FB post about Idaho Hunting

[time2hunt]

There has been much talk this year about our current mule deer situation in Idaho. It seems to be everywhere. This has been exacerbated by the recent bad winter, but underlying issues already existed. A trend by resident hunters is to blame our woes on out-of-staters. That's an easy scapegoat.
The truth is that nonresident tag numbers have always been capped. Nonresident hunters are not "moving the needle" one way or another in general because their numbers are limited. In fact, nonresident numbers have dropped. Available nonresident tags are being purchased by Idaho residents to suck up the difference.
Idaho's issues with creating mature bucks revolve much more around other things. For example:
1. Massive illegal ATV usage and lack of enforcement. It seems there is hardly a nook or cranny left in our great state where an ATV trail isn't pioneered into an area that before was more difficult to reach, or that the trail is completely illegal in nature. Fines are somewhat insignificant, and total lack of enforcement has emboldened the masses to do as they may. You simply CAN NOT create an 8-year-old buck if he has zero chance to live or find an area where he can escape significant hunting pressure. Until we have serious changes in terms of fines, enforcement, and punishment, almost all other points are moot.
2. Lack of overall deer population through excessive doe harvest. Until we have a bountiful deer population, doe harvest by controlled hunt, youth from 10-17, and OTC archery aren't leading to a bountiful population. Hunters need to demand a better base population of deer.
3. General unwillingness of hunters to impose measures on themselves that would make them slightly less successful overall. Everyone wants to hunt every year but few are willing to sacrifice things in order to maintain it. Hunters need to consider being more open to more short-range weapons seasons as an alternative to simply going to a draw and forcing hunters to sit out. Long range rifles are also proving more and more lethal, a trend that doesn't bode well in the long run for continued OTC hunting.
4. The recent bad winter (obviously) has taken a huge toll and set the state back significantly.
5. Increase in the number of controlled hunt units the last decade, which has had serious effects on adjacent units by massively overloading hunters in nearby OTC areas. For example, Units 77 and 75 are bearing the brunt of a controlled hunt in 78. 56 is suffering due to 57 and 55. 32A is suffering because of 22. 70 is affecting 71 and 73A. Would Idaho be wiser to go to more controlled hunts across the board or just the opposite - back to significantly fewer so that OTC hunter distribution is improved? Is catering to the very few who draw a big buck tag worth the long-term effects that come with massive hunter displacement and its effects on adjoining units?
These are some points to ponder, but removing hunters from the equation (removing our base support and funding) does no service to hunting in the long-term. Hunters need to consider being more amenable to more serious off-road restrictions, weapons restrictions, and imposing other things that reduce success rates without the more serious alternative of removing hunters from the hunt itself.
Keep discussion civil and positive please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[time2hunt]

I did not write this it’s from a Idaho resident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kentrek]

I cant agree more...

[SemperFidelis97]

This year was pretty bad everywhere we went in Idaho. I am very curious if Idaho will do anything this next season to help out the mule deer population.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[bearpaw]

The mule deer herds were rebounding nicely until last winter. It's the last winter that hurt the herds, it seemed like about a 50% loss in my outfitting area and some other areas were hit even worse. I firmly believe that there should have been more winter feeding to mitigate the fact that most winter ranges have been taken over by subdivisions. I'm actually more worried about another hard winter than the current situation. Another hard winter and another 50% loss will really set us back!

To their credit IDFG did cut back some of the antlerless opportunity. But I'll agree that most all antlerless opportunity should be cut back after a hard winter, every doe is needed to reproduce and rebuild the herds. Later, antlerless opportunity should be returned as soon as herds recover. 

There is a motorized rule in most of my hunting areas and that has helped a lot. The issue is that too many people ignore the rule and it seems like 20% of the population is somehow disabled and is allowed an exception, so there are some quads everywhere anyway.

[baldopepper]

There has been much talk this year about our current mule deer situation in Idaho. It seems to be everywhere. This has been exacerbated by the recent bad winter, but underlying issues already existed. A trend by resident hunters is to blame our woes on out-of-staters. That's an easy scapegoat.
The truth is that nonresident tag numbers have always been capped. Nonresident hunters are not "moving the needle" one way or another in general because their numbers are limited. In fact, nonresident numbers have dropped. Available nonresident tags are being purchased by Idaho residents to suck up the difference.
Idaho's issues with creating mature bucks revolve much more around other things. For example:
1. Massive illegal ATV usage and lack of enforcement. It seems there is hardly a nook or cranny left in our great state where an ATV trail isn't pioneered into an area that before was more difficult to reach, or that the trail is completely illegal in nature. Fines are somewhat insignificant, and total lack of enforcement has emboldened the masses to do as they may. You simply CAN NOT create an 8-year-old buck if he has zero chance to live or find an area where he can escape significant hunting pressure. Until we have serious changes in terms of fines, enforcement, and punishment, almost all other points are moot.
2. Lack of overall deer population through excessive doe harvest. Until we have a bountiful deer population, doe harvest by controlled hunt, youth from 10-17, and OTC archery aren't leading to a bountiful population. Hunters need to demand a better base population of deer.
3. General unwillingness of hunters to impose measures on themselves that would make them slightly less successful overall. Everyone wants to hunt every year but few are willing to sacrifice things in order to maintain it. Hunters need to consider being more open to more short-range weapons seasons as an alternative to simply going to a draw and forcing hunters to sit out. Long range rifles are also proving more and more lethal, a trend that doesn't bode well in the long run for continued OTC hunting.
4. The recent bad winter (obviously) has taken a huge toll and set the state back significantly.
5. Increase in the number of controlled hunt units the last decade, which has had serious effects on adjacent units by massively overloading hunters in nearby OTC areas. For example, Units 77 and 75 are bearing the brunt of a controlled hunt in 78. 56 is suffering due to 57 and 55. 32A is suffering because of 22. 70 is affecting 71 and 73A. Would Idaho be wiser to go to more controlled hunts across the board or just the opposite - back to significantly fewer so that OTC hunter distribution is improved? Is catering to the very few who draw a big buck tag worth the long-term effects that come with massive hunter displacement and its effects on adjoining units?
These are some points to ponder, but removing hunters from the equation (removing our base support and funding) does no service to hunting in the long-term. Hunters need to consider being more amenable to more serious off-road restrictions, weapons restrictions, and imposing other things that reduce success rates without the more serious alternative of removing hunters from the hunt itself.
Keep discussion civil and positive please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much nails it.  Lot of points that could be discussed in greater detail, but many hunters don't want to hear or contemplate them anyway.

[nwhunter]

Being able to buy a second deer tag doesn't help either in my opinion. Give two deer tags to the guys who are the ten percent of hunters who are usually successful on killing good bucks and that has to hurt. I don't think there is another western state that allows that.. Good for making revenue for the state but maybe not good for the deer herds.

[bearpaw]

Being able to buy a second deer tag doesn't help either in my opinion. Give two deer tags to the guys who are the ten percent of hunters who are usually successful on killing good bucks and that has to hurt. I don't think there is another western state that allows that.. Good for making revenue for the state but maybe not good for the deer herds.

I have a few hunters who buy two tags, I don't see a problem, its the non-resident quota that those second tags come from, that quota has been the same for 25ish years and is around 15,000 or 15,500. Most of my hunters who buy two tags get meat with the first tag and then trophy hunt, some get a second deer but some don't. For several years the quota never sold out, it's just the last couple years it's selling out and selling out earlier as the economy strengthens and hunters realize wolves are being managed so herds previously impacted by wolves have also been rebounding and strong in more zones. The last couple years have been banner years in most of Idaho, it was the last winter that made hunting this year tougher, I don't think you can say it was bad management by IDFG. I do fully agree that herds will rebound faster if doe hunting is limited, but either way the coming winters will decide how soon herds recover from last winter's losses. The winters, mild or harsh make the biggest impact on herds in my opinion.

[2MANY]

Lock the gates at the asphalt and make people work for it.
Most won't.
The animals will flurish and hunters will hunt.
Too much pressure on too few acres when to critters are preparing for winter.
Then they head to winter grounds that are now subdivisions.

Lock the gates and use hunting as a wildlife management tool instead of a revenue stream.

[trophyhunt]

Being able to buy a second deer tag doesn't help either in my opinion. Give two deer tags to the guys who are the ten percent of hunters who are usually successful on killing good bucks and that has to hurt. I don't think there is another western state that allows that.. Good for making revenue for the state but maybe not good for the deer herds.

I agree, they are allowing too many deer to be killed.  There should be deer all over in late deer season, last year was pretty bad. 

[trophyhunt]

I don’t think atv use has a big impact, it allows my dad who can’t walk very far a chance at seeing more ground. Poaching in Idaho along w too many tags allowed are the biggest issues in my opinion.

[bearpaw]

The second tags are out of the non-resident quota which has been set at the same number for about 25 years, no growth. Any growth in hunters would be an increase in resident hunters. But, I'm not sure there are any more hunters than 20, 30, or 50 years ago, you would need to look at historic hunter numbers. 

[Stickerbush]

Hunted Idaho for the first time this year. Got our butts kicked and hardly saw any mulies, nothing to compare it too but the scenery and vast landscape blew me away so I will definitely be returning

[j_h_nimrod]

I don’t think atv use has a big impact, it allows my dad who can’t walk very far a chance at seeing more ground. Poaching in Idaho along w too many tags allowed are the biggest issues in my opinion.

I disagree.  It is great to have access for less than fit hunters, but that is only a small majority of "hunters" out there. This recent elk season down there was a road hunters idiocracy. If me and my partner had figured out the area sooner we could have went 100% on nice bulls within a good hike, while the majority of guys raced up and down the roads at all hours and if it were not for the great terrain within 1/4 mile of the road they should have all went home eating their tags. As it was there were quite a few bulls that came out whole.

We covered a lot of great country and only saw one buck I felt would have been a shooter and it was only a very good 3-point. This was a "good" mulie unit, but I would not hunt it with the animals I saw.

I will likely head back to the area for elk, but we will hunt the area differently to get away from the guys on the roads and should have good success.

It seems too many people equate good hunting areas to areas where you can drive a quad or SxS and shoot animals you can reach without ever hiking.