ID deer plan up for review

[Salmonfg]

Final Mule Deer Plan Ready for Review

The final Mule Deer Plan is complete and ready for public review.

Idaho Fish and Game has completed a final statewide Mule Deer Management Plan for consideration during the Idaho Fish and Game Commission?s March 5-7 meeting in Boise. The final plan was developed after soliciting public comments on a draft during November and December. Numerous changes were made in the final plan, many to address public comments made during review of the initial draft.

Once adopted by the commission, the final version of the plan would guide mule deer management for the next 10 years. The plan would not set hunting seasons, but it would provide management goals and strategies for how Fish and Game would manage mule deer. The Mule Deer Initiative is an integral component of the draft plan, focusing specialized management efforts in areas of Idaho where mule deer are declining.

The plan includes how Fish and Game intends to provide the variety of hunting opportunities desired by Idaho hunters, and it covers the important issues of habitat protection and enhancement, population monitoring, law enforcement, and the recruitment and retention of hunters.

The final plan is available for review on the Fish and Game Website at http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/public. Written comments also may be made to [email protected] attention Mule Deer Plan.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Regional Wildlife Manager

 

[Outdoordan]

Wish it were more specific as to which units would be "high quality" units with better buck/doe ratios. It breaks things down into groups of units, but stops with general info there. It still is a great and useful tool, and outlines actions necessary in each group, to increase overall deer populations.

 

[brymoore]

I've quickly read the plan. Is the general goal to have hunters pick a deer unit similar to elk? I think most hunters are OK with that. My fear (and probably other hunters) is that the F&G will turn too many units into draws, thus reducing general hunt opportunites. Please do not use Utah as your model!

 

[7mmgilbert]

I had the same thought when i read it. The zone thing for elk seems to be OK and if done right it could work for deer. Near the end of the report when they are showing population objectives it appears for the most part to be broken into units simmilar to elk zones. I just hope when they split general/quality/high quality units they make the high quality units in places that have genetics for lots of BIG bucks

 

[Salmonfg]

The units/seasons will be part of the season setting process developed through public meetings this month and as approved by the Commission first week of March. Regional options and info on public meeting dates/places/times should be posted on the IDFG website within the next few days. Salmon Region meetings (open house format) are scheduled for
20 Feb, Salmon IDFG office, 4-7 pm
21 Feb, Challis USFS office, 4-7 pm

You can check with your local office for meetings near you.

Four initial options have been developed for Salmon Region (some from agency staff, some from public input). First 2 options are designed to meet quality criteria established in the state plan by altering deer population structure.

Controlled any buck deer hunts, Units 30A (30 permits) and 37A (50 permits), Oct 10-31. These hunts would displace approximately 130 hunters from 30A and 80 hunters from 37A and invoke landowner appreciation and outfitter allocation permits (where existing outfitters operate).

General spike-only (both sides) buck season, Oct 10-24; followed by controlled any buck Oct 25-31, Unit 30A (10 permits) and 37A (20 permits). (Assumes approximately 50% of current hunters will choose not to hunt general season. Would invoke landowner appreciation and outfitter allocation permits (where existing outfitters operate).

Last 2 options are designed to provide some hunt experiences in the quality range, but not directly alter population structure.

Controlled any buck hunts with very low number of permits, Nov 10-30 (maintain current general season), Unit 30 (15 permits) Unit 36a (25 permits). Alternate units could be selected and/or hunts could be rotated around the region.

Controlled any buck hunts with unlimited permits, Oct 25-31 (maintain current general season), Units 30 36a. Alternate units could be selected and/or hunts could be rotated around the region.

Of course, other options are possible as well.

You can provide input at the regional level at least 3 ways:
Attend a local meeting.
Comment through the website.
Contact your local office directly.

Please take the time to provide input. This is strictly a social issue (biologically, somewhere around 5 bucks/100 does is adequate), so the social tradeoffs and public input are critical to trying to meet the desires of our diverse hunters. I urge all to consider the wide array of social impacts when reviewing options, including hunting opportunity, hunter displacement, traditional hunting areas and groups, youth hunting, etc.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[Salmonfg]

Salmon region public input to date suggests hunters would accept providing/managing 1-2 units for quality. Quality includes several components: hunter density, proportion of mature bucks (% 4 points in harvest), buck ratios, and hunter success. Given the human population distribution in the region, options were developed to try to provide 1 unit in the northern part of the region and 1 in the southern part.

Several criteria were considered in developing the options/locations. One was potential for producing mature bucks (a combination of escapement [avoid harvest long enough to reach maturity], habitat quality, and genetics; in that order). Based on harvest data in this region, bucks regularly reach the age of maximum potential antler development. Managing genetics on a free-ranging population is not feasible (probably not even possible). That leaves habitat as a primary driver; an extremely complex issue. The short answer is that habitat potential was definitely considered, but it is important to recognize that much of Salmon Region sits on granitic soils and winters are relatively long and hard (compared to southwest Idaho for example), so the potential to produce "lots of BIG bucks" is limited compared to some other areas.

Other important considerations in developing options were the current number of hunters (to assess how many hunters would be displaced to adjacent units or quit hunting), current motorized travel management regulations (potential for meeting objectives should be higher in units where the IDFG motorized vehicle rule is in place), and hunter acccess (amount of public land/access).


Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[3bigelkid]

Tom,
First of all, thank you for your years of effort in keeping everyone that visits this website updated. I know not eveyone checks the fishs and game website to get all of this info so your comments are always welcome even if you don't get a lot of replys on some subjects.
I do have a quick question for you. FOr some reason I cannot find the date and time for the southeast regions (Pocatello)public hearing on seasons. I know it is next week but I am not sure on the date? If you happen to have that info could you please post it. Thanks Jake

 

[Salmonfg]

These are from a DRAFT news release that will be out later today.
I'll post the final news release ASAP.

Clearwater Region, all meetings from 5 to 7 p.m. ? 208-799-5010

? Tuesday, February 19: Idaho Fish and Game, 3316 16th Street, Lewiston.

? Wednesday, February 20: Fairground Exhibit Building, 1021 Harold, Moscow.

? Thursday, February 21: Senior Citizens Center, County Road, Grangeville.

Upper Snake Region, all meetings start at 7 p.m. ? 208-525-7290.

? Tuesday, February 19: Mackay High School Library, Mackay.

? Wednesday, February 20: Idaho Fish and Game, Idaho Falls.

? Thursday, February 21: Madison Middle School Media Center, Rexburg.

Southeast Region, all meetings will begin at 7 p.m. ? 208-232-4703.

? Monday, February 18: Malad Senior Center, Main Street, Malad.

? Tuesday, February 19: Oregon Trail Center, Montpelier.

? Wednesday, February 20: Wood River Room, ISU Student Union, Pocatello.

? Thursday, February 21: Larson Sand Library, Preston.

Salmon Region, both meetings from 4 to 7 p.m. ? 208-756-2271.

? Wednesday, February 20, Idaho Fish and Game, 99 U.S. Highway 93 N., Salmon.

? Thursday, February 21, U.S. Forest Service Challis-Yankee Fork Ranger District, U.S. Highway 93, Challis.

Southwest Region, all meetings from 4 to 7 p.m. ? 208-465-8465 in Nampa or

208-634- 8137 in McCall.

? Tuesday, February 19: U.S. Forest Service, 2092 U.S. Highway 95, Council.

? Tuesday, February 26: Weiser High School Library, 690 Indianhead Road, Weiser.

? Wednesday, February 27: Idaho Fish and Game, 555 Deinhard Lane, McCall.

Panhandle Region ? 208-769-1414.

? Saturday, February 23: 8 a.m., St. Maries Elks, St. Maries.

? Wednesday, February 27: (location TBD in Sandpoint or Bonners Ferry)

? Thursday, February 28: 7 p.m. at Idaho Fish and Game, Coeur d?Alene.

Magic Valley Region, meetings from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. ? 208-324-4359.

? Wednesday, February 27: Idaho Fish and Game, 319 South 417 East, Jerome.

? Thursday, February 28; Burley City Hall at 1401 Overland Ave., Burley.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[3bigelkid]

Tom,
Thank you for the info.
Jake

 

[Salmonfg]

Season options/proposals for 2008 big game were just posted on the IDFG website at http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/public/
Please note most regions are still conducting surveys and analyzing data, so some items will change (initial proposals were submitted late last week).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[Salmonfg]

Here's the full news release
Public Meetings on Proposed Big Game Rules

Proposed changes to the 2008 big game seasons will be the focus of several upcoming open-house public meetings hosted by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

Public comments and suggestions will be forwarded to the Idaho Fish and Game Commissioners for their consideration in setting seasons at their meeting March 5-7 in Boise. Commissioners are expected to adopt a proposed Mule Deer Management Plan and a proposed Wolf Population Management Plan, and they will set big game seasons for the 2008 hunting seasons.

Details of proposed changes are available for review and comment on the Fish and Game Website at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/public. A detailed agenda for the March commission meeting will be available on the Website at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/about/commission/schedule.cfm.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to publish a final rule, removing wolves in Idaho from the federal endangered species list, in the Federal Register February 28, and Idaho would assume full management March 28. Litigation over delisting, however, is expected to affect timelines ? perhaps delaying the process for years.

If the commission adopts the wolf management plan, proposed 2008 wolf hunting rules would be available for public review and comment in April and May. The commission would set 2008 wolf hunting seasons in May. Wolf hunting rules brochures also would become available in July.

Details on draft wolf hunting seasons would available in April. General considerations would include statewide population goals, season structure and methods of take.

Interested individuals can discuss the proposed changes, the wolf plan, and the mule deer plan and provide written comment at the meetings listed here:

Clearwater Region, all meetings from 5 to 7 p.m. ? 208-799-5010

? Tuesday, February 19: Idaho Fish and Game, 3316 16th Street, Lewiston.

? Wednesday, February 20: Fairground Exhibit Building, 1021 Harold, Moscow.

? Thursday, February 21: Senior Citizens Center, County Road, Grangeville.

Upper Snake Region, all meetings start at 7 p.m. ? 208-525-7290.

? Tuesday, February 19: Mackay High School Library, Mackay.

? Wednesday, February 20: Idaho Fish and Game, Idaho Falls.

? Thursday, February 21: Madison Middle School Media Center, Rexburg.

Southeast Region, all meetings will begin at 7 p.m. ? 208-232-4703.

? Monday, February 18: Malad Senior Center, Main Street, Malad.

? Tuesday, February 19: Oregon Trail Center, Montpelier.

? Wednesday, February 20: Wood River Room, ISU Student Union, Pocatello.

? Thursday, February 21: Larson Sand Library, Preston.

Salmon Region, both meetings from 4 to 7 p.m. ? 208-756-2271.

? Wednesday, February 20, Idaho Fish and Game, 99 U.S. Highway 93 N., Salmon.

? Thursday, February 21, U.S. Forest Service Challis-Yankee Fork Ranger District, U.S. Highway 93, Challis.

Southwest Region, all meetings from 4 to 7 p.m. ? 208-465-8465 in Nampa or

208-634- 8137 in McCall.

? Tuesday, February 19: U.S. Forest Service, 2092 U.S. Highway 95, Council.

? Tuesday, February 26: Weiser High School Library, 690 Indianhead Road, Weiser.

? Wednesday, February 27: Idaho Fish and Game, 555 Deinhard Lane, McCall.

? Wednesday, February 27: Idaho Fish and Game, 3101 S. Powerline, Nampa.

Panhandle Region ? 208-769-1414.

? Saturday, February 23: 8 a.m., St. Maries Elks, St. Maries.

? Wednesday, February 27: (location TBD in Sandpoint or Bonners Ferry)

? Thursday, February 28: 7 p.m. at Idaho Fish and Game, Coeur d?Alene.

Magic Valley Region, meetings from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. ? 208-324-4359.

? Wednesday, February 27: Idaho Fish and Game, 319 South 417 East, Jerome.

? Thursday, February 28; Burley City Hall at 1401 Overland Ave., Burley.

The open house format allows participants to come and go during the meeting and to visit with Fish and Game personnel about the proposals.

Individuals with disabilities may request meeting accommodations by contacting the Idaho Department of Fish and Game at 208-334-5159 or through the Idaho Relay Service at 1-800-377-2529 (TDD).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[3bigelkid]

Wow,
I just looked at the proposals for 5 different regions. A lot of proposed changes! It looks like the elk herds are suffering across the state...wonder WHY?!?! Its going to be very hard to draw an elk permit with all the reductions in tags. I like a lot of the deer proposals, really looks like the managers are focusing on making good on the MDI.

Everyone that hunts in Idaho needs to go comment on these changes in the comment boxes provided. It is your voice that started the ball rolling now you get a chance to help set seasons. The fun part!

 

[IDdesertman]

I just checked out the proposed changes in the SW region and really like them for the most part. Are "landowner appreciation permits" just depredation tags? I see that there are 38 quality buck tags for the 3 units in the Owyhees under this category. Have they always given out this many, and can only certain landowners put in for these? Thanks very much for the updates.

 

[gemstatejake]

Big Changes for many hunts. I hate to see reduced opportunity but some of the elk proposals seem justified, I guess. I still seem to see plenty of elk in the areas I hunt (southern half of the state), way more than say fifteen twenty years ago, but lots of guys I talk with tell me elk are getting scarce.
I have mixed feelings on the 44-45 deer hunt. A complete 180 in management. On the one hand, it's gonna make the tag I covet even harder to draw (as if it was ever easy) on the other hand, 45 is essentially a useless hunt to the average hunter without big $ or serious contacts. I feel bad for guys who put in for that hunt for years based on the reputation it had at one time. Only to find out after they draw that the deer hunting now belongs to the landowners. And they ain't giving it away. Lots of other stuff proposed I need to mull over before i form an opinion...............

 

[3bigelkid]

GemJake,
I know how you feel about the opportunity thing. We have been spoiled in this great state with all our big game choices and opportunity! However, with all the opinions/goals they are trying to manage within the M.D.I. I feel they are doing a pretty good job.
It is pretty wierd that they are changing directions on 45/44 but you probably noticed all the new landowner appreciation tags for 45. You know as well as I do those tags have been sold in the past and the land owners are looking for a bigger cut of the pie. By increasing tags, landowners get more tags, thus more big money! And as you stated above the best bucks are coming of the private land. Good luck drawing your dream tag, if you do it should be a fun 50 days!

 

[Salmonfg]

Landowner Appreciation Permits (LAP) are not depredation hunts. In units where general season opportunities are replaced by controlled hunts landowners are eligible for 10-25% of available permits (added to the the "regular" permit allocation). LAP tags are valid in the entire unit/hunt area (not restricted to deeded property). To be eligible, landowners must own at least 640 acres in a hunt area/unit. They are allowed 1 permit/species (deer, elk, pronghorn) for 640-4,999 acres and 1 additioanl permit for acreage over 5,000. The landowner can designate who receives the tag. If there are more applicants than permits, a drawing is held among eligible applicants. LAP applicants are eligible to apply for a moose, bighorn sheep, or mountain goat permit; and waiting periods do not apply to LAP tags.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[tworivers]

Tom could you elaborate about Salmon region and buck size?? I am wondering how, just up over the pass in Montana sits two of montana's best limited entry tags, and And to the west by Stanley is the summer range of some of the big deer that kick down into the 43-49, and Unit 50 tags to winter there are some great genetics. Generally speaking they are all within the general region and should contribute to gene pool especially montana side because historically alot of those deer move down into unit 21 around gibbonsville during rut. Is it a case of overharvest that negatively impacts herd, predators?? Winters are generally mild there as compared to the eastern Idaho highlands, yet we have genetics that are second only too Adams county but put out a few big deer still. or is it because of the habitat and no burn policy, that has determined size?? I understand there have been major fires but has old growth shut out browse species in past decade?? The Salmon deer of 70's and 80's were impressive , and I have seen nice bucks in fourth of july creek during rut. could you elaborate on this further?

 

[7mmgilbert]

I attended the proposed changes meeting in IF last night, they put together a good presentation and discussion. It will be interesting to see if the changes that were objected to end up as proposed or how some of the hunters wanted. They also discussed potential of wolf hunting for 08, which looks promising if the wolves get delisted.

 

[tworivers]

From my last post I want to clarify about fires, I make it sound like a dead forest contributes to antler size by my wording and sentence structure. I am asking to what extent to fires limit growth not promote it.

 

[Salmonfg]

One could write a book (and some have) on antler development, so it's difficult to address the issue in this format. Here's a somewhat short answer.

I see a few very old bucks (10+) come through our 1 check station. For some of these a common comment from the hunter was "I should have let him get a year older so the rack would be bigger." They were quite surprised when I told them the age and the buck probably would not have survived the winter. I also see what I consider a fairly good representation of older age class bucks.

Based on known age deer info collected in the 1990s, the average spread for bucks in Salmon region is about 2 inches less than bucks of the same age in southeast Idaho.

Some of the areas that burned in 2000 are now producing nice shrub habitat and some large-antlered bucks (some of the areas I'm thinking of are also remote/hard to access).

These things together tell me some proportion of bucks are getting old enough to display their maximum antler development (from a genetics standpoint) and low quality habitat is a likley contributor to "depressed" antler development. Another indicator of habitat quality is fawn weights going into winter - Salmon Region is the perennial leader in low fawn weights across Idaho (on the order of 8-10 lbs or 10-12%). That tells me there is an issue with summer habitat quality

Fire, forest management prescriptions, and a host of other management practices can be good or bad for deer depending on the scale, intensity, timing, etc. But a good rule of thumb is that deer do better in earlier rather than later successional habitats. The reason is that deer need higher quality forage (compared to elk, for example). That quality comes from forbs and shrubs (usually not grasses) which take longer to re-establish after fire. But the right kind of fire is the most efficient way to rejuvenate those habitats over time.

So, there are 2 basic pieces.

Can we grow bigger antlered deer in the area? Yes, but it will probably take some signifcant, large-scale improvement in habitat. And there are some overall limits because of base geology.

Can we grow more deer into the current 'large' antler classes (have a larger proportion of bucks in older age classes). Sure, by significantly reducing harvest, more bucks will reach older ages. The units in MT (if the same ones I'm looking at - 261 and 270) allow only 25 and 100 buck mule deer hunters (archery and rifle total). I'm not taking the time to look at exact size of the areas, deer populations, etc., but at a quick glance it looks like 270 is about the size of 21 and 21A combined, so I'm guessing we could provide a similar opportunity by reducing our hunter numbers from the current about 1,200 down to the similar 100 (plus no separate archery season). Double or triple that for argument's sake and we still would push some 900-1,000 hunters elsewhere and leave drawing chances of something less than 25% (chance of drawing the MT tags was less than 5% in 2006). Those proportions are similar to the the options in the Salmon section for a couple units under a controlled hunt scenario (eliminate 80% of hunters in Unit 30A).

Hope this helps some. It's a complex topic with a lot of things to consider if you take into account all the angles (which is what agencies are charged with doing).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[tworivers]

Hey 25% for tags in the others states I put in for where is the line??? LOL that is fantastic, Thanks for the reply, using draw odds of Montana is somewhat skewed due to fact you are on preference point system over there, and limited dispersal of trophy quality units in that state so naturally as you stated limited supply of tags will drive down draw %. I think rotating units like they are doing with some magic valley regions will improve quality and offering primitive weapons in this region would dramatically impact harvest ratio, if they were balanced. The geography of area really would limit successful harvest due to the fact that closer ranges are required. Have a every other year rut opportunity, would allow for some carryover but these are just suggestions and may not work, many variables influence these areas.

 

[Salmonfg]

There are a multitude of potential options for management. I would think 25% is optimistic - just based that on removing 75% of current general season hunter numbers. If the hunt were popular, I would expect applicant numbers to increase.

The controlled late muzzleloader hunt in 2005 was for traditional muzzleloader; post-rut with 40 tags in 21 and 21A combined. As a new, unknown hunt, it drew 161 applicants. Success rate was 69%.

We used to have a rotating muzzleloader hunt in Salmon Region. Before my time, but sounds like it drew a fair amount of criticism for cropping off the mature bucks.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[huntin100]

Thanks for the input and info Tom. I made a few comments.