Mule deer opportunity?

[Point Creep]

@Forkyfinder that’s likely an exaggerated anecdotal swag from me, based on my own personal experience with my kids, other kids I know, and all the pics I see annually more so now than ever with Dads who are avid hunters and line their kids up on the best of the best for the youth hunt.

I never needed a youth hunt, my kids didn’t, but if it’s there - it’ll get used by all, as would a similar youth hunt for all the other species if it were available.

Great thing to do with the current quality of our multi-month general season with full on rifle season though all of November right?

More Grown men should be completely satisfied with rifle hunting opportunities for mule deer outside of November. Plenty of deer will continue to get taken if the rifle season was limited to October.

 

[It’s Bucky]

B&C Trophy of the Year in all categories I believe, 1987

 

[El Jason]

Limited access private ranches are just like limited entry districts on a much small scale. The few hunters that do have access are targeting the best of the best in the bell curve and those bucks are likely getting shot at less then optimum age. Throw in people that are not invited and bucks that leave the property and it is very hard to grow many truly big deer even on private. Bucks in WY and CO up until recently are just much harder to hunt when they are in the mountains.

While this is true, one very big ranch in the mix only allowed a very ridiculously low numbers of deer killed each year. Road access for poaching was very low. Yet, we still didn’t see the size of deer you’d expect from such limited harvest.

 

[antlerradar]

While this is true, one very big ranch in the mix only allowed a very ridiculously low numbers of deer killed each year. Road access for poaching was very low. Yet, we still didn’t see the size of deer you’d expect from such limited harvest.

Maybe they just had too many deer.

 

[El Jason]

Maybe they just had too many deer.

Could be?

 

[antlerradar]

Art,
Thanks for cleaning this thread up with a good story and concisely delivered opinions.

Thats kind of my point. The population comes back, and they will be wiped out quickly via doe tags again. If too many deer are dying from lead, and its keeping the population down - thats simply not going to change until landowners/fwp can agree on expanding numbers that are comically low relative to carrying capacity.

Ironically - thats what i was going to allude to with the yao meme. Icelands got an average height of over 5'11" - in terms of raw numbers im certain china has more people (by raw number) than iceland of people who are taller than 6'.

So if youd like more of an age class, more of an antler class, more deer is the most straight forward way.


Sort of dont agree as i cant completely follow the logic from begin to end. I get what youre saying, but if we managed the whole state as restrictive LE - i think the harvest would be comparable to the r4 areas @El Jason mentioned at best. Perhaps im wrong but i see those ranches getting way less pressure than any public land animal (though notably for too long in MT). Part of it is simply the terrain/elevation are mild compared to those places, and thats not a controllable variable.

This i do agree with. Wondering though - if landowners pockets are lined with deer shot in november - how/why isnt that true with elk too? And if it is - if youre changing everything to be "better" why not include changes to elk hunting that are better? Elk are the real cash cow - theres a 2.5 multiplier on an elk hunt compared to a deer hunt. Heck shooting a damn cow elk costs half as much as a mule deer buck and the duration where they (elk) can be shot expanded at least a week.

On that note - maybe an october season for both elk/deer with regulation preventing you from shooting both in the same unit would be better? Deer or elk, depending on unit geography/needs, oct 1 and the other species follows? Or - pick MD units, cant hunt bull elk in those units? Just a thought.


Its disappointing (not suprising) to be attacked about feeling the way i do. I spent about 5:1 days archery hunting to rifle hunting, many seasons of rifle hunting is just a day or two and id rather look for a deer or a cow than hunt bulls with the orange army. However i know plenty of people - who do - who think that MCS proposal sucks that would never come here and say anything because of whats quoted below. For the folks who have been cursed with genetic misfortune and cant grow into competent readers (let alone olympians), i bolded it, hoping they'll read it enough times to get.



1/4 or more of MTs older age class are killed by children in mid October. @Frequently Banned Troll is that an experience based estimate - or did you have some miracle of good data from fwp? Why is it such a leap to think that many more grown men will be completely capable of doing the same thing?

Yeah. Ive got a toddler and potential for more. They dont need a special day for hunting.

On private ranches the lower pressure is focused on the bucks in the very top portion of the deer herd and those deer are not hard to find on private during the rut. I could cull the bucks on the ranch as effectively as I cull cows in the corral with our season. Sure there is a lot more pressure in the mountains, but the pressure is spread out over the entire bell curve, combine that with it is more difficult to find deer and some of the top end bucks will slip through to live another year.

Landowners are still going to make money off of bucks that live on their property too. As for elk, Oct, with the tail end of the rut falling in the first half of the month might be even more advantageous for landowners then November. Landowners are going to make money off of wildlife regardless of season timing. The best we can do is chip at the edges. Quit looking for the magic bullet that will end commercialization of wildlife in Montana. It does not exist.

I don't know where you get your info about MCS and our proposal. We have pitched the proposal to a few group and pod-casters. We are willing to do so to anyone that will listen. We tried to with the board at MCS and they refused to hear us. The MCS board wants nothing to do with it. Who ever is telling you that our proposal is an MCS proposal is ether misinformed or purposely trying to misinform you.

 

[rogerthat]

I have a friend who owns a blocked up 50 section ranch. He is very very selective on the mule deer harvest, yet come rut, often those up and comer big bucks slip off to the neighbors and get shot. Even 50 sections is just 7 miles by 7 miles and if you have a big buck living in the middle(unlikely) it’s just 3.5 miles to the neighbors. They can walk that far in a night

 

[antlerradar]

I have a friend who owns a blocked up 50 section ranch. He is very very selective on the mule deer harvest, yet come rut, often those up and comer big bucks slip off to the neighbors and get shot. Even 50 sections is just 7 miles by 7 miles and if you have a big buck living in the middle(unlikely) it’s just 3.5 miles to the neighbors. They can walk that far in a night

A few years back we had this nice buck on the property, over the course of the season I saw him on 8 different sections, four different landowners and in spots 4 miles apart as the crow flies. It is a flat out miracle that he avoided the outfitters on the neighboring properties or getting blasted form the road.

 

[coleL]

Here in Utah we had an intense winter a few years ago that winterkilled a lot of deer. There has been a decreased amount of tags since then, but the amount is slowly coming up. They still aren't doing any doe tags unfortunately and some units could really benefit from issuing some out.

 

[Brittany Chukarman]

In Oregon mule deer country it's not just a lack of mature bucks, it a lack of deer in general. There's miles after miles of good habitat with few to no deer that used to have good populations. Fawn recruitment is horrible. Not that it makes any difference to the big picture but I haven't hunted Oregon deer in 11 years. And I'm allowed landowner tags. Just don't feel right about killing them anymore after witnessing the decline.

 

[huntin24/7]

In Oregon mule deer country it's not just a lack of mature bucks, it a lack of deer in general. There's miles after miles of good habitat with few to no deer that used to have good populations. Fawn recruitment is horrible. Not that it makes any difference to the big picture but I haven't hunted Oregon deer in 11 years. And I'm allowed landowner tags. Just don't feel right about killing them anymore after witnessing the decline.

Just curious, are there a lot of coyotes in that area? I know it’s more than just that, but I’ve been feeling more and more every year that the ever increasing number of coyotes seemingly everywhere is having a major effect on fawns.

 

[coleL]

Just curious, are there a lot of coyotes in that area? I know it’s more than just that, but I’ve been feeling more and more every year that the ever increasing number of coyotes seemingly everywhere is having a major effect on fawns.

It's a shame that many states are beginning to restrict trapping more and more. If some of them weren't so restrictive it would tremendously help deer populations.

 

[Brittany Chukarman]

Yes, a lot and I agree. While bird hunting the nearby hills I find the bones. Aerial gunning was outlawed except on private land. When that used to take place in the right conditions at the right time they would take out a lot of coyotes but it needs to be done every year or two.

 

[The_Coloradoboy]

In Oregon mule deer country it's not just a lack of mature bucks, it a lack of deer in general. There's miles after miles of good habitat with few to no deer that used to have good populations. Fawn recruitment is horrible. Not that it makes any difference to the big picture but I haven't hunted Oregon deer in 11 years. And I'm allowed landowner tags. Just don't feel right about killing them anymore after witnessing the decline.

Eastern Oregon is a depressing place it seems. My fiancé is from Oregon and family owns a sizable chunk of land around Burns. Such cool country and great habitat, but low numbers of deer is an understatement. Oregon truly is the worst managed state I’ve seen in all the west…

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

i herd a ton of coyotes when i was on my n e whitehorse muzzy deer hunt,,very low deer numbers and virtually didnt see a single fawn in any of the doe groups.

 

[OldManOnTheMountain]

No doubt the reasons for depressed herd numbers vary from region to region, but I agree with those who have said the primary cause for most is habitat degradation/fragmentation. Where, in the past, fires opened vast swaths of forest to create better deer habitat this is no longer the case today because timber companies routinely replant with pine or DF and then spray to eliminate competing broadleaf species. Of course, removing broadleaves such as whitethorn or oak destroys not only the leafy browse deer require, but also the acorns that fatten them up in the fall. To make matters worse, spraying is prohibited over traffic, with the result that the last remaining browse in plantations thus treated exists only in narrow corridors alongside busy roadways, compounding an already grim situation for deer.

For those hunting burns in forested areas, it becomes apparent within just a few years that the better hunting is found on public lands, because the USFS is less inclined to manage entirely for the benefit of the timber industry. Loggers complain that these lands are wasted, but what works well for loggers does not work very well for hunters, so no complaints from me...

So much for the situation on the summer ranges. The winter range with which I am familiar has also been seriously degraded. To start, fires have destroyed much of the bitterbrush and mountain mahogany that used to provide browse and thermal cover. Cheat, thistle and mules ear not only spread hotter fires, but also quickly invade barren soil, replacing superior native species. Overgrazing by horses, cattle and sheep have all contributed. One of my favorite stomping grounds abuts a wild horse management unit that is supposed to support no more than 32 animals. I counted 128 horses coming off one waterhole recently, and this was not the only band in the area. It is so bad that local ranchers put out only a few dozen head where there used to be hundreds. Of course, it won't make much difference which of the two species does the damage, but at least the number of cattle can be controlled, and the length of time they spend on the range can be limited (excepting the Bundy's, of course). Not so with mustangs. The Dept of the Interior/Congress/Administration have all been negligent in their management, mostly because the public does not understand that this is a competition between horses and wildlife, as opposed to competition between horses and cattle. By portraying this problem as a choice between horses or more cattle, wild horse advocates have successfully positioned themselves as heroes to many in a straw man argument that distracts from the larger question of wildlife impact. Cattlemen are relatively few in number and make an easy target for do-gooders; wildlife lovers are largely unaware of the damage to their own interests and so remain uncommitted to resolving the problem of excess horses.

Poaching. I see a lot of deer on my property because there are hundreds of oaks. Sadly, because parcels in the area are relatively small and secluded, most of these bucks will never see four points to a side. Residents tame them by feeding them from the time they are fawns. One could kill one with a bow, or even a rifle, and no one would notice. I once went onto a neighbor's property to recover stolen materials and found that he had two dozen or more small racks tacked up on his barn. I reported the theft to law enforcement and expressed my concerns to wildlife officials, and learned that this guy had never purchased a tag, despite being a lifelong resident in this state. In the end, the case went nowhere--which is why people get away with the poaching. And why honest hunters need to be more vigilant. Its a tough job to protect valuable property, and we cannot expect wildlife officials to succeed while taking a hands-off approach, ourselves.

Around here, predators receive most of the blame (if not attention) when it comes to low deer numbers--probably too much. There cannot be (for example) "many" mountain lions in an area where there is "no" big game to consume, as I frequently hear suggested. Coyotes and bear, on the other hand, have other sources of food, and so can prey heavily on fawns during the early summer and then rely on alternative sources of food as they become available. Their numbers may remain high even as deer populations fall. We can all do something about that. Buy a bear tag. Take one cold weekend this winter and call up a few coyotes. Don't hang them over a fence, and don't turn it into a contest. When it comes to predator control, publicity is not a deer's best friend.

Happy hunting.