California "premium" zones

[Pro953]

Just a reminder that the number of points required for a hunt only reflects on the scarcity of tags, not the quality of the hunt.

All too often we will into the trap of, “I blew 10 points on this hunt and a never saw more than a forkie”

Lots of states have hard to draw tags with crappy success rates.

Also, not sure what anyone would advocate for Doe hunts. Why would we advocate for killing off our breeding population. We are not at carrying capacity so the does are not competing with the bucks for forage. You may see more does and bucks. But once you start shooting at them, they too will become quite shy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bubblehide]

...

Also, not sure what anyone would advocate for Doe hunts. Why would we advocate for killing off our breeding population. We are not at carrying capacity so the does are not competing with the bucks for forage. You may see more does and bucks. But once you start shooting at them, they too will become quite shy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are a whole lot of old nonviable does competing with all the other deer, including the young.

 

[Marble]

No doubt about it all of northern ca used to be heavily logged and we had amazing hunting now that has been traded off for massive forest fires


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is a study I read that discussed habitat and the correlation with logging. Basically logging was creating and maintaining habitat since post WW2. There was a lot of not so great stuff too. But specifically relating to deer, they really did the population a solid.

But it doesn't explain the decline in areas where logging wasn't something helping the habitat.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

Just a reminder that the number of points required for a hunt only reflects on the scarcity of tags, not the quality of the hunt.

All too often we will into the trap of, “I blew 10 points on this hunt and a never saw more than a forkie”

Lots of states have hard to draw tags with crappy success rates.

Also, not sure what anyone would advocate for Doe hunts. Why would we advocate for killing off our breeding population. We are not at carrying capacity so the does are not competing with the bucks for forage. You may see more does and bucks. But once you start shooting at them, they too will become quite shy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think CA is the only state to not have doe hunts since 1927 last I read. I could be offbut it was in the study i reference earlier. It has been a management tool used by several states in years when buck to doe ratio is really bad.

I'm not saying that's the answer to our problem, but it is somthing that should be considered.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Bubblehide]

I think CA is the only state to not have doe hunts since 1927 last I read. I could be offbut it was in the study i reference earlier. It has been a management tool used by several states in years when buck to doe ratio is really bad.

I'm not saying that's the answer to our problem, but it is somthing that should be considered.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Counties have veto rights. So most countries, not all, do not allow doe hunts.

 

[Extrapale]

I wonder if this is the same with the wolf population. Most areas in northeastern CA that have an elk herd also has wolves. I'm not sure if the wolves have moved that far south from Lassen. Also I dont know the effect a wolf pack has on the deer herds.

There are some studies I believe that say wolves will knock back the cougar population. This is by taking their kills I think.

Anecdotally, in a spot we hunt elk in NE Oregon, we are seeing more deer since the wolves got there. We are also seeing less cougar sign. It's not helping the elk hunting though.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[SouthPaw]

I think CA is the only state to not have doe hunts since 1927 last I read. I could be offbut it was in the study i reference earlier. It has been a management tool used by several states in years when buck to doe ratio is really bad.

I'm not saying that's the answer to our problem, but it is somthing that should be considered.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Correct, and I've heard the same directly from CDFW biologists. Some areas of the state have strong deer populations for the given habitat, but the buck:doe ratios are horrible which is why many hunters complain about hunt quality. I've been told that doe hunts have been recommended in these areas for a while but are always shot down at some level of approval.

 

[Banded_spooney]

Hopefully for you it’s this year.

It’s going to be a rough duck season for a lot of guys due to lack of water. Some of the refuge quotas are pretty bleak as well. Access & water will be premium this winter. Add all the new boat owners & it’s going to be a crap show to say the least. I’m still hopeful that we’ll get some early rain like we did last year and it’ll turn things around. We’ll see…

Where you at Wags?

 

[Marble]

Counties have veto rights. So most countries, not all, do not allow doe hunts.

So your saying the county I live in gets input on what hunts to are held?

Ive always understood it is a state ran program. Counties do not have anything like a game commission, game biologist or even get any of the money.

This is CA mind you.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

Correct, and I've heard the same directly from CDFW biologists. Some areas of the state have strong deer populations for the given habitat, but the buck:doe ratios are horrible which is why many hunters complain about hunt quality. I've been told that doe hunts have been recommended in these areas for a while but are always shot down at some level of approval.

It just seems like the way it has been managed for the last 30 years just needs a complete rethinking.

Herds are shrinking
Hunter numbers are dwindling
Buck to doe is off

It's very possible the "reworking" of the deer program limits hunters opportunities.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Wags]

Where you at Wags?

Lodi’ish…

 

[Ridley]

So your saying the county I live in gets input on what hunts to are held?

Ive always understood it is a state ran program. Counties do not have anything like a game commission, game biologist or even get any of the money.

This is CA mind you.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Yup he is correct. The county does have that power and they do have a biologist. The Yuba County biologist was involved during the early comment period for a FERC project I was working on. His comments focused on deer habitat and fragmentation.

 

[amassi]

There is a study I read that discussed habitat and the correlation with logging. Basically logging was creating and maintaining habitat since post WW2. There was a lot of not so great stuff too. But specifically relating to deer, they really did the population a solid.

But it doesn't explain the decline in areas where logging wasn't something helping the habitat.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Juniper infestation and Loss of winter range didn't help.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[SouthPaw]

It just seems like the way it has been managed for the last 30 years just needs a complete rethinking.

Herds are shrinking
Hunter numbers are dwindling
Buck to doe is off

It's very possible the "reworking" of the deer program limits hunters opportunities.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Not going to argue that, I think we all agree. Many of the biologists see it the same way, but the state generally doesn't want to shift from its ways based on those 30 years of indecision.

As for limiting opportunities to rework the program, I'm not sure I'd be opposed given the right balance...but I understand that many hunters might be opposed. We get 2 deer tags, many of which you can hunt from July until almost November, across multiple weapons and multiple zones. Balancing some of that vast opportunity to increase hunt quality, spread out hunter pressure, and improve herd health seems to make a lot of sense.

 

[WKR]

I'm trying to imagine what D3-5 would look like if they gave out doe tags

 

[JakeSCH]

In San Diego Co, there are 3 different tags that you can harvest a doe with.

But I am not going to burn points on a doe...at least not anymore since i started hunting out of state. Lol

 

[Marble]

Yup he is correct. The county does have that power and they do have a biologist. The Yuba County biologist was involved during the early comment period for a FERC project I was working on. His comments focused on deer habitat and fragmentation.

Thank you!

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

In San Diego Co, there are 3 different tags that you can harvest a doe with.

But I am not going to burn points on a doe...at least not anymore since i started hunting out of state. Lol

Dang I'm learning all kinds of stuff today.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Bubblehide]

So your saying the county I live in gets input on what hunts to are held?

Ive always understood it is a state ran program. Counties do not have anything like a game commission, game biologist or even get any of the money.

This is CA mind you.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Counties have veto rights for doe hunts. Not buck hunts. So if the county does not approve the doe hunt, the doe hunt does not happen.

 

[amassi]

In San Diego Co, there are 3 different tags that you can harvest a doe with.

But I am not going to burn points on a doe...at least not anymore since i started hunting out of state. Lol

Camp pendleton used to as well

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk