Conflicting information

[TreeDux]

After our group missed out on 2 other draws in other states that were 100% until this draw, I made the executive decision to put us in for a WY General deer tag so that we could at least go hunting . We got the one in North central part of the state that has some FS and lots of inaccessible public. It’s been called a tourist trap in one forum. Anyway we’re aware of the primary limitations, which are not insignificant. The main thing I’m encountering in research is pretty conflicting data and guidance. This reflects a combination of talking to 2 local biologists, who both pointed me to the area where harvest stats, job completion reports, and the WYFG website all generally discourage me from going. The local enforcement guy was encouraging about finding deer within the region but couldn’t offer anything else. I have plans 1-5 in mind, all are vastly different in terms of habitat and approach. Most of them will burn better part of a day to transition in between. We will have 2 days to scout and full season to hunt. In this scenario which resources would you tend to rely on most heavily to begin with?

 

[Dos Perros]

You have to based your decisions based off of objective data. You'll find that in the reports. Unless someone is telling you the reports are BS...I've seen that before.

Keep in mind, you ask someone about a unit...you may get responses like "it isn't what it used to be," or "all the big bucks are dead." But it's a matter of perspective right? They might define a big buck at 180", where you are happy with any mature 4x4.

At this point you have the tag, are you trying to decide to stay home or hunt?

 

[TreeDux]

You have to based your decisions based off of objective data. You'll find that in the reports. Unless someone is telling you the reports are BS...I've seen that before.

Keep in mind, you ask someone about a unit...you may get responses like "it isn't what it used to be," or "all the big bucks are dead." But it's a matter of perspective right? They might define a big buck at 180", where you are happy with any mature 4x4.

At this point you have the tag, are you trying to decide to stay home or hunt?

Oh no, we’re going and plan to hit it hard. What this ( or any unit) used to be is somewhat irrelevant. But I do want to interpret the information best I can to make wise use of time. The totality of printed data indicates higher success rates and lower units of effort in a couple of units that are many miles from where the bios are both pointing. That unit reports very low success and a lot of days to achieve it. I’m very familiar with different opinions but a complete 180 has me wondering.

 

[Dos Perros]

Oh no, we’re going and plan to hit it hard. What this ( or any unit) used to be is somewhat irrelevant. But I do want to interpret the information best I can to make wise use of time. The totality of printed data indicates higher success rates and lower units of effort in a couple of units that are many miles from where the bios are both pointing. That unit reports very low success and a lot of days to achieve it. I’m very familiar with different opinions but a complete 180 has me wondering.

For the higher success rate / lower effort unit(s), if the sample size is big enough to rule out bias from outfitters or private land or whatever, then it may be a better call.

The 'where to go' thing is tough. Even the same spot year to year can change quite a bit based on a bunch of factors. That's why I try to plan in some flexibility to my hunt. If they're not here they may be there. And if they're not those two places, maybe they'll be over there? Having options is power.

 

[TreeDux]

For the higher success rate / lower effort unit(s), if the sample size is big enough to rule out bias from outfitters or private land or whatever, then it may be a better call.

The 'where to go' thing is tough. Even the same spot year to year can change quite a bit based on a bunch of factors. That's why I try to plan in some flexibility to my hunt. If they're not here they may be there. And if they're not those two places, maybe they'll be over there? Having options is power.

The outfitter component is an outlier as I don’t really know how many operate in the particular unit. I don’t think it’s many and I do think most outfitters in the area are focused on private but I really don’t know. At any rate the perspective is what I was looking for and is appreciated.

 

[Diamondback]

OP, there is data, and people's opinions.
A good scouting trip prior to your hunt starting would answer a lot of your questions to refine your strategy with a list of A, B, C, D, E contingency options.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

You are thinking too much. Analysis paralysis. People have been hunting successfully for hundreds of years before the coming of the internet. Just go hunting.

Remember that corner crossing has been found legal by judgment. They are trying to appeal but it won't be overturned any time soon

 

[Dougfir]

How sure are you that the data you're looking at is relevant to your situation? Sometimes private land can really push the stats in one direction, while reality for public land hunters is very different. It's possible that areas the bios pointed you at look worse on paper and are actually better for someone in your situation. That said, I have been given bad advice by WGF employees before. I think it's more common to get good advice, but it happens. Make some plans, hunt hard and adapt. Have fun!

 

[WyoBC_99]

@Dougfir brought up the same point that I was going to make. Stats do not separate out private land guided hunts and can be heavily biased as a result when you're planning a public land DIY hunt. This could explain the discrepancy and the bios could be giving you the best advice for your situation.

 

[TaperPin]

Hunter success rates are always biased based on things you won’t know about until hunting the area. I don’t put much stock in any of them. Hunt the type of terrain you enjoy hunting.

 

[Swamp Fox]

No experience in Wyoming, but I've noticed some biologists and F&G I've followed or dealt with seem to like to promote certain areas just to spread the pressure around.

If you read what they write for the general public's consumption, that is almost always the case. A private conversation might plow new ground but I still think that government employees are aware they have a job to do (?!?--LOL), and giving random hunters hot tips is not in the job description vs. meeting regional management goals.

 

[wytx]

If you don't check out the area the bios suggested you'll be limiting yourself, go see if they know what they are talking about.

 

[TreeDux]

How sure are you that the data you're looking at is relevant to your situation? Sometimes private land can really push the stats in one direction, while reality for public land hunters is very different. It's possible that areas the bios pointed you at look worse on paper and are actually better for someone in your situation. That said, I have been given bad advice by WGF employees before. I think it's more common to get good advice, but it happens. Make some plans, hunt hard and adapt. Have fun!

Great point. I’m not all That sure of its relevance to my situation. I was very cognizant of that concept when I began my research but lost track of it along the way. Thanks for helping me get it back on my radar. The area has a lot of private land and a lot of public land that is only accessible via private land. That combination can certainly make a difference.

 

[TreeDux]

No experience in Wyoming, but I've noticed some biologists and F&G I've followed or dealt with seem to like to promote certain areas just to spread the pressure around.

If you read what they write for the general public's consumption, that is almost always the case. A private conversation might plow new ground but I still think that government employees are aware they have a job to do (?!?--LOL), and giving random hunters hot tips is not in the job description vs. meeting regional management goals.

You are certainly not wrong about that. I’ve spoken to folks in various western states that did indeed seem to view it as their job to help me out. I’ve spoken to people in other states that seemed disgusted that they even had to answer the phone.

 

[TreeDux]

Hunter success rates are always biased based on things you won’t know about until hunting the area. I don’t put much stock in any of them. Hunt the type of terrain you enjoy hunting.

There is a fair amount of bias, as well as a significant number of variables inherent to those statistics. I do look at them for sure. But they are just a tool to use along the way. I like this idea of hunting the country I like. this area does have variety in terrain types, elevations, and plant communities so that might still be a tough choice, but it’s a good problem to have.