The Theory why Mule Deer are struggling

[coyoteslayer]

First a little history about mule deer

In the early days mule deer were seldom ever seen, and their number were very low. It first started when sheep and cattle overgrazed the land. Grasses hold in moisture in the soil making it harder for browse plants to grow. Overgrazing helped browse plants grow in places that they couldn't grow before. Thus changing the habitat to where mule deer could survive. The mule deer population exploded. The mule deer hunting was excellent from about 1925 until the late 1980's

Habitat is the most important key to having mule deer. Without good mule deer habitat than all other methods use to manage deer are just bandaids. Also without good mule deer habitat then mule deer cannot survive.

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.

Now I will get to the theory. It all began to start in the 1980's. The mule deer hunting was still great because the habitat was still very good for mule deer. The elk numbers were lower so there was less competition on the summer and winter ranges. Fewer houses on the foothills which was prime mule deer winter habitat. Fewer deer were killed on roads because we had fewer roads. Fewer predators because they weren't managed. More coyotes were killed because of the methods used, but now have been outlawed. I'm not sure exactly when it was outlawed, but I'm sure some of you know.

This all benefited the mule deer population.

Then in 1989 Utah began issuing spike-only tags to increase the number of mature bulls on many of the elk units in Utah. The idea was to allow a certain percentage of the yearling bull elk population to be harvested while restricting the harvest of mature bulls.

I'm sure that very few cow tags were issued as well. This helped increase the elk population. As the elk increased then deer now had a more hardy animal to compete with. Elk can survive winters better, they can survive on a larger variety of foods that are less quality. Deer need a higher quality of food.

I'm not say elk are bad. I love hunting elk. It's just a fact than more animals you put on the mountain that compete with deer then the fewer deer you will have.

Therefore, the deer numbers started disappearing. The 1992-1993 winter was a very bad winter kill for deer, but fewer elk died because they can handle winters better. Also the mountain lion population exploded because of poor management by the DWR. They weren't issuing enough lion tags.

We have had years of drought since 1992-1993 making it harder for the deer population to increase. Plus more elk to compete with. Fewer cattle and sheep on the mountain to keep the grasses down for more browse plants to grow.

In many areas the sagebrush is almost dead. We need to plow it and plant new mule deer habitat.

So because of less habitat, more elk, predators, roads, human enroachment on the winter ranges and adding stress to pregnant does which causes them to abort their fawns, drought, less grazing permits.

Equals= fewer deer

[Iron Bear]

I have a couple questions.

Are these deer starving to death? I haven't really seen any of this on any large scale what so ever nor have I herd of it. I do remember this sort of thing in the 80s. But not since.

If elk thrive on such a great variety of foods and deer need specific browse? Then why are elk only found is specific habitats? Deer are found anywhere.

[stillhunterman]

So, pretty much what most deer biologists/deer authorities (ie. long time hunters in the know, etc.) have been saying for a long time...

[coyoteslayer]

I have a couple questions.

Are these deer starving to death? I haven't really seen any of this on any large scale what so ever nor have I herd of it. I do remember this sort of thing in the 80s. But not since.

I never read where the deer were starving in the 1980's. Remember you guys are saying the deer hunting was fantastic.I never said that deer are starving. Jim Bonds was just making a point about mule deer populations getting over populated. It has happened in other states and he gave some examples.


If elk thrive on such a great variety of foods and deer need specific browse? Then why are elk only found is specific habitats? Deer are found anywhere.

Deer need browse plants like Sagebrush, Cliff rose, bitter brush, mountain-mahogany etc which are high in protein.

I can only think of maybe a few places that elk don't exist in Utah. But the deer number are very low there also. Elk can also eat browse plants, grasses, forbs, etc

[stillhunterman]

by coyoteslayer on Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:28 pm

Elk can also eat browse plants, grasses, forbs, etc

Yes, elk have a much, much heartier digestive system which allows them to survive on a greater variety of nutrition sources. I think the biggest impact elk have on the mule deer are during times of extreem weather, when they are forced to compete directly with the mule deer, and they will win the competion every time, imho

[coyoteslayer]

So, pretty much what most deer biologists/deer authorities (ie. long time hunters in the know, etc.) have been saying for a long time...

Yes, Perry, your right. The title should be "The theory why mule deer are struggling.

[skull krazy]

Very good thread Coyote.
There's absolutely NO doubt elk impact deer. However.....i don't think they impact deer to the point where they have an impact on their life or death.
Deer simply don't like elk. Most deer are solitaire or like smaller groups and are very quiet animals. Elk are quite the opposite with a more social lifestyle and are very noisy.
I remember back in the 80's an the Wasatch, Srawberry area in particular.
It was nothing to see 50 bucks during a pre bowhunt scout in ONE evening, yet you were lucky to see one cow elk. Quite the opposite today.
Does that mean the deer are all dead? Not necessarily. I can find good numbers of deer right now in lower lying areas of the Strawberry valley in the more open sage country versus the higher pines and aspen areas where the elk thrive.
As far as the biggest negative factor in overall deer herds, especially the northern and central regions.......shrinking wintering habitat, no question about it.
Take a look at the Wasatch front extended archery areas. Very minimal hunting pressure on those deer for 20 years now, yet they are in the worst shape as far as actual numbers they have ever been in. No question whats causing it.

[Iron Bear]

I lived in Morgan UT from 82 to 87 and wintertime deer on the hay was a problem. And If I remember right the winter of 85 was really bad. I took 2 or 3 deer a week off my fences and I only had 8 acres. We would put the dead deer in piles on the road to be picked up every few days. Huge arguments over winter feeding and all.

I have come along way on the habitat issue. From an all out attitude that it wasn't a factor at all. To concede it very well may me a limiting factor. In the sense that it may be the reason we cannot have 30,000 deer on Monroe. But not a reason for annual decline from #s of today. Or even the 90s for that matter.

And you also mentioned when poison was outlawed as a predator management practice. I don't have the exact yr. But it somewhere in the late 70s.

[coyoteslayer]

There's absolutely NO doubt elk impact deer. However.....i don't think they impact deer to the point where they have an impact on their life or death.
Deer simply don't like elk. Most deer are solitaire or like smaller groups and are very quiet animals. Elk are quite the opposite with a more social lifestyle and are very noisy. Elk also travel around a lot more which might cause more stress on deer. I believe the elk have limited the deer population.
I remember back in the 80's an the Wasatch, Srawberry area in particular.
It was nothing to see 50 bucks during a pre bowhunt scout in ONE evening, yet you were lucky to see one cow elk. Quite the opposite today.
Does that mean the deer are all dead? Not necessarily. I can find good numbers of deer right now in lower lying areas of the Strawberry valley in the more open sage country versus the higher pines and aspen areas where the elk thrive.

[Iron Bear]

Skull Krazy,

In the 80s when you would see 50 bucks per evening. Were they solitary or in groups?

I noticed something similar with deer being lower in places like Strawberry Valley. Interesting there is more human activity here. Less predators?

What about the other 80% of Utah that hasn't seen development? Monroe's winter range has had no housing development.