Another muley management question.

mtmuley

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
8,168
Location
montana
So the area I live and hunt in has what seems a healthy mule deer population. Although healthy, it is basically two different populations. One population produces tremendous bucks that are highly visible and what seems a very high buck to doe ratio. These deer live low in the valley in fairly highly (human) populated areas. The other population lives high in the mountains, equally impressive bucks and a lower, but healthy buck to doe ratio. (From my obsevations only) There are doe tags available, my family has been successful in the drawing. The tags are only valid in the lower valley area. As I said there are two different populations, they don't coexist even during the rut. So, is there a problem killing does in the lowland area that has a high human population? These deer in my opinion, have nothing to do with the overall health of the mule deer in this area. I see a ton of posts about "don't kill muley does". Is there an exception here? mtmuley
 

mtmander

Active member
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
845
Location
Philipsburg, MT or NC
If there are doe tags for a area I would use one. You say there are in a populated area so the deer 'probably' have more interactions with people and they want to reduce the herd.
 

bobbydean

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 5, 2001
Messages
2,414
Location
New Mexico
mtmuley.

Good point, Muley's can be starving in the mountains, but down in the valley or farm land, the farmer is cursing the critter.

Population controls hunts should always be in specific areas needing control.

The hunters are doing the farmer or rancher a favor in overpopulated areas.
 

Hunting Wife

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
2,455
Location
Almost North Dakota, not quite Canada
Sounds like a classic human dimensions problem. Deer doing well in close proximity to people, probably low natural mortality hence good population growth and people are becoming unhappy about game damage, vehicle collisions, or something similar. Given the limited area for the tag as I understand from your description, it sounds like a reasonable attempt to deal with a localized problem. I would take advantage of the tag in this scenario.
 

belly-deep

Active member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
3,465
MT FWP will issue tag not because populations are too high but because ranchers/farmers complain too much. If it seems to you like there's too many deer, kill one. If not, don't.
 

mtmuley

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
8,168
Location
montana
It's not a new tag for the area to be clear. Although the area has been split in the last couple years. I've had the tag before and have had no issues with filling it. I'm going to again. I was merely curious if the "never kill a doe" concensus was the firm mindset of a majority of hunters. To me, it wouldn't hurt to eliminate the whole population that lives among the semi rural area. I don't think it would have an impact on the "wild" deer population. mtmuley
 

sbhooper

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
4,178
Location
North Platte, Nebraska
People that say that does should not be killed, need to read up on deer management. Mule deer can be more problematic than the white-tailed deer, but both need to be managed according to habitat and population. I would say that with two distinct herds, then follow what the game and fish people allow.

Here, there are areas that they have restricted a bit more on the muley take to help the herd since we had a disease issue. Now, some areas just to the south of me are getting overrun with muleys again (read that success story). I have a permit that allows for one muley and one white-tailed doe in one of the areas.

A rancher friend of mine lives in a wintering area and has several hundred in his fields all winter. They slaughter them on the country road that goes through that area. He gets pretty tired of them, but that particular area is still on the re-bound.

If game and fish agencies say that it is OK to kill does, I will be the first in line to fill my freezer. I laugh when people say that they won't kill does. GREAT! More permits for me!
 

mixedbag

New member
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
2,178
Only reason I don't kill doe is because I don't care much for deer meat.I killone buck a year and that's plenty.If a friend wants some meat,then I'd take a doe if I have the tag.Nothing wrong with taking doe in moderation.Here in Pa, years ago the state went with a herd reduction program and slaughtered the does.My area of high amounts of public land is still trying to recover from that plan from almost 10 years ago
 

tjones

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
3,829
Those mule deer doe B license are there to address social issues. There is no biological reason to have them. Landowner pressure brought them.
 

mtmuley

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
8,168
Location
montana
Those mule deer doe B license are there to address social issues. There is no biological reason to have them. Landowner pressure brought them.
Do you think that the deer B licenses need to be eliminated? mtmuley
 

tjones

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
3,829
Do you think that the deer B licenses need to be eliminated? mtmuley

Depends on which science you choose to manage by.

biology says yes, sociology says no. FWP tends to lean hard towards sociology.
 
Caribou Gear

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
94,564
Messages
1,409,857
Members
29,658
Latest member
Kfd518
Top