# Observations on mule deer numbers on winter range in your area.



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

As the title says, what have you observed for mule deer on the winter range in your little corner of the world recently? I'm just curious because of what I have seen in mine this year. I work at Kennecott so the mule deer winter range I observe the most is around there. 

A couple weeks ago I was driving to work in the morning and I noticed something. Usually on that little stretch between Herriman and the parking lot I am driving very attentively, constantly scanning the sides of the road in front of me for a deer that might want to win a Darwin award. This year I realized I haven't been doing that in the mornings and evenings for the simple fact that there just doesn't seem to be any deer around! No deer at all isn't exactly true, but compared to the last few years I am certainly seeing a lot less. Maybe only 1/3 to 1/4 the amount I usually see. At most I will see a little band of about 4 to 6 on any given morning or evening and that's it! 

In prior years while the rut was going on I would see multiple nice bucks around the parking lot and one or two bucks that were absolute units. This year I don't recall seeing anything that was really worth mentioning. I did see a cell phone picture of a hammer of a buck that was killed on the new Herriman extended archery area. I heard that the buck was killed by a trespassing hunter on private land, but that is merely a rumor and a subject for a different day. Overall I am just a little taken back on the low numbers of deer I am seeing there this year. I was curious if the heavy winter last year was going to have a very big effect on the deer and it seems like it has. 

How are the numbers in your area?


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

I've been out quite a bit on the other side of the mountain from you and have noticed a lot of deer wintering in the foothills of the Oquirrhs. Deer and elk actually. I think it's somewhat consistent to years past as well. I was in Vernon on Monday in the lower country where I thought we'd see a ton of deer, but ended up only seeing 30 or so in a few hours. I think the weather played a role in this as it was trying to snow all morning. I am seeing hundreds of deer and elk in the other places I am going. 

I've attached some pics of some of the bucks I saw the other day. Pretty awesome time of year. Nothing overly huge, but still fun to see nonetheless!


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

BigT said:


> I've been out quite a bit on the other side of the mountain from you and have noticed a lot of deer wintering in the foothills of the Oquirrhs. Deer and elk actually. I think it's somewhat consistent to years past as well. I was in Vernon on Monday in the lower country where I thought we'd see a ton of deer, but ended up only seeing 30 or so in a few hours. I think the weather played a role in this as it was trying to snow all morning. I am seeing hundreds of deer and elk in the other places I am going.
> 
> I've attached some pics of some of the bucks I saw the other day. Pretty awesome time of year. Nothing overly huge, but still fun to see nonetheless!


Good stuff! I'm glad to see it's not all doom and gloom out there!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I've got the North end of Manti at 60% off last year. East side of Nebo at 25% from 3 years ago. South Manti is better, 65%.

Boulder is half from 3 years ago.

Pretty dismal were Im looking.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

All the deer in "my" area are dead. I counted 17 on the side of the road the other day.

The good news is none were bucks!


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> I've got the North end of Manti at 60% off last year. East side of Nebo at 25% from 3 years ago. South Manti is better, 65%.
> 
> Boulder is half from 3 years ago.
> 
> Pretty dismal were Im looking.


You actually saw deer on the South manti? My buddy that had the elk tag never got a single deer on his six trail cams all summer long. I never saw a single deer the one day I went and helped him out.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Ridge
Fairview South to Mayfield is pretty good.
Decent deer numbers.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Ridge
> Fairview South to Mayfield is pretty good.
> Decent deer numbers.


I can personally attest to this.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Overall I'm not seeing as many deer on the Cache unit this year. They are still pretty dispersed compared to last year and I have seen higher than normal concentrations in places that don't normally hold a lot of wintering deer. Other traditional wintering places aren't attracting the same number of deer that they used to for whatever reason.


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

I have not seen anywhere near the usual number just south of town I usually do. 
Same when I gone down to Kannara or New Harmony. 

I rode out to Quitchapa canyon the other day and all I saw was 2 dead roadkills. 
And it was prime time, just before dark. Used to see hundreds coming into the hay fields.

Have been north of town towards Summit and Parowan once or twice. 
Pretty much the same thing there.

A couple of guys I have talked to say the same thing when they have been out looking. Doesn't make any sense. I was seeing about normal amounts of deer during the fall up on the mountain.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Spent 10 days on Fishlake last summer. Deer were down 50% from 2 years ago.

Biggest losser is the Bookcliffs.
Easily down 90% from last time I was there.......super bad!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> Spent 10 days on Fishlake last summer. Deer were down 50% from 2 years ago.
> 
> Biggest losser is the Bookcliffs.
> Easily down 90% from last time I was there.......super bad!


I would love to learn how to accurately count an entire unit in 10 days or less.

Can you please share your tactics?

Lol.. a guy on here went 3/3 (or 4/4?) on the books this year with his group on archery. I knew 4 other people with the archery tags and they all got great deer, even with a bow. No complaints.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

The deer are all being killed between Fairview and Ephraim on the roads, I can attest to that. To me and other family members the deer numbers are down on the central Manti


----------



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

From what I've seen, and I have been out far less than usual this winter granted, numbers are down. I talked to Vance recently and he did say that around poverty in an area where they usually count around 500 deer, they are only counting around 200 this winter. I do think last winter had a significant impact on deer numbers in a lot of places throughout the state, and it was a rough winter. that lasted a long time last year. This winter has kicked into gear pretty quickly, so hopefully we don't see numbers drop further. There were places I can usually get to in mid-May last winter that I couldn't get to until mid-June. It was a rough one for sure that had an impact it seems.


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

2full said:


> I have not seen anywhere near the usual number just south of town I usually do.
> Same when I gone down to Kannara or New Harmony.
> 
> I rode out to Quitchapa canyon the other day and all I saw was 2 dead roadkills.
> ...


Sounds like our areas overlap and I'm seeing the same thing. Way more deer last year, but the winter wasn't hard enough to do much of a kill. They just vanished - other than a coyote killed 2 point I found this morning. I am seeing pockets of deer in areas where I typically don't see them, but it doesn't account for the difference.


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

I noticed while hunting with my sons on the La Sal unit this year that there were far fewer deer than normal in our estimations. Whether it be the winter kill, or they were just in a different place was the question. I believe there is adequate wintering ground for the wildlife in that area but I wasn't down there during the winter last year to see how bad it was. I was only down there 7 days and didn't scout during the summer. But I know the place quite well. Where we have always seen deer, there were none to be found. 

I know that of the 5 tags we had in camp for the black powder hunt, nobody harvested a deer which I believe was the first time that's happened since we started hunting there in 2004. Hopefully they rebound down there. It's a beautiful place!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I drove up through Woodruff this morning and seen quite a few deer. It made me think as the snow was over a foot deep all over the valley. Wind blowing like a hurricane. Anyone worried about winterkill south of I-70 should take a drive up north and see what real winter conditions are like.


----------



## Wire (Nov 2, 2017)

I too work at Kennecott but have not noticed much of a decline in deer numbers where I'm at. Still see quite a few and some decent bucks.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Ridge
> Fairview South to Mayfield is pretty good.
> Decent deer numbers.


We were further south than that by several miles.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

ridgetop said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > Ridge
> ...


Ya
South end of Manti, Fishlake.
Low deer numbers.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Lol.. a guy on here went 3/3 (or 4/4?) on the books this year with his group on archery


And they were all giants.


----------



## Hunter Tom (Sep 23, 2007)

I spend a lot of time on the Boulder and observe a long term big decline.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > Spent 10 days on Fishlake last summer. Deer were down 50% from 2 years ago.
> ...


The Bookcliffs is quite easy if you know the migration routes.
Glass, glass, glass.
And water.

Same with Fishlake.
Spent a lot of time there the last 5 years. Area's we saw good deer numbers a few years ago have defiantly diminished.
Rabbits too,
2 years ago, the Mytoge had the most bunnys on it I've ever seen in my life. They where gone this year.
There's was also a herd of antelope on the North side of hwy 24.
Im guessing they winter killed as well last winter. Certainly gone.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> The Bookcliffs is quite easy if you know the migration routes.
> Glass, glass, glass.
> And water.


If it's "easily 90% down", then how is it still quite easy? 90% down over 5 years would be grounds to close down the unit.

The 8 hunters I know if with tags, all 8 killed great deer this year, must have been d*** lucky with a bow and killed the last 8.

I am not disagreeing numbers may be down. 90% is an extreme statement though.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

RandomElk16 said:


> If it's "easily 90% down", then how is it still quite easy? 90% down over 5 years would be grounds to close down the unit.
> 
> The 8 hunters I know if with tags, all 8 killed great deer this year, must have been d*** lucky with a bow and killed the last 8.
> 
> I am not disagreeing numbers may be down. 90% is an extreme statement though.


Putting any kind of % on what is basically guesswork based on the observation of 1 guy is pretty extreme.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well, while most of you guys are running around town, I'm on the mountain looking.

Today I looked at the winter range on South Nebo. Started in Wales canyon. Ran it to the top. Continued north to Maple canyon to Fountain Green. Looking at the bench sage brush and cedars. Traditionally winters are full of deer there.
A few tracks but no deer spotted despite quite a bit of glassing.

Then continued over Big Hollow management area to Indianola.
A total of 7 deer.
And I glassed it good.
Very few track in several day old snow.

I did this same loop last year, and the count was 450.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> RandomElk16 said:
> 
> 
> > Lol.. a guy on here went 3/3 (or 4/4?) on the books this year with his group on archery
> ...


Ya
They harvested some good ones archery.

The problem?
No fawns for a few years now.

Yeasterday, in the Board meeting, studies are showing multiple year's of fawns 70% plus NOT surviving.

That's the problem TS and Random


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Interesting numbers for survival radio collard deer brought to the board meeting.

There's your "science" Kwalk
Random

Some northern units with ZERO fawn survival.

Bookcliffs with 80%+ loss of fawns.
That explains that one!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> Ya
> They harvested some good ones archery.
> 
> The problem?
> ...


You are right, that is a problem. And I'm glad people are finally talking about the limiting factors instead of just crying "We are giving too many tags and we've shot out the entire herd!" This is BS. It's always been BS. It will continue to be BS.

All of my statements when it comes to these types of discussions surround around my belief that people calling for tag cuts are doing so with no actual concern for the health of the herd. If the fawn loss is really 80-100% on some units as people are saying, you can shut down hunting completely and it will not make a difference to the health of the herd. We have to figure out how to keep the "next generation" alive on these units, and human hunters are not what is killing them.

I'm glad these discussions are going forward, and I'm glad the studies are being shared and discussed as well. We can finally start addressing the issue instead of just "cut tags cut tags cut tags!"


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

goofy elk said:


> Interesting numbers for survival radio collard deer brought to the board meeting.
> 
> There's your "science" Kwalk
> Random
> ...


Interesting information for sure. Have they aggregated the data into a report anywhere? Curious to look through it.

You say science like it's a bad thing. That's all I've been looking for all along. I prefer actual data to anecdote.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

TS
Honest question.

How do we not cut permits when deer herds are shrinking like this?

And Kwalk
I think science is a good thing.
It's just that this information is lagging months behind my observations.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Kwalk3 said:


> Interesting information for sure. Have they aggregated the data into a report anywhere? Curious to look through it.
> 
> You say science like it's a bad thing. That's all I've been looking for all along. I prefer actual data to anecdote.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Right... If you have this, lead with data not "I saw".


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> TS
> Honest question.
> 
> How do we not cut permits when deer herds are shrinking like this?


Oh, they'll probably cut tags. It's the easy thing to do. We've been doing it steadily for 30 years, and it's worked so well, so we might as well keep doing it, right?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> How do we not cut permits when deer herds are shrinking like this?


The interesting question isn't what will happen this year. (I agree that a cut is likely) What will be interesting is when the herd starts increasing again and tag increases can be made, consistent with the management plan.

I will predict that there will be ,um, *resistance* to it from some folks.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Not from me!
If the deer numbers increase,
Then put permits up


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> TS
> Honest question.
> 
> How do we not cut permits when deer herds are shrinking like this?
> ...


So what is your proposal for reduced tags for individual units? You can address your preferred units. How many is it going to take to save the herd?

At some point you are going to lose any support because there will be nobody left who cares?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I'm personally looking at several different units ...
The one's I've hunted where I liv for over 40 years are off the list now.

The other ones South where I've also hunted for many years are looking better..


----------



## Hunter Tom (Sep 23, 2007)

I have observed coyotes take down fawns. It is easy for them. I have also observed increased coyote populations. I have also observed decreased populations of rabbits, grouse, marmots and turkeys. Do you need some sort of academic study to prove the obvious?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Hunter Tom
Your RIGHT!

People that liv there know it.
The rabbit die off is obvious.

The deer die off is obvious!

Bunch of idiots up North.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Hunter Tom and Goofy - honest questions for you both:

If the issue is an increased amount of coyotes and the DNR continues to issue a bounty on them, are we perpetuating the problem by hunting them? Is the coyote cycle to an extent where mange is on the horizon for a coyote population correction?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Stuck at work this morning and it is slow so far. :sad:



Hunter Tom said:


> I have observed coyotes take down fawns. It is easy for them. I have also observed increased coyote populations. I have also observed decreased populations of rabbits, grouse, marmots and turkeys. Do you need some sort of academic study to prove the obvious?





goofy elk said:


> Hunter Tom
> Your RIGHT!
> 
> People that liv there know it.
> ...


That's it! Since it is the coyotes, we can put a bounty on them, hunt them heavily, and it will solve all our problems......................oh, wait, 

A couple of comments.

1. If what you are saying is true that the coyote population is high, and I have no reason to dispute it, then that would suggest that the money and effort spent on the bounty program is a waste of money. Not surprised, but it does show that natural systems have a bigger effect on wildlife populations than our piddling efforts. I guess it wasn't the "cure all" $FW suggested it would be. 

2. The rabbit population cycle is well studied by those idiot academics up North and is a pretty reliable 10 year cycle that has occurred consistently throughout my entire life and beyond. Where I hunt, the peak was about 5 years ago, followed by a crash about 3 years ago. It will start going up again in a year or two, unless weather is extreme. I suppose us idiots just have the good sense not to freak out about it.  Since the deer population was still going up when the bunnies went down, I'm skeptical that there would be a relationship, although bunny grazing may conceivably contribute to the range conditions.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Going to keep going.
Hwy 6
Long hollow, Dairy Fork , Sheep Creek......

Were is the deer?

It's UNREAL how low the numbers are....


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

We drove Hwy 6 in the afternoon on 12/29 on our way to Moab and saw a crap load of deer right off the highway. Easily hundreds spotted through those general areas you list all the way down to Price, Goof. My kids got sick of me saying “Deer! Right there!” 

So I’m not sure where they are today, but I know where they were 2 weeks ago.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> I'm personally looking at several different units ...
> The one's I've hunted where I liv for over 40 years are off the list now.
> 
> The other ones South where I've also hunted for many years are looking better..


Ok, make sense. More pressure on the ones that are doing good if you can draw a tag.

I hunt a unit that has, in the study 0% fawn recruitment. And I certainly don't doubt the numbers on the study. But I know that that there wasn't 100% fawn mortality on the unit.

Was there the same amount of deer as a few years ago? I would say no. But in reality the success rate went down on the hunt too.

There are a lot of problems with the herd but no reason for a drastic reductions in tags.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

When we cut tags do lifetime license holders go without? Just curious who suggesting tag cuts has one of those golden tickets. Any problem in Utah is always answered with tag cuts opportunity is down but the problem isn't solved


----------



## Dexter (Sep 23, 2018)

Yesterday I was out looking for chuckars near Brigham City on the benches. No chuckars found but I did see about 10 head of deer within about a 2 mile radius. I seen about another 5 or 6 in residential homes. No bucks. I did see a lot of deer tracks and rabbit tracks, but I didn't see birds or rabbits. Anybody have any suggestions as to where to go to find good chuckar hunting before the season ends in February?


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

weaversamuel76 said:


> When we cut tags do lifetime license holders go without? Just curious who suggesting tag cuts has one of those golden tickets. Any problem in Utah is always answered with tag cuts opportunity is down but the problem isn't solved


Negative ghost rider. I sure wish I had one of those golden tickets.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I’ve got a LL. My track record on tag numbers is pretty clear on here.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Vanilla said:


> I've got a LL. My track record on tag numbers is pretty clear on here.


You always advocate for better opportunity, which I'm grateful for.

Can't promise I won't always resent you at least a little for having a LL though. Only because I don't have one.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Back on topic.

Some stunning numbers out of the Bookcliffs.

83 lions harvested in the last 3 years

Thats Lot of cats!

Guess Iron Bear is right.
At least on some units.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Still counting^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Over 150 lions harvested in the last 5 years in the Bookcliffs.

Holly chit, its a wonder how Theres any deer left! THAT'S A LOT OF CATS!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

So Goof, in your opinion what needs to happen?


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

The argument is made here all the time that hunting isn’t the limiting factor or deer populations. Mainly because we harvest mostly male deer. I believe this to be true. That although there are (what seems to be a lot to some people) deer killed by hunting it’s not enough to limit overall numbers. 

I believe the same is true for cats. Although it seems like a lot of cats are being killed they are mostly male. And hunter harvest is probably NOT limiting the cougar population. I don’t believe hunters are the answer to the problem. Kinda like driving a tack with a sledge hammer. 

First we should know how many cats we have in relation to their prey, deer and elk. Then the DWR can prescribe numbers that will facilitate a general hunt. Then the DWR should employ professional hunters trappers to harvest female and young cats leaving mature toms for sport. Killing a big Tom can create a vacuum where 3 young cats will fill his place. A mature Tom will kill fewer deer than 3 younger cats or a female with kittens. And Toms will also kill young cats also. 

I’m guessing the program will pay for itself with the increased tags sales or they could put a donation box like the coyote fund.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Vanilla said:


> So Goof, in your opinion what needs to happen?


o-||


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

IB- that is interesting. I will readily admit I’m completely ignorant when it comes to cats and how the dynamic works. I’ve never even had a desire to hunt one. The closest I’ve ever come to that is joking with my BYU fan friends saying I’m going to kill a cougar one day just so I can mount it and place a Utah jersey on it up on my wall. 

I’d be interested learning more about this.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> So Goof, in your opinion what needs to happen?


Well 
I killed cats in the BC from 1998 to 2008. There was DEFFENATLY a huge increase around 2015.

And there will always be cats there because of the landscape.

HO hunting on the Rattle snake, South section is already open to unlimited quota, year round season.

The rest of the Cliffs is open to remaining quota of 17.

Cant put much more hound pressure that that with out bringing in the Government trappers.

Then, just as big of a probblem, IMO,
Habitat and range conditions.
The wild horse population out there is out of control .
Destroying the wintering areas BAD.

Cats are not the only thing out there needing to be removed......


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

I've been assisting in a joint study by USU and the DWR in catching and attaching GPS collars on female cougars. The results have taken just about everybody by surprise. One female lion collared above Garden City in Rich County spent last winter in Blacksmith Fork in Cache county, but as soon as the snow melted in journeyed south and east through the Uintahs and now seems to have established a territory in SE Wyoming. Another collared cat in Logan canyon stuck around until August then took off north and 2 weeks later was in the Tetons. This cat has since journeyed part way back and has settled outside Soda Springs, Idaho. Another female lion collared here on the Cache was struck and killed by a vehicle crossing I-80 near Evanston.

It's always been understood that male cougars are wanderers, but nobody knew female lions were also prone to travel. Unit by unit management might work well on some species, but apparently not on cougars.

Another puzzling thing about lions on the Cache unit is despite over 100 cats being taken off the unit in the past 4 years (previously population estimates are about 75 cats), cougar depredation of livestock has actually *increased* not decreased as logic would suggest. The current thinking is that by killing off the older mature cats on the unit with liberal tag numbers we are creating a predator vacuum where the younger more trouble prone cats have moved in and taken over.

There is still a lot to learn from the study, and a lot of unanswered questions remain, but it's been rewarding for me to help out and learn.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Kevin D, that is fascinating information! I had no idea cougars roamed like that. This may not be a fair question yet this early in the game, but from your perspective, what do you do to address this? I know you have a ton of experience with this animal, so I'd love to hear your thoughts, if you have any you are inclined to share.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Kevin D, that is fascinating information! I had no idea cougars roamed like that. This may not be a fair question yet this early in the game, but from your perspective, what do you do to address this? I know you have a ton of experience with this animal, so I'd love to hear your thoughts, if you have any you are inclined to share.


We've got a bunch of new collars put out so far this season, we'll have to wait and see where these cats wind up once winter is over and the traveling is easy.

Another puzzling thing about this study is that collared female cougar in the other two study units, Manti and the Book Cliffs, aren't moving, they seem content to stay in the same general area they were collared in. Only in the Cache unit does the population seem to be in flux. Why? One can only speculate the liberal tag numbers for the unit invite in the wanderers, which we catch and collar, only to have them move on to other areas. We also caught a tom that we didn't collar, but he had a DWR ear tag and was likely one of the problem cats from Salt Lake County last year. So it does seem to me we've created a predator vacuum that draws these cats in.


----------



## SCS_Bg_Hunter (Oct 27, 2019)

Would they be pulled into the vacuum or pushed out of the area where they currently are? You mentioned that the cats on the Manti and in the Books aren't moving, are you seeing them wander at all then return or do they just stay where they are all the time? It almost seems like those cats that are wandering are forced out of their current location. We've all heard about the poor fawn recruitment last year on the Cache, do you think lack of food could be causing these wandering cats to travel so far?


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

SCS_Bg_Hunter said:


> Would they be pulled into the vacuum or pushed out of the area where they currently are? You mentioned that the cats on the Manti and in the Books aren't moving, are you seeing them wander at all then return or do they just stay where they are all the time? It almost seems like those cats that are wandering are forced out of their current location. We've all heard about the poor fawn recruitment last year on the Cache, do you think lack of food could be causing these wandering cats to travel so far?


One of the cats from the Book Cliffs did wander into Colorado for a few weeks, but it soon came back in the same area it was captured in.

Poor fawn recruitment has been discussed as a possible reason why the Cache cats seem to vacate the unit, but that theory would be more credible if deer populations on the Manti and Book Cliffs were thriving, which doesn't seem to be the case. The bottom line is we don't know. There is an age disparity between cats collared on the Cache and these other units primarily because liberal harvest quotas on the Cache has left very few older more mature cats on the unit, this seems the more plausible theory. Younger cats are more apt to wander, more apt to prey on livestock, and more apt to wander into town.

What has biologists scratching their heads is why the Cache doesn't seem to be running out of cougar. Killing greater than 10% of the estimated population with over 40% of those being females for a number of years is supposed to have greatly reduced the population, but it hasn't, why?? Best guess is that we draw a fresh crop of cats in from other areas every year to fill the void. This is the predator vacuum I mentioned.

We are just entering the second year of the five year study and still have lots to learn. But while the experts are analyzing the data, I better scrape the dog chit off my boots and clean up the muddy tracks I left to the computer to post this before my wife gets home and freaks out again :shock:


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Seriously fascinating stuff Kevin. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Kevin D said:


> One of the cats from the Book Cliffs did wander into Colorado for a few weeks, but it soon came back in the same area it was captured in.
> 
> Poor fawn recruitment has been discussed as a possible reason why the Cache cats seem to vacate the unit, but that theory would be more credible if deer populations on the Manti and Book Cliffs were thriving, which doesn't seem to be the case. The bottom line is we don't know. There is an age disparity between cats collared on the Cache and these other units primarily because liberal harvest quotas on the Cache has left very few older more mature cats on the unit, this seems the more plausible theory. Younger cats are more apt to wander, more apt to prey on livestock, and more apt to wander into town.
> 
> ...


Maybe we should build a wall and keep the new one out.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Another interesting thing brought up at the WB meeting was the studies showed more than a few recorded predator kills that were initially killed by cats, then they were run off by bears. That resulted in the cat killing another deer, and so on. Kills can add up pretty quick with that scenario playing out.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well, what happened to the 370k claim?
New on Instagram from the DWR.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> Well, what happened to the 370k claim?
> New on Instagram from the DWR.


370k was from last winter's post-hunt classifications! And, although there aren't any numbers posted on this Instagram item, apparently this winter's classifications show some loss in many units which is understandable since we're still in a long drought.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

ridgetop said:


> Maybe we should build a wall and keep the new one out.


It might happen. Don Peay was Trumps Utah campaign chair. The next question would be how the WB would pay for it?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Catherder said:


> The next question would be how the WB would pay for it?


They're clearing the path by moving higher education funding to the General Fund. Now that k-12 is funded from income taxes, there should be plenty left over for the Predator Wall.

#KeepPredatorsOutOfUtah
#BuildTheWall


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well, they are extending (adding) lion HO permits where they estimate deer herds are down over 15%. And lion quotas where filled, or close.

Quite a few reopened units!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Goof, you want to take me to go kill a lion? I've never really had a desire to do so, but I'll do my part!

I don't even care about finding the biggest tom either. I'll kill a female.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

Vanilla said:


> Goof, you want to take me to go kill a lion? I've never really had a desire to do so, but I'll do my part!
> 
> I don't even care about finding the biggest tom either. I'll kill a female.


Oh hell ya!! Anyone else looking forward to the Vanilla and Goofy elk lion chase thread!!??

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

TS
PM sent.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Goof, you want to take me to go kill a lion? I've never really had a desire to do so, but I'll do my part!
> 
> I don't even care about finding the biggest tom either. I'll kill a female.


Actually you make a good point. If lion hunters were really concerned about deer predation from lion numbers then it is the female's they should be killing. Killing of the males of any species does little to harm(deminish) the population.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

The problem with killing females and the reason most houndsmen shy away from it is that you are also killing kittens. Lion kittens stay with their moms for up to 2 years and are dependent on her for their survival. Female lions will stash their kittens and set out alone to hunt. If the kittens are extremely young she'll return to nurse them, but once they are weened and old enough to travel at about 3-4 months old she'll gather them up and lead them into her kill. 

This pattern of stashing her kittens and hunting alone continues until the kittens are about a year to 18 months old and she'll let them start accompanying her on hunts. In the meantime, a hunter may find her tracks where she is travelling alone (it's unlawful to kill a female accompanied by kittens) and harvest her, not knowing or sometimes not caring that she has dependent young stashed away. This condemns the dependent kittens to a slow death by starvation.

I've been running hounds for almost 40 years and every year, including this year, I've seen where a female lion has been killed in an area and 2 or 3 days later see unaccompanied kitten tracks wandering the road looking for mom. These orphans usually survive a week to 10 days before they disappear.

So anytime a mature female lion is killed the odds are she has kittens stashed away that the hunter may not be aware of. It becomes an ethical choice among houndsmen who understand the life patterns of lions whether or not to take a mature female cougar.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

What Kevin states is WHY there has been, or was, an unwritten code amongst hounders not to kill females.

All the years I ran, killing females was almost shameful.

I know the last decade or so, many more females are being killed.
I also believe that is what is causing the issues we are seeing today that Kevin is describing.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Kevin D, that all makes sense. And while it may not play well on the 6 o’clock news, when you talk about this vacuum created by targeting only mature toms, is this (the scenario you described above about females with kittens) exactly what needs to happen to balance that vacuum out? 

Kind of a downer to think about that.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Kevin D, that all makes sense. And while it may not play well on the 6 o'clock news, when you talk about this vacuum created by targeting only mature toms, is this (the scenario you described above about females with kittens) exactly what needs to happen to balance that vacuum out?
> 
> Kind of a downer to think about that.


When a unit is put on a predator management plan the objective is to bring female harvest to over 40%. Here on the Cache at least, that female harvest has exceeded that 40% for several years in a row now, even on those off years when we weren't under a predator management plan. There are one or two local houndsmen that kill everything they put in tree regardless of size or gender. There are also some CWMU operators just to the south that have been given unlimited depredation authority to kill cougar long after the season ends and the quotas have been filled, and they too kill everything, particularly females and kittens. So the traditional code among houndsmen not to kill females that goofy mentioned has, by the numbers, fallen by the wayside.

Yet our deer herd continues to struggle and depredation of livestock has actually increased. Again, why? We can only speculate that removing the older mature cats, both male and female, from the unit has opened the door for younger more trouble prone cats to move in and set up shop. Empirical data so far suggests expanding quotas to kill more lions hasn't been particularly effective in restoring mule deer herds.

There is still a lot we don't know. A lot of old ideas may have to be altered as new questions emerge. Hopefully we'll have a better understanding with continued study.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well,
Helicopters in the air with shooters.

Central utah, 28 Coyotes shot recently in North Sanpete.

More arial gunning going on around the state this week as I understand.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Just a ramble of thinking out loud here....bear with me....

We have too many cougars / predators.
The best way to manage populations is by controlling the numbers of females.
We don't kill female predators because they might have dependent young.
Not enough hunters are killing predators.
We give out more predator tags, but keep restrictions in place to limit hunter opportunity.
The State is hiring professional companies to kill predators from helicopters.



I'm obviously missing something here. Why do we have so many contradicting things going on?? This sounds to me like an education and public outreach issue. If predators are a problem, then we need to enable and encourage hunters to kill more predators. Seems pretty simple to me. I'm sure I'm missing something...


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Well
Since we're doing 'ramblin thoughts'

Killing predators is NOT EASY!

Most average joe hunters cant even do it...........

Extra lion and bear tags,
Coyote bountys?
Other than houndsmen,
Only small percent of hunters are actually successful.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Killing predators is NOT EASY!
> 
> Most average joe hunters cant even do it...........
> 
> ...


OK -- so why make it hard? Why not allow the spot-and-stalk crowd more opportunity to use those tags? Why restrict them to 1 specific hunt period? If success percentages are so low, allow those guys more seasons (ie: archery elk and deer) to fill those tags!! It doesn't have to be hard!

If the predators are a problem and the State wants more killed -- then give us better opportunities!!

#TOTP


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Umm , PBH
Spot and stalk crowd can buy over the counter, UNLIMITED, lion permits.
Some year round units!
And certainly almost state wide opportunity during HO season!

Coyotes, year round with a BOUNTY

Bears also with quite a bit of HO ,
Over the counter opportunity.

How is that " making it hard " ?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

goofy --- I know we're talking mainly lions. My gripe is with the spot-and-stalk bear permits. They're going to give out more again. What they won't do is allow their use similar to a cow elk permit. If you are hunting another hunt (ie: archery deer / elk) in the same unit as your bear permit, allow to fill said permit during that other hunt. Currently you can't do this. The reason is because they don't want to upset _other bear hunters_ that are hunting bears under different methods during those times.

I think that's stupid, and is the reason why I will not get a bear permit, and thus will not help do my part in attempting to control the bear population. If I could kill a bear during my archery deer / elk hunt with my bow using a spot-and-stalk permit, I'd do it. We have opportunities nearly every year anymore...

Further -- why don't the bobcat trappers trap lions? i mean, they do, of course....but by accident....

While I'm certainly not on the same page as Mr. Albrecht, with trying to change the laws to allow "year round open season" on predators, I do think there are plenty of ways to provide additional opportunity _if the DWR truly wants more predators killed_.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

I don't believe "lion hunters" really want to control the lion population. Why would they, that's what they want to hunt, the more the merrier.... and the bigger(males) the better. No hunter wants to see his species of choice declared vermin and have them set upon by the masses. 
I personally like the way things are now, let mother nature do the controlling. When the deer numbers drop, the lion numbers will drop, when the lion numbers grow it's because the deer numbers have grown.
And you lion hunters that won't shoot hens...simple, teach your dogs to stop chasing 'em.:smile:


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Take some of the millions used on habitat and set up a predator control dept in the DWR. Figure out how many cats we have. Collar mature dominant cats when treed. Collar and strerylize select females. You can’t kill a collared cougar unless you have a LE tag for one. The predator control dept employs professional trappers/houndsman to insure harvest objectives are met when the average joe fail to reach them. 

IMO most partys get a win. Houndsman get trophy cats and get to chase the crap out them. Some will make a living doing it. They get to be the hero’s for deer. Cougar get to have a healthy strong population with less disruption. Deer hunters get a slice of the deer pie back. DWR gets their revenue.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

The helicopter just flew by me shooting dogs again!
SFW ponyed up some cash.
Coyotes hittin the ground on the winter range!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> The helicopter just flew by me shooting dogs again!
> SFW ponyed up some cash.
> Coyotes hittin the ground on the winter range!


Good to hear!


----------



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

Big storm incoming tonight into Tuesday. After spending more time out the past week and a half, I will say I've seen far less deer overall. I do think last winter had a pretty big hit and I wouldn't be surprised if this one takes a toll as well. Hasn't been too bad of a winter yet, but if we get deep lasting snow through February and March doesn't see winter subside, I honestly think things could look pretty bleak for quite a few years.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> We drove Hwy 6 in the afternoon on 12/29 on our way to Moab and saw a crap load of deer right off the highway. Easily hundreds spotted through those general areas you list all the way down to Price, Goof. My kids got sick of me saying "Deer! Right there!"
> 
> So I'm not sure where they are today, but I know where they were 2 weeks ago.


OK TS.

I've spent 6 days now over the last two week looking up canyons off HWY 6.
Lake Fork, Long Hollow, Dairy Fork, Sheep Creek and Tie Fork today.
Starvation and Tucker 2 days ago.

And ya , there's a few deer liking salt on the side of the hwy.

But gee, very few deer on the mountain winter range!

I've got that stretch at 30% of normal for that deer herd.......


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Ok, I've just read this entire thread from post 1 page 1, to the last post of the last page. I'll try and recap everything I've just read, and someone tell me if I'm summarizing this correctly.

Deer populations are *way *down. To make bad news even worse, 70-80% of the fawns are not surviving. Conjecture as to the cause is multiple:

- Bad winter last year, which was preceded a drought the year before.
- Large Coyote population dropping fawns.
- Large Lion population dropping deer/fawns.
- Bears savaging kills off lions, forcing them to make more kills.

Am I missing anything?

It sure doesn't sound good. What got me looking into this thread to begin with, is I was looking at unit population objectives and estimated populations and they are ALL down. Buck to doe ratio are also all on the lower end, or below objective. There is only two units that looks like their doing ok according to the hunt planner (assuming the info is current): Zion, which I guess half the deer habitat is on private property, and Pine valley - but judging by the way the topo lines are stacked, it makes humping the Nebo look easy by comparison. Pretty far drive too.

If I'm reading all this correctly, its downright depressing. I hate saying it, but I find myself thinking about saving my point, and sitting this deer season out.


----------



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

Lone_Hunter said:


> Ok, I've just read this entire thread from post 1 page 1, to the last post of the last page. I'll try and recap everything I've just read, and someone tell me if I'm summarizing this correctly.
> 
> Deer populations are *way *down. To make bad news even worse, 70-80% of the fawns are not surviving. Conjecture as to the cause is multiple:
> 
> ...


Are population estimates out already? But yes I agree. I think due to a combination of a lot of things, numbers are going to be down and take some time to recover again. We had a perfect storm that brought them up as high as they were, and a perfect storm that just knocked them back down.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I just read this whole thread...

....and I am still scratching my head. 

We harvest the heck out of lions in places like Cache unit and create a predator vacuum; we harvest the heck out of lions in other places like the Book Cliffs and deer continue to decline. Virtually every winter/spring government trappers fly the skies and shoot coyotes...and yet our deer numbers drop.

It just leaves me to wonder...are predators really the problem? Or, is something else driving the decline? I mean weren't deer herds on the rise until last winter? Doesn't that mean that the weather was a bigger factor in the decline than predators? Doesn't predation increase when drought or severe snow/winter patterns make deer more vulnerable?

It also makes me think...if the harvest of cougars leads to a predator vacuum in one unit, won't the same thing eventually happen in others? And, if so, doesn't this exacerbate the predation problem and not help it?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> It just leaves me to wonder...are predators really the problem? Or, is something else driving the decline? I mean weren't deer herds on the rise until last winter? Doesn't that mean that the weather was a bigger factor in the decline than predators? Doesn't predation increase when drought or severe snow/winter patterns make deer more vulnerable?


While I do believe that there is a biological basis for increased predator harvest, based on the decline in their prey base, I am of the opinion that all of this frantic "kill all the predators" chatter is just another demand to "*Do something*" even though the current decline from previous high deer numbers was predictable and inevitable due to multiple factors largely out of our control.

Based on previous history, pretty typical for our state.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Do.. Do we sometimes sound like the gun control nuts? 

Is predator management the "common sense" conservation law?


The thing is, there are LOTS of factors. Can the impact of each be calculated? Then can you determine the cost and impact of fixes for each? 

Fact is 18-19 winter had a big part and is something you can't "manage" for outside of demolishing the homes that destroyed winter range and stop building others. We need the opposite of urban deer management.. Like 200 more hardware ranches but for deer.

Was it lonetree who always talked about minerals? Don't think he was wrong either.

Do predators kill deer? Sure.. how many is the right balance?


We love subjective solutions without measure lol. Hell the wildlife board lives off subjectivity.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Well, you can't control the weather. All I know is summer/fall of 2018 was DRY. I saw a lot of watering holes that were dried up. Probably wasn't a lot of browse either. I do recall seeing a few emaciated looking deer that year. I also saw a metric buttload of sheep systematically defoliating the Manti.

Yeah, not to bring THAT up again, but on a dry year, do the sheep grazing have an effect on how much browse is available for the deer to fatten up on for the winter? Because following all of what I saw, we had our first decent winter in several years. It could be the deer didn't have their fat reserves going into that winter, and that may have contributed to a lot of winter kill that year. Yeah, I know, all conjecture on my part.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

To be honest sheep have been grazing the Manti since the 1850's and for the most part in far larger numbers than they currently are allowed. I'm sure there have been a few dry years and wet ones thrown in during that time.

And I'll bet those pesky wool growers are applying a ton of pressure for predator reduction.

Over grazing is sometimes credited with the explosion of deer in the 1950's and 60's.

So I don't think that is a clear reason for the current decline.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

We have data showing that 80% of fawns were killed by predators on a unit. Isn’t that a problem? 

I’m not a biologist, nor am I a math major. But I have to think if 80% of your recruitment on one unit is being lost to one factor, and it’s a factor you can control, then you control it. We can’t control how much snow falls or what the temperature is. We can’t control how much summer rainfall we get. We can control predators, and it seems the data shows the vast majority of mortality on certain units is due to predators.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Like most hunters, I suck at predator hunting. I've tried several times, and I keep trying coyotes every winter for something to do, but I suck at it. I have yet to drop dog number 1.

I wouldn't mind trying cougar or bear, just to have a nice skin on my wall (how do they taste anyway?), but I have never even considered hunting them before. They are usually something I try to avoid. I've seen more bear then I've seen cats though. I've glassed bear few bears, i've even had a bear come into my camp, but the most I ever see of cats is when their tracks cross mine. My assumption is, without a houndsman, your wasting your time. Average joe hunter like me, isn't hiring a houndsman.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Vanilla said:


> We have data showing that 80% of fawns were killed by predators on a unit. Isn't that a problem?
> 
> I'm not a biologist, nor am I a math major. But I have to think if 80% of your recruitment on one unit is being lost to one factor, and it's a factor you can control, then you control it. We can't control how much snow falls or what the temperature is. We can't control how much summer rainfall we get. We can control predators, and it seems the data shows the vast majority of mortality on certain units is due to predators.


I agree that loss to predators is something we can control but only to an extent. If the predator in question is the coyote then it can be managed a lot easier that if it were lions, because of the nature of the predator and the difficulty in hunting it down.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

The tricky part about cats and to some extent, bears is the most effective way to get them is with hounds. And those with hounds aren’t super keen on killing them off at a higher rate. And as was stated above, there isn’t much good in giving me a permit for a cat. I’m not hiring a guide to take me out with hounds, and there is basically a zero chance for me to be successful otherwise. 

It’s definitely a bit of a conundrum.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

Biologists know that killing predators is not a long term solution to struggling deer herds. Predator populations follow the deer population in a classic predator/prey cycle, not the other way around. The tail doesn't wag the dog as people some seem to think.

Killing off predators adds volatility to the deer population cycle. The highs may be higher, but the lows are going to be lower. We are making game herds more susceptible to the whims of weather conditions by removing the moderating influence of predators, and in the end we may be worse off than where we started due to the added stress on the winter range in the peak years. If a more stable deer population is our goal, then removing predators is not the way to achieve it.

I too think that the current anti predator hysteria is more of a reaction to do something, anything, even if it is wrong. Game managers have their hands tied in many respects, they can't control urban sprawl or many of the other factors contributing to a struggling deer herd, all they can do is issue more predator tags. After all, if ones only tool is a hammer, you're going to view every problem as a nail.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Kevin D said:


> B. Game managers have their hands tied in many respects,* they can't control urban sprawl* or many of the other factors contributing to a struggling deer herd,


Like the weather, there is nothing that can be done about that. Urban sprawl in fact, is only going to get worse. The genie is out of the bottle, the horse has already left the barn, and whatever other metaphor you want to use, they're ain't no going back now.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

Based on what everyone is saying. Deer numbers are going to find a new lower carry capacity and we can't do anything about it. We can only live with this new reality and adjust accordingly


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Kevin D said:


> If a more stable deer population is our goal, then removing predators is not the way to achieve it.


I agree with removing all predators being a problem, and I don't think anyone is advocating for that. Are you saying removing "ANY" predators is going to be a problem?


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Vanilla;2162561[B said:


> ]We have data showing that 80% of fawns were killed by predators on a unit. Isn't that a problem? [/B]
> 
> I'm not a biologist, nor am I a math major. But I have to think if 80% of your recruitment on one unit is being lost to one factor, and it's a factor you can control, then you control it. We can't control how much snow falls or what the temperature is. We can't control how much summer rainfall we get. We can control predators, and it seems the data shows the vast majority of mortality on certain units is due to predators.


Sure it's a problem, one that biologists are fully aware of and trying to get to the bottom of. On the surface, the predator/prey relationship is pretty simple: the number of predators is relative to the number in their prey base, and as that prey base fluctuates up or down, predator numbers follow accordingly and usually keeps prey numbers from moving _dramatically_ in either direction.

Scrape away the surface and dive into predator/prey population dynamics and the factors that affect each temporally and spacially, and you end up with a much more complicated dynamic, which is where we find ourselves right now. Ask yourself 'why' the fawn crop is one unit (and to a lesser degree in others) was so dramatically affected by predators? The possible reasons to such a question begin to show a much more complicated dynamic occurring than a simple 'too many predators, reduce their population and the deer will come back' scenario.

Currently we have a situation where the deer herds have been growing fairly rapidly for a few years, nearly doubling. And as nature dictates, the predator base has been matching that growth, maintaining that symbiotic relationship. Then something goes wrong, the deer herds go into a winter under weight, with very low fat reserves for the winter, the fawn crops are very under weight with mom being in poor condition along with the older class of bucks. Winter is harsh and long. We end up with a healthy predator base, a sickly prey base, with the results being exactly what we are seeing now. And that leads to many more questions, which end up primarily being "why?"...

As others have said in this thread, population dynamics for our deer herds are complicated, and dramatic fluctuations one way or the other usually have multiple reasons. The simplest one is too many predators, because it's the easiest to deal with. Perhaps it's time to start worrying more about 'summer range' and it's health, and not put so much emphasis on winter range at this point. I dunno...maybe.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Vanilla said:


> I agree with removing all predators being a problem, and I don't think anyone is advocating for that. Are you saying removing "ANY" predators is going to be a problem?


I'm certainly not answering for Kevin, just putting in my two cents to the question. We currently have a deer population that took a substantial nose dive, while the predator base remains much higher than should be for the normal regulation of that prey base. I think a reduction in predators is called for at this time, but by no means do I think it should be an over reactive reduction.


----------



## cedar (Jul 29, 2013)

Here is a podcast about big game management in utah especially deer:

https://wildlife.utah.gov/news/wildlife-podcast/861-big-game-management.html


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Looks to me like predators are a problem in other states also. Just read an article on Eastman's about the high number of lions in Colorado.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I think the real problem is everybody thinks Utah is at the bottom of the list for management.

There is not a western state that is magically increasing the health of the herd. Every one of them is struggling to maintain or increase the numbers.

So far as I see the deer in northern Utah have pretty good conditions so far. I hope it lasts.


----------



## Slayer (Feb 3, 2013)

The deer looked good and healthy today along I-15 in Southern Utah. Saw several groups out feeding in the sun.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

Saw about 10 healthy lookers in Cabelas parking lot in Lehi. :shock: TOTFP


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

stillhunterman said:


> Perhaps it's time to start worrying more about 'summer range' and it's health, and not put so much emphasis on winter range at this point. I dunno...maybe.


There is alot less acreage for winter range than summer. I fear that if we take our focus off winter range, current drops in deer populations will only get worse.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

MWScott72 said:


> There is alot less acreage for winter range than summer. I fear that if we take our focus off winter range, current drops in deer populations will only get worse.


Summer range is much less threatened by development, etc. as well. It's not completely protected, but doesn't face near the threat that the habitat along the winter range does.


----------

