A different take on trophy mule deer management - Our solutions have been the problem

[littlebigtine]

Those are some pretty good statistics and I can’t argue them. But I’m talking about sheer numbers of BC bucks entered, not the biggest bucks entered. In Mikes video at about the 55:30 mark- he talks about the number of bucks entered. In 2005 (28) BC bucks were entered, 2006 (25) bucks and 2007 (50) bucks were entered. That’s 103 book bucks entered in 3 years.

In 2023 (6) bucks were entered.

According to my OnX records, over the last 10 years in just Eagle county (arguably the best mule deer habitat on the planet) has only had 19 heads submitted.

So yeah, I guess it’s not even a comparison.

Fair enough, agree to disagree on this one. Im in the camp where if there are still bucks getting put in the book at the current rate, im comfortable giving people a crack at them.

You should go check out the Idaho's list and you will feel alot better about Colorados numbers.

 

[Plainsman79]

Fair enough, agree to disagree on this one. Im in the camp where if there are still bucks getting put in the book at the current rate, im comfortable giving people a crack at them.

You should go check out the Idaho's list and you will feel alot better about Colorados numbers.

Definitely, to each their own! I’m nobody to tell another person what to shoot or what I think they should shoot.

might give it a look.

I don’t hunt Idaho, so I guess I never really paid attention to it.

Your picture cracks me up.

 

[littlebigtine]

Definitely, to each their own! I’m nobody to tell another person what to shoot or what I think they should shoot.

might give it a look.

I don’t hunt Idaho, so I guess I never really paid attention to it.

Your picture cracks me up.

I agree.

As for the pic…

Public land diy pepperoni pizza!

 

[AHayes111]

I would agree the buck on the right is a bigger deer. How many guys are passing the one on the left, but not the one on the right? How many guys will accurately field judge the difference between the two? How long are you willing to wait for a chance at the buck on the right instead of a chance for the one on the left?

No doubt some bucks will get bigger year over year beyond 4.5. Some may even “blow up”. However some will also regress or throw out a smaller set depending on feed conditions. The argument is that it’s not worth it to give up the opportunity, and your picture is IMO a pretty good example of why.

To answer the first question. All most no one, and I would not expect hunters to or pass judgement on anyone that shot the buck when he was smaller. To the second question, most people can not tell the difference between a 160 and a 200 in the field, much less a deer like this where he is better than 190 with the earlier set and and 10 inches bigger on the latter. However if the two bucks were standing sided by side even the most inexperienced eye would think you were looking at father and son. The larger antler is better on mass, spread and height.
Judging by the four year old buck in my avatar I too can be unwilling to wait at times, but on the other hand the last buck I shot I was willing to wait four more years until he blew up. It is a personal choice.
While I have watched or found antlers from hundreds of deer that lived past four and can not think of a one that has regressed at age five, I am sure with the right conditions it could happen,
Your last argument is a good one and I do not disagree. I just do not want people thinking that bucks are at or even close to there best at age four, because that is just not true. There is nothing wrong with game managers choosing seasons were few bucks get to the age of four in the name of opportunity. Where I draw the line is when hunters keep demanding their opportunity even when the deer herd is in long term decline. Where I live in SE MT is a good example of this.
There are also other trade offs when managing for opportunity other than just the quality of the bucks. The quality of the experience also is effected. To landowners, opportunity is money, the more opportunity the more money landowners can make from hunting so the more opportunities for hunters, the more commercialization you are going to have until most of the opportunities are going to be based on your willingness to pay.

 

[AHayes111]

I’m not close-minded about this topic, but I do wonder how one would explain the fact that Montana has basically been a general tag “opportunity” state for many years now and the result quite clearly has been that it is no longer a state (with very limited exceptions) that produces realistic opportunities for big, mature bucks.

We have bigger issues with the mule deer herd in Montana than trophy bucks at present.

 

[Buglebrush]

Do NOT make people choose a weapon. That's Garbage. If you want that system move to Washington. Why are we so excited to reduce hunter opportunities? Washington has been following that model for years, and the results are terrible! Bounty system on predators should be the first priority! Especially in Wilderness units. People are giving away their future and going to get nothing in return!

 

[dirtytough]

In my hypothesis if Co cuts tags 15% total, changes season to 3 weeks earlier for all seasons, and goes to 90-10% (@Foldem) , so as not to put too much pressure on resident allocation well in 5 years we would be exceeding b/c bucks produced in the “golden age”……..

I agree with your post except this part is confusing.

If moving all seasons forward 3 weeks it’s going to make it way tougher to kill with a rifle which is the goal. But then it’ll make it way easier during archery.

Since you are an archery hunter it seems like you are promoting what’s best for you. I’m assuming that’s not what you are doing so what’s your reason for moving all seasons earlier? Why not just rifle season?

 

[Buglebrush]

Cash bounty system on Coyotes, bears, and lions funded by license fees. Allocate some special draw tags that you're put in for if you check in a bear or lion in the previous year. Why do we never push back against the narrative that reduced hunter harvest is the only way to go? Do we want to be Washington? I don't!

 

[littlebigtine]

Do NOT make people choose a weapon. That's Garbage. If you want that system move to Washington. Why are we so excited to reduce hunter opportunities? Washington has been following that model for years, and the results are terrible! Bounty system on predators should be the first priority! Especially in Wilderness units. People are giving away their future and going to get nothing in return!

Whats the problem with making a guy decide if he want to hunt with a bow or muzzy or rifle?
Do you think the rifle hunt how it is currently designed does not result in over harvest?

 

[Buglebrush]

Whats the problem with making a guy decide if he want to hunt with a bow or muzzy or rifle?
Do you think the rifle hunt how it is currently designed does not result in over harvest?

Because it's a huge huge huge loss of opportunity. I don't believe the rifle hunt causes over harvest in most cases. Especially in Idaho. Rut hunts in open country with lots of access are the exception. I enjoy archery and rifle hunting both. Why choose? Hasn't worked in the liberal states that do it. Increased predator harvest should always come before decreasing hunter harvest by slashing opportunity.

 

[cbeard64]

Because it's a huge huge huge loss of opportunity. I don't believe the rifle hunt causes over harvest in most cases. Especially in Idaho. Rut hunts in open country with lots of access are the exception. I enjoy archery and rifle hunting both. Why choose? Hasn't worked in the liberal states that do it. Increased predator harvest should always come before decreasing hunter harvest by slashing opportunity.

No, it’s not. If the season is open, the opportunity is not lost. Hunting with a bow is still hunting.

 

[littlebigtine]

Because it's a huge huge huge loss of opportunity. I don't believe the rifle hunt causes over harvest in most cases. Especially in Idaho. Rut hunts in open country with lots of access are the exception. I enjoy archery and rifle hunting both. Why choose? Hasn't worked in the liberal states that do it. Increased predator harvest should always come before decreasing hunter harvest by slashing opportunity.

Hate to break it to you but there are unlimited wolf tags with a $2000 bounty where I live and 2 cougar and black bear tags available otc. I think it is naive to think that predators affect the deer population more than humans do. And dont make this about politics. I dont care if you are red or blue if you hunt and you care about ungulate populations you are on my team.
The reality is that the deer population have been suffering for over a decade and the biggest contributors are weather and habitat loss. Thats science.
When they come for our otc opportunity, compromise will probably be better than losing it all together. I refuse to believe le or controlled hunts benefit anybody right now in idaho. Id rather see some tweaks to otc then doing away with it altogether.
Also, ill repeat myself. Im advocating for a universal three weapon general season for all units. The resident must choose 2 specific units to hunt and only 2 weapon seasons inside that unit. Not a drastic change from how it works and actually you could say its more opportunity because there will be an otc muzzy opportunity in every unit. Yes the seasons will be a bit shorter but once you cook it you could still hunt all three seasons across 2 units just not 1. You can look at my earlier posts for a better explanation.

 

[WRO]

Yes it does, because the notion that antler size is at near peak at age 4 1/2 is misleading at best and likely closer to out right false. The problem with these studies is that they all rely on the B&C scoring system and while the B&C scoring system may be the best out there for many reason, its one flaw is that it puts more weight on length of points than on mass. This inflates the relative size of younger bucks that often have nearly the same length but not near the mass of their older selves. Attached is a picture of two antlers from the same buck. The buck was at least 4 and likely 5 when he shed the smaller antler and at least two years older when he shed the larger antler. Score wise there is not that much difference between the two. Weight wise the larger antler is 30% larger and if you are holding the two, there is little doubt there is a big change in size. Anyone that spends thirty minutes in my antler collection will no longer be pushing the 4 1/2 is near peak. I have dozens of examples like the one posted.View attachment 840344

I’ve spent some time with guys who manage for big wild deer, they won’t kill a muley under 7 and have harvested several gov tag bucks up to 240.. he said you have to get 10 to 5 to kill 2 at 8 just because they get so hard to kill and many die post rut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Buglebrush]

Hate to break it to you but there are unlimited wolf tags with a $2000 bounty where I live and 2 cougar and black bear tags available otc. I think it is naive to think that predators affect the deer population more than humans do. And dont make this about politics. I dont care if you are red or blue if you hunt and you care about ungulate populations you are on my team.
The reality is that the deer population have been suffering for over a decade and the biggest contributors are weather and habitat loss. Thats science.
When they come for our otc opportunity, compromise will probably be better than losing it all together. I refuse to believe le or controlled hunts benefit anybody right now in idaho. Id rather see some tweaks to otc then doing away with it altogether.
Also, ill repeat myself. Im advocating for a universal three weapon general season for all units. The resident must choose 2 specific units to hunt and only 2 weapon seasons inside that unit. Not a drastic change from how it works and actually you could say its more opportunity because there will be an otc muzzy opportunity in every unit. Yes the seasons will be a bit shorter but once you cook it you could still hunt all three seasons across 2 units just not 1. You can look at my earlier posts for a better explanation.

Actually Utah did a thorough study on mortality in Mule Deer and for most of their units predators were the number 1 cause. You're wrong about the bounty too. I assume you're referring to F4WM's reimbursement program. I have read your posts, and categorically disagree with your conclusions. We'll leave it at that.

 

[Buglebrush]

No, it’s not. If the season is open, the opportunity is not lost. Hunting with a bow is still hunting.

I currently have the opportunity to hunt multiple weapons all over the state. If I must choose one weapon then it's a huge loss of opportunity. That's not debatable.

 

[CasNed]

The reality is that the deer population have been suffering for over a decade and the biggest contributors are weather and habitat loss. Thats science.

The wolves have been the biggest contributor to ungulate populations in a lot of areas in MT and ID.

 

[littlebigtine]

Actually Utah did a thorough study on mortality in Mule Deer and for most of their units predators were the number 1 cause. You're wrong about the bounty too. I assume you're referring to F4WM's reimbursement program. I have read your posts, and categorically disagree with your conclusions. We'll leave it at that.

Whats incorrect about the $2000 dollar bounty program for most of central idaho? And if you look closer at that utah study, predation changes dramatically unit to unit. Also, if im not mistaken there is another utah study where removing alpha toms from a landscape actually can increase the cougar population because they either remove(kill) competing cougars or displace them into entirely different units. If there is not an alpha in a given area the cougar population can accelerate before one eventually takes over.

 

[cbeard64]

I currently have the opportunity to hunt multiple weapons all over the state. If I must choose one weapon then it's a huge loss of opportunity. That's not debatable.

It may be a loss of opportunity for success, but it’s not a loss of opportunity to hunt.

If numbers go down in given units so much that the season is shortened or closed in that unit, that’s a real loss of opportunity.

 

[WRO]

I currently have the opportunity to hunt multiple weapons all over the state. If I must choose one weapon then it's a huge loss of opportunity. That's not debatable.

It’s also not sustainable, I’m guessing you’ll act like the rest of the locals and blame non residents next, while refusing to allow for any change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

Whats incorrect about the $2000 dollar bounty program for most of central idaho? And if you look closer at that utah study, predation changes dramatically unit to unit. Also, if im not mistaken there is another utah study where removing alpha toms from a landscape actually can increase the cougar population because they either remove(kill) competing cougars or displace them into entirely different units. If there is not an alpha in a given area the cougar population can accelerate before one eventually takes over.

From camera experience, if you want to cut populations kill females and cubs, then leave all the big Tom’s..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk