collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer  (Read 20574 times)

Offline Killmore

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 754
  • Location: Ellensburg WA
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2017, 12:32:12 PM »
We haven't had doe permits in 340-336 gmu for years, the herd size have not increased from this, didn't the muckleshoots do a study a couple years back on the deer herd?

Offline MonstroMuley

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2016
  • Posts: 167
  • Location: [Lost in GMU 335]
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2017, 01:30:08 PM »
All Great Ideas ... DaveMonti Nailed It ... "Where's the Data?"  :dunno:
"Everyone has a Gut Pile..." - "The Nuge" (TN)

Offline runamuk

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2008
  • Posts: 17878
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2017, 01:34:47 PM »
We haven't had doe permits in 340-336 gmu for years, the herd size have not increased from this, didn't the muckleshoots do a study a couple years back on the deer herd?
I believe it was in 2014ish they were collaring and doing surveys to gather more information on the herd.

Online bigmacc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 4581
  • Location: the woods
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2017, 05:15:24 PM »
All Great Ideas ... DaveMonti Nailed It ... "Where's the Data?"  :dunno:

Methow herd, peak 30 to 40k....now days around 19k or less, (F and W numbers).way less according to some "other folks" data, including mine, but at least we see the trend... :twocents:

Offline h20hunter

  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 20873
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Please Delete
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2017, 05:17:30 PM »
Why delete?  :dunno:

Online bigmacc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 4581
  • Location: the woods
Re: Please Delete
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2017, 08:19:06 PM »
Was it one of my posts? sorry.

Offline DaveMonti

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2008
  • Posts: 1249
  • Location: Snohomish County
Re: Please Delete
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2017, 08:23:31 PM »
The OP wanted to discuss ONLY the option of not allowing doe hunting as a means of improving deer numbers and asked that people don't stray into other "solutions".  Being that everyone immediately started offering other solutions, I suspect he got frustrated and decided to bail out of the conversation.


Offline bowman

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Posts: 414
  • Location: Marysville
Re: Please Delete
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2017, 08:42:59 PM »
Informative post. Mods please don't delete. There has been nothing negative or offensive to other members. Only a discussion that has been informative to other members, such as myself.

Offline h20hunter

  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 20873
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Please Delete
« Reply #38 on: November 17, 2017, 08:46:18 PM »
Not slated for deletion at this time. Carry on.  :tup:

Offline bowman

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Posts: 414
  • Location: Marysville
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #39 on: November 17, 2017, 10:08:11 PM »
I am like many others on this forum and I am clueless to the "chain of command" for WDFW.  Can someone enlighten us for who answers to who (regards to deer)?

Offline greenhead_killer

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2010
  • Posts: 2036
  • Location: the burg
  • Groups: wsf life member, wsta, mdf, sci, sscf
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #40 on: November 18, 2017, 03:02:30 AM »
1:I think we need to start the season earlier. Not let weather play in any factor of general season harvest.
2:go to a draw for a season 1-4 much like Colorado does. Keep rut tags the same as far as timeline.( Maybe shorten that hunt to a 10 dayer instead of a 20 day season?)start gen season 1 oct 1st and go for there. Each ‘season’ is a 5 day hunt with days in between to give them a break.
3:take away antlerless harvest until herd numbers reach healthy numbers.
4:let us run dogs on cats again! Bigger than the wolves at this point is the over population of cats running around with nothing to keep them in check.
5:get rid of 3pt min. It’s targeting mostly mature deer which will be the guys making it through winter anyhow.
6:run a special 2pt ‘mature’ buck hunt. Have to pass a test verifying you c am tell the difference between a young 2pt and an older guy before they will issue the tag

That’s my 2cents on the issue.
Side note, I’ve got 40 acres in nc wa. First time in 13 years I didn’t see a legal 3pt or better md while hunting or on any of the half dozen cams I have in surrounding areas. Something needs to change

Offline ironhead14

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 111
  • Location: Newport WA.
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #41 on: November 18, 2017, 06:48:12 AM »
How about killing some damn predators???  They are what are destroying the game animals!

Offline Elkcollector82

  • Work to live, not live to work.
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2016
  • Posts: 760
  • Location: Idaho
  • Hunt hard by laying boot tracks, Not tire tracks
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #42 on: November 18, 2017, 07:05:58 AM »
Doesn’t matter what you change. If you don’t control the predators. Your not going to rebuild any herd. So start by seriously hunting the big cats before December 31. That away hunters can nock down more then the quota in a gmu. That’s my thoughts. Also Washington needs to sell additional cougar tags like Oregon does.


Offline NOCK NOCK

  • Timberdog Slabs
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 6188
  • Location: E. Wenatchee
  • Timberdog Slab Designs
    • https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063502962432
    • Timberdogslabs.com
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #43 on: November 18, 2017, 07:16:20 AM »
Well, that about sums up the single idea approach.  Everyone has their ideas of what needs to be done.

How many of these ideas are supported by data?  As far as the "doe" question goes, how many doe (or antlerless) deer are taken each year in this state?  In each unit?  How do those number of "antlerless" compare to the total number of deer in the state or in the units where the antlerless deer are harvested?

I don't have these answers.  I do, however, know that any "solution" that actually works is supported by data and sound reasoning.  While stopping the harvest of antlerless deer may SEEM like an intuitive solution to the problem of low deer numbers, does the data support that?  Does someone want to pour effort into a perceived solution that may not be supported by data? 

Suppose there are 4000 deer in a unit, and each year, 50 antlerless deer are taken from that unit.  Say that 40 of those antlerless deer are female with the rest being young antlerless bucks.  Will saving 1% (40/4000) of the population each year is going to make a difference in deer numbers?  Of those 40 female deer you save, how many survive the winter, predators, vehicles?  If you assume that of the 4000 deer, 3000 of them are does (I have no idea if this is right) but in buck heavy harvest areas, I expect there are more bucks than does), you are saving 40 of 3000 female deer.  What is the impact of an additional 1.3% of the doe population on the herd for the next year?  5 years? 

I have no idea of these numbers are anywhere NEAR the truth.  I don't have a solution.  I don't even know if there is a real problem as I've not looked up deer population trends for the past 20 years.  I'm not "for" or "against" a ban on antlerless hunting.  My point is that everyone has a "solution", and those solutions tend to be based on perception and not data.  If you want to make an impact, present an argument to the governing body that has DATA associated with it, and real analysis that shows results.  If you do not, you OR the governing body has NO idea how impactful your solution is. 

Now, I understand that REAL DATA is hard to come by, and it takes work, and most people have no idea of where to get the data, and if they did, it would probably be somewhat difficult to gather and compile, so guess what?  It's too hard! to get the data.  It's much easier to go with perception, which is highly emotional. 

So on and on we go, people throwing out emotional based solutions that are as varied as the personalities on this forum and no solutions get implemented because there is no data supporting how the solution may change the status quo. 

I know this idea is going to be met with hostility.  Nobody want's to hear that their "perception" isn't necessarily valid, or enough "evidence" to base real changes on.  And nobody want's to be faced with the task of collecting the data, if it even exists.  So my observations will not go over well with anyone who has an emotional based "solution". 

Now, just remember, before you go on and tell me "Well, if you have all the answers, what does your data tell you?" 
I don't have the data.  I have not decided to wade into this mess.  I just spend most of my hunting time in other states.  I don't profess to have the solutions or the data or the desire to do any of this.  But if you are so motivated, take some advice and start with the data.



Dave, I have read all of these topics/posts......You are SPOT ON, couldn't agree more.
Live edge Slab woods, Log Furniture, Beds, Dressers, Tables, Chairs, Custom signs, Décor, Cedar fencing w/artwork cutting. Supplies
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063502962432

Offline Slamadoo

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Posts: 266
Re: A Proposal for Washington's Mule Deer
« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2017, 08:45:14 AM »
Honestly, I think the best and most effective way that anyone of us could help is by joining the Mule Deer Foundation. This organization is already a conservation group dedicated to the future of Mule Deer and Mule Deer hunting. If you look at the work that RMEF has done for elk over the past two decades, it isn't a coincidence that our elk numbers across the west are so high. RMEF has way more influence than MDF and many other conservation groups because of the size of their membership. Now much of the work that RMEF does, has positive effects on Mule Deer, but imagine if the MDF had the same financial muscle as RMEF to put towards Mule Deer conservation. Especially when it comes to habitat.Join the MDF and encourage others to do so as well. Collectively, we need to put our money and volunteer hours where our mouth is.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Springer Fishing Opportunity 3/29 & 3/30 by Blacklab
[Today at 12:48:56 PM]


Long Beach Clamming Tides by dilleytech
[Today at 12:39:19 PM]


Let’s see your best Washington buck by abhold87
[Today at 12:03:27 PM]


Bearpaw Season - Spring 2024 by bearpaw
[Today at 11:45:41 AM]


Walked a cougar down by Rainier10
[Today at 11:17:49 AM]


SB 5444 signed by Inslee on 03/26 Takes Effect on 06/06/24 by hughjorgan
[Today at 09:03:26 AM]


Springer 2024 Columbia River by WSU
[Today at 08:31:10 AM]


Average by lhrbull
[Today at 07:31:56 AM]


CVA optima V2 LR tapped hole for front sight by Remdawg
[Today at 07:09:22 AM]


Which 12” boat trailer tires? by timberhunter
[Yesterday at 08:22:18 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal