Mule Deer Letter - WYO

Colorado Cowboy · Dec 12, 2017

He doesn't mention depredation by wolves & grizzlies. I am sure they are part of the problem too.

One thing I don't agree with for sure is limiting sights. Iron sights only would put a lot of us older hunters at a serious disadvantage. As your eyes age, it becomes difficult to focus on 3 the things at once required for iron sights: rear sight, front sight and target. "Old eyes" can only focus on 2 of the 3. This is not the answer to solving the "1,000 yard shot" craze.

Daubs · Dec 12, 2017

I do not know Rob, nor have I hunted Wyoming. He makes some interesting claims yet does not present the reader with much data.

Has anyone seen hard data from Idaho game and parks documenting the decline in Mule Deer numbers through the years, and their plans to help the heard? Or seen data showing increased license purchase / higher success rates? Is there similar data / information / documentation from Wyoming Game and Fish available. Rob mentions specifics as they relate to Regions G and H, area 135 (I'm assuming this is where his business is located).

His main solution is "Limited quota is the only strategy that would protect this herd and give the managers the tools to stop the decline." What are the other options available?

I am a conservationist 100%, and firmly believe in game management and protecting our wildlife and resources.

Federal and state biologists and wildlife management experts do their best...but sometimes their projections / plans fall short. Rob brings up great points. And I will certainly be following this issue going forward.

** Note: I have seen the feds "make improvements" to a Rainwater Basin public marsh in south central Nebraska...and they totally destroyed it as a waterfowl resource. It's great pheasant and summer grazing land for cattle...but holds no fowl. Infuriates me. Also have heard horror stories of small / vocal contingent of hunters lobby and rally the masses asking for change from Game and Parks...only to find out later those changes only benefited that that small group either monetarily or game wise. Not cool! **

mallardsx2 · Dec 12, 2017

The long range shooting and modernized equipment has certainly taken its toll. Thats indisputable.

-People are killing and mortally wounding deer at 70 yards with a bow.
-People are killing and mortally wounding deer with rifles out to 1000 yards and beyond. (YouTube videos of guys whacking away at deer at 1000 yards make me want to vomit)

If the herds really are in danger then let them go to Recurve bows and flintlocks for 3 years.

That would bring the herds back to were we all want them. Write that down.

Wasn't that Colorado that had flintlocks only that one year? I remember everyone crying the blues about it.

mcseal2 · Dec 12, 2017

I can see the point on iron sights limiting harvest, but I personally don't like that idea. I agree with CC on the difficulty for hunters with older eyes, and I think a lot of the idiots out there who aren't used to them would cripple a lot of game if forced to use iron sights. I grew up using iron sights on 22's and BB guns, still shoot them a lot to stay in practice. At 38 I don't think I see them quite as clear as I used to, but can still be effective with them at reasonable range. I don't know what the answer is to decreasing technology now that everyone has it.

I haven't hunted G or H myself and have no personal knowledge of what the herd is like there, just what I've read here and other places. I certainly wouldn't be opposed to limiting tags to help the herd out or even giving the herd a year or two off of hunting all together if that's what it needs.

An idea I like that was brought up for unit 82 was to split the season into 2 shorter seasons, and only let a hunter have a tag for one or the other. That way all the pressure isn't there at the same time. Maybe that's an option in this situation too.

Ridgerunner · Dec 12, 2017

I?m very surprised he took the stand he did to be honest. He has hunted that herd for a long time and guided clients to some amazing trophies out of it. That being said while he is not directly responsible for the decline he does play a significant role in it. To take this stand tells me things must be pretty bad up there. I?ve only hunted it a few times and it?s an incredible place to pursue Muleys for sure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BuzzH · Dec 12, 2017

Lots of dishonesty and pointing fingers at everyone else, when he isn't willing to give up anything to help the situation.

On top of that, its a knee-jerk reaction to one bad season, following a 100 year snow event that hammered the older age class of deer.

What I find interesting, the things that Wiley complains about, are things that he either currently does, or did in the past. He has a long-range hunting school that he conducts every year. He flies to scout the big bucks (although thanks to WYBHA that's been severely curtailed).

The things he recommends will not impact his business, but will impact the tradition of hunting for Wyoming residents, and will not help the over-all deer herd.

There are many things that we've yet to do in that country that will help deer...his solution is for the benefit of his paying clients and to create less competition for him and his clients. Its a concern for buck quality, but ignores a lot of the problems that the HERD faces.

I don't agree with much of anything in that letter...and neither do the Residents of Wyoming.

Conrad8899 · Dec 12, 2017

I wouldn't support limited quota either.. I don't hunt out there.. But if its that bad... Shorten the season would be a start.. That way Rob and his outfitter friends.. Couldn't sit on a deer for three weeks...

mntnguide · Dec 12, 2017

I agree with BuzzH...im not going to go to deep into my thoughts but...Wiley promotes a long range shooting school all summer teaching how to shoot long distances at big bucks. He also packs one of the long range guns on his hunts when he is after a huge buck, so even if the hunter has never shot long distance, he will give the hunter that gun if they cant close to a normal distance and "coach" them on the shot.

He is right about our herd being in bad shape, last fall was rough for everyone i know that is a hardcore backpack hunter around here. I know for a fact it was one of the worst years Wiley has had and they only shot a handful of deer total and I think maybe one about 200...which is a bad year for him.

Also, like mentioned above, Rob will suffer no loss of business if the hunting is changed dramatically or not, He is one of the most well known outfitters for big bucks and will continue to book full year upon year. Other smaller name outfitters are the ones who will struggle. Im more than fine with pick a region for residents, which might keep some people closer to home when they realize they cant just return home to hunt another season.

I dont want to see LQ for residents, because once it goes there, it will never come back. There is a serious issue with non-res party hunters who bring spotters, radios, etc and though only 1 or 2 have tags, there are 6 guys there...I saw it personally this past fall, and i know for a fact, that specific group was out of Utah. There are other issues aside from residents being able to hunt where we want. Game and fish manages for opportunity, not trophy, and I highly doubt you will see a LQ hunt in G or H anytime soon.

Daubs · Dec 12, 2017

BuzzH said:
There are many things that we've yet to do in that country that will help deer...his solution is for the benefit of his paying clients and to create less competition for him and his clients. Its a concern for buck quality, but ignores a lot of the problems that the HERD faces. I don't agree with much of anything in that letter...and neither do the Residents of Wyoming.

Mentor of mine said one day, "people aren't against you...they are for themselves."

This sounds like a prime example...well, maybe both ; )

cowboy105 · Dec 12, 2017

Hypothetically speaking if they shortened the season it would help some. Take it a step further. Split the seasons into two. Make them 8 days or so each. One year let all the residents hunt the first season with their general tag and non res hunt the second season. Then the following year flip flop it. Less pressure during each season for res/non res. A non res with less points may have a better chance at drawing a tag when the non res have the second season to hunt because most would want first crack at them. It’s a pipe dream because what resident would want non res having first dibs in their state, understandably so. Wish there was an easy fix.

RICMIC · Dec 13, 2017

I just had a guided elk hunt in the Wyoming range (it would be deer area H, and close to G), and was surprised to have seen a fair number of deer and they all appeared to be in very good condition. Having said that, I only saw one mid-sized buck, and the outfitter told me that they had a very tough buck season. I was planning to hunt H next year, but on his recommendation will wait a while and see how the herd recovers. It would be nice to have our fish and game agencies be able to make their decisions based on science, and for the long tern viability of the herd, but politics will always prevail. As a NR hunter, I will have to live with whatever decisions are made. The easiest decision is to further reduce NR tag allotments, but that won't have a huge impact except financially to the state, and to some outfitters. Criticize the outfitting industry all you want to, but it does provide an important bit of income to quite a few people who live in the state other than the outfitter (guides, cooks, packers, hay/feed growers, farriers, vets, etc.

johnsd16 · Dec 13, 2017

mntnguide said:
There is a serious issue with non-res party hunters who bring spotters, radios, etc and though only 1 or 2 have tags, there are 6 guys there...I saw it personally this past fall, and i know for a fact, that specific group was out of Utah. There are other issues aside from residents being able to hunt where we want. Game and fish manages for opportunity, not trophy, and I highly doubt you will see a LQ hunt in G or H anytime soon.

I don't believe much of what the outfitter has to say really, sounds like talking out of both sides of his mouth.

This party hunting business on the other hand is unsettling. I get having a friend come along for a OIL type sheep or goat hunt due to terrain, safety, experience, low tag numbers (two friends won't both get tags), and extrapolating that to a high demand deer unit, but those non-tag holders should have to stay with the tag holder. They shouldn't be allowed to fan out over the unit and spot animals for the tag holder (that is outfitting in my mind). In MN if you are in the field assisting with taking or pursuing game in any way, you must be licensed for that species. When I went trapping, a friend that was tagging along couldn't even hand me my trowel to dig a dirthole without having a trapping license, or go out in the boat to pick up a dead duck without all the waterfowl stuff. It's one thing to sit next to the hunter and use binos while they're on the spotter, but to show up with 1-2 tags and have 10 guys cover the unit is BS. Game and Fish should nip that in the butt somehow, but I guess it rolls into the whole pre-scouting and selling coordinates deal too.

Ikeepitcold · Dec 13, 2017

This is a great thread. Thanks for all the responses guys. Lots of great points made it will be interesting to see how this shakes out.

Plainsman · Dec 14, 2017

This really starts to hit on some tricky and difficult-to-answer questions. Fall of 16' did see rather high harvest in comparison to the long term trend, but the WY and Salt Ranges were very likely bumping up against "carrying capacity" also. It had to be, otherwise even in tough winters there should be enough winter range resources to carry the healthier individuals through. But to really begin painting the picture, we have to start looking at the long term population trends, and whether you like G&F and trust their info or not, its the most robust data set to go off. This particular herd management/hunt area has and will continue to place the season at a time where the hunter has the most difficulty, blaming harvest for declining deer pops is really a biased opinion and speculative at best. Sure in 2016 3,400+ bucks were harvested, but how many mature bucks die in the tough winters ~every 5-7 yrs because they are wore down from the rut when the big weather finally hits? So then which is better- harvesting more when the population is on the upswing and capable of increased pressure, or significantly limited tags and always maintaining a high population that consumes the resources beyond the level that it can reasonably support year in/out? The whole point here is if limiting tags was the absolute solution, it most likely would have been done by now, but its trickier then that. Understanding what the landscape can truly support (which is also very nebulous depending on annual moisture, temp., vegetation community composition, other landscape uses, etc.) is really the foundation to understanding how much/many is truly reasonable. There's some interesting stuff coming out of UW right now focused specifically on these animals...if this is something you're truly interested in I'd encourage you to read those publications and support those projects in your own ways. That's how realistic long term sustainability will really become more apparent and understandable...

JM77 · Dec 16, 2017

^^^^+1

As long as post season buck/doe ratios fall within management objectives, the current allocation of licenses is fine in G & H. Season length and APRs can always be tweeked.

I can't speak to what Rob Wiley's true motives are, but his solutions won't negatively effect his business and his prior actions with long range shooting and flying to scout, don't help his cause.

Triple BB · Dec 16, 2017

I've hunted G for quite a few years and have never heard a good word about Wiley. This year my outfitter told all of his deer hunters to wait a few years to apply. I think he only booked three of us. One guy was in his late 70's and said he didn't have years to wait. The guy ended up shooting a 199 gross buck. 2016 in G was the best I've ever seen. One morning on a migration route, we counted 54 bucks including several over 180. This year, the most we saw in one day was 12. One of them was a 32", 204 - 206 class buck. Can't say if we would've seen more as we watched and hunted the big buck for 4 straight days. I unfortunately ended up wounding him and we never found him. We went through the check station on the Greys and chatted with their long time biologist. He had quite a few pic's of big bucks from this year. We talked about the limited quota thing. He had a bunch of data regarding research they're doing up there. He said based on what he's seen, he's opposed to limited quota. He said one bad winter doesn't merit changing everything. My outfitter told him he was in favor of residents picking regions. I suggested they leave it as is and give no consideration to non resident input if it impacts resident hunting. I got a big head nod in response. We saw a fair number of does with twins and my outfitter indicated they'd been seeing the same. Given does are the key to the area's recovery, I think G will bounce back pretty strong in 4 or 5 years if we don't get another 100 year winter...

Rich M · Dec 18, 2017

BuzzH said:
Lots of dishonesty and pointing fingers at everyone else, when he isn't willing to give up anything to help the situation.

On top of that, its a knee-jerk reaction to one bad season, following a 100 year snow event that hammered the older age class of deer.

What I find interesting, the things that Wiley complains about, are things that he either currently does, or did in the past. He has a long-range hunting school that he conducts every year. He flies to scout the big bucks (although thanks to WYBHA that's been severely curtailed).

The things he recommends will not impact his business, but will impact the tradition of hunting for Wyoming residents, and will not help the over-all deer herd.

There are many things that we've yet to do in that country that will help deer...his solution is for the benefit of his paying clients and to create less competition for him and his clients. Its a concern for buck quality, but ignores a lot of the problems that the HERD faces.

I don't agree with much of anything in that letter...and neither do the Residents of Wyoming.

Sounds about right...

88man · Dec 18, 2017

We can't divide and conquer ourselves in regards to which weapon, how far was the shot, how many guys helped or where they were from
. We need to do what is best for the long term health of the deer herd.

Mule Deer Letter - WYO

Very Active Member

Super Moderator

Active Member

Veteran member

Veteran member

Active Member

Very Active Member

Active Member

Very Active Member

Active Member

New Member

Veteran member

Active Member

Very Active Member

Administrator

Member

Member

Active Member

Very Active Member

Active Member