Do you trust and support your state/region mule deer biologist?

[30.06]

Here in Washington the Biologist are young college grads that have been schooled in the anti-hunting class rooms. Then we have a wildlife commission that is nothing but a woke group of libs trying to figure out a way to shut down hunting in our state. The game dept has become a political arm of the lib Gov and his flunkies. The wolves, cats, and bears are so out of hand, our state is looking like Yellowstone with all the predators running free with no worries of getting shot.

100% agreed

 

[30.06]

It’s clear you are not from Washington State. Anyone who says they have a predator problem in their state would be hard pressed to say they have a worse predator problem than here. Lions are only hunted by calling or luck. Bears only in the fall by spot and stalk, calling or luck. Wolves completely unmanaged. Small population of grizz unmanaged and attempting at every opportunity to bring in more grizz, regardless of where they came from.
And all our biologists ever say is “deer numbers seem fine, it’s predator numbers we are concerned with”

Yup, agree 100%. Lion quotas in each management unit (several Game Management Units) are 1-3 cats.

 

[khart_6882]

Yup, agree 100%. Lion quotas in each management unit (several Game Management Units) are 1-3 cats.

Oh yeah I forgot about that frickin quota. And now they’ve got problem lions counting against the quota numbers as well.

 

[mike.adams.467]

The Idaho F&G has gotten insane with the number of cow elk and doe mule deer controlled tags it issues in some areas. It started last year. In one particular area, there were 1900 cow elk tags and 300 doe tags passed out, in addition to the general hunts and controlled buck/bull hunts. This week they published an article about how well the herds are doing based on the increased kill in 2025. The cow hunt last fall was a slaughter. The practice will continue at least through the 2026 hunting season. People are being led to believe their good game management is the reason for the spike in kills.

 

[NDHUNTER24]

Absolutely zero trust or support to the biologists in North Dakota. They have "managed" our deer to the lowest level I've seen in 30 years (I am talking whiteail).

The biologists are employed by the G&F which is self-funded. They want revenue, that translates to selling as many tags as possible. The agency has always bent a knee to landowners as well so it's gratis tags for everyone.

I used to push the idea of quality deer management until realizing it was a pipe dream. Sad situation really.

Just out of curiosity what part of the state are you in?

 

[WMDM]

SE

 

[WRO]

The Idaho F&G has gotten insane with the number of cow elk and doe mule deer controlled tags it issues in some areas. It started last year. In one particular area, there were 1900 cow elk tags and 300 doe tags passed out, in addition to the general hunts and controlled buck/bull hunts. This week they published an article about how well the herds are doing based on the increased kill in 2025. The cow hunt last fall was a slaughter. The practice will continue at least through the 2026 hunting season. People are being led to believe their good game management is the reason for the spike in kills.

Thank your local rancher for those hunts.

Most of the west’s elk herds are limited by social constraints not habitat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[S.Clancy]

It always amazes me when random people think they are smarter than the people that do it daily.
I'm sure most people on here don't think someone off the street could replace them at thier job because the lookyloo's watched their process a couple weeks every fall.

Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[mike.adams.467]

Thank your local rancher for those hunts.

Most of the west’s elk herds are limited by social constraints not habitat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are no ranches to speak of in this area, and the winter range is public land. This was a decision by the IDFG.

 

[KenLee]

I'm 50/50 but really more like 75/25 for trusting a biologist, seems like this thread could be viewed from 2 separate perspectives.

1. Published quota, buck/doe ratios/ hunter harvest, etc. issued by F/G agencies.
2. Direct personal communication with F/G or Forest Service biologist.

1. I do study published data and feel that its only a piece to the puzzle, one needs to really understand how the report data is accumulated. Ive never really based my decision to apply for a tag or hunt an area solely on published data, in my experience negative data can help to discourage others from applying in an area.
2. I've had alot of direct communication with F/G and Forest Service biologist through the years (Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, California and Idaho). What I've learned is that being prepared to ask direct questions is way more productive than just "tell me about an area and where do I find game", the biologist I've communicated with appreciate a guy that's prepared and has knowledge of the area of discussion. Listen up and you'll get nuggets of info through the conversation. If the biologist hunts (which alot of them do) then I'd expect he/she is gonna withhold info.

I understand carrying capacity but would never doe hunt (or pay a hefty tag fee as a non-resident to hunt doe), in todays day/age I don't see that any area cold be over carrying capacity for deer, just my opinion. Now cow elk is a different story, I can see how taking a cow off the landscape could be beneficial...... and fill the freezer at he same time!

Many areas in the Southeast are overpopulated with whitetail doe, but thats mostly an overdevelopment of land issue.

 

[WRO]

There are no ranches to speak of in this area, and the winter range is public land. This was a decision by the IDFG.

The fact that they have any doe tags is mind blowing.

Tags are also constrained by public land ranchers who want the grass for their cows instead our elk. 41 is a good example of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Customweld]

Tags are also constrained by public land ranchers who want the grass for their cows instead our elk. 41 is a good example of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As is the Weiser River Zone. Whether a guy wants to face it or not, a lot of the determination of elk population is dependent on what farm bureau thinks it should be.

 

[AHayes111]

I always thought tags should be on a sliding scale. $250 for buck 200 inches or larger, $500 for 150-200 inches. $750 for 120-150 inches, $1,000 for 75 to 120 inches. $1500 for under 75 inches.

Those poor dumb lil forkies need to be protected.

They say antler restriction dont work.

I would implement a sliding scale 180 degrees the other way.

 

[AHayes111]

Good comments!

So for the doe harvest I know a bunch of hunters are against it, but in some areas across the west, winter ranges are small and only getting smaller mainly due to encroachment. The biologists where I live say that our winter range quality is deteriorating because they are so many deer in such a small area. So they either have a doe hunt and allow hunters to harvest the does or we wait until another 22/23 winter and a ton of deer will die due to starvation because our winter range quality is poor. That’s where doe hunts can be beneficial!

While I generally agree, I sometimes wonder if winter range plants need the big die off so that they can get ahead. It may be that the winter range is in poor conditions because we haven't had the big population crashes.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I have confidence in the CPW agency biologists here. My issue is with all these “ecologists” that work for the various “rewilding” and “biodiversity” non-profit organizations in Colorado. Basically anti-hunting activists that now hold positions on the wildlife commission and at major universities. Dr. Rebecca Niemiec is one of the main ones from Colorado State University. She headlines all the events with First Gentleman Marlon Reis and the CatsArentTrophies Prop 127 crowd. Many have ties to the Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club. They love to run out all their propaganda, public opinion polls as “peer-reviewed, verifiable” science.

 

[270Hunter]

While I generally agree, I sometimes wonder if winter range plants need the big die off so that they can get ahead. It may be that the winter range is in poor conditions because we haven't had the big population crashes.

I think that could be a valid theory, I think we might be seeing something similar to this in parts of Wyoming the past few years. Big winter, substantial die off, plants overall are in better shape and then after the deer that lived recover. They are in better shape because the feed is abundant and good quality.

Maybe an actual biologist can help us out on this one!

 

[AHayes111]

I think that could be a valid theory, I think we might be seeing something similar to this in parts of Wyoming the past few years. Big winter, substantial die off, plants overall are in better shape and then after the deer that lived recover. They are in better shape because the feed is abundant and good quality.

Maybe an actual biologist can help us out on this one!

Or some one in range science.

 

[wind gypsy]

I've a lot more trust for the biologists than the politicians or politically appointed management they answer to. In most cases the game agencies force management decisions to support opportunity and total population #s rather than age class, sex ratio, and hunt quality. A small number of 1.5-3.5 year old bucks can breed a bunch of does..