# Stop drinking the kool-aid



## highdesert (Dec 13, 2016)

Utah's deer herds are struggling... don't be fooled by all the bull****. Finding older age class mature bucks in UTAH to film is becoming almost impossible. Simply finding and filming a 5 year or older age class buck on public hunted utah lands is a joke. So hunting and harvesting one is almost non existent. I'm talking 5 plus year old bucks and older. Even our beloved top tier trophy units are in trouble. We need to STOP killing all the young bucks and give them a chance to grow up. We've become too efficient at killing our deer. The playing field needs to be leveled. OUR MULE DEER need a chance to rebound or they will be gone forever. We had healthy deer herds in the 70's and 80's... what happened??? We can keep drinking the kool-aid or do something about it.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Why do all the bucks have swollen necks and are sniffing the rear end of the does?

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Maybe all the guys targeting 5+ year old deer are the problem?

Sometimes this crap just cracks me up.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Awesome footage!!

**** I feel great just beating the odds and finally drawing a tag in this state.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Heck ya
What HD said!


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

LOL


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)




----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

San Juan or the Henrys?


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> San Jaun or the Henrys?


If deer like this are all over the State then nobody will mind sharing their location, right?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Very nice footage Highdesert.

What camera are you using now?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Ya
1:35 mark.
Looks like San Jaun.

No ones drinkin "cool aid"......
Most of Utahs LE is producing good stuff.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

I have the solution to increase the deer population and make sure older bucks are being harvested. --- 


1- Cut the tags in half. 
2- Triple the price of a tag.
3- Must attend an orientation class.
4- 4 Point or better can only be harvested. 


The largest/oldest population of mature Mule Deer are living in the subdivisions of the foothills. I see two 24" 4 point bucks every day in the center of SL valley along the Jordan River.


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

Nice video HighDesert! 

It seemed this last year there were fewer deer. But I did see some crazy big deer taken. A neighbor kid killed one of the biggest bucks I've ever seen... and on a public unit that people have paid 400K for on Antelope Island for a similar sized buck.. But overall I think your right. 

I helped a friend on the Vernon this last year. We saw more monster 2 points and 2x3s than anything. Nobody seems to be taking these and shooting smaller 4-points leaving the big 2s and 2x3s to breed the does. From my observations there, the place could use a management hunt.


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

ridgetop said:


> Very nice footage Highdesert.
> 
> What camera are you using now?


I asked him this after the video of the elk fighting... Unless he's changed since then, he was using the Canon EOS 80D at that point. Nice camera


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Now I've read it a couple times,
Highdesert is spot on.

Hunters drinking "cool aid" thinking Utahs GS deer are OK are up in the night, clueless bunch!

Areas I've filmed and taken pics of nice bucks rutting and on winter ranges for 40 years simply do not exist this year.

Sad, sad deal.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

The solution to having more bucks and more mature bucks is to get rid of scopes. Open sights all around. And get rid of trail cameras. And range finders. We would have more mature bucks running around if tech was limited. Or we could cut tag numbers substantially and hunt a lot less. I'd vote for less tech over less tags. 

Problem is that it isn't the buck hunters who are suppressing deer populations. Buck hunters are not shooting fawns. And there are so few antlerless permits given that antlerless hunters are not suppressing deer populations across the state. 

I do find it interesting that many people who want to see older deer in the herd continue to propose 4 point or better which places all of the hunting pressure on the bucks they want more of. 

Guys can argue all they want about buck management, but - Where are all the fawns going? 

..


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

I don't know that I would want to see the loss of a scope, but some scopes now days are so advanced people are taking very long shots on game which to me seems to cut the fair chase out of the hunt. Open sights could help, but it could also result in more wounded animals. I agree with you that tech could be more limited. 

I wonder how much game is lost already to this. How many deer are not recovered after a bad shot, and the hunter simply goes to the next animal because they couldn't find the first one, or second one they shot. We all know people that do or have done this. 

Trail cams have become a nuisance over the years in my opinion. Multiple cams on every watering hole, people messing with other peoples stuff, etc. I would be ok getting rid of them much like some other states have done. 

I love hunting as much as anyone else, but I would prefer a cut in tags to help increase the herd if that is what it took. Maybe I am in the minority there.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Wait a minute. Do you tag cutters have an agreement with predators to not kill more deer if hunters leave them on the range? Goofy knows better than most if he would do a little less deer and elk looking and bltching and more cat killing primarily female and young cats. We would all look better trophy and meat guys but would never need or want to hire him or his buddies for hunting big game. 😉


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

Iron Bear said:


> Wait a minute. Do you tag cutters have an agreement with predators to not kill more deer if hunters leave them on the range? Goofy knows better than most if he would do a little less deer and elk looking and bltching and more cat killing primarily female and young cats. We would all look better trophy and meat guys but would never need or want to hire him or his buddies for hunting big game. &#128521;


I think the predator thing goes without saying. Most here wouldn't disagree with you that predators need to be better managed. Cats / Yotes... And black bear seem to be at an all time high in many areas. And wolves could be just around the corner. I do what I can on the Coyote front. Would love to kill a lion but I can't afford someone with dogs. Anyone on here killed a lion on a spot and stalk method? I got a big bear a few years back this way on La Sal. I can only recall seeing one lion in the wild in Utah though I know they are everywhere.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Packout said:


> Guys can argue all they want about buck management, but - Where are all the fawns going?


That depends on if one wants to go off studies and data, or just off what makes one feel better about one's own opinions.

Lions, bears, yotes, and even some bobcats. That's where MOST of the fawns we aren't seeing become adults are going. Not all, but most.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I've made this point before, but: 

If it were only hunters suppressing the deer populations, then we should be seeing populations explode in areas where hunting is not allowed. National Parks, State parks (ie: Antelope island minus the two deer being killed currently which statistically should be insignificant), ect, ect.

But Packout is absolutely correct, about two things: 

1) Fawn retention is one of the most critical factors in herd growth and health

2) You cannot expect to have big deer if you focus all your pressure on big deer. I've said forever on this site and even the old DWR forum: Antler restrictions for 3pt or LESS. Protect the big boys, let'em breed those does. 


-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

DallanC said:


> 2) You cannot expect to have big deer if you focus all your pressure on big deer. I've said forever on this site and even the old DWR forum: Antler restrictions for 3pt or LESS. Protect the big boys, let'em breed those does.
> 
> -DallanC


It amazes me that people still advocate for antler point restrictions, even in the face of all the data saying that they do not work beyond a very temporary and short term showing, yet have documented long term negative impacts.

If people were really serious about some of the things they say, they'd espouse exactly what you are proposing, Dallan. Shoot the little guys and leave the big boys alone to do all the breeding. But what they are "saying" is not what they really want, unfortunately.


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

Add cougars to the Mule Deer Restoration ACT and pay the $50 bounty on them.
* Please note I capitalized Act.


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

And turn an area or two in to a two point or less area and see what happens.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Wait a minute. Do you tag cutters have an agreement with predators to not kill more deer if hunters leave them on the range? Goofy knows better than most if he would do a little less deer and elk looking and bltching and more cat killing primarily female and young cats. We would all look better trophy and meat guys but would never need or want to hire him or his buddies for hunting big game. &#128521;


Your probably right Bear.

There was a lot of years that we killed 2 cats every week in the winter.

But my cat killin days are over.

So maybe that why everyone thinks there's more lions these days.

Here's an XL I cut yesterday.LOL


----------



## highdesert (Dec 13, 2016)

goofyelk you have some great insight. the footage for this short video was all shot in millard county. The mule deer and bighorns on the oakcreek. I spend most of my time on the oakcreek and henry mountains as well as the vernon unit. Lots of general season public units in central and southern utah. I've never set foot on the san juan except to drive through to new mexico. You're right there are a few big bucks taken every year on our limited entry units and even a few big ol deer taken each year on GS units. But there's no denying the overall numbers are decreasing dramatically every year. I just want to be able to show my grandkids someday a healthy mule deer population to keep them motivated and interested before it's too late. 

Ridgetop thanks for the compliment on the video. I used a canon 80d and tamron sp 150-600 G2 lens. I'm a novice videographer at best and shoot everything in manual mode. I noticed a lot of the footage on this video is a bit over exposed. I'm learning. 

Packout and DallanC make very good points. I observe good fawn crops in the early summer months with many twins. Yet deer herds aren't reflecting that. Every year on winter ranges fewer and fewer deer. I know there are several factors impacting our deer herd. I think the discussion is vital. Lots of good ideas.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I'll go right back to , we need more mature bucks doing the breeding and getting those fawns on the ground earlier in the summer.
And further a Long going into the winter.

And yes, as I type,
Looking at anther Central Utah winter range today.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

highdesert said:


> Ridgetop thanks for the compliment on the video. I used a canon 80d and tamron sp 150-600 G2 lens. I'm a novice videographer at best and shoot everything in manual mode. I noticed a lot of the footage on this video is a bit over exposed. I'm learning.


Tamron makes good lenses. I got sick and tired of swapping lenses often for close vs long shots so the last lens I bought was a Tamron 18-400. Its AMAZING...shoot wide, shoot tight... it does it all. A little heavy but its sooo convenient its worth it.

The reach of a 600 would be stellar though.

-DallanC


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Weird weather the past few years has probably taken a larger toll than most anything else.

Add hunt codes that let a few who are lucky enough to draw shoot a 4 pt or better, more permits to shoot a 3 pt or smaller. Make a spike no longer legal, has to be branch antlered.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> I'll go right back to , we need more mature bucks doing the breeding and getting those fawns on the ground earlier in the summer.
> And further a Long going into the winter.


Goof, if this is in fact true, then antler point restrictions will have the exact opposite effect. If we accept Todd Black's study as biologically sound, focusing our attention on the bigger bucks is completely detrimental to the deer herd.

I don't believe that study is settled and agreed upon science, personally. But just for the sake of discussion, accepting it as the gospel truth, we should be pushing Dallan's proposal of killing younger deer only.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I actually dont want antler restrictions of any type or form. People who have a Buck tag should be perfectly free to shoot anything that meets that definition. 

But it makes no sense to force all hunting pressure on the specific type of bucks we want to have around.

-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I realize that, Dallan. Your proposal was entirely hypothetical, which I did not make clear. My bad. I know you are not really advocating for that, any more than I am.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

BigT said:


> I think the predator thing goes without saying. Most here wouldn't disagree with you that predators need to be better managed. Cats / Yotes... And black bear seem to be at an all time high in many areas. *And wolves could be just around the corner.* I do what I can on the Coyote front. Would love to kill a lion but I can't afford someone with dogs. Anyone on here killed a lion on a spot and stalk method? I got a big bear a few years back this way on La Sal. I can only recall seeing one lion in the wild in Utah though I know they are everywhere.


I don't even want to think about that, and I don't know who I'd be more angry at. The idiot urban dwellers in Colorado who voted for it, or the Californian special interest groups that funded it. At that point, it won't matter, the deer herds will probably be decimated.


----------



## SCS_Bg_Hunter (Oct 27, 2019)

I'm not aware of any state that has instituted a 2 point or lower restriction on mule deer. Can anyone point me to a state or some research where this has been tried? Personally I was happy with the spike only units in the beginning here in Utah. Within a few years there were a lot of big bulls running around but I haven't seen anywhere that has tried the same for mule deer.


----------



## SCS_Bg_Hunter (Oct 27, 2019)

Just to be clear I'm against the 4 point or better restrictions that have been tried in the past.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I doubt antler restrictions put increased presure on mature bucks. How many hunters are passing on 4ptr for a 2pt? So as it stands now any 4 pt being seen during the hunt will get killed regardless of antler restrictions. What it will do is help graduate young deer into maturity. I’m guessing a buck has the best chance of out smarting hunters if he can get a few year of experience first. Making him less likely to be killed by a hunter. 

Every CWMU effectively has an antler restriction program. I think the consensus is that private lands overall provide better quality trophy hunting than GS units.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

High Desert Elk said:


> Weird weather the past few years has probably taken a larger toll than most anything else.
> 
> Add hunt codes that let a few who are lucky enough to draw shoot a 4 pt or better, more permits to shoot a 3 pt or smaller. Make a spike no longer legal, has to be branch antlered.


Weird weather? Talk about koolaid. Is this just a guess or do you not realize that there are predators out there killing deer 24/7/365. They have to or they will starve.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> Weird weather? Talk about koolaid. Is this just a guess or do you not realize that there are predators out there killing deer 24/7/365. They have to or they will starve.


Well, seeing as just about anyone that lives in Utah saw last years heavy snow storms in the mountains right start of fawning... not a guess.

Look, there is no single smoking gun on this. There are alot of different issues all affecting fawn recruitment: time of gestation, weather conditions at the time of fawning, disease / sickness, automobile collisions, predators, quality of summer feed dictated by rains, snowfall on the winter range covering food etc etc.

-DallanC


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> Weird weather? Talk about koolaid. Is this just a guess or do you not realize that there are predators out there killing deer 24/7/365. They have to or they will starve.


My comment has NOTHING to do with "climate change" and has everything to do with a season of drought followed by a harsh winter. This pattern has been happening in the RM west for the past 3 decades.

Couple that with uncontrolled predation and your deer nose count goes down. Never mind loss of winter range...


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

<fulll random draw>

:mrgreen:


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

DallanC said:


> Well, seeing as just about anyone that lives in Utah saw last years heavy snow storms in the mountains right start of fawning... not a guess.
> 
> Look, there is no single smoking gun on this. There are alot of different issues all affecting fawn recruitment: time of gestation, weather conditions at the time of fawning, disease / sickness, automobile collisions, predators, quality of summer feed dictated by rains, snowfall on the winter range covering food etc etc.
> 
> -DallanC


Let's not discuss this with the nuance it actually deserves. We should only focus on a singular issue like predators. (Sarcasm Intended)

You're absolutely correct Dallan. There are so many limiting factors here. These limiting factors are also different for every unit in the state. No sweeping generalized solution is going to improve populations everywhere in Utah, especially when one of the biggest limiting factors and determinants of fawn survival/recruitment is the weather which is entirely out of our control.

Multifaceted problems require multifaceted solutions, but instead we will get advocates for tag cuts and antler restrictions because some guys aren't seeing deer in the same places they were last year.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Kwalk3 said:


> Multifaceted problems require multifaceted solutions, but instead we will get advocates for tag cuts and antler restrictions because some guys aren't seeing deer in the same places they were last year.


Yeah, but having a multifaceted discussion about the deer herd doesn't cut it because we have to Do Something, Right Now. (regardless of whether it actually helps)


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Catherder said:


> Kwalk3 said:
> 
> 
> > Multifaceted problems require multifaceted solutions, but instead we will get advocates for tag cuts and antler restrictions because some guys aren't seeing deer in the same places they were last year.
> ...


Or I guess we can wait and see what hunting looks like in another 40 years.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Kwalk3 said:


> DallanC;215651
> Multifaceted problems require multifaceted solutions said:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

goofy elk said:


> Kwalk3 said:
> 
> 
> > Listen kid
> ...


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

DallanC said:


> Well, seeing as just about anyone that lives in Utah saw last years heavy snow storms in the mountains right start of fawning... not a guess.
> 
> -DallanC


By that standard there would be no mule deer in Canada, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota.

But I guess it is hard to maintain body fat when your to scared to rest and eat because of so many predators. No matter how mild the winter.

See how I steered that back into a predator bash.

Wait are we talking about a deer decline over the last year or two or over the last 50 years? The last year or two I can't say partly because I haven't drawn a tag in two years because of mentalities brought up
In this very thread. Take take take from the hunters. And then blame uncontrollable factors when that didn't work.

It really doesn't matter but I like to pontificate on the subject.

I believe everyone has some great insights in the issue. Although most are wrong. &#128513;


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> By that standard there would be no mule deer in Canada, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota.
> 
> But I guess it is hard to maintain body fat when your to scared to rest and eat because of so many predators. No matter how mild the winter.
> 
> ...


I don't even disagree with you that predators like lions are overpopulated in some areas. I think they are definitely a piece of the puzzle. I've seen several(3) lions in the last 12 months. All separate locations.

I'm not as sure as you that the populations are creating additive predation, instead of just compensatory, but there's not a doubt that they have the ability to affect localized populations of deer.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Kwalk3 said:


> I don't even disagree with you that predators like lions are overpopulated in some areas. I think they are definitely a piece of the puzzle. I've seen several(3) lions in the last 12 months. All separate locations.
> 
> I'm not as sure as you that the populations are creating additive predation, instead of just compensatory, but there's not a doubt that they have the ability to affect localized populations of deer.


The only way to tell is to find out real numbers first of all. On both predators and prey. Then limit numbers of predators and see if deer numbers go up. But this has to go on for a sustained amount of time so that deer can adap---oh crap! It's just easier to let mother nature do her bit and come up with excuses when customers complain. Lol


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Look at it this way. CWMU’s aren’t cutting tags and panicking about weather. Why should public lands doing any diffrent.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

Lot of Biologist chiming in on this thread. Where did you receive your degree? Out of Cracker Jack box! :rotfl:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Im talking about game management not biology. Biologist make terrible game managers. Game managers need only to know a little bit of biology to have success. Game management is more like ranching and you defiantly don’t need a degree to know what your doing in that world.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> Look at it this way. CWMU's aren't cutting tags and panicking about weather. Why should public lands doing any diffrent.


This statement is not factually accurate. There are several CWMUs in the state that are have had a steep decline the last few years. And there are some that are doing as good as they ever have.

Sounds a bit like our public land units too, huh?


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> Im talking about game management not biology. Biologist make terrible game managers. Game managers need only to know a little bit of biology to have success. Game management is more like ranching and you defiantly don't need a degree to know what your doing in that world.


Agree. I was almost a biologist (by degree) until I saw the light. A biologist sees the human factor to heard management as a plague and should have no involvement at all. Enter the wolf debate...


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

The happiest biologists around work up at Yellowstone where Mother Nature is at work and they can sit back and observe.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> The happiest biologists around work up at Yellowstone where Mother Nature is at work and they can sit back and observe.


I gotta admit, I'd love to sit in a lawn chair and watch tourists trying to get selfies steam rolled repeatedly by pissed off Bison.

-DallanC


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

What does a wise person do when a fox gets in the hen house?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Interesting, Gawd IB is going to go wild on this one.

Today's WB meeting, the numbers claim 71 % of the deer fawns killed by lions and bears...........


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Interesting, Gawd IB is going to go wild on this one.
> 
> Today's WB meeting, the numbers claim 71 % of the deer fawns killed by lions and bears...........


I heard that about the Book Cliffs and about fell out of my chair.

But with the herd numbers out there from what saw last fall I could believe it.


----------



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

I used to get worked up over the size of bucks I saw. As I age I have become much more concerned/interested in the long-term viability of species. Yes mule deer are in trouble. Their consistent decline for over 40 years with a few small upticks show how much trouble the species is in. No it has nothing to do with what size of bucks your shooting. There are plenty of bucks to breed does every winter and does getting pregnant is not an issue from every study I've seen done. The issues are much more serious. Between habitat fragmentation and loss, energy development, climate change, and invasive species like cheat grass destroying mule deer habitat the challenges for mule deer are tough ones, and are going to get worse. 

I really wish as hunters more of us, especially in this state, would interest ourselves in trying to determine and fix the issues that are truly hurting the species. How many 4 point bucks you see has no bearing on the health of mule deer locally or range-wide. There are plenty of bucks to breed the does. The problem is the does/fawns and overall herd health going on 50 years looks bleak. There's been small upticks on this roller coaster ride but eventually the roller coaster levels out and comes to an end. The tags the DWR gives out may impact the size/amount of bucks you see, but the overall amount of deer is impacted by much deeper issues. Maybe the size and number of bucks you see is all you care about. Nothing necessarily wrong with that but lets focus on helping mule deer as a species and not have such a boxed in local view of how we can simply see more or bigger bucks next season as numbers continue their decades long declines. Some of the conversations we have are so silly in the overall picture of managing our wildlife. I do it too, often. I don't know what all the answers are but far too often we're having the wrong conversations if we truly want mule deer to have a bright future.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Im talking about game management not biology. Biologist make terrible game managers. Game managers need only to know a little bit of biology to have success. Game management is more like ranching and you defiantly don't need a degree to know what your doing in that world.


I grew up on a cattle ranch and from your comment I can see your not that educated about ranching. More to it than buying a few cows, drinking coffee and spitting Copenhagen.

Oh ya! - I got my degree from a gumball machine, not from a cracker jack box.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

My degree come from a fortune cookie......LOL


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Isn't it interesting that the earliest known reference to Mule Deer populations in the west are from Lewis and Clarks expedition and the meticulous notes they took. 

They specifically call out how rare the "Big Eared deer" were even then, as the first explorers. IDK what kind of impact native americans had on mule deer, but I doubt it was any major amount. Native Americans primarily focused on Bison and Elk, which were more of a plains animal back then.

One has to wonder, if the initial settlement from Pioneers and their war on predators caused the mule deer populations to explode artificially from their historically "rare" levels, into the vaccum left by dramatically lower predators.

We had alot of deer around until 1983... when we got that massive winter kill, which followed the ban of 1080 and rise of predator populations.


-DallanC


----------



## Hunttilidrop (Jun 12, 2018)

If You were a bear and could hone in on the scent of a rotting carcass from what... 2-5 miles away. Think of how easy it would be come calving or fawning season!


----------



## APD (Nov 16, 2008)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I used to get worked up over the size of bucks I saw. As I age I have become much more concerned/interested in the long-term viability of species. Yes mule deer are in trouble. Their consistent decline for over 40 years with a few small upticks show how much trouble the species is in. No it has nothing to do with what size of bucks your shooting. There are plenty of bucks to breed does every winter and does getting pregnant is not an issue from every study I've seen done. The issues are much more serious. Between habitat fragmentation and loss, energy development, climate change, and invasive species like cheat grass destroying mule deer habitat the challenges for mule deer are tough ones, and are going to get worse.
> 
> I really wish as hunters more of us, especially in this state, would interest ourselves in trying to determine and fix the issues that are truly hurting the species. How many 4 point bucks you see has no bearing on the health of mule deer locally or range-wide. There are plenty of bucks to breed the does. The problem is the does/fawns and overall herd health going on 50 years looks bleak. There's been small upticks on this roller coaster ride but eventually the roller coaster levels out and comes to an end. The tags the DWR gives out may impact the size/amount of bucks you see, but the overall amount of deer is impacted by much deeper issues. Maybe the size and number of bucks you see is all you care about. Nothing necessarily wrong with that but lets focus on helping mule deer as a species and not have such a boxed in local view of how we can simply see more or bigger bucks next season as numbers continue their decades long declines. Some of the conversations we have are so silly in the overall picture of managing our wildlife. I do it too, often. I don't know what all the answers are but far too often we're having the wrong conversations if we truly want mule deer to have a bright future.


so you're saying if we get rid of the flat brims and californian's then the deer population will be healthy again?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> Interesting, Gawd IB is going to go wild on this one.
> 
> Today's WB meeting, the numbers claim 71 % of the deer fawns killed by lions and bears...........


That's even more than I would have guessed. But you right. Let's kill a few cats. Females and young cats. Let's leave those big ole toms for the houndsman to chase and occasionally kill to make a rug and what not.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I B
Gotta say I'm interested in keeping this conversation alive.
.
I've cut 7 lions in 2 days.
I'm surprised.
And very few deer.


In places I've not looked at for several year's....stay tuned....


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Apparently when cougar run out of deer they can live on elk just fine. The Idaho DWR is finding more elk are killed by cougar in Idaho than wolf.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.spok...-kill-slightly-more-elk-than/?amp-content=amp


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> My degree come from a fortune cookie......LOL


Since we are sharing where (and what) we got our degrees (in), I got mine in Animal Field biology from the U of U (magna cum laude) a long time ago. Which probably makes me the least believable person in this conversation to some. For most discussions here, that doesn't mean squat, but I am going to put on a biologist hat on for my comments on the subject.

Yes, we appear to be having a die off in the deer right now. Is this surprising? I would submit the answer is no. Does this mean there is some long term crisis with our deer populations? I would say also no. The current die off is fully expected to anyone familiar with biological cycles. Consider a few items.

1. Our deer population has steadily increased from about 2011 until this past year. (As I recall, we had a crisis then too) It went from 210,000 to close to 400,000, so nearly a doubling. We had nearly ideal weather conditions for many of those years.

2. As has been noted in these discussions, some of the winter range has been hammered hard by overgrazing, poor growth, and invasive plants. In addition, drought has resulted in poor growth of many browse plants and the new growth has the most nutrition. If the plants eaten provide poor nutrition, the deer cannot put on sufficient fat.

3. We had a very wet, snowy winter. While not extreme, It would be a challenge for deer going in in poor condition to get through.

4. It is biology 101, but if the prey species increases, then the predator species also increases in response. I think we have good evidence that is happening.

With these things in mind, my response to all these panicky threads about the die off is no duh. What we are seeing is naturally supposed to happen. It sucks, but this isn't the first time we've been through these cycles and it sure as heck won't be the last. Things will also improve.

Are there things that should be done? Sure. Some increased predator control is indicated and is biologically sound. (otherwise, they too will have their die off, or they wander into schoolyards and be shot by panicky police officers or citizens.) Range management and cheatgrass control and abatement are solid. If there are few bucks to hunt, then sure, cut tags. There are other things that may help in select areas.

The point of my rant though is this. While there are things that can be done, I feel it is dangerous to rant for instantaneous and poorly thought out action. As an example, the crash in the 90's brought about a lot of sportsmen demanding action and SFW came about. They have done positive things, but they also have their mitts in the Wildlife Board and DWR, and the Expo speaks for itself. I struggle to see that the overall effect has been positive in hindsight. And guess what. *We are still having deer dieoffs. *

What will the next panicky overreaction bring?


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

Cath, your absolutely on point with the "cycle" of nature! I would also add at least one more subject to your comments. It follows the lines of grazing and winter habitat. I feel strongly that Urban Sprawl is beginning to take its tole on the Mule Deer/Elk population.


I've no doubt that there are many factors that need to be addressed to try and overcome a bleak outlook that can happen to Utah's wildlife. "Someone" just needs to put it together and hope for the best.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

There’s a whole lot of Utah that hasn’t seen sprawl. Like 90%.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> . The issues are much more serious. Between habitat fragmentation and loss, energy development, climate change, and invasive species like cheat grass destroying mule deer habitat the challenges for mule deer are tough ones, and are going to get worse.





APD said:


> so you're saying if we get rid of the flat brims and californian's then the deer population will be healthy again?





Catherder said:


> 2. As has been noted in these discussions, some of the winter range has been hammered hard by overgrazing, poor growth, and invasive plants. In addition, drought has resulted in poor growth of many browse plants and the new growth has the most nutrition. If the plants eaten provide poor nutrition, the deer cannot put on sufficient fat.
> 
> 4. It is biology 101, but if the prey species increases, then the predator species also increases in response. I think we have good evidence that is happening.
> 
> Are there things that should be done? Sure. Some increased predator control is indicated and is biologically sound. (otherwise, they too will have their die off, or they wander into schoolyards and be shot by panicky police officers or citizens.) Range management and cheatgrass control and abatement are solid.





taxidermist said:


> It follows the lines of grazing and winter habitat. I feel strongly that Urban Sprawl is beginning to take its tole on the Mule Deer/Elk population.


From everything I've read in this thread, it sounds like maybe some more cougar and bear tags should be cut this coming year. Personally, I have hunted neither, and know nothing about it, but it sounds like it would be good news for any cougar or bear hunters should DWR cut more tags. For what it's worth, in my own wanderings, I have noticed more bear and cat sign over the past few years then I have in the past. Hardly evidence, but correlates in my own mind.

Loss of habitat has been an issue, and will only get worse. Have any of you seen the population projects for Utah? If I remember correctly, by 2040 or 2050, I think it was projected to be DOUBLE what our population is now. I think that translates into more urban sprawl in wintering range. I say that, because while I can't prove it, ill wager 170 years ago, deer and elk where dropping a load somewhere in the living room of every house along the wasatch front. We build our towns in the most hospitable areas, and that, I think, means wintering range.

As flat bills and califorians go.... (I can't resist poking at em) As much as i fervently hate all this mass migration of Califoriians we are seeing, and would love to send them all packing back to the liberal hellhole from whence they came, it isn't all their fault for our expanding urban sprawl. They've just been accelerating it in the last 3-5 years. Their basically a can of gasoline, being poured on an already lit fire.

On a humorous note, Hey Flatbills, you bought the hat already, time to ditch that "I *just now *picked this hat out of a stack of hats in the store" look, and break that puppy in already.

As for browse, cheat grass, grazing, and what not, I have to wonder how much freegrazing sheep effect the deer herds. All I know is what I've seen, and what I've seen is in some areas, utter defoliation in the wake of sheep. My assumption has always been that the sheep are eating what the deer and elk would need to be eating. But is that really the case? Are sheep helping with the cheat grass and leaving what the deer and the elk need, or are they destroying the mountain like I think they've been? I kid you not, i've seen nothing but bare loose soil, and ammonia smelling scat in their wake. It's hard to think they are not destroying habitat.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

[QUOTE=Lone_Hunter 
My assumption has always been that the sheep are eating what the deer and elk would need to be eating. But is that really the case? Are sheep helping with the cheat grass and leaving what the deer and the elk need, or are they destroying the mountain like I think they've been?

Imo If they do not overgraze the sage brush they are very beneficial for deer and the plant. Look at the 50s and 60s and there were more sheep then.? Now cattle different story they trample


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

goofy elk said:


> Interesting, Gawd IB is going to go wild on this one.
> 
> Today's WB meeting, the numbers claim 71 % of the deer fawns killed by lions and bears...........


That's considerably higher than I would of thought.. So the number is likely much higher when considering coyote then...


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Iron Bear said:


> There's a whole lot of Utah that hasn't seen sprawl. Like 90%.


But a lot of that 90% isn't where deer live anyway. The urban sprawl is in critical winter range.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

There are some good and valid points being made here. Catherder is right on with his views, and they were talked about at the Wildlife Board meeting yesterday. The DWR is fully aware of the hit mule deer took last winter. As Catherder said, our herd nearly doubled since 2010, and along with that growth predators increased by at least double, more according to DWR. They are calling for many more cougar and bear tags this coming season, despite having the 3 year bear plan just passed last year. One board member is talking minimum 25% increase in all LE zones and up to 50% in others. Guess we'll see if they follow through.

As for Packout's comment about fawns, he too is right on. Going into the winter of 18/19, fawns across the state were well under weight, and adult deer were well below ffat reserves for good survival rates: that proved true with the winter we had and fawns and even adults were smacked hard across the state. Cache unit had 0 fawn survival rate.

With the predator growth that naturally occurs with prey growth, the problem become a timing thing. Naturally predators will follow the rise and decline of herds, but in the decline it takes several years for the predator counts to balance out due to lack of food, so to speak. However, with our elk herds doing well, cats and bears have a secondary food source that can keep their numbers up, and may create a top down additive issue. Thus the DWR seeking 'emergency' tag changes to address the issue.

They are also going to focus more on summer range habitat, as that is just as important if not more than the winter habitat. If there is little food to put on fat reserves, winter survival goes down hill, especially with a harsh winter. Fortunately this year, fawn body weight is higher than last winter, and fat reserves are much higher in adults. At least this winter they have a better chance.

And remember, this is not just a Utah thing for mule deer, it is across the board in the west. Wait til some of you folks read what is being implemented regarding CWD control in the west...

https://www.wafwa.org/Documents and...Recommendations_WAFWAfinal_approved010618.pdf

*"Harvest Management

Increase buck harvest, bias harvest toward
bucks, and/or shift timing of harvest to post-rut." 
*
Just some food for thought...


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

^^^^^ +1

The idea that predator populations will regulate themselves is not so true in this case. If the deer population drops there’s a bunch of alternative prey to go after. Coyote can survive on crickets and grasshoppers if needed. None of the predators in Utah need deer. One predator prefers deer but will eat elk sheep porcupine grouse turkey rabbit livestock or pets. So it’s not like if the deer population drops the predator population drops with it. Maybe after all prey populations have been wioed out.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> The idea that predator populations will regulate themselves is not so true in this case.... One predator prefers deer but will eat elk sheep porcupine grouse turkey rabbit livestock or pets.


Yes, and no. Cougars (bears too) that decide to dine on livestock and pets markedly increase their risk of "lead" poisoning. Elk are a harder kill. Cats eating lower calorie items like rabbits and porcupines have to expend more energy in killing enough to eat, so even that isn't ideal for them either. It's equivalent to the deer eating poor quality food. Nutritionally challenged females will produce unhealthier kittens, less likely to survive. As omnivores, bears depend on the same plant and berry growth that the deer do. So yeah, the effect is there. It just is a lot slower than we would like it as hunters to see things bounce back from a downturn. It also justifies more predator harvest, which should warm your heart.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

7MM RELOADED said:


> Lone_Hunter
> My assumption has always been that the sheep are eating what the deer and elk would need to be eating. But is that really the case? Are sheep helping with the cheat grass and leaving what the deer and the elk need said:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well
I looked at South Nebo hard.
Seeing if it would be worth deer hunting 2020.
The answer.............NO

Going to look elsewhere.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

goofy elk said:


> Well
> I looked at South Nebo hard.
> Seeing if it would be worth deer hunting 2020.
> The answer.............NO
> ...


Dang! And I was just fixin' to hit you up for some "general guidance" on the unit, not looking for any honey-holes mind you.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> ..... Every CWMU effectively has an antler restriction program. I think the consensus is that private lands overall provide better quality trophy hunting than GS units.


I believe the antler restriction has little do do with the quality of the deer on CWMU/Private Lands. Quality has more to do with the overall herd management of the area. Effective predator control, land management, winter feeding, etc all contribute to a healthier herd and better fawn recruitment which leads to better herd numbers and more importantly gene culling results in better quality bucks.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Sodium Fluoroacetate.


-DallanC


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

Just gotta make sure the right animal gets it.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Sodium Fluoroacetate.
> -DallanC


What are we trying to kill here?


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

MadHunter said:


> What are we trying to kill here?


This conversation.....

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

