Where do they get their numbers?

A

AWHOLELOTTABULL

Long Time Member
Messages
4,357
I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the numbers on these. Out of 32 public land management units the DWR wants us to believe that only 4 are not at or above objective when it comes to buck to doe ratios. I spend a lot more time in the field than your average hunter and I haven't seen numbers like this in years. In fact, I can't remember when I have seen numbers like this. I'm not talking about big bucks or deer populations either.


Buck to Doe ratios given by the DWR: FACT or FICTION?
2006-2008
# Bucks/100 Does
Unit Subunit 3 year average

Box Elder Box Elder 18.6
Cache Cache 14.8
Kamas Kamas 19.1
North Slope West Dagget/Three Corners 17.4
South Slope Vernal 15.6
Nine Mile Range Creek 27.1
Central Mountains Nebo 16.7
Central Mountains Manti (Central Region) 13.3
Central Mountains Manti (Southeast Region) 17.3
Wasatch Mountains DF/Heber/Timpanogas 19.0
Wasatch Mountains Salt Lake 37.0
Wasatch Mountains Currant Creek 16.3
Wasatch Mountains Avintaquin 18.7



These seem awfully inflated to me.

It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
Back when I used to give a rats ass!

A few years back,(and before) (and after) (and still) the buck to doe ratio's were below UDWR standards.(15 bucks per 100 does)
At a RAC meeting it was brought up,when they get below the 15 bucks per 100 does something is suppose to be done to improve the numbers.
Well this area is broke down in to 4 sub-units,during the RAC meeting the DWR calls a private meeting of their own,20-30 minutes later they return,saying 2 of the sub units were above the 15 bucks per 100 does while the other 2 sub units were below the 15 bucks per 100 does,so you know what they did?

Ya,you guessed it,they used some 'Pro-Triganometry' added everything together & divided it by 4 therefore leaving the 4 sub units open as usual.

Ya,that fixed everything didn't it?

AWLB,we are getting older & evidently we need some 'seeing glasses'

One thing about the Utah Deer herd,the opportunists always enjoy their chances at Pisscutters,hasn't changed in 37 years now!
 
Who is going to prove them wrong? They can come up with whatever numbers they want. Its good for the paycheck to have good numbers but a couple to work on for job security.

NO GUTS, NO STORY!!


4b1db2ac644136c4.jpg
 
I can only give perspective on 2 of these units. Currant creek and the central mountain unit between levan and manti, on the currant creek its not near what they're numbers say, 2009 I saw around 300 deer and only 5 bucks all 2 points. The central unit is a little trickier, there numbers are right on the bottom third of the unit but not even close on the other 2/3's. I believe they inflate their numbers so that they don't have to drop the number of tags or put restrictions on it, because that would mean they don't sell as many tags which means they don't make the money and well let's behonest, utah is all about the money...
 
OK.....So here's how you do it.

You get in your Govt truck, go to Starbuck's for coffee and BS with some other Govt nerds.

Leave there at about 10 am and drive into the unit. Spot "x" does and "x" bucks. Then you multiply the number of deer times the number of acres in the unit.

Return to town. It's now about 11:15 and almost lunch time.

When you get back to your desk, divide the total of bucks and does by the ambient temperature of the particular day you were out.

Divide those numbers again by the number of years you have in Govt service.

Multiply it all by the number of years you have until retirement.

Add or subtract 10%, depending on how harsh you personnaly think the winter was and,...."Bob's Your Uncle", as they say in Australia.

It is all VERY scientific, I assure you.....just ask them.

Nobody will dispute your numbers, because you have a BS in Biology and work for the game department.

The hunters, hikers and residents, who live in the area and have a realistic view of actual numbers, are considered "anectdotal" idiots.

OH SNAP! I forgot to factor in the number of times you got laid last month.....that's the main reason for annual variations in numbers!
 
I can't speak for Utah but in Montana I know for a fact that they have temp biologists (students)from back east that do the counting. When they do a big game count they must include domestic sheep, cattle and horses in the mix. One of the so-called biologists (from back east) got into an argument with a hunter on whether the deer being checked was a muley or whitetail. Turns out it was your basic whitetail buck but the argument got heated and a second opinion from another biologist was needed before the game warden was notified. The hunter was pi$$ed as expected and hopefully the biologist learned something. The biologist also mentioned something about having the kidneys left inside the body cavity when it was actually chunks of fat. WOW! I wonder how many deer are counted as elk and vice versa.....not to mention livestock counts. GOD help us!

Sportsmen need to do the hiring of their local biologists and wardens. I called the local biologist on a sheep count and got a ridiculous number of full curl rams in the area. I watch the same rams during the winter and have never once seen what I was told. I decided not to put in for that area as I wasn't sure what their full curl rams actually looked like.
 
I hunted 2 days at Currant Creek last year, saw about 120 deer... 1 buck that was a 2 point... And they're saying 16/100 buck to doe... Laughable


"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-31-10 AT 09:24AM (MST)[p] Funny, I spend a gawd awful lot of time in the hills. I have seen a DWR biologist twice in my life in the field. Once on the henrys in a chopper doing buff counts and once on the dirty devil sheep unit doing sheep counts.
How the hell would they know how many deer there are let alone how many are bucks and does. They are never in the field. They plug numbers from their desk in an office. 95% of them dont know their ass from a hole in the ground.
And I take that back I have seen one other in the field setting a prarie dog trap off the freeway near Cedar. Morons!
 
Why doesn't the DWR take $400,000 from their auctioned tags on rent, lease or buy a helicopter with a FLIR camera and fly winter range at night. Record footage as you traveled a specific search grid and review the footage later.

When I was in high school we had a Wildlife management coarse. We went on a field trip every yr to Middle Fork in the Ogden valley. We were tasked with counting deer and dead deer. I can tell you out of the 30 kids in the class (easy A) about non gave a sh!t on coming up with any accurate #s. As matter of fact it was a bit of a tradition to sneak a few beers and get away from teach and have a little party.

Also while on college my buddy got summer work with the DWR classifying animals. He managed to get paid all summer but only went out a few times. He was counting small game. He figured there was no supervision and the method for counting was ineffective in his mind. Something about quartering off a section of land counting how many critters where there and applying that sample to the rest of the area. Im sure thing haven't changed much other than the kids out today are even less effective. Its hard to text and count at the same time.
 
AWLB,
My favorite is them opening back up the Nebo unit... There was no deer last year, and there's not many more this year, but my opinion is that they HAD to open it up because everyone that usually hunts down there ended up on Timp... It was a nut house... Nebo use to produce some killer bucks, now you're lucky if you see
anything...
But now, they don't want that many hunters on Timp, so the numbers magically came back up... How does that work?
What makes it worse is the fact that the Nebo unit is where the DWR puts all of the "problem" bears. I spoke with one of the sheep herders last fall and he said that he had seen at least 4 different bears in just a few square miles.
They need to go to smaller units but they can't cause if they did, they would have to cut tags because so many of the units would be bad ratios. And they can't cut tags, where would they get their cash???
DUMB!!!

CSO

It's all about the good times...
 
yep it's all about the doom and gloom. The buck numbers are way down, and deer no longer run out and say shoot me shoot me!!
 
The DWR could go to statewide LE cut tags drastically and charge up to $280 bucks for their LE deer tag like they do elk. And have even more money than with the 90,000 general tags.

Not my vote. But that's what they will probably do.
 
It will also split of families that hunt together. People will also not be able to hunt their favorite spots because those popular areas will be harder to draw thus making it 5 years to draw some units.
 
Lifetime license holders will be screwed because like the wording says......

Each year, a lifetime licensee who is eligible to hunt big game "MAY" receive without charge, a permit and tag for the region of their choice for one of the following general deer hunts:

It doesn't say shall receive or will receive. With the word "May" then there is no guarantees.

I also believe you will see an overhaul in the DH program and archers will be forced to pick a region or unit.
 
I think for the $500 we bought it for we have more than got our moneys worth out of a lifetime license. A lifetime license won't mean a thing if there isn't any deer to hunt. I have bought a tag but not hunted in Utah for the last couple of years. If I would have seen something worth chasing it would have been a different story.



It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
dont belive any north slope or south slope you wuold be lucky to see 15 deer total a day spent lot time on these units if you see a buck your lucky . did not see 15 bucks a week in the book cliffs this winter if did small .3 & 2 points.!!!!
 
I have hunted three spots on your list AWB and I would bet the numbers are right on. In those three spots I have seen big bucks also.

One of them is the front and I wont say where the other 2 areas are because I dont want to see more tards in them.

4a7d1f93337c7fd7.jpg

Nets are for fish!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-31-10 AT 06:43PM (MST)[p]Why

I am assuming you are kidding when you say you couldnt find 15 bucks in the books in a week.

If you are not It makes me question your hunting ability's.
 
I don't doubt the numbers on the front are correct. I do think that those deer would be a little easier to get an accurate count though. The places that I have hunted on that list are no where near that. I know that when we hunt them they are scattered but I would think that a person spending as much time in the hills as I do would see a lot more deer. I don't think anybody can argue that fact that our deer herd is hurting. People like EHH are in the minority by a long shot but I guess it takes some positive thinking to keep your butt out there on the mountain. The numbers are waaaaaaay below carrying capacity as you can see in the numbers on the DWR survey. They have been for years. Why is it that a state like Colorado can get pounded with snow and lose a tremendous amount of deer yet they have the brains to cut back tags for a couple of years to let the herd recover. I pretty sure that habitat improvement would not have helped much in that situation.

It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-31-10 AT 09:01PM (MST)[p]Mr. Bullshi+ I also to spend a lot of time scouting during June, July, and August and I have seen a lot of good bucks. I don't believe this doom and gloom garbage that is constantly posted on this MM forum. I'm not sure where you're looking for deer, but I do know that big deer are on the mountain. Bucks don't get big by being stupid.

Habitat improvement actually helps deer rebound faster. I get a kick out of how people count deer during the hunts. The best time to count deer is during the winter months when the deer are down on the winter range. It's a lot easier to find those bigger bucks at that time of year.

Colorado has a lot more habitat and winter range. They also have more deer.
 
Counts are done in January/February/March, NOT in the fall during the hunts.

I also see a lot of misconceptions on how buck:doe ratios are figured. It doesn't mean 15 bucks for every 100 deer you see, you have to also consider the fawns into the equation. A herd with a 15:100 buck:doe ratio and a 25:100 fawn:doe ratio would mean in a herd of 140 deer, 15 would be bucks, 25 would be fawns, and 100 would be does. The numbers are much closer than you guys think, IMHO.
 
So Pro?
You're telling us you know for a fact the numbers posted above are factual?
 
>So Pro?
>You're telling us you know for
>a fact the numbers posted
>above are factual?

Reread the last sentence of my previous post. You're reading comprehension skills are lacking big time.
 
Pay the f attention!
I didn't argue that!
Just wondering how you'd know for a fact the numbers listed would be true?

And don't tell me because biologists said it was so!
 
>Pay the f attention!
>I didn't argue that!
>Just wondering how you'd know for
>a fact the numbers listed
>would be true?
>
>And don't tell me because biologists
>said it was so!


No, it's because TheElitehornhunter said it was so!.....can't you read?.....LOL
 
My exact words: "The numbers are much closer than you guys think, IMHO."

Your exact words in response to mine: "So Pro?
You're telling us you know for a fact the numbers posted above are factual?"

As anyone outside the Basin can see, nowhere did I say I "know for a fact the numbers posted are factual". Nor did I imply anything like that. But, I DID/do base my opinion with at least a smidgen of understanding what goes into determining buck:doe ratios instead of making observations based in complete ignorance. Radical concept isn't it?
 
Radical?
You've never seen Radical!
Pro,You wanna argue with guys like AWLB who do get out and about & they see WTH is going on with UNITS.

Tell you what Pro?
The MDF doesn't seem to be changing many things with the Utah Deer Herd.
Since you know everything & have ALL the 'reasons why' & 'why not' why don't you & your followers start your own thing & fix the Quality of the Utah Deer Herd?
Are you telling me in the last 37 years there couldn't'of been something better than what's been done?
I think biggest reason the Utah Deer Herd is where it is today is because of people like yourself,you wanna hunt 3 months every damn year,pressure the herd to no end,but at least you've got opportunity at a pisscutters.

You need to join the DWR Pro,they wouldn't even need to train you,your book of excuses is at least as big as theirs and you've tried baffling people with your bullsshit for years!
 
If ignorance is bliss, Bessy is the happiest guy on MM.

SFW hasn't "fixed" the deer issue either, and the mule deer is struggling in EVERY western state and Canada. That should tell anyone with the ability to use reason that Utah hunters are NOT the problem/cause of our struggling deer herd. in 1993 Utah went to weapon choice, and then Utah cut the permits down to less than 100K, and the herds still struggle. We turned the several 'struggling' units into LE, and those units 15+ years later are STILL struggling. If lowering buck harvest was the cure-all Bessy claims it to be, the Henry/Pauns/Books/Vernon/Oak Creek would all be at/over population objectives, yet not ONE of them is.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 08:36AM (MST)[p]>>Pay the f attention!
>>I didn't argue that!
>>Just wondering how you'd know for
>>a fact the numbers listed
>>would be true?
>>
>>And don't tell me because biologists
>>said it was so!
>
>
>No, it's because TheElitehornhunter said it
>was so!.....can't you read?.....LOL

I never said that, but I believe their numbers more than hunters who are just counting deer during their deer hunts.

I think hunters get spoiled when they draw places like the Bookcliffs where it's easy to see 60 bucks a day and then go back hunting GS units only to whine and complain because they aren't seeing bucks around every tree.

General Season units are managed for quantity not for quality, but there is quality bucks on public land because people kill them every year.

If people are willing to hike then they can find big bucks on public lands instead of riding the roads on 4-wheelers.


So these same people want to reduce hunter opportunity because they think it will cure everything. They blame their hunting success on the DWR. We should have deer tied up so people can be guaranteed a harvest, right?
 
Do the math on any given unit in Utah. Hunter harvest compared to fawn recruitment. Also account for buck doe ratio's. When you come up with a recruitment #. Ask yourself where are we loosing this # of deer? Starvation, roads, winter kill? 3 factors you really aren't going to control. Other than winter feeding deer but that's a whole other debate. Yet another factor predator harvest. In most cases equaling or exceeding human harvest.

Now out of these 5 factors what can we control? Weather, Climate, roads, humans, predators.

Most easily we can control hunters and predators with simple policy changes. It will take decades or an act of god to resolve the others. I'm not in favor of limiting hunter opportunity. As a hunter I just wont support that. Which leaves us predators. In times of herd decrease I have no interest in sharing a limited resource.

Again I ask what is the big difference between a deer killed by hunter or predator? Would anyone support 40 deer tags on Monroe that allowed for up to 50 deer to be shot by one guy yr round? Of coarse not even if that hunter paid $400,000 for the permit. And after the herd declined would anyone not think it was those 40 hunters shooting all those deer?
 
If the whole state was managed like the Bookcliffs/Henries/Pauns then these same people who claim that Utah has no bucks anymore would still be complaining. They would still whine and complain because they couldn't draw a tag so they would just sit on their asses during the deer hunts and boob all winter long..


People need to be careful what they wish for. It might sound wonderful and great, but when reality sets in then it won't seem as wonderful and great.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 09:19AM (MST)[p]We need to issue more bounties on coyotes. If we could still poison coyotes then I know there wouldn't be as many as today. We can also control closing some roads. There will be a lot of people out chasing turkeys at the same time does will be giving birth to fawns.

Will this have an impact on the deer?

We can also continue to cut down juniper/pinyon because they suck up a lot of water to where other browse plants don't grow. We also had a good wet spring last year, and if it continues this year then we will see an improvement in the deer herds. We should be planting a lot of habitat where old died sagebrush today. Sagebrush/bitter brush doesn't need a lot of water to survive after planting, but last year would have been excellent.
 
I have never said we don't have deer EHH. I'm not a biologist either. I'm a hunter plain and simple. I hunt more than the average guy. A lot more! As I have said before, I hunt several states a year including Wyoming and Colorado. Nobody has answered my question. Not MDF. Not SFW. Definately not the DWR. How is it, when I drive 20-30 minutes over the border to Colorado or Wyoming the deer numbers drastically increase. I'm not "counting deer" during the hunts as some have said but I'm not naive enough to say that our deer herd is fine. The numbers I see in a 5 day hunt in Colorado and Wyoming far exceed the numbers I see in Utah in an entire hunting season. I'm not hunting private areas. I'm not hunting areas that are difficult to draw. These are general areas or areas you can draw with 0-1 preference points. So here is my question that NOBODY seems to be able to answer . . . How come these states have more deer numbers that Utah. How come these states have more visible bucks than Utah. Wyoming has roads everywhere thanks to the oil rigs. In the area I hunt in Colorado, you can get a 4 wheeler to just about any place you want. They allow the same high powered rifles that we do with the same high quality optics. There's no limit on the poundage of your bow or the inline muzzleloaders. I just want to know the anwers to these questions. I have my theories just like EHH and Hoytme but that's all they are boys. Don't forget that. As much as I think some of you have some legitimate numbers and theories, they are still just ideas. None of them explain why our neighbors continue to outdo us in the mule deer arena.


It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
Only difference I see in management between ut, co, and wyo is micro management, utah won't do it for the money of it all
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 09:43AM (MST)[p]AWLB I also hunt Wyoming and Colorado almost every year. The biggest buck I killed was a 29 inch 6 by 7 in Wyoming. The difference I see in Wyoming and Colorado compared to Utah is the habitat. It's NOT because Utah has more predators because Wyoming and Colorado have a ton of coyotes. Colorado units have buck numbers as good as the Bookcliffs.

Colorado's habitat is night and day compared to Utah. They have more winter range. Wyoming does also.

SFW hasn't made Colorado and Wyoming great. They don't need SFW to get the job done.

They also micro-manage their deer herds which reduces hunter opportunity in many of the places unless you can draw a tag on private lands.
 
I have no idea I have tried to check. I would like to know accurate counts on deer predator ratio's in these states. What does Colorado's cougar population look like? Whats its history of management over the last 10 yrs? And does Colorado do a better job at coyote control?
 
I'm not talking about the size of bucks. I'm talking about the sheer numbers. I can hunt Colorado every year. I can also hunt Wyoming every year. Micromanagement reduces pressure and hunter overcrowding. Just ask the boys in the Southern Region. They aren't hunting their own back yards every year. Spread the pressure out. There will be units that go undersubscribed or you would be able to draw second choice.

I don't disagree that SFW has had no affect in Colorado. All that tells me is that their DWR is smart enough to do the right thing when it comes to game management. Our DWR is inept at best. It appears that most of our biologists can't count, see or hear (sportsmans voice) so it's no wonder our numbers are down.

It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 11:11AM (MST)[p]"I don't disagree that SFW has had no affect in Colorado. All that tells me is that their DWR is smart enough to do the right thing when it comes to game management. Our DWR is inept at best. It appears that most of our biologists can't count, see or hear (sportsmans voice) so it's no wonder our numbers are down."

Colorado's DWR hands might not be tied by special interest groups. Who is managing deer in Utah? The DWR or special interest groups like SFW?

Obviously people will more often put the blame on the DWR than special interest groups that they are members of. I'm not saying this about you Wholelotofbull.

You know if SFW would put the money they raise more into habitat on General season units then we would have more deer. They focus a lot on the Henries because of the money they receive from tags.

Every decision made in Utah is about money, money, money. Our elk herds grew because we limited hunting pressure, and now we are focused on the money that elk can bring us.

But we should all just shut up because we have all these wonderful spike tags Or we could just go to Colorado to kill a bull.
 
"Colorado's DWR hands might not be tied by special interest groups. Who is managing deer in Utah? The DWR or special interest groups like SFW?"

I would buy this theory if the DWR would have been managing things right before SFW was formed. They were not. To my understanding, SFW was formed to put pressure on the DWR to manage our wildlife better. So far they have done a great job doing that except for deer. Your question, "Who is managing our deer?" NOBODY!!! Except for a few areas like the Book Cliffs and the Henries, we have no deer management. That's the whole point of this thread. Innacurate numbers and greed are the reason our general deer are in this situation. Bottom line, I really don't care who gets it done. SOMBODY PLEASE JUST GET SHI+ DONE NOW!





It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 11:35AM (MST)[p]This is taken out of a book called "In Seach of Big Heads" written by Jim Bonds.

When a deer population "explodes" or increases twenty-fold, thirty-fold, forty-fold in a matter of ten to fifteen years, it is the result of good browse habitat. Proceeding any big game build-up of mule deer population there is a period of twenty to thirty years during which time the browse gets a head start on the deer. In other words, DEER POPULATIONS CAN BUILD UP AT A RATE FASTER THAN BROWSE CAN GROW.

What happens when a deer population increases beyond carrying capacity of any range?

(1) If they are not harvested by hunters they take the browse
(2) When the browse is gone; the deer die, often 95% of them.
(3) Then, everything is lost-the browse plus the deer
(4) And we start all over. Its takes from 15 to 40 years for the browse to come back

Good management means regulated harvest. There is one concept in good deer management that is gaining ground by leaps and bounds

(1) Pay MINIMUM ATTENTION to the actual numbers of deer;
Pay MAXIMUM ATTENTION to the condition of the browse, the range. If you have good browse, you cannot help but have mule deer.

(2) Mule deer's worst enemy is overpopulation.

If you are satisfied that the range is in excellent condition-with a huge deer population thriving on a large health browse plants then demand that the DWR harvest 40% of ALL the deer every year for thirty years.

Yes, harvest 40% of ALL the deer. The last 15 years it's all been about reduce, reduce, reduce harvest.

Habitat is the key to having more mule deer until we address this issue through hard-core projects then our deer herds will continue to struggle in many areas.

We have a lot of old dead unproductive sagebrush. All you need to do is take a drive, but yet no deer or very few deer, right?
 
I don't disagree with that at all. The problem with Utah is that even with exceptional brouse/habitat, we won't back off on hunting pressure long enough to let the herd thrive. Great habitat won't mean anything if we keep taking deer at the level we are taking them now. They don't have a chance to mature and breed. Example: Vernon unit - when they closed it, the deer were in dire straits (same with the Book Cliffs). A friend of mine had an archery tag on that unit the first year they opened it. WOW!! Deer everywhere. Good bucks, GREAT bucks, etc. The archery hunt was one of the most enjoyable hunts I've been on for deer. I can't remember the exact number of rifle tags they gave out but it was like shooting fish in a barrel. That unit could have been a premium unit but they came really close to destroying it in one fail swoop. Again, a major DWR blunder. Too much pressure and too high of harvest for the resource. That had NOTHING to do with habitat.

It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
>I don't disagree with that at
>all. The problem with
>Utah is that even with
>exceptional brouse/habitat, we won't back
>off on hunting pressure long
>enough to let the herd
>thrive. Great habitat won't
>mean anything if we keep
>taking deer at the level
>we are taking them now.
> They don't have a
>chance to mature and breed.
> Example: Vernon unit -
>when they closed it, the
>deer were in dire straits
>(same with the Book Cliffs).
> A friend of mine
>had an archery tag on
>that unit the first year
>they opened it. WOW!!
> Deer everywhere. Good
>bucks, GREAT bucks, etc.
>The archery hunt was one
>of the most enjoyable hunts
>I've been on for deer.
> I can't remember the
>exact number of rifle tags
>they gave out but it
>was like shooting fish in
>a barrel. That unit
>could have been a premium
>unit but they came really
>close to destroying it in
>one fail swoop. Again,
>a major DWR blunder.
>Too much pressure and too
>high of harvest for the
>resource. That had NOTHING
>to do with habitat.
>
>It's always an adventure!!!
>www.awholelottabull.com

Yes, there has been a lot of bad decisions made in the past. The Vernon unit still doesn't have the amount of deer that it had before the closure when we were issue 1,000 rifle tags. The tags have been very limited since. There is a lot of winter range. This unit has less human encroachment. I believe it's because of Habitat and predators.
 
Another example: I used to hunt the Book Cliffs archery when they had 3 point or better. Again, deer everywhere, good bucks, great bucks, etc. The first year they lifted the 3 point or better restriction with unlimited licenses that herd suffered big time. Utards shot the shi+ out them. I archery hunted it the next couple of years and it got worse every year to the point I quit going out there. Too much hunting pressure on younger age class deer. Again, it had nothing to do with habitat or brouse.

EHH, I'm not dumb enough to say that habitat is not important but I'm also not dumb enough to say that hunting pressure doesn't have a huge affect of deer population. Can we not agree on that?


It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
Seriously, I'm 45. The reason I am asking, I really believe you have to be at least 40 to appreciate where we are now compared to where we were back when I started hunting (as far as the elk, buffalo, sheep, & moose are concerned). There is no reason we can't do the same for deer. And no I'm not talking about limiting deer hunting like we have done the elk. I'm talking about getting the deer resource to a huntable population again so everybody can enjoy it.


It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
>Another example: I used to
>hunt the Book Cliffs archery
>when they had 3 point
>or better. Again, deer
>everywhere, good bucks, great bucks,
>etc. The first year
>they lifted the 3 point
>or better restriction with unlimited
>licenses that herd suffered big
>time. Utards shot the
>shi+ out them. I
>archery hunted it the next
>couple of years and it
>got worse every year to
>the point I quit going
>out there. Too much
>hunting pressure on younger age
>class deer. Again, it
>had nothing to do with
>habitat or brouse.
>
>EHH, I'm not dumb enough to
>say that habitat is not
>important but I'm also not
>dumb enough to say that
>hunting pressure doesn't have a
>huge affect of deer population.
> Can we not agree
>on that?
>
>
>It's always an adventure!!!
>www.awholelottabull.com


Oh yes, the wonderful 3 point or better argument. There is enough studies done that proves that it's not very effective. You don't target the mature bucks and then expect more mature bucks to survive. You will have more younger bucks breeding the does. People also shot deer and then counted points.

The more bucks you have taking up space on the winter range the fewer fawns will survive. Again, it only takes 7 bucks to breed 100 does.

3 point or better was also implemented in the 1980's We had a lot of good rainfall. 1982-1986 is reported as recorded preceptation years. I'm sure you were old enough to remember the flooding and mudslides. I'm sure all that moisture was great on the habitat for several years.
 
What about the habitat improvements done out on the Vernon. I know of several chaining and reseading projects that have been completed out there. One I have personally looked at since and it's amazing the grasses that are growing. I honestly think that the Vernon could hold 30% more deer than there are now. Obviously I agree that habitat is important or I wouldn't belong to several conservation groups or break my back doing projects. We just need to give the deer a chance to come back and if we are consistantly shooting 1 and 2 year old deer every year (like Utards are famous for) then we won't ever see the big increases that your author is talking about. EVER!


It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
>Seriously, I'm 45. The
>reason I am asking, I
>really believe you have to
>be at least 40 to
>appreciate where we are now
>compared to where we were
>back when I started hunting
>(as far as the elk,
>buffalo, sheep, & moose are
>concerned). There is no
>reason we can't do the
>same for deer. And
>no I'm not talking about
>limiting deer hunting like we
>have done the elk.
>I'm talking about getting the
>deer resource to a huntable
>population again so everybody can
>enjoy it.
>
>
>It's always an adventure!!!
>www.awholelottabull.com

I was joking I'm 32. Yes, you had some very good years, but there was also a lot more habitat back then also. In the 1970's you could also poison the heck out of coyotes.
 
What about the habitat improvements done out on the Vernon. I know of several chaining and reseading projects that have been completed out there. One I have personally looked at since and it's amazing the grasses that are growing
> I honestly think that
>the Vernon could hold 30%
>more deer than there are
>now.
>
>
>It's always an adventure!!!
>www.awholelottabull.com

Then why doesn't the Vernon hold more deer? I remember seeing large groups of deer everywhere. Many groups had 10 to 15 bucks. I hope the grasses you speak of are more browse plants which benefits deer more.

The encroachment of cheat grass is also a major issue.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 12:20PM (MST)[p]I was just a young boy back then so I don't know all the factors. I haven't read any studies done either about the reasons why the Bookcliff unit crashed. 3 point or better wasn't very productive as a management tool. It might have crashed regardless. What was the condition of the habitat? Did more bucks on the winter range outcompete fawns thus causing a lower recruitment rate and it finally caught up and the result was a crash?

What do you believe happened?
 
Ok EHH - I've got to run to Cabelas so here's my final post for the day.;-)

Increase predator control, smaller units for deer (similar to Colorado), and IMPROVE HABITAT HABITAT HABITAT. Problem with the last for you and Hoytme is that, without the conservation organizations the funding for these habitat projects has got to come from somewhere. You and I both know that the only way that the DWR will fund anything is if they raise tag prices significantly and in this economy, you've just taken away a lot of opportunity for "families" to hunt together. We'll continue this later. I'm truely interested yours and Pro's ideas on how to fund projects without using conservation orgs or raising tag/license fees out of the range of average joes.




It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
OK - this is the last post for a while - Really!

I just assumed that it was because the deer got slaughtered. IMO there wasn't a drastic change in habitat that I'm aware of. There were just a lot of young bucks running around one year then they opened it up to any buck and the number of young bucks after that was drastically reduce. If my old mind can remember, it was a normal winter. Nothing too harsh. They don't get slammed out there with snow anyway for the most part. Like I said, I'm not a biologist, just an observant hunter that saw the decimation of a herd of deer in only a couple of years. It would be interesting to find some numbers though. I bet Pro has numbers. Hell, he's got number to my pant size!:D

It's always an adventure!!!
www.awholelottabull.com
 
In my area the the ratio I see seems to be about the same as the DWR's.

Here is the problem. A mature buck {at least 4 years old} is only capable of successfully breeding 25 or so does in a season.

Younger bucks are capable of breeding but there success rate is very much lower, and the doe can not judge the genetics of a younger buck. A doe will breed with a younger buck but only as a last resort and many times a month or so after the regular rut.

So even at 15 or 20 bucks per hundred your herd may be in a slow genetic nose dive.

If you see alot of noticable size difference among the fawns in late summer and early fall your herd is in trouble due to age class of the bucks even though the ratio my indeed be at what the DWR biologists call for.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 01:07PM (MST)[p]>In my area the the ratio
>I see seems to be
>about the same as the
>DWR's.
>
>Here is the problem. A mature
>buck {at least 4 years
>old} is only capable
>of successfully breeding 25 or
>so does in a season.
>
>
>Younger bucks are capable of breeding
>but there success rate is
>very much lower, and the
>doe can not judge the
>genetics of a younger buck.
>A doe will breed with
>a younger buck but only
>as a last resort and
>many times a month or
>so after the regular rut.
>
>
>So even at 15 or 20
>bucks per hundred your herd
>may be in a slow
>genetic nose dive.
>
>If you see alot of noticable
>size difference among the fawns
>in late summer and early
>fall your herd is in
>trouble due to age class
>of the bucks even though
>the ratio my indeed be
>at what the DWR biologists
>call for.

Are you saying that the older a buck gets the better genes that buck will have? Offspring of giant bucks have the same genetics.

I do agree that some fawns are born later in the year which causes that fawn to die in the winter.

The DWR also lists the older class bucks which is usually around around 30 to 40%
 
Elithornhunter, No what I'm saying is that does having to breed with what ever they can get will over time make for a much less
desirable herd as far as genetics.

Genetics of course stay the same no matter what the age of the animal.
 
If a mature buck can breed 25 does, that means you only need 4 mature bucks per 100 does. Or, 2-3 mature bucks and 13-15 immature bucks. Seems to be a non-issue then. I guess the biologists, notice I used the PLURAL form, are right in only needing 7-10 bucks per 100 does to get the breeding done. Everything above that is strictly for hunter management, NOT deer management!
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-10 AT 02:11PM (MST)[p]What I was pointing out is that a noticable number of late rut fawns is an indicator that there is likely a shortage of mature bucks in a herd.

Does having to breed with out the choice of the best genetics{ big heavy horns and bodies} will of course over time allow
the introduction of less desirable genetics like being pencil necked willow horned three pointers.


Not every mature buck carries good genetics and the less choice the doe has will over time favor week genetics over strong.
 
Hey guys,

Have any of you read the most recent issue of MuleyCrazy mag?

The reason I ask is there is a very interesting article in there about deer counting and the science (or lack there of) behind it.

It was written by a DWR Biologist by the name of Kay.

He is very blunt in revelaing the fact that deer numbers tend to be swayed more by politics than anything else.

They use sampling methods and he goes into great detail to define these methods and show the amount of error potential involved with each method.

The point being, What do you want the numbers to be? We can make em look as good or as bad as you like.

He does talk about a couple of very good options, one of which is already mentioned above here, adn that is IR.

He also mentions the idea that the military has technology right now that can measure every deer in an entire area (no more sampling) from outter space. Doesn't get much more accurate than that, but very costly.

So, I guess I would have to say I am not so sure about their numbers and I think we should be asking the DWR which method they used to get these counts. This will give all of us a much better idea of how accuratwe their numbers actually are and what type of error we may expect to see in them.

My 2 cents!
 
Your correct I read that sa well. I believe the FLIR is an answer to accurate population counts. As stated the military has this technology today. Much is available the public. Also stated this method allows for counts of multiple species in one survey. Absolutely invaluable to a big game manager.

Part of me believes the DWR doesn't want accurate counts. You know why.
 
I don't mean to butt in here, but:)

Be careful about questioning the DWR buck to doe ratio numbers. If you convince them it's too low, they might just have a doe/fawn hunt to raise it.

Eel
 
Castnshoot

...informationally unencumbered.

"does' cooosing", "25 does a season".....etc.

You are watching WAY too much "Bambi".
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

1995_MD_Archery.jpg
2D5054E7-4022-42D2-A3C2-9495AA07707D.jpeg
06B0E348-C55B-48FB-99E8-EC928D6CAEB2.jpeg
IMG_2609.JPG
IMG_0856.jpeg
IMG_5393.jpg
BABAE8D1-089B-41AA-BA9A-D4663D39B8F6.png
20221210_103016_resized.jpg
93F29953-E41F-4BB6-8567-ED7923C44962.jpeg
BBEE25E7-F541-427B-A5FE-46661DCD3206.jpeg
AAEBD693-B215-41F5-825D-C4225EA7316B.jpeg
Attachment-1.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom