southern interior mule deer strategy?

[Linksman313]

At our local wildlife association AGM in the Boundary this week we discussed a partnership with BCWF and other groups regarding a large MD study including numerous radio collars etc.. Anyone know anything about this study coming up? Due to being the AGM and voting and all we did not have time to discuss.
Hopefully it will come to fruition and we can get some solid numbers (for those in love with them) and results from our own province.

[Fisher-Dude]

Questions #1 and #2 are irrelevant if the deer numbers aren't there . Its a truly dumb way to manage IMO . Lowering the doe numbers if the buck numbers are low ?and lowering the buck numbers if the doe numbers are low? isn't working ... How about increasing the numbers instead? I have started reading what GG posted ....so far Idaho seems to agree with what I have been saying ... ie they have target amounts of deer numbers which allow NO harvest of does if under ,
they have target numbers of 4 point bucks as well as buck to does ratio's . If they have predators they manage those numbers as well . I am just starting to read the info but it seems like it is far different from what you and GG have been advocating ... I haven't read enough yet to know if they have to deal with FN issue's
I dont know specifically the numbers are low (just anecdotally) but pointing out if we want numbers to increase ... we need females of the species ...the more the merrier ! and we need to let them live to breed (fawns/calves) so eliminating causes of death that we can control would be a plan whether it is wolf , coyote , cougar, FN , hunters .

You're in the WK. Hasn't been a mule deer doe LEH there for what, 20 years now? So I fail to see where you're saying buck:doe is manipulated by shooting does in your area.

You dismiss fawn recruitment as "irrelevant." However, fawn recruitment is the ONLY factor that will increase your deer herd. Nothing else will. If your fawn recruitment is only 10% but 15% of your herd gets hit on the highway and killed by preds, guess what happens.

Therein lies the problem: people are trying to stop you from shooting an adult mule deer, but preserving adults only will result in a declining population if you don't provide proper habitat for fawn recruitment.

We get over 90% pregnancy rates with buck:doe ratios as low as 6 or 7:100, yet we're managing buck ratios to a 20:100 target through our current season structure. And the deer continue to decline. Ever think that hunting those bucks isn't the problem?

[horshur]

You know cougar and wolves kill fawns/ young more so then adults..Bet at least 10 to one.

[horshur]

I would like to see survey of deer range to determine carrying capacity.my opinion is it will be shocking low..So much so that it will be clear we have been overstocked for years..Look at what the buggers live on...

[Fisher-Dude]

You know cougar and wolves kill fawns/ young more so then adults..Bet at least 10 to one.

I'd say bear 10:1 but I'm skeptical about wolves and cats.

I believe it was only 1 out of 21 studies on predator control saw a positive response in mule deer populations.

Habitat, habitat, habitat.

[Fisher-Dude]

I would like to see survey of deer range to determine carrying capacity.my opinion is it will be shocking low..So much so that it will be clear we have been overstocked for years..Look at what the buggers live on...

Agreed. NDT4 in this province hasn't been burned for decades, but it should have been.

[horshur]

I'd say bear 10:1 but I'm skeptical about wolves and cats.

I believe it was only 1 out of 21 studies on predator control saw a positive response in mule deer populations.

Habitat, habitat, habitat.

this is in reference to the link I posted last night about the kootenay study where they listed death stats and cougar and wolves were better then 50% responsible of the dead Does...what I am saying is that wolves and cougar kill 10 young deer to every adult..but that is a mute point if there is no range for the increase to live on. All you have is stunted fawns,an easy mark. THIS IS WHERE I THINK PEOPLE ARE NOT UNDERSTANDING. Animals are not like money you cannot save and have more unless there is range to sustain them. Range is limited to a certain number...it will only carry more at the cost of future generations...it (range) is successional so even if game numbers are meticulously managed productivity may be reduced...there has to be a renewing of range to replace that which has succeeded in order to maintain productivity. The reality is hunters can't have there cake and eat it!

[Dannybuoy]

. I am from the N Okanagan ... and know most of the hills around that area better than most . Been here in the WK for a year .
Most of my comments have come from you and others saying that the MD pops are in trouble etc etc , From a personal view I would have no problem shooting a legal buck in the OK but I do think the numbers are down (anecdotal) .
If the MDeer aren't in trouble population wise then this is all a moot point .

[HarryToolips]

. I am from the N Okanagan ... and know most of the hills around that area better than most . Been here in the WK for a year .
Most of my comments have come from you and others saying that the MD pops are in trouble etc etc , From a personal view I would have no problem shooting a legal buck in the OK but I do think the numbers are down (anecdotal) .
If the MDeer aren't in trouble population wise then this is all a moot point .

From my observations, MD in reg 8 are doing fine...

[GoatGuy]

this is in reference to the link I posted last night about the kootenay study where they listed death stats and cougar and wolves were better then 50% responsible of the dead Does...what I am saying is that wolves and cougar kill 10 young deer to every adult..but that is a mute point if there is no range for the increase to live on. All you have is stunted fawns,an easy mark. THIS IS WHERE I THINK PEOPLE ARE NOT UNDERSTANDING. Animals are not like money you cannot save and have more unless there is range to sustain them. Range is limited to a certain number...it will only carry more at the cost of future generations...it (range) is successional so even if game numbers are meticulously managed productivity may be reduced...there has to be a renewing of range to replace that which has succeeded in order to maintain productivity. The reality is hunters can't have there cake and eat it!

True story........