Why? CA hunting licenses over time.

[Mark1970]

Zooming in, I did notice that recent year to year variation (though not necessarily the long term down trend) seems to be driven by upland, small game.
I was also surprised to see more upland stamps than big game.
Makes sense. CA has some of the best quail hunting in the union.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Nope.... does not seem to be a national issue.
Hunting licenses are on the rise nationally.

View attachment 168687

Massive landscape change, in terms of deer herd reduction.

Predators-meh, lions still get killed in CA and all the west has lions and aren’t seeing the same issue.

The major drop from the 50s has to be a product of the transformation of the Central Valley + fire suppression.

Human development is the biggest threat to herds in the west IMHO.

In terms of hunter numbers, I hunted MA this year, I’d guess I hunted 12+ days, a mix of sitting and still hunting. I saw 2 hunters in the field. I saw a couple more at trailheads, all the hunters I met were over 50, all lamented about how in the 80s they would do huge deer drives with 20 people and now there is no one. At the same time I found 16 stands in a single WMA basically one every couple hundred yards...though I never once walked under someone in a stand. Some of these stands were decades old, many though were new... it seems like in this area maybe 40-50 people would hunt a couple of days in the 80s now there are a handful of hunters who hunt 15+ days.

MA has pretty similar barriers to entry as CA and/or firearm stigma. 2020 had 58,000 license holders, 2004 had 68,000. It’s percent population of hunters is super low like .8%

I think generally there is a loss of interest coupled with a suburbanization that destroys habitat and reduces public hunting spots. Further a lot fewer opportunities to hunt private across the country.

So less hunters but even fewer spots, which makes it seem like there are more hunters even though the data says otherwise.

 

[TOGIE]

I’m not trying to belittle anyone’s analysis here and the situation is absolutely very complex. But to wllm’s point to some degree I think we’re over complicating it.

more people —> less animals —> fewer licenses sold —> lower harvest

Colorado is headed down this path. It’s the good old days boys

 

[Blacktailbc]

Deer numbers in CA are abysmal. Biologists , DFG like to claim habitat. Take a walk in B Zone. Everywhere you look , great habitat. A mix of burns from 2 to 12 yrs old. Heck, half the damn state has burned in the last 15 years. You can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a bear. Seriously, it’s the golden days if you are a bear hunter.
People are only going to hunt for so long without seeing any animals until they throw in the towel.
I’ve hunted B Zone since I was a kid, and it’s depressing what has happened to deer numbers. A guy can still find a buck, but you have to work really hard for it.

 

[Lyfter1013]

Deer numbers in CA are abysmal. Biologists , DFG like to claim habitat. Take a walk in B Zone. Everywhere you look , great habitat. A mix of burns from 2 to 12 yrs old. Heck, half the damn state has burned in the last 15 years. You can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a bear. Seriously, it’s the golden days if you are a bear hunter.
People are only going to hunt for so long without seeing any animals until they throw in the towel.
I’ve hunted B Zone since I was a kid, and it’s depressing what has happened to deer numbers. A guy can still find a buck, but you have to work really hard for it.

I’ve never hunted the B zones so I’m not familiar with the area, what do you think the cause of the decrease in the area is if not Habitat related. I know there’s a ton of bears up there just have a hard time thinking the bears do that much of a damage on the fawns

 

[Blacktailbc]

Predators & persistent drought are two big factors imo .

 

[H&H]

A lot of good info here that people put together, gets people thinking. All I know that in my neck of the Sierra Nevada Foothills, land is being cut up and developed for single family homes. The migratory paths have been cut off with interstates and subdivisions. The forests above 5000' are choked to death with same-age class trees as logging was deemed too destructive by the tree-huggers, owl hooters and the like of the 70's/80's/90's. Deer no longer migrate. Their food supplies in valley and foothills year round due to irrigation of lawns, golf courses and landscape beautification. I see more deer and waaaaaaay better antler class in deer that live in gated communities compared to high mountain deer. In our area Cal-Trans, National Forests, DFW and others are now getting together and starting to install wildlife crossings in areas of the most concern (migration routes, high kill areas due to vehicles).

Yes we need more understory burns, need more logging, need more wildlife crossings. But more than anything we need a state agency who has the ability and desire to manage the game...er...wildlife in California. Like every gov agency in Cali..too complicated and too political.

 

[SO7mm]

I think more people putting in.
Some refuges had some partial closures due to not getting enough water, but you dont really see that in the duck validation data.

It feels like there are more duck hunters now, but I think in reality there are fewer, but they are trying harder.

Thanks. That's what I thought.

 

[SO7mm]

A lot of good info here that people put together, gets people thinking. All I know that in my neck of the Sierra Nevada Foothills, land is being cut up and developed for single family homes. The migratory paths have been cut off with interstates and subdivisions. The forests above 5000' are choked to death with same-age class trees as logging was deemed too destructive by the tree-huggers, owl hooters and the like of the 70's/80's/90's. Deer no longer migrate. Their food supplies in valley and foothills year round due to irrigation of lawns, golf courses and landscape beautification. I see more deer and waaaaaaay better antler class in deer that live in gated communities compared to high mountain deer. In our area Cal-Trans, National Forests, DFW and others are now getting together and starting to install wildlife crossings in areas of the most concern (migration routes, high kill areas due to vehicles).

Yes we need more understory burns, need more logging, need more wildlife crossings. But more than anything we need a state agency who has the ability and desire to manage the game...er...wildlife in California. Like every gov agency in Cali..too complicated and too political.

Not too good at hunter recruitment either. I think it was last year that they changed the youth hunting age for deer tags. I personally now a lot of high school kids that had been waiting to draw a youth tag and were left out of the drawing.

 

[jryoung]

Not too good at hunter recruitment either. I think it was last year that they changed the youth hunting age for deer tags. I personally now a lot of high school kids that had been waiting to draw a youth tag and were left out of the drawing.

Legislation again, not the department.

 

[jryoung]

Predators & persistent drought are two big factors imo .

Drought is habitat, and poor habitat and predation work together. Poor forage due to drought causes deer to leave their home range and be more susceptible to predation.

Between the Mendo complex and the August complex fires as well as a few others these past 4 years could result in massive habitat turnover if we can get good rains.

 

[sneakypete]

Is that because of a decrease in spots or more people putting in?

More people!

 

[Slightball]

CA rules and regulations are much harder to understand than other states, including things like non-lead ammo, etc. On top of that, the zones and difficultly in drawing a decent zone are tough. Sure they issue 60,000 tags in A zone, but we all know what hunting there is like.

Unless you have money for private property access or are very dedicated to scouting and putting the work in, there just isn't the attraction like some other states.

 

[jryoung]

CA rules and regulations are much harder to understand than other states, including things like non-lead ammo, etc. On top of that, the zones and difficultly in drawing a decent zone are tough. Sure they issue 60,000 tags in A zone, but we all know what hunting there is like.

Unless you have money for private property access or are very dedicated to scouting and putting the work in, there just isn't the attraction like some other states.

I don't think CA regs are difficult at all when compared to a MT general deer v deer permit, preference and bonus points for each as well. Or WY and their various types of licenses. In CA it's pretty straight forward, what parts do you think are so challenging?

 

[NoBadP17]

Given the low numbers of animals, what are your guys' thoughts on reducing the number of tags to one instead of two? Or keep the 2 tag system but cutting the total number of tags in half in the OTC zones? I'm all for getting 2 bucks annually, if the population supports it. However in my experience, just seeing a legal buck in D5 or A Zone is a win in and of itself.

Of course I'd like to shoot a mature animal, but the prevalence of the "if I don't shoot that 1x2, the next guy will" mindset seems to erode that opportunity. Granted I'm guilty of it myself, as my A Zone buck this year was exactly that.

CA has so many issues between the anti-hunting sentiment, predator mismanagement, loss of habitat, droughts, wildfires, poor deer numbers, over allocation of tags coupled with a HUGE human population and ever expanding development. "Frustrating" has been my favorite word for 2020, and this issue is no different. I'd like it to be discussed at one of the upcoming commission meetings, but then again, it being CA and all, it'd prob turn around to bite us and eliminate deer hunting altogether

 

[cahunter805]

A lot of great points have already been made. Habitat and predators are IMO the top 2 issues that have greatly affected CA deer populations.
Coyotes are a big problem that many overlook. I can’t tell you how many hunters I talk to that state oh I saw 4 coyotes but no deer on my hunt today. Why didn’t you shoot the coyotes? Didn’t want to ruin my deer hunt. Hmmmmmm but you didn’t see a deer.
Also in my personal experience I’ll shoot a coyote any chance I get. It doesn’t scare deer that much either. I’ve been hunting and a buddy or myself shot a coyote. We walked around the hill and there stood a group of deer. The shot didn’t scare them one bit.

 

[Lyfter1013]

I don’t think This is a huge factor when talking about the decline in deer numbers but I’m sure it happens From time to Time in other areas as well and just thought I’d post up. This happened a couple years ago and if anyone is familiar with the California hunts this was out of the herd that’s hunted on what used to be one of the most coveted tags in California for Mule deer. If you do a google search there are multiple articles with several pictures of different angles. Basically a herd coming to their winter grounds hit some ice and slid down into a Boulder fields killing over 70 deer between several areas

Migrating Mule Deer Deaths in High Sierra

Migrating deer slid to their deaths below Bishop Pass. Photo Nov. 11, 2017 Courtesy of California Department of Fish and Wildlife ...

sierrabighorn.blogspot.com

 

[Bigjav]

DFW (I still so badly want to call them DFG) publishes how many licenses are issued each year.
I decided to plot it for each year, and it sadly shows the decline of hunting in our state.

What are your thoughts on why this is happening?

View attachment 168544

Lack of hunting opportunity?
A general decline of outdoor activities in competition to being on the computer all day?
Perhaps a changing perception on the values of hunting? (hunters are "evil", or its an outdated activity)
Perhaps most of the hunters were military transplants from other states and this is just a decline in military personnel?

If we loose hunters, then hunting has less of a voice when it comes to legislation.

What are your thoughts?

There’s public land and most of the private that folks used to be able to hunt is no longer accessible, the areas where I deer hunt seem to be more crowded

That's the biggest corner that has been turned, people are finally realizing that controlled burns are necessary, and that logging of public land typically doesn't mean clear-cut like it does on SPI.

you give the state and the residents too much credit, unfortunately I think they’ll likely screw up the opportunity to do something positive like they always do

 

[H&H]

Given the low numbers of animals, what are your guys' thoughts on reducing the number of tags to one instead of two? Or keep the 2 tag system but cutting the total number of tags in half in the OTC zones? I'm all for getting 2 bucks annually, if the population supports it. However in my experience, just seeing a legal buck in D5 or A Zone is a win in and of itself.

I would gladly give up a year or 3 of hunting to reduce tag numbers and let the species rebound. The problem is that CA DFW depend HEAVILY on deer tag revenue. So the powers that be will never make that decision, unless we want to pay $300 for a deer tag.

If I remember correctly there was a poll taken by DFG (at the time) on how to increase deer numbers. The poll was for biologists and/or wardens, don't remember exactly. But the number one answer was to limit tag numbers or put an entire hold on deer hunting for a number of years. Welp...D3-5 still has 30,000 tags, and they sell out.

 

[jryoung]

I would gladly give up a year or 3 of hunting to reduce tag numbers and let the species rebound. The problem is that CA DFW depend HEAVILY on deer tag revenue. So the powers that be will never make that decision, unless we want to pay $300 for a deer tag.

If I remember correctly there was a poll taken by DFG (at the time) on how to increase deer numbers. The poll was for biologists and/or wardens, don't remember exactly. But the number one answer was to limit tag numbers or put an entire hold on deer hunting for a number of years. Welp...D3-5 still has 30,000 tags, and they sell out.

With harvest % as low as they are and even lower with respect to total population what benefit (especially on the west slope Sierra and B zones) do you think will occur? I've talked with a few biologists and they say the same thing, in mature forest like B and D zones, we can move tag numbers, but harvest won't change much. In X this is a different story and is why there has been a lot more movement in tag numbers over the years.

Deer tag revenue makes up 1% of the DFG budget. Total hunting license revenue is roughly 5% of the total budget, wit all big game fees reserve for the Big Game Management Account and there is still a structural deficit and a need of more than $100M from the general fund.. The Legislature was able to close some gaps in the budget in the past, but now in the Covid era it is different. Just look at the range of co-signers on this request when it comes to the budget. Groups that don't agree on much, except for the budget challenges in the department.

https://www.calwaterfowl.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Governor-Letter-re-CDFW-Budget.pdf