# UDWR - Time for a Hard Look In The Mirror!



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

I just don't understand. What the UDWR says vs. its actions are not the same. The UDWR promotes the Outdoor experience for youth in various ways of hunting and fishing experience. Yet, how do I explain to my 17yr old son that yet another year we have failed to draw not only any limited entry tags, but a basic general deer season tag as well. Now, I might understand if I was putting in for a popular area. But according to last years stats, we had a 1 out of 1.8 chance of drawing. We also put multiple areas for multiple choices. (Let alone the bonus point). How do I explain to him, yes that is just hard life - that new rifle you bought 1.5 yrs ago and you haven't had a chance to hunt with yet, from lawn mowing money, will just sit in the gun safe yet another year. Now obvious life is full of choices. But why is it when I do attend the RAC meetings, sure we as the public can voice our opinion, but the board does not listen to the people. The choices have already been made influenced by other parties than the people themselves. "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." - Abraham Lincoln Why is the UDWR an exception?

I'm making a motion here on UtahWildlife.net to retract the 30 areas set up by the UDWR and go back to the 5 basic areas as it was before.

UDWR, your supporting statement is to better manage the deer herd. I challenge you to read the latest issue of MuleyCrazy magazine by Ryan Hatch. Located right here in Utah. Just take a glance at is research on predators and what Arizona has done or not done in certain areas of state to improve and manage deer herds. This information is public. Time to look in the mirror and see if you truly represent what this country was founded upon.


----------



## 10yearquest (Oct 15, 2009)

Outdoorzman, I feel your frustration with the tag situation. I have a 14 year old that has not hunted general season deer yet either. He has had the opportunity to hunt antelope and elk and has filled his tag both times. The antelope was a nonresident wyoming doe tag and the elk was a cow tag in a really good area that has taken me several pref points to get. He drew it first time. So there are many opportunities for youth, they just may be antlerless hunts. Teach your boy that hunting is a privelage, that you dont get what you want all the time and sometimes you have to go with plan "B".


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

Trade that rifle in for a bow! ;-) JK
Seriously though I feel your pain. I think most of Utah agrees with you. Like you said though the real problem is the board. Even if the biologists or let alone the PEOPLE give a different opinion, the board will still do whatever they want. Really wish I was a millionaire right now...:shock:


----------



## RichardClarke (Nov 5, 2011)

Sort of getting sick and tired of reading about parents whining that their kids didn't draw tags. You know what folks, life ain't fair. Maybe, just maybe, in this world of instant gratification this is a good lesson for kids to learn. Some things come with patience and perseverance. Not everything in life is fair, not everything is a fast food drive thru. If your kid sucks at baseball he probably won't make the team. Life isn't fair, it is a hard lesson but an important one. There are some things in life where daddy still can't pull out the wallet and plastic card and make everything better for little Johnny.


----------



## N8ON (Oct 7, 2010)

Looks like there is some opportunity to take him. Sure you might have to invest in a bow or muzzleloader, or learn a new area, but it can be done.
http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hunting-information/big-game/562-2012-remaining-biggame.html


----------



## alpinebowman (Sep 24, 2007)

outdoorzman the DWR did not want to chop up the state into more units. If you were following things you would know the WB forced this onto the division. I am sorry for your lack of success in the draws I am still waiting for my disappointment but as an archer I don't deal with the demand for tags like the rifle guys do. Archery is a more dedicated weapon but I wouldn't change that as I think archery is year round fun for me and my family. 
So like I said don't get mad at the division it was the option 2 people that bent the WB ears enough to get it passed. Get your group built up and join the others that are trying to bend it back.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Still plenty of tags left.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Pretty sure that new rifle wont have any objection to shooting an elk? Plenty of and I mean PLENTY of elk tags available this season. No LE tag for a 17 yr? I guess I dont see that as abnormal? 

Look in the mirror and do what? Give a tag to every person that feels they should have one? How could they look in the mirror after doing that???? The reason not everyone gets a tag is the fact that our deer herds were at 800,000 plus. We are now somewhere between 250,000-310,000. No there should not be more tags. If the odds where 1.8 then having 1 point will probably not get you a tag. Apply accordingly if having a tag is the #1 priority.


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

Muley73 can you please provide a source showing herd estimate numbers at 800,000 for Utah. I've seen this quoted on here more than once but can't seem to find any actual data for this claim.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Outdoorzman said:


> how do I explain to my 17yr old son that yet another year we have failed to draw not only any limited entry tags, but a basic general deer season tag as well.


Bummer about the general deer, but he might as well learn the lesson now that LE tags are hard to come by. His day will come on the deer soon enough.

"Pretty sure that new rifle wont have any objection to shooting an elk? Plenty of and I mean PLENTY of elk tags available this season. "

+1.


----------



## torowy (Jun 19, 2008)

This is just the reality of limited resources. In lots of states in the US you can't go hunt at all without paying thousands of dollars to a land owner. I think we are still pretty fortunate in utah to be able to buy an over-the-counter license and be able to hunt every year. Ya, you might not get a deer tag every year, but you can always buy and elk tag. Also, if you are really concerned about your kid getting the chance to hunt, you can try other states. Some of our neighbors have great youth tag programs.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I'd like to see a 1-time youth conservation deer tag. Good for any general area, any weapon, and has an extended season from November 15 through December 15. A kid could get the tag and it is good until he/she fills it, or turns 18 - whichever comes first. Once a kid gets his/her first deer, then they put in like anyone else. To get the tag, the kid must complete hunter's education, 20 hours of conservation service, and attend at least one RAC or WB meeting or conservation organization event. If they don't want to do the extra stuff, then after completing hunters education, they put in like everyone else and take their chances.

This way, a first time hunter willing to learn the bigger picture, is assured a tag. And with the late hunt, would be assured a chance at a decent buck.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Why should antler size matter? So now we want to ensure kids a subjectively "large" deer? News flash, very few of my most memerable hunting trips in my life were of the harvest of a really big deer. People just want to hunt.

As for the OP... this was brought up when the whole Option 2 thing was being discussed. Some general units would be extremely hard to draw for. If you dont like it put in for other areas that have higher draw chances. Its an unfortunate situation but you can thank the SFW and Wildlife Board for the mess we are in.

-DallanC


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> Pretty sure that new rifle wont have any objection to shooting an elk? Plenty of and I mean PLENTY of elk tags available this season. No LE tag for a 17 yr? I guess I dont see that as abnormal?
> 
> Look in the mirror and do what? Give a tag to every person that feels they should have one? How could they look in the mirror after doing that???? The reason not everyone gets a tag is the fact that our deer herds were at 800,000 plus. We are now somewhere between 250,000-310,000. No there should not be more tags. If the odds where 1.8 then having 1 point will probably not get you a tag. Apply accordingly if having a tag is the #1 priority.


This is irrelevant in the grand scheme of wildlife management. 2012 saw an increase in harvest, but a decrease in hunters. The way things work out over the long haul, hunters harvest deer based on the availability of deer, not how many hunters there are.

Reducing hunters, does not increase deer. If it did we would be swimming deer.

Furthermore, tying buck to doe ratios to the number of tags issued is just one more "social" factor that has nothing to do with actual scientific management, that needlessly complicates the whole problem, and reduces tags even further.

The problem with the WB, the Division, and $FW, is they all live by the same moto. "Sportsmen ****ing Sportsmen".


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I agree that it's a tough situation. If you are the type to make lemonade out of lemons, look at all of the youth archery tags available:
http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hunting-information/big-game/562-2012-remaining-biggame.html

Any 17 year old is going to love shooting a bow. I promise. The practice is almost as fun as the actual hunt.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

As for the hard look in the mirror, we as sportsmen need to do just that. Then, when we get our priorities straight, try to stick with them, rather than wondering off into the tangents and traps, that continue to keep us subservient to the special interests.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

BirdDogger said:


> I agree that it's a tough situation. If you are the type to make lemonade out of lemons, look at all of the youth archery tags available:
> http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hunting-information/big-game/562-2012-remaining-biggame.html
> 
> Any 17 year old is going to love shooting a bow. I promise. The practice is almost as fun as the actual hunt.


Hear that, all you 12-18 year old hunters that have never picked up a bow. You have 2.5 months to get proficient, as soon as you get a bow, and arrows, and camo, and a few other things. Should be a blast.

Don't get me wrong, I like the sentiment, but it is not practical. I could have taken a deer with a bow, when I first started hunting deer. But as a family, we hunted rifle, my father had not picked up a bow in years, and my grandfather and uncle did not bow hunt. So what about the kid that has no exposure or experience. Yes, given some time, they can pull this off on their own, but probably not this year.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

I hope Carma bites you in the rear hard. Its a kid, give me a break.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Guys seriously. Its not about the tags. Its about the fact that most of you know most Deer hunters are now being forced to hunt in areas they have no experience in, or forced to pursue Elk to hunt at all. Guess what all that Elk hunting pressure does to the Elk. Runs them ragged for four months. I've seen elk die in November with full bellies from exhaustion. And as far as the mirror, if UDWR was promoting family and youth, then why take group hunt applications from 10 to 4. Go figure.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Why should antler size matter? So now we want to ensure kids a subjectively "large" deer? News flash, very few of my most memerable hunting trips in my life were of the harvest of a really big deer. People just want to hunt.
> -DallanC


I'm with you. Antlers don't make the hunt. My most memorable deer hunt involved harvesting only does. So I get it. By chance at a "decent buck," I should have said "decent chance at a deer." The things that WILL make memories and get a kid hooked on hunting though - are seeing deer, and having the chance at a harvest. My suggestion was one that if a kid is committed enough to donate time, participate in the process, and gain a better level of wildlife management and conservation, then give them a one time tag that maximizes the opportunity to see and harvest a deer when they are still a kid. That's it. Nothing more. Nothing less. And if they don't want to do the extra stuff, that is fine. Put in like everyone else. But I didn't intend the suggestion to entitle a kid to a trophy animal. Not at all. Just increase the chance to see and harvest a deer. If I could really get my way, that youth tag would be an either sex tag.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

bowhunt,
I'll see if I can find the link. The 800,000 is the number that came from the UDWR I believe that number was from around 1983.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

got a great idea. lets change the rifle hunt from 3 days to 5 days and then 9 days. cut the number of tags and see how well are deer herd thrives..then take some tags away from the archers. after all their killing most of the deer any way.. while were at it lets make a smoke cannon that can shoot 300 yards..These changes should get the herds off the charts..


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Or better yet, quit changing all the boundaries, how many days you can hunt, or only allowing archers, rifle hunters, and smoke pole hunters so many tags. Go back to hunting with so many tags overall, period. If you want to hunt bow season, then take your family and go do it. 

Focus on the real problem and who is killing most of the deer and elk in the first place. Coyotes, Mountain Lions, and yes - wolfs. Admit they are here, (First step in problem solving), and deal with them.

Please read the latest issue from MuleyCrazy from Ryan Hatch. He has real hard data and stats from predator control. I am just a subscriber, but this is the truth. 

If we all want more chances to hunt in the future, and more animals. Peel back the layers of the onion and lets address the core issue. Predators.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> I'm with you. Antlers don't make the hunt. My most memorable deer hunt involved harvesting only does. So I get it. By chance at a "decent buck," I should have said "decent chance at a deer." The things that WILL make memories and get a kid hooked on hunting though - are seeing deer, and having the chance at a harvest. My suggestion was one that if a kid is committed enough to donate time, participate in the process, and gain a better level of wildlife management and conservation, then give them a one time tag that maximizes the opportunity to see and harvest a deer when they are still a kid. That's it. Nothing more. Nothing less. And if they don't want to do the extra stuff, that is fine. Put in like everyone else. But I didn't intend the suggestion to entitle a kid to a trophy animal. Not at all. Just increase the chance to see and harvest a deer. If I could really get my way, that youth tag would be an either sex tag.


Gotcha, its not a bad idea. My boy is 12 and this will be his first year hunting Deer, we stuck more to an area I knew he would get a tag, than stick with the area I would prefer to hunt. I got him out last fall for antlerless elk, got a shot but missed ... but elk is a pretty hard proposition for most people in this state if you dont have horses.

-DallanC


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Outdoorzman, your not saying anything that hasn't already been said. And while predator control is an issue it is far far down the list of issues affecting deer herds.
And yes it is being addressed in Utah more so than in any other state. Hell you get $50 for a freaking coyote in Utah! All the HO tags for bear and lions. 
Arizona has far more predators than Utah so I don't see how it is the main problem.
I'm sorry your kid didn't get a tag, like others have said that is hunting in Utah now. Its not the DWR though they don't make any decisions on the wildlife without approval from the WB and if the WB says, the DWR has to do. Even if its bad for the herds, ie option 2. 
What rifle did your son get by the way?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Or better yet, quit changing all the boundaries, how many days you can hunt, or only allowing archers, rifle hunters, and smoke pole hunters so many tags. Go back to hunting with so many tags overall, period. If you want to hunt bow season, then take your family and go do it.
> 
> Focus on the real problem and who is killing most of the deer and elk in the first place. Coyotes, Mountain Lions, and yes - wolfs. Admit they are here, (First step in problem solving), and deal with them.
> 
> ...


Or peel back a few more layers, and see what actually drives predation. This line is getting old, and it is one of the biggest reasons we will never see progress in wildlife management. ****tard idiots keep getting their wildlife information from horn porn mags, and the politically motivated.

We have been cutting hunting tags for years in the West, it has not brought deer numbers up. If predator control worked, so would reducing hunters. It does not work, this is scientifically proven. Lion numbers are not high, nor are bobcat numbers. And wolfs, yes we have a few, I saw my first Utah wolf in 2004. And there have been at least 3 trapped. So we have a few wolves, that is not going to reduce squat.

Coyotes are not your typical predators, they are omnivores, they will eat carrion, and they can survive on insects and plants. If there are too many coyotes eating deer fawns, then there is an underlying problem, not a "predator" problem. Study after study shows this, which is why coyote predation expresses as compensatory. You can remove the coyotes, and the over all deer trends do not go up. Wyoming has already done coyote bounties, it did not raise the deer trend line. Colorado has reduced tags, and managed for higher buck to doe ratios, it has not raised the deer trend line, etc. etc. etc.

Do you have the source information, and metrology methodology available for the "article" you read? I am assuming it has some attempted basis in science.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree, I love your ignorance. There are studies from the Department of Wildlife for Arizona that will completely back up my statements. These studies are not just based on a year or two, they cover a ten year period and are done by a combination of Universities and Scientists as well as the Department of Wildlife for Arizona.... But what would they know. Lions and Coyotes are your biggest combined loss of Deer Herds, with the exception of vehicles. Now to me, you can control two of those three. Yes we have offered $50 a coyote and there has already been thousands of dollars payed out. Meaning we really do have a problem. Kudo's to UDWR for this program.... I'll give them that. But Lions will kill up to 10 deer a week. And anybody that says there only killing the weak, your foolish. I can forward pics and videos of Lion kills of extremely large bucks. As far as your "Horn-porn" Magazine comment. Not all of us look at the pics. (though that is a perk!), There is a lot of knowledge to obtained from other hunters. Not just your neighbor down the street, but guys who typically year to year find decent size bucks. Like I challenged before, try reading the latest issue of MuleyCrazy on Predator Control and the black and white info on the studies before shooting an opinion based comment.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Lonetree, I love your ignorance. There are studies from the Department of Wildlife for Arizona that will completely back up my statements. These studies are not just based on a year or two, they cover a ten year period and are done by a combination of Universities and Scientists as well as the Department of Wildlife for Arizona.... But what would they know. Lions and Coyotes are your biggest combined loss of Deer Herds, with the exception of vehicles. Now to me, you can control two of those three. Yes we have offered $50 a coyote and there has already been thousands of dollars payed out. Meaning we really do have a problem. Kudo's to UDWR for this program.... I'll give them that. But Lions will kill up to 10 deer a week. And anybody that says there only killing the weak, your foolish. I can forward pics and videos of Lion kills of extremely large bucks. As far as your "Horn-porn" Magazine comment. Not all of us look at the pics. (though that is a perk!), There is a lot of knowledge to obtained from other hunters. Not just your neighbor down the street, but guys who typically year to year find decent size bucks. Like I challenged before, try reading the latest issue of MuleyCrazy on Predator Control and the black and white info on the studies before shooting an opinion based comment.


Yes, lions and coyotes are predators, that is not news. Coyotes only prey on the weak and young. With lions it is a little more complicated. Females have been shown to target sick animals, where as mature toms, will seemingly attempt to go after anything. We do not have many old tom cats around.

So you have some research that says coyotes and lions kill deer, so what, you do not understand the intricacies of what that actually means. When I said peel back a few more layers, I mean look at actual cause and effect, and the dynamics of it. Just because lions and coyotes kill deer, does not mean that if we remove the lions or coyotes, that there will be more deer. That predation is most compensatory by nature, much like regulated seasonal human hunting. If we shoot all the lions, and all the coyotes, you will not bring up over all deer numbers, in any kind of sustained, significant way. Predation is symptomatic of larger underlying problems.

Tell me why reducing deer hunters for 20 years has not brought deer numbers up? Why did Wyoming's coyote bounty program not bring deer numbers up. Why did multiyear, multi area studies, in Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado, show that predation was compensatory, and predator removal could not bring deer numbers up? You read the good publications, educate me.

Don't take my word for it, get an actual education in wildlife biology and ecology. I am currently in contact with wildlife researchers and biologists, in Canada, Wyoming, and Colorado, I have been reading wildlife studies for years, before they ever get published. Do you get any of that with Muley Madness? because maybe I need to look into a subscription.

Final question, while you are learn'n me. Do you think that reduced glutathione peroxidase function driven by weather fluctuations, is more complex than originally believed? And that an over sight in the importance of the role of magnesium and zinc in GPx, could be the reason past supplementation trials have had limited success? And what factor would you apply, to account for increases in pollution over the last 30 years? 

Pardon my ignorance on the subject, but if you could please include the reference information, and corresponding journals of publication, along with answering the additional questions, it would really help me understand this. :roll:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Sad to see no tag but dont sweat the small stuff. There are options everywhere! Apply for cow tags, antelope doe tags. Spike tags, anybull tags. Colorado elk or idaho deer are also options. Heck i think you can get an over the counter antelope doe tag in wyoming. 

Last but not least, dont over look the left over bow or muzzy tags here in utah. 

I guarantee you he will have more fun going the bow rout. Less pressure, more bucks, nicer weather, doesn't have to miss as much school, longer season.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree, I would love to sit down face to face at match wisdom or (education) with you. It would be most interesting. 

swbuckmaster, the only challenge as previously stated is getting a 17yr old ready for a archery hunt. Being a former bow hunter, the challenge is not only expense. But to me is having enough time and practice to not only take ethical shots, but being able to make them in 2.5 months. Nothing worse than deer being hit and never found, or worse yet, running wounded for days. Thanks for your comment. 

I heard of an Idaho Management tag that is not as expensive, I've been searching their web site. Anyone with more info out there?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Lonetree, I would love to sit down face to face at match wisdom or (education) with you. It would be most interesting.=QUOTE]
> 
> :grin: But not publiclly? I take it you are not going to provide reference information, or answer my questions. It is real simple, you do not understand additive vs compensatory predation. Or the dynamics that drive the compensatory nature of said predation. Which is why you won't fully engage on the subject.
> 
> I'll buy lunch, and you can school me face to face. PM me for a time and place that works for you.


----------



## svmoose (Feb 28, 2008)

Not drawing tags is tough, unfortunately that's the current state of the hunting situation. It sucks, but it's either throw in the towel or figure out how to change hunting styles or locations to make yearly hunts a reality. I know it's late this season to get your son on a bow hunt, it is also expensive. Perhaps you could plan and budget for next season. Used archery equipment is readily available. I shot an old PSE nova for 12 years. It was $200 dollars when I bought it, and shot straight until I sold it. Personally I think Utah is doing a great thing allowing youth to get tags if they choose to bowhunt. Utah simply has too many hunters and not enough game to allow everyone to have the opportunity to kill mature animals with a rifle every year like we all want. So they have provided alternative seasons that provide more opportunity. I used to think Utah's general deer seasons were crappy. I don't think they are the best in the country, but I do think they are good. Every time you get ANY general buck tag in utah you have a legitimate change at killing a 170" deer. Whether that be a cache archery tag, or a nebo any weapon tag. The bucks are there. 

I would seriously encourage you to look out of state. I like to keep a 3-5 year plan for myself and my family members to budget and plan for hunts that I know (100% draw odds) that I will have. I'm not rich, but I save my money and make it a priority to hunt every year. I like to plan one out of state hunt - this year will be Wyoming Antelope.

I didn't draw a deer tag in the draw last year and was bummer for a while. But I bought a leftover cache archery tag and was happy to have a tag in my pocket. I also hunted in Colorado for deer on a 2nd choice tag and missed a very nice buck in the timber. So I had my chance and I blew it. It was fun and I'd like to try that unit again. 

I'm all for providing the youth opportunities to hunt and I think Utah is doing that - but even if they weren't with a little planning you can have some pretty great hunts every year.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

SVMOOSE - Thanks for your comments, its a welcome relief to get some positive comments on this thread.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

SVMOOSE, yeah thanks for the positive note, and the distraction away from things Outdoorzman started to talk about, but now wants nothing to do with.

Everyone is still missing the bigger picture. We have fewer tags, for no other reason than some special interests thought we should have fewer tags. That is why people can not even draw general season deer tags. 

Option WTF! has no up side, but we have been sold on the notion that it does. It can not grow the number of deer. Hell, it could not even reduce hunter harvest the first year it was implemented. But so many us just roll over, and say, "oh well, it will work it self out".

Can some one remind me how many hunters PETA has knocked out in Utah, I lost count.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

If you do look out of state, I recommend Arizona. I heard they had done something with predator problems for ten years, so their deer herds are probably fixed. There for, getting a tag should be a piece of cake.


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Since


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Since Utah big game is managed for the profit of P.H.s I took my sons too Alaska while they were still in High school. So they could see what hunting in a free country that manages wildlife for hunters was like.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

*LoneTree you've got a few things right!*

Contrary to what you think, Lonetree I agree with some of your statements. Especially the one about just rolling over and accepting what the UDWR has implemented. Hence the entire reason for this thread. I'm not saying I have the answers, but I am advocating we need changes, and not the ones that just further restrict and screw up the fun of hunting for all but those but a lucky few whose credit cards got hit this year.

Real changes...If the UDWR is going to have 30 units. Then there needs to be an independent fly over count of Deer herds in all 30 units every year. Not some inflated count of 800,000, and a flyover once every 5 years.

Changes that allow the Sportsman to truly have a voice that is listened to. You know, at my position of employment, if I choose to not listen or follow those who write my paycheck - I won't be receiving one much longer. Last time I checked, it was all of us, as a group of hunters that buy tags and pay the fees each year that fund the UDWR. They need to start listening. We need to group together, period... and it can be done in a positive manner. It is the younger generations that suffer and will continue to suffer over the next 50 years. As for me, I've taken plenty of Deer, but I care for our kids, so should you.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Contrary to what you think, Lonetree I agree with some of your statements. Especially the one about just rolling over and accepting what the UDWR has implemented. Hence the entire reason for this thread. I'm not saying I have the answers, but I am advocating we need changes, and not the ones that just further restrict and screw up the fun of hunting for all but those but a lucky few whose credit cards got hit this year.
> 
> Real changes...If the UDWR is going to have 30 units. Then there needs to be an independent fly over count of Deer herds in all 30 units every year. Not some inflated count of 800,000, and a flyover once every 5 years.
> 
> Changes that allow the Sportsman to truly have a voice that is listened to. You know, at my position of employment, if I choose to not listen or follow those who write my paycheck - I won't be receiving one much longer. Last time I checked, it was all of us, as a group of hunters that buy tags and pay the fees each year that fund the UDWR. They need to start listening. We need to group together, period... and it can be done in a positive manner. It is the younger generations that suffer and will continue to suffer over the next 50 years. As for me, I've taken plenty of Deer, but I care for our kids, so should you.


The 30 unit are counted, and population estimates are done every year. This was the case even before moving to the 30 units for hunter management. Over flights and exact counts are not practical, or needed. As long as the counts and estimates are achieved with the same methodology, every year, that is what matters. This gives a long term picture of population growth and decline. Utah's numbers jibe with other Western states, so there is nothing wrong there. The 800,000 number is a high point number. The current estimate is less than half that.

I am all for growing deer, and I am all for youth hunters. I spent several days putting kids on turkeys this fall. And I spend an exorbitant amount of my time and money researching wildlife problems. More tags, more deer, better opportunity for youth hunters, and a continued hunting heritage, are not going to be delivered under our current understanding of "wildlife management" and those that influence, and implement it.

I am harsh, and "negative" for a reason, overturning 50 years of misunderstood, sixth grade level, quasi life science, is a monu_mental_ task. But one of overriding moral imperative.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> Everyone is still missing the bigger picture. We have fewer tags, for no other reason than some special interests thought we should have fewer tags. That is why people can not even draw general season deer tags.
> 
> Option WTF! has no up side, but we have been sold on the notion that it does. It can not grow the number of deer. Hell, it could not even reduce hunter harvest the first year it was implemented. But so many us just roll over, and say, "oh well, it will work it self out".
> .


Really! I didn't realize that cutting tags was suppose lowing hunter harvest. I thought it was going to improve it. 
Also, before in the Southern region, most people were hunting it every 3 years. Now in a few of those sub-units , people will be hunting it every other year.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> If you do look out of state, I recommend Arizona. I heard they had done something with predator problems for ten years, so their deer herds are probably fixed. There for, getting a tag should be a piece of cake.


Maybe you can do some research on the strip. 
There may be more deer there now than in the 1980's. I think there might be more permits given out now than back then too. Why is that?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

You're harsh and negative cause your a immature DB troll and nothing more. ..!.,


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Guys, keep this positive and maybe we can create a new movement to fix the issues.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> Really! I didn't realize that cutting tags was suppose lowing hunter harvest. I thought it was going to improve it.
> Also, before in the Southern region, most people were hunting it every 3 years. Now in a few of those sub-units , people will be hunting it every other year.


Cutting tags was suppose to improve hunter harvest? So because we have fewer deer, we need fewer hunters, so we can harvest more deer?

This is the strategy for bringing deer numbers up?

Hunter numbers, over the long term, are not the driving force for deer harvest. Hunter harvest numbers follow the deer trend numbers, not the number of hunters in the field. Ask Tom, he has some numbers on this, and reminded me of this very fact last Monday.

So to improve harvest, you have to improve overall deer numbers. Option WTF! has no mechanism to achieve this.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> You're harsh and negative cause your a immature DB troll and nothing more. ..!.,


:mrgreen: If I am just a troll, why do you feel compelled?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Guys, keep this positive and maybe we can create a new movement to fix the issues.


:mrgreen: There was a new movement that was started in response to Option WTF! Sorry for the cynicism, but I was there, and I've been a few other places over the years.

I appreciate your optimism, and am all for supporting said change, but I am jaded.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

*HUNTERS - Look in the Mirror!*

ALL responsibility for the current state of affairs, for better or worse, rests solely on the shoulders of _We, the People_. Don't know about you, Outdoorzman, but when I look in the mirror, all I see is me.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Really? I thought it was dictated by the Wildlife Board that none of "We the People" had any input or vote to put them in their board positions.


-DallanC


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

DallanC said:


> Really? I thought it was dictated by the Wildlife Board that none of "We the People" had any input or vote to put them in their board positions.
> 
> -DallanC


Unfortunately, that does seem to be a big part of the problem. But, "We the people" do need to do more. A bigger part of the problem, is that there is no focus, plan, or message. The opposition is either being sold out, or has ADHD. While the rest of us cant see the forest for the trees, the symptoms from disease, or the disease from the cure.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The problem that I see with the "we the people" statement is that if we left it up to the people we would still be issuing 300,000 deer tag over the counter every year. Every one wants to hunt but no one wants to be the one that will give up a few years to get a tag or be the one that passes up a few bucks just to give them a chance. They usually shoot the first spike or two point that they see and then complain that there are no big bucks left. 

I also see there there are as many different ideas of what has happened to the deer herd as there are people that want to tell you what happened and every one thinks that the other person is wrong and that their idea is right. 

The problem as I see is is that there are not as many deer as there used to be. Now weather that is because of the predators, range conditions, highways, or too many tags I don't know for sure. I only know what I have observed over the years that I have been hunting. 

As for getting a kid out hunting, that is a crap shoot. Most of the kids that I know that have grown up in a hunting family would rather play a video game than watch a side hill for a day hoping for a buck to walk out into the open. I took my nephew hunting one year and he was more interested in the bugs on the ground and once he got tired of watching the bugs he pulled a book out of his back pack and started to read it. He could of cared less if a deer walked right in front of him.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Critter said:


> The problem that I see with the "we the people" statement is that if we left it up to the people we would still be issuing 300,000 deer tag over the counter every year. Every one wants to hunt but no one wants to be the one that will give up a few years to get a tag or be the one that passes up a few bucks just to give them a chance. They usually shoot the first spike or two point that they see and then complain that there are no big bucks left.
> 
> I also see there there are as many different ideas of what has happened to the deer herd as there are people that want to tell you what happened and every one thinks that the other person is wrong and that their idea is right.
> 
> ...


Passing up two points, and cutting tags, in no way shape or form grows more deer, or bigger bucks. You can read all the bull **** from the fish and game about how deer management went from low deer numbers in the '30s, to a more "balanced" scenario in the 50s and 60s, and how "wildlife management" was responsible for that. But the cold hard reality is that it is all bull ****. Go read the thread I put up on pinion and juniper encroachment. Over the next few years, as with the last few, our understanding of ecology is going to make leaps not seen since the turn of the century.

As to the problems that plague mule deer, they are vast, and complicated. But managing based on how people feel, while trying to support those feelings with sixth grade speculative life science theory, is not going to get us anywhere. All of the clinging to old outdated unproven models, is nothing more than a lethargic knee jerk response, to an avoidance of responsibility. Because looking at reality, does just that, makes us culpable and responsible. And face it, most turn away from it. Whether that be looking to what the science says, or confronting the continued assault on hunters and our wildlife.

Its convenient, is it not?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

So Lonetree if I read you right we should still be issuing 300,000 tags over the counter and let the deer herd end up where it ends up at.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Critter said:


> So Lonetree if I read you right we should still be issuing 300,000 tags over the counter and let the deer herd end up where it ends up at.


You could imply that, but that is not what I am saying at all.

First, we do not need to cut more tags. We do not need to over issue, ie. 300,000 tags, but we sure as hell do not need to be cutting tags. Cutting archery tags? this accomplishes what? This accomplishes only one thing, it makes people think that their hunt will be better, because of the reduction in other hunters. There is no scientific basis for this. It does not grow deer, and it does not improve "quality". More deer does that.

Second, we do not know what is driving deer numbers, especially our DWR. So no we don't just let the herd end up where ever. But cutting tags and shooting coyotes is a waste of money and resources. And we don't get any further in our understanding, or lack there of, of what is driving deer numbers.

Cutting tags and hoping for the best, is the ultimate "let the deer herd end up where it ends up at".

While some of the things we are doing seem proactive to some, they are not. They are exercises in futility, that have been played out all over the West, with the same failed results.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> Cutting tags was suppose to improve hunter harvest? So because we have fewer deer, we need fewer hunters, so we can harvest more deer?
> 
> This is the strategy for bringing deer numbers up?
> 
> ...


I think we are talking about two different things. I'm talking about hunter success rates being higher, not overall bucks being killed. Although they may be all the same in some units. I'm saying if we have less hunters afield, which creates higher buck to doe ratio's, then hunter success percentages usually go higher too. Also, more mature bucks tend to get harvested under these conditions too. And those who do hunt under these conditions, just may have a better experience. Just a thought.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> I think we are talking about two different things. I'm talking about hunter success rates being higher, not overall bucks being killed. Although they may be all the same in some units. I'm saying if we have less hunters afield, which creates higher buck to doe ratio's, then hunter success percentages usually go higher too. Also, more mature bucks tend to get harvested under these conditions too. And those who do hunt under these conditions, just may have a better experience. Just a thought.


No, we are talking about the same thing. More deer, mean higher deer harvest, regardless of the number of hunters. And higher buck to doe ratios, do not grow deer, they can actually be detrimental to herd growth. More overall deer numbers, mean more deer, which means more bucks. This also leads to more hunters being able to harvest deer.

If your goal is to have small deer herds, and even fewer hunters, then I guess.....

A "better experience", and "social norms" or "acceptability" have no place in the equation. Ask the folks in Montana about that, they are learning all about it.


----------



## Skally (Apr 20, 2012)

sell that "new rifle" and buy a sweet bow. The rifle hunt is to overcrowded and to cold anyway. And you can use the bow on upland game and waterfowl as well


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Question for all those in the "life ain't fair" crowd getting on the original poster for expressing his frustrations with our new crappy system: When you were introduced to deer hunting did you have to wait a minimum of 3 years to draw a tag? I know I sure didnt! Spare me the "I had to walk to school up hill both ways" bull crap! If I hear one more spit that non-sense I just might go postal. Seriously. 

You're the same people talking about how messed up kids are these days by not getting outdoors, playing video games, etc. Guess what? This guy is trying to get his kid involved....BUT CAN'T because of a moronic decision fueled by special interests and not science. These are supposed to be GENERAL SEASON, not LIMITED ENTRY! 

Yes, there is elk hunting, bears, and even jack rabbits. What if they want to hunt deer like we all got to do? Get off your high horses people. A kid not drawing 2 years in a row is a travesty. If you can't see that, then you plain don't get it.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

TS30 you are the bomb!!!! Thank you so much... Now lets change it.


----------



## HunterGeek (Sep 13, 2007)

I'll get hammered for this opinion, but I see little reason for kids to be given out-of-the-ordinary special privileges in drawing tags. Sure, everyone wants the best for their sons and daughters, but learning the important lessons in life don't come through give-aways, gifts and special treatment. Besides, ensuring that every kid gets a tag would be accompanied by an equivalent reduction in tags for adults. In other words, the deer hunt might start looking like a youth festival where every kid gets an LE deer then has to wait ten or twenty years before finally getting a chance at another. Doesn't seem an especially fair system to me — even for the kids.

With that little rant out of the way, blame it on the wildlife board, the DWR, changing habitat, elk encroachment, too many units, too few units, too many predators, climate change or the Man in the Moon, the bottom line is that there aren't enough mule deer in the state to accommodate all those wishing to hunt them. If someone knows some magic formula to bring supply in line with demand, we're all ears. Unfortunately, nothing so far has worked, and I'm not holding my breath.

In the mean time, as others have said, there are plenty of elk to shoot at. Turkeys are on the verge of becoming as thick as flies, and a coyote will bring in $50. And since when should shooting a big buck with big antlers be instilled as a primary goal in an impressionable teenager. Buy an elk tag — elk are bigger than deer anyway. Better still, buy your kid a fishing rod, a camera or a shotgun. Take him camping and teach him to love and respect the outdoors. He'll get far more lifetime pleasure out of those things than focusing his attention on chasing down a diminishing resource. Times change, but there are still opportunities out there, and quite of few of them weren't there when we were kids. Take advantage of them and be happy they're there.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Did you put in as a group with the kid or did you apply separately?

I believe if you apply as a group you end up screwing yourself. 

As for the bow comment. If you get the bow and are around the slc area i will get your boy ready for the hunt or have one of the other coaches i work with get him ready. We coach 40-60 kids every friday year round! Cost is a dollar if your not a member. How can you beat that?

The money goes to maintaining our equipment and building rental. Our time is free!

We have about 10 kids that consistently rank in the top 10 in the US in their devisions so we must be doing something right. 

Your boy would fit right in


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

HunterGeek said:


> I'll get hammered for this opinion, but I see little reason for kids to be given out-of-the-ordinary special privileges in drawing tags. Sure, everyone wants the best for their sons and daughters, but learning the important lessons in life don't come through give-aways, gifts and special treatment. Besides, ensuring that every kid gets a tag would be accompanied by an equivalent reduction in tags for adults. In other words, the deer hunt might start looking like a youth festival where every kid gets an LE deer then has to wait ten or twenty years before finally getting a chance at another. Doesn't seem an especially fair system to me - even for the kids.
> 
> With that little rant out of the way, blame it on the wildlife board, the DWR, changing habitat, elk encroachment, too many units, too few units, too many predators, climate change or the Man in the Moon, the bottom line is that there aren't enough mule deer in the state to accommodate all those wishing to hunt them. If someone knows some magic formula to bring supply in line with demand, we're all ears. Unfortunately, nothing so far has worked, and I'm not holding my breath.
> 
> In the mean time, as others have said, there are plenty of elk to shoot at. Turkeys are on the verge of becoming as thick as flies, and a coyote will bring in $50. And since when should shooting a big buck with big antlers be instilled as a primary goal in an impressionable teenager. Buy an elk tag - elk are bigger than deer anyway. Better still, buy your kid a fishing rod, a camera or a shotgun. Take him camping and teach him to love and respect the outdoors. He'll get far more lifetime pleasure out of those things than focusing his attention on chasing down a diminishing resource. Times change, but there are still opportunities out there, and quite of few of them weren't there when we were kids. Take advantage of them and be happy they're there.


No one is talking about giving kids hand outs, or freebies. Elk are great, but deer are the species that young biggame hunters cut there teeth on, that is just the way it has been.

We had more hunters, and fewer deer, not that many years ago. And the deer made it, because we shoot bucks, during regulated seasons. And because when there are fewer deer, fewer deer are killed, regardless of the number of hunters in the field.

Growing up, we ran rivers, fished, rock climbed, backpacked, hunted upland game, waterfowl, slaughtered rabbits, etc. But none of it was like deer camp. My grandfather would be getting ready for months, it is what he lived for. There are a lot of folks, that grew up the same way. And there a lot of folks that had that tradition cut short, or that will never get to. And it has nothing to do with not having enough deer.

Yes, deer have declined, but the opportunity to hunt deer has been cut exponentially further, than the decline in the number of deer. We are talking about a state where people do not draw archery deer tags two years in row. Where the focus is not on growing more deer, and addressing the declines. Instead the focus is on increasing the buck to doe ratio, and improving the "experience". This is the kind of talk you expect from high fence ranch operators.

If biologically unsound things like higher buck to doe ratios, and "quality" can be put on the table as arguing pawns, then why not youth recruitment, and hunting opportunity? Which of these really have long term benefits, to deer and deer hunters, on the whole?

Sacrifice herd health, cut opportunity, shut more youth hunters out, and for what? a "better experience"? for who?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Lonetree, you act like with a snap of the finger, more deer will appear. I know several people have asked if you think it would be good for deer hunting right now(2013), if there was unlimited over the counter tags and you seem to be avoiding the question. 
Really, how many tags should have been given out this year?
It's not only the deer tags that have been limited in the past few decades. It has been small game, other big game and even our fisheries. Should we just have no limits on anything we hunt or fish?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> Lonetree, you act like with a snap of the finger, more deer will appear. I know several people have asked if you think it would be good for deer hunting right now(2013), if there was unlimited over the counter tags and you seem to be avoiding the question.
> Really, how many tags should have been given out this year?
> It's not only the deer tags that have been limited in the past few decades. It has been small game, other big game and even our fisheries. Should we just have no limits on anything we hunt or fish?


I am not avoiding anything. We can easily support pre-Option WTF! tag numbers. We had fewer deer in 2008, and more tags.

Yes, we need to regulate tag numbers. This needs to be done based on biological factors, not made up bull **** parameters, that have no real world bearing, on what they are tied to. Option WTF! changed the rules, and the metrics, midstream, with no biological reasoning to support its convoluted, arbitrary, make up and structure.


----------



## hatch000 (Aug 4, 2011)

This thread is exactly why I've been telling all my hunting buddies who have kids that can hunt or will be hunting soon......"GIVE YOUR KIDS AS MUCH OPPURTUNITIES TO HUNT AS POSSIBLE!" 

Whether it be antlerless hunts or other states.......APPLY>>APPLY>>APPLY:grin::grin:.

If your child loves to hunt....you owe it to your kids to give them as much oppurtunity as possible. But we also need to teach them that they will not always get the hunts they want, or the weapon they want to choose.. 

Teach your kids now how to use multiple weapons. It opens the door for more possibilites when they can use different weapons to hunt.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree - I'm liking you more and more. We need to just do something, form an alliance or group of hunters that want change, but change that makes sense. Change that allows us to still manage our deer herds with a cap on tags. But a change that is not some micro-managed halfway effort of screwing up what most hunters hunt for in Utah. That is the "experience" of being in the outdoors. The "experience" of watching youth hunters fall in love with the same traditions that have been handed down for many generations. We can talk, we can post threads, we can debate one way or another, but we need to actually do something about it. Will you help? Will all of you help? Put your differences aside for a few minutes and engage in some sort of action that will let those in control know its time for some real wildlife management. Sure Ridgetop- your correct that we can't snap our fingers and change it in an instant. But if we don't start something now, in 5 years it'll be the same, or mostly likely even worse,. I'm talking a Coalition, or Union, something that involves every single hunter who really cares about the sport and the "experience." ENGAGE IN AN ACTION.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Outdoorzman, let me ask you a question. Since your son didn't draw a any weapon tag for the general season do you plan on putting him in for a anterless tag, and if not why not?


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Let me make myself clear, my goal is not to create a club with membership fees. This is a group for one and all. This is a group of individuals that can have a powerful voice in the future. This is a group for every single person who purchases a tag or permit. This is a group for the "people". As individuals we are just voices in the wind, as large group we become a voice to be heard. And with a "voice" comes change. But we must engage in an action! 

Maybe "Utah Coalition of Hunters"


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Critter- I am putting him in. I'm even trying to put him in for Idaho. Although I must admit, I've been trying to figure Idaho's Entry Process out and it is very confusing. 

*** I'm not looking for sympathy with my next statement, but hopefully the "Dad's" out there, whether (past or future) will be a little understanding.***

Understand my son is 17, I've hunted with him since he was 3 yrs old. Packing him on my shoulder those first few years was Crazy. But he fell in Love Hard Core with the sport of Deer Hunting. The "experience" of being with his Cousins, Aunts, Uncles, Grandparents at deer Camp. It was what I call (******* Family Reunion). Those days now are gone because of Micro-managing. My point is this- he has learned what its like to not draw a tag now for two years. We were Dedicated Hunters previously, so he knows whats involved in the "experience". Its not all about the taking of animals. Its about having the opportunity to be out there. 

-This was my last year with him. The next couple of years he will be away to school, then mostly likely married.

"Dads" - make every year count, create a voice that will make changes to the current system that will let you. Enjoy every minute - cause it will pass you by as fast as lightning.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

You say tags have not been cut to match the lost of deer? You are correct they have not been cut to match the loss of deer. Go look at the UDWR numbers and you will see. Our deer herds are literally 1/3 of what they use to be. We do not have 2/3 less deer tags available. Seriously go take a look at the numbers. Not to mention the fact that technology has made hunters far more efficient. 

Utah has been behind the curve on smaller units. Look at the surrounding states. Change is difficult I understand but it was necessary. Some adapt and others live their lives wishing things where back to old way. I think my family has more Utah tags than normal. Good luck to all. I'm looking forward to a great fall!


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Outdoorzman said:


> Let me make myself clear, my goal is not to create a club with membership fees. This is a group for one and all. This is a group of individuals that can have a powerful voice in the future. This is a group for every single person who purchases a tag or permit. This is a group for the "people". As individuals we are just voices in the wind, as large group we become a voice to be heard. And with a "voice" comes change. But we must engage in an action!
> 
> Maybe "Utah Coalition of Hunters"


Warning! Info-mercial ahead! 

We already have a group like you describe. It's called United Wildlife Cooperative. No sign up fees, no dues, few meetings, members fom the general hunting public, surveys and info online and representation at every Wildlife Board Meeting and most RAC meetings, even the fishing, cougar, Utah Prairie Dog meetings. Our challenges are first, getting members from the general public who don't have hunting/fishing as a number one priority. They're the ones we want, but they are also the ones who don't keep up with the policies and don't participate in the prosess and only get interested when they don't like something that has already been implimented, usually blaming the DWR because they don't know how the process works. Second, we have a challenge finding good leadership who have leadership skills and the time/money to spare. No one is paid in the organization and seldom reimbursed. We do except donations, but most of that is used for projects (Youth fishing days, archery shoots, habitat projects, etc.) and/or promotions (outdoor expo booths, hats, shirts, flyers, etc.). We do not (and will not) use Conservation or Convention tags to raise money. What we want is to get more people involved in the processes and projects that promote sound wildlife management based more on science/biology. That's the only way our hunting and fishing future will survive.

We're growing, but not as fast as we would like. Join us! unitedwildlifecooperative.org


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Muley, MY FAMILY TOO,, MORE tags than ever!

I cant believe I'm reading some of this stuff, 
There SO MUCH opportunity for youth hunting right now it's UNREAL!

I have a plan in place guaranteeing me, and my Kidd's, GREAT hunts,
EVERY year for at least the next 10 years!!!!!

Anyone thinking deer hunting is going to change management wise in Utah,
Well, good luck with that..................................It ain't change'in.........

In-fact, looks like the last western state with region deer hunting (Wyoming)
is looking to follow the Utah opt 2 system....Along with the rest.......

You simply need to learn the systems, and play the points game, in multiple states.

I can put 1 or two Le , or LQ tags, PLUS a couple general deer and antler-less
permit in our family EVERY YEAR!!! PLUS the added opportunity for youth filling
these tags.....Usually means 60 day or so to fill permits! ALL 3 or 4 HUNTS.....

GOOD GAWD..... WERE was all this stuff when I was a kid?????
Couldn't even 'legaly' hunt a deer til we were 16..........................OMG.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

ElkfromAbove, will you pm. me with more information? What is your member count so far?
Thanks.

Goofy Elk- Love your Winston Churchill quote, now stand behind it and join us.


----------



## huntnfool (Sep 16, 2007)

my son turned 16 in dec. He has drawn a deer tag every year in utah since he was 12 including this year. He has taken 4 bucks, 1 buck antelope in Wyoming, 3 doe antelope in Utah and had 2 cow elk tags killing 1 of the 2 in utah. When I turned 16 back in the day I had my first deer tag that year... Who has or had it better, 11 tags by age 16 or first tag at 16???? What is all this crying????? Play the game it's not that hard..... What I would've given to be in my boys shoes.. 
Goofy Im with you on this one. way more opportunity today. And yes I support option 2. :


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

huntnfool - that is awesome... I'm glad he has had that much opportunity- not all are as fortunate as you. BUT that is still awesome...


----------



## HunterGeek (Sep 13, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> No one is talking about giving kids hand outs, or freebies. Elk are great, but deer are the species that young biggame hunters cut there teeth on, that is just the way it has been....
> 
> Where the focus is not on growing more deer, and addressing the declines. Instead the focus is on increasing the buck to doe ratio, and improving the "experience"....


Kids might have cut their teeth on deer when you and I were that age, but that, unfortunately, just can't be the expected norm any longer. I don't think there's a single person on this forum who's happy about the situation, but like it or not, there just aren't the numbers nor the quality of deer (as in lots of big bucks) in the state compared to 20 or 40 years ago. This is just the simple reality of the situation.

The UDWR's focus isn't on increasing buck-to-doe ratios and managing smaller units, as you suggested. That whole thing is a minor licensing issue to them that was imposed by the wildlife board due to demands of sportsmen groups who wanted to see a higher ratio of bucks to does. It's a minor social management issue except to people here whose hunting experience will be, depending on viewpoint, be slightly enhanced or degraded by it.

Instead, the UDWR's main focus has been on spending a fortune on big game habitat improvements (buying winter and migratory range lands, reseeding after fires, mitigating the effects of juniper and pinyon encroachment, etc.), funding various studies (fawn survival, predator kills, highway mortalities, supplemental feeding, etc.) working with UDOT on installing fencing and deer crossings and about a dozen other big issue, big focus projects directly tied to understanding and increasing deer populations. Their focus has most definitely _not_ been focused on the nuisance whims of the wildlife board, like implementing smaller hunting units, except in how those ever-changing whims tie up their time, energy and resources dealing with these silly issues that, for whatever, reason grabs the public's attention at the expense of the important things that the DWR is actually focused on doing.

Furthermore, the UDWR is doing all of this on a yearly budgets that are only a small fraction of that available to their sister agencies in surrounding states and being siphoned off in a hundred different ways. Yet, you know what, mule deer herds are declining in those states as well, and they've had no greater luck in dealing with the problem than the UDWR.

Look, despite some people's logic to the contrary, there are no licensing allocation tweaks that are going to mitigate the plain and simple fact that demand outstrips current supply. Give more high-end permits to kids, break it up into smaller hunting units, sell more or fewer out-of-state permits, let the market determine fee prices, implement antler size and age restrictions, change the way points are allocated, set up more sportsman clubs to lobby the WB for their preferred magic-bullet solutions or whatever, it doesn't really matter.

The fact of the matter is that there are a shortage of deer and an excess of those who want to hunt them. Slice and dice the pie in any way you see fit, but the total size of the current pie stays the same and only so many people get a piece.

Maybe down the road, deer populations will rebound and maybe they won't. Maybe all the expense and effort that various states are putting into figuring it out will bear fruit and maybe they won't. In the mean time, I'm not going to moan over how things aren't how they once were and how my kids can't sit around the family camp each year and then head home with a pickup full of deer stacked in the bed of the truck.

Hey, those were great and important memories for all of us, but I'm not about to compromise the experiences of my kids by setting false expectations about how shooting a big buck is still a key milestone on the road to becoming an adult because it just isn't any longer. Instead, it's a real cool opportunity if and when the chance arises.

Times change and new opportunities and experiences arise for youth as old ones fade into the past. I've got fantastic memories of hunting deer and pheasants with my dad and older brothers. My kids will have the same fantastic memories only they will be less about deer and more about hunting elk, turkeys and going fishing. And you know what, their memories will be every bit as good, meaningful and character building as those I had when I was their age.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

A little back ground on the UWC. I was an original member. They were formed in response to Option WTF! And then promptly got distracted from it, just like every thread on this board. They have no direction, and they waffle, a lot.

As long as you head off on these irrelevant tangents, of conjecture, that you do not really understand the weight of. Then you are going to continue to get ****ed.

Keep talking tag reduction, "quality", "experience", predator control, buck to doe ratios, horn restrictions, other opportunity, etc. Non of it does anything for the deer. And all the while, hunter recruitment is going to continue to decline, regardless, of what you guys tell yourselves to make you feel better about it.

Ultimately, the average hunter will be shut out. And the argument will devolve into one of: "If you are a serious hunter, you would find the _money_ to be able to hunt"

Bottom line: 
There is no biological basis for the buck to doe ratios, that are tied to tag allocation. This is arbitrary, and based solely on social factors. This has nothing to do with declined deer numbers. There is no mechanism to grow more deer, and no biological reason to implement these made up "standards" In fact, higher buck to doe ratios, have been shown to be detrimental, to overall herd growth.

The deer trend has been slowly increasing over the last 4 or more years, yet we drastically cut tags, by the thousands. So if we had less deer 4 years ago, how could we have possibly supported the number of deer tags we were selling?

Hunter harvest follows deer trends, not hunter trends. If you want fewer hunters to contend with, and bigger deer. Learn how to get of the beaten path. It is you that makes the quality, and experience, of your hunt* If this is too hard, there is a place called Texas, it is not that far away.

Deer hunting is a family institution, and it is the place that most young hunters, become life long hunters. This is regardless of other opportunities, and this goes beyond the bounds of Utah, or even the West.

30 units, ok, but every other argument, and metric attached to Option WTF! is wrong. It is not based in science, and the sociology that is used to justify it, is also wrong. Above and beyond youth hunters, or their fathers not getting tags, we are showing our youth a very poor example.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

HunterGeek,
I really liked your last post. 

Lonetree, 
you remind me a lot of a guy on tv I saw a while back. The show was called "Hart of the matter". It's about a guy that has fallen away from the LDS church but now he just wants to let anyone that will listen know how misguided the church is and the host seems to have all the answers for all the misguided souls that will listen to his way of thinking.
I know your a smart guy, it's to bad that you can't be more constructive with your life. 
You try to make it sound like the DWR or the many wildlife groups are doing nothing to improved habitat or road crossings or some of the other environment issues but they are doing a lot and will continue to do so.

Outdoorzman,
despite what Lonetree thinks. The UWC does do a lot of good and is very involved in many issues with the DWR, along with many other groups.


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> Really! I didn't realize that cutting tags was suppose lowing hunter harvest. I thought it was going to improve it.
> Also, before in the Southern region, most people were hunting it every 3 years. Now in a few of those sub-units , people will be hunting it every other year.


Exactly, some people don't understand that it has been this way for many years in the Southern Unit. I haven't drawn out consecutive years in a long long time, like 10+ years. Didn't hear everyone crying back then, but now that it slightly effects people up north its time to change the whole system.

In my opinion, people need to stop crying and realize hunting is a privilege not a right.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> HunterGeek,
> I really liked your last post.
> 
> Lonetree,
> ...


Yeah the 8 hours on the phone with wildlife researchers this week in Wyoming, not constructive. All the nights I stay up until 3 in the morning, researching papers for projects, not constructive. All the emails and hundreds of dollars(that I really cant afford) to wildlife biologists and their projects this month, not constructive. That's me, not constructive, not trying to move the conversation along. :roll:

Regardless of what you think. 19th century alchemy is not going to get us any progress in the realm of 21st century wildlife issues. Using the Manual for a single barrel carb, to try and fix a fuel injection system, will not work.

Sure, there are lots of 3 letter abbreviations doing things, and yes, some of it is very commendable. But a whole lot of it adds up to nothing, and is more of a waste, and many times detrimental. So yeah, I don't have all the answers. Show me the deer, SFW, MDF, DWR, ETC. Same old bull **** solutions, that did not work for yesterday, applied to tomorrow.

Your analogy about the church, may have merit in a way. Dogma, is an extremely limiting factor to progress. And a great insulator from responsibility, if you don't know, you cant be responsible, right? Wrong.

Option WTF! is wrong!


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Uni said:


> Exactly, some people don't understand that it has been this way for many years in the Southern Unit. I haven't drawn out consecutive years in a long long time, like 10+ years. Didn't hear everyone crying back then, but now that it slightly effects people up north its time to change the whole system.
> 
> In my opinion, people need to stop crying and realize hunting is a privilege not a right.


It may be a privilege to get to hunt some species, but hunting as an act, or abstract concept even, is a birth right. This has been established by hundreds of years of common law, and legislated law. The Anglo-Saxon roots of this are 800 years old. And in some cultures, they are thousands of years old. Saying that hunting is a privilege, and not a right, is like saying gun ownership is a privilege, but not a right. These two rights have some of the same roots, that go back hundreds of years in common. Yes they can be regulated, but they are for all intents, purposes, and legal rational, rights.

No ****ing wonder, our hunting heritage is so easily trodden on by "hunters".


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Must say, the comment about hunting down south for us guys in the north bothers me. Since when does it make it your area. I know many guys from the south that hunt up north and I could care less. Good luck to all of them. Truth be known, I have hunted Fish Lake for over 30 years. I have spent entire summers there. And I know it better than you probably know your own backyard. I've done my homework, hiked countless miles, scouted some dandy deer and created awesome experiences for my family. I don't consider it "my area". I have many times even helped fellow hunters I don't even know fill a tag.

-Yes hunting is considered a privilage - but I am with Lonetree on this one. It is a God-given right that dates back to times when this country was created.

And I guarantee if someone tried to take it away from you, you change your tone. Now I have not drawn this tag consecutive either. And this is not a popular area for hunters, or large deer. Well to most,- cause their to dang lazy to get out of their truck or off their ATV and truly "experience" the outdoors.

With that being said, I do have one proposition.

Years ago, they made Fishlake 3 point or better area. Yea first year of Deer hunt was not as successful for most because of the above listed reasons. "HOWEVER"- this continued for something like 3 to 5 years. And the Deer herd population exploded. The quality of Deer was dramatically increased. It was so successful that the UDWR lifted the restriction. Unfortunately that next year was a slaughter. They didn't cut tags or limit them by an area. And it worked...

What if instead of micro-managing 30 areas. Create a 3 point or better for the entire state for 3 years. Give the younger bucks a chance to grow to a point they can help breed back in larger populations. Quit screwing with family traditions.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Must say, the comment about hunting down south for us guys in the north bothers me. Since when does it make it your area. I know many guys from the south that hunt up north and I could care less. Good luck to all of them. Truth be known, I have hunted Fish Lake for over 30 years. I have spent entire summers there. And I know it better than you probably know your own backyard. I've done my homework, hiked countless miles, scouted some dandy deer and created awesome experiences for my family. I don't consider it "my area". I have many times even helped fellow hunters I don't even know fill a tag.
> 
> -Yes hunting is considered a privilage - but I am with Lonetree on this one. It is a God-given right that dates back to times when this country was created.
> 
> ...


I know your heart is in the right place, but three point of better has no biological basis, for growing deer. It is a mechanism to reduce the harvest of young bucks. There are many reasons why people think this will help, but it is right in there with higher buck to doe ratios. In the long run, more bucks, or bigger bucks, do not equate into more deer.

You have not been around for the last two years to hear me drone on about deer health, so I'll be nice. But in a nut shell, the health of deer, is where we need to be looking. It is healthy deer, that grow herds. They rut efficiently, they have twins, they can utilize forage better, etc.

If you are interested in this, I have enough reading material to keep you busy for years.

People like to talk about thinking outside the box, I am way outside of that box. It is really quite simple, just a quick, on the fly, complete rewrite, of the last 50+ years, of mule deer life science :mrgreen:


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Lonetree, 
Don't agree with a lot of your posts but I do love signature. Got love the preachings of The Reverand Maynard Keenan.


----------



## 2:22 (Jan 31, 2013)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> Trade that rifle in for a bow! ;-)


My family went 3 for 6 on general Archery tags.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> Lonetree,
> Don't agree with a lot of your posts but I do love signature. Got love the preachings of The Reverand Maynard Keenan.


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forty_Six_&_2

"Hoping I can clear the way, By stepping through my shadow, Coming out the other side."


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Outdoorzman, feel free to PM me and I'll explain how your kids can have a better chance at drawing in the future.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Outdoorzman said:


> What if instead of micro-managing 30 areas. Create a 3 point or better for the entire state for 3 years. Give the younger bucks a chance to grow to a point they can help breed back in larger populations. Quit screwing with family traditions.


For the thousandth time. if you really want more big, healthy bucks, you should cull the smallest bucks and protect bucks once they get to their third summer. Instead, everybody thinks we should kill only the biggest bucks on the mountain.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Fishrmn said:


> For the thousandth time. if you really want more big, healthy bucks, you should cull the smallest bucks and protect bucks once they get to their third summer. Instead, everybody thinks we should kill only the biggest bucks on the mountain.


This can be a mechanism for promoting bigger deer, but only to a certain extent. Culling the "smallest bucks" in no way shape or form will have an impact on deer health, or in some way make for "healthy bucks". Again this kind of rational applies to the maintenance of high fences operations, and deer farming. In these scenarios you are managing for very high buck to doe ratios, with limited harvest, and you are always at carrying capacity.

For the "more" part of your statement, the factors limiting overall deer growth, have to be identified and addressed.

Deer health, affects antler size.


----------



## svmoose (Feb 28, 2008)

Here's my 2 cents on Utah hunting and where we're going:

Today Utah caters extensively to trophy hunters to the point that it has expanded beyond the LE system and into the General Deer - (which is now LE due to tag cuts). This issue stems from allowing a "conservation" organization to become entwined in the political and decision making process (Wildlife Board). These folks are interested in high success "trophy" hunts and the money that these tags create through auctions.

Option 2 isn't that bad in my opinion other than the tag cuts. Splitting the state up into geographic units that represent different populations/herds of mule deer is a great idea -- but you need enough man power to study and understand the problems associated with each unit. Utah lacks that as funding for wildlife isn't enough. There are so many factors that play into Mule Deer mortality that these blanket statements don't work. Predators isn't always the problem, neither is highway mortality, or stress, etc. Sometimes they are and the only way to properly identify the issues (which vary across the state) is to have the time to study these population segments who's issues are unique to their geography and associated behaviors.

The UWC is on the right track I believe. They are a free organization, I used to get polls in my email quite often and like that. Many hunters are not politically involved or voice their opinions outside family and circles of friends - we *all* need to be more involved in order for a full understanding of what the public wants to be acheived.

For real change to be made the Wildlife Board needs to be revamped or removed. This issue should be taken up with the state legislature and governor. The wildlife board needs to be an electable position with short term limits. I'm sure many of you have great ideas on what would be the best change to make here.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

*outdoorsman*

, I have hunted the Fishlake units since 1964 . Use to be excellent. Started to go down hill bout 3 years before the 3 point or better was put into place. when the restrictions were first implemented I was upset.. But after the 3rd year< BAM! like you said herds exploded. The last year of antler restrictions and before the slaughter took place the following October, west of Hogans Pass, 2 o clock
in the afternoon 2 nd week of the Archery Season. my buddy and I counted 33 legal Bucks laying in the Quakes and sagebrush. I've never since or will ever see what we witnessed again in my life time. now 68 yrs old. Only a few folks on this forum will agree with me or you on this subject.. But I AGREE! AGREE!. and NO ONE will ever change my mind, Toss out all the stats they want. . I learned in junior high school you can make numbers do whatever you want. And in this case I Feel the DWR or who ever BLEW IT!!


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

I realize some on this forum might have not seen what hunting is like in countries where it is considered a "right". Management is needed, it may not conform to the "god given right" that you have in your head. The "god given right" people are also the ones that nearly killed off every big game specie in the early 1900's.

Oh and on a side not, it doesn't matter if it is a "god given right". Thankfully our forefathers were smart enough to have a separation of church and state.


----------



## Uni (Dec 5, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Must say, the comment about hunting down south for us guys in the north bothers me. Since when does it make it your area. I know many guys from the south that hunt up north and I could care less. Good luck to all of them. Truth be known, I have hunted Fish Lake for over 30 years. I have spent entire summers there. And I know it better than you probably know your own backyard. I've done my homework, hiked countless miles, scouted some dandy deer and created awesome experiences for my family. I don't consider it "my area". I have many times even helped fellow hunters I don't even know fill a tag.


I hope I didn't come off that way. My only point was anyone who hunted in the Southern Unit is use to not drawing out every year. People who hunted up North never had to deal with this problem.

It does suck that it has to be this way. My favorite memories are hunting with my cousins down South. Sadly, it only happens once every 5 years now since we never can seem to draw out at the same time.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Uni said:


> I realize some on this forum might have not seen what hunting is like in countries where it is considered a "right". Management is needed, it may not conform to the "god given right" that you have in your head. The "god given right" people are also the ones that nearly killed off every big game specie in the early 1900's.
> 
> Oh and on a side not, it doesn't matter if it is a "god given right". Thankfully our forefathers were smart enough to have a separation of church and state.


I clearly stated rights could be regulated, I am versed on this. And in deist fashion, I said _birth_ right.

Irregardless, hunting, just like self defense, is a fundamental right. And at a basic level, making that distinction, is important. Understanding how and why it came to be a well established right, as our forefathers knew well, is also important. The right to hunt, in a modern American context, has its roots in the same documents, and shares much the same history as self defense, and public trust doctrine. The latter being intrinsically tied to hunting. This pre American history was well known, and borrowed from heavily by the Founders.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

some of you guys need to learn to fish!


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

svmoose, thank you - exactly what this thread is about. 

oldfudd- your right. I personally witnessed the exact same thing. Why not do it statewide? It does work - I can testify to it.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Uni, take a look at the dollar bill in your pocket. "In God We Trust" 

Thanks for the effort though.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Uni, take a look at the dollar bill in your pocket. "In God We Trust"
> 
> Thanks for the effort though.


Placed there long after the demise of our Founders.


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

Lonetree said:


> It may be a privilege to get to hunt some species, but hunting as an act, or abstract concept even, is a birth right. This has been established by hundreds of years of common law, and legislated law. The Anglo-Saxon roots of this are 800 years old.


If you want to speak of Anglo-Saxon hunting privledges, you need to either insert "noble" before 'birth right', or lop several hundred years off your 800 figure.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

oldfudd said:


> , I have hunted the Fishlake units since 1964 . Use to be excellent. Started to go down hill bout 3 years before the 3 point or better was put into place. when the restrictions were first implemented I was upset.. But after the 3rd year< BAM! like you said herds exploded. The last year of antler restrictions and before the slaughter took place the following October, west of Hogans Pass, 2 o clock
> in the afternoon 2 nd week of the Archery Season. my buddy and I counted 33 legal Bucks laying in the Quakes and sagebrush. I've never since or will ever see what we witnessed again in my life time. now 68 yrs old. Only a few folks on this forum will agree with me or you on this subject.. But I AGREE! AGREE!. and NO ONE will ever change my mind, Toss out all the stats they want. . I learned in junior high school you can make numbers do whatever you want. And in this case I Feel the DWR or who ever BLEW IT!!


What you witnessed, has to be put into context, of everything else. Did the deer numbers explode only in the places that had 3 point or better restrictions, while everywhere else suffered, No.

Explain to me the biological function, where having more, or bigger bucks, grows more deer over all. It does not work that way. I am not discounting your observations, but rather your implication, of what drove the things you had seen.

Healthy does having fawns, and the survival of those fawns, is what drives over all deer numbers. This will also get you more bucks.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Charina said:


> If you want to speak of Anglo-Saxon hunting privledges, you need to either insert "noble" before 'birth right', or lop several hundred years off your 800 figure.


Or Freeman(ie. any non-serf, this was the vast majority of people), and while Nobleman and Barons alike shared disproportionately, in many of the new decrees they fostered, the most basic were intended for everyone. And they are none the less, the roots of, what we and our forefathers understand and know to be rights.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

svmoose said:


> Here's my 2 cents on Utah hunting and where we're going:
> 
> Today Utah caters extensively to trophy hunters to the point that it has expanded beyond the LE system and into the General Deer - (which is now LE due to tag cuts). This issue stems from allowing a "conservation" organization to become entwined in the political and decision making process (Wildlife Board). These folks are interested in high success "trophy" hunts and the money that these tags create through auctions.
> 
> ...


Absolutely agreed on the emphasis of trophy hunting. And the influence you speak of goes beyond the WB.

Mule deer declines: Everything you mentioned is a compensatory component, that only exacerbates the larger problem. You can address all of those things, as they pertain to each unit, and you over all deer trend numbers are not going to improve. In Washington and Oregon, it is HSL. And in Montana there was EHD, so very different problems, across the West, driving the same trend lines? More likely much of what we label as "problems", are in all reality, just symptoms, of the real problem. The way these things are looked at and thought about, have to change. Or everyone is just going to be chasing their proverbial tail.

What does the UWC stand for? What are they striving for? Do they have goals, are they organized? Do they even understand their own mission statement? My experience on the matter is no. A lot of great guys, with a lot of great intentions, but that pretty well sums up all the three letter alphabet soup groups.

A democratically elected WB is probably one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time. If you figure out a way to mandate the "sound science" part of the NAMWC, then you really have something. But if its just a different set of people, that were placed there by different means, you are not going to see any kind of fundamental change.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Wow, way off on a tangent now.

Lonetree- all true, but it does require some mature bucks to breed those healthy does. You have to have somewhat of pool to use to accomplish this. By the way, think about the big picture of trying that option statewide. 
*Bigger deer for the horn hunters.
*Higher bucks to does ratio.
*No more draws for General Hunts.
*Unlimited tags sold over the counter (More revenue for UDWR to waste)
*Everyone gets an opportunity to hunt.
*No stupid 30 Unit boundaries.
*Your not killing off everything in sight. (Just hunting 3 Points or Better!)

Whats the downside?

Unless your a Bambi hunter...

PS. ELiminate anterless Deer tags until you get the overall population numbers back in line. (That'll get some of you guys commenting)


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Wow, way off on a tangent now.
> 
> Lonetree- all true, but it does require some mature bucks to breed those healthy does. You have to have somewhat of pool to use to accomplish this. By the way, think about the big picture of trying that option statewide.
> *Bigger deer for the horn hunters.
> ...


They have already cut most antlerless tags.

The biggest problem with all of that, is that it does not increase the over all number of deer. And that is the root of the problem.

Solve the problem, or at a minimum, identify the largest driving force of deer declines, and then you have a place to start. Growing more deer, and understanding why deer are declining(root causes), will set you on a course, to everything you mentioned in your list, except for higher buck to doe ratios. There is no biological basis for increasing buck to doe ratios beyond something in the 20:100 range. It takes only half that many bucks to sustain a herd.

3 point or better restrictions, are a short term management, and maintenance tool. They can actually have a detrimental effect on the health of a deer herd. Much like proposals for higher buck to doe ratios, these things can have negative affects on herd health.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Outdoorzman said:


> ElkfromAbove, will you pm. me with more information? What is your member count so far?
> Thanks.
> 
> Goofy Elk- Love your Winston Churchill quote, now stand behind it and join us.


Warning! Another info-mercial!

I hope this satisfies your inquiry, Outdoorzman.

Rather than pm'ing you, I thought I'd just let all the readers know the numbers. Approximately 2,500 members. We don't have an exact count because of the many different methods, places, and situations of sign-up. We have designated the 5 Utah Wildlife Regions as chapters, but some of the members live outside of the state, let alone the chapter in which they are listed. Some of them prefer to sign up in the chapter/region where they hunt or fish or where their relatives live or where they happen to be when they signed up. And, of course, they may have moved since signing up. We're still grass roots and not so formal (intentionally) as to be concerned about keeping track of members to the point where we have that kind of information at hand. We much prefer to communicate online. For instance, I haven't personally met nor had meetings with some of the Southern Region Chapter members, but I do know we have Southern Region Chapter members who live as far north as Ogden UT and as far south as Colorado City AZ and Mesquite NV and as far west as Bakersfield, CA.

Also, as you may have noticed, on this forum, there are some people who agree with us that may not have actually signed up. For instance, I forward the Parowan Front deer transplant updates to the Southern Region members who have emails, but I also send them to several others who asked for them, even though they haven't officially signed up as members.

Now, having said all of that, our state leadership is very active and more formalized. The state board has more meetings than I care to attend, even if I were invited, and they are more aware of the opinions of the members and more involved with the politics than I care to be. They are the ones who set UWC policy and set up most of the projects and events. I (and others) may not always agree with the details, but I do agree with the idea that UWC represents most of the Utah outdoorsmen/women who aren't able to make their voice heard at the RAC's and Wildlife Board meetings. And I see their efforts to provide opportunities to hunt and fish to those who may have those activities further down on their priorities list than those who normally attend the RAC's and Wildlife Board meetings. And they focus on the science.

Also remember, we are a *COOPERATIVE* and are willing to (and have) worked with other groups and entities to improve and/or keep our chosen outdoor lifestyle, even beyond the Option 2 episode (Which BTW, isn't necessarily over in spite of what has been claimed).

We don't have all the answers, but we are working to get them. And with help from people like you, we have a good chance of getting there.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

There is a lot of merit to this proposition:

3 Point or better for the entire State of Utah.

-I would rather have a tag and opportunity to hunt and the experience for the next three years, and watch all of the above happen. Then no tag at all and the Deer herds decline. Lonetree I get your theory, I just know what I personally witnessed- and this works.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> There is a lot of merit to this proposition:
> 
> 3 Point or better for the entire State of Utah.
> 
> -I would rather have a tag and opportunity to hunt and the experience for the next three years, and watch all of the above happen. Then no tag at all and the Deer herds decline. Lonetree I get your theory, I just know what I personally witnessed- and this works.


Its not a theory. You wont have more deer over three points, until the third year. And then you are on a course to more deer declines. If you throw unlimited over the counter tags into the mix, and target three point or better, you defeat the purpose.

This is short term thinking, what do we do after 3 years? We wont have any more deer, this is a falacy. All this does is keep some younger bucks from getting shot, until they are older. It does nothing to actually increase the number of bucks, nor the over all number of deer in general.

There is no meaningful, or long term gain to doing this. At the end of three years there will be some more bucks that are three point or better, so some hunters will get to shoot a few more larger deer, more easily. But that is it, and then it is all over.

Three point or better restrictions are not an answer to anything. It is nothing but a "quality" trap arguement.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

The state tried 3 point or better on several units in the late 80's. Simply delayed the killing one year. Never saw a benefit and after several years it ended.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

"I (and others) may not always agree with the details, but I do agree with the idea that UWC represents most of the Utah outdoorsmen/women who aren't able to make their voice heard at the RAC's and Wildlife Board meetings."--Elkfromabove

It is just an _idea_, there was no UWC representation at the last Northern region RAC. And they have missed some key WB meetings. They hold no firm stances on anything. And while the Option WTF! fiasco is far from over, you do not found a group in response to something, and then neglect what was to be your charter cause.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Sorry Dukes Daddy, Just try and agree with ya,, But I seen it on Fishlake Units , The Boulders. and the Pavhant was un real. Filmore Canyon all the way to Beaver a success story, Don't know where you hunted but not to see the increase blows me away. Guess will just have to wait and see what it bring in Wyoming.I do know that the antler restriction in Mass and parts of Wisc have been a major success story.. hunters didn't care for it at first. now there asking why it wasn't do 20 years ago,, Am asking the same question for years. oh well got to go with this stuff thats going on now.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

oldfudd said:


> Sorry Dukes Daddy, Just try and agree with ya,, But I seen it on Fishlake Units , The Boulders. and the Pavhant was un real. Filmore Canyon all the way to Beaver a success story, Don't know where you hunted but not to see the increase blows me away. Guess will just have to wait and see what it bring in Wyoming.I do know that the antler restriction in Mass and parts of Wisc have been a major success story.. hunters didn't care for it at first. now there asking why it wasn't do 20 years ago,, Am asking the same question for years. oh well got to go with this stuff thats going on now.


If you are reffering to the three point or better restrictions around Lander, they are only going to be in place for 2 years. Because it is detrimental to the deer herd to apply it for any longer period of time. I know a guy studying deer in that part of Wyoming. Those restrictions were proposed, and implemented, by short sighted ignorant people that dont know any better, just like the people pushing it here in utah.

Once again, explain to me the biological basis, for how 3 point or better restrictions, will increase deer numbers. If it works, you should be able to explain to me, how it works.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree. Its not that complicated. 
1st: More bucks means more grow to a mature state where they benefit in breeding. 

2nd: Also More bucks means you just increased the overall population right there. 

3rd: By having more bucks (even though smaller) creates more opportunity for predators to prey on males and not females. Therefor more females are left alone to breed as well.

That is just 3 fast points.

Now question to you... Why won't it work? Why is is only a short term fix.

And one more point, at least a short term fix is better than none at all. Because I sure haven't heard of a long term one thats working. Food for thought....


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Lonetree. Its not that complicated.
> 1st: More bucks means more grow to a mature state where they benefit in breeding.
> 
> 2nd: Also More bucks means you just increased the overall population right there.
> ...


It is only a short term fix for having a few more bucks, that are bigger. this does not last, and it does not equate into more overall deer, bucks do not have fawns.

It does not create more bucks, that is the biggest problem in this aruement. Just like with Opyion WTF! You are pushing the same agenda as the folks, that have reduced deer tags to unreasonble levels.

You are in theory talking about increasing the deer population by a few percent, this does not open more tags, if this is your base line.

Predation is not going to shift based on buck to doe ratios, it does not work this way. Deer predation in the West has been shown to be overwhelmingly compesatory, so there is no gain here.

More bucks will not increase breeding. Your are wearing on my patience. Bucks, particularly higher buck to doe ratios, do not drive breeding. Weather drives the timing of does going into estrus, this in turn brings on the rut. Healthy does, breeding with healthy bucks, produces fawns, and drives deer numbers. This can be accomplished with 10:100 buck to doe ratios.

In short, you do not understand what you are proposing, which is the same problem, we already have with our scientifically unsound management plan. You are proposing we make an already bad situation worse, because you believe in something, that you do not understand.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Lonetree said:


> Your are wearing on my patience.


Never lose sight of the fact that you are a voluntary participant. No need stressing yourself out.----SS


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Wow. short sighted? Ignorant? Man! Tell us how you really feel...opinion is just an opinion.Take a pill.You ever raised livestock?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Oldfudd knows HOW HARD I tried to push getting AR's on units
insted of having to go the opt 2 route!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The AR days on the Henrys, Fishlake, Boulder,Bookcliffs, BEST THE DEER HUNTING
in Utah EVER WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

oldfudd said:


> Wow. short sighted? Ignorant? Man! Tell us how you really feel...opinion is just an opinion.Take a pill.You ever raised livestock?


By grandparents, and three sets of great grandparents were in the cattle industry(beef, bulls, and dairy) for over 100 years, I've raised goats, game birds, and a myriad of exotics. I spent a few summers on a fence line. I know animal husbandry.

And I would say how I really feel, but then I would get criticized for being negative.

Are you talking about your opinion, or mine? Three point or better regulations, being a solution to Utah's deer problem, is an opinion. Stating that it will not work, has already been tried and failed, etc, is a quantifiable, scientific fact.

This is why Utah wildlife management, is where it is at. It is in a RUT: Recycled, unimaginative, Thinking.

So please explain how having more bulls is going to increase my dairy herd. Because it sounds like someone selling bull.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Oldfudd knows HOW HARD I tried to push getting AR's on units
> insted of having to go the opt 2 route!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> The AR days on the Henrys, Fishlake, Boulder,Bookcliffs, BEST THE DEER HUNTING
> in Utah EVER WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


So it increased the deer population?, raise fawn recruitment?, and did all of this disproportionately above and beyond the areas that did not have AR.

Show me the data, and I'll be the first one there to sell it with you at WB meeting.

There is no biological basis for it, this is a "quality" argument, and a week one at that.

Remember how good the hunting was when you could shoot does? I propose that that is what we need to got to. Think about it, more bucks for us real hunters, and remember, remember how good it was?


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

This is the hard thing for me to square in my mind: Those that are in favor of APR's are absolutely adamant that they work. They swear up and down that they witnessed the best hunting ever during a time of APR's in certain areas. I have no reason to question those individual observations. I believe you that was your experience. 

However, this is the hard part for me---there are multiple studies out there that are reviewed and accepted by biologists on the success of APR's with mule deer in the West and virtually every study says they don't work. I can't square those contrasts, can anyone help me with that? 

Finally, I think it is important to remember that Option 2 was a political decision by the Wildlife Board. The DWR biologists did not support this option. Many people throw out "DWR" and "Wildlife Board" as synonyms. But these are two distinct groups and have very different roles. To be fair to the DWR.....


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree your on. This is something I will invest some time into finding you some data. 

Goofyelk- what was your biggest obstacles in pushing for the Ar's. What was your opposition. Can you help me get Lonetree to jump the fence.:O_D: Please PM me.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

TS 30: I swear on some relatives graves this works. Could it be a conspiracy that the wildlife board didn't want to admit it. Anyone can fudge facts and numbers.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

TS30 said:


> This is the hard thing for me to square in my mind: Those that are in favor of APR's are absolutely adamant that they work. They swear up and down that they witnessed the best hunting ever during a time of APR's in certain areas. I have no reason to question those individual observations. I believe you that was your experience.
> 
> However, this is the hard part for me---there are multiple studies out there that are reviewed and accepted by biologists on the success of APR's with mule deer in the West and virtually every study says they don't work. I can't square those contrasts, can anyone help me with that?
> 
> Finally, I think it is important to remember that Option 2 was a political decision by the Wildlife Board. The DWR biologists did not support this option. Many people throw out "DWR" and "Wildlife Board" as synonyms. But these are two distinct groups and have very different roles. To be fair to the DWR.....


For most of us, seeing is believing, it is innate, it is human nature. But correlative logic, is something that has to be learned, and is a matter of perspective. If you are focused in too close, all you can see is the puppet dancing. You have to step back, and walk around the booth, to see the puppeteer.

Unfortunately the WB and the DWR being synonymous, is all too often the case. And though I hear you on the biologists, I attended the deer open houses, I spoke with some individuals that know better, make arguments for Option WTF! It was by no means all the DWR biologists, but there are a few.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> TS 30: I swear on some relatives graves this works. Could it be a conspiracy that the wildlife board didn't want to admit it. Anyone can fudge facts and numbers.


These are the first stages :grin:, stick with it, follow your curiosity. Keep asking why, and then ask again.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Goofy.. Now ya see why I quit posting on the forum. And YESSIR the BEST HUNTING this State has ever seen or will ever see. Lonetree Am sure a good guy. But Hey JACK!;-);-);-);-) ain't going to debate you. Your just to darn quick for this old man..Have A Good One................
)))------------------->OLD FUDD


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

oldfudd said:


> Goofy.. Now ya see why I quit posting on the forum. And YESSIR the BEST HUNTING this State has ever seen or will ever see. Lonetree Am sure a good guy. But Hey JACK!;-);-);-);-) ain't going to debate you. Your just to darn quick for this old man..Have A Good One................
> )))------------------->OLD FUDD


Then we want to find out what made it the best hunting, because it was not antler restrictions.

I am pretty sure, that as deer hunters, we all want mostly the same thing, more deer. I know I want to see sustaining, healthy herds. So what moves us towards that goal? We have a whole game book, that has not moved us forward. It is high time, we learn some new plays.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Outdoorzman said:


> TS 30: I swear on some relatives graves this works. Could it be a conspiracy that the wildlife board didn't want to admit it. Anyone can fudge facts and numbers.


Not a single study I've read on the topic was done in Utah or published by the WB. Again, I have no reason to say you're lying, so no need to swear on anyone's graves. But I'm still trying to reconcile what is going on here. I don't know why every state that's tried it out west went away from it and said it didn't work if it actually did work. Doesn't make sense, unless PETA has effectively infiltrated all wildlife agencies in the west!


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Guess I'm kind of with oldfudd here on this one. You guys can debate, and put the kabosh on any idea. Whether it worked in the past or not based on data. What I saw, what I hunted, what I experienced was that this did work. Short term, long term - does it matter? Its better than the present position today of declining deer herds. General Deer tags now becoming limited entry, Udwr always whining they don't have enough funds, and guys like me (your average everyday Joe) has a better chance of getting a Deer tag in Idaho than my own home state. Pretty pathetic... 

You know Lonetree, with all that knowledge you possess, and all the studies you have read, and all that experience you have,,, I still haven't read one thing you would propose that could stop the bleeding, and start mending our current situation. 

Everyone has a quote on their signatures I've noticed.... Here's mine & I owe this all to you Lonetree...

"If your not part of the solution, you become part of the problem"

Good luck all. 

Goofyelk- if you ever need a voice on backing up what AR's really can do- Shoot me a Pm.:amen:


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Lonetree said:


> "I (and others) may not always agree with the details, but I do agree with the idea that UWC represents most of the Utah outdoorsmen/women who aren't able to make their voice heard at the RAC's and Wildlife Board meetings."--Elkfromabove
> 
> It is just an _idea_, there was no UWC representation at the last Northern region RAC. And they have missed some key WB meetings. They hold no firm stances on anything. And while the Option WTF! fiasco is far from over, you do not found a group in response to something, and then neglect what was to be your charter cause.


So start your own group that is fully organized, gets to every RAC and WB meeting, takes a firm stance on every developing issue while sticking to their charter cause!


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

elkfromabove said:


> So start your own group that is fully organized, gets to every RAC and WB meeting, takes a firm stance on every developing issue while sticking to their charter cause!


 Not a bad idea, but not my style either. I would not get too upset at my criticism, the UWC is still at the top my three letter abbreviations list.

But seriously, if it is a voice, for the average hunter, that you guys are trying to be. I don't hear it, and that only means a couple of things.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Guess I'm kind of with oldfudd here on this one. You guys can debate, and put the kabosh on any idea. Whether it worked in the past or not based on data. What I saw, what I hunted, what I experienced was that this did work. Short term, long term - does it matter? Its better than the present position today of declining deer herds. General Deer tags now becoming limited entry, Udwr always whining they don't have enough funds, and guys like me (your average everyday Joe) has a better chance of getting a Deer tag in Idaho than my own home state. Pretty pathetic...
> 
> You know Lonetree, with all that knowledge you possess, and all the studies you have read, and all that experience you have,,, I still haven't read one thing you would propose that could stop the bleeding, and start mending our current situation.
> 
> ...


This is the problem with Utah wildlife management. It does not matter what you guys think you witnessed. Can you show me how ARs grow deer herds, over other methods? Can you explain to me how ARs grow deer herds? If it is a legitimate means to grow deer, then you should be able to demonstrate this.

Doing things just because we feel like it will work, or because we need to do "something" is why we are in the mess we are in. Look at the last 30 years of deer numbers, and explain to me how ARs play into the grand scheme of mule deer trends. It does not.

The simple truth of the matter, is that we do not know exactly what has caused the last 30 years of deer declines. But we have thrown everything, in the current book at the problem, with no results. This includes ARs, predator control, reduced tags, grazing treatments, etc. None of the known methodology has provided results. This is not just the case in Utah, it is the same across the West.

Fawn recruitment, and over all deer health, are the things that drive deer numbers, not antlers. Enviromentaly driven nutrition issues, and subclinical disease. Take a look at the last 30 years of Bighorn sheep trends, they line up nicely with mule deer trends. Nutrition and disease are the known culprits in the declines of Bighorns. So it only makes sense to look there, it is a starting point. You can't fix the root of a problem, if you don't know what causes it. Some short term "solutions", can cause more harm than good. So yes it does matter.

Outdoorzman, Thanks for playing


----------



## svmoose (Feb 28, 2008)

So how to we achieve higher fawn recruitment and overall herd health?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

svmoose said:


> So how to we achieve higher fawn recruitment and overall herd health?


According to lonetree It requires an act of god as well as we go back to stone age and drive horse and buggies. Acid rain won't allow selenium to get in plants and without selenium the deer get diarrhea and worms which make predators eat them instead of grasshoppers.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

swbuckmaster said:


> According to lonetree It requires an act of god as well as we go back to stone age and drive horse and buggies. Acid rain won't allow selenium to get in plants and without selenium the deer get diarrhea and worms which make predators eat them instead of grasshoppers.


Something like that, but its a little more complicated. And this is not according to just me, there are nuclear scientists contributing to some of this work. There have actually been some very interesting ideas proposed, in just the last two weeks. But yes, a combination of human activity, and acts of God(the weather)

So its ok to reduce our hunting opportunity, and we should slow down on the road and watch for deer. But to consider our responsibilities in, and propose altering anything else we may do that harms mule deer, is in some way taboo? Setting higher standards for our selves, our health, and reducing negative affects on the wildlife we hunt, that's a bad thing? OK... No one is talking about taking your truck.

With Bighorn sheep as my example again. You have mineral deficiencies, and lungworm, both driven by weather shifts, that lead to pneumonia, and have crashed herds across the West. So how do you fix it? Well in the early days, there was nothing you could do, because we did not know why it was occurring. So step one is to get informed. Find out the root causes of your declines. With out that information, you are just pissing in the wind.

So with sheep we have learned a lot. Well.... some people have. The exact pathogen that leads to all pneumonia outbreaks has been isolated. This means you can focus attention there, and look at vaccines for domestic sheep. The cause and timing of mineral deficiencies is better understood, and we can now mitigate some of those affects, at least in some states. And right now as I type there is work being done on a break through, where bighorn disease, nutrition, and range condition all meet. The lab work is still being done. But I do believe a paper is to be published this fall.

We have to look to the root causes of Mule deer declines, before we can make meaningful decisions about Mule deer management, let alone forge solutions. This is the process, this is the method in which you discover the means to improving Mule deer numbers.

I understand you are a goat packer? Have you ever read "The Pack Goat" by John Mionczynski?


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Here is a novel idea.

Use the spike elk model. Anyone can kill fork horns and limited entry for mature bucks. Seemed to fix the elk herds. Hell you can BUY an antlerless tag.

Ok start the attacks now.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Here is a novel idea.
> 
> Use the spike elk model. Anyone can kill fork horns and limited entry for mature bucks. Seemed to fix the elk herds. Hell you can BUY an antlerless tag.
> 
> Ok start the attacks now.


I've said it for years. Protect the big bucks and kill any spike you see. The older deer survive rough winters better than yearlings. One of the things that seems to limit the effectiveness of Mule Deer transplants is that the deer that are moved don't know where all of the summer range is, where the winter range is, when to begin the transition to winter range, etc. It seems to be a learned behavior. They learn it from the "old heads" in the herd.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Here is a novel idea.
> 
> Use the spike elk model. Anyone can kill fork horns and limited entry for mature bucks. Seemed to fix the elk herds. Hell you can BUY an antlerless tag.
> 
> Ok start the attacks now.


Elk and deer are just not the same thing. Spike hunts are not what is driving elk numbers.

I am not talking about "hunter management" and unfortunately, that seems to be where everyone gets hung up, when it comes to what should be wildlife management. That seems to be all the further we can think or see, on the matter.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Lonetree said:


> Elk and deer are just not the same thing. Spike hunts are not what is driving elk numbers.
> 
> I am not talking about "hunter management" and unfortunately, that seems to be where everyone gets hung up, when it comes to what should be wildlife management. That seems to be all the further we can think or see, on the matter.


Fishrmn makes a great point and I do feel having mature bulls helped the health of the elk herds. You need some seniority around to teach the ropes and kick ass at times.

What would the human population be like if we only had teenage males trying to breed. Lord of The Flies meets Max Max

Kill Bambi - Save His Dad


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Fishrmn makes a great point and I do feel having mature bulls helped the health of the elk herds. You need some seniority around to teach the ropes and kick ass at times.
> 
> What would the human population be like if we only had teenage males trying to breed. Lord of The Flies meets Max Max
> 
> Kill Bambi - Save His Dad


We have mature deer, and we have sufficient buck to doe ratios. So how does having bigger bucks, or only shooting bigger bucks, or shooting all the small bucks, or antler restrictions, have any bearing on breeding? And, can you demonstrate to me where we have a breeding problem with our Mule deer? I am not saying that there is in no way shape or form, a breeding component to mule deer declines. But where is the data that says antlers have anything to do with fawn recruitment, and retention?

Study after study, has tied the health of does, and to a lesser extent, the health of bucks, to increases or declines, in deer herds. This can affect antlers, but not the other way around.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Read for yourself. Page 11 http://dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/res...ddatacollectionmethodsforungulateresearch.pdf

I go back to Fshrmn comment. Need some maturity for leadership


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Read for yourself. Page 11 http://dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/res...ddatacollectionmethodsforungulateresearch.pdf
> 
> I go back to Fshrmn comment. Need some maturity for leadership


No where in there, is there any data that supports what you guys are saying about deer. All the data about young versus old, is in the section titled "breeding _bull elk_ study". This in no way, has any bearing on MULE DEER. Show me the correlation, and then show me how shooting all the fork horns is going to grow more deer. Elk and deer are not the same thing, we are wasting money and effort, right now, on studies that will bear this out. Even though notions to the contrary have already been shown to be a fallacy.

Colorado, and Nevada have areas with higher (35+) buck to doe ratios, with lots of mature bucks. Why are the overall herd numbers not exploding in these places? If it is just more, big bucks, that are needed to make the herds grow, then these places should be over run with deer.

Furthermore, show me how spike elk hunting, has driven elk number rises across the West. If what you are proposing, is a solution, and elk are your example, show me how spike elk hunting across the West, has driven elk numbers up over the last 30 years.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Not saying big (mature) bucks are needed to expand the herds. Just that some things are passed on from the mature animals. I've watched a bachelor herd when pushed where the smaller bucks wanted to take the easy way out. It was the two bigger bucks that actually blocked the 4 smaller bucks from going up the easy trail. They not only stood in the trail to block it, they lowered their antlers and pushed one of the smaller bucks away from the trail. It was as if they were saying "humans always take the easy trail. If we go up the steeper trail, the hunters are less likely to follow us".

If my memory serves me, there is a herd of Mule Deer that migrate into Arizona that leaves the summer range long before there is any snow to block their migration. If they wait until there is snow on the ground, they can't seem to make it to their winter range. It seems to be knowledge that sends them down the mountain much earlier than most other herds. It doesn't get passed along to the next generation if the animals that know when to migrate are all killed.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Fishrmn said:


> Not saying big (mature) bucks are needed to expand the herds. Just that some things are passed on from the mature animals. I've watched a bachelor herd when pushed where the smaller bucks wanted to take the easy way out. It was the two bigger bucks that actually blocked the 4 smaller bucks from going up the easy trail. They not only stood in the trail to block it, they lowered their antlers and pushed one of the smaller bucks away from the trail. It was as if they were saying "humans always take the easy trail. If we go up the steeper trail, the hunters are less likely to follow us".
> 
> If my memory serves me, there is a herd of Mule Deer that migrate into Arizona that leaves the summer range long before there is any snow to block their migration. If they wait until there is snow on the ground, they can't seem to make it to their winter range. It seems to be knowledge that sends them down the mountain much earlier than most other herds. It doesn't get passed along to the next generation if the animals that know when to migrate are all killed.


I have seen the "herding" behavior that you are referring to. I watched two big bucks push 20 deer past me(30 yards away) because of a Bobcat, that was laying in wait, to the other side of the ridge. It was a very cool thing to witness. The deer, me and bobcat all wound up in the same place, at the same time. But I have often witnessed mature bucks, let a string head out, and then take a different route also.

I am not saying that there is not a role for this. But it is not a driving force of deer herd numbers.

If you can point me to anything on the AZ deer, that would be cool. That is interesting behavior. Deer tend to be driven to migrate by weather, unlike Bighorns that seem to be programed to do things by date.


----------



## Outdoorzman (May 31, 2013)

Lonetree, happens every year. They migrate off the tops of the mountains around Bryce Canyon south thru the Paunsaugant to the Arizona Strip. My personal opinion - something to do with daylight and the amount of it. 

The crazy thing is, we experienced it last year because my lucky brother drew that tag with 12 points. We watched deer migrate constantly and all going in one direction (South).

There is some passes that lead off the plateau, everyone tries to cut the deer off in those passes. (Mainly a bunch of guides)

You made a comment about Limited entry areas not being overrun by deer, due to have larger bucks and restrictions. I must say, I saw more deer in 1 week in that unit - than the last 3 years combined on public.

Now I have pondered and researched some of your latest posts on more than just this thread. I will give you some merit in disease control, quality of food, and weather. But using sheep as an example??? Just as you have stated Elk and Deer are completely different - then how do you compare a sheep with a deer? True, the biologists play a part in solving the big decline problem, but it takes a lot more than just them. It is a combination of a lot of variables. You can't pin it on just one issue. We need a broader, more of a big picture plan. This is were I believe the Dwr or Wildlife board or both, need to take of the goggles that give them such tunnel vision and create a bigger plan.

Maybe a plan that could include:
1-Antler restrictions
2-Large investments to biologists for labs and study.
3-Predator control for more than just the dogs.
4-Hunter Involvement
5-Elk tags for overpopulated areas
*and many more... these are just a few. Its the balance of all these that will most affect the Deer in the future. 

The most important is education of the public and all those involved...
Just my 2 cents....:|


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I havent read that book


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Outdoorzman said:


> Lonetree, happens every year. They migrate off the tops of the mountains around Bryce Canyon south thru the Paunsaugant to the Arizona Strip. My personal opinion - something to do with daylight and the amount of it.
> 
> The crazy thing is, we experienced it last year because my lucky brother drew that tag with 12 points. We watched deer migrate constantly and all going in one direction (South).
> 
> ...


Yes, sheep are very different than deer. Here is the correlation: They have both followed very similar decline patterns over the last 30 years. And at least since the '90s, Moose have followed suit. With deer and sheep these are across the Western United Sates and Canada. With Moose, those declines have been across the Western, and middle portions of the United States, Canada, and Northern Europe. There is plenty of data and lab work to show that these declines are being triggered in a similar matter, if not by the same mechanism.

So Elk have been shown to be negatively affected by many of the same weather and nutritional issues as deer, sheep, and moose. But over all, they are doing very well. There are a lot of reasons for this.

1-Antler restrictions--Do not grow deer. This is hunter management
2-Large investments to biologists for labs and study.--I like the sentiment, but there is nothing to a sure that the money is not wasted on junk research, as is the case now.
3-Predator control for more than just the dogs.--You can kill all the predators, it wont bring the deer back. Many people believe otherwise, but study after study, has shown that predators are not the limiting factor for mule deer
4-Hunter Involvement--Absolutely, but how and why. We have hunters that are involved now. 
5-Elk tags for overpopulated areas--Yes, but this needs to be done for the elk. Deer are in the same boat, in areas with elk, and areas with out elk.

Why is it that deer in every Western state, suffer from a whole host of different issues, from state to state. And at the same time, their populations rise and fall, in unison, for the last 100 years? Why have the last 30 been so dramatic?

Everybody has witnessed their own glory days, and we all have our own experiences of areas that are better than other. And we all have our own reasons, that we attribute to these experiences and observations.

But when you get right down to it, mule deer have declined across their range, for 30 years, regardless of the amount of predator control, hunter control, antler restrictions, etc. This goes for Bighorn sheep, and moose as well. We need a paradigm shift, in the way we look at these declines, and in the way we go about trying to "fix" them.

Areas around the Tetons have experienced unprecedented Mountain goat expansions, and for the first time, there will not be a moose hunt in the Teton wilderness. Sound familiar?

We have to think much bigger, and past much of this conventional thinking on the matter. Take a real, hard numbers look at some of it. If so many of the basics don't hold water, what about the rest of it?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

swbuckmaster said:


> I havent read that book


It is out of print, if you find a copy, hold on to it. John pioneered, modern American goat packing, as we know it. Goat Packing did not really exist in North America, prior to John. He pioneered the gear, and the techniques used today.

He did this out of a necessity to haul research gear into high elevation, alpine areas, of the Wind Rivers in Wyoming. You could not get horses in there, and you certainly could not keep them there for very long if you could get them there.

Anyway, him and a guy named Flueck, discovered the link between selenium deficiency, and Bighorn sheep declines. I just talked to a guy today that is putting the JM brand on saddles and panniers that he is buildlng. They are getting a label that reads: "Acid rain panniers" :grin:


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Nice


----------

