The Greatest Mule Deer Herd? With Gary Fralick

[robby denning]

Gary’s always a good bio to chat with.

The Greatest Mule Deer Herd? with Gary Fralick - Rokslide

Robby hosts Gary Fralick, biologist for the Wyoming Range Mule Deer herd. They discuss and all that goes into managing the world’s greatest mule deer herd

www.rokslide.com

 

[venado mula]

Horses, mountains and Booner mule deer bucks is my language. Thanks Robby!

 

[robby denning]

Horses, mountains and Booner mule deer bucks is my language. Thanks Robby!

 

[venado mula]

Great talk with Gary. The APR part of the conversation is exceptional (I worked on a project of this very such topic). It's just another tool in a biologist's toolbox and it works in certain circumstances like Gary said. It really speaks volumes about mule deer and their different geography, every herd is different in every state and even within that state so if it doesn't work in one place it will in another. I'm fascinated on how our mule deer biologists will/are adapting to climate change. Every season continues to have more extremism in my area but I really believe our mule deer are resilient and the utmost survivors (the horses and I have had to adapt to some new games the bucks are developing). I'm seeing big bucks in such unorthodox places already from security cover loss from wildfires and climatic pattern shifts in some of the areas I hunt (Forbs growing I haven't seen in years at particular elevations, slope angles and positional faces, different species of grasses and sedges that appear at elevations I haven't seen before) and the bucks in particular have been shifting as well (especially during traditional times of the season). Keep up the podcasts Robby, everyone serious about mule deer should listen. Thanks!

 

[robby denning]

Great talk with Gary. The APR part of the conversation is exceptional (I worked on a project of this very such topic). It's just another tool in a biologist's toolbox and it works in certain circumstances like Gary said. It really speaks volumes about mule deer and their different geography, every herd is different in every state and even within that state so if it doesn't work in one place it will in another. I'm fascinated on how our mule deer biologists will/are adapting to climate change. Every season continues to have more extremism in my area but I really believe our mule deer are resilient and the utmost survivors (the horses and I have had to adapt to some new games the bucks are developing). I'm seeing big bucks in such unorthodox places already from security cover loss from wildfires and climatic pattern shifts in some of the areas I hunt (Forbs growing I haven't seen in years at particular elevations, slope angles and positional faces, different species of grasses and sedges that appear at elevations I haven't seen before) and the bucks in particular have been shifting as well (especially during traditional times of the season). Keep up the podcasts Robby, everyone serious about mule deer should listen. Thanks!

Super interesting!

& thanks

 

[wyobigbuckhunter]

I have grown up and currently live in the heart of the Salt River Range. I have had many conversations with Gary over the years and am grateful for the work that he has done for nearly four decades. I think that Gary, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and commission have incredibly difficult task of not only managing wildlife from a biological standpoint, but also to appease the Wyoming public as well. This was stated multiple times in the podcast. I can't imagine how frustrating it would be to ride the line of known science, yet trying to satisfy sportsman that only see the landscape through an anecdotal lens clouded by emotion and many false pretenses based on tradition. As Gary mentioned, one way that the G&F tries to quantify this is through the hunter harvest and satisfaction surveys. I agree with the department that this is one way to quantify public opinion. However, basing management decisions on the current way of taking these surveys has a potential to give a false pretense due to the fact that the surveys AREN'T mandatory. There has been a great push locally and state wide from sportsman to make harvest surveys mandatory. Yet, there has been significant resistance from the G&F to implement this. I still have not been given a sufficient answer as to why. I would be curious to know if anyone has more information as to why harvest surveys aren't mandatory in Wyoming.

It was also questioned in the podcast about the reasoning for again cutting non-resident tags. Thank you Robby for pushing this question. Although it wasn't stated directly, it seemed clear to me that this was based more on a social construct than biological. My purpose with saying this isn't to start the debate. I just hope that Wyoming residents (myself included) realize the slippery slope that we are starting to go down. Factors affecting the viability of the Wyoming range mule deer herd are complex. Perseverating on non residents and other hunters, isn't the answer in my opinion. I am seeing a huge movement of residents wanting to limit everyone else (including residents) because there are "too many hunters on the landscape". This way of thinking ONLY encourages self centeredness, a mentality of entitlement, and a notion of over crowdedness which isn't always the case.. It also creates unnecessary conflict when we should be targeting things that we know make a difference to the survivability and longevity of mule deer in general (ie. habitat, migration corridors, winter, summer range, etc.). Change is coming. I just hope people realize what they are asking for and the ramifications of what they are risking.

 

[mntnguide]

The "mandatory harvest reports" was brought up at the commission meetings.. game and fish wants to go that way.. but they are under contract with the current company for another year i believe. But are talking with University of Wyoming and the professor down there who has done a lot for the game and fish to utilize a system for mandatory reports. I believe we will see it soon enough hopefully, but they can't break contract right now is what i understood, but are in talks to get a new program built and started

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

 

[MallardSX2]

Mandatory reporting should be in everyone's toolbox.

The law should be that if you don't report, you don't get a license. If you get caught lying on your report, you don't get a license for 5 years and you lose all preference points for all species in that state.....

 

[wyobigbuckhunter]

The "mandatory harvest reports" was brought up at the commission meetings.. game and fish wants to go that way.. but they are under contract with the current company for another year i believe. But are talking with University of Wyoming and the professor down there who has done a lot for the game and fish to utilize a system for mandatory reports. I believe we will see it soon enough hopefully, but they can't break contract right now is what i understood, but are in talks to get a new program built and started

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Thanks for this. This is the first time I have been given a straight answer in regards to mandatory reporting. I must have missed this discussion at the commission meetings for some reason. Hopefully soon this will come to pass.

 

[venado mula]

I have grown up and currently live in the heart of the Salt River Range. I have had many conversations with Gary over the years and am grateful for the work that he has done for nearly four decades. I think that Gary, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and commission have incredibly difficult task of not only managing wildlife from a biological standpoint, but also to appease the Wyoming public as well. This was stated multiple times in the podcast. I can't imagine how frustrating it would be to ride the line of known science, yet trying to satisfy sportsman that only see the landscape through an anecdotal lens clouded by emotion and many false pretenses based on tradition. As Gary mentioned, one way that the G&F tries to quantify this is through the hunter harvest and satisfaction surveys. I agree with the department that this is one way to quantify public opinion. However, basing management decisions on the current way of taking these surveys has a potential to give a false pretense due to the fact that the surveys AREN'T mandatory. There has been a great push locally and state wide from sportsman to make harvest surveys mandatory. Yet, there has been significant resistance from the G&F to implement this. I still have not been given a sufficient answer as to why. I would be curious to know if anyone has more information as to why harvest surveys aren't mandatory in Wyoming.

It was also questioned in the podcast about the reasoning for again cutting non-resident tags. Thank you Robby for pushing this question. Although it wasn't stated directly, it seemed clear to me that this was based more on a social construct than biological. My purpose with saying this isn't to start the debate. I just hope that Wyoming residents (myself included) realize the slippery slope that we are starting to go down. Factors affecting the viability of the Wyoming range mule deer herd are complex. Perseverating on non residents and other hunters, isn't the answer in my opinion. I am seeing a huge movement of residents wanting to limit everyone else (including residents) because there are "too many hunters on the landscape". This way of thinking ONLY encourages self centeredness, a mentality of entitlement, and a notion of over crowdedness which isn't always the case.. It also creates unnecessary conflict when we should be targeting things that we know make a difference to the survivability and longevity of mule deer in general (ie. habitat, migration corridors, winter, summer range, etc.). Change is coming. I just hope people realize what they are asking for and the ramifications of what they are risking.

I agree 100% every state should have mandatory harvest reporting, I'm data driven and the more the better. Remember that all employees at state wildlife agencies are public servants. This is something I strived to reiterate to past employees and the general public during my time served. I always continue to push for more public involvement with our wildlife managers (public meetings, online engagement, etc.) I even suggested a chatbot to answer questions about species specific questions that the public could access online. When I worked for ODFW they implemented a mandatory hunter harvest report after season closer or if failed to report you received a $25 fee toward the purchase of your next calendar year tags/license purchase. I believe this is fair and it seems to work. When I worked for MTFWP, they have always hired folks to conduct phone surveys but nothing has been mandatory (these are randomized phone surveys from a list of tag holders), we are pushing for that to become a mandatory 100% online report, hopefully this get's implemented this season. I can't give you a direct answer on why some states do not implement a mandatory harvest only that I have been in meetings and engaged in conversations with biologists and some have stated that their annual surveys have provided enough data for management objectives (I disagree) while others agree that the more reporting and hunter harvest engagement the better. Wildlife agencies are complex in regards to the way they conduct business. Everything is budget/money driven (some use third party contractors for IT systems, some use internal employees with no contracts) and unfortunately some employees develop emotional feelings to projects that transparency is lost between employees/departments within (and with other stakeholders/land use agencies). It takes general public engagement to keep wildlife agencies accountable and operating for the public's resource at all times. I would advise contacting your state wildlife agency and asking for it, most will respond positively toward the subject. It takes all hunters to participate year around on our public wildlife. Hope this helps.

 

[wyobigbuckhunter]

I agree 100% every state should have mandatory harvest reporting, I'm data driven and the more the better. Remember that all employees at state wildlife agencies are public servants. This is something I strived to reiterate to past employees and the general public during my time served. I always continue to push for more public involvement with our wildlife managers (public meetings, online engagement, etc.) I even suggested a chatbot to answer questions about species specific questions that the public could access online. When I worked for ODFW they implemented a mandatory hunter harvest report after season closer or if failed to report you received a $25 fee toward the purchase of your next calendar year tags/license purchase. I believe this is fair and it seems to work. When I worked for MTFWP, they have always hired folks to conduct phone surveys but nothing has been mandatory (these are randomized phone surveys from a list of tag holders), we are pushing for that to become a mandatory 100% online report, hopefully this get's implemented this season. I can't give you a direct answer on why some states do not implement a mandatory harvest only that I have been in meetings and engaged in conversations with biologists and some have stated that their annual surveys have provided enough data for management objectives (I disagree) while others agree that the more reporting and hunter harvest engagement the better. Wildlife agencies are complex in regards to the way they conduct business. Everything is budget/money driven (some use third party contractors for IT systems, some use internal employees with no contracts) and unfortunately some employees develop emotional feelings to projects that transparency is lost between employees/departments within (and with other stakeholders/land use agencies). It takes general public engagement to keep wildlife agencies accountable and operating for the public's resource at all times. I would advise contacting your state wildlife agency and asking for it, most will respond positively toward the subject. It takes all hunters to participate year around on our public wildlife. Hope this helps.

It does. I have reached out to the local area representatives with little success as stated previously. Your comment helped me realize that a call at the state level may be the next step. Thank you for your response and willingness to share behind the scenes information.

 

[ianpadron]

I have grown up and currently live in the heart of the Salt River Range. I have had many conversations with Gary over the years and am grateful for the work that he has done for nearly four decades. I think that Gary, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and commission have incredibly difficult task of not only managing wildlife from a biological standpoint, but also to appease the Wyoming public as well. This was stated multiple times in the podcast. I can't imagine how frustrating it would be to ride the line of known science, yet trying to satisfy sportsman that only see the landscape through an anecdotal lens clouded by emotion and many false pretenses based on tradition. As Gary mentioned, one way that the G&F tries to quantify this is through the hunter harvest and satisfaction surveys. I agree with the department that this is one way to quantify public opinion. However, basing management decisions on the current way of taking these surveys has a potential to give a false pretense due to the fact that the surveys AREN'T mandatory. There has been a great push locally and state wide from sportsman to make harvest surveys mandatory. Yet, there has been significant resistance from the G&F to implement this. I still have not been given a sufficient answer as to why. I would be curious to know if anyone has more information as to why harvest surveys aren't mandatory in Wyoming.

It was also questioned in the podcast about the reasoning for again cutting non-resident tags. Thank you Robby for pushing this question. Although it wasn't stated directly, it seemed clear to me that this was based more on a social construct than biological. My purpose with saying this isn't to start the debate. I just hope that Wyoming residents (myself included) realize the slippery slope that we are starting to go down. Factors affecting the viability of the Wyoming range mule deer herd are complex. Perseverating on non residents and other hunters, isn't the answer in my opinion. I am seeing a huge movement of residents wanting to limit everyone else (including residents) because there are "too many hunters on the landscape". This way of thinking ONLY encourages self centeredness, a mentality of entitlement, and a notion of over crowdedness which isn't always the case.. It also creates unnecessary conflict when we should be targeting things that we know make a difference to the survivability and longevity of mule deer in general (ie. habitat, migration corridors, winter, summer range, etc.). Change is coming. I just hope people realize what they are asking for and the ramifications of what they are risking.

Well said and couldn't agree more.

If ya haven't given the last few WY posts on the big Facebook mule deer groups a read..holy cow... you'd think every WY resident knows more than all game biologists combined, and that game and fish employees sit at a desk all day and don't even know what a mule deer looks like

Sad state of affairs, and I feel like the last 3 years of other world issues has forced a lot of folks to dig their heels in deeper and throw all science and experts out the window after having the trust in both those things plummet.

We're seeing the same thing in Montana. Lots of old timers that grew up during the peak of the logging industry when the landscape had peak carrying capacity, almost zero predators, and 1/5th the hunting pressure...demanding more/bigger bucks when the herd has been relatively stable for almost 20 years, 100% of does are being bred, no antlerless tags issued in 20 years, and FWP is issuing more cat tags every year...

Ask them how far from the roads they've been huntin'....well that's besides the point!

The guys that are the loudest critics of the agencies are the guys that don't hunt predators, don't volunteer on habitat projects, and don't talk to their local/state reps about earmarked funding for game and fish.

Bios like Gary are truly an invaluable resource for hunters and I trust that the pendulum will eventually swing back to where game departments are well respected (at least in high functioning states like WY and MT)

 

[wyobigbuckhunter]

Bios like Gary are truly an invaluable resource for hunters and I trust that the pendulum will eventually swing back to where game departments are well respected (at least in high functioning states like WY and MT)

I couldn't agree more. I hope you are right with the pendulum swinging back. The sad reality is that Gary is nearing retirement and it will be interesting to see how everything changes when his experience and tenure isn't there anymore.

 

[CM]

I grew up hunting Western Wyoming, I love that country and hope those deer bounce back. The last few years I have blamed "influencers" for Western Wyoming tags getting tough to draw but this thread and podcast led me to crunch the numbers. I used the draw data on Wyoming G&F's website and a calculator. I might have fat fingered a few numbers, but I think it's mostly correct. NR applicant numbers haven't changed that much, there was a bit of a bump in 2014-2016 and 2021-2022 (I think this coincides when the hunting was getting good), but overall applicants have been pretty consistent. The tag cuts are what is killer, roughly the same amount of hunters are vying for ~1/3 of the tags

I don't mind the decrease in tags after bad winters but it seems like any time tags are cut, they don't come back. I don't always think tag cuts are the silver bullet we think they are, when tags were easy to get a lot of guys hunted them pretty casually. You can bet the next time I have a tag I'll be spending most the hunt there. I don't think less NR tags always means less pressure. Idaho's recent NR change shows this, the NR deer tags used to not even sell out and a lot of them were purchased as a "backup" and not really hunted, now they are really tough to get, and I think guys are hunting them like they are 10+ point draw tags.

 

[snowymtnwolf]

Once again. Pennsylvania representing !!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk