wyoming public imput on 2012 hunting season

M

mtnhigh

Guest
WGFD is holding some public meeting's for people to share information,observation's and idea's for developing 2012 hunting seasons. We need to put some preasure on these wildlife managers that are doing a piss poor job on the deer heard in western wyo.
Meetings will be: Jan.17, baggs community center 6:30 pm. Jan. 18, Kemmerer, south lincoln traing and event center 6 pm .
Jan. 19, Greenriver, G&F regional office 6 pm. Jan. 24 Lyman, Lyman courthouse 6 pm. Jan. 25, Evanston, uninta county libary/ bridger carter room 6 pm.
 
Show up everyone and make your viewpoints heard loud and clear. I will try and make the 100 plus mile trip.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-12 AT 11:06AM (MST)[p]I hope a lot of well-intentioned people show up and voice logical well thought-out observations and ideas, rather than getting into a nasty pizzing match where nobody, especially the deer, wins!!!
 
The deer have already lost, and the game and fish won't do anything to change the status quo unless they really hear from the public.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-12 AT 12:13PM (MST)[p]I understand that, but I think you know what I mean. Get a lot of people together and maybe have one or two spokespersons for the group that can give a logical explanation that will be listened to, rather than a bunch of people shouting and telling the F&G they are a bunch of jerks, etc. You know, use a little honey, but do it in mass and with the past winter that everyone seems to know was a disaster down there, maybe something positive will be accomplished! Good luck!!!
 
G&F won't do a damn thing different,IMO.I actually thought they were reaching out to us with the Wyoming Range Initiative meetings,but they turned out to be a waste of time.They got all these different suggestions from a large group of people,but did nothing in response.Soon Wyoming's deer hunting will be like Utah's deer hunting.I would have gone to the Green River meeting tonight,but instead I went to a meeting for a new group we are organizing in Rock Springs that is dedicated to helping mule deer.After many years of trying to get Wy G&F to listen with no response,we will try a new approach now.
 
We are a break-away chapter of MDF.Our MDF chapter began 5 years ago,and since then we have set the national record for most net $$ for a single banquet.We have raised over $500,000 for mule deer in 5 years.We are tired of seeing our money go elsewhere because of the setup that MDF has in regards to how the money is allocated.Out of that 500K,we got just over 100K to put on the ground for projects that we wanted to do locally(sw Wy).We will now be putting all monies raised here to projects here.So far,we have been receiving overwhelming response to this.Since our organization is in it's infancy,we currently are in a money raising phase,so we have no projects on the agenda;only ideas.Our first banquet is scheduled for March 3.www.muleyfanatics.com.
 
>We are a break-away chapter of
>MDF.Our MDF chapter began 5
>years ago,and since then we
>have set the national record
>for most net $$ for
>a single banquet.We have raised
>over $500,000 for mule deer
>in 5 years.We are tired
>of seeing our money go
>elsewhere because of the setup
>that MDF has in regards
>to how the money is
>allocated.Out of that 500K,we got
>just over 100K to put
>on the ground for projects
>that we wanted to do
>locally(sw Wy).We will now be
>putting all monies raised here
>to projects here.So far,we have
>been receiving overwhelming response to
>this.Since our organization is in
>it's infancy,we currently are in
>a money raising phase,so we
>have no projects on the
>agenda;only ideas.Our first banquet is
>scheduled for March 3.www.muleyfanatics.com.

Awesome! We had a chapter here in Nebraska to, and simply disbanded for the same reasons. We have talked about starting something else but haven't put anything together yet.


"In the breast of every meat hunter there beats the heart of a secret, frustrated trophy hunter."
 
Good luck with these meetings. We attended in force 2 years ago. The Game and Fish people sat and nodded their heads while they listened intently and then ignored everything that we said; shrugged off our questions; disputed what we told them we saw with our own eyes and did what they had planned to do in the first place. But, who knows, maybe they have changed!
 
No, I didn't make the Green river meeting, we got lots of snow yesterday and I chickened out, did anyone go to one?
 
this may not go over well with the locals or NR for that matter but I suggest an antler restiction. With deer numbers so low across the state, I can believe they havent done anythin glike that already.

Either way, Good luck. Wyoming in a great state and mule deer are by far one of the most coolest north american big game species to hunt.
 
How is an antler restriction going to increase the herd that is low in numbers? All that would do is allow for some bucks to reach maturity so a person could kill a bigger rack, but it probably wouldn't increase the overall herd number.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-12 AT 08:03PM (MST)[p] Bodhi- if you went, tell us a little of what was said at the meeting ?
 
Having mature bucks in any herd helps with the overall health of the herd. You are right Topgun, one way we as hunters benefit is by havesting large antlered bucks. But without knowing the preg/birth rate etc. I'd be speculating on how it would increase the herd size. Lots of other factors come into play like weather, habitat, predation etc. and I am not qualified to talk about. It was only a suggestion for the areas that have been hit the hardest.

I do know this, letting younger bucks grow to maturity is never a bad thing regarless of AR.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-12 AT 10:01AM (MST)[p]3 point or better has been tried many times, and as far as I know it never has show to be an effective management tool. Colorado used three point or better for years before finally going to a seperate unit management with a limit on tag numbers. Until Wyoming starts managing deer as they do antelope, nothing will change much, other states have proven that, and its stupid not to learn from those examples.
 
I'm gonna tell you all this. If we want to make a differnece with the deer herds in Wyoming or any other state for that matter. A group can raise 100 million dolars and do projects out the hind end. But if the G&F doesnt manage the herds correctly, then the money is useless. Its all in the management. Want to make a difference? Start with calling your county commissioners, the G&F commissioners then the Gov. office.

All of us including me. We complain about our herds,complain about the G&F, complain to our friends and complain to the G&F. Then we pick up our guns the next season and go hunting. Do it again the folowing year and the cycle never ends. The G&F will not do what we ask at the local level. It all comes from Cheyenne which is run by the all mighty dollar, the G&F commission and the Gov's office. We need change!!! Sports groups can only do so much. That is raise money and do projects. Thats it! Heck SFW of Wyoming still hasnt changed the G&F in Wyoming. It comes down to individual preasure beeing applied. More individuals applying preasure the better our chances of change.
 
true story, get ahold of the commisioners, Email or whatever, thats where the power to change is.
 
Wyoming's Sportsmen have never asked WY SFW to change the G&F. This is the group that can get it done; however, it will only happen if a significant number or high enough percentage of sportsmen get on the same page. As long as sportsmen remain divided we will never see a change.

I have always maintained the purpose of WY SFW was not to hunt the heads of any G&F employee but rather to seek solutions to identified problems.

The hard reality is that some believe nothing can be done to fix our deer herds, some believe nothing is wrong, some are worried that hunting will become too restrictive, etc, etc.

One thing is for sure; it is far easier to sit at home on a computer and throw rocks then it is to work for a solution. As those trying to make a difference, it is very frustrating to see nothing but criticism from people that are not even engaged in the debate. Every time WY SFW takes a position on any issue, some one will find a point of disagreement or a fault. More often than not, those finding fault didn't attend a single meeting to provide input or voice their opinion.

As long as sportsmen remain fractured and divided, we will continue to be easily defeated and manipulated.

Those that attended the winter meeting pertaining to the Wyoming Range Deer Herd in Green River, WY know exactly what I am talking about.
 
"As long as sportsmen remain fractured and divided, we will continue to be easily defeated and manipulated. "

Yeah, and I know of a group or two that are the absolute masters at fracturing and dividing hunters.

Mainly SFW and BGF.

Classic examples of the last couple weeks are the attempted tag grab by AZSFW where they tried to sneak through some legislation to get 350 of Arizona's best tags. Of course, included in the legislation, SFW would be the only group allowed to control those 350 tags.

Another classic example is the appointment of Corey Rossi, that was pushed through via SFW's political machine. Pretty amazing, considering Rossi is now up on 12 charges of illegal hunting. He did manage to get several of AK's governors tags to the hunting expo though. Nothing "unites" hunters more than a group that truly is "head hunting" the AKG&F director, which is exactly what happened during the corrupted appointment of Rossi, who doesnt even have a degree in Wildlife Biology.

How about Don Peay throwing public access under the bus by trying to restrict Utahs stream access law? Theres a real winner that is sure to not cause any fracturing. Nothing says, "our group supports hunters/fishermen" more than trying to strip them of legal public access.

How about WYSFW pushing for transferable landowner tags? Is that something that will cause Wyoming hunters to "unite"??? Me thinks not, that BS did nothing but fracture Wyoming hunters and landowners, real smart move there. How about outfitter sponsored tags in Wyoming that SFW was pushing??? Another favorite that really united Wyomings hunters and endeared them to their outfitter friends.

Then there is BGF and SFW alligning themselves with the wolf hippies and lobbying anyone that would listen to them in their attempt to derail legislation to take wolves off the ESA and allow MT and ID to hunt them. The net result of the legislation that BGF and SFW were attempting to destroy, has led to successful hunting seasons in MT, ID, and now it appears the great lakes regions as well.

So, Mr. Wharff...you can beat your tired old drum all you want about hunters not being united and not be willing to unite on a cause. Theres a reason why they wont...and your group is a big reason why they wont.

Its not enough that public land, DIY hunters who believe in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, have to watch the anti-hunting groups, but now we have to watch every single thing that BGF and SFW are doing as well. The biggest threat to the North American Model is the power hungry greed of a couple supposed sportsmens groups.

Thats sad.
 
Buzz is right and politics is a nasty business, its also true that quality deer hunting is basicly over with in Wyoming. No state besides Nevada has been able to change from the old ways of OTC tags and opportunity for all deer hunting to controled unit based hunting without a whole lot of the hunting public making a whole lot of noise. Im afraid Wyoming isn't even close, there are still a bunch of hunters that think OTC tags are the way to go, and change is hard. WGF doesnt really have an articulate spoksmen working for them that knows whats going on, and the missteps of SFW left them with little credibility with Wyoming hunters and unable to be a uniter on the issue. Wyomings deer hunting is just like and will stay like Utahs general deer hunting, and Idahos general deer hunting, sad but true.
 
Buzz,

Unlike you, I won't speak about things I know nothing about.

Unlike you, WY SFW is at least trying to make a difference. Do we get it right 100% of the time? Probably not; however, we continue to try to get it right.

As I have asked before; where has WY SFW caused the State of Wyoming harm?

Your bias against SFW is so obvious but have you tried to help the organization at all? As far as I know you have never been a member, you have never attempted to assist with identifying a problem in the state nor a solution. I attend just about every G&F Commission meeting, several G&F public meetings throughout the state. I also attend state legislative meetings throughout the year. As far as I am aware, you have never once came to any of these meetings and spoken on any issue. If you have you have never identified yourself. You prove my point. SFW is not the enemy of sportsmen; however, you seem to have a hard on for anything and everything SFW.

The model developed by SFW does work but only to the degree its members help to identify issues, find common solutions, craft and implement a plan to obtain the desired outcome. Besides criticizing SFW & BGF, what have you done?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-12 AT 10:35AM (MST)[p]Piper,

Here are my ideas on mule deer in Wyoming and I'll explain why I dont believe in the whole state going limited entry.

For starters, I'll never be in favor of hunting coming down to who is lucky in a drawing and who isnt. I personally feel that making more drawing areas is the easy way out, doesnt require habitat to change, etc. Sure, you can change the age class of bucks via LE units, but, have you really improved the habitat and have you really improved the deer herd? I think you havent done anything other than make those that want bigger bucks, easier, happy.

The key to actually improving the over-all HEALTH of the deer herds is not just to go to limited quota areas. Its making aggressive habitat changes, securing winter range, etc.

There are also several big dead elephants in the middle of the room that nobody wants to talk about...poaching, road-kill, limiting easy access, and hunters themselves.

I cringe when I think of the amount of poaching that goes on year in and year out. We need to get people to turn the SOB's in that poach. I personally know guys that are too spineless to turn others in when they see it happen. We also need more wardens on the ground, there is scarcely even 1 warden per COUNTY in Wyoming. That is going to take money, and hunters, in particular resident hunters, are going to have step up by asking for increased resident license fees.

Road-kill...take a drive on any highway in Wyoming that goes through deer country. Holy balls, drive hwy 789 from Creston Junction to Baggs. The boulevard of broken mule deer is what I call it. We need underpasses, fencing, etc.

Next, how about we discuss making access harder? I know, because every time you do, some d-bag is whining because their "right" to drive an atv on every last acre of public land is being violated. Most think if you cant drive there, its "locked up". They then continue to whine about how their 60 year-old broke-di ck uncle that has a bad back isnt able to hunt anymore if they limit access. They'd rather create easy access and kill every last 2 point off the handle bars than ever think of "locking up" some areas and making access via walk-in only.

Finally, hunters themselves. I've watched as countless people who complain about low mule deer numbers, and no quality bucks, whack small immature bucks year after year. Just because you have a tag, doesnt mean you have to fill it on a mule deer. I've only shot 1 mule deer in Wyoming in the last 5 years. There is NO reason why a hunter cant pass immature mule deer and then hunt whitetails in the later part of the season if they just have to fill their tag. There is a real need to harvest whitetail bucks and does in many areas of Wyoming on your general tag. Thats what I've done several times in Wyoming...we have a choice and should be making the correct decisions, we have the ability.

Finally, the reason I dont care for limited quota areas is that it doesnt do a lot of good to increase interest for youth hunters. Its pretty tough to claim that we're interested in hunter recruitment, but then we take away opportunity for youth via LE units. I'd rather see hunters limited to one mule deer buck every 2-3 regulatory years than see a single LE area. The years in between, you could chase whitetails that are in need of increased harvest.

I'm in agreement that mule deer are in the tank, but theres a lot of things that havent been considered to help improve the situation. The easy way out, which IMO, wont ever recover the health and increase numbers, is to just say lets make everything LE.

My 2 bits...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-12 AT 10:52AM (MST)[p]Mr. Wharff,

Why would I want to be a member of a group that is in direct conflict with the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation?

Why would I support a group that has fractured hunters via the things I listed in my first post?

That makes no sense. SFW's aganda is clear, and its not a good deal for the average DIY hunter who believes in the North American Model...just flat isnt.

I attend meetings all the time, I also send comments to the legislature, I send numerous letters to commissioners, State and Federal delegates, Governors, etc. in multiple states.

I'm also a member/life-member of several hunting organizations that havent decided to throw the average DIY public land hunter under the bus...like BGF and SFW does all the time (see first post).

I've written to the WYG&F as well the commission on mule deer issues, making suggestions like those I posted above in my response to Piper.

You're naive to the fact that most of the Sportsmen in Wyoming dont buy SFW's crap...SFW does a fantastic job of uniting them in defiance of your lame "model" of peddling the public wildlife resources to the highest bidder, defying wolf delisting, taking public access away, creating transferable landowner tags, outfitter tags, and back door politics to head hunt trained biologists, and take control of G&F agencies.

But, at least SFW is doing something, right?

Congratulations?
 
I am really not going to get into this suqabble again about SFW because I think BuzzH has done well enough that I don't need to make any comments. However, I do have a question for Mr. Wharff. How many resident hunting/fishing licenses are sold in the state of Wyoming and how many members do you presently have in your organization? In your position, I would think that should be a pretty easy question to answer, at least member number. Would you also know those figures for Utah?
 
The more I read of what BuzzH has to say the more I like him. If I still drank I would stop by and by him one, but I stopped that so the next time I have a camp fire in Wyoming I will invite him by for an elk burger. I don't usually chime in because of people like "Smokestick". I think there is a million good ideas to help the deer. The problem I see is not with all of the things listed it is with the money. I manage an office and have a budget to live by. When things get tough the belt gets tightened. The belt only has so many holes and then you have to make new ones. And that is tough.... not giving raises to laying off a provider of a family, the list can go on and on. So let's figure out how to get the revenue to match the needed budget, even if we think they are overpaid or to many chiefs or whatever. We can let an organization sell tags at an elevated price to bring in more money per tag. Over my dead body says Joe. Or we can raise general tag fees for NR. Then they stop buying them like in Idaho. Or we can raise tag fees to residents. Over my dead body says George. So here we are tring how to harvest less animals and still meet a budget. That is where the real problem is. We can do all that we can to fix other areas that BuzzH listed and that will help, but if we don't fix F&G budget they will sell more tags. The only suggestion I would have is to put a cap on tags sold. Whatever the number is to maintain the budget. And then allow people to pay for a tag and not redeem it. So it would allow the F&G to receive the funds and those wishing to help that can afford it to do so. It would reduce the number of hunters by the amount of dollars "donated" or whatever you want to call it. No one would receive special privileges for doing so. If a tag is $10.00 and someone gave $100.00 then there would be 10 less tags in the field. Just two cents from a guy that really misses the old Muley days.
DZ
 
BuzzH,

What is amazing is that after reading your comments to piper, I agree with everything you have said.

You know nothing about SFW and you assume everything. I am glad to hear that you are sending in comments. That is certainly better than doing nothing but what have you accomplished?
 
BuzzH---Did you notice how my post was missed by Mr. Wharff? Maybe he knew exactly why I asked for those numbers because I would bet that his organization has a miniscule percentage of the people buying licenses as members, and yet they supposedly are toutng themsleves as speaking for the biggest percentage of hunters the way I understand it.
 
Mr. Wharff,

Please, if you can get around to it, tell me one thing that isnt true about SFW that I just posted.

I've indisputable facts to back up my assertions about SFW and BGF.

The types of things that SFW has done in the past 10 years isnt going to unite hunters, isnt going to help wildlife and does nothing but create problems for those individuals, G&F Agencies, and sporting groups that are actually solving problems.

Its bad enough having to worry about the anti-hunters, non-hunting public, etc. without having to fight supposed "hunting organizations".

There is a massive amount of work to be done, being distracted by the bullchit that SFW has caused isnt helping.

I'd also have to guess that I've had as much success with making changes to mule deer managementin Wyoming as WYSFW has.

Unfortunately, I've also been distracted having to fight transferable landowner tags, ranching for wildlife programs, outfitter sponsored tags, corruption of G&F agencies via AK/UTSFW, attempted tag grabs in AZ, SFW leadership trying to deny legal public stream-access, stopping SFW/BGF from trying to derail wolf delisting in MT, ID, and the Great Lakes, etc. etc. etc.

We've all only got so much extra time on our hands, lots of mine is spent just trying to keep SFW/BGF from gerry-mandering the publics wildlife resources.
 
If sfw is responsible for the pathetic TAG giveaway in Utah that hasnt helped the average guys hunting or the game numbers why would anybody want them in thier state? Buzz you make some good points. BH1
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-12 AT 11:30PM (MST)[p]Buzz, here are some of the reasons why I believe Wyoming needs to go to unit by unit controlled hunts with a limited amount of deer tags. Surprisingly its not much different than the reason Wyoming uses that same management strategy on pronghorn Antelope, do you know why they don't sell over the counter tags for pronghorns? Even though pronghorn hunting is a luck of the draw hunt, I would venture that more young people are hooked on hunting because of a antelope hunt than deer, and I bet more kids are turned off by deer hunting experiences than either elk or antelope. You talk about young people needing a good experience, growing up in Nevada I have some experience in total draw hunts, and I can tell you kids love deer hunting in Nevada, more than Wyoming on average, and far more than Utah, and the reason for that is the quality of the experience, and if you think kids go without opportunity there, just look it up. I have only killed one buck in the last 8 years hunting in Wyoming, I wish everyone would do that, but they don't, and I wish everyone would kill a whitetail in places where they are over populated, but they don't, I wish people wouldn't hammer all those big greys river bucks when they are young and immature, but they don't. In the real world the only way for those things to happen is to have a multiple choice draw hunt, wishes won't work, it doesn't work in the wilderness state of Idaho, it doesnt work in Utah, and it didn't work in Colorado. Improving habitat and limiting access are good ideas that we need to do, but the constantly improving scope and reach of the modern hightec hunter will quickly take away any improvements those things would likely bring, and we will be back right where we are now, mule deer hunting poor and getting worse.
 
Buzz,

That's twice in a month you have been told you were wrong. Once by a guy who told you and I that we couldn't possibly understand the statistics behind preference points (because he had BA from U of Wyo); the second by a guy who says the same tired SFW mantra over and over. I like your style, for sure! Keep up the fight against those who neither understand, nor care about the North American model of wildlife conservation.

I, too, have not killed a mule deer in Wyoming since I moved back in 2008. Maybe you'd willing to send me some ideas on a few places to shoot a whitetail?

Piper,

Some of your ideas have merit, also. The way Nevada helps the youth hunters could definitely be applied here in Wyoming.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 12:46PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 12:40?PM (MST)

BUZZH,you certainly have some great ideas,and I agree with them for the most part.Just wondering,though.How much does an underpass cost to build?If there are very few whitetails near Green River or Rock Springs;and no late seasons for them;are we supposed to drive up to Sundance in Nov so we can fill our tags?Motels and gas aren't cheap,either.Since I'm 60 yrs old(my ##### isn't broken,and I am someone's uncle),does that mean I should be done with my hunting career since I don't want to hike in 10 miles anymore?Not trying to start a fight with you,but your comments are definitely biased towards what YOU think is right.You call those who want LQ tags selfish,because that is not what you believe.(BTW,I am playing devil's advocate here).I am in good enough shape I can still do okay for myself.I have killed 3 deer in Wy since 2000.How do you make everyone stop killing yearlings?How do you pay for an over/underpass?Shouldn't we try to do something for our deer before it's too late?Who pays for all the habitat projects?TOPGUN-a question for you.What percentage of Wyoming hunters belong to ANY sportsmen's organization?I guarantee you the number is very low.It's called APATHY.Some may know it as INDIFFERENCE.In my opinion,it is the worst malady facing hunters today.It will kill hunting long before wolves,CWD,SFW,or BGF will.Whether you agree with me or not,that's my take on it.THEY should do this.THEY should do that.BUZZ and Bob Wharff have a lot more in common than meets the eye.Neither has apathy.Right or wrong-They are both doing what they believe is right.
 
nontypical,

You have asked some honest questions...and I'll give you honest answers in return.

Not sure what under/over passes cost. The funding for that type of thing can come from federal grants, combined with sportsmens groups, and state agencies combining resources to pay for them. I'm aware of a couple that have been done in recent years in Montana, and they were funded through what I mentioned above. They have also greatly reduced vehicle/wildlife collisions, have saved a lot of wildlife and undoubtedly have also saved human lives as well.

Look, I'm not saying we have to fund all this stuff this year, but I know that funding is available and that things get done when people want them done...savvy?

Next, yes, hunters do have to be willing to travel if they want to hunt whitetails with general tags...but you dont have to drive clear to Sundance to do it. Again, its a question of personal accountability and truly how concerned you are with helping the mule deer herds. If you want to be a cheapskate and whack an immature mule deer close to town...do it. Just dont expect me to be backing you when you start whining that there, "just arent many deer around and we need to go LE". The fact is, you go limited entry and you WILL be traveling to hunt deer anyway, unless you get real lucky in the draw.

Secondly, there are multiple areas to get type 6 cow tags, on the cheap, and close to anywhere you live in Wyoming. If meats an issue and you dont want to travel for deer, get a type 6 cow tag. Elk are over-objective in many,many areas, provide more bang-for-the-buck meat wise, and can be done in a unit near you. Plus, there is even some compelling evidence that increased elk numbers have a negative impact on deer...best of both worlds, fill the freezer with an elk, and make room for more deer, and dont feel like you have to shoot a deer for meat...win-win-win.

Next, the "I'm old so I cant get where I used to...build me a road". Never going to get my support, we all get old, we all will eventually not be able to reach country we hunted in our youth. I'm not selfish enough to demand my areas remain accessible to me because I'm old, disabled, lazy, or whatever. The health of the herds should come first. If closures mean some of the older, fatter, and lazier are kept out...thats just too bad, hunt where you're able to. I am totally all-right knowing that many of the things I push now will eventually keep me out as well. But, its more important to me, that I know remote country will be there for many generations and for wildlife, than my selfishness of wanting to keep it open for me forever. I've never let my own agenda cloud the common good for wildlife and future generations...if access needs to be limited to provide that (which I beleive it does), then we need to do it. I agree that its painful, it will suck for me too.

The way I see things, go after the low hanging fruit first, things that arent going to cost you anything. Its not a bad thing to ask hunters via discussions like this to think about killing whitetails and cow elk rather than shooting a dink mule deer just to fill a tag/freezer. Its not costing us anything to do so.

Asking for limits on access, wont cost anything.

Forcing legislation that only allows hunters to kill one mule deer every 2-3 regulatory years, wont cost much.

I agree with you that habitat projects, over/underpasses are not done cheaply. But, do you find yourself feeling guilty that all you pay for a deer tag in Wyoming as a resident is $38? In particular when that wont even pay for a single tank of fuel for a warden to patrol?

Its time for Residents to step up, open their wallets, and start funding these things if we want to really start getting serious about saving mule deer.

Patching it together via LE units is a band-aid approach that will leave many on the side-lines not hunting deer at all each year.

Another thing I thought of is also a $5-$10 annual mule deer enhancement stamp that you must buy if you want to hunt mule deer in Wyoming. Use that money exclusively for mule deer enhancement projects. Very similar to the elk feedground stamp.

What I'm saying there are ways to get things done if you really want to...most find it easier to let others solve the problems. Then they whine because they're paying $38 for a deer tag...gee, thanks for your massive contribution.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 03:03PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 03:02?PM (MST)

Limited entry hunting is a band aid approach? Does anyone know why they use the band aid approach when managing Antelope? Why don't they just give out OTC tags on pronghorns? they are certainly as numerous as muleys. Im just guessing here and maybe some of you can straighten me up, but I think its because like muleys,they are vulnerable to hunting pressure, and I think known trophy areas like the red desert ( Salt river range ect) would get pounded to death by hunters, yet other areas (White tail areas ect)that really need harvesting wouldn't get much of a harvest. Can anyone see a similar situation happening with mule deer,? and does that sound like a good way to manage big game? Or would the band aid approach work better?. If people don't want to drive very far to go hunting, they can hunt cow elk, or maybe they live near white tail country? or maybe even muley country? Interestingly Colorado seems to keep opportunity open for all their mule deer hunters every year, and since they have roughly ten times our population, Im actually quite sure people wouldn't be left of the sidelines every year with limited quota hunting if they really wanted to go hunting, although I will admit that everyone probably wont be able to pound the Greys river country every september with a 1000 yd rifle, but who knows maybe thats a good thing?.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 03:28PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 03:27?PM (MST)

Piper,

Yes, I think its a band-aid approach, and surely the easy way out without having to invest $hit in the future of mule deer and habitat.

Explain how going LQ is going to change habitat, secure more habitat, etc.???

Also, how do you propose the drop in license sales that will result from every area going LQ be dealt with? Who's going to fund the sure short-fall in license sales?

Thats what you're proposing, and exactly what will happen, a net loss in revenue to the G&F.

I'm not totally against LQ, but I'm against it until other options have been exhausted.

Also, dont you find it odd that just about all the LQ areas we already have in Wyoming are not worth even applying for? Not producing any better bucks than the general units, in many cases, not even as good.

Based on that fact, I dont think its worth going LQ.

Habitat and habitat improvement is the answer, along with producing more deer, not just creating better hunting with what we have left for the few that get lucky in a LQ drawing.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-12 AT 06:30PM (MST)[p]I never said LE hunts would replace investments in deer habitat, I say do it all. I also don't believe tag sales would go down as dramaticly as you imply, hunt pressure would be the biggest change, more in some places and less in others, thats the beauty of small unit management. Tag costs should go up anyway, and beating up on the deer herds isn't the best way for the game and fish to raise money in my opinion , sadly thats probably a lot of the reason things never change. I think in past posts you have been told by people in the know, just how much better some of the controlled areas are compared to the past when they were OTC. did you forget? We both have our opinions and I have stated mine the best I can.
 
Thanks for your response,BUZZ.I certainly agree with your views almost entirely.My point is that sportsmen need to be more vocal.I am actively engaged and have been for many years.What a shame that as a group,sportsmen tend to stand on the sidelines and do nothing.Then,when something changes that they don't like,they whine and cry about it.Somehow,some way,we need to unite for the cause.Big game populations center around fawn and calf survival.Bottom line.The best habitat in the world will not matter if fawns don't survive.IMO,that is step number 1 in figuring out a solution to our plummeting deer numbers.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-12 AT 09:14AM (MST)[p]That's for sure! If you don't get good recruitment most every Spring with a large pecentage of those animals reaching maturity, it won't matter after a while whether we hunt or not because there just won't be enough animals to warrant a season!
 
Those are great ideas, the only problem is we have no control over the weather, and if any of you know much about Wyoming, its the weather that counts. Talk is cheap, and hot air is hot air, I hope for the best also, maybe we can pray too, but the truth is, its far better to take care of what you have, right along with doing what you can to make things better.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-12 AT 10:15AM (MST)[p]My personal opinion is we need to take steps to reduce the predator effect on the fawns.Timely coyote eradication during fawning/calving periods would help,IMO.Also,maybe we need to take a closer look at increasing the total lion kill.Piper-correct me if I'm wrong,but I'm pretty sure Nevada issues unlimited lion tags.Sure doesn't seem to have a negative impact on the kitty populations there,does it?In deer unit 102 in Wyo,the lion quota was filled before winter even started.That tells me that there are either a lot of cats or more people are hunting them.Also-why do we protect the females?They are feeding a family.Wouldn't it stand to reason that they would need to kill more food than a lone tom?Just some thoughts.I will post some info from a study done when I receive the info.It's my feeling that we are on the edge of being in a "predator pit"(maybe there already)that is preventing the deer from fully rebounding.In other words,the predator/prey balance is out of whack in favor of the prey species.Especially after last winter,which wiped out a large percentage of the herds.www.muleyfanatic.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-12 AT 10:48AM (MST)[p]Yea Nevada does issue unlimited lion tags, and they push selling them, but it doesn't seemed to have helped overall deer numbers much, and I have heard outfitter complain about the lack of cats. Where I live in Wyoming there aren't very many coyotes, hardly ever see them, and you can read detailed scientific information about coyote predation on line, as there have been some in depth studys in different states over the years. I still believe weather is the biggest factor in this state, not only because of winter kill but in forage production. The difference in Nevada is they use biological data to set tag numbers in individual units, if the deer are doing well then more tags are issued, I remember left over tags in lots of units during the 1980s when deer populations were robust, thats how you can steer hunters to hunt in areas, and that the same thing could be done in Wyoming. Wyoming has a lot recent young male hunters moving here because of the energy boom, we have amazing new technology in hunting devices, information and weapons, and we have very poor, stagnant or declining deer herds, yet people can't figure why the hunting is poor? The Game and Fish dept manages antelope pretty well, they feed the already more robust elk herds and do a decent job managing them, but they just can't drop the old ways of deer management, the deer get poached, smashed on the roads and then hunted to death with tons of nonresident hunters and OTC tags. Im sure there is a predator pit going on, and human predators are a big part of it.
 
I posted this on a different thread, but here is my report from the meeting in Evanston:

"Along with Game and Fish personnel and sporstmen there was representation from the state legislature and large landowners in the county. It was good to have this mixture in the same room to talk about the issues that we face together. This format was much better than previous meetings that I have attended when the seasons are already printed, the decisions made and it is too late to provide our input. This is a much better way for the Game and Fish to get face to face with the people that they are working for and see if we can work WITH each other instead of opposing each other. It is a big first step that I hope will lead to improved opportunities for all."
 
Piper-You are absolutely correct about weather being an important factor.But we've had many bad winters that wiped out deer that I can remember.'78-'79,'83-'84,'92-'93.The difference is that the deer always recovered from those winters relatively quickly.For whatever reason,they are no longer recovering.I shouldn't have included '92-'93,because I feel like they never fully recovered from that winter.Perhaps we are witnessing the evolutionary process of extinction for the species.Because it's not just happening here-it's all across the west.Very few areas where mulies are not in decline.
 
There isnt one thing causing this...and there isnt one silver bullet thats going to fix it.

All you have to do is look at what has changed since the 60's and 70's to find your answers.

IMO, the thing thats changed the most is the habitat...and also where I feel the biggest positive changes to improve the situation will happen.

You create better habitat, you have more deer and you have healthier deer. With healthier deer a lot of the other problems solve themselves.

Healthier deer are more productive (more fawns).

Healthier deer survive winters easier.

Healthier deer evade predators much better.

Healthier fawns...the more that make it to maturity.

The list goes on and on.

Think of some of the other things that have changed since the 60's and 70's.

How many people pursued mule deer that aggressively? Not as many as do now. How much more easy access is there now? How many people were out pushing deer around on winter range photographing them? Looking for sheds the second they drop? How much less oil and gas development was there? How many fewer elk were there? How many hunters had long-range rifles? How many hunters had high quality optics? How many even had a 4-wheel drive vehicle? How many fewer hunting magazines were there? How many hunters concentrated on big bucks? How many fewer homes were there on winter range? How much less traffic was there on the highways? Whats the impacts of higher speed limits on deer being hit on the highway? How often did you have a whole posse of hunters helping ONE guy with a tag? How many outfitters now vs. in the 60's and 70's. And, yes, how many more predators do we have now?

Theres a literal laundry list of things that are kicking the crap out of mule deer.

When you have all those impacts, combined with predators, it is possible that predators then push them over the edge. I'm still not convinced that predators are the main problem, more of a final straw.

I also dont think that killing off every last predator is going to help that much when you have a whole bunch of other things that are having a combined impact thats much greater.

Solutions are few and costly...and not many are willing to pay the price to try to come up with them.
 
We have created a predator free for all behind the winter closures on the winter grounds. I agree the concept is good to eliminate the poachers, video and shed pressures. Just a cause and effect. I wonder what is worse??
 
BuzzH---I couldn't agree with you more on everything you stated in that post! Everyone knows we need to band together to start working on things and it's become damn near impossible when so many people have such divergent ideas/philosophies as to why the mule deer is on this down hill spiral.
 
My point is that perhaps Wyoming should be doing some kind of predator removal WHILE THE HERD IS DOWN.Once the deer recover,then ease back off the predators.We all know that coyotes produce bigger litters when their numbers are down,and we all know that a larger prey base also will cause coyotes to produce larger litters.But it's been proven in many instances that timely coyote removal can result in higher fawn survival.BUZZ-you are absolutely spot on about habitat.I couldn't agree more.But the greatest habitat in the world will not produce more deer if half of them get eaten before they are 2 months old.I don't really see why G&F can't just TRY SOMETHING NEW once in awhile-on a more frequent basis.How hard can it be to change things up a little?If it don't work,change it back the way it was!But do something before it's too late!
 
YOU GUYS ARE ALL RIGHT ON THE $$$$$$

STOP THE ANTLERLESS HUNTS FOR 5 YEARS

STOP SHOOTING THE FORKY'S FOR 5 YEARS

START AN AGGRESSIVE PREDATOR REDUCTION PLAN ( DOGS & CATS )

IMPROVE HABITAT, BUILD SOME FENCE AND UNDERPASSES....

HOPE FOR MILD WINTERS, WE HAVE HAD 2 BAD WINTERS IN THE LAST 5 YEARS

I AM SURE EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS THIS BUT , PINEDALE TO A LITTLE PAST DANIEL HAS NEW FENCE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD WITH UNDERPASSES. I HEARD THE OIL & GAS FOLKS KICKED IN MONEY FOR THE PROJECT. ALSO THE BAGGS AREA GOT THE SAME BACK IN 09 ,,,NOT SURE WHERE THAT MONEY CAME FROM...I HAVE READ THAT IT IS WORKING VERY WELL.
 
I commend everyone on MM for their passion for mule deer. The people on here are special and we need to recognize the passion we all have for muleys. That said I don't post much anymore because there are so many know-it-all types who really don't know as much as they think and are so harsh it is difficult to maintain a reasonable dialog on MM.

I could not agree more that mule deer should, at the very least be managed in the same fashion as pronghorn antelope in Wyoming. I've held that position on MM for over a decade and it's still true. And virtually nothing has changed in mule deer management in Wyoming during that decade. There are several factors and they have been discussed. Here are the two biggies:

? Money. G&F won't change to a well-managed deer plan because it will cost them money.
? Cool aid. The G&F employees talk to each other so much and others that support them; they really believe they are right. And they are way off target.

I've heard the habitat argument for decades, even when I was getting my undergrad degree in wildlife in the early and mid 70?s. And some habitat has been changed for the worse. But here in eastern Wyoming, very little has changed. Much of the habitat is better than it was 30-40 years ago. I lease over 100,000 acres and those places still have the same few houses they did 50 years ago. And there are FAR FEWER mule deer than 30 years ago. Many of the ranches have undertaken conservation improvements through conservation programs like EQIP, WHIP, GPCP, etc. And habitat has improved significantly. Water is more available and there's better grazing management than 30-40 years ago. On our family ranch, we are taking out 50 acres of young encroaching ponderosa pines in key mahogany stands this year. Many others are doing similar improvements. But there are fewer deer.

Even in today?s Casper paper, an article mentions the old Budd Ranch in Sublette County has been placed in a conservation easement. There are many more similar situations and that is great. But the habitat on many of those big ranches has not been degraded.

We shoot 3 deer off of a 42,000 acre ranch we lease and that might be one buck too many. I have a friend who owns about 20,000 acres near Chugwater. They used to shoot about 10 bucks per year in a sustainable situation. For the last couple of years they have not hunted or taken a single buck. There are just not many deer. Very few does and no mature bucks. And it is some tremendous habitat, loaded with mahogany, bitterbrush and good winter country along 12+ miles of creek and hayfields.

I agree that it is a complicated equation. But it is not just habitat. PREADTORS are a key issue. There are far more lions that we really think there are and the coyotes really are suppressing a depressed population of mule deer in many areas.

Winter weather is not a factor in our country. I've been living right here for over 30 years. The winter of 82-83 was tough as was 92-93. We lost antelope and a few deer in the higher country in 82-83, but nothing since then. We don't get much snow and the darned wind blows so much it clears the ridge tops. We just don't really have winter kill.

So what should we do? We all know the definition of insanity ? dong the same thing and expecting a different result. We?re following an insane course of action. The management has not changed and the result has only gotten worse. After 25+ years of trying to get positive change and interacting with G&F, I have given up on them. They simply don't get it and are driven by biopolitical factors. If I had a dollar for every time I have heard a Game and Fish employee tell me there's ?no biological reason? for changing deer management, I could but steak dinners for everyone who has posted here. But there are biological reasons and those employees have simply consumed too much G&F cool aid.

So ?if I was king for a day, here?s what I'd do:

1. Manage mule deer like we do antelope. Our Wyoming antelope are well managed and provide more than ample opportunity for virtually every hunter who wants to pursue them. I'm still an advocate for making us in Wyoming choose a weapon as well.
2. Keep harping about habitat. It really is critical in many areas, but not as much in others.
3. Kill the heck out of predators. Even though some who post here said Wyoming will never kill wolves, we're almost there. But we should also kill as many coyotes as we can. And we need to do more to REDUCE LION numbers. I'd be an advocate for reclassifying them as predators. (If wolves can be predators, why not lions?) At the least, I'd like to see mortality quotas increased, but that is a moot point in many areas. It's just tough to kill lions with dogs in areas where the wind blows as much as it does in southern Wyoming. I'd like to see lions trapped, at the very least on deeded lands.

Those that argue we'll lose young hunters if we manage mule deer by areas or regions. Those folks don't know much about other states. My young nephew who lives in Colorado just killed his second elk of the year yesterday. To go along with his nice buck muley and nice antelope buck as well. Numerous states have special programs to encourage young hunters and it would be easily done in Wyoming. Wyoming can accommodate young hunters. We are also losing support from what I call ?mature? hunters because we don't provide a quality experience. Older people like to hunt, too, but many give up in Wyoming because of crowds and a lack of mature deer. Just because we have young folks does not mean we should forget about other hunters.

People also say that Wyoming residents won't accept the change. When Colorado changed their deer management over a decade ago, people went ballistic. Ask Colorado residents now, and I'd bet almost no one would want to go back to the old, over-the-counter deer licensing system. There are opportunities for relatively uncrowded quality experiences for mule deer in Colorado every year. Wish I could say the same for Wyoming.

In the last decade, I've hunted mule deer from Nevada to Nebraska and from BC and Alberta to Texas. I think I've bought about 36 licenses during the last decade. I've shot 6 bucks. I like to shoot mature deer and won't generally take one unless he is solid. The only two deer I've shot in Wyoming in the last decade have been with my bow and I would not likely have shot either with my rifle. Many of us are conservationists who shoot cow elk and whitetails for meat, but love mule deer.

Even Nebraska has gone to limited quotas on mule deer in some areas.

I respect every one of you, but I can't take the drama and attacks on this site much anymore. So I won't spend any time responding to the know-it-alls who attack this rambling post.

I apologize for being so long winded but this a passionate issue for me. I'll be glad to help with either time or money and will be glad to follow up in a positive way. But I just don't have time for the bickering that seems rampant here.

Good luck and good hunting to all.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-12 AT 11:34AM (MST)[p]Thank for the post ICMDEER, I hope your letting your views be known to the game commission and everyone else you can think of.
 
Nice to hear from you,Jim-you are spot on,as usual.Sure seems like more people are concerned now than there was just a couple years back.The situation in western Wyoming is as bad as I have ever seen.There are many things G&F have no control over.I've said it many times before.The one thing they can control is hunters.Up to now,they have not done much in that regard.Hopefully,they will now.Maybe it's time to get back on the bandwagon.
 
Thanks, guys. I let everyone who I think might care know my feelings about mule deer. I have had a couple of friends who were on the Commission in the past. They were very frustrated by the way things went. They both said the situation is very internally run and that you get the G&F jacket upon arrival, the top version of a red shirt. Then you sit in the Commission room, which used to be kinda like the Supreme Court room. They sat in big, elevated chairs and the public sat in small chairs far below them. And the G&F upper-echelon employees ran the show. There was little to no latitude for discussion or issues addressed by Commissioners.

I hope both the room and the mindset have changed, but from outward appearances, I'm not convinced. I'll try to follow up though.

Again, thanks to everyone on this site for caring and trying to do what's best for mule deer. Just the fact we all agree on the importance of the deer is a good foundation for all of us to build upon.
 
ICM---I sure can't quarrel with a thing you've mentioned in your posts! It's hard to beleive that the deer are so few and far between on any private property out where you are to not be able to take more than the few good deer you mentioned in any given year. That tells me a lot right there that's it's not just the public lands that are devoid of enough animals for a good outdoor experience.
 
To add to the predator situation you guys are speaking of.... I was in winter range closure areas a few days before they closed. I couldnt believe the amount of coyote tracks in the snow. It looked as if a small herd of sheep got pushed down the 2 tracks. Shutting down public land isnt going to help the deer. It just gives sanctuary to predators. My personal opinion is shutting down the hunting for 5 to 10 years. If the game and fish go bankrupt for it, thats too bad. they have made thier own bed. All those type 4 and 6 elk tags that are being sold is going to have negaties affects on elk numbers too. Just wait in 3 or 4 yrs we are going to be complaining there isnt any elk...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-12 AT 05:15PM (MST)[p]ICMDEER,

The only thing I cant agree with at this time is the entire state going LQ.

Its a deal breaker for me, as things currently stand. I'm not saying it may ultimately come to that, but I dont beleive that we've explored other options enough to make that kind of drastic move. Going LQ statewide would cause a lot of problems to the point of creating a bigger PITA than its attempting to solve. Theres many, many, many things that would need to be addressed to make that kind of move.

You can bet that hunters in each LQ unit, with each weapon type, will want different things and be demanding their pound of flesh from the WYG&F on any LQ program. Plus, the outfitters and landowners would want their pound as well...

If thats the road we ultimately find ourselves on...it will get ugly...and thats a given.

I think it may be more important to start addressing some of the other concerns first...try them. I think theres a chance to get some of those things done now, and most agree on most of them.

If it doesnt work, push the LQ idea from there.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-12 AT 08:09PM (MST)[p]Colorado went LQ and last I checked no one died, in fact its generally considered a success story, Nevada went that way decades ago, some people whined as you could imagine back then, but it worked and they would never go back. The problem with business as usual is the recent drastic decline in deer numbers, they are giving out 800 nonresident tags in region G and 1200 in region H alone, on top of that there are unlimited nonresident tags available. Its a mess, Sublette county just got a new representitive in the state congress, people are everywhere, lots of young male residents with all the new toys. What a shame to see the beautiful Salt River range on the 15th of september, and the Wyoming range is a simular mess. Without limited quota, whats the solution? 3 day hunts? thats a poor way to recrute young hunters and have a good experence. Its been shown that often times shorter seasons have the effect of increasing the amount of animals killed, and thats not what needs to happen.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-12 AT 06:27AM (MST)[p]ICMDEER, I've posted some of my thoughts, but you are living in the heart of all this. You have some great insight,coming from many years of experience. Thanks for sharing. Maybe we need to start a "King for a Day" program.
 
We may not be colorado but we are sure headed towards being like Idaho...

I realize change is hard for everyone but wyoming has been successfully managing antelope with limited quota for decades. Mule deer could be the same. It is going to be imperative for the survival of quality trophy hunting to take at least the mountain units of region G-H to limited quota. It simply gives the managing party the most tools to do their job most effectively.

The herd can not be managed by the lack of desire to lower tags because of money. What other reason could it possibly be. A common sense observation tells me and many many more we are putting to much pressure on the high country. Short seasons are not the answer to fixing the problem either take a look at Idaho again or Utah.
 
wolfhunter---You speak of trophy hunting and it's obvious that the F&G are not managing the deer herds strictly for trophy bucks. I'm actually wondering what they really are managing for when I hear how low the deer numbers are down in G & H and keep dropping every year, especially from the winter kill last year. Cutting tag numbers of NRs and eliminating all, or parts, of G & H from the resident General Tag may be what needs to be done to decrease pressure that people are saying those areas are experiencing. It might also take some extensive road closures so that more areas can only be accessed on foot and/or horseback, but from what I'm reading on various websites, there are more and more people hunting that way every year up in the high and back country.
 
The Fish and Game dept claim they manage G and H for older age bucks and a high buck to doe ratio, I don't know how they are supposedly doing that, lots of nonresident tags? Unlimited resident tags? long seasons? they got me on that one.
 
+1 wolfhunter

to add to your comment i believe region k should be limited as well as g and h.
 
Like I've already stated, why are we going LQ statewide?

Is it really to benefit deer and increase deer numbers and improve habitat?

Or is it just to increase the trophy potential of what we have left?

one way we as hunters benefit is by havesting large antlered bucks.

I wish people wouldn't hammer all those big greys river bucks when they are young and immature,

many give up in Wyoming because of crowds and a lack of mature deer.

It is going to be imperative for the survival of quality trophy hunting

Sounds to me like the push behind LQ has nothing to do with inceasing the number of mule deer, securing habitat, or trying to address why mule deer numbers are declining.

Rather its about saving trophy hunting for the minority, from whats left of the mule deer we have. I still havent heard a single logical explaination of how LQ hunting of buck mule deer is going to secure habitat, or significantly increase deer numbers. I reckon the reason I havent...is because it wont.

Going to be a tough sell to the majority of deer hunters in Wyoming that dont care about trophy potential, to go LQ statewide.

There are things that both groups of hunters, trophy, and non-trophy hunters can both agree on. Too bad its all or nothing for at least one of those groups...
 
LQ buck tags will help. not shooting one single doe will too. Less animals will get killed meaning more animals will reproduce. seems pretty logical to me. ive seen more dry does than i ever have the past two years. could it be there isnt enough bucks to go around during the rut? i think so. peoples interest on just harvesting a deer should be sidelined for the better interest of the herd.
 
...and following your logic, peoples interest in only trophy hunting should be side-lined for the better interest of the herd and fellow hunters as well.

Just for conversation, how do you know whats causing the "dry doe" theory you're claiming?

I'd not be too sure its because of too few bucks, I wonder what the age-structure of the doe herd is?

I wonder if the extreme winter last year could have anything to do with it?

Lets just further an agenda and make wild speculation that its all to do with buck-to-doe ratios...that sounds good.

Also, how do you know that more bucks will survive under LQ management? Take a guess who sets the quotas??? I wonder if people who wait 2-3-4 years to draw a LQ area are going to not shoot a deer on a tag that they've waited several years to draw?

Going LQ is fraught with questions and also fraught with problems.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-12 AT 10:36AM (MST)[p]Limited quota hunting will help steer hunter away from overharvested areas to other areas that could possibly handle more pressure , and its proven to be a sound biological way to manage deer herds. Limiting the harvest also helps in maintaining a quality experience thereby retaining interest in hunting and recruting young hunters' and those are future advocates for the deer herds. There isn't any reason we can't have limited quota hunts and still do everything possible to help the deer herds grow. This isn't rocket science, the past is the past, some years ago Wyoming started limited quota unit by unit antelope hunt management, it wasn't the end of the world and Im sure some people got their feelings hurt, but everyone can't have everything, nothing stays the same. The reasons they changed over to limited quota antelope management in the past are the same reasons we need to apply that management tool to the deer herds now.
 
I adamantly Adamantly agree we have more problems that just a focus on big deer.Agreed! Agreed! We are not going to cure the habitat problems in 3 years. We are not going to stop the oil and gas development on winter habitat. (which I'm not sure we should it's good for Wyoming) But by going to limited quota the tag numbers can be adjusted to match the herd size...seems simple. Healthy herd should be the most important focus!!

I have discussed until I am blue in the face with the Wardens and Biologist. Sharing with them they need to reduce the pressure on this herd!! They tell me they will not drop the non resident tags any lower. They claim the ratio is already below limited quota ratio's. Of what? is it 20 percent??? They also sound just like Buzz and say YOU want to limit everyone for a few hunters. Unless they are blind I think the majority of hunters in G-H that are climbing those HUGE mountains and working their asses off are doing so for big deer. And 99 percent of them dream about a better management process!! Let's not throw these units under the bus because other area's in the state are different habitat's and have a different focus.

Just think what these mountain units could produce for quality hunting, quality experience, high quality trophies and on and on. If we simply pulled 30 percent of the pressure off from everyone resident or non resident combined. I would be willing to bet we would solve a bunch of mule deer problems in the Wyoming range. And when we addressed the herd issues, the habitat issues, then we issue more tags! We adjust pressure based on health of our herd. I don't know why but that seems really REALLY simple to me. And in short order we would have units that would rival the best of the best anywhere in the country!!!!!!! Why is this so hard??

And Buzz or anyone else that has an Idea on addressing the habitat problems, poacher problems, (big gun with no hunt) hunter problems, predator problems count me in, I will be there to help!!

When Wyoming residents decide to work together to save our mule deer herd it will happen. But as long as we remain divided the deer will continue to lose!!!
 
I just ran across some data from the Game and Fish Department regarding the Wyoming Range Deer herd. It states:"Our winter mortality surveys showed the highest mortality rates recorded in this herd since the 1980;s....On average we lost 65% of our fawns. In addition, fawn production is likely down this year as many fetuses were likely absorbed, fawns born were in poor condition, and other fawns may have died from the prolonged cold/wet spring. Low fawn recruitment has been a recurring issue, and is related to habitat conditions."

Can't grow much of a deer herd for the future with a 65% loss of replacement stock. The chart seems to indicate there was about a 20% loss of fawns in 2009 and 2010 with the huge jump to over 60% in 2011.
 
Low fawn recruitment has been a recurring issue, and is related to habitat conditions."

Who'd a thunk it...
 
Wow!! would it not make since to pull a few hunters out of the field for a year or two so we don't completely destroy our buck to doe ratio??? Hmmm How might we do that?? Maybe we should look at limited! quota!

No, let's just talk about the habitat and do nothing about it...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-12 AT 05:29PM (MST)[p]There is no doubt that the mule deer factory is no longer producing as it has in the past. One of the questions is whether fawns are being produced and either consumed by predators, dying from starvation or malnutrition or dying from disease? Jeff Short, the area biologist, has been doing some neonatal studies to determine what is happening. The question remains, what can be done in the short term while some information is gathered? I agree that limited quota is probably not the best answer; yet, I really wonder how effectively the population can be managed under the current scenario. It seems that doing the same old thing and expecting a different outcome has not worked to date. Most likely, it will never work.

At the last G&F Commission meeting, the Department talked about developing a new population estimation model. They said it will be based on a model developed and used by the Colorado department. With a more advance and reliable model the G&F department will have a better idea where our herds are at relatively to our current objectives. More than likely, we will see that our mule deer numbers are lower than thought.

In addition, the G&F stated that in the past, they decided whether hunt areas should be managed under a recreational or special classification. Recreation areas are for maximum opportunity and special are managed for higher buck:doe ratios. It sounds as though the department will now being taking that out to the public as well when they consider population objectives.

At the Commission meeting, I suggested that the department consider using average age of harvest when addressing herds that are difficult to estimate population size. My bias is that not enough attention is given to the average age of harvest. Most areas the department doesn't know the average age of harvest as they are not collecting this data. I believe it is a fundamental problem as it is data that can be measured and quantified. Even if you do not know the numbers within the population, you can tell what impacts the population is experiencing from harvest data.

For the first time, the G&F is willing to take a hard look at the role predators are playing in low fawn recruitment numbers. It was said that perhaps by targeting specific fawning areas for coyote removal fawning recruitment levels may be increased. This is a step in the right direction but we must continue to look at habitat conditions, automobile mortality rates, hunter harvest, competition between mule deer and elk, conifer encroachment of Aspen stands, fire intensity and reclamation efforts, etc.
 
Some interesting thoughts about deer management. Seems to be lots of sentiment about LE everywhere and more consideration for trophy potential. Statewide, I suspect those who support such notions are in the minority. If it came down to actually decreasing tags via limited quota and realizing your chances of hunting might be reduced to every five years or maybe never like it is for me with elk, support for statewide LE would disappear like a fart in the wind. Fact is, there's about 60k resident deer hunters in Wyoming and I'll bet only a small amount of those folks give a hoot about trophy quality.

I'm not sure where the experts would start first, but if I was in charge, the first thing I'd do is eliminate the number of non resident buck hunters and then I'd jack the cost up on resident hunters. Most folks don't realize how bad non residents are hammering our buck deer. In 2010, out of 34,000 bucks harvested, non residents smacked over 14,000 or 41% of them. They're almost nailing as many bucks as residents. That's unacceptable in my opinion.

For you guys talking about LE in regions G&H, how come no one is addressing how they'll fight the outfitters over there. You have over 800 non resident hunters in some of those areas. You also have more outfitters working over there than you can count. Many outfitters in this state feel they're owed a living via hunting(like when the WGOA partnered with SFW a few years ago on welfare license set asides). You try to go limited quota and reduce tags on the west edge of the state, you'll be fighting with outfitters, legislators, ranchislators and anyone else over there who thinks they're being denied a dollar. I don't see it happening.

Hope is a good thing, but I don't see a viable comprehensive solution to the problem of declining deer numbers anytime soon...
 
Here's something that we were going to bring up at the meeting and spaced it. It won't improve the numbers of deer but it would sure take some of the guess work out of determining the actual harvest. Why doesn't the Fish and Game make it mandatory for every hunter to file with them if they were successful or not? They could find out what type of deer, size wise (points) were being killed. Age might be tricky, but at least check young/middle/mature. They could pin down unit success, and many other pieces of information related to each unit. The questions could pretty much be pulled off the random samples they send out. It shouldn't be too hard to set up. At least no one could blow smoke about the harvest numbers. Make it mandatory, or the hunter couldn't buy a license the following year. I think Idaho already has this kind of reporting system. Maybe most of you would just think it would be a waste of time, but it would at least be a solid realistic number we could start working to improve. Good idea or bad? You won't insult me one way or the other. Just help me see both sides. Thanks
 
A few years ago I passed a petition around that basicly asked for limited quota hunts to be implemented in the western side of the state, about 9 out every 10 people I asked in Pinedale signed it, and a lot of them were lifelong residents, another funny thing is that it was a well known outfitter in the greys river country drew that petition up, and that outfitter told me that every outfitter in that country was on board for going limited quota. I believe him, as every outfitter I have talked to wants to have a limited quota system in place for that part of the state, they know its a mess, and the lack of quality hunting is something that gets harder and harder for them to sell. I don't want to be rude, but I don't believe you know what your talking about tripleBBB
 
I think triple_BB has the pulse of the average hunter in Wyoming and is spot on.

I also like the idea of mandatory harvest reporting and I'd like to see more deer aged through tooth cementum studies.

Its also interesting that Non-Residents are harvesting nearly half of the mule deer bucks in Wyoming. Maybe there should be more reductions in non-resident permits issued. It is a fact that many NR's simply wont go without a deer as they feel they need to shoot a deer for the amount of money they spent for the tag, trip, etc. I hear that, and see it on these boards all the time.

Of course, I also agree that if we reduce NR deer quotas, we need to charge more for the residents. There cant be a net loss in revenue to the G&F if we expect them to manage our wildlife.

Piper, I could pass a petition around tomorrow that would be 90% against limited quota deer permits anywhere in Wyoming.
 
Piper,

Maybe it's time for you to fire up the petition again... Wyoming residents have more power than they realize. We ALL see with our own eye's the herd is slipping. The crazy thing I don't think anyone thinks about is, if the herd rebounds to historic levels the tag numbers can be increased. More simple tools to do a better job.

Doing nothing is just getting us no where!!

Work on the habitat, kill the predators, build the migration fences, and limit over harvest. The mule deer machine would start humming again!!
 
Bucklover---What you mentioned is already being done to some extent if everyone that takes an animal does what the F&G asks of them. When you finish your hunt you are supposed to send the landowner coupon to the rancher if it's killed on deeded land or in to the F&G Cheyenne Office if it's killed on public land. The problem is that I'm not aware of any penalties for not doing itwhen it could be made mandatory like New Mexico does. They require you to report online on the F&G website whether you took an animal or not and answer a few questions. They will not allow you to apply for a license the following year if the computer shows you didn't do that. Wyoming could either go to that or make the present system mandatory and add a few little checkoff boxes as to sex, antler points, etc. on the coupon, where the only thing you put on it now is the unit the animal was taken in. If you have an either sex tag they don't even know what sex you killed under the present system when they look at the coupon. That would at least allow an accurate count of what was taken in a unit and give them good statistics to decide what should be done for tag quotas, whether to allow doe/fawn tags, etc. the following season.
 
Topgun, thanks for your reply. I know I get a survey card in the mail on a pretty regular basis, but not on every type of animal, and not every year. I'm aware of the landowner coupons, but I don't remember anything pertaining to public land. Speaking of the Fish and Game saving a little money. It always drives my crazy that they send 2,3 and 4 reminders that I haven't filled my survey out before I'm even done hunting! I'm mostly referring to the elk hunt when I have a type 6 late hunt. I don't want to fill it out until I'm done hunting, but I have sometimes just filled it out to save them more postage.
 
I agree, I get the reminders before I'm even done hunting...with type 6 elk tags as well as general deer.

That has to cost quite a bit of money to send out so many reminders...think I'll fire off a message to the G&F about that.

While on that subject, do they need to send every single tag in a seperate envelope with all the maps, etc. in each?

I usually draw 3-4 antelope tags a year, all come in a seperate envelope. Not sure why they couldnt put them all in one envelope with ONE map.
 
Yep; if you look at a coupon, it tells you to do exactly as I mentioned. I've also had what you mentioned happen as far as those postcards coming a number of times even when I have already gone online when I got the first one telling me what to do and the number to enter into the system to do the survey and have completed it. It would seem like they would have the system programmed to take you off the list as soon as you reply and definitely not send more than the first one until after your season has been closed for a couple weeks. Things like that bug the chit out of me when I see waste that could easily be eliminated and the money put to good use! Another good example was when the Feds spent millions of our taxpayer dollars to send all of us a letter telling us we would be receiving that stimulus check within a couple weeks. WTH did they need to do that for when it was so well publicized all over the media!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-12 AT 09:39PM (MST)[p]I had forgot about that one. It griped the crap out of me too. Kinda like when you're in the hospital and the nurse wakes you up to give you something to help you sleep!?!
 
Anyone with half a brain can see the deer herds are in terrible shape, not only are their numbers down, but the quality of the hunting is in sad shape in many places, and thats a direct result of too many hunters over too many years, both residents and nonresidents. I predict things are not going to change much though, change is hard and if only half the people want change, it won't happen. Im discusted, and Im betting there will be a slight cut in nonresident tags this year,and thats about it. 500, maybe 600 instead of 800 in region G this year and 800 to 1000 in region H as opposed to 1200, and some slight cuts in a few other regions in the state. Anyone want to make their guess? I don't even know why I bother saying anything to anyone, its futile.
 
The fact that this post has raised so many responses should show any interested party that Wyoming's mule deer are in sad shape.Actions need to be taken NOW.If regions G,H,and K were all to go LQ,I could deal with that.If G&F made us all pick a region(like NR have to)-I could deal with that.Other states have made the unpopular decisions that Wyoming needs to make.And in most those cases,the G&F depts ended up making their hunting better in each respective case.And in the process of helping the herds,made the hunting better.And not just for trophy hunters.Sure would be nice if a coupla G&F guys would read this thread(without the attitude that we are all a bunch of know-nothings) and maybe take some of our thoughts to heart.
 
You guys may be right about making those three Regions LE for at least a few years to lessen hunter impact. I know I've heard that in the past you could go in deep and have a good hunt without seeing a lot of orange. Now I hear on websites that no matter how far you backpack in there are tons of people doing the same thing or taking horses way back in. That alone would ruin it as a quality hunt for me, whether I saw animals or not. Then you add in the other problems of winterkill, environmental exploration for gas, oil, etc. in fragile areas and it's no wonder people are talking gloom and doom. I don't know what the answer is, but if I wanted to hunt those areas I guess I would have to support a big reduction of hunters to make it an enjoyable hunt for me. By that I don't mean seeing a ton of animals or huge bucks, but to be able to enjoy the solitude of country like we're all talking about. I'm afraid I was born about 40 years too late and will never experience what I just mentioned, unless I could afford expensive trips up into Alaska and the Canadian Provinces.
 
nontypical your right the game and fish should listen... But Fralick (Biologist) will just tell us the harvest in 2011 was at historic levels(which if it was we killed way WAY to many young deer) Hymas (Warden) will blame the outfitters and ranchers and discount the predators have any impacts. Hymas will say the 100 and 100's of coyotes that are on the winter range are only eating rabbits (what a joke) Graham (Warden)will just say well the residents are not ready for change. The guy from Kemmerer (Warden) is just lost.

Basically nothing will happen...
 
TOPGUN-Exactly my sentiments.In most general areas,hunter numbers are just too high.Anyone who has hunted in Wyoming on a regular basis for the last 20 years can see the difference in hunter numbers compared to game numbers.Give the deer a break and make for a better hunt in the process.Wolfhunter-I think G&F is getting more concerned about mulies than ever before.Maybe they are beginning to hear the grumblings from hunters and put some merit to us.But,then again,you're probably right.Been that way in the past.I guess we'll see..
 
Was just reading the latest issue of the Wyoming Wildlife News. On the inside cover was Director Talbott's full page article about Wyoming mule and the problems we're dealing with. He discusses the mule deer initiative, variou issues, what they're trying to do, ideas and possible solutions. I might've missed it as he noted alterations to hunting seasons, but he didn't mention anything about reducing hunter numbers via limited quota hunting or reducing non resident hunters for that matter.
 
Reductions to resident and/or non-resident hunters or general hunt areas switching to limited quota will not happen until the 2013 season. They've been pretty up-front with that.

Although the G&F can fiddle with the current limited quota numbers at this point, they have already released the non-resident regulations, so expect any changes to new limited quota areas next year.
 
Had a long conversation with a biologist tonight.Possibly in the works would be LQ for the Platte Valley country in 2013.Seems that was the general concensus from the mule deer initiative meetings in that area of the state.According to Jeff,LQ was overwhelmingly shot down in western Wyoming at those same meetings.Pick a region(like for NR)was discussed.He seemed to be fairly open to that suggestion.That would cut down on hunter congestion,I believe.Maybe a step in the right direction.It kinda sucks to have to make that choice,but hard choices need to be made.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_0609.jpeg
IMG_20221229_101538577_HDR.jpg
B4B39B27-FD84-4393-AD17-9CF53255B704.jpeg
7FBA9977-541A-499E-BEE3-D5ECC16D4010.jpeg
Resized_20211120_083144.jpeg
0765CDBB-21BC-4EF3-B33D-6DC10FBF57C1.png
Nevada 2020.jpg
DSC00013.jpeg
IMG_3610.jpeg
image3.JPG
39CF1278-093B-4351-8A40-E22D4318A741.jpeg
9AD5F784-99A7-4E05-8911-91F03BA7B9CE.jpeg

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom