Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[WIbiggame]

I agree there is value in mandatory reporting but its minimal in wyoming. Watch the regional presentations, if bio says we need to reduce/increase tags they do! This typically isnt based soley on hunters success. Its a lot of things hunter feedback, crop damage, but weather is typically biggest factor (surely for deer/lope) they have years of harvest data so they know pretty resonably how hunts went. Fishing yesterday the sheep guys were flying over doing surverys, which they plan to reduce 3 tags i believe in that area because thats what the herd needs based on experiance and scientific information. Wyoming has a pretty good g&f when it comes to this stuff. My basic opinion: if it aint broke stop trying to fix it, support it! As far as deer tags leave gens alone for now, i want to see LOTS more whitetails taken, I think they are a big part of muleys decline.

I am going to watch the meetings. Learning real quick the west is WAY different than here in the Midwest. Thanks to you and @SnowyMountaineer for answering my questions.

Might just have to pack my bags and bring the family west.

 

[WIbiggame]

i want to see LOTS more whitetails taken, I think they are a big part of muleys decline.

This has been scientifically proven hasn't it? Whitetails are a heartier animal in that they are less finicky on food and are more aggressive so run muleys off preferred food? I will come some whitetail for you guys! mule deer don't really excited me but love chasing whitetails.

 

[Pucky Freak]

I think WY could very easily forgo R pick a general deer region for quite some time. There are undersubscribed general areas outside G&H where hunters can go if they want less crowding, and are OK with lower trophy potential. Some general areas with open terrain, lots of roads, and decent public access get pounded (relative to WY standards), and could be made limited entry. The season structure of pre-rut and sometimes short seasons balances a quality hunting experience with leaving some mature animals on the landscape.

 

[WYelker]

I really don't know this answer and feel free to call me dumb if I should know. But, how much of a monetary expense is setting up an automated registration?

Computer answers phone person types in numbers, computer runs report? You already have the people in place running the reports from the call station. Am I missing something?

Also the data on human harvest is important along with accurate herd counts. Knowing how and why a herd is thriving or dying is the only way to make accurate decisions in the management of said herd.



Of course they do what benefit would it be to say the data they have is wrong or flawed?

Edit: I am not saying that the data is wrong or flawed but just pointing out some extreme bias could be coming from the department.

The state has a new app for picking up road kill. They developed that and implemented it within months of picking up road kill becoming legal.

All it takes is a simple app

 

[Deleted member 16014]

The state has a new app for picking up road kill. They developed that and implemented it within months of picking up road kill becoming legal.

All it takes is a simple app

Sorta. The 511 app has a whole lot more behind it in platform development than throwing it together within a few months. That particular aspect is new yes.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

If someone wants to develop a legit reporting app for cheap and recommend to G&F at a commission meeting I’ll gladly support in comment if it’s a good product. Sounds like a good idea whether used for mandatory reporting or not.

I looked it up. The 511 app cost $240,000 to develop in 2016. Obviously it has a lot of features, probably not very apples to apples but for what it’s worth.

 

[WIbiggame]

The 511 app cost $240,000 to develop in 2016.

Sent you a PM too, but quick question was this just the buy in from WY to use the app or for the whole country to have the 511 app?

 

[JM77]

I'm not seeing the data that resident caps would be measurably beneficial for the resource in G and H. Maybe I'm just not aware of it. We could get there, and if so I'd just as soon look at LE and skip the middle step. Edited to add: the middle step being "pick your region" but OTC

It's all related. Say you put a cap on G/H for resident tags. Then you've got to justify the NR quotas (currently 400/600), show your math, and explain that to the outfitter lobby, resident sportsmen, and the legislature. It absolutely escalates the 90/10 DEA allocation discussion and rushes something that shouldn't be rushed. All that for a cap that we don't even know if we need.

At this point, data or G&F Biologist input is not being requested. I wouldn't be surprised if it never is. The TF is bouncing around some very crazy ideas, that if implemented could be devastating to the resource. The group seemingly believes, elk are not currently being properly managed and require some kind of voodoo to be brought to objective. Amazingly enough, the G&F Director rarely challenges some of the most simple concepts that are wrong. Believe me I am more than aware that many areas in mostly eastern Wyoming are over objective, but the idea that selling more general elk tags to kill bulls to solve this, just doesn't make grade. Especially considering that most general areas are out west where herds are at or below objective.

On an another subject, Josh Coursey, one of the co-chairs, is full speed ahead on region deer tags and splitting whitetail and mule deer to separate licenses. He is so bent on separate tags, this morning he started off the discussion with the claim that everyone on the TF was already in favor. If this is implemented, for the first time a person could apply for both a LQ type 1 mule deer area and an additional LQ type 3 any whitetail tag and the draw odds for both will be following the path of the Titanic to the ocean floor. RIP poor souls...

 

[JM77]

My basic opinion: if it aint broke stop trying to fix it, support it! As far as deer tags leave gens alone for now, i want to see LOTS more whitetails taken, I think they are a big part of muleys decline.

I agree about when it's not broke, but I can't recall when whitetails were given any slack in Wyoming. Just like over objective elk herds, too many whitetails can be traced back to refuges on private land.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

At this point, data or G&F Biologist input is not being requested. I wouldn't be surprised if it never is. The TF is bouncing around some very crazy ideas, that if implemented could be devastating to the resource. The group seemingly believes, elk are not currently being properly managed and require some kind of voodoo to be brought to objective. Amazingly enough, the G&F Director rarely challenges some of the most simple concepts that are wrong. Believe me I am more than aware that many areas in mostly eastern Wyoming are over objective, but the idea that selling more general elk tags to kill bulls to solve this, just doesn't make grade. Especially considering that most general areas are out west where herds are at or below objective.

On an another subject, Josh Coursey, one of the co-chairs, is full speed ahead on region deer tags and splitting whitetail and mule deer to separate licenses. He is so bent on separate tags, this morning he started off the discussion with the claim that everyone on the TF was already in favor. If this is implemented, for the first time a person could apply for both a LQ type 1 mule deer area and an additional LQ type 3 any whitetail tag and the draw odds for both will be following the path of the Titanic to the ocean floor. RIP poor souls...

Same thing happens with a child when they get their way on one thing. They next want their way on another thing and another thing. Pretty soon you have a spoiled kid that is like uncle Rico ruining your life and eating all your steak.

 

[appaloosa]

At this point, data or G&F Biologist input is not being requested. I wouldn't be surprised if it never is. The TF is bouncing around some very crazy ideas, that if implemented could be devastating to the resource. The group seemingly believes, elk are not currently being properly managed and require some kind of voodoo to be brought to objective. Amazingly enough, the G&F Director rarely challenges some of the most simple concepts that are wrong. Believe me I am more than aware that many areas in mostly eastern Wyoming are over objective, but the idea that selling more general elk tags to kill bulls to solve this, just doesn't make grade. Especially considering that most general areas are out west where herds are at or below objective.

On an another subject, Josh Coursey, one of the co-chairs, is full speed ahead on region deer tags and splitting whitetail and mule deer to separate licenses. He is so bent on separate tags, this morning he started off the discussion with the claim that everyone on the TF was already in favor. If this is implemented, for the first time a person could apply for both a LQ type 1 mule deer area and an additional LQ type 3 any whitetail tag and the draw odds for both will be following the path of the Titanic to the ocean floor. RIP poor souls...

We shouldn't be combining two species on one license application just to maintain better draw odds. Mule deer and whitetail deer are two entirely different species. Tags for every other species of big game in Wyoming are allocated individually without any regard for other species, why do mule deer and whitetail have to have some common nexus? Cause they are both "deer"? Hell, moose and elk are "deer"....

 

[Deleted member 16014]

It seemed like to me that most, maybe almost all, of the changes the task force discussed around WT and MD tags could be addressed through expanding type 3 and type 8 opportunities and educating the public on how those work.

I don't have heartburn about splitting them out, I just don't think it's really necessary. In the long run it would probably clarify where management goals and hunting opportunity intersect, but I'm not sure an educational push around type 3's and type 8's wouldn't do something similar. Just how I see it.

 

[madtom]

We shouldn't be combining two species on one license application just to maintain better draw odds. Mule deer and whitetail deer are two entirely different species. Tags for every other species of big game in Wyoming are allocated individually without any regard for other species, why do mule deer and whitetail have to have some common nexus? Cause they are both "deer"? Hell, moose and elk are "deer"....

No one would argue that WT and MD are the same species, but when demand far exceeds supply for the quality tags for both species, why not make the applicants choose what to put in their first choice? They can still be managed by the state separately, but this allows more people to receive a first choice deer tag. I like the status quo in this case.

 

[appaloosa]

No one would argue that WT and MD are the same species, but when demand far exceeds supply for the quality tags for both species, why not make the applicants choose what to put in their first choice? They can still be managed by the state separately, but this allows more people to receive a first choice deer tag. I like the status quo in this case.

Well, then lets apply that to elk and antelope tags too.
I just don't understand why we have to have all these nuances built into the tag allocation process that are only applied to some species or some license types because it pleases one segment of hunters over another. I would prefer to put in for both, just like I put in for licenses for antelope, elk, sheep, goat and moose all separately. Coincidently, in all cases, demand far exceeds supply.

 

[madtom]

Well, then lets apply that to elk and antelope tags too.

We both know that’s a straw man position. I guess we’ll sell separate licenses for huns, pheasants, and grouse (separate by species also).

That’s not even getting into fish…

 

[huskyhunter]

Here is a question for fellow NRs, what if WY allowed you to only apply for one species(antelope, deer, or elk) a year? Would you be fine with this if it meant you would be able to hunt the great state of WY more often. This also means no buying PPs for the other species that year.

 

[JM77]

We shouldn't be combining two species on one license application just to maintain better draw odds.

How does changing, manage deer any different?

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

I can go either way with the WTD/MD split. At first it makes sense (to me anyway) to split them into separate licenses, as they are different species. If the draw odds go down, so be it. However, I am a fan of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" line of thinking. If the current system is working for deer management, leave it alone.

 

[JM77]

I can go either way with the WTD/MD split. At first it makes sense (to me anyway) to split them into separate licenses, as they are different species. If the draw odds go down, so be it. However, I am a fan of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" line of thinking. If the current system is working for deer management, leave it alone.

Currently, if a general license holder fills their tag on a whitetail, we know with certainty a mule deer doesn't die on that license.

 

[appaloosa]

We both know that’s a straw man position. I guess we’ll sell separate licenses for huns, pheasants, and grouse (separate by species also).

That’s not even getting into fish…

so your arguing we should combine all big game licenses?