2021 Mule Deer Plan

"If you can't win, lower the standards..." UDWR 2020.

They should have included the current population estimate in the table and I'll look for it but there needs to be some kind of justification to support their recommendations.
 
Apparently they are accepting defeat and changing the MD objective to a more current and retainable number on paper, not physically decrease the state wide overall by 50k
 
BruinPoint said:
"If you can't win, lower the standards..." UDWR 2020.

They should have included the current population estimate in the table and I'll look for it but there needs to be some kind of justification to support their recommendations.
Click to expand...
All I saw was the population "Objective" of 454,100 down to 403,800
 
There's the current objective, the proposed objective, and the population estimate. They're leaving the last one out. Whether they are planning on dropping the POPULATION to meet OBJECTIVE is my question, and my point in asking is I think they need to include all the information up front.

edit: Colorado did the same thing a few years ago, but at least the data was available and the State made their case based on a set of justifications. There was a combination of range trends, a problem with the modeling, and some inconsistencies in data collection.
 
BruinPoint said:
There's the current objective, the proposed objective, and the population estimate. They're leaving the last one out. Whether they are planning on dropping the POPULATION to meet OBJECTIVE is my question, and my point in asking is I think they need to include that information up front.
Click to expand...
It better be to MEET current population, we cannot afford to lose another 50k deer.
 
I grew up in Price and it's probably the reason I love deer so much, but Utah keeps finding new ways to disappoint. Colorado is doing its best to keep up though... Elk are on a pedestal in both states and for a mule deer guy the silver lining is sure turning gray in a hurry.
 
We have already lost another 50k deer. If you believe those numbers you are up in the night. Take a look at the units you love and hunt, and tell me the numbers in that unit match what you see on the ground. The Beaver unit shows there being 13,000 deer right now. That unit would be hard pressed to have half that number.
 
southernutahhunter said:
We have already lost another 50k deer. If you believe those numbers you are up in the night. Take a look at the units you love and hunt, and tell me the numbers in that unit match what you see on the ground. The Beaver unit shows there being 13,000 deer right now. That unit would be hard pressed to have half that number.
Click to expand...
Which was the point of option 2. Removing statewide archery and managing each unit based on buck to doe ratios. It’s a bunch of BS because there isn’t a unit in the state where numbers are at objective. So, essentially they need to shut down the entire state until the numbers are correct.
 
southernutahhunter said:
We have already lost another 50k deer. If you believe those numbers you are up in the night. Take a look at the units you love and hunt, and tell me the numbers in that unit match what you see on the ground. The Beaver unit shows there being 13,000 deer right now. That unit would be hard pressed to have half that number.
Click to expand...
I completely agree ?
 
Ummm, Serengeti of the West!

That's what they keep telling us.

We give these groups more tags and money than every western state COMBINED.

Does anybody think our herds are better than every state combined? Are we better than even the majority of states? Are we better than any of them?

Where are the results? Where's the payday?
 
Well, your odds of drawing the units where they are INCREASING population numbers just took a major crap! Who's going to continue to put in for Thousand Lakes with half the deer numbers?? Or any other units for that matter?
 
The only thing that gives me hesitation on bashing the lowering of the mule deer objective is the current state of the rangeland throughout Utah. Utah has been under extreme and exceptional drought conditions 2 of the last 3 years. These exceptional droughts leave lasting damaging to the range resources, and until we get more precipitation, the land may not be able to handle the deer numbers we used to have.

I have processed 9 different animals this year with my friends and families, and all of them have had little to no fat. Very poor body condition. Even a moderate winter may severely impact the animals ability to survive and reproduce.

Wildlife/Rangeland management is a dynamic science. Population objectives shouldn't be a static number. They should change with the landscape and climatic conditions. However, the UDWR isn't doing a good job in informing their constituents as to the reasons behind lowering the objective. I wish they would inform us the reasons behind the lowering of the objectives.
 
I'm sure it's justifiable. The range is in bad shape this year in Colorado as well. In fact I was just wrapping up a reclamation analysis for a project, and this year's drought and heat set the recovery projections for some sites back by more than a decade.

I've relaxed some since this thread started but it sucks watching the objectives drop, no habitat improvement, no population improvement... Then the objectives drop again. It's been a cycle for the 20 years I've been paying attention and rarely goes back the other way.
 
Am I missing something here? I thought population objective was set so that if population dropped below objective levels, by law the F&G would have to take steps to increase the population. That would mean habitat improvement and restoration, predator control, antlerless restrictions, etc. If that’s the case why would any of us support dropping the objective? It would just be an excuse for the F&G to do nothing. Am I wrong?
 
It may be blamed on range but that is just the current convenient excuse.
The bottom line is that the Mule Deer Plan states that if units are under objective tags must be cut. The state does not want to cut tags so they lower the objective to justify no further tag cuts. The Division will issue tags until there are zero deer left. They have no problem selling you a license to hunt pheasants unlimited and they will do the same with deer.
Units should be shut down and predators should be addressed. Outside the box thinking should and could take place to lessen the impact on units that are not closed. But it will not happen. Growing more deer and having a healthy herd is not the objective of the DWR and too many "sportsmen" cry opportunity and give them justification.
 
When you have the Utah Division of Wildlife Resource and the Wildlife Board who ask for input and then does not want to hear it because it is just "Coffee Shop Talk". You have nothing. I MEAN NOTHING!
 
Muley_73 said:
It may be blamed on range but that is just the current convenient excuse.
The bottom line is that the Mule Deer Plan states that if units are under objective tags must be cut. The state does not want to cut tags so they lower the objective to justify no further tag cuts. The Division will issue tags until there are zero deer left. They have no problem selling you a license to hunt pheasants unlimited and they will do the same with deer.
Units should be shut down and predators should be addressed. Outside the box thinking should and could take place to lessen the impact on units that are not closed. But it will not happen. Growing more deer and having a healthy herd is not the objective of the DWR and too many "sportsmen" cry opportunity and give them justification.
Click to expand...



I issued you, and a bunch of others for tag cuts a challenge in the spring.

If you are for tag cuts, CUT UP YOUR TAG, post a pic.

Amazingly I aint seen notva single pic of a cut up tag. Which means you want "other people" to not have oppurtunity. YOU and your circle will keep on keeping on.

I also extended the challenge further. Postcard pic of your cut up Expo tags as well. Or ate those deer not hurting?

Post a pic of you NOT putting in for LE deer either. I mean the deer are hurting, right?
 
Hoss, I remember that challenge and liked it, but took another approach.

My thoughts were (and still are) "self discipline without sacrifice".
Meaning, if I draw a GS deer tag, I will not harvest a buck unless it is mature.

My tag did not get notched.

I still got to enjoy hunting, and I more than likely saved an immature buck from being taken had my tag been in the hands of another.
 
You can achieve things without cutting tags.

Using round #'s

Unit A has 1000 tags.

50% go archery

30% go muzzy(Colorado rules. Open sights, granulated powder, no sabbots)

20% rifle


You can achieve a lot lower success rate, while not ostracizing even more hunters.


And add to that you can only apply GS or LE. Not both.

Super simple fixes, keeps oppurtunity up, stops point creep, helps increase deer #.
 
slamdunk said:
Hoss, I remember that challenge and liked it, but took another approach.

My thoughts were (and still are) "self discipline without sacrifice".
Meaning, if I draw a GS deer tag, I will not harvest a buck unless it is mature.

My tag did not get notched.

I still got to enjoy hunting, and I more than likely saved an immature buck from being taken had my tag been in the hands of another.
Click to expand...


In the 9 years I've done dedicated I have killed 2 deer.

So I 100% agree
 
Hoss, I still wish they would issue GS tags that specify an age class of buck you are hunting, or do like Wyoming does and have APR's within a unit.

For instance, I apply for a "Mature Buck Only" tag which legally binds me to that choice i made.

Wyoming has some APR's within some units where if you are hunting a certain area, you can only harvest what is outlined in the proclamation like "3 point or better" "4 point or better" "any buck" or even "any deer".

I would have to assume most hunters cannot discipline themselves and will harvest a yearling buck just to kill a deer if they cannot find an opportunity for a mature buck early in their hunt.
I'm definitely guilty of that in my younger years.
 
Muley_73 said:
It may be blamed on range but that is just the current convenient excuse.
The bottom line is that the Mule Deer Plan states that if units are under objective tags must be cut. The state does not want to cut tags so they lower the objective to justify no further tag cuts. The Division will issue tags until there are zero deer left. They have no problem selling you a license to hunt pheasants unlimited and they will do the same with deer.
Units should be shut down and predators should be addressed. Outside the box thinking should and could take place to lessen the impact on units that are not closed. But it will not happen. Growing more deer and having a healthy herd is not the objective of the DWR and too many "sportsmen" cry opportunity and give them justification.
Click to expand...
 
Hoss,
Myself and my dad both turned our tags back this year. As I’ve stated before I have killed 2 General season bucks in Utah in 13 years. And one was a badly wounded buck that I put out of his misery and put my tag on him. That being said I honesty don’t give a half a shiit of your opion or views on Utah’s wildlife, you’ve proven to be a clown too many times.
 
Muley_73 said:
Hoss,
Myself and my dad both turned our tags back this year. As I’ve stated before I have killed 2 General season bucks in Utah in 13 years. And one was a badly wounded buck that I put out of his misery and put my tag on him. That being said I honesty don’t give a half a shiit of your opion or views on Utah’s wildlife, you’ve proven to be a clown too many times.
Click to expand...


Wait. You want tag cuts, yet you put in for tags? PRICELESS.

Then you turned them back?

Why not cut them up? Oh, that's right. You'll ***** about the DWR and $$$$, but YOU weren't going to eat that $35.


Thanks for making my point. YOU WANT OTHERS TO NOT HUNT. Not you.

I could careless what you think. At least im not a hypocrite.
 
I was furious with the mule deer population cuts, I even contacted Slam Dunk on this and asked why the mule deer foundation is not jumping in and not letting this crap happen, he tried to help and thankful for trying, but nothing changed, Still don’t like it, and no Conservation group is asking why or putting foot down to say no to the DWR and asking bigger questions, or putting In a more solid plan. Frustrating, they spent one meeting and about 4 hours to put together a plan, way to sacrifice for the betterment of our deer.
 
Last edited:
Hoss,
Again your intelligence shines through. When you turn a tag back you do not get a refund, or a point. So it’s actually just a donation back to the DWR. Another perfect example of you running your mouth without even knowing reality. Changes are coming to some units I hope they will help but my guess is that the DWR will stop short of anything actually effective. So congrats on having some pull continual baseless tanturm throwing. You’re a perfect example of our current societies finest.
 
Last edited:
cantkillathing said:
I was furious with the mule deer population cuts, I even contacted Slam Dunk on this and asked why the mule deer foundation is not jumping in and not letting this crap happen, he tried to help and thankful for trying, but nothing changed, Still don’t like it, and no Conservation group is asking why or putting foot down to say no to the DWR and asking bigger questions, or putting In a more solid plan. Frustrating, they spent one meeting and about 4 hours to put together a plan, way to sacrifice for the betterment of our deer.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for other conservation groups and I can only be a messenger from the MDF, but I can assure you we are well aware of the issues with our deer herds and the complaints surrounding it.

The MDF has been taking steps to help address and improve our deer numbers through the numerous habitat restoration projects (especially in fire ravaged areas) predator study projects, highway game fences, etc, etc.
We actually have a habitat project this Saturday the 14th at the Santaquin WMA and need volunteers for anyone needing dedicated hunter hours or just want to help.
PM me for details.

As far as the announcement of lowering the objective goes, my understanding of that is they are not physically reducing the herd by 50k, only lowering the "objective goals" on paper to a more reachable and sustainable number.

Under the many current circumstances we are seeing throughout the state, especially with drought conditions and low fawn recruitment, it's extremely difficult to grow more deer, so the "objective" is lowered to more "match the hatch" and will increase as conditions improve.
 
Muley_73 said:
Hoss,
Again you’re intelligence shines through. When you turn a tag back you do not get a refund, or a point. So it’s actually just a donation back to the DWR. Another perfect example of you running your mouth without even knowing reality. Changes are coming to some units I hope they will help but my guess is that the DWR will stop short of anything actually effective. So congrats on having some pull continual baseless tanturm throwing. You’re a perfect example of our current societies finest.
Click to expand...




You said you put in for tags, even though your for tag cuts?
Muley_73 said:
Hoss,
Again you’re intelligence shines through. When you turn a tag back you do not get a refund, or a point. So it’s actually just a donation back to the DWR. Another perfect example of you running your mouth without even knowing reality. Changes are coming to some units I hope they will help but my guess is that the DWR will stop short of anything actually effective. So congrats on having some pull continual baseless tanturm throwing. You’re a perfect example of our current societies finest.
Click to expand...


Huh.

My "intellegence" told me to not accept your usual drivel as fact.

Surrendered permits and refunds
What happens if you obtain a permit and then realize you won't be able to use it? As long as your season hasn't started, you should consider surrendering the permit. It's an easy process, and it's important if you want to keep your bonus points or preference points and avoid a waiting period.

Depending on the type of permit you have, there are different rules for surrendering it and some situations that qualify for a refund or a variance.

So. We can only assume the reason you turn the tag back rather than just eat it is you want to keep points. Right? What other reason in the world would you go to the bother of filling out the surrender form and mailing it back? Why would you care about points?



As always. You talk out of every side of your mouth and hope no one has a memory longer than 30 seconds.

I wont ask how your kids did this year, I dont want you to have to admit they didnt boycott deer hunting either.

Nor will I ask you how Colorado was.

Finally I wont ask you how many deer the state can carry, because then youd have to break out that fantasy population number you've kicked around for years.

Ill let you get back to supporting $fw, but not being a member, but having neen a member, but opposed to them, while your supporting them, while nit supporting them.

The biggest issue this "society" has is the suspension of reality.

Reality is tge population of people in this state is skyrocketing. There is far less winter ground. There are 10x cars. We are, and always will became desert. Or forests have reached maturity, a vast swath completely dead. Its not 1950, there will never be the mass eradication of predators like that again. We are too effective at killing deer. We have elk.

But you go right ahead with how closing down hunting is good for hunting. Because that's the fantasy you live in.
 
Slam,
Think about your comment. Yes of course the drought has a negative effect on the herd. But why cut your goal objective? If the drought is hurting the herd the objective should not be changed. What should be affected is the other factors preventing the herd from reaching the objective goals. More predator controls to eliminate that pressure ( including human predators). More guzzlers? Improved habitat? More highway crossings? Address the issues we can control outside of the weather. Not cut the goal down to feel better about the end number that is madness.
Tell me this, where does the MDF stand? Do the support lowering objective? Because if the answer is yes that are ZERO value to sportsmen or any other lover of our mule deer. The number one goal and mission statement should be the growth and expansion of mule deer herds. Not the acceptance of lowering overall numbers. They should be the loudest voice screaming for other options other than lowering the goal of overall numbers in the state.
 
Slam.

Dont forget who your talking to and what he actually believes deer numbers once were.

Dont try to explain to him modern realities of predator management.

Dont try to explain that MOST habitat work in the state is off limits because of politics.

Dont try to explain drought.

Dont try to explain any of the realities of mule deer in 2020. Hes had that dillusional voice in ear for decades. Hes also never ventured north of Levan or south of cedar city. He has no idea why the state cant carry a larger population.
 
@M73

I have spoken to the state chair about this, and the person on the on the mule deer committee we have, and they both agree that this does line line up with our agenda and would get back with me after getting answers or explanation.

I am not happy about it, nor is anyone I've spoken to about it.

I will continue digging into it and will gladly relay information as I receive it.
 
M73
Are you insinuating the MDF has not addressed predator control, habitat, fencing and crossings, guzzlers, etc etc??
I can assure you that the state chair or our comittee members do NOT support deer tag increases.
 
The MDF dumps millions of sportsman's dollars back into OUR deer herds, but we can only voice our concerns, ideas and suggestions on how to get where we all want to be.

Don't shoot the messenger, I am only a missionary.
Screenshot_20201109-082745_Gallery.jpg
Screenshot_20201109-083303_Gallery.jpg
 
Here is a little history about the reduction specifically on the San Juan Elk Ridge Unit. About 10 years ago I was on the SE RAC board during that time on this specific unit the management plan was set for 8,000 deer the UDWR proposed that they need to reduce this to 6,500 because they didn't feel like they could reach this number, that the drought and habitat and such wasn't good, and the fawn survival was consistantly low. Sound familiar right, I drank the Koolaid and fell for this then. Fast forward to now, They have a meeting and say the same things and now want to reduce the number to 1000, So we have gone from 8000 at one point down to 1000. Anyone else see the problem with this?
 
Here is a little more issues I have with this plan, One is that the meeting was held and I asked for months that I be included in this meeting, I made sure that this meeting was going to happen so that sportsmen have a voice in this. DWR sends me a message and informs me that they put a sportsmen on the board and if I had concerns to talk with them. I figured they would hold a meeting and then get in contact with people that had an interest and then they would discuss the plan and meet again to finalize. But nope one meeting and that was it, no input from anyone that wasnt in the meeting. Also the meeting consisted of several RAC members and to me this should be a conflict, because they have already agreed to this plan and now will not make any changes the public might put into it. The RAC members should not be involved if they are going to have an open mind come RAC meetings. Am i the only one that sees a problem with this as well?
 
Please Let’s blow up there e mails !!!!!

[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],
[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],
[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],
[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],
[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],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
 
slamdunk said:
The MDF dumps millions of sportsman's dollars back into OUR deer herds, but we can only voice our concerns, ideas and suggestions on how to get where we all want to be.

Don't shoot the messenger, I am only a missionary.
View attachment 16985View attachment 16986
Click to expand...
Slam can you show or provide me the evidence that juniper removal in box elder county will help the population? In the last few years that country has changed a whole bunch do to the brush hog. Have the herds faired any better? I don't believe so. Where are they suppose to winter, what cover do they have left?
 
Hoss,
You stated I wasn't willing to eat the 35.00. Which I did eat. Then you flip it to points. I addressed your claims of eating 35.00. You changed the assumption after I responded...typical.

No CO for me or my kids this year. Son bought a point, Daughter bought a point, other son hunted on his dedicated permit. On the last day of the late rifle season he chose to shoot a stag buck that was aged at 6 years old, thus taking out a non producer from the herd, that was after passing younger bucks. I have ZERO issue with people filling tags. If you buy a tag you should shoot what you want. Thus the need to manage that number correctly. My wife burnt 15 points on an LE tag and did shoot a buck on the last afternoon, that was the second deer she has killed in 18 years.

All actually irrelevant when discussing the lowering of herd objectives on multiple units in the state. Again rather than focus on the betterment of the resource you choose to only focus on tag numbers. That is one of the major issues that prevents proper management of our deer herds. I have said time and again there are multiple options outside cutting tags. However as long as people like you scream loudest about tag numbers the Division will take the easy route and use voices like your own as justification.

I spent 75 plus days on the mountain and desert again this year. Hitting multiple areas and habit. Most of the areas that I hit are affected my human encroachment minimally if not zero in the past 50 years. Deer numbers are way down, not fantasy land, that is reality land. I spent all weekend in an area that has very very little impact from population growth and lose of winter range. It is an area that 30 years ago would hold 1200 plus deer (That number is from actual counts 30 years ago) over the weekend I counted 83 does and 6 bucks. That was covering ground and glassing hard. Spin those numbers anyway you want but the truth is that should be alarming and addressed! Don't believe my numbers...how about the Division biologist. One of the southern Utah units for this years count...as per the biologist there was not enough deer counted to enter in an actual count. That was after multiple attempts at getting a count. Again that is in a county that has probably increased in population less than 3000 people in the past 30 years. As far as never traveling north of Levan...I lived and hunted on the Cache for 20 years. Moved to Santaquin 2 years ago and have spent a lot of time in that area so again...a foolish assumption that is 100% incorrect.

The only fantasy numbers being kicked around are the fantasy numbers of deer we will actually have if we don't take strong measures to preserve our resource. That should be the number 1 focus. Hunting will be preserved just fine with species that are not currently struggling. But mule deer need a much different approach.
 
UtyoteKiller said:
Slam can you show or provide me the evidence that juniper removal in box elder county will help the population? In the last few years that country has changed a whole bunch do to the brush hog. Have the herds faired any better? I don't believe so. Where are they suppose to winter, what cover do they have left?

Juniper acts like an umbrella and can inhibit growth of sagebrush and other vital habitat crucial for muledeer.
By removing sections of densely populated juniper areas, it opens up cleared quadrants to grow additional and new habitat.
Most of these projects are done on winter range areas where it is needed the most.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Juniper acts like an umbrella and can inhibit growth of sagebrush and other vital habitat crucial for muledeer.
By removing sections of densely populated juniper areas, it opens up cleared quadrants to grow additional and new habitat.
Most of these projects are done on winter range areas where it is needed the most.

I realize this is not "proof", i can only provide why it is done all around the west in multiple states.
 
While I agree with your first sentence, what is the thought behind totally stripping it from portions of the landscape all together, leaving no wind block/barrier? I've never seen so few deer and so few trees.
 
UtyoteKiller said:
While I agree with your first sentence, what is the thought behind totally stripping it from portions of the landscape all together, leaving no wind block/barrier? I've never seen so few deer and so few trees.
Click to expand...
I don't have an explanation for you, I've not been involved on any projects there, nor do I know who was in charge of that particular project.
 
rubucky said:
Am I missing something here? I thought population objective was set so that if population dropped below objective levels, by law the F&G would have to take steps to increase the population. That would mean habitat improvement and restoration, predator control, antlerless restrictions, etc. If that’s the case why would any of us support dropping the objective? It would just be an excuse for the F&G to do nothing. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
you are absolutely correct...
 
Muley_73 said:
Hoss,
You stated I wasn't willing to eat the 35.00. Which I did eat. Then you flip it to points. I addressed your claims of eating 35.00. You changed the assumption after I responded...typical.

No CO for me or my kids this year. Son bought a point, Daughter bought a point, other son hunted on his dedicated permit. On the last day of the late rifle season he chose to shoot a stag buck that was aged at 6 years old, thus taking out a non producer from the herd, that was after passing younger bucks. I have ZERO issue with people filling tags. If you buy a tag you should shoot what you want. Thus the need to manage that number correctly. My wife burnt 15 points on an LE tag and did shoot a buck on the last afternoon, that was the second deer she has killed in 18 years.

All actually irrelevant when discussing the lowering of herd objectives on multiple units in the state. Again rather than focus on the betterment of the resource you choose to only focus on tag numbers. That is one of the major issues that prevents proper management of our deer herds. I have said time and again there are multiple options outside cutting tags. However as long as people like you scream loudest about tag numbers the Division will take the easy route and use voices like your own as justification.

I spent 75 plus days on the mountain and desert again this year. Hitting multiple areas and habit. Most of the areas that I hit are affected my human encroachment minimally if not zero in the past 50 years. Deer numbers are way down, not fantasy land, that is reality land. I spent all weekend in an area that has very very little impact from population growth and lose of winter range. It is an area that 30 years ago would hold 1200 plus deer (That number is from actual counts 30 years ago) over the weekend I counted 83 does and 6 bucks. That was covering ground and glassing hard. Spin those numbers anyway you want but the truth is that should be alarming and addressed! Don't believe my numbers...how about the Division biologist. One of the southern Utah units for this years count...as per the biologist there was not enough deer counted to enter in an actual count. That was after multiple attempts at getting a count. Again that is in a county that has probably increased in population less than 3000 people in the past 30 years. As far as never traveling north of Levan...I lived and hunted on the Cache for 20 years. Moved to Santaquin 2 years ago and have spent a lot of time in that area so again...a foolish assumption that is 100% incorrect.

The only fantasy numbers being kicked around are the fantasy numbers of deer we will actually have if we don't take strong measures to preserve our resource. That should be the number 1 focus. Hunting will be preserved just fine with species that are not currently struggling. But mule deer need a much different approach.
Click to expand...


That was quite a book you wrote. All of which sounds good.

But none of it changes the fact THAT YOU are calling for tag cuts, yet YOU put in for a tag. Then surrendered it, meaning you did keep a point, and depending on your reason may have gotten a refund.

If you believe cutting tags is an answer, which you do, then you DONT PUT IN. You dont tirn them back after you scouted and didnt see what you wanted.


Second. Their is cutting edge research being done on the Cache. It counters much of what your constantly spouting. One of those things is that BUCKS ARE NOT POPULATION creators.
You want herds, and in fact research is showing BIGGER BUCKS, you want FAT DOES. All the feed a does loses because of completion hurts her ability to produce good healthy fawns.

Next, continual and random predator killing only increases the number of predators, especially coyotes. Clearing the area prior to fawning works. Killing them in july, not so much.

Finally. We have climatic issues. Hate to be the Al Gore, but the green wave our deer/elk ride in the spring, isn't happening, or is happening too fast, meaning regardless of how many 3 points we dont shoot, we aint growing a herd.

You can shut down any unit, or the whole state. The problems will be there when you open it up. You've just lost hunters.

Which we did. Which just cost us support and votes and money. Cutting hunters by 2/3 didnt improve the herds one bit.

Nor does pretending that we managed deer in the golden age. We DID NOT. We managed the state for sheep and cows. Some benefit to deer, and at the expense of elk, were accidental, not intentional.

I called my shot in the spring. I knew uoud draw a tag. I knew Bess would. I knew the other shutdown guys would.

Ill call it now. You will again next year.
 
Wow! That's all I can say about the down-shifting objectives.

I know when I lower my standards, I don't feel better but maybe they can. Yikes!
 
Cutting deer tags doesn't save bucks, it only reduces the number of hunters in the field and therefore raises the success rates a smidgen, but the same amount of bucks will still be harvested.
(Taking one person out of the field just allows the next person to shoot that same buck.
It may save a few back country low pressured bucks, but hardly measurable.)

The only way reducing tags would impact the actual herd would be if there was a 100% hunter success rate, and in Utah's GS units, i believe the average is only around 20ish percent.

Correct me if I am wrong please
 
slamdunk said:
Cutting deer tags doesn't save bucks, it only reduces the number of hunters in the field and therefore raises the success rates a smidgen, but the same amount of bucks will still be harvested.
(Taking one person out of the field just allows the next person to shoot that same buck.
It may save a few back country low pressured bucks, but hardly measurable.)

The only way reducing tags would impact the actual herd would be if there was a 100% hunter success rate, and in Utah's GS units, i believe the average is only around 20ish percent.

Correct me if I am wrong please
Click to expand...
Thats exactly what I tell people when we ask to reduce tags, that it will only increase success rates for those with tags, you would have to cut over 50% of tags to make a difference, I doubt anyone wants to do this, but the DWR has admitted that going to 3 point or better for a couple years is a bandaide and quick fix but not long term benefit.
 
I’m no expert, but I don’t believe a cut in tags is needed to increase the deer herds. It seems there’s always been enough bucks around to breed the does. What I believe is needed, is a plan to protect the breeding stock and increase fawn survival rates. I’m not sure if you’re all seeing what I see, but what I see on is very few deer and does without fawns or only a single fawn, and this is in areas where there seems to be great summer and winter range and this trend seems to be getting worse. In the way distant past I heard the F&G claim a deer herd could increase by more than 150% in a year due to most does having twin fawns. I’m not sure if this is true but I’ve personally seen deer herds rebound remarkably after massive die offs. As an example, during the winter of 83-84, N-Utah had an approximate 80% winter kill. This included bucks, does and fawns. Back then I was traveling, between Wyoming, and North and Southern Utah and it was unbelievable the amount of deer which perished. And in the spring, driving From Kemmerer Wyo and Randolph the stench of rotting carcasses was almost unbearable. That fall, deer were hard to find and where we used to see 100 head a day we now saw 6-10. Fast forward 3 years later and we were back up to seeing significant deer numbers. Keep in mind this was during Utah’s magnificent 2 point era when mature bucks were hard to find and they sold approximately 175,00 tags a year and I think you even got an extra tag with an archery license. I think back in those days, the F&G didn’t actually manage deer herds to increase numbers they managed herds to reduce numbers to prevent depredation. As an example, back in the 80,s East Canyon still had a two doe permit area. I also heard a quote, I believe from a biologist from Colorado... I’m paraphrasing, who said “they actually had to learn how to manage deer to increase populations, because in the past, deer herds were so dynamic that despite massive die offs, if left on their own in a few years they would rebound to the point of exceeding carrying capacity.” I believe nowadays, in some areas deer herds are being artificially constrained especially in areas where range conditions look good. I believe predators are currently a significant factor and I know that when I personally noticed a big change in the deer population was back in the early to mid 90’s when I also saw a large increase in predators. Back then I had an Idaho limited entry deer tag and mid hunt trip into town for gas, which was about a 30 mile round trip produced 6 coyotes and another time on a November muzzy hunt in a different area, a short trip into town in the dark we saw 3 Dogs and only 2 jack rabbits. keep in mind, back in the 70’s when I was young we saw very few coyotes. That was when fur prices were high and there were lots of night hunters. I’ve also seen this same thing in Colorado and Wyoming. Also a mountain close to where I live, in the last 3 years has seen a significant drop in the deer population including some impressive bucks which strangely enough coincided with numerous lions being picked up on trail cameras. What’s funny about this is the deer on the mountain are disappearing but they’re increasing in the surrounding urban areas.
I know there are many things which affect low deer populations such as habitat, loss, range conditions, competition from elk and predators and we can argue about what the cause is, but I think we can all agree that we need a plan to increase deer herds and not just drop the population objective... just my 2 cents.
 
rubucky said:
I’m no expert, but I don’t believe a cut in tags is needed to increase the deer herds. It seems there’s always been enough bucks around to breed the does. What I believe is needed, is a plan to protect the breeding stock and increase fawn survival rates. I’m not sure if you’re all seeing what I see, but what I see on is very few deer and does without fawns or only a single fawn, and this is in areas where there seems to be great summer and winter range and this trend seems to be getting worse. In the way distant past I heard the F&G claim a deer herd could increase by more than 150% in a year due to most does having twin fawns. I’m not sure if this is true but I’ve personally seen deer herds rebound remarkably after massive die offs. As an example, during the winter of 83-84, N-Utah had an approximate 80% winter kill. This included bucks, does and fawns. Back then I was traveling, between Wyoming, and North and Southern Utah and it was unbelievable the amount of deer which perished. And in the spring, driving From Kemmerer Wyo and Randolph the stench of rotting carcasses was almost unbearable. That fall, deer were hard to find and where we used to see 100 head a day we now saw 6-10. Fast forward 3 years later and we were back up to seeing significant deer numbers. Keep in mind this was during Utah’s magnificent 2 point era when mature bucks were hard to find and they sold approximately 175,00 tags a year and I think you even got an extra tag with an archery license. I think back in those days, the F&G didn’t actually manage deer herds to increase numbers they managed herds to reduce numbers to prevent depredation. As an example, back in the 80,s East Canyon still had a two doe permit area. I also heard a quote, I believe from a biologist from Colorado... I’m paraphrasing, who said “they actually had to learn how to manage deer to increase populations, because in the past, deer herds were so dynamic that despite massive die offs, if left on their own in a few years they would rebound to the point of exceeding carrying capacity.” I believe nowadays, in some areas deer herds are being artificially constrained especially in areas where range conditions look good. I believe predators are currently a significant factor and I know that when I personally noticed a big change in the deer population was back in the early to mid 90’s when I also saw a large increase in predators. Back then I had an Idaho limited entry deer tag and mid hunt trip into town for gas, which was about a 30 mile round trip produced 6 coyotes and another time on a November muzzy hunt in a different area, a short trip into town in the dark we saw 3 Dogs and only 2 jack rabbits. keep in mind, back in the 70’s when I was young we saw very few coyotes. That was when fur prices were high and there were lots of night hunters. I’ve also seen this same thing in Colorado and Wyoming. Also a mountain close to where I live, in the last 3 years has seen a significant drop in the deer population including some impressive bucks which strangely enough coincided with numerous lions being picked up on trail cameras. What’s funny about this is the deer on the mountain are disappearing but they’re increasing in the surrounding urban areas.
I know there are many things which affect low deer populations such as habitat, loss, range conditions, competition from elk and predators and we can argue about what the cause is, but I think we can all agree that we need a plan to increase deer herds and not just drop the population objective... just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...


Can someone point me to where a GS unit is better today than it was pre 90k hunters?

Seriously. We whacked 2/3 of our hunters to save the mule deer.

Is there evidence it worked? Dont tell me LE units. Unless you support only a few thousand deer hunters per year.
 
Unless we are willing to address ALL issues impacting our herd numbers, including eliminating public grazing, I really don’t care anymore. If they wanna shoot the Shiitt out of them, I’ll participate. If they wanna cut more tags every year and think that’ll fix the problem, I’ll be forced to participate in that as well. We’ve all been sold the lie that these new management tactics will solve the problem (option 2), and 9 years later, all that’s taken place, is limited more opportunities than what we had to start with.

im very opposed to public grazing in general, but when one of their claims for low deer numbers is fat retention going into the winter when range conditions is poor, I get really irritated. Our wildlife needs to come first. If they are struggling to live on the unit with the current conditions, take away the mouths they are competing with that are *optional* to the resource. There’s no reason why private parties should benefit from public resources, when the native wildlife is struggling in to sustain a healthy population number. Don’t lower objectives UNTIL you eliminate outside factors in range conditions.

and don’t jump in and tell me that cattle grazing is beneficial to our land and helps prevent fires. They grazed the **** out of the Nebo for years and that thing went up in flames like no one could have guessed. Yep, worked great there! SMH
 
Why is there only 42 people watching this rac mess? Nothing but a bunch of lies and terrible ideas. Our voices are not being heard.
 
Why do they keep taking about elk plan and deer plan and then keep trying to change it? You set the plan for x amount of years. Don't change it in the middle trying for a bandaid, do the right thing first!
 
Funny how Covey states its biological why they reduce population numbers, but again 8-10 years ago when they reduced the San Juan from 8000 to 6500 it was biological, so why has it changed?
 
The Deer Numbers that the Dwr claims they have at the present time are one of our major problems. I would guess that everyone on here would say they do not believe the deer numbers are correct on the unit they hunt. If that is the case, then the deer numbers in the state are already way below the 50,000 they want to decrease. Any person who has been out in the field and walked miles of ground can honestly say the deer numbers are drastically down. So the question is how do you increase the deer herd when the population is much lower than the DWR leads us to believe? The unit I hunt is well below the numbers they estimate (Beaver). Most businesses have independent auditors that come in an validate numbers. The Dwr is in the deer numbers business, but yet they will not listen to the common sense hunter who spends hours and many miles covering ground, then tries to tell them that the deer numbers are wrong.
 
I spent alot of time in the field for the last 3 years chasing deer( I had the DH tag)it has dropped drastically the numbers are way down but what i have notice in those 3 years there has been no bucks left after the muzzleloader hunt.

What is everyone thoughts on scopes on muzzleloaders?
 
Elkslayer2015 said:
I spent alot of time in the field for the last 3 years chasing deer( I had the DH tag)it has dropped drastically the numbers are way down but what i have notice in those 3 years there has been no bucks left after the muzzleloader hunt.

What is everyone thoughts on scopes on muzzleloaders?
Click to expand...
I love the muzzy hunt and yes I shoot a scoped Knight Extreme.
But......I would be tickled pink to see it strictly "traditional style only" hunting ?
 
grizzly said:
Ummm, Serengeti of the West!

That's what they keep telling us.

We give these groups more tags and money than every western state COMBINED.

Does anybody think our herds are better than every state combined? Are we better than even the majority of states? Are we better than any of them?

Where are the results? Where's the payday?
Click to expand...
Spot on!!!
 
Elkslayer2015 said:
I spent alot of time in the field for the last 3 years chasing deer( I had the DH tag)it has dropped drastically the numbers are way down but what i have notice in those 3 years there has been no bucks left after the muzzleloader hunt.

What is everyone thoughts on scopes on muzzleloaders?
Click to expand...
I dunno that I’d go as far to say that there’s no bucks left after the muzzy. Lots of people don’t struggle to locate or kill bucks every year on the rifle hunts, myself included. Opening morning this year I saw around 15 bucks before 8:00. They are there. Just a lot more tuned up.

pull all scopes off all muzzleloaders and other firearms. I love long range shooting for centerfire and muzzy rifles, however it’s too effective. Had I not been allowed a scope the last 3 muzzleloader tags I’ve had, I’m certain at least 2 of those bucks would have lived past opening morning. The other I could have got closer if I wanted to, but didn’t need to. No scopes will allow many many more bucks carry over every year. Yes it would suck for all of us. But if we are truly concerned about the deer, we need to manage ourselves as well.
 
deerkiller said:
I dunno that I’d go as far to say that there’s no bucks left after the muzzy. Lots of people don’t struggle to locate or kill bucks every year on the rifle hunts, myself included. Opening morning this year I saw around 15 bucks before 8:00. They are there. Just a lot more tuned up.

pull all scopes off all muzzleloaders and other firearms. I love long range shooting for centerfire and muzzy rifles, however it’s too effective. Had I not been allowed a scope the last 3 muzzleloader tags I’ve had, I’m certain at least 2 of those bucks would have lived past opening morning. The other I could have got closer if I wanted to, but didn’t need to. No scopes will allow many many more bucks carry over every year. Yes it would suck for all of us. But if we are truly concerned about the deer, we need to manage ourselves as well.
Click to expand...
Very true indeed!
 
Question how many of you submitted letters or responses to RAC members? Do you feel like your being heard? Or do you hear all the same verbiage that we all just need to be educated more by the DWR, that we don’t understand, that biology is always best. It’s the same song and dance. It’s frustrating to me to watch the San Juan Elkridge deer unit suffer and suffer and no one will put a fire to the DWR to do something about it. I wish I would have been involved with the RAC before I was on the board, then my eyes would have been more clear on how the public feels about the RAC, and would have listened more myself. I don’t know how much more clear that a LE deer unit is about gone and no one will put fire to the DWR. How many of you would be pissed if you General Season unit had 600 deer on it?
 
I have written letters, talked at RAC meetings and still do not seem to be heard. The deer numbers are in the tank, yet the dwr comes up with this ratio that they keep saying year after year will grow the deer herd. Fast forward from 10 years ago, or even a year ago when they said they had more deer on the mountains of Utah than any other year in history. Now they want to cut the total by 50,000 deer statewide. Do we even have 50,000 deer in Utah?

I wonder if it would be possible that the hunters and sportsman who are on the ground may actually know a little more about the total number of deer in our Utah Mountains. The number of deer they estimate is so far off that any kind of decisions they make will not help. They cut a given number of tags each year based on the total deer THEY say are on a unit. The trouble is, the starting numbers THEY say are not even close. The deer herd is in dire condition, yet only small changes are made if any.

We have all these deer units in Utah so why can't they take the suggestions we give and try them in some of these units that are hurting so much? Are there any units that are successful that we could pattern or are all units in dire need of help?
 
Technology is awesome, but sure hurts the wildlife population.

Scoped muzzleloaders, 1000 yard rifles with way to many hunters thinking they can do it and todays archery equipment and hunters shooting 90 yards plus at animals.

Back in the good old days of open sight rifles, if you could not see horns with naked eye it was not big enough.

Technology, equipment, scopes and ego's sure have the deer at a disadvantage!!!
 
BurntRidge said:
Utah doesn’t know how to manage any species
Click to expand...
That’s not true! We have a flourishing herd of inbred retarded wild horses, boat loads of common and mirror carp, strong numbers of euro doves, starlings and sparrows... and it seems like the turkeys are expanding at a rapid pace as well!

let’s not forget that utah manages cattle pretty good as well. They seem to care more about creating feed and water sources for the cattle grazing on public land than the wildlife that lives there.
 
Elkslayer2015 said:
I spent alot of time in the field for the last 3 years chasing deer( I had the DH tag)it has dropped drastically the numbers are way down but what i have notice in those 3 years there has been no bucks left after the muzzleloader hunt.

What is everyone thoughts on scopes on muzzleloaders?
Click to expand...


I dh

I 100% supporting Utah adopting Colorado muzzy rules.

No scope, no sabots, granular powder
 
Cutting tag's won't do a bit of good

1992 there was 213,937 permits sold
1993 there was 140,701 permits sold
1994 there was 86,121 permits sold

And it has stayed in that range till now 85,000 ish permits! there was 3 years that it hit 100,000 but it drop back down 85,000 ish

After looking at this the DWR did there part and but it's not bouncing back WHY?
 
Elkslayer2015 said:
Cutting tag's won't do a bit of good

1992 there was 213,937 permits sold
1993 there was 140,701 permits sold
1994 there was 86,121 permits sold

And it has stayed in that range till now 85,000 ish permits! there was 3 years that it hit 100,000 but it drop back down 85,000 ish

After looking at this the DWR did there part and but it's not bouncing back WHY?
Click to expand...
Great post!
This has been brought up by a few people before, but we are still scratching our heads.

Cutting buck tags does not save deer, it only changes the success rates and how much dust you'll be eating.
Lowering 500 tags off the Beaver unit will not save 500 bucks, it won't even save 100 or even 50.
Success rates are simply too low.

We have reduced 100k tags, yet still have 100k less bucks (hypothetical numbers of course)

Cutting doe tags creates deer.

We have almost half the permits and hunters in 2020 as we did in the early 90's, yet arguably far less deer in almost every GS unit.

One thing we all agree on is today's efficiency.
Weaponry is light years ahead of what it was 30 years ago.
Accessibility is superior to 20 years ago with our transportation toys.
More hard-core hunters (including guides and Outfitters) these days, thanks to social media and the hunger to create names for themselves for the sake of money, popularity or "follows" & "likes".

So are those types of hunters to blame for declining bucks?
No, but I do believe they skim the cream off the top of the milk, yes absolutely.
(I still very much disagree on some of their tactics on our public lands, but that's a whole different topic.)

The average Joe hunter has more impact on bucks than the "elitists" by far.

I still truly believe our bigger problem is habitat issues, especially on winter ranges.
Extremely high vehicle collision mortalities with more and faster cars on our roads today.
Poor spring and summer feed conditions due to several years of less than par water and overgrazing of free range livestock when feed conditions are poor.
Predators.
Predators.
Predators.
Did I mention Predators?
Low fawn recruitment and everything mentioned effects that.
 
Last edited:
The same drought and habitat issues which affect deer also affect elk and their numbers don’t seem to be declining despite liberalized hunting licenses and hunters afield. Remember Dr. Montcrief PhD UW has published extensively on the overlap of deer and elk using the same forage and same winter ranges in the Wyoming Range. If you want deer numbers to increase you have to go after Cow elk aggressively.
 
What's My Thoughts on Scopes on MuzzleLoaders?

Bows that Are Lethal at 100+ Yards!

Rifles Wounding Ssshhitt at 1,000+ Yards!

It's Every Weapon Type!

Not Just Scopes on SmokePoles!





Elkslayer2015 said:
I spent alot of time in the field for the last 3 years chasing deer( I had the DH tag)it has dropped drastically the numbers are way down but what i have notice in those 3 years there has been no bucks left after the muzzleloader hunt.

What is everyone thoughts on scopes on muzzleloaders?
Click to expand...
 
When All Of You Accept the Fact that there is 50+ F'N Reasons Why Our Herds are in PISS POOR Shape with PISS POOR Management/Managing Big Game For Money being the # 1 Problem maybe Some Day You'll see the Light!
 
highfastflyer said:
The same drought and habitat issues which affect deer also affect elk and their numbers don’t seem to be declining despite liberalized hunting licenses and hunters afield. Remember Dr. Montcrief PhD UW has published extensively on the overlap of deer and elk using the same forage and same winter ranges in the Wyoming Range. If you want deer numbers to increase you have to go after Cow elk aggressively.


For whatever it's worth...

Elk Nutrition And Home Range | Rangelands | USU Extension

extension.usu.edu extension.usu.edu
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I've Seen it with My Own Eyes!

PISS POOR Management Since 1972!

48 F'N Years & Counting!

I Expect it All to Be Fixed by 2021!
 
Dont you know bess we need more hunts for these critters, that get to much rest, if we can push them even harder we might be able to push more muscle on them and less fat content
 
Im sorry folks but the biggest problems with our wildlife, and I think deer, is we hunt way to much, we have way to many days in the field pushing deer around. I doubt there is 1 week in the year that they are not pressured. In January we are out looking at them looking for the best shed hunt area, also hounds chasing lions which will chase deer, by February people our out looking for sheds, by march/April shed season/ Bear hunt moving things around. May/June/july end of shed and bear, but know we are setting up game cameras all of the mountain, scouting. August/September/October we are hunting them. November/December/January we have cow elk hunts going on that subsequently we chase deer around as well. I wonder when these deer get a rest, its no wonder they are becoming urban deer at least they can rest in the city..
 
Hey Bess did you listen to the NE RAC board, there is a guy on there that says we are dumb, and all the old RAC and WB, and us older people just dont get it, not exact words but about right...someone needs to check his koolaid
 

Similar threads

H
Significant restrictions are being proposed in 2024 Novembers RAC's
5 6 7
Replies
652
Views
7k
Bux n Dux
Bux n Dux
JakeH
Nov 2024 RAC & Wildlife Board meetings
Replies
3
Views
333
Ac300win
Ac300win
A
For Trade Prime Nexus 4
Replies
3
Views
181
alyuaz
A

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_4370.PNG
KIMG0088~2.JPG
IMG-2380.jpg
D0069731-8AFF-40AD-BA9C-B987B73698CB.jpeg
IMG_20220919_132340263_HDR.jpg
201D676B-E2A2-4BD1-A6C1-F5BF7EC74376.jpeg
IMG_2331 (1) - Copy.JPG
2012blacktailbuckcloseup.jpg
Screenshot_20221224_132727_Facebook.jpg
Screenshot_20191022-195002.png
IMG-0026.jpg
IMG_8709.jpeg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom