FUTURE DEER STRATEGY FOR THE CENTRAL REGION

[nebocreek]

FYI-- Packout and Forfun have a couple of proposals that I believe have some merit. Hopefully, they will post them on the forum. Their ideas are insightful and I believe could be implemented and it would not tie the game managers hands. In fact it could help them implement better management models because the proposals require sacrifice on the part of hunters as needed. You could PM them for their proposals and then give them feedback. I believe that Packouts proposal takes into consideration most if not all of the factors that affect the herds. More input will be needed. The buck/doe ratio, habitat etc. will take care of itself because it is set up be self regulating. The DWR folks will be able to manage it with the numbers they have counted and then the permits will be tied to the formula. Hope I have got you interested. Thanks for your help.

[Big uns']

Nebo,

So basically you already had it in your mind what you wanted to hear!!! I think that if anything is done to the nebo unit it needs to be excluded from the "central" region, listed as a sensitive area or something.

In recent observations (the last five days) the stansbury's look good, the oquirrh's look good, and all the west side of strawberry (all the way to the wasatch) looks real good. So how about coming up with a strategy for the nebo unit itself!!!

[nebocreek]

That is what the proposal would help do-- allow some micro-managing on smaller areas without affecting the entire region. I see no reason to restrict the entire region when there may be only certain areas that need it.
By the way, I certainly believed that there needed to be some changes to help the Nebo area, but I really wasn't sure what would be best. The input I have recieved has certainly been the biggest part of helping me understand what some hunters would be willing to do-- that is, restricting their own hunting seasons etc. I believe that most hunters are now willing to give up part of their opportunity if they believe that it will help the herds and the quality.

[wyo2ut]

The input I have recieved has certainly been the biggest part of helping me understand what some hunters would be willing to do-- that is, restricting their own hunting seasons etc. I believe that most hunters are now willing to give up part of their opportunity if they believe that it will help the herds and the quality.

Maybe instead of asking hunters whether or not they are willing to give up part of their opportunity, you should be asking whether or not hunters giving up their opportunity would benefit the herd. From the information gathered by the central region this appears NOT to be the case...

...how about this: ask not what the hunters should give up, but what the hunters can give! How about asking the hunters if they are willing to donate their time and money to habitat preservation, reservation, access, and improvements?

Also, without seeing this "proposal" I fear one thing: if we micromanage the Nebo and shorten the season in this area alone, the result may end up hurting other areas. According to Cranney, "We've tried reducing the season to five days in some areas of the state, but that hasn't worked real well," he said. "People hunt the 5-day areas hard while they're open, and then they shift and apply pressure to other areas in the region. For example, in the Southeastern Region we've had several 5-day hunts over the past two seasons and the Manti unit, which is open for the full 9-day season, has fallen below objective."

Also, Craig Mclaughlin said, "The problem is that five-day seasons don't do what they're intended to do," McLaughlin said.

[Coyoteslayer]

Wyo2ut has the 5 day hunt really hurt the Southern Unit. You said so yourself that you are seeing more bucks

wyo2ut wrote:Quote:
With that being said, I, too, have liked the change from a 9 day rifle hunt to a 5 day rifle hunt because I feel like I am seeing more mature bucks...

So make up your mind where you stand instead of playing in the middle.

[wyo2ut]

Nice try, Coyote...but I never said I am seeing "more" bucks. Reread what I posted.

Also, you are looking at one aspect of a very complex equation and assigning only one cause for an effect that has multipe causes. "More" bucks, as I have posted previously, is probably more of a result of good habitat, good nutrition, less predation and roadkill, and fewer doe tags than it is a result of a 5-day hunt.

Again, the DWR has good evidence to support the case against 5-day hunts...

Also, what may be a "limiting factor" on one unit may not be on another unit...if hunter harvest were a limiting factor on the Nebo unit, I would be all for changing hunting regulations to try and reduce hunter harvest. But, it isn't. So, from that vantage point, Wile E., I won't make up my mind...

[Coyoteslayer]

WYO2ut wrote

Most of what I am going off is what was said last year at the RAC meeting in the south. If I remember the southern RAC last year right, the DWR showed that hunter hours actually increased during the 5 day hunt compared to a 9 day hunt and the number of bucks killed did not change. So, if that is true, it doesn't matter if the hunt is 5 days or 9 days...

With that being said, I, too, have liked the change from a 9 day rifle hunt to a 5 day rifle hunt because I feel like I am seeing more mature bucks...

...I am trying to find what was said at that RAC.

Also, the DWR wants to micromanage units... splitting the state into additional hunt areas would improve management by providing more flexibility in determining hunter numbers of the units.

Right now deer numbers in certain areas of the state are being sacrificed to the regional system. We have certain units where we can't get the number of deer to the objective of 15 bucks per 100 does because the current system doesn't allow us to control hunter pressure in those areas.

According to Cranney, "We've tried reducing the season to five days in some areas of the state, but that hasn't worked real well," he said. "People hunt the 5-day areas hard while they're open, and then they shift and apply pressure to other areas in the region. For example, in the Southeastern Region we've had several 5-day hunts over the past two seasons and the Manti unit, which is open for the full 9-day season, has fallen below objective."

Also, Craig Mclaughlin said, "The problem is that five-day seasons don't do what they're intended to do," McLaughlin said. "Most of the deer taken during the rifle hunt are taken during the opening weekend, so a five-day season really doesn't save many deer."

Thats is why Pro asked what is it.......? I quoted it

Very entertaining thread.

wyo2ut wrote:Quote:
With that being said, I, too, have liked the change from a 9 day rifle hunt to a 5 day rifle hunt because I feel like I am seeing more mature bucks...
Then he said:Quote:
My crystal ball says that hunter harvest is not the limiting factor...therefore, changing the harvest will not improve the herd.

Hunting is a limiting factor because its a FACT when the NEBO was a 5 day hunt then the buck/doe ratio went up

[wyo2ut]

more MATURE bucks...

Do I need to read it for you? "more MATURE bucks". Not "more total bucks". There is a huge difference...thanks, though, for trying to put words into my mouth!

What I am expecting from you now is some lengthy cut and paste quote from Todd Black on how more mature bucks will ensure that the does will be bred during the first estrous cycle...to save yourself some time let me say this: THE DOES ARE BEING BRED IN THE FIRST ESTROUS CYCLE AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF MATURE BUCKS WILL NOT INCREASE THE HERD.

[wyo2ut]

Hunting is a limiting factor because its a FACT when the NEBO was a 5 day hunt then the buck/doe ratio went up

Hmmm...one simple cause for one complex result. Very simplistic thinking...I don't suppose that the improvements the winter range condition and the increase in water those same years played a significant role, though, did they?

[Coyoteslayer]

hahahaha oh man you make me laugh so hard sometimes. So it wasnt the 5 day rifle season during those 3 years that helped the buck to doe ratios, but the water and habitat????

Ratio in 1999-2000 was 5/100

Then the 5 day hunt started

2000-2001 was 12/100

2001-2002 19/100

2002-2003 15/100

Then the rifle was back to 9 days

2003-2004 16/100

2004-2005 8/100

2005-2006 13/100

snow storms that hit hard and many bucks went down because of the long 9 day hunt with snow to move the bucks lower for easier access

Currently 2006-2007 is 10/100

But I guess the habitat and water didnt last long because Wyo2ut the expert who know everything about the Nebo says its habitat and water and NOT any hunting pressure.