I

[Andrew12gauge]

I’ll chime in, I’m sure nothing I say here will be popular, at least most of it.

Personally I think IDFG is doing a good job of managing a finite resource while allowing for the opportunity of the people to utilize that resource.

I killed a real nice buck on a general hunt this season, and when I brought it home my neighbor and I were having a tailgate talk, and he said “I know it’s easy to complain about how IDFG manages mule deer hunting but just knowing that I get to hunt every season and I have the possibility of running into a buck like that every few years or so is enough for me” and I agree with his sentiments wholeheartedly. I enjoy mule deer, I enjoy seeing mule deer, I enjoy hunting mule deer, just knowing that mule deer exist brings a smile to my face, big bucks, little bucks, does and fawns, I like them all.

Now, that said I do have a couple of ideas for how IDFG could improve mule deer management.

1. Unit/zone tags: make them like elk tags, they are good for a specific unit or set of units. Some areas could have a quota, others could be unlimited. This would go a long way on reducing pressure and overcrowding.

2. Do away with 2 point only hunts: imagine that they issued twice as many tags for unit 40 or 22 and didn’t kill 90% of the bucks out of these units as 1 1/2 yr olds. Not much else to say on that one

3. Eliminate doe hunts: Maybe not all, I understand doe hunting has it’s time and place as a management tool, but let’s scale it back quite a ways.

In summary, I still mostly agree with IDFG mule deer management, I just think some minor tweaks could be made to allow for opportunity while also allowing more actual management of the resource.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Customweld]

I’ll chime in, I’m sure nothing I say here will be popular, at least most of it.

Personally I think IDFG is doing a good job of managing a finite resource while allowing for the opportunity of the people to utilize that resource.

I killed a real nice buck on a general hunt this season, and when I brought it home my neighbor and I were having a tailgate talk, and he said “I know it’s easy to complain about how IDFG manages mule deer hunting but just knowing that I get to hunt every season and I have the possibility of running into a buck like that every few years or so is enough for me” and I agree with his sentiments wholeheartedly. I enjoy mule deer, I enjoy seeing mule deer, I enjoy hunting mule deer, just knowing that mule deer exist brings a smile to my face, big bucks, little bucks, does and fawns, I like them all.

Now, that said I do have a couple of ideas for how IDFG could improve mule deer management.

1. Unit/zone tags: make them like elk tags, they are good for a specific unit or set of units. Some areas could have a quota, others could be unlimited. This would go a long way on reducing pressure and overcrowding.

2. Do away with 2 point only hunts: imagine that they issued twice as many tags for unit 40 or 22 and didn’t kill 90% of the bucks out of these units as 1 1/2 yr olds. Not much else to say on that one

3. Eliminate doe hunts: Maybe not all, I understand doe hunting has it’s time and place as a management tool, but let’s scale it back quite a ways.

In summary, I still mostly agree with IDFG mule deer management, I just think some minor tweaks could be made to allow for opportunity while also allowing more actual management of the resource.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree for the most part. IFG does the best with what they have. I think they spend an unfortunate amount of time dealing with elk and depredation problems, much to the detriment to mule deer. No amount of hunting restriction is going to have as big of an impact as a statewide winterkill.

 

[Dioni A]

The best analogy I can think of for the problem in Idaho is that you have a flat tire with 9 holes in it. You patch one of those holes and you still have a leaky tire. Hunters are a part of the total mortality picture but that picture also includes predators, cheat grass encroachment, loss of winter range, poor forestry management, drought, harsh winters, excessive access with utv's, shed hunting and overabundance of elk. It's easy to point to blame at IDFG. Not saying they don't have their problems and that they couldn't be better. The reality of it is that Weather and habitat are likely the biggest contributing factors in this picture. Essentially we're left with a really small lever to try to move a really big problem. The mechanics that change this situation are largely out of our control.

 

[idelkslayer]

There is an opportunity right now to review and comment on the draft management plan for winter range and migration corridors.

F&G encourages public to comment on its Idaho action plan for big game migration and winter ranges

Idaho Fish and Game is encouraging the public to provide comments on its Idaho action plan for conserving priority big game migration routes and winter ranges is now available on Fish and Game’s webpage through April 24.

idfg.idaho.gov

I tend to think that IDFG does a good job. I'm still in the camp of wanting to prioritize opportunity and the ability to hunt every year. The current framework makes it so that hunters who are dedicated and put in the time can focus on and hunt older age class bucks. I would rather have to work hard to find good bucks and be able to do it every year than only be able to hunt every 2-3 years. The alternative is to restrict opportunity and create draws or quota systems that result in hunters believing they are owed a big buck just for drawing a tag.

I know it comes up a lot in these discussions but the percentage of 2-pts in the harvest has always been high. Even during the magical golden years the percentage of bucks killed that were 2-pts was about 50% and still is today. The glory days also featured 2 either-sex tags per hunter and higher percentage of does in the harvest. A lot has changed since then and it is difficult to nail down all the contributing factors to the current plight of mule deer. I for one think that the biggest focus has to be on protecting winter range and migration routes. All the beautiful high country meadows and alpine forage don't mean anything without winter range and the travel routes to get there.

I'd like to see IDFG and the Governor's office working to protect winter range, especially any winter range that is currently in private ownership before any more of it gets carved up for Subdivisions.

 

[Andrew12gauge]

The best analogy I can think of for the problem in Idaho is that you have a flat tire with 9 holes in it. You patch one of those holes and you still have a leaky tire. Hunters are a part of the total mortality picture but that picture also includes predators, cheat grass encroachment, loss of winter range, poor forestry management, drought, harsh winters, excessive access with utv's, shed hunting and overabundance of elk. It's easy to point to blame at IDFG. Not saying they don't have their problems and that they couldn't be better. The reality of it is that Weather and habitat are likely the biggest contributing factors in this picture. Essentially we're left with a really small lever to try to move a really big problem. The mechanics that change this situation are largely out of our control.

I’m hopeful that these new treatments for cheatgrass along with the new MDF/Forest Service partnership will help out with the cheatgrass issue. I think that is one of the biggest issues mule deer face in the future throughout their range not just in Idaho. Controlling cheatgrass would go the farthest toward one of your 2 biggest issues.

UTV’s I agree are a major issue, people need to stick to trails but unfortunately none of the agencies have enough enforcement to make this a reality. I don’t know the answer other than some backcountry tuneups.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WeiserBucks]

Winters are obviously out of our control but what really rubs me the wrong way is when IDFG keeps killing the piss out of does for years after a hard winter.

16/17 winter killed an estimated 95% of fawns and 50% of the total deer population in my area, IDFG waited until 2021 to reduce doe harvest and cut the late buck tags in half.

It's a money grab without any consideration for the resource. My home unit is in shambles and every Res. in the state can still hunt bucks here and their 7 kids can still shoot does for the first week of the season.

I'm all for opportunities and especially for kids but we can't just destroy the resource and then stand around asking why it's destroyed.

 

[TheTone]

I'd like to see IDFG and the Governor's office working to protect winter range, especially any winter range that is currently in private ownership before any more of it gets carved up for Subdivisions.

convincing people not to carve up winter range to make money is always going to be a tough sell. Anything that restricts the use of private property goes way against the political game here. Look how few acres are in crp, people trying to break crp contracts and people trying to break conservation easements or do away with them all together

 

[Andrew12gauge]

convincing people not to carve up winter range to make money is always going to be a tough sell. Anything that restricts the use of private property goes way against the political game here. Look how few acres are in crp, people trying to break crp contracts and people trying to break conservation easements or do away with them all together

100% agree with this, at some point people are going to have to decide if they enjoy space or if they want to leave some for wildlife. Unfortunately I don’t think wildlife will win


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WeiserBucks]

Unfortunately I don’t think wildlife will win


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It never has and it never will.

 

[Customweld]

Winters are obviously out of our control but what really rubs me the wrong way is when IDFG keeps killing the piss out of does for years after a hard winter.

16/17 winter killed an estimated 95% of fawns and 50% of the total deer population in my area, IDFG waited until 2021 to reduce doe harvest and cut the late buck tags in half.

It's a money grab without any consideration for the resource. My home unit is in shambles and every Res. in the state can still hunt bucks here and their 7 kids can still shoot does for the first week of the season.

I'm all for opportunities and especially for kids but we can't just destroy the resource and then stand around asking why it's destroyed.

That unit used to have some good bucks in it. When Hillman’s had a good portion of that northern end locked up, you’d see quite a few bucks chukar hunting later in November. It still has everything needed to produce again, they just got to have a chance.

 

[WeiserBucks]

That unit used to have some good bucks in it. When Hillman’s had a good portion of that northern end locked up, you’d see quite a few bucks chukar hunting later in November. It still has everything needed to produce again, they just got to have a chance.

I agree 100%, but it's not looking promising. We ran into a family hunting there a few years ago and the kids hadn't killed their does yet. I told them that the regs had finally changed and they told me to my face "We've been doing this for ever, not changing now."

 

[WRO]

Idahos mule deer management is a joke.

If it’s otc it should be a 5 or 7 day season in early October with capped zones.

 

[Spoonbill]

Idahos mule deer management is a joke.

If it’s otc it should be a 5 or 7 day season in early October with capped zones.

If we went to a 5 to 7 day otc season, there wouldnt be a forkie alive because more people would feel like they have to shoot the first deer they see so “they could get their buck”. If anything, elimating doe tags, including youth and archery hunts, should be on the table.
I am probably in the minority but I would rather see longer seasons. If Idaho went to a five week season like Montana, how many more people would be willing to not shoot the first deer they saw because they had more time to hunt for a mature buck?
Another issue that whitetail deer are outcompeting mule deer. A change I would like to see is instead of having to select a whitetail only tag for residents, just allow residents to use a general deer tag to only hunt whitetails.

 

[Dioni A]

The tough pill to swallow that I doubt many of you are going to believe is that some of these units are at carrying capacity. I've spent a lot of time this spring talking to biologists. Deer and elk are coming in underweight and malnourished. The habitat is not what it used to be. The deer herd can only be as large as the weakest habitat component. With expanded road systems, housing developments, expanded backcountry use we're losing massive amounts of habitat couple that with a few serious years of drought and it's not pretty. The feed may still be there In some places but the deer either won't use or have lost the knowledge of the areas maternally and it results in a net loss in carrying capacity.

 

[WRO]

If we went to a 5 to 7 day otc season, there wouldnt be a forkie alive because more people would feel like they have to shoot the first deer they see so “they could get their buck”. If anything, elimating doe tags, including youth and archery hunts, should be on the table.
I am probably in the minority but I would rather see longer seasons. If Idaho went to a five week season like Montana, how many more people would be willing to not shoot the first deer they saw because they had more time to hunt for a mature buck?
Another issue that whitetail deer are outcompeting mule deer. A change I would like to see is instead of having to select a whitetail only tag for residents, just allow residents to use a general deer tag to only hunt whitetails.

There already aren’t many forkies alive, there’s a large component of hunter’s that are happy with 35lbs of boned out meat.

Doe tags for mule deer need to be abolished.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheTone]

Allowing increased whitetail harvest across the southern part of the state should absolutely be on the table, but pushing non residents to the northern part of the state to hunt them would stink for those of us up here. Whitetails aren’t the unlimited resource some would be led to believe. Decreasing southern elk number should also be on the table but people are so resistant to it already as they’ve become accustomed to having good elk hunting. It’s also something to consider that hunter displacement with season changes is a real thing, people don’t typically just quit when a spot they are used to hunting has a season change that effects their ability to hunt, they move to a new area and thus pressure in other places goes up and someone else’s hunting satisfaction is going to change

 

[Dioni A]

There already aren’t many forkies alive, there’s a large component of hunter’s that are happy with 35lbs of boned out meat.

Doe tags for mule deer need to be abolished.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is neglecting the fact that deer numbers are at carrying capacity in some units. Until we resolve habitat issues some of these units cannot support more animals. Your not fixing the root of any problem taking away doe hunts.

 

[WRO]

This is neglecting the fact that deer numbers are at carrying capacity in some units. Until we resolve habitat issues some of these units cannot support more animals. Your not fixing the root of any problem taking away doe hunts.

Got it, killing more deer is the answer, Its worked great so far.

Carrying capacity is more often than not a political number rather than a biological number.

 

[Dioni A]

Got it, killing more deer is the answer, Its worked great so far.

Carrying capacity is more often than not a political number rather than a biological.

Feels like you only know one tool to fix things with so you're going to use your hammer no matter what the problem is.

The point that you're missing is that until you fix the root of the problem not killing deer isn't going to make the deer herd healthier. You may get a short-term bump in deer numbers but if animals are already coming in underweight Fawn production will come in lower and you won't really add anything substantive.

 

[eye_zick]

The tough pill to swallow that I doubt many of you are going to believe is that some of these units are at carrying capacity. I've spent a lot of time this spring talking to biologists. Deer and elk are coming in underweight and malnourished. The habitat is not what it used to be.

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly. The units are at carrying capacity for deer. But that capacity is diminished by the grazing that happens on every inch of national forest.

This will show you the allotments: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=3f449b10713748eb90f2dd386751d28a


Take this AOI for example, 3,700 sheep on prime mule deer habitat...


The sheep grazing may not reduce the carrying capacity of deer on a 1:1 basis, but they greatly reduce the population quantity and quality of fat reserves.

Secondly - these AOI's allow for up to 45% of the winter range to be grazed. Grazing is incompatible with mule deer.