Explain Kaibab Antlerless Table?

[Sneaker]

The proposed guidlines have a table that is trying to explain when they will increase or decrease antlerless tags and hunts and it is not making any sense to me.

 

From the way I'm reading it, when the three year average or trend shows the heard is struggling/tough winters/vegetation is poor or fair and yearlings are less the 90 lbs and general body conditions are poor: Increase doe tags.

 

When the heard is doing well and vegetation is strong and yearlings are over 90 lbs and body condition is excellent: Decrease doe tags.

 

I don't understand the reasoning behind that. I think there is an undertone of Life of Pi and "When stranded in a boat with 4 people with only enough water and food for 2, you need to kill 2" but I'm not quite sure?

 

If you have a theoretically optimal/stable deer population of 8,XXX lets say, and then the herd experiences a couple bad winters in a row, and are maybe down to 6,XXX, the department will then increase doe tags, further decreasing the herd size just because the herd had a hard time the last three years and is in bad shape? What?

 

Hopefully I'm not reading it correctly.

[CouesPursuit]

From the way I'm reading it, when the three year average or trend shows the heard is struggling/tough winters/vegetation is poor or fair and yearlings are less the 90 lbs and general body conditions are poor: Increase doe tags.

 

 

This may have changed and anyone please correct me if I'm wrong, but only a few years ago, studies were showing does were in great shape coming off the summer range, often times conceiving twins and even triplets - not necessarily common in mule deer. However, the winter range was so poor, there was a 10% mortality across the board, deer appeared to be dying from starvation/predation, it wasn't age specific.

 

From a variety of factors, and overbrowsing is not a major one, there is only x amount of winterfat, four-wing saltbush, i.e. quality browse remaining on the plateau. By increasing the doe tags when indications say their body conditions are poor, the individual strain may be offset by the population decrease from hunter harvest.

 

When the heard is doing well and vegetation is strong and yearlings are over 90 lbs and body condition is excellent: Decrease doe tags.

 

Let them populate when indications say they are fit to do so. This is just my speculation.

[Red Sparky]

It all goes to management and carrying capacity of the range. If the deer are struggling going into the winter then you increase doe tags. The remaining animals are not struggling and survive the winter better due to less competition for food sources. So if the animals are entering the winter in the conditions stated that means the herd is getting too big for the habitat to sustain it.

 

Once the deer are passed the conditions stated that means the habitat can support more animals. You decrease doe tags to increase the herd.

 

By increasing/decreasing doe tags it is easier to bring the herds back as one buck can breed many does. The nice thing is it is a three year study rather than yearly. That time frame gives enough time to effectively manage the herds. Not knee jerk reactions and not too long to have a major die off.

 

Edit to add: Think of it as a sine wave. You have a baseline and when the herd is at the top, low yearling weights, poor animal condition,etc., the habitat will not support it. You increase doe tags to come closer to the baseline. Now when the herd is at the bottom below the baseline, great yearling weight, good animal health,etc., you decrease doe tags to allow the herd to grow back to the baseline or above.

[Sneaker]

It just seems like it is too slow to really help the cycle get back to or stay at equilibrium. If the herd got overpopulated, then had 3 bad years, of forage, weight, body fat metrics etc, then by the fourth year nature would have already been bringing the herd way down in population. But on top of that, then they increase doe tags(generally a multi-year decision), because of the prior three years of bad metrics and therefore fourth, fifth, and maybe sixth years instead of the herd starting to rebound/recover, they get hit with increased doe tags.

[Red Sparky]

The thing you have to remember is the three years is leading up to the peak of the sine wave. So if you see the trend you increase doe tags to prevent the herd from hitting the peak and having mass die offs. The same is true on the other side of the spectrum. If you have mass die offs from EHD or CWD, as examples, the herd may fall way below the baseline and take years to recover.

 

We as hunters are to help maintain a healthy herd the habitat can sustain, the baseline. Wildlife is a renewable resource and is managed as such. The amount of tags issued are based on harvesting excess animals without taking too much. It is all based on the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

 

Here is a direct quote from the Hunter-ed.com Today's Hunter book pg. 82 Lessons in Wildlife Management

 

" In the early 1900's for example, wildlife managers attempted to preserve a mule deer herd in the remote Kaibab Plateau of Arizona. Hunting was banned, and predators were destroyed. The result was severe overpopulation, habitat destruction, and mass starvation.

 

The Kaibab Plateau was opened to hunting in 1929, which brought the population into balance with the habitat. Today a large, healthy herd of mule deer inhabits the area."

 

So it may not make sense but is the best way to maintain a healthy herd of animals.

[azelkhunter2]

Sneaker... Give me a call I can answer your question. The reason for the phone call is I just came off a stand up 48 hr shift, Don't feel real great and don't have the brain power to sit and type all the info you seek...Thanks Dave Bruns ( VP Arizona Deer Association ) 602-228-1719

[Sneaker]

Most of us all understand the basics of wildlife conservation, thank you.

 

I'm trying to discuss the specific changes for 2016. This is a brand new table and part of the guildelines that has never existed before. I'm trying figure out if I agree with how they are going to change the treatment of the doe hunts going forward.

 

It seems alot of it is relying on winter feed quality(to determine if the herd is too large or too small). We have to have faith that our biologists have it under control as far as the correct measurements, relationships between winter range and the herd etc since it seems like a huge factor.

[lancetkenyon]

I think they have probably been doing this all along, but they are just now adding public knowledge to the regs.

[Red Sparky]

Most of us all understand the basics of wildlife conservation, thank you.

 

I'm trying to discuss the specific changes for 2016. This is a brand new table and part of the guildelines that has never existed before. I'm trying figure out if I agree with how they are going to change the treatment of the doe hunts going forward.

 

It seems alot of it is relying on winter feed quality(to determine if the herd is too large or too small). We have to have faith that our biologists have it under control as far as the correct measurements, relationships between winter range and the herd etc since it seems like a huge factor.

Then you should understand it is not based on winter feed but rather spring and summer feed. Why else would they be worried about the yearlings only being 90 pounds. It is about the whole habitat health, winter included.

 

It is a government agency so why try to figure it out. Like it or not they are going to do what they want, hopefully with good science behind it.

[Sneaker]

Sparky, the G&F is only using "Winter Range/Vegetation Condition", as a specific metric in the decisions table, nothing of spring or summer feed. Of course if mr. yearling had a ton of feed at 8,300 ft elv. during the summer he should be in better shape at measurement time.

[Red Sparky]

I tried to explain it the best I can with the information given in the original post. There are a lot of variables that go into a populations dynamic so it is just more than winter range/feed. If you have a link to the scientific study by the biologist I would love to read it. I have weird reading interest and I love biology.

[dsturla]

I tried to explain it the best I can with the information given in the original post. There are a lot of variables that go into a populations dynamic so it is just more than winter range/feed. If you have a link to the scientific study by the biologist I would love to read it. I have weird reading interest and I love biology.

You might enjoy this book.

[Red Sparky]

Will look for it. I haven't found a good forensic anthropology or biology book in a while. Like I said I have weird reading interest.