to always advocate more government involvement but what if they came up with a way to somehow subsidize someone who has a well trained pack of hound dogs who takes out the average hunter who may not be willing or able to pay full price for a "guided" hunt.

jeff

 

[RabidRattleSnake1]

"Can someone tell me how the number of tags is determined in this state??".....I have the exact formula that the NMDGF uses for deer tag allocation, here it is, kinda complicated but I will apply hypothetical numbers so it will make some sense:

# of deer in unit as of 01/16/14(end of hunting season): 1000
Deduct winter kill: -150
Add spring births - fawn recruitment 800
Deduct (spring) predator kill: -799
Deduct road kill -150
Deduct due to poaching -300
deduct natural death -2
deduct death due to drought/poor range conditions -400

deer as of September 1, 2014 (start of hunting season) -1

Total tag allocation for this unit 1300

Please keep in mind that this is the general formula the NMDGF uses and by some miracle there are some deer left by the end of the next season. I personally think space aliens feel sorry for the deer population and replicate a few here and there so they are not totally wiped out from the face of the earth.

In all honesty how can the NMDGF set permit numbers not knowing what the outcome of the hunts are and more importantly the outcome of the winter. Look at how UT sets its numbers. You don't know until late in the spring after they have taken into account some data.

I think we need to outsource the NMDGF functions to the CO, UT, or AZ game and fish. Might be best to outsource their duties to some Chinese or East Indian firm

 

[OCHO]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-14-14 AT 11:06AM (MST)[p]Nice that is the quodratic formula of hunting! Pretty much sums up my thoughts exactly! I think some real management based on actual numbers would be the birth of going in the right direction!

 

[NMPaul]

Someone mentioned introducing Coues into some of the SE units including the lower elevations of 34.
Not sure if they were here at one time or not. We have a Texas type whitetail already that do real well on private it seems.

Rather have Coues deer than no deer. They are talking about planting Big Horn sheep on the rim above Alamogordo. If it works there may be 1-2 tags a year. It would be nice to see a healthy deer herd.

 

[nm_alazan]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-14-14 AT 02:43PM (MST)[p]I'm no expert by any means, but I do know that harvesting bucks has very little impact on the overall herd numbers which is probably why G&F issues so many tags (which are nearly all buck tags to my knowledge).

Killing a buck only reduces the herd by that one buck. As long as some of the bucks survive the hunting season to breed, the herd is not significantly impacted (one buck can breed quite a number of does in a season).

On the other hand, harvesting a doe reduces the herd not only by that animal, but also the whole family tree of offspring and offspring's offspring from that one doe, so it has a much more significant impact on the overall herd. This is why wildlife agencies across the country utilize anterless tags for actual management/reduction of deer and elk herd numbers, not buck/bull tags which are more of a secondary management tool generating revenue which can then be used for further management and habitat.

The way that a herd size is best increased is by creating higher fawn production, and/or by minimizing doe mortality (which in turn increases fawn production). Therefore, G&F reducing buck tags (or even eliminating for that matter), would only create a higher buck to doe ratio, which is really only a superficial way of increasing the herd size, since fawn production would stay essentially the same.

Certainly, there would be somewhat better hunting opportunity for bucks in the short term if buck tags were decreased, but the main problem of the overall herd (doe survival and fawn production) still hasn't been addressed, and that is the REAL problem with the deer herd in NM and throughout the west with many factors contributing to it and with much debate.

But, I am with you guys that the deer herd is in trouble, and I do hope they figure out how to save it and grow it back.

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

Only way reducing buck tags would increase the overall population would be if there is just not enough breeding age bucks to breed the does. Which in my opinion is a factor in some areas.

 

[cosmic_cowboy]

I agree that buck harvest has little to do with herd numbers, but dumping way to many tags into a unit is still not sound science.Its all about money and that's it!!

Everyone cry's our deer decline is because of human encroachment into winter range this is total BS look at Silver City I don't live any where near there but they are going to have a DOE HUNT to reduce problem deer that are in town.

As I have said for years now the problem with our deer herd is first and foremost PREDATORS but its not politically correct to blame them so nothing gets done. Second on the list is winter poaching of trophy bucks standing by the road, until we make these scumbags pay dearly nothing is going to change.Very few get caught and when they do its a slap on the wrist and they are back at it the next year.It's almost excepted in some parts of the state.
And I don't think this culture can be changed anytime soon.

Jack

 

[ELKMAN]

I can understand the "taking of bucks" does not really impact the deer population in most circumstances.

Dumping 1,000's of tags in units adds a bit of pressure on the animals, roads, and etc. With all the tags, there are people all over the place from Sept-Jan.

The ole "two rut roads" look like a super highway by OCT.

 

[outdoorsdude]

THIS: "Also there is an argument that if does are bred quickly and during a tighter time period, then they will not be dropping fawns over such a long time period as well. Dropping fawns over a long time period, makes the overall group of fawns more vulnerable to predators, because, there are 3 week fawns available to the same predators over a longer period of time."

At my sisters (unit 36) the day after Christmas, a spotted fawn showed up! To me that denotes a serious coverage problem.

And now add thieves (poachers).

 

[elkfanatic]

I really think that they need to lower the tag numbers for a few units a year, that way there are other units to hunt and those units could get a small rebound each year and then on top of that put a bounty on mountain lions and coyotes if possible to attempt to get the predator population down. My hunt this year was pretty good but there was almost no deer more than a half mile to a mile away from the one water tank that was being pumped too. Granted it was a rut hunt and we saw a good amount of deer, it was still tough to find them away from the water source.

 

[hi_lohunter]

In one of the above posts I believe I read a game management plan is in place for 4 years? Wow, so basically regardless of population count, drought conditions, success rates they game and fish is committed to a plan put in place 4 years ago. That needs to change. The game department should be able to react quickly to certain conditions. If you have a unit that has 15% success, low population count, and has received 5 inches of rain or less cut the tags, it doesn't seem that complicated to me. Cut the tags and raise prices. Not sure who is to blame for this policy but it should change if in fact this is the case.

Numerous issues have been brought up but another that is rarely mentioned is the length of our hunting seasons. Guys hit the hills in August archery and end in January and February cow elk huts and mule deer archery. So August, September, October, November, December, January and February the animals are pressured. That seems a bit harsh to me and a bit long. 2013 hunts should end in 2013, cow elk should be done in January. We shouldn't be pressuring animals for 7 months a year.

Also great points about water. I know I already stated this but deer are dramatically effected by rain fall. Most deer I see are within 1 mile of a reliable water source. So many creeks throughout the state have gone dry. Hopefully NM receives plenty of snow fall over the next few months if not could be another dry year, which means dry creek beds and stock tanks, which means no mule deer. Elk seem to travel much further to reach water and thus have adapted in certain areas like the gila better than the deer.

 

[RabidRattleSnake1]

Ok just my 2 cents which doesn't mean anything to anyone except me, but based on what I have read and seen I see the following as the major factor in the low deer numbers:

1. Drought ? enough said about that and fairly straightforward
2. Predators ? same here enough said
3. Lack of mature bucks for breeding
4. Poor habitat

The first two items are fairly straight forward.

Lack of mature bucks - With regard to the lack of mature bucks I remember reading a study about the effect that a lack of mature bucks has on a deer population. In a nut shell what it stated was that does in general will not allow immature bucks to breed them on their first cycle. They will however allow immature bucks to breed them come their second cycle if they never found ?Mr. big?. The problem with this is that a good number of the fawns end up being born late and this leads to numerous problems the primary of which is that instead of all the fawns dropping at the same time they are born over the course of several weeks which makes them much more susceptible to predators. I really believe in this theory in that a lot of the fawns I see seem to be really little come September when I really get out. After reading this study I find a lot of faults in the argument that tag numbers do not effect deer populations since you only need one buck to breed all of the does.


Poor habitat ? I am a really firm believer that the habitat we have is in very poor condition. Here again I read a study that changed my way of thinking. This particular study was based on the effect that poor habitat (sage brush) had on deer population in Wyoming. It stated that although there is tons and tons of sage brush it was not of high quality. It stated that as the sage brush matured it did not have anywhere near the nutrition quality of a younger plant. In fact it stated that it was essentially ?junk-food? for deer due to the extremely low nutritional quality. Prior to human efforts at fire suppression the older plants would be wiped out and replaced every so often so as to keep the quality up. I would think that this theory is applicable to the NM habitat to varying degrees based on plant type and location. To the human eye there seems to be plenty of food for the deer it might actually not be all that great. Kinda the same difference between a salad bar and fast food. You know that the guy living off of the fast food is going to be more susceptible to disease and an early death.

For the life of me I can't find the ?Lack of mature buck? study, but if I do I will post a link. There are plenty of articles on the web about the poor food quality. The UT game and fish have some on their website.

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

FYI...
Saw on the department's website that they are seeking public comments about big game for the next 4 year rule cycle. This is the time for everyone to really let the department know our concerns with our deer herd.

 

[NMdoghunter]

Couldn't agree more. Cut tags in half and quadruple the price. Less Hunters = Less Bucks Killed

 

[live4muleys]

Post #13 gives the direct link to the Game and Fish page.

 

[NMPaul]

I sent them this link also.