AZGFD Hunt Recommendations

[gamespec]

Hey Jim - thanks for all the input. I do have a couple of questions.

 

First - is the 138 deer sample from unit 31 really a valid sample size. I read your post in the other thread about buck to doe ratios but personally think 138 is a little low. I could be wrong - it has been awhile since I took a stats class.

 

Second - what is wrong with having the youth deer hunts in the southern units over Thanksgiving weekend?

 

Third - isn't the youth harvest percentages you listed a pretty good correlator/indicator to the health of the mule deer herds on southern AZ?

 

Thanks Chris.

 

The total of 138 deer for the ratios is lower than I would like to see, but the WMs get out there on the ground and in the air and do the best. As everyone here knows it is hard to see and classify a lot of WTs in a morning and then go find different ones in different areas each day (and helicopters cost about $700/hour). They have to go canyon by canyon and survey new areas each day. The 5-yr average number of deer seen in that unit for surveys is 174 so this year was below average for number seen. For some reason hunters just prior to our surveys saw plenty of WT as the 26% and 28% and 47% hunt success shows for the Oct/Nov/Dec hunts. Keep in mind this sample of 138 is gathered consistantly with previous years and other units which is important for comparison purposes. We calculate confidence intervals with show us how solid our ratios are and take that into consideration when making the recommendations.

 

All our Junior hunts in SEAZ are over the Thanksgiving holiday. Kids have off, parents have off, its cooler, and the mule deer may start showing some increased activity as it gets closer to rut.

 

I think the trend of jr hunters harvesting a higher percentage of WT is a reflection of MD populations much lower and WT populations holding out very well (relatively speaking) during the mostly dry decade we have experienced. In units like 33 I would expect kids to go after WT, rather than the scattered MD.

 

JIM

[monstercoues]

Wow, I am glad to see things calm down a little bit. Jim, you da man! I have been biting my tongue and holding back from all the people bashing the AZFGD. I do want to get some info out that I have been holding in. First off, this is awesome that all of you are here posting your thoughts and opinions, but you NEED to attend these COMMISSION meetings. The COMMISSION has the overall say in all of these changes. Yes I know there are some of you that say u go and they don't care, but that wasn't true last year for the elk and lion changes that didn't go into affect. Not to mention there were only like 6-10 people who showed up in for the late Coues hunt change discussions last year. Gee I wonder why they got changed.

 

I can't sit here and keep reading people say it's all about the money. First of all the license and tag increase bill took 2 yrs to pass, just like every other bill out there. This wasn't just something that happened overnight. Plus the poor people who work for GandF don't get paid jack crap. Trust me I know, my best friend is a game warden and he can barely afford to put food on the table. You guys need to understand that they are out there for the wildlife. With all the people who are bashing the department, if I was a game warden, I would be affraid to even work anymore. It seems everyone hates the department these days.

 

In talking to my buddy, all hunt permit changes are based on hunt guidlines that the dept has used for years. Buck to doe ratios and fawn to doe ratios as well as overall hunt success. All population estimates are calculated over time and are also estimated for the following year that way they know or have a really good guess whether the poulation can handle the increase. All hunt recommendations are then sent to Leonard and Brian and then the commission for final approval. Hense--quit bashing the game wardens and go to the commission meetings.

 

Sorry if I repeaded anything that anyone else had already posted about this. I didn't have time to read every post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We have turned this discussion into a 7 page discussion. We need to continue this effort on April 21st by attending the meeting in force.....maybe even this year than in the past.....and truthfully I feel that we can and will make a difference. Another thing someone should do is to record the meeting on video or tape. That way a discussion doesn't get overlooked.....its sounds like one did from the meeting notes Amanda has posted.

 

It actually sounds like we are somewhat unifying ourselves......and it helps when we actually have someone from the AZGFD (Jim) helping us dispell rumors and false info....this way we arean't just pissin' and moanin' for nothing.

[azyoung]

Another overlap issue is with the 36A Jr hunt. I know this does not effect a lot of people but last year and again this year the 36A Jr hunt starts the last weekend of the Nov general whitetail and the fall javalina hunt. That unit was extremely busy opening weekend of the Jr. Hunt and I know some general whitetail hunter did not like all Jr crew showing up their last weekend that in the past was an opportunity for a quite end to their hunt. I do not understand why you they would mix a Jr. hunt with two general hunts. If they are trying to recruit young hunters why have the Jr’s start their hunt when the hills have been pounded several weeks prior. The Elk overlap does not make sense to me or moving the archery hunt earlier if I remember right the last archery tag I had seemed like the rut exploded the last few days of the hunt. Thanks Jim and Amanda for the information!

 

azyoung

 

I didn't like the overlap either, but for a different reason. I took my son to a "secret" spot during opening weekend (Sunday afternoon) of the 36A Jr hunt and when we were just about to our destination we met a guy leaving with a ~ 2yr-old whitetail buck in the back of his jeep. From my perspective, I don't want WT hunters in there when I'm trying to get my son on a deer. The reason for the overlap (and this applies to a lot of species and seasons in the state) is that you really run out of calendar space to fit everything in. As everyone reading this thread is now aware of, these hunts are all interconnected and moving one thing may seem easy but can cause all sorts of other repercussions. We try to get the kids in during a time of the year that is not too hot, not after all the other hunts, during a holiday so they have time off, etc. When you get a calendar out and try to lay all these seasons out and try to take into consideration all the misc considerations it gets very hard to avoid all overlaps. In the past we have thought that an overlap between a WT and MD hunt is less critical because they are hunting mostly different areas by elevation. Junior hunts have traditionally been mostly a mule deer hunt. Data from just this past year has shown that there is a recent shift in the species make-up of the junior harvest - juniors are taking a lot more WT now.

 

In 2001, the harvest from the GMU32 Junior hunt was 35% WT, but last year (2006) it was 53% WT.

In 2001, the harvest from the GMU36A Junior hunt was 34% WT, but last year was 68% WT.

Juniors in GMU33 last year reported a whopping 83% of their harvest was WT!

 

(See how important it is for you to return your post-hunt questionnaire? We can gleen all sorts of cool stuff from that thing.)

 

This means we will have to rethink our idea that the Jr hunts are basically "mule deer" hunts and will have to do a better job of keeping the junior hunts from overlapping with the WT hunts. For the fall of 2007, however, I would say we should leave it because as we saw here, making last minute changes to hunt structure can be problematic. Also, (and more important) the public meetings this summer all over the state are to get input for hunt structure changes like this. The best and most appropriate time to fix this Jr problem is during this next cycle for the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons.

 

JIM

 

Jim, thanks for the reply. What happened to the late Jr. Hunt in 36A a few years back we hunted the first week of December and that was an awesome hunt. Did the December whitetail hunters complain? We hunted the last week of the hunt and saw several bucks every day and not one other hunter.

 

 

Thanks,

 

azyoung

[gamespec]

"Jim, thanks for the reply. What happened to the late Jr. Hunt in 36A a few years back we hunted the first week of December and that was an awesome hunt. Did the December whitetail hunters complain? We hunted the last week of the hunt and saw several bucks every day and not one other hunter.

 

Thanks, azyoung"

 

That was an awesome hunt! As mule deer populations declined and we were slashing tags to keep up with the decline, we didn't think we could justify having a hunt where the 70% of the hunters killed mule deer and a lot of them very very nice mature bucks. As muley populaitons recover you will again see some of these cool hunts we used to have. Remember the late December rotating mule deer muzzleloader hunt in 36ABC? That was a great one too. IMO it doesn't make sense to take 3 hunters out of the field so one 15-year-old can shoot a 180 B&C (and that is coming from someone who has a 15-yr-old that hunts down there). These hunts can be brought back when the deer herds recover (and they will).

 

JIM

[IHunt2live]

"Jim, thanks for the reply. What happened to the late Jr. Hunt in 36A a few years back we hunted the first week of December and that was an awesome hunt. Did the December whitetail hunters complain? We hunted the last week of the hunt and saw several bucks every day and not one other hunter.

 

Thanks, azyoung"

 

That was an awesome hunt! As mule deer populations declined and we were slashing tags to keep up with the decline, we didn't think we could justify having a hunt where the 70% of the hunters killed mule deer and a lot of them very very nice mature bucks. As muley populaitons recover you will again see some of these cool hunts we used to have. Remember the late December rotating mule deer muzzleloader hunt in 36ABC? That was a great one too. IMO it doesn't make sense to take 3 hunters out of the field so one 15-year-old can shoot a 180 B&C (and that is coming from someone who has a 15-yr-old that hunts down there). These hunts can be brought back when the deer herds recover (and they will).

 

JIM

 

 

Thanks for all your insight Jim. All your post have been very informative and backed up with the stats. And its good to hear a biologist say that our deer herds will recover.

[HUNTMUP]

Easy monstercoues,

 

First off the commision can change the amount of tags in any given unit as they deem fit (more tags generate more revenue without a price change). The price increase is what took two years or whatever it was to be approved. I realize the Wildlife Managers (WM'S) pay is not as high as some fields of work but the pay is not that bad either if you stick with the dept. Everyone picks their own path and everyone that I know in the dept. is not there primarily for the money anyway. I also do not think that anyone on here is bashing the WM'S just the commission and or the process of how things seem to work. I appreciate all the effort and true passion that the WM'S have for the wildlife of Arizona and I truly think they have us hunters high on the list when it comes to what we want. As far as increased tags the WM'S submit a report with many items detailed such as range conditions, fawn ratios etc. and a recomendation for any changes. Each unit based on many factors dictates the carrying capacity or amount of animals the area can sustain. Lower hunt success (and there are exceptions) usually ends up with a higher post-hunt population count. This in turn most likely will lead to more tags during the next years hunts to bring the animals back into check to keep the overall units carrying capacity in check. Taking tags from a high hunter success rate hunt and moving them to a time when the anticipaited hunt success will be lower also enables you to greatly increase the amount of tags, sometimes by double or more. Increasing tags does not need legislation to pass, however rate increases involving residents from another state and ours does.

 

I could go on for hrs and not all of my comments can be validated and some might be completely 180 degrees the wrong way, just a small ranting on your post.

[gamespec]

Hunters have always been and will always be the rock solid foundation for this system of wildlife conservation we have in North America. Our conservation model (the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation) is the greatest system ever developed in the history of mankind for conserving native wildlife, their habitats and entire ecosystems. The entire world is envious of what was built by hunters and what continues to be strengthened every year by sportsmen and women. We should all be so proud of our part in funding this incredible achievment - we should be telling everyone who will listen about the financial support that hunters give and what it continues to accomplish on a continent-wide scale. We shouldn't be complaining about how our state wildlife agency is trying to convert permits to noodle a couple dollars out of us (IMO).

 

I didn't understand some of the deer management discussion above, but I did post some recommendation details on the other thread dealing with B:D ratios.

http://forums.coueswhitetail.com/forums/in...30&start=30

JIM

[wetmule]

Jim your above post is very heartening and well said and I am on your side and agree with you. There are perhaps a few within the Dept., a few commissioners I can think of and one Governor that might do well and be wise to read your above statement - as a little refresher course. The AZ GFD has a long and storied history as one of the finest around and a leader and the envy of many a state Game Dept. I'm sure. I hope the powers that be try to continue that legacy and not get away from those principles that put them in the front. In my opinion there is a survey every year that the Dept. gives out in the form of the annual hunter application process and the results thereof. One need only look at those areas with very tough odds and the number of applicants for those units to understand that people like what they are putting in for and to drastically change the management and harvest goals of those areas might get people a little bit on edge. Anyways, thanks for all your personal and professional input.

[KGAINES]

It is kind of funny when the thought of taking deer tags to make money is raised, if there were 500 extra deer tags at lets say an average of 50.00 dollars each, I don't think that there would be a conspiracy to get 25,000 dollars out of the deer tags. If that is the case I wonder why some of these decisions are made, almost all of us say quality over quantity, the ADA survey said quality over quantity, even when talking to dept. people they say they are trying to maintain quality hunts around the state and still have hunter recruitment, the extra 500 people with tags are not going to equal the amount of people that complain about the over crowding, or it is too hot, or the hunt was too hard, they didn't see anything, or there are not as many deer as there used to be, and there are a lot more complaints that you will hear and they are all directed at the AZGFD, I don't think the 25,000 dollars is worth that.

 

I use the numbers 500 and 50.00 as examples

 

Up until a few years ago I didn't care, I put in every year waited for the results, I didn't worry about all of the political crap that drives everything, not just hunting, but everything, now I just want to ensure that my kids have the chances I had.

It sucks that it seems like everything we do now is a fight, some we ask for, some we are thrown into, but it seems like every way we turn as hunters we are under attack and all we do is defend and counter.

 

Get rid of the eaarly whitetail hunts in the northern units and move some of those tags back to Dec., don't kill the does unless you need to, and give the kids hunts that give them a good chance at success.

[HUNTMUP]

Wetmule, I don't think you could have driven home a point better that I think alot of people overlook. If a vast majority of hunters just wanted to go hunting and didn't really put a lot of worth in the quality of the hunt or the game itself, the elk units and deer units with a very low percentage draw rates would not see year after year of mass amounts of applicants for them and the hunts with high draw rates would go down accordingly.

 

If tags were removed from high hunter success rate hunts and moved to hunts with a low success rate, you could add more tags to achieve the same results..

If you apply this to just elk hunts across the board rifle, archery, muzzleloader etc one could assume that an increase in tags by say 2,100 permits, would put the dollar total in excess of a quarter of a million dollars. Not to mention the interest it accrues even on a short term deposit etc. Would that still be considered "noodling"?

 

I will not give up hope on the fact that the AZGFD will do the right thing for both the residents of Arizona and the wildlife that inhabit it. Especially if they listen to the hunting residents (until they prove me wrong). In the past I have been upset with many things that were proposed as many of you have but I guess in the end I can't remember anything so important to us that has not been fixed or changed. I do not mind paying more for tags and or license fees if that it what the Dept needs. But I feel that sooner or later everyone will have to come to realize that we are one of the fastest growing states in the country and with that growth comes more and more hunters. How many of the members of this site are natives? Everyone who resides in Arizona deserves a fair and reasonable opportunity to engage in this sport that to so many of is more than just a pastime.. The AZGFD has to juggle opportunity, quality and the cost of maintaining the best hunting in the country and try to keep everybody happy, not an easy task....

 

My main gripe is the overlapping deer / elk dates and I am sure after the turn out on the 21st, they wil be changed back, I hope..

 

Thank you Jim for allowing us to blow off some steam!! An I promise to not say another negative word until the 21st

[monstercoues]

Well I am not sure why you are ranting on my post. I totally agree with you and I said everything you are saying. My whole point was your first sentence. Thats why I am telling everyone to go to the commission meetings. Anyways I don't want to argue or fight with anyone so I am gonna just stop typing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Easy monstercoues,

 

First off the commision can change the amount of tags in any given unit as they deem fit (more tags generate more revenue without a price change). The price increase is what took two years or whatever it was to be approved. I realize the Wildlife Managers (WM'S) pay is not as high as some fields of work but the pay is not that bad either if you stick with the dept. Everyone picks their own path and everyone that I know in the dept. is not there primarily for the money anyway. I also do not think that anyone on here is bashing the WM'S just the commission and or the process of how things seem to work. I appreciate all the effort and true passion that the WM'S have for the wildlife of Arizona and I truly think they have us hunters high on the list when it comes to what we want. As far as increased tags the WM'S submit a report with many items detailed such as range conditions, fawn ratios etc. and a recomendation for any changes. Each unit based on many factors dictates the carrying capacity or amount of animals the area can sustain. Lower hunt success (and there are exceptions) usually ends up with a higher post-hunt population count. This in turn most likely will lead to more tags during the next years hunts to bring the animals back into check to keep the overall units carrying capacity in check. Taking tags from a high hunter success rate hunt and moving them to a time when the anticipaited hunt success will be lower also enables you to greatly increase the amount of tags, sometimes by double or more. Increasing tags does not need legislation to pass, however rate increases involving residents from another state and ours does.

 

I could go on for hrs and not all of my comments can be validated and some might be completely 180 degrees the wrong way, just a small ranting on your post.

[Dick]

To update who will be where Leonard is going to be at the ADA meeting on Tuesday the 17th and Brian Wakling will be at the DCA meeting the same evening.

[HUNTMUP]

Thanks monstercoues for not beating me up!! Sometimes I get a little carried away and I probably should have taken a deep breath and then posted. The last thing I would want is to be apart of a division of members and ther opinions and I do agree with you that we should all stick together and go to the meetings to atleast be heard..

I don't want to argue either, I hope I can finally meet some of you guys on the 21st!!

[DesertBull]

Seems to me they had the best of both worlds with the central unit WT hunts. Good opportunity (25% +/- draw rate) and a good quality hunt. If you are going to micromanage the deer harvest, does EVERY unit have to managed for opportunity over quality? Can't there be some whitetail hunts managed strictly for quality?

[coues krazy]

I agree desertbull, and 6a should be one of those units. There are not a lot of deer as compared to the southern units, but 6a holds some big whitetail bucks. It should be managed for quality.