Post by: Tundra on October 22, 2012, 11:53:40 AM
Dad commented that deer numbers really seemed down this year. Even on years when the big bucks weren't around he usually sees quite a few does and some young bucks. This year they only saw 6 does and covered more territory than is typical. (they spent a week out there hunting)
He has seen increased sign of "paw prints" in the area the last few years, but even those seemed less this year. Seeing a cougar in the wild is not that common, but within our party we have seen at least 1 a year for the last 5-6 years. Why is that significant? Family has been hunting that area since the 50s and had never seen a cougar (only minimal sign) until mid 2000s. Lot of cattle run around the hills we hunt in. Wonder if any ranchers are having issues with predators?
Are you guys seeing an impact in your hunting areas by an increase in predators? Dad seems to think that last 4-5 years had a pretty good increase in bears and cougars and now the entire area feels "dead." The last few winters probably haven't helped any, but was curious if other hunters had similar thoughts or evidence. ???
Perhaps wolves or coyotes are part of the problem?
Post by: boneaddict on October 22, 2012, 12:15:24 PM
Post by: NRA4LIFE on October 22, 2012, 12:23:33 PM
Post by: Tundra on October 22, 2012, 12:26:02 PM
Does WA F&G have a plan to help check the cougars and wolves? Is the Mule Deer Foundation championing this effort? I feel pretty out of touch with that area being up here in AK, but it will always hold a spot in my heart due to my history with it. Sure hate to see it just die out... Mule Deer are my favorite critters to chase...
Post by: boneaddict on October 22, 2012, 12:28:24 PM
Post by: WaltAlpine on October 22, 2012, 12:39:44 PM
Post by: Buckmark on October 22, 2012, 12:53:07 PM
Waltpine did ya look at the field of alfalfa and corn on the corner of talkire lk rd and hwy 20?
Post by: Kowsrule30 on October 22, 2012, 01:07:55 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 22, 2012, 01:13:52 PM
Post by: tmtimestwo on October 22, 2012, 01:19:13 PM
Post by: ldjbuff on October 22, 2012, 01:33:39 PM
Post by: Bwana Bob on October 22, 2012, 01:46:51 PM
I saw more grouse than deer. And I thought that I had lost my deer hunting MOJO.
What a bummer of a season.
Post by: bobcat on October 22, 2012, 01:50:33 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 22, 2012, 01:52:44 PM
Post by: mazama on October 22, 2012, 02:12:00 PM
Post by: WaltAlpine on October 22, 2012, 03:23:41 PM
Besides the predator problems (4 legged and 2 legged) the rifle hunt is to early IMO for any great success, atleast in my area. The weather this week is highs in the 40's, lows in the 20's and possible snow. Also "back in the day" the hunt went for 3-4 weeks......
Waltpine did ya look at the field of alfalfa and corn on the corner of talkire lk rd and hwy 20?
Yes I did see those fields. There was a camp at the edge, and a guy posted up on the road. I assume they got their tags filled as they were gone after two days, but I never did see anything shootable. As far as I can tell they didn't move up the creek during the day or at night.
There's a lot of sad stories around the office today.
Post by: TimberCutter on October 22, 2012, 04:06:02 PM
Post by: WaltAlpine on October 22, 2012, 04:08:30 PM
I lived at Bonaparte lake resort from 1974 till my mom sold it in the 80's never have i seen so few deer. It is sad i remember when you could see 50 to a 100 a day . I think fish and game should have a few more doe tags and just finish off whats left. It would save us all allot of money!!! Very poor hunt.
Funny, (not really), I was going to leave where I was to go check it out up there. Glad I didn't.
Post by: Tundra on October 22, 2012, 04:10:40 PM
Post by: WaltAlpine on October 22, 2012, 04:13:46 PM
Thanks guys. Appreciate the info. So is it bad year because Mule Deer numbers are down in general? Or just down due to the timing / weather?
We'll probably find out when the late tag guys are done with their hunts???
Post by: MtnMuley on October 22, 2012, 04:20:18 PM
Post by: Buckmark on October 22, 2012, 04:20:26 PM
Thanks guys. Appreciate the info. So is it bad year because Mule Deer numbers are down in general? Or just down due to the timing / weather?They have been declining every year for awhile, success rates drop every year up there.
Post by: Buckmark on October 22, 2012, 04:21:55 PM
I lived at Bonaparte lake resort from 1974 till my mom sold it in the 80's never have i seen so few deer. It is sad i remember when you could see 50 to a 100 a day . I think fish and game should have a few more doe tags and just finish off whats left. It would save us all allot of money!!! Very poor hunt.There was a biggin hanging in your camp opening weekend, any pics?
Post by: TimberCutter on October 22, 2012, 04:26:41 PM
Post by: Birdguy on October 22, 2012, 04:46:02 PM
I wonder between the coyotes and locals trying to stay alive how many deer disappear each year? I know things are tough over there (they always have been) but I think poaching is accepted on most levels at this point. I am thankful I do not need the meat to survive but I had really hoped to get my son a shot at one. I do not even think he needed to pull the trigger but to see a legal buck would have been great. I guess we will see what next year brings in the form of permits for him, maybe he will get his youth doe tag and a second deer tag 8).
Post by: sako85 on October 22, 2012, 04:49:26 PM
on Whiteys and Mules. Even the Grouse #s seemed way down from last yr.
We get up there about once a month and the Yotes and Bear sure seem
to do a number on the them in our area. The Nov. guys should still do well
with the rut.
Post by: Scottystyle on October 22, 2012, 09:45:02 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 22, 2012, 09:47:54 PM
Post by: boneaddict on October 22, 2012, 10:10:20 PM
Post by: dr.derek on October 22, 2012, 10:10:37 PM
Post by: Scottystyle on October 22, 2012, 10:15:14 PM
Post by: MtnMuley on October 22, 2012, 11:42:25 PM
Post by: ldjbuff on October 23, 2012, 05:59:37 AM
Post by: rideorange on October 23, 2012, 06:44:37 AM
Post by: canyelk48 on October 23, 2012, 08:37:37 AM
Post by: ldjbuff on October 23, 2012, 09:31:47 AM
But we still saw bucks in our honey holes, Bonaparte area is hunted heavy and we still saw 2-3 decent bucks a day.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 23, 2012, 11:17:32 AM
Open sage country, so no grows. The weather was jacked upfor sure, but I would imagine seeing the bedded in draws. Or. In the. Rocks or something. Im wondering if poaching is an issue :dunno:
Open sage = muleys
Post by: superdown on October 23, 2012, 11:58:34 AM
Post by: huntnphool on October 23, 2012, 02:31:18 PM
Every once in awhile you'll get someone that pipes in that they seen a ton, but I often wonder about those sightings:hello: Well I guess you are talking about me. :chuckle: FWIW, I was in the Methow Pumpkin Patch the entire season, and like most of you guys wasn't seeing much after the initial onslaught on Saturday/Sunday. I counted 45 deer Saturday and 39 Sunday, with most of them heading right to the private land in the bottom of the valley, where the majority stayed the entire week.
Every day we managed to see a good number of deer but the local, non migratory bucks were quickly wiped out. Each day we heard less and less shots, unless it was some idiot that emptied his clip on a buck that he couldn't hit.
If you go back and read threads from last year and the year before you will hear guys saying the deer just were not there and the numbers are down blah blah blah..........wolves, cougars, bear, yotes etc etc etc. I'm quite sure they do make a impact on the herds but sooner or later you guys are going to wake up and realize that the single biggest factor in lack of deer sighting in the general season is the time of year WDFW is putting us out there.
After the weather started to turn on Tuesday, we actually got some snow high in the hills, the deer started showing up more and more each day. We saw 50+ deer this last Saturday and more on Sunday.
Same thing last year and the year before, yet when I went back 2 weeks later for late hunts there were deer in every draw, on every hill and plenty of bucks. Don't believe me? thats okay, just ask Bucklucky and his wife, they had never been there before and couldn't believe how many deer there were and how people on these sites could be saying there are no deer.
This is what happens when WDFW starts the season on the second weekend of October and only lets the season go through the following weekend, some of us have been explaining this every year. It doesn't matter how long the season is if it ends on the 21st of Oct, you are likely only going to see local, non migratory deer and when they are wiped out the first few days its going to seem like the numbers are way down. They could add another week to the hunt but if its added on to the front end of Oct. its really not going to change the numbers much, other than it would greatly help spread out the hunting pressure. The same local deer aree the ones that are going to be harvested and not much more.
When you take all those hunters and force them all to take off the same week from work and hunt the same time, the escapement for those legal bucks that are out there is extremely low. Once you take them out thats pretty much it until the weather and rut bring the migratory deer down out of the high areas. Is it a surprise that the last decent year we had was 04, the last year that the season ran to the 28th? If you think this year was bad just wait until next year when the season starts and ends a day earlier, and the year after that when it starts and ends two days earlier. :chuckle:
After that we were told that the next three year set was going to see the eastside modern season was going to be cut back to allow the herds to rebound. Well this year we have the area bio's coming out and saying the herd is in great shape. My question is if the herd is in great shape then why have we not been given those days back?
I'm betting 95% of you that hunt over there don't go back a week or two later to see what the difference actually is, to see for yourself. I'm not sure how you can hunt over there for a few days and come up with the determination that their numbers a way down.
Yes there are those of us that come on here and pipe up that we saw a ton. Some will believe me, some won't, but those that I help out each year don't complain. ;)
Post by: Guy on October 23, 2012, 03:18:09 PM
Guy
Post by: wamuledeer on October 23, 2012, 03:20:36 PM
Post by: huntnphool on October 23, 2012, 03:43:13 PM
I have a whitetail tag in Winthrop next month and two of my buddies I will be camping with have Pearrygin late mule deer tags. It is going to be a fun week.That is going to be a great hunt, I will be over there helping another member again this year, good luck to you. :tup:
Post by: huntnphool on October 23, 2012, 03:55:50 PM
I gave the details, GPS location and description of the vehicle to WDFW. I didn't get the license number because I didn't think anything was wrong at the time since I didn't see the buck before he shot.
I found a dead 4 point as well that someone had lost, a buddy on here found a lost 4 point as well.
Post by: savage.270 on October 23, 2012, 05:45:59 PM
Post by: boneaddict on October 23, 2012, 07:53:39 PM
We have this arguement every year and of course I still think it would be devastating to have the season later. We have already witnessed what it did the last time they tried that stunt. Sure, you guys can knock em dead for a year. Good luck the year after. :)
I would love to be wrong. I hope when I go out next week all of the deer miraculously show up and I can see hundreds in the fields and lowlands to photograph. I am sure I will find some as I usually do. It sure isn;t like it used to be. Pretty sick looking curve lately even compared to" the graph" I have been "charting" through countless bad winters, late hunts, early snows, the banning of hounds etc.
Post by: ghosthunter on October 23, 2012, 08:19:52 PM
The last five years have been in the dumpster. We took two does. saw one spike. Arrived Thursday before opener and stayed till this past Monday.
Pittiful
There were 25 camps in my general area. I never saw a buck hanging. i spent 30 minutes a day on the car seat and the rest of the time hiking into every place I knew.
NOTHING
Post by: huntnphool on October 23, 2012, 08:50:15 PM
We have this arguement every year and of course I still think it would be devastating to have the season later. We have already witnessed what it did the last time they tried that stunt. Sure, you guys can knock em dead for a year. Good luck the year after. :)I choose to think of it as a discussion between enthusiasts. ;)
The problem Bone is the guys complaining can't have it both ways. Either they except the fact that ending the season on the 21st...ish will have you fighting over the non migratory local deer until they are gone and seeing little after that, or you extend the season through the next week and have a few of the migrators harvested.
Like I said, the last good year of hunting in the Methow Valley was 04, everyone will agree. What has happened since then to have the hunting go to sh#@? Bears, cougars, yotes and wolves, loss of habitat? Or is it more likely that its because they have removed the most productive dates from the season? I know you understand this is the case, but it sounds like a lot of these guys don't.
Post by: SkookumHntr on October 23, 2012, 08:53:12 PM
Post by: Alchase on October 24, 2012, 08:08:49 AM
Opening morning I heard 2 shots. One I know got a decent 3x4.
We use to see hundreds of bucks and does every night in the meadow above Pearygin.
Of course that was when the season ran through Halloween.
I totally agree with the season starting as early as it is only the local bucks get hunted.
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 10:08:21 AM
Post by: WAcoueshunter on October 24, 2012, 10:41:28 AM
The problem Bone is the guys complaining can't have it both ways. Either they except the fact that ending the season on the 21st...ish will have you fighting over the non migratory local deer until they are gone and seeing little after that, or you extend the season through the next week and have a few of the migrators harvested.
Like I said, the last good year of hunting in the Methow Valley was 04, everyone will agree. What has happened since then to have the hunting go to sh#@? Bears, cougars, yotes and wolves, loss of habitat? Or is it more likely that its because they have removed the most productive dates from the season? I know you understand this is the case, but it sounds like a lot of these guys don't.
I agree with you 100% on the cause of the low numbers...there just aren't any migratory deer in the traditional areas this early in the season. You constantly here about people 'hunting the same area for fifty years' like that should make them an expert and get them a buck every year. But the reality is that most of their experience regarding locations and patterns was learned under very different circumstances. With the earlier seasons, people need to adjust where they are hunting, and most aren't doing that yet. :twocents:
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 10:52:53 AM
Bingo!!! ;)The problem Bone is the guys complaining can't have it both ways. Either they except the fact that ending the season on the 21st...ish will have you fighting over the non migratory local deer until they are gone and seeing little after that, or you extend the season through the next week and have a few of the migrators harvested.
Like I said, the last good year of hunting in the Methow Valley was 04, everyone will agree. What has happened since then to have the hunting go to sh#@? Bears, cougars, yotes and wolves, loss of habitat? Or is it more likely that its because they have removed the most productive dates from the season? I know you understand this is the case, but it sounds like a lot of these guys don't.
I agree with you 100% on the cause of the low numbers...there just aren't any migratory deer in the traditional areas this early in the season. You constantly here about people 'hunting the same area for fifty years' like that should make them an expert and get them a buck every year. But the reality is that most of their experience regarding locations and patterns was learned under very different circumstances. With the earlier seasons, people need to adjust where they are hunting, and most aren't doing that yet. :twocents:
Post by: Colville on October 24, 2012, 11:08:54 AM
If you want to hunt every year, you have to hunt more marginal dates so that the net impact is the same. There just aren't perfect solutions. I'd personally rather hunt every year and know that I have to get way the hell back up where the migrators are at that time than hunt every 3rd year.
The state knows they'll lose a ton of their hunting license revenue if that happens as well so I don't expect them to go that route.
Post by: MtnMuley on October 24, 2012, 12:58:56 PM
:)Bingo!!! ;)The problem Bone is the guys complaining can't have it both ways. Either they except the fact that ending the season on the 21st...ish will have you fighting over the non migratory local deer until they are gone and seeing little after that, or you extend the season through the next week and have a few of the migrators harvested.
Like I said, the last good year of hunting in the Methow Valley was 04, everyone will agree. What has happened since then to have the hunting go to sh#@? Bears, cougars, yotes and wolves, loss of habitat? Or is it more likely that its because they have removed the most productive dates from the season? I know you understand this is the case, but it sounds like a lot of these guys don't.
I agree with you 100% on the cause of the low numbers...there just aren't any migratory deer in the traditional areas this early in the season. You constantly here about people 'hunting the same area for fifty years' like that should make them an expert and get them a buck every year. But the reality is that most of their experience regarding locations and patterns was learned under very different circumstances. With the earlier seasons, people need to adjust where they are hunting, and most aren't doing that yet. :twocents:
Post by: M_ray on October 24, 2012, 06:56:08 PM
:)Bingo!!! ;)The problem Bone is the guys complaining can't have it both ways. Either they except the fact that ending the season on the 21st...ish will have you fighting over the non migratory local deer until they are gone and seeing little after that, or you extend the season through the next week and have a few of the migrators harvested.
Like I said, the last good year of hunting in the Methow Valley was 04, everyone will agree. What has happened since then to have the hunting go to sh#@? Bears, cougars, yotes and wolves, loss of habitat? Or is it more likely that its because they have removed the most productive dates from the season? I know you understand this is the case, but it sounds like a lot of these guys don't.
I agree with you 100% on the cause of the low numbers...there just aren't any migratory deer in the traditional areas this early in the season. You constantly here about people 'hunting the same area for fifty years' like that should make them an expert and get them a buck every year. But the reality is that most of their experience regarding locations and patterns was learned under very different circumstances. With the earlier seasons, people need to adjust where they are hunting, and most aren't doing that yet. :twocents:
Ding, Ding, Ding ... we have a winner! :hello:
Post by: M_ray on October 24, 2012, 07:15:26 PM
Quote
There's only so many ways to slice the onion of hunt opportunity days to population dynamics. If we want to hunt later, mule deer will have to go draw only.
This is what the WDFW wants you to believe :rolleyes: I for one am not buying what they are selling ... again if you don't believe me then wait two, three weeks and take another drive to the Okanogan and see for yourself. It will make you mad when you see what Fitkin says is true and that the herds are in fine shape.
Look every year I say it and will say it again ... a season that runs until the end of Oct wouldn't hurt a thing. I know its hard for some of you to believe cause the dept has you drinking their Koolaide but twenty plus years ago the season was longer than it is and ran into Nov AND there were more hunters. That type of pressure on the early part of the migration did not hurt a thing and did not decimate the herds as some of you have suggested it will. The hunting pressure was spread out cause not everyone was forced to take the same week off, there were those that didn't feel the need to spank the first thing that came by and young local deer were left to walk which doesn't happen anymore.
The Dept could do this and with the few late permits given there would still be plenty for breeding and yes even back then with (if my memory serves me correct) 125,000 more hunters there were still deer that made it through or we would have any today.
Days were taken away and season pushed into mid Oct because there were a few winters with bad winter kill the herds needed the rehab. We did our part by complying now Fitkin do yours and give back what was taken away! :bs:
Post by: nw_bowhunter on October 24, 2012, 07:25:47 PM
I agree about seeing more bear scat than normal. From my perspective I find myself more concerned with the "archery hunters" up there who are continuing the decline of mule deer due to wounding perfectly healthy animals. Way to much of this going on! Take some time to practice and make better shots. I tried to put down a doe which had a broken leg from poor shot by another hunter but just couldn't get a good shot. Not to mention the continued abuse of road hunting, etc. Something needs to change over there or we are going to be in some serious trouble. I'm sure other situations are affecting the decline as well.
Post by: nw_bowhunter on October 24, 2012, 07:35:23 PM
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 08:13:19 PM
They will give them back alright but don't be surprised if they do it in the form of another "permit" hunt. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see them try to generate more revenue by coming up with a "Early Quality" category that runs from the end of the general eastside hunt through the end of Oct.Days were taken away and season pushed into mid Oct because there were a few winters with bad winter kill the herds needed the rehab. We did our part by complying now Fitkin do yours and give back what was taken away! :bs:Quote
Post by: Ridgerunner on October 24, 2012, 08:40:13 PM
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 08:44:38 PM
I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.See, they take it away long enough and people will be willing to pay for it. Soon you will see them go to a three season permit system. :bash:
Post by: M_ray on October 24, 2012, 09:22:54 PM
I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on October 24, 2012, 09:27:45 PM
I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 09:52:43 PM
Did they take away the Alta hunt this year?I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
Post by: bobcat on October 24, 2012, 09:55:22 PM
Did they take away the Alta hunt this year?I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
No, it was probably about 20 years ago.
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 10:01:32 PM
Oh I got ya, they took it away and made it a permit hunt?Did they take away the Alta hunt this year?I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
No, it was probably about 20 years ago.
Post by: bobcat on October 24, 2012, 10:04:02 PM
Oh I got ya, they took it away and made it a permit hunt?Did they take away the Alta hunt this year?I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
No, it was probably about 20 years ago.
Right.
Post by: huntnphool on October 24, 2012, 10:05:18 PM
Actually no........it aint right!Oh I got ya, they took it away and made it a permit hunt?Did they take away the Alta hunt this year?I personally would like to see a buck category hunt in Chelan and okanogan counties that went from the end of the season and ran ten days. Give out 75 to 100 tags per unit.
I would too! ... but not as a lottery or if I have to pay for something that was part of my usual General season tag originally! :nono: I want what once was :dunno:
OK, then I want the late muzzleloader season back that we used to have in the Alta and Chiwawa units. :tup:
No, it was probably about 20 years ago.
Right.
Post by: boneaddict on October 25, 2012, 07:17:35 AM
Post by: MtnMuley on October 25, 2012, 08:17:51 AM
Post by: Ridgerunner on October 25, 2012, 10:10:11 AM
Post by: bearpaw on October 25, 2012, 10:25:52 AM
The reality is they aren't going to give us those days back even though they essentially promised that back in the day, that is why I'd take a limited permit hunt, it's better than nothing which is what we have now.
It would be poor management to give us the season lenghts that we used to have without improving the herds. They have to give us less or the resource will suffer. The only way to more opprtunity is through better predator control and providing winter range or winter feeding in the areas with little winter range due to development of one type or another. :twocents:
If we control predators better and provide food one way or another in winter to make up for development, then we will have more animals on the landscape.
Post by: andrebeergog on October 25, 2012, 01:11:50 PM
Post by: muleyguy on October 25, 2012, 04:03:20 PM
There are nuggets of truth in a lot of the statements made, but, the whole spectrum needs to be looked at.
IMHO here are my thoughts:
The deer numbers are not as healthy as they have historically been, period. Looking at deer numbers in November, during the rut, after weather has initiated the migration is not an accurate way to judge what is going on. We have a constantly shrinking winter range area and much higher predator numbers, this will tend to congregate the deer into the better winter range areas. This can make it seem like certain areas are "full of deer" during these certain times. Predator numbers are most certainly higher then they have historically been, and this too changes deer and elk behaviour. Certain areas of Montana were wolves are prevalent have seen a complete change in elk migration patterns; for example: in areas of western montana, the elk now tend to migrate from the high country down to the Valley floors much sooner then they ever have; at the first hint of snow in Mid october the herds in high predator areas are migrating enmasse to farmland on the valley floor because the elk are safer in these areas; there can literally be thousands of elk all herded up in these areas and it "looks" like there is massive numbers of elk, when it reality, the herd is no stronger then it used to be, and probably weaker in numbers, it is just that predators have changed the elk behaviour and congregated them.
My point with this is that it can be a dangerous thing to judge the health of our mule deer based on what we see in mid november; there are a whole host of reasons why the numbers could appear to be good, but in reality are not. Anecdotal evidence is pretty overwhelming that herd numbers are at low levels relative to historical numbers.
I do agree completely with lengthing the season out though, just in a different way then most here would like..........the points about shortening the season and it congregating the hunters and forcing poor escapement are spot on!! The problem is, and I hate to continually bring this up, is that with APR's that is the legacy of them..........they force earlier October seasons because a 3 pt min rule focuses the harvest on the mature animals; then, once you force 75,000 hunters into a 9 day season, the buck escapement becomes non-existent. The ONLY mature mule deer bucks left are the migrators because they are not in the area during the general season. If they were, they too would get hammered because they are the target harvest group with a 3 pt min rule!
We are in a severe management rut in this state.......we are trying to rely on APR's to do something they are not capable of doing, and that is "recover the herds"; but instead, what they do is put is in this downward spiral: Earlier seasons, shorter seasons, more people, jammed into fewer days, poorer buck escapement, which makes for shorter seasons, earlier seasons, and on and on......I mean its not working! How many years of this failed management scheme do we have to go through??? so, pretty soon we are going to have 75,000 hunters jammed into a 6 day season all shooting 5 pt or better mule deer bucks?? That is where we are headed.......
Here are some suggestions to help things:
1. Protect the doe population; period; no antlerless opportunities at all until population objectives are reached
2. Continue to hammer away at the dept about the need for increased predator seasons, control, etc
3. Work on winter range habitat, winter range protection, etc long term project, but, winter range is the key
4. Get rid of the APR's
5. Lengthen the season back out to include the first week of Nov. to spread the hunter pressure out;
6. Get rid of the late buck permit tags
7. Sorry, but there is no free lunch in life........you will have to reduce the number of hunters in the field...........reduce the number of hunters by 1/3 rd through a rotating draw system; you basically would get to hunt 2 out of every 3 yrs. And.....you would have to raise the tag fees by 1/3 to keep the dept properly funded.
The primary problem from a management perspective in this state is that it is basically impossible to have your cake and eat it too.........you can't provide everybody the ability to hunt unrestricted and for long seasons without the resource suffering.
I know some of you want to believe this, but, there is no grand conspiracy going on within the WDFW where the number of deer are actually wonderful, but, they are forcing us into this early, short season for some reason. The biologists know very well that if they lengthen the season back out with no tag restrictions, with an APR, that it will be disasterous.
So, we get these management techniques like APR's and earlier and shorter seasons to try and let everybody hunt without any restrictions on tag numbers. Its failed policy........our deer numbers are not going radically up anytime soon; our deer hunter numbers are not going down radically anytime soon; we do have trending down deer hunter numbers, but, days in the field per hunter are also going up, so the pressure is really the same or even higher. you cannot look at deer hunter numbers alone; you have to look at total days afield to accurately judge the pressure.
There are long term trends in place that are going to limit our deer herds for well into the future; shrinking winter range, increasing predators, etc We have to decide how we are going to split this shrinking or stagnant resource up and what kind of experience we want when we are in the field.
Personally, I would gladly give up 1 out of 3 yrs hunting in this state to get 2 out of 3 yrs were I am not having to deal with a pumpkin on every ridge, buck populations and age structure of the buck population are decent, I have a long season were I can hunt when my schedule allows, hunter pressure is much lowered and, I can spend quality time in the field.
Honestly, we can have that experience in this State with just a very small sacrifice on our parts, and that is to just give up 1 yr out of 3..............
Post by: MtnMuley on October 25, 2012, 04:11:54 PM
Post by: Colville on October 25, 2012, 04:34:31 PM
Since the pregnancy rate is the population, unless our curernt hunting is reducing fecundity, chaning it around isn't solving the big problem. The big problem will remain increasing the total population, not just the quality of the buck population.
Seems to me we need, no doe pmts. Improved winter range and a program that rewards predator harvest and makes for very liberal predator seasons. I'd be for an extension of the season if a hunter got the extra week after turning in a bear or 5 yotes to earn those days afield. Have the WDF put up carlton, twisp, chewuch check stations on a series of weekends and let hunters go kill predators and earn additional and later hunting time. I know that's a pipe dream. I've seen nothing that implies WDFW wants to address the problem with emphasis on predator management. They'll stick to people management.
Changing to every 2 out of 3 years is about affecting quality it appears to me without addressing population. It's just reducing pressure and improving buck numbers but unless that drives an improvement in pregancny rates it's not a "solution" to anything but reducing hunter numbers in the field and improving the average buck quality at the expense of oportunity.
I want a bigger pie, not bigger slices of the same pie.
Post by: muleyguy on October 25, 2012, 05:02:45 PM
I am not saying you should abandon trying to deal with those things, I am just saying that relying on those things to "make a bigger pie" in this State is most likely not going to be successful. If you will notice, my first 3 suggestions were things to try and make the bigger pie.
But, honestly, we will be lucky to keep mule deer levels at the current level they are at.
I never said that does were not getting bred; that is not the problem, you are correct; so not sure were you got that one. There is lots of evidence biologically though that age structure of the breeding male population in ungulates is important to fawn recruitment. We have now gone several generations were we have permantly lowered the age structure of the and buck to doe ratios in the population. My guess is that as mule deer biology evolves it will become apparant that the long term consequences of having immature males breed females is having a negative impact on fawn recruitment. Do, I think this is the only thing causing our mule deer herds problems? Absoulutely not, but, I do believe that significant breeding by immature males is a problem and one of the causes of poor fawn recruitment.
So, yes, in my opinion, I do believe that if you raised the average age of the breeding males in the population that it will result in better fawn recruitment and healthier herds. With the current APR scheme, the vast majority of the buck population in this state, post harvest, are 1.5 yr old males; it only follows that since this is the dominant age group they are doing a fair amount of the breeding.
But, those arguments above aside, you bet I am talking about affecting quality; not only quality of the animal, but, quality of the hunt.
I mean, isn't that why we hunt??? To have a quality experience??? I guess why else do you hunt?? Sorry, but, I am not going to apologize because I want to have a choice on the quality of animal I shoot, spike or 4.5 yr old or better buck, without having 9 million hunters in the field, on October 11th.
For the foreseeable future, the size of the current pie right now is about as good as it is going to get, if not worse, that is the reality; We need to structure the seasons so we do have a quality hunting experience; a quality hunting experience is not only the size of the animal, but choice of buck, number of hunters, length of season.
Post by: Colville on October 25, 2012, 05:15:08 PM
Can't fix habitat easily. Don't disagree about older average bucks breeding either, but extending the hunt will kill mature migrators, I'm not sure you're going to shift the age much, just going to shift the kill into some of the mature late arrivers. And lets be certain that if an extension of the season comes available, everyone knows when the "best" opportunity for big deer will be and it will shift hunting pressure to that week.
Lastly, I'm not angry in the least, we just have different preferences. My bias is toward opportunity. I don't mind if that means harder work. I can't have a good or bad experience in hunting, from my couch. I'm not interested in solutions that restrict opportunity into draws unless viable and reasonable options that can be tried, are tried, and fail. If we shift these hunts to draw, it will push that hunting activity elsewhere where pressures now permit open general seasons and it may cascade the state into Oregon with a draw for everything. No thanks, not interested.
Post by: muleyguy on October 25, 2012, 05:36:37 PM
it is just a tough deal in this State with the challenges it has;
I don't disagree that the one issue with what I was proposing is that people might shift to the later of the season and we end up with no better mature buck escapement; that is an unknown and might have to be dealt with with a slot system.
I do believe in my heart though that we need a better age spectrum in our buck population and that would help on fawn recruitment, and, I think that these APR's are doing lots of harm in that area;
here is some good info on it from the Montana Department of Game; it pertains to elk, but, this is true of all ungulates:
At about this
same time, Smith (1980) reported a strong correlation between the presence of older males in the breeding
population and significantly higher pregnancy rates in Roosevelt elk of the Olympic Peninsula. In an Oregon study
a few years later (Hines et al. 1985) concluded that is it not prudent to depend on yearling breeders, that older
bulls are needed to ensure maximum herd productivity. Following studies of breeding by known-age bulls in the captive Starkey elk herd,
Noyes et al. (1996) explained the Oregon elk decline with the following rationale:
1. High hunter numbers and limited security results in a long-term total bull kill.
2. Yearling bulls (protected as calves during the preceding hunting season) must do 100% of
the breeding. my emphasis: this is exactly the problem APR's cause
3. Inexperience and immaturity of those bulls cause most cows to breed at the second estrus,
which means that calves are born late.
4. Younger calves have reduced body weight going into their first winter.
5. Consequently, there is lower overwinter survival and overall reduced productivity.
Post by: SuperDave on October 25, 2012, 08:49:47 PM
Post by: Buckmark on October 25, 2012, 09:20:41 PM
This is a good read pertaining to mule deer and APR's
http://www.createstrat.com/muledeerinthewest/harvest.html (http://www.createstrat.com/muledeerinthewest/harvest.html)
*
Something is affecting our mule deer herds, before the 3pt apr's it was any buck and a longer season, alot more deer back then, less predators also. Then after the 2 bad winters and the implementation of apr's it never really rebouned, and with the reduction of days afield it still is declining, why?
I am a home body when it comes to hunting the okanogan, i do not hunt the methow area but an area approx 80-100 miles away. I have for 30yrs and i spend alot of time in my area throughout the year so i get to see deer in my core area alot and every year the numbers are lower.
I believe either a draw system for somes area's with tag limits (like other states use successfully) or maybe an east or west deer tag system, still with a limit on tag numbers will help.
Popular idea, well no not since it never has been a part of our heritage, but if nothing is done we wont be hunting mule deer like we do now in 20yrs..
Post by: huntnphool on October 25, 2012, 10:03:42 PM
As far as the loss of habitat in the Methow Valley, I don't see it, at least not because of developement. Little has changed in that area over the last 20+ years, certainly not anything that has reduced mule deer habitat.
I agree 100% with the pred problem, but with WDFW cowering in the corner whenever animal rights groups get involved I don't see that issue getting any better anytime soon.
The 2/3 year deal sounds interesting to me, I proposed a similar model, hunting deer and elk with a yearly rotation, that way you hunt each year and not have to sit out yet reduce the hunters in each field. All that happened was people getting upset that it was even suggested that they get limited in any way. They don't realize that either we come up with a system we can live with or WDFW are going to come up with another one that none of us like, and possibly make it every 2 or 3 years that you get to hunt. Once that happens it will be too late for a compromise, we will never get it back.
Post by: muleyguy on October 25, 2012, 10:48:58 PM
Quote
As far as the loss of habitat in the Methow Valley, I don't see it, at least not because of developement. Little has changed in that area over the last 20+ years, certainly not anything that has reduced mule deer habitat.
I don't totally disagree with this; I sometimes get frustrated at the bio's because they always go right to "the lets run the habitat issue up the flagpole for all our problems"; I think this is sometimes a strategy on their part to deflect criticism off of their inability to deal with the predator issue and/or take the hard pill of reducing opportunities to help the deer herds.
I have hunted in Montana and Wyoming for over 20 yrs, and I can categorically state that to my eye, nothing has changed in these areas; in fact, in many areas there are actually LESS people and LESS cows, but way lower deer numbers.
But, I have also come to appreciate the argument that a cabin here, a house there, a change of use here, a change of use there, a new road, bridge, that doesn't allow deer to pass, etc can have some fairly drastic impacts on the winter range just because it is so limited.
and, I have come to appreciate arguments from bio's that what "looks" like good browse and feed, in fact is not; fire suppression, aging of the browse, less grazing, changing land use patterns, cheat grass invasions, etc all have combined to slightly change the quality of the habitat.
what I do know is that there is fairly consistent secular decline of mule deer all over the West, and the causes of it have to be bigger, environmental, increased preadator, etc type of trends to cause this all over the West. Although E Montana has seemed to not see that, notwithstanding the bad winter kill 2 yrs ago. I do believe the habitat in E Montana has remained one of the most productive in the US
Honestly, at least in WA and ID, the mule deer have never been able to recover since the winter of 1993; and, that was almost 20 yrs ago now; all we have seen since then is APR's and shortened seasons, and the deer herds still cannot seem to adequatlly recover; at some point, habitat issues must be coming into play to my way of thinking;
There are no easy answers; but, that being said, we have to play the hand we are dealt with at the moment, and growing the overall deer population is going to be difficult at this point, so we have to come to grips with making the best of what we got. I don't mind giving up opportunity to have a better experience in all areas when I do hunt. But, I certainly respect others who want to have the experience every year, even if that means a poorer experience.
Post by: huntnphool on October 25, 2012, 11:01:58 PM
I hear ya. I have been hunting Montana for 20+ as well, predominately the SE where I have a lease. In that area we are seeing large numbers of deer, good genes but lacking maturity. Years of high number harvests have reduced the age class of the average buck but its been getting better the last few years with the elimination of guaranteed outfitter tags and loss of some outfitters.QuoteAs far as the loss of habitat in the Methow Valley, I don't see it, at least not because of developement. Little has changed in that area over the last 20+ years, certainly not anything that has reduced mule deer habitat.
I don't totally disagree with this; I sometimes get frustrated at the bio's because they always go right to "the lets run the habitat issue up the flagpole for all our problems"; I think this is sometimes a strategy on their part to deflect criticism off of their inability to deal with the predator issue and/or take the hard pill of reducing opportunities to help the deer herds.
I have hunted in Montana and Wyoming for over 20 yrs, and I can categorically state that to my eye, nothing has changed in these areas; in fact, in many areas there are actually LESS people and LESS cows, but way lower deer numbers.
But, I have also come to appreciate the argument that a cabin here, a house there, a change of use here, a change of use there, a new road, bridge, that doesn't allow deer to pass, etc can have some fairly drastic impacts on the winter range just because it is so limited.
and, I have come to appreciate arguments from bio's that what "looks" like good browse and feed, in fact is not; fire suppression, aging of the browse, less grazing, changing land use patterns, cheat grass invasions, etc all have combined to slightly change the quality of the habitat.
what I do know is that there is fairly consistent secular decline of mule deer all over the West, and the causes of it have to be bigger, environmental, increased preadator, etc type of trends to cause this all over the West. Although E Montana has seemed to not see that, notwithstanding the bad winter kill 2 yrs ago. I do believe the habitat in E Montana has remained one of the most productive in the US
Honestly, at least in WA and ID, the mule deer have never been able to recover since the winter of 1993; and, that was almost 20 yrs ago now; all we have seen since then is APR's and shortened seasons, and the deer herds still cannot seem to adequatlly recover; at some point, habitat issues must be coming into play to my way of thinking;
There are no easy answers; but, that being said, we have to play the hand we are dealt with at the moment, and growing the overall deer population is going to be difficult at this point, so we have to come to grips with making the best of what we got. I don't mind giving up opportunity to have a better experience in all areas when I do hunt. But, I certainly respect others who want to have the experience every year, even if that means a poorer experience.