Latest on Wy Region G Deer success rates

[6.5Express]

The comparison to utah is not valid. Limited entry is limited to draw for both residents and non-residents alike.

Region G is open to any and all residents. Point being if you want to make an impact on this regions deer herd you'll need to restrict the majority of participants not the minority.

This point is exemplified as they already reduced non-resident tags just this season and the impact was unnoticed.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

See my other response regarding Utah and my non resident status there.

The point in the article linked at the beginning of this is that it takes does to make more deer. Limiting the opportunity to hunt the bucks will only potentially increase harvest success percentages, increase the average age class of the bucks, and increase hunter satisfaction. Those dont necessarily increase the overall popultion.

Too often hunters confuse saving the herd with managing for older age class of bucks.

Point is, what we all want is more deer so we can have more bucks and more opportunity. Doesnt matter if youre a meat hunter or a trophy hunter.

 

[realunlucky]

My point with Utah is that im not whining on the internetthat residents opportunity should be reduced so mine can be maintained or improved.

It was simply pointed out that without adjusting resident status quo, continuing to further restrict nonresidents tags in unit G has no impact except to appease the selfishness of some residents.

I agree moving the season dates changes the amount of resident hunting pressure and more bucks live. That's going to be hard to sale to the locals.


Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[mt terry d]

Seemed like a sarcastic shot at the bios and WGF more than a statement of fact.

As a FNG I’ll point out that English is my second language. My native tongue is Sarcasm of which I am supremely fluent. Re: killing bucks doesn’t affect populations I call BS. When you don’t have enough bucks to compete for does you have young bucks breeding. Young bucks produce lighter birth weights which have a higher mortality rate. One way to cut the number of bucks killed without restricting hunting opportunities is to allow hunters to self- regulate via allowing hunters over a certain age, say 30 for instance, one buck every 3 or 4 years. Many would be willing to pass up smaller bucks in hopes of tagging a real trophy instead of shooting a forkie the last weekend just to fill the tag. You may reasonably counter that more older bucks would be killed. I highly doubt that as big bucks are rarely ever easy to kill and probably 90% of hunters only kill easy bucks And those young stupid bucks get a better chance to learn how to not be so stupid. Another thing that can be done is don’t allow rifle hunting during the rut which is the time the big bucks are most vulnerable.

 

[wind gypsy]

Maybe i missed the recommendation in this thread to cut NR licenses by 83%. I responded to a recommendation to make resident licenses LQ by stating i didnt think it was necessary in WY due to our low population statewide.

Haha and that was the origin to all of this. It was recommended to cut G tags to 50 total. My interpretation was that there were 405 G tags in 2022 but looking now, maybe it was closer to 350? regardless, that's a big ass proportion of the tags but still small compared to what #'s indicate show up for residents from your low population. So if the state population isn't big enough to go away from General tag hunts in the WY range, why would cutting a much smaller # of NR help?

 

[6.5Express]

It was simply pointed out that without adjusting resident status quo, continuing to further restrict nonresidents tags in unit G has no impact except to appease the selfishness of some residents.

I agree moving the season dates changes the amount of resident hunting pressure and more bucks live. That's going to be hard to sale to the locals.


Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Going back through this string, my point was that due to our limited statewide population, i didnt feel making what is regions G and H for non residents LQ for residents. What it would / could do depending on the quota level is shove more residents in some other general unit that very likely doesnt need more pressure.

Utah has almost six times the population Wyoming does. Colorado has about 10 times the population, and Idaho about four times. It would be interesting to see how the resident license allocation and overall deer herd numbers correlate with the population ratios.

 

[amassi]

So, you pay for a chance to hunt, invest in energy stocks, and purchase firearms and ammunition in your home state but dont actively participate in any of the other things that you suggested others do?

Sorry, but my name isnt Buzz.

Read it again, maybe tomorrow.
I do all the things I propose others do
Even in states I don’t live in, often on my own dime and time as a volunteer.
Respect and awe of a resource aren’t stopped by lines on a map
You just sound an awful lot like another of Wyomings finest. Eerily similar


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[6.5Express]

It was recommended to cut G tags to 50 total. My interpretation was that there were 405 G tags in 2022 but looking now, maybe it was closer to 350? regardless, that's a big ass cut in tags.

Im seeing the post you're referencing now. Sorry.

My point remains the same regarding the desire by some to move the residents to LQ in what is G and H for non residents.

 

[wind gypsy]

Im seeing the post you're referencing now. Sorry.

My point remains the same regarding the desire by some to move the residents to LQ in what is G and H for non residents.

My point remains the same as well. I'm not even advocating for residents moving to LQ. But if one advocates to cut G tags down to 50 without any concessions (WGF #'s 4658 Res hunters in G 2022) well that's pretty damn selfish

My point with Utah is that im not whining on the internetthat residents opportunity should be reduced so mine can be maintained or improved.

You don't have to, they already allocate the changes in opportunity equally when permit quotas go up or down by using a set 10% NR allocation. Not the case with G/H tags as we've covered repeatedly.

 

[realunlucky]

As a FNG I’ll point out that English is my second language. My native tongue is Sarcasm of which I am supremely fluent. Re: killing bucks doesn’t affect populations I call BS. When you don’t have enough bucks to compete for does you have young bucks breeding. Young bucks produce lighter birth weights which have a higher mortality rate. One way to cut the number of bucks killed without restricting hunting opportunities is to allow hunters to self- regulate via allowing hunters over a certain age, say 30 for instance, one buck every 3 or 4 years. Many would be willing to pass up smaller bucks in hopes of tagging a real trophy instead of shooting a forkie the last weekend just to fill the tag. You may reasonably counter that more older bucks would be killed. I highly doubt that as big bucks are rarely ever easy to kill and probably 90% of hunters only kill easy bucks And those young stupid bucks get a better chance to learn how to not be so stupid. Another thing that can be done is don’t allow rifle hunting during the rut which is the time the big bucks are most vulnerable.

I'm interested in this statement "younger bucks breeding produce lighter fawn weights". Do you happen to remember the impact percentages? We had quite a few long time biologists from various states on the Rokcast and of all the things that can impact fawn birth weights I don't recall any of them mentioning this.

Have you ever had to wait every 3 to 4 years to hunt deer? I'm asking because I live in state where every deer tag is a draw. Just my opinion but the longer the wait the more likely people are to notch thier tag even if the animal fails to meet their expectations. They waited and aren't going home empty handed.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[6.5Express]

My point remains the same as well. I'm not even advocating for residents moving to LQ. But if one advocates to cut G tags down to 50 without any concessions (WGF #'s 4658 Res hunters in G 2022) well that's pretty damn selfish

I suggest you go back and read my first post you quoted. What i pointed out that you said was obvious was that changing residents to LQ wasnt necessary with our small population.

Is the selfish comment directed at me for that? If so, im not following your reasoning

 

[Archer86]

Yeah, lets get serious about saving these deer by further limiting the folks who wait 10 years to come out once and make up 8-9% of hunters and 13% of the harvest but not restrict that vast majority of hunters who can do it OTC for cheap every year. That'll move the needle.

I can hunt it otc and did this year didn't see much for deer had a first year hunter with me if anyone of us was going to shoot a deer this year it was going to be her and she passed on most bucks a nr would have shot. So to say otc residents are the problem is crazy also. Residents want that area to come back as well. All limiting resident will do is all but guarantee less nr tags carefully what you wish for.

 

[6.5Express]

Have you ever had to wait every 3 to 4 years to hunt deer? I'm asking because I live in state where every deer tag is a draw. Just my opinion but the longer the wait the more likely people are to notch thier tag even if the animal fails to meet their expectations. They waited and aren't going home empty handed.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

THIS

 

[wind gypsy]

I suggest you go back and read my first post you quoted. What i pointed out that you said was obvious was that changing residents to LQ wasnt necessary with our small population.

Is the selfish comment directed at me for that? If so, im not following your reasoning

Perhaps i'm talking in circles. Good night to you sir.

 

[wind gypsy]

I can hunt it otc and did this year didn't see much for deer had a first year hunter with me if anyone of us was going to shoot a deer this year it was going to be her and she passed on most bucks a nr would have shot. So to say otc residents are the problem is crazy also. Residents want that area to come back as well. All limiting resident will do is all but guarantee less nr tags carefully what you wish for.

LOL. Well if you cut G tags down to 50 and keep throwing 4600 resident hunters in there, there wont be many NR who still want to chase it. Just a lot of scorned people who were at one time fine with waiting a decade for something you feel entitled to every year but eventually feel burned by the selfishness.

 

[Archer86]

LOL. Well if you cut G tags down to 50 and keep throwing 4600 resident hunters in there, there wont be many NR who still want to chase it. Just a lot of scorned people who were at one time fine with waiting a decade for something you feel entitled to every year but eventually feel burned by the selfishness.

I would be fine with that might make it easier for my nr buddies to draw the tag then if there is less nr interest

 

[ProStaffSteve]

Yeah, lets get serious about saving these deer by further limiting the folks who wait 10 years to come out once and make up 8-9% of hunters and 13% of the harvest but not restrict that vast majority of hunters who can do it OTC for cheap every year. That'll move the needle.

Residents can’t do every other year bro

 

[Pro953]

I'm interested in this statement "younger bucks breeding produce lighter fawn weights". Do you happen to remember the impact percentages? We had quite a few long time biologists from various states on the Rokcast and of all the things that can impact fawn birth weights I don't recall any of them mentioning this.

Have you ever had to wait every 3 to 4 years to hunt deer? I'm asking because I live in state where every deer tag is a draw. Just my opinion but the longer the wait the more likely people are to notch thier tag even if the animal fails to meet their expectations. They waited and aren't going home empty handed.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

The buck age to birth weight thing is confusing to me too. Doe age maybe, but the bucks breeding age should have no impact on the size of the fawn. The genetics passed on should be same same no matter what age they breed at.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HOT ROD]

To the people who are concerned about waiting 10 plus years to draw a resident general area why not burn Ur points on one of our premium LQ areas. Would really like to no where 4600 resident hunter number comes from since there is no mandatory reporting in Wyoming so how would WG&F no if I hunted G or H.... The only way they could no is if WG&F would make residents pick a general region tag and I would be okay with that.... If they did that then we would really no how many residents did hunt region G and mandatory reporting would give them a better understanding of the total number of deer killed... Resident or Non resident fails to mandatory report they will not be able to get or draw or receive a preference point the following year...

 

[mt terry d]

I agree that the longer one waits the more likely one will lower one’s standards. I’ve done that many times like most everyone else (how many of us have looked at an animal on opening day and passed because it wasn’t a “ first day “
buck?) But if I’m only allowed that one buck every 3 or 4 years I am probably going to save my tag and eligibility to hunt next year instead of taking a small one the last weekend and not being able to hunt at all the next year or two. It’s self- restricting. Just look at it as you get one tag good for three years. How much do you like to hunt vs how bad do you need to kill something? Re: mature vs young bucks breeding. The genetics are probably always there. But (generally speaking) mature bucks have the proven strength and smarts to survive. Intelligence and stamina have to play a part in herd survival. Not every offspring even from record book animals will necessarily have or pass on the hardiness and intelligence to survive and grow strong. Time and nature and hard winters help weed them out.

 

[sndmn11]

I'm under the impression that best practice when under population carrying capacity is to save does and shoot more bucks.

The best I could read through all the comments was @amassi pointing that out, and then things got off track.

Why isn't there more folks wanting to shoot more bucks now to help improve the population health now and in the long term? This is where I scratch my head at some double speak of conservation efforts because it seems the concern is more for antlers. Calling for a reduction in buck tags is directly adding competition for does and fawns.

Over population = kill does/cows
Under population = kill bucks/bills

I also wonder if populations weren't well over carrying capacity when there's an increase in winter kill like occured in this thread and with the elk in NW Colorado.