JakeSwensen
Active Member
- Messages
- 667
Interesting data that was presented at the April 28th task force meeting.
Wyoming Range Mule Deer Data
- Thread starter JakeSwensen
- Start date
PleaseDear
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 10,435
Very informative.
Thanks for sharing this
Robb
Thanks for sharing this
Robb
Yes. The man that presented this data was there specifically to refute that push. An individual compiled and presented this data, not F&G. I thought he hit it out of the park. TF was less convinced.
DoubleDropMuley
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,814
Task Force!!!
Region G and H sure have potential. Can you imagine what quality of bucks would be available if res tags were limited and the WG&F could actually manage both res plus nonres hunter numbers. The genetics are definitely some of the best in Wyo. It's obviously up to res whether they prefer having the ability to hunt each year or if they would rather hunt every couple years with better quality bucks. I have a feeling I know the answer to that question.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,138
The same quality there is now. Nothing wrong with it the way it is now. But if you’re that concerned they could probably shave a few non resident tags again like they did a few years back. Since it’s for the good of the resource I’m sure you wouldn’t mind…
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,138
Meh no one cares
DoubleDropMuley
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,814
LQ saved 102 so I’m guessing it’s the answer, now I think about it, it has saved every area that has gone to it?.
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,470
I spent the day with Gary Fralick a couple weeks ago on the winter range buzzing around BSing. I had the chance to look at his photo album of bucks that have passed through the check station in Alpine. Going back to the late 90’s, there was no big difference in the caliber of bucks. I would have expected to see far more super bucks, but not.
Of course I believe the advancements in technology, along with other things, allows hunters to kill more of the top end bucks now than 20 years ago. So maybe there were more super bucks back then on the mountain each year, but it wasn’t by a large number.
That deer herd up there is doing well. In fact, after looking at some of Gary’s study forage that’s been devoured by the deer, there might actually be too many deer on the winter range. If a bad winter occurs after another couple years of increasing deer numbers and drought, it could send deer numbers down farther and faster than Peloton stock.
I know there are those who don’t believe Gary’s numbers, but I do. Fawn/Doe and Buck/Doe numbers are very good. Tags do not need to be cut! Not for residents or non-residents.
I know it won’t happen, but I think NR tags could be increased by a hundred or so in G without having any significant effect on buck numbers.
Many people look at the winter range up there and think it can support an unlimited number of deer, but that’s just not the case. Deer don’t eat every bush out there. They eat specific bushes and many of those bushes get devoured and then drought hinders their recovery in the spring and summer and they don’t fully recover before being devoured again.
Of course I believe the advancements in technology, along with other things, allows hunters to kill more of the top end bucks now than 20 years ago. So maybe there were more super bucks back then on the mountain each year, but it wasn’t by a large number.
That deer herd up there is doing well. In fact, after looking at some of Gary’s study forage that’s been devoured by the deer, there might actually be too many deer on the winter range. If a bad winter occurs after another couple years of increasing deer numbers and drought, it could send deer numbers down farther and faster than Peloton stock.
I know there are those who don’t believe Gary’s numbers, but I do. Fawn/Doe and Buck/Doe numbers are very good. Tags do not need to be cut! Not for residents or non-residents.
I know it won’t happen, but I think NR tags could be increased by a hundred or so in G without having any significant effect on buck numbers.
Many people look at the winter range up there and think it can support an unlimited number of deer, but that’s just not the case. Deer don’t eat every bush out there. They eat specific bushes and many of those bushes get devoured and then drought hinders their recovery in the spring and summer and they don’t fully recover before being devoured again.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,138
I believe all the above except I do not agree with increasing NR tags at this time. While a 100 more NR tags wouldn’t really affect the buck to doe ratio it would affect the # of mature bucks.
I also believe that it would take an act of god to get NR tags increased under any scenario moving forward. Deer population could double and they could just make the season longer to increase harvest. When the hunting is easy the word gets out and everyone gets a tag.
Founder
Founder Since 1999
- Messages
- 11,470
I’d agree that NR’s will never get any tags back, but with 45 bucks per 100 does, a small 100 tag increase wouldn’t be noticed. IMO
I also believe that when opportunity is decreased, that in turn results in more pressure on the top end bucks. The more rare the opportunity, the more likely someone is to put in more days scouting, more days hunting, hire a guide or buy information that’ll increase odds of success on the top end bucks.
That’s definitely the case with me! Every year I tell my wife that this could be the last so I have to put in just as much time scouting and hunting as possible. Got to make the most of it while it’s available, cause it may not always be available. I’m not sure I’d do that if it were available every year.
But again, while I believe there’s room for a few more NR tags, I’m 99.9% sure there never will be. Residents don’t want more, outfitters don’t care because the rarity aspect allows them to book hunts easily even with fewer NR tags and the G&F can just increase application fees to make up the $$ for fewer tags sold.
I also believe that when opportunity is decreased, that in turn results in more pressure on the top end bucks. The more rare the opportunity, the more likely someone is to put in more days scouting, more days hunting, hire a guide or buy information that’ll increase odds of success on the top end bucks.
That’s definitely the case with me! Every year I tell my wife that this could be the last so I have to put in just as much time scouting and hunting as possible. Got to make the most of it while it’s available, cause it may not always be available. I’m not sure I’d do that if it were available every year.
But again, while I believe there’s room for a few more NR tags, I’m 99.9% sure there never will be. Residents don’t want more, outfitters don’t care because the rarity aspect allows them to book hunts easily even with fewer NR tags and the G&F can just increase application fees to make up the $$ for fewer tags sold.
jm77
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,359
Because of the information presented, the TF voted region tags down by a close vote. But they did vote in splitting mule deer and whitetail, which will allow a hunter to buy both general tags(most likely a separate region tag for NR). My opinion is the outcome from this is as bad as resident deer regions. In 2021, 7000 general season resident hunters used their license on a whitetail. With splitting tags, those same hunters have a mule deer tag they can fill. This will lead to more pressure and more harvests in areas where mule deer don't need it.
With that, we can expect more areas going LQ and at this point the domino effect would eventually require LQ in the Wyoming range. I am really disappointed the TF feels they should meddle in management decisions that belong to G&F and the Commission.
With that, we can expect more areas going LQ and at this point the domino effect would eventually require LQ in the Wyoming range. I am really disappointed the TF feels they should meddle in management decisions that belong to G&F and the Commission.
Last edited:
