ND Deer season structure - Are changes needed?

[Labman]

ND Proclamation states tags are not transferable and the century code says no person may use the license of another.....

So we have that going for us.

I wouldn’t and don’t have a problem with transferable landowner tags. Not everyone hunts and what do I care what they do with a piece of paper? My gripe in ND if I still had a dog in the fight is that a landowner with 150 ac gets to hunt the whole unit (unlike deer where it is their deeded land only), and can pull a tag nearly every year, while the average sportsman will never see an elk tag in their lifetime. The sportsman see no benefit to that landowner getting a tag, that land isn’t automatically open to hunting. If a peasant draws an elk tag it’s 1x a lifetime -including a cow!? COME ON MAN! Isn’t that the saying nowadays?

 

[dirtytough]

I'm a proponent of this personally. By that I mean I'm a proponent of having a draw where every archer still gets a tag, but they have to pick between whitetail or mule deer, they have to apply at an arbitrary date before the season starts, and they are only allowed to kill one buck no matter how many tags they hold. So if they draw a rifle tag for 4C and shoot a buck in September with their bow, they don't get to rifle hunt in 4C in November because they've already notched their tag.

Its a combination of the first two options I listed above.

I'm also in support of splitting seasons. NDBHA's FB polls show this to be the more acceptable changes discussed. I think it looks like a 9 day season at the end of October and a 9 day season in the middle of November. I'd take it a step further and say all does should be harvested in the October season, before they are bred, or even perhaps a 3rd doe only season in the beginning of October. We'd need a biologist to elaborate on this.

The November season will become the most coveted, without a doubt. Success rates will probably be lower in the October season. But I think the hope is that you can draw that tag more often, so people might not feel the need to shoot a forky on the last day. But, I'm probably wrong on that.

I ran some analysis and learned something kind of interesting. I compared units 4C with unit 2G in terms of county road miles within the units. I chose these 2 units because they are very close to each other in total surface acreage (4C =510k acres, 2G = 523k acres). I learned that in terms of county roads, 2G has over double the amount of county road miles compared to 4C (4C = 591 miles, 2G = 1,351 miles), yet 4C has around 300 more deer tags in that unit. I haven't run the analysis for 4A or 4B or the other badlands units but I would assume based on the road data that we would see this common trend when making similar comparisons for the other badlands units as well.

I found this to be significant information in trying to get to the bottom of our problem and address concerns with a solution if there is one. There's a tremendous amount of traffic shoved into 2 short windows of time on less overall access points/roads than the eastern whitetail units.

To me, there's only two ways to address that problem of intense pressure for rifle season....cut tags or slit seasons.

I don't really feel archers are giving up much if they can draw an archery tag and rifle tag but still only kill one buck. That wouldn't improve odds for rifle hunters to get drawn. And you would still have multiple rifle hunters hunting archery every year because they can't draw a rifle tag.

Idaho is proposing/doing the exact thing I mentioned with archery antelope. Make people use their first choice in the draw for archery. You are guaranteed the tag but you have zero chance of drawing the rifle tag then. It would increase rifle draw odds and lower pressure during archery.

Something else that I would like to see is maybe split the rifle quota and create a mule deer muzzleloader tag. That way it opens up more options.

Archery statistics paint a different picture. Around 1000 mule deer killed over the entire season at 40% success rate (that success rate includes all archery tags). So with that number that's 2467.5 bowhunters after mule deer for the entire season, presumable most are hunting in September, October, November. We don't have much for statistics available that tell us how many bowhunters are after whitetail in the badlands.

2019 Deer Season Summarized | North Dakota Game and Fish

A total of 57,949 North Dakota deer hunters took approximately 37,250 deer during the 2019 deer gun hunting season, according to a post-season survey conducted by the state Game and Fish Department.

gf.nd.gov

I checked out that link and feel like the number of archery mule deer hunters you tabulated is pretty low. Your math is obviously correct but its hard to tabulate without an exact breakdown. If my calc's are correct there were about 607 non res any deer archery tags in 2019. That would put resident archers around 1850 for mule deer. That seems extremely low out of 24,902 archery licenses. Is it really only 7.5% of resident archers hunting mule deer?

I believe if you made archers choose archery as their first choice there would be a lot more left over rifle tags for doe's and whitetail bucks. Plus rifle hunters could draw more tags second choice.

And with rifle hunters being able to draw more often it might be easier to get a split rifle season approved. And like you or another poster posted maybe they would let a few more younger bucks walk?

It really seems like across the west most people want maximum opportunity and don't care about quality as much. I want opportunity also but would rather have a more quality experience socially. Of course I would like better quality and more mature animals. To start with though I would just like them address some of the crowding issues.

I love hunting mule deer in September. But when you have 10 guys pile out of a couple rigs and do deer drives with their archery equipment it puts a damper on it for me.

brocksw have you talked to NDGF and asked if they are receptive to change or how to go about trying to get somethings changed? From their perspective I am sure it is easier just to keep it as is so they don't have to deal with the backlash from unhappy parties no matter what the changes were.

 

[brocksw]

I don't really feel archers are giving up much if they can draw an archery tag and rifle tag but still only kill one buck. That wouldn't improve odds for rifle hunters to get drawn. And you would still have multiple rifle hunters hunting archery every year because they can't draw a rifle tag.

You're right, in that most scenarios the archery hunter doesn't have to give up as much. To me that's because there are fewer archery hunters and success rates are far lower. We see this in other states as well with Mule deer and Elk. Archery tags are given out more freely because of those factors. Until one or both of those numbers equalize, I think that's the way it should be.

Idaho is proposing/doing the exact thing I mentioned with archery antelope. Make people use their first choice in the draw for archery. You are guaranteed the tag but you have zero chance of drawing the rifle tag then. It would increase rifle draw odds and lower pressure during archery.

I don't think it would increase them that much. That's the problem with ND mule deer. There's so few rifle tags and such a high success rates that this idea doesn't put that many tags back into the pool. Since it's a point system, we all have the odds of when we should draw. So bowhunters can just hunt with a bow until they have enough points draw the rifle. Basically nothing has changed from what we have now except that 1 year they draw the rifle they won't bow hunt. Some might miscalculate, but overall people will play the statistics.

Think about it, archery hunters for the whole state take 1,000 mule deer. Even if you eliminate archery all together and add 150 tags each to the 4X units, what are you really doing to draw odds? Yes, that's 150 people that get to go hunt, but the draw odds might have only changed by half a year and you have even more pressure out in the badlands during that 16.5 day season, and some of that 150 are bowhunters too, so you just moved them from one season to the other. What have we really accomplished aside from eliminating archery?

I checked out that link and feel like the number of archery mule deer hunters you tabulated is pretty low. Your math is obviously correct but its hard to tabulate without an exact breakdown. If my calc's are correct there were about 607 non res any deer archery tags in 2019. That would put resident archers around 1850 for mule deer. That seems extremely low out of 24,902 archery licenses. Is it really only 7.5% of resident archers hunting mule deer?

I don't disagree with you there. The problem is the GF hasn't collected data that paints a real clear picture here, so like you say we can only go by the numbers they provide. This is why I'm such a staunch supporter of splitting the archery tag by species. Both for the data it will provide the GF about pressure on the resource and priorities of hunters, plus I think it has the potential to be better for the resource.

I think Mule deer success rates are far lower than whitetail. This is pure speculation on my part. But let's say they're 20% success instead of 40%. This bumps up our mule deer bowhunter numbers quite substantially and I think that's more inline with reality. But again, even doubling them to 5k hunters...are they all out there over 16.5 days like rifle hunters?

I believe if you made archers choose archery as their first choice there would be a lot more left over rifle tags for doe's and whitetail bucks. Plus rifle hunters could draw more tags second choice.

And with rifle hunters being able to draw more often it might be easier to get a split rifle season approved. And like you or another poster posted maybe they would let a few more younger bucks walk?

You might be right, but this seems to be very geographically dependent. I drew a second choice whitetail buck tag last year in SW ND. That tells us a lot about the number of people applying for that unit. All the leftover tags are usually down in SW ND. They don't sell out right away either when they go out to First come first serve. That means people don't want to drive down there and the people complaining about not getting drawn for deer tags don't simply want to hunt deer. They want to hunt deer close to home or the same place they always hunted deer. I get where they're coming from but do we really considering limiting other opportunity so they can stay close to home to hunt deer?

It really seems like across the west most people want maximum opportunity and don't care about quality as much. I want opportunity also but would rather have a more quality experience socially. Of course I would like better quality and more mature animals. To start with though I would just like them address some of the crowding issues.

In ND, my belief is that the NDGF will pursue balance that favors opportunity when it comes to Mule Deer.

brocksw have you talked to NDGF and asked if they are receptive to change or how to go about trying to get somethings changed? From their perspective I am sure it is easier just to keep it as is so they don't have to deal with the backlash from unhappy parties no matter what the changes were.

I've talked to them numerous times. Just depends on the issue. They are very receptive to change overall in my opinion, and do a very good job trying to listen to public input, aka managing the social aspect as well as the biological. It's the resident hunters of ND that are not good with change.

 

[Labman]

It's the resident hunters of ND that are not good with change.

The most accurate statement made on the internet today.

 

[dirtytough]

I don't think it would increase them that much. That's the problem with ND mule deer. There's so few rifle tags and such a high success rates that this idea doesn't put that many tags back into the pool. Since it's a point system, we all have the odds of when we should draw. So bowhunters can just hunt with a bow until they have enough points draw the rifle. Basically nothing has changed from what we have now except that 1 year they draw the rifle they won't bow hunt. Some might miscalculate, but overall people will play the statistics.

I'm not saying they will add rifle tags because of less archers. I am saying there will be less archers competing for rifle tags and less rifle hunters out during archery season.

Unless I completely don't understand how our draw works here in ND which I don't believe is the case, you lose your points if drawing your first choice. So there is no way to apply and draw an archery tag as first choice and still gain a point to game the rifle tag is 5-6 years.

Which will help with the social issue of crowding during archery season and help rifle draw odds.

Think about it, archery hunters for the whole state take 1,000 mule deer. Even if you eliminate archery all together and add 150 tags each to the 4X units, what are you really doing to draw odds? Yes, that's 150 people that get to go hunt, but the draw odds might have only changed by half a year and you have even more pressure out in the badlands during that 16.5 day season, and some of that 150 are bowhunters too, so you just moved them from one season to the other. What have we really accomplished aside from eliminating archery?

I'm not saying eliminate archery. I'm saying spread the hunters out. Archery is crowded during September. As crowded or more than when I have been out during rifle. I hunt the same areas during both seasons so maybe its just that archers are crowding that area and rifle hunters don't?

In ND, my belief is that the NDGF will pursue balance that favors opportunity when it comes to Mule Deer.

So they aren't going to lower rifle tag allocations in your opinion. Which is what I believe also. They might split the season but who knows. Because I think rifle will be crowded regardless I would like to see the change happen in archery for selfish reasons. If they would make a muzzy season and maybe shift a lot of the doe tags that direction that could help with the rifle crowding?

A more quality experience. If that means giving up a rifle tag every 4ish years I am ok with that.

I've talked to them numerous times. Just depends on the issue. They are very receptive to change overall in my opinion, and do a very good job trying to listen to public input, aka managing the social aspect as well as the biological. It's the resident hunters of ND that are not good with change.

Thanks for this. I totally believe that last sentence is the main obstacle.

There are multiple states that don't allow you to buy an archery mule deer tag otc and allow you to apply for rifle hunts. And the ones that do have way more mule deer. Also a few are limiting some of their archery otc units or eliminating otc archery all together.

If you need help or know of any meetings that it might help to attend let me know. I would be down with:
Guaranty archery tag for first choice in the draw.
Unit specific archery tag.
Species specific archery tag.
Split rifle seasons.
Adding a muzzy mule deer season and reducing the rifle quota.
Shift more of the rifle tags to muzzy to reduce crowding during rifle season.

I honestly think the 1 buck deal isn't going to do anything when it comes to crowding during archery or rifle imo.

Regards, Branden

 

[brocksw]

I'm not saying they will add rifle tags because of less archers. I am saying there will be less archers competing for rifle tags and less rifle hunters out during archery season.

I see what you're saying now. I think I was on a slightly different page. That would be one way of doing it.

So correct me if I'm still confused.

But you're saying you would get the archery tag every year, but you forfit your ability to get a point or build points for the rifle draw by doing so.

If that's the case, sign me up. I'm bias towards archery though, if it wasn't already obvious. If I got to archery hunt every year for mule deer. I'd give up every other deer tag in ND until I couldn't physically pull a bow back anymore.

It makes me wonder how many people would give up rifle hunting vs bow hunting. And I'm still not sure if that would improve rifle odds much. Maybe slightly more than the numbers I posted above? Lots of speculation there though.

I always encourage people to attend the advisory board meetings held throughout the state. It is an awesome chance to engage in the process, ask questions, hear dialogue, and see what's front and center in the GF brain trust. Any changes to season, tag allocations, etc. Will all be discussed at these meetings in advance of the decision.

 

[dirtytough]

I see what you're saying now. I think I was on a slightly different page. That would be one way of doing it.

So correct me if I'm still confused.

But you're saying you would get the archery tag every year, but you forfit your ability to get a point or build points for the rifle draw by doing so.

Yes Idaho is a little different since they don't have points. Here if you draw your first choice for deer you lose your accumulated points and don't gain a point. So essentially the NDGF could model it after Idaho and guarantee you draw that hunt code if you use it as your first choice. If you don't use that hunt code as your first choice you have zero chance of drawing it. We don't have hunt codes so they could just say statewide archery or something like that.

Something else they could do is possibly split the non res any deer archery tags and allocate them by the unit that the 15% of tags corresponds to. Then instead of all the non res hunting 2-3 units it would spread them out a little more also. Plus then NDGF should be able to manage a little better and actually know how many hunters are hunting what units.

 

[NDGuy]

Yes Idaho is a little different since they don't have points. Here if you draw your first choice for deer you lose your accumulated points and don't gain a point. So essentially the NDGF could model it after Idaho and guarantee you draw that hunt code if you use it as your first choice. If you don't use that hunt code as your first choice you have zero chance of drawing it. We don't have hunt codes so they could just say statewide archery or something like that.

Something else they could do is possibly split the non res any deer archery tags and allocate them by the unit that the 15% of tags corresponds to. Then instead of all the non res hunting 2-3 units it would spread them out a little more also. Plus then NDGF should be able to manage a little better and actually know how many hunters are hunting what units.

If that's the case, sign me up. I'm bias towards archery though, if it wasn't already obvious. If I got to archery hunt every year for mule deer. I'd give up every other deer tag in ND until I couldn't physically pull a bow back anymore.

Oh boy if you want a badlands archery shit show every year lol let guys keep their whitetail archery tag and give them a muley buck archery tag too.

If there is any semblance of a muley only archery tag given out, they have to control the amount of hunters in these units. Currently there is nothing in place to do so.

 

[brocksw]

Oh boy if you want a badlands archery shit show every year lol let guys keep their whitetail archery tag and give them a muley buck archery tag too.

If there is any semblance of a muley only archery tag given out, they have to control the amount of hunters in these units. Currently there is nothing in place to do so.

Well he's saying if you get an archery mule deer tag then thats it. No whitetail archery. No putting in for rifle. No getting a point for rifle.

I would be really curious how many archery mule deer tags would be handed out. Selfishly, Id be satisfied with that system just because I'd get an archery mule deer tag every year. Giving up a rifle hunt once every few years is no big deal to me.

Once they go to unit specific then it has to become a true limited entry. So it's a double whammy. They'd cap the number of tags in each unit and go to a draw similar to whats dirtytough is saying, or some variation of it.