How should we manage our Mule Deer in WA?

[KFhunter]

First, let me make a couple things clear....I am for predator hunting and management, and the MDF has been very vocal in supporting the same.  Yes, predators have an impact on Mule Deer, but there are bigger issues: let me play devil's advocate...
Look at other states and their studies on the effect of predators on Mule Deer.  Comparison of units with active predator mgmt. plans vs no predator mgmt. showed no appreciable difference in the numbers of Mule Deer decline, proving that there are other factors that are affecting Mule Deer populations.
Also, all Western states are seeing a decrease in Mule Deer; some with no real predator threats to speak of.  So, yes, predator control can and will have some affect on our Mule Deer, but we need to look at the bigger issues that are causing a decrease in our herds, both here and nation-wide.
I agree with your comments as a whole so far, but we need to take all factors into account and find the base reasons our herds are falling in WA and the entire West.  If we could find the base of the problem, we could help not only our herds but those all over the West.

More concerned with WA at the moment rather than the entire west - and in WA the blame for decreased mule deer falls heavily on predators.  Without predator control all we really have left is people control and loss of hunting = special draws. 


But let's not only look at perceived problems, but bring up intelligent, thought out solutions.  That proves to be a better approach with state and federal agencies.  An example is the over-grazing of our public lands.  That over grazing results in a multitude of problems that lead to decreased Mule Deer numbers.  But grazing rights are a VERY touchy and sometimes taboo issue with the agencies because of the $$$.  So, one solution is to show the cattlemen a way to increase yield by 100%, meaning we could reclaim 1/2 of the land currently allocated to grazing.  Is it possible?  YES!  I've spoken with specialists who have proven it.  But it will take proving it to the agencies and cattlemen to see a change.  And this change will take a growing season or two.  Long term solutions are out there; we just need to find them and then find a way to implement the solutions. 
The more ideas we come up with here, the more likely we are to succeed.  Thanks for your help!


Booo - Hissss

Cattlemen are knuckle dragging neatherals that need to be shown the way     ...sure they know all the ways to increase yields.  There is no magic to that,  only the bottom line.  I vehemently oppose further restrictions to public grazing.  Furthermore, I'd lobby for increased public grazing opening more public lands to grazing.  Contrary to popular public opinion responsible grazing improves habitat and quality - and holds more game.    

Lost me on this post.


edit:  I would like to hear you elaborate on increasing yields by "100%"   

[muleracks]

The decline of the Northeastern and Okanogan County mule deer mirrors the increase of the whitetail deer invasion into that part of the State.  Could be a coincidence but I doubt it.

As far as over the counter vs late season permits goes, I like the over counter but the heavily migratory mule deer in Chelan County would miss out on much of the hunt unless the season was extended extened into early November.  Before the late 80s the mule deer (over the counter) hunt ended on or around November 11th.  We don't want that because the habitat is more open now (fires) and over harvest would be assured.

[idahohuntr]

First, let me make a couple things clear....I am for predator hunting and management, and the MDF has been very vocal in supporting the same.  Yes, predators have an impact on Mule Deer, but there are bigger issues: let me play devil's advocate...
Look at other states and their studies on the effect of predators on Mule Deer.  Comparison of units with active predator mgmt. plans vs no predator mgmt. showed no appreciable difference in the numbers of Mule Deer decline, proving that there are other factors that are affecting Mule Deer populations.
Also, all Western states are seeing a decrease in Mule Deer; some with no real predator threats to speak of.  So, yes, predator control can and will have some affect on our Mule Deer, but we need to look at the bigger issues that are causing a decrease in our herds...

Well said MD.  You will find that many vocal forum members like to screech about predators as basically the only thing that can possibly cause declines in ungulates...it is quite laughable.  Especially when you get numbers like cougars alone eating 200,000 deer...given there are about 90,000 mule deer in Washington state as estimated in 2013...you can clearly see the severity of the cougar predation situation    But hey, if we can offset the cougars eating 200,000 deer with increased public land grazing...boy, then we will really see good mule deer numbers!   

[baldopepper]

My 

1) First you must determine what are your actual herds (any one GMU may actually have 2-3 or more separate
 herds in it).
2) Get an actual best estimate on those herds.
3) Determine what is the optimum carrying capacity of each herd.
4) Extrapolate the harvestable (if any) number.
5) Determine how you want to divide up the hunt-keeping in mind a percentage of predator kill and negotiated tribal take.

Obviously this is a very simplified version, but covers the basics.  I believe you have to take care of quantity before you worry about quality (don't have to worry about quality if there's nothing to hunt). 
I think you also have to move the hunt setting dates back.  I'll always hated it when dates and numbers are set in advance of knowing what winter kill and projected fawn survival rates are.  We need to manage for what's best for the deer, not what's best for the hunters. You can't effectively manage when seasons cover huge swaths of area that may encompass 20-30 (or more) herds in it-some doing well and some doing poorly.
I suspect this type of management will require more permit hunting and fewer OTC tags, but if that's what it takes to properly manage the herds-so be it. 

[rsarkks]

I voted for quantity. Maybe I could use some educating, please correct me if I am wrong.

I would think that if the population increase, the quality of hunting would also increase. If there are more deer, more bucks would survive and live to be old age. This would increase the number of big old bucks, though maybe not to the point of a limited entry draw where huge bucks lined every ridge.

My reasoning is based on blacktail hunting as I know it. As a westsider I am a lot more familier with blacktails so my reasoning can easily be flawed when it comes to mule deer. In the blacktail woods where I hunt (public lands/large private timber companies/clear cuts and surrounding forest), I have not had trouble finding deer, though mostly does and small bucks. In the last couple years I have been changing my hunting and have started seeing big bucks. I also know several guys who regularly pull out large 4 point bucks from these same hunting lands. The big bucks are there, it just takes more work to learn where to find them.

For this reason I would think more deer would also mean more trophy bucks for those willing to put the effort into finding them.

[bearpaw]

First, let me make a couple things clear....I am for predator hunting and management, and the MDF has been very vocal in supporting the same.  Yes, predators have an impact on Mule Deer, but there are bigger issues: let me play devil's advocate...
Look at other states and their studies on the effect of predators on Mule Deer.  Comparison of units with active predator mgmt. plans vs no predator mgmt. showed no appreciable difference in the numbers of Mule Deer decline, proving that there are other factors that are affecting Mule Deer populations.
Also, all Western states are seeing a decrease in Mule Deer; some with no real predator threats to speak of.  So, yes, predator control can and will have some affect on our Mule Deer, but we need to look at the bigger issues that are causing a decrease in our herds...

Well said MD.  You will find that many vocal forum members like to screech about predators as basically the only thing that can possibly cause declines in ungulates...it is quite laughable.  Especially when you get numbers like cougars alone eating 200,000 deer...given there are about 90,000 mule deer in Washington state as estimated in 2013...you can clearly see the severity of the cougar predation situation    But hey, if we can offset the cougars eating 200,000 deer with increased public land grazing...boy, then we will really see good mule deer numbers!   

Of course there are other factors but are you saying all the studies done by F&G Depts in western states (including Washington) that have established cougars kill deer and have established rough averages of deer killed by cougars are all faulty, that cougars do not eat deer. Your reply is laughable at best. 

With guys like you on the GMAC it's no wonder we have little to no predator management in WA. Ignoring the predator impacts does not help our herds. A good plan needs to address all issues impacting herds, anything less is simply more of what we have been getting for the last several years.

[bearpaw]

A good Mule Deer Plan should address at least these issues if not others:

1. Predators.....(documented fact that predators eat deer, reduced predator numbers will eat fewer deer)
2. Antlerless Hunting.....(most if not all antlerless hunting should be closed until a herd exceeds objective)
3. Fawn Survival......(determine the key factors in different areas and take actions to increase fawn survival)
4. Buck Hunting......(vary by GMU or zone, depending on herd numbers and hunter expectations)
5. Winter Range.....(issues vary greatly, address by area, development, winter feeding, planting shrubs/grains, predators, etc)
6. Lack of Forest Management/Logging......(National Forest regeneration is needed to enhance habitat)
7. Poaching Issues......(find additional methods to reduce poaching)
8. Auto Impacts......(determine and implement methods to reduce deer collisions)
9. Feral Dog Impacts......(work toward reducing the number of feral dogs running loose chasing deer)
10. Wildfire & Other Natural Disasters......(establish a plan to help herds when needed due to natural disasters)
11. Crop Depredation......(find and implement methods to reduce crop damage other than issuing kill tags)
12. Over Grazing......(when an area suffers from actual over grazing measures should be taken to resolve the problem)

The most productive deer herds I know of thrive on private and even public land where they are interspersed with cattle/sheep and see humans tending to the herds, managing crops, or logging on a daily/regular basis. I'm tired of hearing managers and biologists use cattle, logging, and human activity as a scapegoat to hide the results of their failing management of the forests, predators, and herds.

[baldopepper]

I believe mule deer have always been very low on the management priority list in Wa.. Elk management (and hunting) has always been the shining star here and elk and deer management often are not the same.  Seems to me mule deer have always been kind of a "oh, yeah, guess we better throw out a season on mule deer"  when it comes to game management here.  We put a far higher priority on optimum wolf and cougar numbers (I'm not entering into the argument on predator effect on numbers) than we deer numbers.  Supposedly we know within a dozen or so how many wolves we have (Not entering into that argument either) but we can't tell within thousands how many deer we have.  Realistically, game managers have to decide whether mule deer management is a priority or not and, if so, come up with some real numbers to work with.  I'm not sure Washington really wants to make that kind of commitment.  I would think deer management would be a higher priority as deer hunting has always been a major revenue generator and is by far the most popular big game hunting sport by participation in the country.  Just like your bank account, you can't manage it until you know what the numbers are you're trying to manage against.

[lamrith]

A good Mule Deer Plan should address at least these issues if not others:

1. Predators.....(documented fact that predators eat deer, reduced predator numbers will eat fewer deer)
2. Antlerless Hunting.....(most if not all antlerless hunting should be closed until a herd exceeds objective)
3. Fawn Survival......(determine the key factors in different areas and take actions to increase fawn survival)
4. Buck Hunting......(vary by GMU or zone, depending on herd numbers and hunter expectations)
5. Winter Range.....(issues vary greatly, address by area, development, winter feeding, planting shrubs/grains, predators, etc)
6. Lack of Forest Management/Logging......(National Forest regeneration is needed to enhance habitat)
7. Poaching Issues......(find additional methods to reduce poaching)
8. Auto Impacts......(determine and implement methods to reduce deer collisions)
9. Feral Dog Impacts......(work toward reducing the number of feral dogs running loose chasing deer)
10. Wildfire & Other Natural Disasters......(establish a plan to help herds when needed due to natural disasters)
11. Crop Depredation......(find and implement methods to reduce crop damage other than issuing kill tags)
12. Over Grazing......(when an area suffers from actual over grazing measures should be taken to resolve the problem)

The most productive deer herds I know of thrive on private and even public land where they are interspersed with cattle/sheep and see humans tending to the herds, managing crops, or logging on a daily/regular basis. I'm tired of hearing managers and biologists use cattle, logging, and human activity as a scapegoat to hide the results of their failing management of the forests, predators, and herds.

  I like what you have there, the one item I question a little is #2.

I have heard it mentioned by others but question how much it would really affect things given that many eastern states you get one buck, then multiple does (2,3,4+) and they have no herd population issues?  The only antlerless Mule hunts as it is are Archery or late muzzy in certain GMU's.  I guess my point is Doe harvest is probably not the significant issue that some make it out to be, as it is limited in hunter numbers and geography.

[bearpaw]

Antlerless harvest is a tool to prevent herds from increasing and/or to decrease herd size. If a herd is under objective why would antlerless harvest be needed? The reason there is so much antlerless harvest in eastern states is to try and control the deer populations from growing further.

[bigmacc]

First, let me make a couple things clear....I am for predator hunting and management, and the MDF has been very vocal in supporting the same.  Yes, predators have an impact on Mule Deer, but there are bigger issues: let me play devil's advocate...
Look at other states and their studies on the effect of predators on Mule Deer.  Comparison of units with active predator mgmt. plans vs no predator mgmt. showed no appreciable difference in the numbers of Mule Deer decline, proving that there are other factors that are affecting Mule Deer populations.
Also, all Western states are seeing a decrease in Mule Deer; some with no real predator threats to speak of.  So, yes, predator control can and will have some affect on our Mule Deer, but we need to look at the bigger issues that are causing a decrease in our herds...

Well said MD.  You will find that many vocal forum members like to screech about predators as basically the only thing that can possibly cause declines in ungulates...it is quite laughable.  Especially when you get numbers like cougars alone eating 200,000 deer...given there are about 90,000 mule deer in Washington state as estimated in 2013...you can clearly see the severity of the cougar predation situation    But hey, if we can offset the cougars eating 200,000 deer with increased public land grazing...boy, then we will really see good mule deer numbers!   

MuleDeer,in my humble opinion there is no bigger issue in the state of Washington concerning muledeer numbers than the predator issue,NO IDAHO,im not one of THOSE GUYS,MD have you checked into the book and study i had mentioned(THE OKANOGAN MULE DEER...by Don L.Zeigler)..And Idahohunter should read it also! Predators have been a big problem with mule deer in the past(study was done by the Washington state game dept from 1972 to 1975). Mule deer can and will recover over time from natural disasters such as fire,tough winters etc,and even can live around human encroatchment to a certain extent but have a difficult time thriving IN CLOSE PROXIMITY and REBOUNDING FROM growing predator numbers,especially after issues such as hard winters or major fires have occurred. As bearpaw said,it is a big issue in this state that is hammering our muledeer herds. Growing populations of cougar,bear,coyotes and now throw in the wolf and you have a deadly cocktail that will eventually limit our hunting and continue to take a toll on the herds. With all due respect MuleDeer, i highly recommend this book,and as for you Idaho, I cant quite figure you out,you are a mystery and a different bird for sure! dont really know what your agenda is?(idahohunter that is!)....as always,just my 

[lamrith]

Is there any data on the amount of does actually harvested each year?  Given it is bow and late muzzy only it is not like open free for all on does is what I am trying to say.  What percent of total harvest do does account for?

Those that take a doe do so because there are likely no legal bucks to be had and/or they are in it for the meat.  aka food on the table.

[bobcat]

All the data on buck and doe harvest is available online in the harvest reports.

[KFhunter]

everyone wants to take the big mule deer states like Montana and apply their study's and observations to WA

Just ain't gonna work here folks,  WA is just too different.



The Mule herds in the NE are in tiny scattered pockets,  some giant bruisers to be sure but they're far and few between and unless you know where a small pocket of bucks are good luck!  These small herds can't grow in size with the predators constantly pulling them down.   

Another problem is hunters are whacking the barely legals, antler restrictions IMO are a double edged sword in that it's causing some unscrupulous hunters to shoot multiple deer.  We've all seen the two point laying to rot if you hunt mule's enough.

I equate this to the stupid salmon rules I've fished under where you have to release all intact salmon....well heck the seals and dogfish and dolphins are following the boats it's just stupid.    What's the survival rates of released salmon?  20%?  If that!

You can release 20 intact salmon to retain a limit of hatchery       Kind of like antler restrictions, it's causing some deaths of younger bucks the hunters walk up and turn around "oh I can't find it, musta missed"..  Is it creating trophy hunting?   I dunno.   Seems to me if some hunters retained the dinkers they shot then the trophy's would still be running around.   

If enough hunters put a forked horn in their scope, eventually one of them is going to pull the trigger.


quantity > quality   IMO 


don't shoot the does,  do shoot the predators and the rest will pan out.
especially if you feed them in the winter and keep them protected from predators

[MuleDeer]

Glad to see I stirred the hornet's nest...
KF, the grazing issue I'm talking about has nothing to do with responsible grazing practices.  It's the un-responsible grazing that cause a huge loss of habitat.  That's not public opinion, it is backed up by scientific studies on the habitat.  The increase in yield I spoke of?  Growing plants and forage that produces twice the yield on the same amount of land.  That means effective grazing (as it may stand now under a current contract) could be done on 1/2 the land than traditionally needed.  I have nothing against cattlemen at all; it's a great way of life that's been around as long as we've lived in this country.
As for predators, I never said they weren't an issue, and said prior that the MDF FULLY  supports the mgmt. of predators.  But saying that all we need to do is not kill does, and kill more predators to solve the problem isn't the answer.  Part of the answer? Yes.  But we need to look at EVERY issue that is affecting Mule Deer, not get tunnel-vision and miss something else that is important to their success.  With the writing of this MDI, we can at least make those issues visible, leaving the opportunity to try and correct them, if need be.
Personally, I agree with almost every comment on here so far.  But I for one want to make sure that we don't miss anything while we have this chance, so keep your comments coming, even if you don't agree with me and I don't agree with you.  That's what will make this a very well-rounded discussion!