# 25K fawn killer removed !



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

2 years now of predator control has resulted in 25,000 plus dead coyote's!

Quote from report:

"*Conclusion *
The Predator Incentive Program was efficiently and effectively implemented at a state-wide scale during fiscal year 2014. The Program likely increased the numbers of coyotes killed in Utah and provided government-supplied economic rewards to individuals and businesses throughout the state. Based on two years of data collected we estimate that 25,054 coyotes were killed. "

Link to report:http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/predator_program_summary_2014.pdf

I believe this plus our mild winters will be the factors that improve
Utahs deer herds dramticaly in the near future..........

Thoughts?


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

The one question I have is how many more Coyotes were really killed because of this program. In the conclusion it says numbers are up 59% from 7,397 annually to 12,527 annually. But the 7,397 number used as the pre-Mule Deer Protection Act came only from "hunters licensed to harvest furbearers".

I didn't see anywhere in the report that tried to estimate how many coyotes were killed annually by people that were not licensed to harvest furbearers prior to the protection act. Seems to me that, prior to the protection act, a lot of people out to just shoot coyotes, not necessarily for their fur, would not have their kills documented before the program but they will be documented now because they're collecting the bounty. Perhaps the Division estimates the number of coyotes taken in those circumstances to be insignificant?

Also, the 12,527 number includes 2,605 coyotes removed by "Wildlife Services (US Department of Agriculture)". Is the agreement the Division has with the USDA for predator removal a direct result of the protection act? If not it's misleading to include those coyotes removed by the USDA as part of the 59% increase. 

In any case, the increase of coyote killing should help the deer herds. I'm just curious how much the coyote harvest was really increased as a direct result of this program.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

I share the same thoughts as Willfish. Those who push this act as though there was never a coyote killed in Utah before the MPA came into place a couple years ago. Wildlife Services has removed coyotes for decades, the UDWR has paid to remove coyotes from struggling herds for decades. It is disingenuous to claim the program has killed 25,000+ coyotes. The article makes no mention of the coyotes killed and submitted from outside Utah, which was estimated 3-7%.

There is no doubt in my mind the program has saved fawns. No doubt it has increased take on coyotes. Was the increased take (2,000-5000 more killed) worth the Million dollars? Is it worth $550 per dog for this-- "contractors were paid $140,000 and they turned in a total of 236 coyotes." Those are the questions we should be asking. 

Does anyone else notice the roadkill coyotes lacking heads? So much more to it than the quick snap-shots we all like to see.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Packout said:


> I share the same thoughts as Willfish. Those who push this act as though there was never a coyote killed in Utah before the MPA came into place a couple years ago. Wildlife Services has removed coyotes for decades, the UDWR has paid to remove coyotes from struggling herds for decades. It is disingenuous to claim the program has killed 25,000+ coyotes. The article makes no mention of the coyotes killed and submitted from outside Utah, which was estimated 3-7%.
> 
> There is no doubt in my mind the program has saved fawns. No doubt it has increased take on coyotes. Was the increased take (2,000-5000 more killed) worth the Million dollars? Is it worth $550 per dog for this-- "contractors were paid $140,000 and they turned in a total of 236 coyotes." Those are the questions we should be asking.
> 
> Does anyone else notice the roadkill coyotes lacking heads? So much more to it than the quick snap-shots we all like to see.


 Additionally, what's the long term effect of this program? Coyotes are so adaptable that when there's less competition, the surviving litters are bigger and we may end up with more than we started with. And even if we did kill all those coyotes due to the new program, what's that in terms of the percentage of the total population?


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

While those numbers are encouraging we need to remember that yote's are just one part of the problem. There are many predators in Utah and they all take a toll on deer. Cougars take a lot of grown deer and wild dogs will take down fawns and full grown dear too. When you do your homework you actually find out that one of the biggest causes of dead deer in Utah is vehicles! However while deer numbers are a multi-faceted problem there are only certain parts of the equation that can be reasonably affected to control the deer count at an optimum level based on management objectives.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> While those numbers are encouraging we need to remember that yote's are just one part of the problem. There are many predators in Utah and they all take a toll on deer. Cougars take a lot of grown deer and wild dogs will take down fawns and full grown dear too. When you do your homework you actually find out that one of the biggest causes of dead deer in Utah is vehicles! However while deer numbers are a multi-faceted problem there are only certain parts of the equation that can be reasonably affected to control the deer count at an optimum level based on management objectives.


Rut Roe.

Here comes another thread about Cougar Control......


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I'll start. Kill a cougar save 50 deer per year. Do one better and kill a female and save 1000s over a lifetime. 

Don't go getting fiscal on predator control. Cause it will kick habitat restorations ass in that arena. Especially on a dollar per deer basis.


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

LostLouisianian said:


> While those numbers are encouraging we need to remember that yote's are just one part of the problem. There are many predators in Utah and they all take a toll on deer. Cougars take a lot of grown deer and wild dogs will take down fawns and full grown dear too. When you do your homework you actually find out that one of the biggest causes of dead deer in Utah is vehicles! * However while deer numbers are a multi-faceted problem there are only certain parts of the equation that can be reasonably affected to control the deer count at an optimum level based on management objectives.*


Would love to hear about the other remaining parts to the "multi-faceted problem", and what the "certain parts of the equation" that can be "reasonably affected", and the meaning of your term "reasonably" in the given context.

Would whole heartedly agree mule deer population dynamics can be quite the complex 'dynamic'.


----------



## polarbear (Aug 1, 2011)

Look at the coyote annual report. Unless there are a ton of mule deer fawning right next to roads in the West Desert and Box Elder I'm not sure we are saving a ton of fawns. Just sayin.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I've done my homework on car deer incursions. And they are nowhere near the leading cause of deer mortality in Utah. 

The auto insurance industry would have donated high fence for 1000s of miles of hwy by now if 70k deer were wrecking bumpers smashing windshields and every so often causing a fatal accidents. 

But they are not. Not even paying for a campaign on awareness of the issue in Utah. 

Fact is its a red herring. Manufactured from the good folks up a USU. Maybe they should doctor up a study showing roadkill as compensatory. Then we can sweep it under the rug and sleep better at night.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> I've done my homework on car deer incursions. And they are nowhere near the leading cause of deer mortality in Utah.
> 
> The auto insurance industry would have donated high fence for 1000s of miles of hwy by now if 70k deer were wrecking bumpers smashing windshields and every so often causing a fatal accidents.
> 
> ...


Road kills a big issue, does are the main harvest by vehicles and that kills lots of fawns over a lifetime. If you don't think this is a big issue, you better reconsider.

As for your habitat BS. I'm sure deer will survive great with no habitat and less coyotes because we have a bounty on them, because a place to live isn't anywhere near as important as the possibility they might run into a coyote or cat.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> I'll start. Kill a cougar save 50 deer per year. Do one better and kill a female and save 1000s over a lifetime.
> 
> Don't go getting fiscal on predator control. Cause it will kick habitat restorations ass in that arena. Especially on a dollar per deer basis.


Rabbit > Porcupine> Squirrel> Penguin> June Sucker> Coyote > Cougar as far as a killers of deer go.

There I said it.


----------



## polarbear (Aug 1, 2011)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> As for your habitat BS. I'm sure deer will survive great with no habitat and less coyotes because we have a bounty on them, because a place to live isn't anywhere near as important as the possibility they might run into a coyote or cat.


Huh?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

How many deer in the transplant studies have died to roadkill? Combined? 

Do deer die on the roads? Yes 

70,000? No more like 7000

Is it a universal limiting factor? No 

I have suspicions that hwy fencing has done more harm then good for overall deer numbers.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Being someone that hunts coyotes often and seeing what this programs has done. I would say we have far more coyotes than we did when the program started. 
And the problem is now they are so **** smart that calling them in is really becoming a chore. I have seen them as a distress call is played and most will tuck tail and run the opposite direction. 
So according to Mr. Peay now we've killed the 25000 coyotes our deer herd should multiply to like 500,000 right!


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

mikevanwilder said:


> Being someone that hunts coyotes often and seeing what this programs has done. I would say we have far more coyotes than we did when the program started.
> And the problem is now they are so **** smart that calling them in is really becoming a chore. I have seen them as a distress call is played and most will tuck tail and run the opposite direction.
> So according to Mr. Peay now we've killed the 25000 coyotes our deer herd should multiply to like 500,000 right!


Pretty soon the only way you will be able to hunt them is Helicopter, Night Vision, and Heat Seeking Rockets.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Lobowatcher said:


> Would love to hear about the other remaining parts to the "multi-faceted problem", and what the "certain parts of the equation" that can be "reasonably affected", and the meaning of your term "reasonably" in the given context.
> 
> Would whole heartedly agree mule deer population dynamics can be quite the complex 'dynamic'.


Populations are a product of many factors. Habitat, water, weather, predation, hunting, chemical contamination etc. Some of these variables can be easily and economically affected while others would require vast sums of $$$ to get into the optimum range. Things that are reasonably affected can be to limit the number of hunters and dates on specific units. Also managing the land for animal habitat can actually be reasonably affected but is more of a long term project than a short term solution.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> How many deer in the transplant studies have died to roadkill? Combined?
> 
> Do deer die on the roads? Yes
> 
> ...


I think somewhere in the middle of those numbers would be more accurate. Anything killing off does is killing off future deer populations and is a contributing factor . Suspicions and feelings don't equate to reality.


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

I would count it like this in terms of deer mortality/vital rates, 1) Heavy Snow and cold weather that happen periodically, 2) Drought, 3) invasive exotic vegetation, 4) Vehicle strikes, 5) development on the winter ranges 6) Predators (coyotes, bears, cougars and wolves combined) 7) Hunting. 

We are just one droughty summer followed by a hard winter away from back to scratch on the deer population. No amount of coyote shooting is going to save the fawns from starving on the winter ranges. Most of the deer hit on roads are females so that takes a serious toll. Coyotes mostly eat rodents, and only occasionally take a fawn and there is not enough bears and cougars to make much of a dent. My top three factors can all be mitigated with better habitat. Seriously, if there were that many coyotes, I would have expected way more than 25,000 coyotes killed over this period.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Somewhere between 70,000 and 7000? What make you think that? Just because you want it to be? 

Hmmmmm yet the transplant studies show 0 roadkill and sorry to tell Kevinitis that coyotes do infact kill lots of doe. Unless your calling EFA a liar. They kill almost as many adult doe deer in Utah as cougar. None of the transplanted deer have died to deep snow either. 

As was said recently here. Reality can be pesky at times.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> Somewhere between 70,000 and 7000? What make you think that? Just because you want it to be?
> 
> Hmmmmm yet the transplant studies show 0 roadkill and sorry to tell Kevinitis that coyotes do infact kill lots of doe. Unless your calling EFA a liar. They kill almost as many adult doe deer in Utah as cougar. None of the transplanted deer have died to deep snow either.
> 
> As was said recently here. Reality can be pesky at times.


Would you agree it's to many? Drive 40 from Vernal to I-80 and it's disgusting the number of dead deer in certain areas. Still in doubt just look at the Cow Catchers on every oil rig. If they were rarely hitting deer they wouldn't mount something from Mad Max on their trucks.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Somewhere between 70,000 and 7000? What make you think that? Just because you want it to be?
> 
> Hmmmmm yet the transplant studies show 0 roadkill and sorry to tell Kevinitis that coyotes do infact kill lots of doe. Unless your calling EFA a liar. They kill almost as many adult doe deer in Utah as cougar. None of the transplanted deer have died to deep snow either.
> 
> As was said recently here. Reality can be pesky at times.


And what if the problem wasn't the coyotes killing the deer, what if the deer were malnourished, had deformities, or were because of a combination of both . Did you consider the coyote or cougar were not the primary reason for the seers death? The weak and I'll are those who get picked off most the time. You're looking at secondary issues, not primary reasons for population limitations, let's move forward instead of trying failing policies and procedures over and over. Instead we waste money and the deer that don't get eaten eventually end up dying for the primary reasons anyway, shock is why there isn't a population boom. Predators aren't holding a healthy 330,000 herd of deer from booming there are so many more important factors.

And add highway 89, and 24 to the list as well. Get out and look for roadkill it isn't hard to find. I've talked to people who have hit 8 deer in one year on 24 and another 5. I have close calls every time I drive that highway and see a dead elk or deer every time I travel it. Roadkill is much higher than 7,000, don't live in a dream world.


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

Let me start off by saying I am not a coyote hunter, but I also have no problem with those that do hunt coyotes, and no problem with a bounty on coyotes.

You also have to remember that deer aren't the only thing coyotes prey on. So what is happening to the rodent/rabbit populations?

With a possible spike in those populations what happens to livestock grazing on the range?

Will the other predators of rodents/rabbits (weasel, skunk, raptors, reptiles, etc.) increase in numbers?

What effect will that then have on other populations such as pheasants, and quail, etc.

There is truth to trophic cascades. Our target "control" species doesn't always do what we expect. We've managed wildlife for so long now that there isn't a species on planet Earth that doesn't need some sort of management/control. The question is what species and to what degree do we manage?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

So now the deer transplanted were or are malnourished or diseased? Don't you think the biologist capturing weighing and collaring them would have caught that? 

7000 deer allows is 20 per day. Most are hit in a 4 month period. Pushing the average around 50 per day in winter statewide. That's about right. Not no 500 per day nonsense. 

Rabbits seem to be a bit up. Although I'm sure birds of prey will compensate for any reduction of coyotes preying on rabbits.


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

And where are they transplanting deer from, Antelope Island, which has higher coyote densities than most areas of the state, yet the deer herds are doing well enough there to move a few. mmmm. Oh and by the way, the mule deer transplants have not gone on long enough to experience a heavy winter. Lets count after that happens. What I do know is if you visit any winter range in the spring after a hard winter, what you will see is dead fawn carcass after dead fawn carcass, dead and starved to death, perfectly in tact (not eaten by coyotes).


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> So now the deer transplanted were or are malnourished or diseased? Don't you think the biologist capturing weighing and collaring them would have caught that?
> 
> 7000 deer allows is 20 per day. Most are hit in a 4 month period. Pushing the average around 50 per day in winter statewide. That's about right. Not no 500 per day nonsense.
> 
> Rabbits seem to be a bit up. Although I'm sure birds of prey will compensate for any reduction of coyotes preying on rabbits.


You're living in the mind of the old timers who have had predators ground into their minds and won't ever believe anything else, even in the name of sound science. I'm fine with killing as many coyotes as we can because it can't hurt, but let's not pretend we 're solving the problem. It's a bandaid when you need stitches and a wrap, you've slowed the bleeding temporarily you haven't stopped it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

And an average of 190 deer a day statewide doesn't seem at all out of the ball park IMO. Your talking about our entire state, do you know how much highway there is out there?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Yep just like the guys who managed game from the 20s till the 80s. We sure had it good back then. 

Yes deer do well on AI. Plenty of coyotes you say. How many cougar on AI? Could you have 1 cat for every 150 deer like the rest of the state? Could you drive the b/d ratio to 1/10 and still see the need to transplant?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

So only 1 in 30 people hitting deer are making insurance claims or police reports? Cause there are less than 1000 of those claims or reports a year.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Weather and habitat IB, those are the two elements that mak or break. Weather determines survivability , and habitat determines the rest. Can't survive with no place to live, let's focus money on worthy causes.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

The Utah department of highway safety has statistics and studies on the subject. UDOT keeps figures. The DWR used to but quit decades ago. 

Facts are roadkill is down fro historic highs. For several reasons first one being more deer equal more deer being hit. As a deer population goes down deer highway deaths go down. Second is improved signage and awareness and road fencing. More deer were killed in the 70s 80s on the highway then today. Are we worse at reporting deer accidents today then in the past? I doubt it. Especially considering that today's cars are plastic weak expensive to repair compared to the all steel bumpers and grills of yesteryear. 

Sorry I don't drink the roadkill cool aid it just don't add up. 

A little secret I'm in the risk management business. So critical and proper analysis is a fundamental tenant to my success. I have no room for BS. If it doesn't add up then I can't validate it. If it adds up I cannot deny the facts just to fit a philosophy.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

This thread has taken an interesting turn. "The Olson-Bissonette Report for Vehicle-Related Mortality of Mule Deer in Utah" was published in 2013. The study looked at mule deer/vehicle collisions. Many agencies were involved collecting data from roadkills. The study estimated that up-to 5% of the deer population is killed by vehicles annually. That equates to approximately/up-to 17,000 deer per year using our current population estimate. It does not take into account orphaned fawns which die due to the loss of the mother. An interesting note is the Fawn study on the Monroe had vehicle mortality by ATVs.

Cutting off migration routes with highway fencing is a huge issue to me. I pushed very hard for identification of migration routes in the Mule Deer Management Plan. Hopefully the UDWR can use that data to identify migration needs and protect those areas. Hopefully.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Yep Those boys over at USU keep throwing numbers against the wall maybe this lower 17,000 will stick. 17K is their latest reduced number. Math and reality keeps getting in the way of their "estimate". 

Money talks and BS walks. There is far bigger money involved in paying auto claims then the DWR budget. Again how many fatal accidents per year due to deer car accidents. How about just serious injuries? The statistics are there. You have to get real creative to extrapolate the numbers out to what USU is trying to say they "might" be.

Go ask an auto body guy if he thinks deer are being hit at the tune of nearly 100 per day. 

100 potential customers a day and nobody is running deer collision specials? 100 a day and UDOT UHP public safety mothers of deer accidents and the insurance industry aren't doing any PSA's on the subject. 

Look at the havoc DUI causes and the attention it brings. We have about 12,000 DUI arrest per year statewide.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

In the abstract. I wonder how many calories - 25K yotes saves. Not only do predators kill but they burn calories. Less calories burnt means less feed needed or better body condition. A deer avoiding getting eaten burns more calories then a deer that doesn't have a cat or yote on the ridge above them 24/7.

It's all very dynamic.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I have to give it to you IB...you are a crusader! How's that 1-man crusade going for you? Found any recruits to join the cause? You and SWbuttmaster seem to be back-slappers....made any headway on the cause to fight unjust predation by cougars, yet?


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> Yep just like the guys who managed game from the 20s till the 80s. We sure had it good back then.
> 
> Yes deer do well on AI. Plenty of coyotes you say. How many cougar on AI? Could you have 1 cat for every 150 deer like the rest of the state? Could you drive the b/d ratio to 1/10 and still see the need to transplant?


Utah Estimates that cougar population is around 3,000

Utah Esimates the cougar habitat is 35,790 mi^2

Which is one cougar per every 12 square miles.

With these numbers, why do so many people go to Idaho and Montana to hunt cougars - when they can hunt them close to home.

Utah estimates the deer population as 333,920

Which is a 1:110 ratio, but at the rate that you think that they slaughter the deer, the number would be lower.

If a cougar kills a deer every three days as you suggest, then each cougar kills 122 deer a year.

Which is 363,000 a year. Hmm....

It doesn't take a rocket doctor to figure out that you can't take 333920 away from 363000 and come away with any positive number.

If a cougar kills a deer once every 3 weeks as the deer population would take a hit of 52,000 a year, which is more realistic and probably a little high.

I hope you enjoyed this little math experiment of mine.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I never said a cougar makes a kill every 3 days. A cougar will make a kill on average once a week. About 50 deer per yr. 

Once every 3 weeks? Nope I don't think so. Call Hogal zoo and ask them how many pounds of meat they need to sustain a cougar for a week. And that's a lazy car that doesn't have to chase it's food. I certain a wild cougar has much higher caloric needs.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> I never said a cougar makes a kill every 3 days. A cougar will make a kill on average once a week. About 50 deer per yr.
> 
> Once every 3 weeks? Nope I don't think so. Call Hogal zoo and ask them how many pounds of meat they need to sustain a cougar for a week. And that's a lazy car that doesn't have to chase it's food. I certain a wild cougar has much higher caloric needs.


Numerous studies support the one per week kill rate of cougars. However I don't think deer are the only prey of cougars so I honestly suspect that the rate is somewhere between 25-40 deer per year killed by an individual cougar.


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

The 2013 publication on vehicle strikes on deer does not show every deer hit because some move off the road and die, and not every carcass is found even when the animal died by the road. So that report probably under represents actual losses. And you can't count on insurance claims for the full picture because 1) not all vehicle strikes cause damage to vehicles, 2) many strikes are not reported because insurance coverage may be liability only, and 3) Not everyone who hits a deer wants that to be claimed on their insurance to keep their bills lower. What the report does show is that vehicle strikes kill a disproportionate number of FEMALE deer. Which greatly affects your next year's fawn production, and thus population growth. Whereas predators are likely killing more fawns than adults, and likely kill both males and females equally relative to their abundance.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> I never said a cougar makes a kill every 3 days. A cougar will make a kill on average once a week. About 50 deer per yr.
> 
> Once every 3 weeks? Nope I don't think so. Call Hogal zoo and ask them how many pounds of meat they need to sustain a cougar for a week. And that's a lazy car that doesn't have to chase it's food. I certain a wild cougar has much higher caloric needs.


So, Lets use 7 days instead.

Each cougar kills 52 deer a year.

Use the 3,000 population estimate

52 x 3,000 = 156,000 deer a killed by cougars a year.

The deer population is estimated at 333,920.

333920 deer estimated -156000 estimated cougar kill= 177920 deer left every year .

Now let's assume 10% are bucks 1:10 B/D

177920 deer -17792 bucks = 160128 does

Let's say 75% of the does are impregnated, so 120,096 will bear children.

Let's say they average 1.5 fawns per doe = 180144 fawns a year

177920 total deer population + 180144 fawns = 358064 deer would be the estimate for the year.

The Deer herd would thus be increasing thus to cougar predation.

Isn't math fun?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

^^^^^ now you're getting it. 

Cougar are killing more deer in Utah then anything else. Probably less than your estimates because there are likely fewer than 3000 cats in Utah. And as stated they will eat other critters if the opportunity presents itself. But none the less well over 100k deer per yr go to kitty feed.

Now that we have that out of the way. Are those deaths additive or compensatory? In lay mans terms. Does it matter. Are the deer at capacity meaning if that deer did not die it would have eventually caused another deer to starve to death or it would have starved to death itself. I happen to believe we are not at capacity. Not to be confused with objective which is a whole different thing. I don't see signs of capacity. I don't see starvation in the herd. I don't buy that 1 in 40 drivers are not reporting the deer they hit. I don't buy that deer evaporate. I haven't seen a large scale winter kill since the last one in 93. Like you did I can estimate and account for all the factors that kill deer and identify mathematically why the deer herd was stagnant or reducing for so many years. I can also see trends of higher cougar harvest then increased deer numbers to follow. I watched fist hand one of the finest mule deer units in the world become one of Utah's worst. I don't find it a coincidence that a cougar study was conducted in that unit limiting the cougar harvest to almost nothing for a decade. Meanwhile this mtn went to crap. I watched the DWR go from 0 elk to arguably one of the greatest elk units in the world. Largely by implementing policy. It wasn't weather or habitat. I've watched conservation groups and the DWR pimp out wildlife to the highest bidder all in the name of habitat. I remember buying my first habitat stamp thinking what kind of BS is this? As if! Most importantly I remember Jerry Dahlberg telling me the DWR is getting out of the deer business. I didn't know exactly what he meant at the time but I sure as heck do now. Rest his soul. What I would give to have him chime in here about what he knew.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> I have to give it to you IB...you are a crusader! How's that 1-man crusade going for you? Found any recruits to join the cause? You and SWbuttmaster seem to be back-slappers....made any headway on the cause to fight unjust predation by cougars, yet?


Says the ewe.


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

All the while we have also seen winter ranges disappear due to development, the human population grow exponentially, the number of shrubs on nearly all winter ranges decline, the invasion of annual grasses, the loss of square miles of habitat lost to wildfire only to be replaced by more annual grasses, and elk numbers grow exponentially. I think we are at K (carrying capacity), which in addition to starvation include other density dependent factors. The evidence I have is right in population estimates in the annual big game report. The population has cycled up and down along that 300,000 mark since 1994. Predators are a part of that, but I don't think they are the limiting factor because I don't think they drive the trend. The trend since 1994 responds downward whenever we have harsh winters, and upward whenever we have mild winters. Which is why I say it's habitat. Good habitat allows deer to build enough fat reserves, and have enough forage during harsh winters.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> How many deer in the transplant studies have died to roadkill? Combined?
> 
> Do deer die on the roads? Yes
> 
> 70,000? No more like 7000


Where did you come up with the 7000 number? Is it something you made up, or is it documented somewhere?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I'm on my phone so finding and posting a link is beyond my computer skills. 

I will post some links when I'm at a PC. 

UDOT has very extensive info on the subject. 

UDHS has statistics also.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Does it matter if 30 or 30,000 deer are being hit on the roads? Aren't those deaths compensatory? 

You can't wave a magic wand and make one death additive and another compensatory. Either the herd is at capacity and those deer hit by cars are making room for smart deer that don't play in the street. Or the herd is not at capacity and those deer would have lived on until another factor killed it. Then the death would be additive. Method of death matter not when determining additive or compensatory. 

So either these cars are taking deer away from us or not. And just the same cougars and other predators are taking deer away from us or not. Poachers are taking deer from us or not. Hunters are taking deer from us or not. Disease is taking deer from us or not. Winter kill is taking deer from us or not. She'd hunters and ATVs are taking deer from us or not. 

I believe all these deaths are additive. And if the DWR wanted we could have 1 million deer in Utah. I know some chuckle at that notion. Because of perceived habitat limitations. But nobody ever told cattlemen and wool growers habitat is such poor shape. Cause there running as many animals as the have in the past. They didn't see a major reduction in herd size from the 80s to 2000.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> ^^^^^
> Cougar are killing more deer in Utah then anything else. Probably less than your estimates because there are likely fewer than 3000 cats in Utah. And as stated they will eat other critters if the opportunity presents itself. But none the less well over 100k deer per yr go to kitty feed.
> 
> .


Use 1000 for your math numbers and you will be much closer to reality.......
On top that, there are cats out there living on elk..!....
I see it first hand EVERY year.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Well 1000 is a bit low but I agree 1000 is likely closer than 3000 is today in Utah. 

Sure they eat elk. But if there doing it on any regular basis it due to a lack of deer.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Have any of you ever bothered to look at the deer numbers in states that have no Cougars? I have and you might be amazed. For example, in my home state of Louisiana there are no cougars and not very many coyotes. The deer herd in Louisiana is estimated to be well over 500,000 and the take by hunters is usually between 130,000-165,000 per year. Keep in mind a few things. Utah is 84,897 sq miles, LA is 52,378 sq miles, meaning Utah has 62% MORE area than LA. Utah has 2.94M people taking up that space, LA has 4.65M people taking up that space. So LA is smaller and has a much larger population, meaning the deer in LA have a much smaller area to live in yet the population is significantly higher than Utah. The two glaring differences? No Cougars/coyotes and much more favorable vegetation.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Use 1000 for your math numbers and you will be much closer to reality.......
> On top that, there are cats out there living on elk..!....
> I see it first hand EVERY year.


I used this and rounded up to 3,000

The first statewide population estimate of 2,528-3,936 cougars resulted from
summing unit population estimates. The number of cougars on each unit was estimated
by first multiplying the total area contained within the unit by the highest density of the
range assigned to it, and then by the lowest density of the range assigned to it.
For comparison, a second estimate of* 2,927* cougars statewide was generated
based upon mean cougar densities and total occupied cougar habitat within the state.

Source: https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/cmgtplan.pdf


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Use 1000 for your math numbers and you will be much closer to reality.......
> On top that, there are cats out there living on elk..!....
> I see it first hand EVERY year.


Well, Spring Bears Also Benefit on Elk calves.

Source: It's what people in Idaho tell me.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> Have any of you ever bothered to look at the deer numbers in states that have no Cougars? I have and you might be amazed. For example, in my home state of Louisiana there are no cougars and not very many coyotes. The deer herd in Louisiana is estimated to be well over 500,000 and the take by hunters is usually between 130,000-165,000 per year. Keep in mind a few things. Utah is 84,897 sq miles, LA is 52,378 sq miles, meaning Utah has 62% MORE area than LA. Utah has 2.94M people taking up that space, LA has 4.65M people taking up that space. So LA is smaller and has a much larger population, meaning the deer in LA have a much smaller area to live in yet the population is significantly higher than Utah. The two glaring differences? No Cougars/coyotes and much more favorable vegetation.


Well, that are they are a different deer.

That's really an apples to oranges comparison.

We could use Iowa or other places that have deer as populous as rabbits and use that in comparison.

Utah's biggest deer problem is habitat and the population struggles.

Idaho biggest deer problem is predators and the population is fine.

I hunted Idaho in a wolf infested unit last year and there were plenty of forked horns to choose from and the bigger bucks disappear until the rut (Common Mule Deer Tactics).

I did see a lot of Elk too, so people might be a little too apprehensive about predators up there.

Like I have said before - If a cougar has to travel ten miles to find a deer, because of great habitat - then the number of deer taken by the cougar goes down.

Adversely. If a cougar has to only travel a quarter mile to find deer, because of poor habitat - then the number of deer taken by the cougar goes up.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

LostLouisianian said:


> Have any of you ever bothered to look at the deer numbers in states that have no Cougars? I have and you might be amazed. For example, in my home state of Louisiana there are no cougars and not very many coyotes. The deer herd in Louisiana is estimated to be well over 500,000 and the take by hunters is usually between 130,000-165,000 per year. Keep in mind a few things. Utah is 84,897 sq miles, LA is 52,378 sq miles, meaning Utah has 62% MORE area than LA. Utah has 2.94M people taking up that space, LA has 4.65M people taking up that space. So LA is smaller and has a much larger population, meaning the deer in LA have a much smaller area to live in yet the population is significantly higher than Utah. The two glaring differences? No Cougars/coyotes and much more favorable vegetation.


Whitetails and mule deer are far from the same. Mule deer suffer more in a lot of ways. Also you aren't considering winter range. Of those square miles how much is remaining winter range in Utah? Because it's gonna be a big determiner of how many deer you can have. Many winter ranges are being developed like hell in this state (look at the ugly wasatch front). By developing these you don't leave the deer reasonable chances to survive a tough winter. Utah is too economically driven to decide we need to protect important places and resources for our wildlife, instead we fund coyote control .


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Whitetails and mule deer are far from the same. Mule deer suffer more in a lot of ways. Also you aren't considering winter range. Of those square miles how much is remaining winter range in Utah? Because it's gonna be a big determiner of how many deer you can have. Many winter ranges are being developed like hell in this state (look at the ugly wasatch front). By developing these you don't leave the deer reasonable chances to survive a tough winter. Utah is too economically driven to decide we need to protect important places and resources for our wildlife, instead we fund coyote control .


Winter Range, Uninhabitable range, food sources, etc - Are not a problem they have in Louisiana.

Just an Idea, maybe we should stock Alligators, Crocodiles, Wild Pigs, Cottonmouths, Coral Snakes, and Rusty Crayfish to boost the Mule Deer Numbers in the state.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Winter Range, Uninhabitable range, food sources, etc - Are not a problem they have in Louisiana.
> 
> Just an Idea, maybe we should stock Alligators, Crocodiles, Wild Pigs, Cottonmouths, Coral Snakes, and Rusty Crayfish to boost the Mule Deer Numbers in the state.


No native crocs in LA but there are plenty of crawfish here. I would love it if they had some pigs to hunt....yum! Cottonmouths and Coral snakes are fine but I never cared much for eating them but my next door neighbor had a particular liking to them. Now if we're talking gators....I would absolutely love it if gators could survive here, they're one of my absolute favorite things to eat....gators do actually prey on deer. My cousins killed a 13' 2" gator a couple of years ago and the gator had been seen several times killing deer that came to that particular bayou to drink. That was one of the largest gators I've ever seen.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

There is no apples to apples comparison. There are no mule deer herds void of cougar or coyote. Well maybe city deer and AI. But plenty of city deer are being culled by cars. Or professional hunters. And they are transplanting deer off of AI. 

A great comparison is CA to other western states. CA has 5x the habitat as Utah little winter kill. And it's a terrible place to hunt cats. Because they don't let you. Here's the great contrast between UT CA and eastern states that don't have apex predators. The hunter looses CA has some of the lowest hunter harvest numbers in the US but in states back east hunters are relied upon to keep deer numbers in check. How many deer harvested in LA and AL anyway? 

As to Utah's lost winter range. Just take out you calculator and a map and see how little of Utah's total acreage has been turned into subdivisions in the last 30 yrs. 90% of the state is still untouched.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> There is no apples to apples comparison. There are no mule deer herds void of cougar or coyote. Well maybe city deer and AI. But plenty of city deer are being culled by cars. Or professional hunters. And they are transplanting deer off of AI.
> 
> A great comparison is CA to other western states. CA has 5x the habitat as Utah little winter kill. And it's a terrible place to hunt cats. Because they don't let you. Here's the great contrast between UT CA and eastern states that don't have apex predators. The hunter looses CA has some of the lowest hunter harvest numbers in the US but in states back east hunters are relied upon to keep deer numbers in check. How many deer harvested in LA and AL anyway?
> 
> As to Utah's lost winter range. Just take out you calculator and a map and see how little of Utah's total acreage has been turned into subdivisions in the last 30 yrs. 90% of the state is still untouched.


The Wastach Front would be the ideal winter range for the deer. We are developing it quite well.

There is a lot of land in Utah that isn't conducive to sustaining a lot of deer. A lot of rocky desert where nothing grows. There are some desert spots that will hold deer, but not a ton.

California is a bad argument, because it is messed up in so many ways.

I would go back to looking at Idaho as a comparison for deer. Idaho has a ton of predators, there are areas that you can take two bear, two cats, and unlimited wolves. Harvest rates on deer is still 25-50 % on these areas and most have an opportunity to take two deer.

Why?

The Answer is habitat in fact 2.4 million acres of wilderness. Plus more national forest land and BLM land for the deer to home. I would venture to say that Idaho has substantially more kitty's and bears(definitively) than Utah.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> There is no apples to apples comparison. There are no mule deer herds void of cougar or coyote. Well maybe city deer and AI. But plenty of city deer are being culled by cars. Or professional hunters. And they are transplanting deer off of AI.
> 
> A great comparison is CA to other western states. CA has 5x the habitat as Utah little winter kill. And it's a terrible place to hunt cats. Because they don't let you. Here's the great contrast between UT CA and eastern states that don't have apex predators. The hunter looses CA has some of the lowest hunter harvest numbers in the US but in states back east hunters are relied upon to keep deer numbers in check. How many deer harvested in LA and AL anyway?
> 
> As to Utah's lost winter range. Just take out you calculator and a map and see how little of Utah's total acreage has been turned into subdivisions in the last 30 yrs. 90% of the state is still untouched.


Areas that would actually hold large numbers of wintering deer are what are going to the waste side. You have the wasatch front that is being developed at an alarming rate destroying winter range, waterfowl, and upland habitat as well. Luckily there are areas being conserved but not enough to buffer those being lost. Above salt lake you can't hold near as many deer as if the freaking city wasn't growing like a tumor on the benches from Provo to Ogden. I hope to see more wilderness areas in Utah, more WMA's, more conservation easements and better protections of our open space in this state. If the habitat keeps going at the pace it's going, expect lower populations in the future not greater. We are doing quite well as far as population for the time being but I think we're approaching as good as we're going to see, if a good winter hits you'll watch a real down turn of our current population, not because of the easy to blame predators but deep snow, development, and no where to live or eat will be the true demise of our deer herd in many parts of the state. You want to help our deer, elk, upland game, waterfowl, any of our wildlife? You better start protecting and preserving habitat from development destruction and forever losses, rather than temporary predator control. Once habitats gone it isn't coming back, coyotes and cats however, will always be there so long as their food source is available. Oil and gas development are a big what if on the book cliffs, what if they weren't there, would populations be higher? My guess is definitely yes. I'm for getting the resources we need, but we can always strive to do it in a better way. Destroying habitat in the name of the almighty dollar is what will determine if the future holds wildlife or not, predators won't be making the decision, it will be us, and hopefully we can see past the dollar signs to what kind of world we want to pass on to the future. A developed and wasted one, or one where we protected our natural resources that are so important to sustain and keep our country going.


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

Numbers for Alabama for the 2013-14 season are: 535,000 hunters and of those, 197,000 were licensed hunters (in Alabama, you don't need a license to hunt land you own). Estimated deer harvest was about 270,000 and of those 108,000 were bucks and 162,000 were does. To accomplish this, the average hunter spent 19 days hunting.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Areas that would actually hold large numbers of wintering deer are what are going to the waste side. You have the wasatch front that is being developed at an alarming rate destroying winter range, waterfowl, and upland habitat as well. Luckily there are areas being conserved but not enough to buffer those being lost. Above salt lake you can't hold near as many deer as if the freaking city wasn't growing like a tumor on the benches from Provo to Ogden. I hope to see more wilderness areas in Utah, more WMA's, more conservation easements and better protections of our open space in this state. If the habitat keeps going at the pace it's going, expect lower populations in the future not greater. We are doing quite well as far as population for the time being but I think we're approaching as good as we're going to see, if a good winter hits you'll watch a real down turn of our current population, not because of the easy to blame predators but deep snow, development, and no where to live or eat will be the true demise of our deer herd in many parts of the state. You want to help our deer, elk, upland game, waterfowl, any of our wildlife? You better start protecting and preserving habitat from development destruction and forever losses, rather than temporary predator control. Once habitats gone it isn't coming back, coyotes and cats however, will always be there so long as their food source is available. Oil and gas development are a big what if on the book cliffs, what if they weren't there, would populations be higher? My guess is definitely yes. I'm for getting the resources we need, but we can always strive to do it in a better way. Destroying habitat in the name of the almighty dollar is what will determine if the future holds wildlife or not, predators won't be making the decision, it will be us, and hopefully we can see past the dollar signs to what kind of world we want to pass on to the future. A developed and wasted one, or one where we protected our natural resources that are so important to sustain and keep our country going.


That's why oil/gas/mining/industry hire environmental engineers.

Having worked in mining, I know the quickest way to shut down a mine is environmental concerns.

The environmental engineers work to maintain the permits to allow for the production to continue - I know they do a lot of paperwork and I assume they know all the loopholes(It's there job to ensure they do not get shut down due to environmental issues).

I also know killing a deer on a mine site costs around $10,000 (same for domestic cattle) and they do there best to keep them out or give them areas away from the haul roads. (The haul truck tires are 12' high). Edit: Sage Grouse is $25,000 if it is killed on the mine site

I'm not against these industries moving into areas and providing jobs and resources, but they have to do it in the right way to minimize their impact.

I do agree we need to save/restore/build as much habitat as possible especially with the growing population (next generation hunters)


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> No native crocs in LA but there are plenty of crawfish here. I would love it if they had some pigs to hunt....yum! Cottonmouths and Coral snakes are fine but I never cared much for eating them but my next door neighbor had a particular liking to them. Now if we're talking gators....I would absolutely love it if gators could survive here, they're one of my absolute favorite things to eat....gators do actually prey on deer. My cousins killed a 13' 2" gator a couple of years ago and the gator had been seen several times killing deer that came to that particular bayou to drink. That was one of the largest gators I've ever seen.


I think it would be cool to have gators in Utah.

Also, wild pigs and skunk hogs (javelina) would be cool too.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I think it would be cool to have gators in Utah.
> 
> Also, wild pigs and skunk hogs (javelina) would be cool too.


Javelina is definitely on my bucket list. Those look awesome!

If you want some great alligator and you're ever in Baton Rouge, go to Chimes East restaurant and order both the fried alligator and the cajun blackened alligator. Best I've ever eaten anywhere. While you're down there load up on frog legs too...yum! There are actually places online where you can order the alligator meat and have it shipped here. 
The only thing about growing up around gators in Louisiana that had me a little concerned was early duck season and being in waders in areas I knew had gators. There was a few times that I ended up having to leave an area or retreat to the boat because gators got a little too close for comfort (less than 50 yards away).


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I think it would be cool to have gators in Utah.
> 
> Also, wild pigs and skunk hogs (javelina) would be cool too.


Javelina are a blast to hunt. I believe though the border of their range is the Colorado river. Not sure if its because they wont cross or the weather wont support them this high up.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> Javelina is definitely on my bucket list. Those look awesome!
> 
> If you want some great alligator and you're ever in Baton Rouge, go to Chimes East restaurant and order both the fried alligator and the cajun blackened alligator. Best I've ever eaten anywhere. While you're down there load up on frog legs too...yum! There are actually places online where you can order the alligator meat and have it shipped here.
> The only thing about growing up around gators in Louisiana that had me a little concerned was early duck season and being in waders in areas I knew had gators. There was a few times that I ended up having to leave an area or retreat to the boat because gators got a little too close for comfort (less than 50 yards away).


Yeah, I would be worried about the dog. Gators sure love dogs.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

mikevanwilder said:


> Javelina are a blast to hunt. I believe though the border of their range is the Colorado river. Not sure if its because they wont cross or the weather wont support them this high up.


I have seen them in the wild and seen them up close as road kill - and they are smelly.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

massmanute said:


> Where did you come up with the 7000 number? Is it something you made up, or is it documented somewhere?


Just a quick search on the Department of Highway Safety.

http://watchfordeerutah.com/

Their site has changed, it used to show reports on how many and what type of crash. Maybe it still does. http://publicsafety.utah.gov/highwaysafety/index.html

http://watchfordeerutah.com/collision-consequences/

This page states that in 2010 2800 animal collision were reported. That's "all" animals combined.

I hate reading studies. So I'm not going to read this one to glean facts to prove my point. But I will say this that the issue has been looked at time and time again. I still never have seen anything suggesting that roadkill is anywhere as high as some of the folk here think it is or state that it is. I just defies any reasonable logic to believe that 30 40 50 60 thousand deer are dieing from roadkill. http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=9770519209812457


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Id like someone to point me out to a study that shows 2000 cougar don't kill 100,000 deer per yr. Or do we all agree that 2000 cougar will in fact kill 100,000 deer per yr. 

But the roadkill guys aught to fudge and overstate and imagine that cougar kills are more than science tells us like raodkill.


----------



## fishreaper (Jan 2, 2014)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I think it would be cool to have gators in Utah.
> 
> Also, wild pigs and skunk hogs (javelina) would be cool too.


As much as I like wild boar hunting, I don't think you want them. They can reproduce every three months, three weeks, and three days almost exactly. They reach sexual maturity within half a year to a year, and will have a litter of 8-15 piglets. 
My neighbor would trap one, put it in a pen, and wait for other wild boar to maneuver their way into the pen. he'd fatten them up on old baked potatoes, BBQ restaurant trash, and expired snickers bars and sell them once they got large enough where they'd be slaughtered and sent to Europe. I was typically put in charge of taking care of them since he lived in town, and it was not my favorite thing to do in the early light before school.

In Texas they destroy billions in agricultural damages and can be particularly dangerous. I would say the are essentially terrestrial carp. Fun to shoot, good to eat, but they can cause too many issues. I can only imagine what would happen if a bunch of pigs set up shop in a potato field. They'd uproot the entire field faster than any plow.

The last thing you want is your dog to be mauled by some tusked Wilbur, lest yourself. There is a reason a lot of pig hunting bull dogs that do the heavy jobs wear kevlar vests.

There are few things that put me on edge like walking around before light to hear pigs squealing. Sounds like bloody murder.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> Id like someone to point me out to a study that shows 2000 cougar don't kill 100,000 deer per yr. Or do we all agree that 2000 cougar will in fact kill 100,000 deer per yr...


Not a study per se, but information for the wikipedia page on cougars says they average about one large ungulate kill every two weeks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar#Hunting_and_diet) If this applies to Utah then 2000 cougars would kill about 52,000 dear in a year, not 100,000.

According to the Utah 2012 annual game report, page 9, in recent years the annual dear harvest is about 25,000, which is about one fifth of the harvest of the glory years of around the year 1960.

In recent decades the deer population has hovered around 300,000. Taking an oversimplified point of view, if there would be 52,000 more deer in the absence of cougars, and if we assume that the hunter success is proportional to the total number of deer then we would expect an increase in the deer harvest of 17%, or about 4,000 total deer. That's not a huge increase.

Also, consider this. Cougars are going to tend to take the easy prey, which would disproportionally favor the taking of sick or otherwise ill-fit animals. This goes to the old idea that predation by natural predators strengthens the herd by culling the ill-fit animals.

Chronic wasting disease puts a whole new spin on this. I say the more of the animals infected by chronic wasting disease taken by cougars the better.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

fishreaper said:


> As much as I like wild boar hunting, I don't think you want them. They can reproduce every three months, three weeks, and three days almost exactly. They reach sexual maturity within half a year to a year, and will have a litter of 8-15 piglets.
> My neighbor would trap one, put it in a pen, and wait for other wild boar to maneuver their way into the pen. he'd fatten them up on old baked potatoes, BBQ restaurant trash, and expired snickers bars and sell them once they got large enough where they'd be slaughtered and sent to Europe. I was typically put in charge of taking care of them since he lived in town, and it was not my favorite thing to do in the early light before school.
> 
> In Texas they destroy billions in agricultural damages and can be particularly dangerous. I would say the are essentially terrestrial carp. Fun to shoot, good to eat, but they can cause too many issues. I can only imagine what would happen if a bunch of pigs set up shop in a potato field. They'd uproot the entire field faster than any plow.
> ...


I don't think there is much risk of a feral pig population becoming established in Utah. If there were then it would likely have happened already, given the fact that people have been raising pigs in Utah since the mid 1800s, and some would have surely escaped and tried to set up housekeeping in the wild. I don't think the habitat here is conducive to pigs living in the wild here, especially considering that Utah is a very arid state.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

massmanute said:


> Not a study per se, but information for the wikipedia page on cougars says they average about one large ungulate kill every two weeks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar#Hunting_and_diet) If this applies to Utah then 2000 cougars would kill about 52,000 dear in a year, not 100,000.
> 
> .


Now cut that number in half again due to harvest objective lion hunting
and we have current, realistic numbers............


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

I heard an anti-hunting cougar advocate on T.V. say that an adult cougar needs to eat a deer a week.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

fishreaper said:


> As much as I like wild boar hunting, I don't think you want them. They can reproduce every three months, three weeks, and three days almost exactly. They reach sexual maturity within half a year to a year, and will have a litter of 8-15 piglets.
> My neighbor would trap one, put it in a pen, and wait for other wild boar to maneuver their way into the pen. he'd fatten them up on old baked potatoes, BBQ restaurant trash, and expired snickers bars and sell them once they got large enough where they'd be slaughtered and sent to Europe. I was typically put in charge of taking care of them since he lived in town, and it was not my favorite thing to do in the early light before school.
> 
> In Texas they destroy billions in agricultural damages and can be particularly dangerous. I would say the are essentially terrestrial carp. Fun to shoot, good to eat, but they can cause too many issues. I can only imagine what would happen if a bunch of pigs set up shop in a potato field. They'd uproot the entire field faster than any plow.
> ...


Fair point


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Now cut that number in half again due to harvest objective lion hunting
> and we have current, realistic numbers............


Not too mention the decimation and destruction the Cougars have on the Porcupine Population.


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

Interesting comments, though many are more than a bit misleading, to say the least. As to the statements made by the DWR, I find them incomplete and also fairly misleading, but not surprisingly so. I like the statement made by a state biologist, can't remember at the moment which state, Colorado I think, and I'm paraphrasing here: "The only thing we know for SURE about Cougars is that they kill and eat deer". 

There is a great deal that ISN'T known about cougar/prey dynamics, and rate of kill is one of them. It varies between less than one ungulate per week to as much as nearly two per week. And those numbers are based on MANY factors, including habitat quality, ungulate densities, predator densities, time of year and weather. Although there are some who don't seem to like the word 'dynamic', it is certainly appropo when it comes to predator/prey relationships. Busy day, I'll have to repost a bit later with some more fun facts and theories.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Deer Population: ~300,000
Cougar Predation: ~ -100,000
Car Predation ~ -25,000
Hunter Predation ~ -25,000
Winter/Sickness Kill ~ -25,000

Total Deer after the year ~125,000
1:10 B/D = 12,500 B and 112500 D
75% of Does get impregnated 84375
1.5 Fawns per doe = 126563 Fawns
Fawn Mortality 35% = 82266 Fawns survive (Coyote based)

Total Deer at the end of the year would be 207266

So basically the deer herd get cut in half every-year, but still is around the 300,000 mark every year.

The math just doesn't make sense.

My Realistic numbers

Deer Population ~ 300,000
Cougar Predation ~ -40,000
Car Predation ~ -25,000
Hunter Predation ~ -25,000
Winter/Sickness ~ -25,000

Total Deer after the year ~185,000
1:10 B/D = 18,500 B and 166,500 D
75% of Does get impregnated 124,875
1.5 Fawns per doe = 187,313 Fawns
Fawn Mortality 35% = 121,753 Fawns survive (coyote based)

Total Deer ~ 306,000

So, the deer is relatively stable currently and the only change is the winter kill. Cougars won't kill a deer every other week, because they will also prey on other ungulates (elk, sheep, domestics). 

You can't make the math make sense with the cougar kill 100,000. It just doesn't happen like that.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Problem is all this doesn't happen in 5 min like your equation. It happens by the second instead. 365/24/7.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> Problem is all this doesn't happen in 5 min like your equation. It happens by the second instead. 365/24/7.


The math was just a simple way at proving a point.

I'm sure if I had the right data, I could provide a more accurate depiction on what the true impact cougars have on deer and compare them with all other aspects of deer morality. Then trend them moving forward to show what we would need to do to increase the deer herd.

But I'm just a man on the outside looking in and they pay people to do that.

I would welcome the opportunity to provide statistical analysis and trending for the DWR.

But,

I'm not cheap, but I am easy...

Or is it

I'm easy, but I'm not cheap.

:grin::mrgreen:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Yep^^^ I'm certain you could also. I ask all the time, the DWR wants to know how many deer hunters harvest. Right down to the individual deer. As if it mattered a lot. But the DWR is fine with broad estimates to how many cougar there are even in the state. And never a mention to how many deer might be getting killed. As if it doesn't matter. Then supports and echo erroneous figures on things like roadkill. 

The DWR spends millions to make sure they know about most human kills. (25,000) But spends next to nothing to put a number on how many deer are killed by predators. (100,000)


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Iron Bear said:


> Yep^^^ I'm certain you could also. I ask all the time, the DWR wants to know how many deer hunters harvest. Right down to the individual deer. As if it mattered a lot. But the DWR is fine with broad estimates to how many cougar there are even in the state. And never a mention to how many deer might be getting killed. As if it doesn't matter. Then supports and echo erroneous figures on things like roadkill.
> 
> The DWR spends millions to make sure they know about most human kills. (25,000) But spends next to nothing to put a number on how many deer are killed by predators. (100,000)


I don't want to go through the math again, but 100,000 predator kill in a 300,000 deer population is way way way too high.

I would say 75,000 max (coyote, cougar, blackie, wayward wolfer, wild domestic dog) - which does include fawn predation.

I would probably be more in favor of minimizing the cougar population to restore the porcupine aka prickly wood beaver population.

:mrgreen:


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

If those stupid deer would just use the deer crossing areas we would have a lot less killed by vehicles.:shock:


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

So IB how do you suppose the DWR find out exactly how many deer predators kill?
The reason they can get the hunter harvest info is because its an easy process. I don't think they can call every predator and ask them their harvest data. Maybe fix a camera to every predator and then check the video every year? Its impossible to find out so, the best they can do is estimate and that is what they do. Sucks it doesn't fit your beliefs but it is what it is.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

No no they are happy to put a figure or estimate on just about everything that kills deer except predators. 

Is it because they have no clue and couldn't possibly put a number on it. Or is it because they don't want that number floating around out there. 

I'd say spending millions to find out just how many deer were killed by humans is not exactly easy.

Please link me to a figure or estimate the DWR has published as to how many deer die to predation per yr in Utah.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Here the last 4 year deer herd estamates,

2010: 293,700
2011: 286,700
2012: 318,550
2013: 332,900

Three strait years of rising deer numbers.

I beleive direct correlation with much lower lion and coyote numbers AND
mild winters----------- 
Opt 2 will come even more into play now keeping hunters evenly dispersed.

Wouldn't be a bit surprised to see a 350,000 plus deer herd estimate number used for
this years permit allocations used at the April RAC meeting...............

I have to wonder what these deer numbers would look like had 25,000 plus coyotes
had NOT been killed over that last couple years ....?.....?.....


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Hunt Unit/Tribal Coyotes Percent
Box Elder 698 10.5%
West Desert 566 8.5%
Southwest Desert 524 7.9%
Fillmore 519 7.8%
Beaver 517 7.8%
Pine Valley 476 7.1%
San Juan 421 6.3%
South Slope 332 5.0%
Cache 307 4.6%
Central Mountains 307 4.6%
Zion 246 3.7%
Oquirrh-Stansbury 235 3.5%
Plateau 200 3.0%
Paunsaugunt 169 2.5%
North Slope 145 2.2%
La Sal 123 1.8%
Wasatch
Mountains 110 1.7%
San Rafael 105 1.6%
Nine Mile 89 1.3%
Monroe 79 1.2%
Mt. Dutton 77 1.2%
Morgan South Rich 75 1.1%
Book Cliffs 72 1.1%
Panguitch Lake 69 1.0%
Henry Mountains 52 0.8%
Kaiparowits 48 0.7%
Ogden 46 0.7%
East Canyon 28 0.4%
Navajo Reservation 23 0.3%
Chalk Creek 3 0.0%
Kamas 3 0

Looking at the numbers. I am still shocked that a couple of these units do not have more Yotes killed. Looks like there is a lot more work to do.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> Here the last 4 year deer herd estamates,
> 
> 2010: 293,700
> 2011: 286,700
> ...


I don't mean to open Pandora's box here, but what makes the DWR estimates for deer accurate when we know you don't accept their numbers on elk?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Hunt Unit/Tribal Coyotes Percent
> Box Elder 698 10.5%
> West Desert 566 8.5%
> Southwest Desert 524 7.9%
> ...


 And these numbers come from???


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Ummm TS, Were did I say I thought they were accurate?..........^^^^^^^^

Simply saying these are the numbers the DWR uses to determined permit numbers..;-)

And ya TS..Do you believe that there are 8,900 head of elk on the Wasatch unit?
That was the 2013 estamate by the DWR pryor to this last seasons hunt.....


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Yep, what we* believe* to be true is much more efficacious than what the professionals tell us. But hey, we can use their numbers to attempt to_ prove _our own points in most anything, right goofy?


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

elkfromabove said:


> And these numbers come from???


http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/predator_program_summary_2014.pdf

The link buried at the beginning of the thread.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/predator_program_summary_2014.pdf
> 
> The link buried at the beginning of the thread.


 Thanks! I usually don't go back to the beginning once the thread gets going.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

elkfromabove said:


> Thanks! I usually don't go back to the beginning once the thread gets going.


Yeah,

I think we are all at fault of that.

And

Taking the thread off in a tangent that it wasn't intended on going too.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Good, to be fair, I guess you didn't specifically say you thought they were accurate. However, you strongly implied it...and not even you can deny that!

I've never disagreed with you on the numbers on the Wasatch. I just found interesting you're willing to accept their deer counts but always claim the elk counts are horribly wrong. Just wondering what the difference is?


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

I wonder how many cougars there were in Utah back in the glory years of Utah deer hunting, back in the early 1960s when there were about 125,000 deer killed by hunters every year and the deer populations were, I dunno, maybe 800,000.

By the way, maybe its off topic, but has anyone noticed that deer hunting is dying sport in Utah? Once the hunter population drops below a certain level (I don't know what that number is), there will be insufficient political support for hunting in the state and insufficient funds from hunting license sales to support wildlife management. At that point you can pretty well kiss hunting goodbye, or at least you can kiss easy access to hunting goodby. Actually, maybe we are already closer than you think to that outcome.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

massmanute said:


> I wonder how many cougars there were in Utah back in the glory years of Utah deer hunting, back in the early 1960s when there were about 125,000 deer killed by hunters every year and the deer populations were, I dunno, maybe 800,000.


I can only comment on my own experience. I first started following a friend's dad's hounds into lion trees back in 1975 and have been running my own hounds since 1983. Lion populations have always mirrored deer herds; when deer numbers were up, cougar populations followed and visa versa. The happy times for houndsmen was the late 80's early 90's when the state enjoyed large numbers of both lions and deer.

The only real exception was in the early 2000's when caving to pressure the DWR started issuing 30+ harvest objective tags (on the Cache unit) on a population estimated at 75 animals. After a couple years of heavy harvest there was basically nothing left as far as lions on the unit.

How did the Cache deer herd respond to what was essentially a 5 year span of a zero mortality rate to cougar predation?? It didn't. Any increases that may have occurred were wiped out by another harsh winter. I think it was the spring of 2008 when I could stand in one spot and count the remains of over 50 winter killed deer, so many the scavengers couldn't keep up to the number of deer that were tipping over from starvation.

I remember thinking at the time what a gawd damned waste; we killed all those lions, sacrificed our lion hunting opportunities for what?? A pile of rotting carcasses on the winter range?? What a ****ing waste!

So you'll have to excuse me when I read posts by those that think we can kill our way back to mule deer prosperity as simple and uneducated. I think the problem is more complex than simple minds can grasp.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Kevin, can you tell us how many cougar there probably were in Utah in the 50's and 60's? Honestly? 

Why is there an instant result expectation when it comes to predator reduction? 

Does anyone put that expectation on any other management practice to increase deer numbers? In the 20s it took a few yrs to basically exterminate predators and the deer herd didn't exactly boom to 1 million in a yr or 2. It took more than a decade. 

When UDOT fences off sardine canyon is that a failure because the deer herd didn't explode after it was built? 

When DH's Install a guzzler is anyone expecting the deer herd to boom. And when it doesn't declare guzzlers as ineffective. 

They catch prolific poachers and you don't see an uptick in wildlife numbers instantly, 

They Dixie harrow 1000s acres of great sage habitat. The deer then disappear and everyone wants to say habitat restoration takes time. If we hadn't then thing would have been worse. Wow that's a contrast. 

A year of good weather and we don't increase the deer herd by 50%. Is that because weather isn't really a factor? 

We cut deer tags and don't see any increase in deer numbers. Is that instantly identified as a flawed practice? (It is by some here) 

Restrict access to winter range. But the deer herd doesn't explode. So should we abandon these practices? 

Make a guy take a class to hunt for sheds. But yet no more deer. Should we just forgo all shed hunting restrictions?

I understand a houndsmans motivation to keep the spotlight off of the cats he loves to hunt. All I can say to the houndsman is that you're not gonna get more cats until you get more deer. Maybe houndsman do believe every cougar kill is compensatory. I doubt it. So as long as we have maximum cats then we will see minimal gains if any over the long term with deer. Because there is no micro management of cougar. Just as Kevin correctly points out the cougar population follows the deer population. 

I wouldn't care if there were 4000 cougar in Utah. As long as we had 1,000,000 deer to feed them and sustain a OTC general deer hunt. You know the family style hunting we all grew up knowing and loving. Now we hunt tags more the the critters themselves. 

Speaking to a previous post about the possible demise of the deer hunt in Utah. Rarely do things happen by accident. Especially over 40 yr period. Its by design.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Bear, Rant all you want, BUT you are missing the biggest pice of the puzzle....

FAWN SURVIVAL..:!:....:!:....:!:.....

And the coyotes are MUCH harder on fawns than a few cats ....

Lion numbers on most the units I spend time on everyday are at the LOWEST I've
witnessed in 30 years of tracking lions....:!:.....

Cats ARE NOT the main factor holding deer herd from " Exploading " ....

IB, You continue to bark up the wrong tree.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Ok cats don't kill deer. They don't kill fawns and they don't kill pregnant doe. They don't make deer nervous burning more calories then if they weren't about to be eaten. Yep I'm barking up the wrong tree Cougars main prey are deer there are mor than 1000 cougar in Utah and they have no effect of deer. 

Pffff spoken like a true houndsman.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Goofy, 
How many cougar do you think we're in Utah on the 40s 50s and 60s?


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

Iron Bear said:


> Goofy,
> How many cougar do you think we're in Utah on the 40s 50s and 60s?


Iron Bear:

Some of the things you are saying are a bit confusing to me, but I'll address them in another post. Here is a post from a different popular forum from a fellow who was on the Utah Mule Deer Committee. His thoughts aren't all that different than yours, but I may be wrong in the comparison. Is this how you feel?



> We no longer need to prove or disprove the need to reduce predation on mule deer units. We know it helps and we know it helps more on some units than it may on others. What needs to be done is to "get after it", hire the specialists, fund the cost and get the deer eaters removed and keep them removed, until we have a monster sized mule deer herd again, then we can afford to do a new experiment: That being, how many predators can you allow back on the unit before they adversely impact the deer population, when the herd is at unit carrying capacity.
> 
> My belief is we can have a lot more predators, if we want the **** things, if we have a lot more deer on the unit. Let's try that experiment for the next 40 years.
> 
> ...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Goofy,
> How many cougar do you think we're in Utah on the 40s 50s and 60s?


I wish old Garth 'cougar' Robinson from Antimony was still around,
he was THE MAIN player when it comes to lions during the 40s,50s,60s...

He described it back then to be VERY difficult to kill a good, mature Tom.
Very much like it is currently today...........
So I'd guess about the same, WAAAAY down from the 90s thru 2005..

Although, Garth did manage to kill a giant Tom during that time,
He actulaly took a word record lion , taking the record away from Teddy Roosevelt.:!:.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Kevin, can you tell us how many cougar there probably were in Utah in the 50's and 60's? Honestly?


No, nor can you or anybody else for that matter......

Because of their reclusive nature, lions have never been easy to count and thus an accurate census for the time period does not exist.

To think lions were nonexistent during the time period you mentioned, however, would be delusional. Even though my own experience with hounds may only go back 40 years, I have personally met and listened to houndsmen whose experience goes far beyond that. Ever notice that historical photo near the restrooms at Cabelas of dead cougars?? Those lions were caught by dogs belonging to the father of a good friend of mine, a man that I've shared plenty of campfires with and have heard many a story. He ran hounds on horseback for a number of years but gave up his dogs when he entered service in WWII. Lions and deer have always coexisted in Utah in numbers that I suspect would surprise you.

There are several reasons why there was never a large cougar harvest during those earlier years you mentioned, one was the money and leisure time available for a houndsman to raise up and train a competent pack of hounds. Before and during the Great Depression it took almost every working hour of every day for able men bodied men to eke out a meager existence. Few had the time or inclination needed to devote to training lion dogs.

Technology has also come a long way to promote hound dogging and thus lion harvest as well. Snow machines and 4WDs were a monumental leap forward openning up areas to hound doggers that were pretty much inaccessible before hand. Prior, access was only feasible by horseback or on foot when conditions were dry, tough tracking conditions for hounds, thus low catch rates. Also, given that a female lion's territory is 25 square miles and a tom lion's is 35, these transportation advancements made it possible for the first time to cover enough ground to make finding a fresh track a good possibility.

Another side effect of transportation advancement, was that suddenly nonhoundsmen started noticing lion tracks as well and began raising the alarm, places where they had probably always been but had gone unnoticed before.

Bottom line Iron Bear, is that it would be tough to make the case that lack of predators was the primary cause mule deer expansion. The data just isn't there to support your theory and there are so many other factors in play that are unaccounted for.

As a side note, mule deer populations on the Cache seem to be on the upswing the last 5 years, as are lion numbers locally as well. Cougar harvest on the Cache is still too heavy IMO judging by the age and size of cats taken, but the harvest seems to be sustainable for the population. What central Utah is experiencing now is what we went through on the Cache back in the 2000's when cats were pretty much nonexistent. So I can sympathize with Goofy and other houndsmen throughout the state going through their own lion drought. Hopefully biologists and sportsmen alike can realize that we can strike a healthy balance where both species can coexist as nature intended.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Lobo, I'd agree with everything in that quote. 

Goofy, 
We both agree cougar hunting isn't/wasn't the greatest today or in the 40s thru 60s. Difference is that we had over a million deer during early days. I contend for the benefit of deer hunters and houndsman. Cougar should be managed on a per deer basis. Not on a per acre basis and a it's hard to kill a huge Tom basis. To avoid bust boom and conflict between the 2 parties. 

Kevin, 

You forgot to mention 3 big things. Back in the day you could kill a cat on site no questions asked and no need to report it. Unless you didn't want to get a pat on the back and a hand shake if not a bounty. And the biggest one 1080 poison. 

Next was the implementation of LE cougar hunting. And managing for trophy toms. 

And I would agree. Deer hunters and houndsman can be best buddies. 

I'd support pouring millions into a comprehensive program to make both camps happy. I believe it's possible for Utah to be the best state for cougar hunting and deer. I'd love to see houndsman and deer hunters working together for each other's benefit. But united we stand and divided we fall. 

So understating the effect cats have on deer and how many cats we have actually is counterproductive for both of us. I firmly believe houndsman are the key to a viable family hunt I'm always talking about.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

I once knew someone whose father was a mountain lion hunter back in the 1950s. I think he used to guide hunts, but I don't remember that detail for sure. Anyway, there were at least enough lions that someone in the state found it worth his time to hunt them.

I don't know how many there were back then, but my guess is there were probably twice as many back then as there are now. Why? because there were more than twice as many deer, i.e. twice as much for them to eat, though I believe not as many elk back then.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

an interesting quote from the website

http://mountainlion.org/us/-us-timeline.asp

"1959 Utah ends its bounty program on mountain lions. Since 1913 (first year records are available) 3,895 mountain lions were killed and turned in for the bounty."

It looks like there were, on average, a little under 100 per year turned in for bounty during that time. That doesn't tell us how many there were living in the wild, but it must have been a pretty significant number to be able to take that many per year.


----------

