ODFW Future Black-tail Deer Seasons

[fortywinks]

Time is drawing short for comments on proposed changes to future Black-tail Deer seasons. From what I can tell, they need a lot of help. Their current proposals are listed on their Web site. Comments can be faxed to 1 503 947-6330.

Attended a meeting this last week and they seem to be open to anything. Their current options don't offer much hope IMHO.

[skein]

That link is

Future Black-tail Deer Hunting Seasons

Skein

[BrianMaguire]

From the Deer planning meetings 2 years ago it seemed like the ODFW really lacked any real data to the actual populations of blacktails over long periods of time. The only problem they see is less deer killed from what I listned to at the meetings. I have not had a problem finding deer while hunting. Honestly I don't think there is a problem, it may be that people are killing less deer but in the 1980's everyone hunted from a road in a fresh clear cut. Road closures and less clear cuts do not make a problem. many hunters are fat and lazy, they don't get out of the truck.

Does the ODFW have good data that says that by restricting hunting will do any good? I don't know anyone that attended the meetings know?

Suggestions?

[ 02-27-2004, 10:53 PM: Message edited by: BrianMaguire ]

[dla]

ODFW has a credibility problem here with me. There are half as many hunters today as there were in 1981. So focussing attention on hunting itself seems inappropriate.

What really bugs me is that the ODFW wants to turn Westside hunting into a giant research project. It gives them something to do, but it is not the best use of the Dept's money.

Many things have changed in 20yrs, the biggest are predators (we don't harvest adult cats anymore),disease, and poaching. It is hard to justify setting up this goofy research project that focusses on hunters, when there are half as many hunters to start with.

If they stopped all hunting for 2yrs, you would see only a moderate improvement in ratios. Why? Hunting is not the biggest factor.

I know the Wildlife Dept is hurting for money and I know they don't want to give up the ridiculous over-supply of tags which pays their salaries. But if I look at the decline in hunting participation and opportunity over the last 20yrs it becomes clear that they can't continue the present course.

If you keep regulating, if you keep drawing systems that require somebody to buy an otherwise useless hunting license before they can pay money to draw for a tag, if you require people to buy an upland game bird stamp when the money isn't used for upland game birds, etc., etc. - you will eventually turn the common Oregon citizen completely away from hunting.

Credibility is job #1. Seems folks should know that after the lopsided defeat of M30.

[gottafish]

Bring back the hounds and do a few controled burns on the coast and mt. hood habitat is the key and reduce cat and bear populations also reduce coyotet populations I.E trapping or bounty they kill a hell of a lot of fawns. more deer are lost to them than any other preditor just look at the crap in the spring. Its simple we need to open up feeding areas and the only way to do it is with fire. logging areas does not pu nutriants back into the soil. plus burning would kill of non native vegitation. fir suppresion sucks for wildlife. Just ask RMEF controll burn and plantings need to happen suspend hunting for 3 years. then open to a draw system. Things will be great!!!

[Washington Hunter]

Gottafish, I agree with you. More fires would help blacktails tremendously. Good habitat is definitely the key to good deer populations, and fire is just about the only solution.

[TheRogue]

Many things have changed in 20yrs, the biggest are predators (we don't harvest adult cats anymore),disease, and poaching. It is hard to justify setting up this goofy research project that focusses on hunters, when there are half as many hunters to start with.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I respectfully disagree. I believe the single biggest change is NOT predators, disease, or poaching. The biggest change is lack of logging on federal timberland in the blacktail's habitat, coupled with the extensive use of herbicides (defoliant) on private timberlands.

Elk do well in timber, deer don't. I don't believe you can change either of the two problems, especially just to support our "sport".

TR

[fortywinks]

TR - I agree.

dla - According to their statistics the number of hunters has dropped from 160,000 to less than 120,000 since 1981 if I remember correctly. That is based on tags sold, and I would assume is adjusted for the different tags available. And this during major increases in the general population. They also mentioned that the average age of hunters is older now because fewer youngsters are brought into the sport. Of course you say you doubt their credibility............but just thought I'd mention it.

[WaterDog]

TheRogue - I agree too. We hunted the same area for years. When the logging stopped, we saw less and less deer as the years went by. We ended up going to a different unit that had more private land.

[dla]

fortywinks: You're off by quite a bit.



The peak was 1981. If I take a 20 year slice from 1981 I see half the hunters.

Everyone hunting has to have a hunting licence. In 1981 there were 215,462 Resident and 7,640 Non-Resident licenses sold. In 2002 there were 106,815 Resident and 22,184 Non-Resident licenses sold.

128,999 hunters in the field during 2003 versus 223,102 in 1981.

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/...formation.html

[WaterDog]

fortywinks is talking about tags not licences. I assume he's talking about western oregon blacktail tags since this topic is about western oregon blacktail deer.

[dla]

Originally posted by TheRogue:
I respectfully disagree. I believe the single biggest change is NOT predators, disease, or poaching. The biggest change is lack of logging on federal timberland in the blacktail's habitat, coupled with the extensive use of herbicides (defoliant) on private timberlands.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">OK, I'm not sure I follow the logging bit, since there is only about 100sq/ft of Federal land from Astoria to Lincoln City. :smile: I can't argue the herbicide - I've seen it used in some areas, but I'm not sure how prevelant it's use is.

I think we agree that the ODFW isn't making much sense pressuring hunters.

[ 02-28-2004, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: dla ]

[dla]

Originally posted by WaterDog:
fortywinks is talking about tags not licences. I assume he's talking about western oregon blacktail tags since this topic is about western oregon blacktail deer.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Nice interpretation, did you check the Westside tag numbers?

[WaterDog]

&lt;sigh&gt;

Originally posted by dla:
Nice interpretation, did you check the Westside tag numbers?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Maybe you need to learn how to read.

Posted by fortywinks:

According to their statistics the number of hunters has dropped from 160,000 to less than 120,000 since 1981 if I remember correctly. That is based on tags sold, and I would assume is adjusted for the different tags available.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">THIS LINK show sales of ALL deer tags. It's NOT broken down by west or east side. If you have a link to WESTERN TAG sales post it.

I'm still trying to figure out what total LICENSE sales has to do with this discussion. :whazzup:

[dla]

WaterDog: Try to keep your blood pressure in check here. I said that there are half the hunters and I even gave you the numbers and the link. Fairly straight forward. Clearly there aren't as many bodies in field.

I haven't looked up the number of tags sold, perhaps you could do that for us. Could be that as hunting participation has declined, the ODFW has given lots and lots of tags to just a few individuals.

[BrianMaguire]

&gt;&gt;&gt;Elk do well in timber, deer don't. I don't believe you can change either of the two problems, especially just to support our "sport".

I thought it was the other way around. Elk are grazers and like grasses. Deer browse and like shrubs. If you read "Trophy Blaktails Tactics" a big theme by Boyd Iverson is to hunt the timber for big blacktails. I kill a blacktail every year and have never shot one in a clear cut. I see elk in clear cuts all the time.

The correlation I think between the decrease logging and the decrease in observed and killed deer has to do with the fact that blacktails are nocturnal amphibians and if you can't glass hundreds of clear cuts you are never going to see one unless you spend some time in the forest.

Even if clear cuts provide good habitat its only for 10 years or so. Then the reprod shades out everything for the next 60 years and nothing can use the habitat. The tillamook is finally getting to be decent in the tall trees for hunting and they (ODF Oregon department of forestry) wants to start using 30 year rotations. This is a sure fire receipt for long term blacktail deer declines. Cutting the forest at the proposed 35 annual rate means in 20 years everything will be cut (assuming that 1/3 has already been cut). 10 years after that there will exactly 0 blacktail habitat. It will be a reprod jungle and not a deer or elk in site.

[ 02-28-2004, 10:34 PM: Message edited by: BrianMaguire ]

[Washington Hunter]

The DNR in Washington has been doing a lot of thinning on the westside recently, instead of clearcutting, believe it or not. I love it. I think it's going to be great for the blacktails. Like others have mentioned, clearcuts nowadays get sprayed and it kills everything except the conifer trees, so the clearcuts are just about useless as far as feeding areas go for deer. (and elk) For anybody in Washington, if you get a chance, take a drive into the Fall River unit west of Chehalis. Get up onto P & E ridge and check out the type of logging that's going on up there. They're creating some great deer and elk habitat. I just wish the private timber companies would do more of this.

[WaterDog]

Good grief.

dla - whatever.

Posted by Brian:

the fact that blacktails are nocturnal amphibians

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Blacktails are frogs? :whazzup:

[img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img]

[Don Becker]

My brother and I attended the meeting in Clackamas and left pretty disgusted. ODFW really has no valid statistics (obviously, and by their own admission). They don't know whether there are 20 or 2,000,000 blacktail deer out there. Basically, they draw their conclusion that there are decreased numbers of deer by the decrease in license sales. Many of their points (also as made in this thread as well) about habitat are likely a factor. ODFW has even less idea what impact is occurring as a result of increased predation. They claim a couple of studies are underway but the results (if any and if useable) will be very long in coming. So, what they propose to do is try a whole laundry list of things simultaneously and then measure them against . . . . . well, nothing. Lacking any data to correlate results with (assuming they can even measure what they do from here forward), our group consensus (it seemed to me) was that ODFW should only implement a very few measures and track the results of those, discard what doesn’t seem to help and then try others, over a period of time. Our group was also very positive toward it’s recommendation that ODFW begin acquiring data from blacktail hunters by means of a mandatory and somewhat detailed annual questionnaire (‘you don’t complete it for last year, no "tagie" for this year . . . ). The idea being that most of us would see the value in giving complete and valuable information and through statistical sampling means, the results can be adjusted for those who might be less than candid. In order to be valid (certainly an easy thing to do when they have NOTHING at the present time), we hunters do not have to “give-up” our secret little sweet spot . . . . telling them I hunted the NW corner of Unit 21, for example, is more than adequate. The idea behind the questionnaire/survey is that you and I are the ones in the field. At the end of the hunt we pretty well know how many bucks/does/fawns/elk/coyotes/bear/carcasses/gutpiles/etc/etc/etc we saw and where (generally) we saw them. I think there must also be some clues they can give us non-biologists with which we can estimate the age of the “critter(s)” we do take so as to further enhance the information gathering and accuracy of the questionnaire/survey without having to spend even more money/hassle with check stations/mailing teeth/etc.

[Washington Hunter]

In Washington we are required to complete a questionnaire for all big game species hunted before we are allowed to buy a tag for the following year. It's real simple and can be done online. Maybe Oregon should take a look at how Washington does it. (not that our deer populations are any better)

[TheRogue]

Brian.. They will live in old growth. It has scattered pockets which let enough light through to make brushy spots. Otherwise, it's just grass and mushrooms...which is good for elk.

The regenerating forest that is the Tillamook and the Clatsop State Forests, along with the grown-up federal timberland, are often way too dense for any big game. They're basically dead. Really good for fish, supposedly.

Hopefully as we begin logging Tillamook and Clatsop, the State will not allow any herbicide use.

TR

[Don Becker]

Thanks, Skein! And, well put!

Washington Hunter, your suggestions are well taken and those ideas did come up at our meeting. In fact, the idea was that the questionaire/survey would be available for completion by several means.

[Bait O' Eggs]

I would think a questionaire at the end of the season would be a useful tool for the ODFW.

Having hunted in Idaho the last couple years I like some of the things I see East of us. Idaho requires me to fill out a questionaire that answers how many days I hunted, what unit, success rate, number of points on the animal harvested, etc. etc......

If you dont send in the answers, supposedly you are not eligable for tags the following year.

I also like Idahos voluntary pledge & Fishing ethics on the back of the tag.


I pledge to go beyond obeying laws and regulations and will be guided by the following commmitments to the fish and game I pursue.

I will honor and respect them.
I will learn their habits and habitats.
I will provide for their needs as they provide for mine.
I will pursue them fairly, assuring they have a reasonable and natural chance to escape.
I will attempt to kill them only if I am reasonably sure they will die quickly.

Signature_______________________

[Grip It-N-Rip It]

BOE;
You can remove the supposedly from your response about not turning in your harvest report for Idaho. I sent mine in and some how they didn't get it for the second year in a row. I had to call in my harvest report before I could apply for my SE tag. The lady told me quite nicely were sorry no report no tag that is just our rule.
I agree with you though Oregon should go to doing the same thing and I wrote that as well as brought up that point when I went to the meeting.
The thing that shocked me the most was this. One person asked the question "Are any of these hunt options aimed at increasing the blacktail population here?" The answer he got was "NO we dont need anymore deer." Which left me kind of shocked..

[skein]

The answer he got was "NO we dont need anymore deer."

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Maybe you should have replied, "Then WE don't need any more biologists, either!"

That statement sort of says it all!

Skein

[skein]

Don, [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Your ideas make sense in every way. I agree it's time to put the pressure on THEM to quit coming up with knee-jerk "biology" and devise a scenario that will provide real data and, yes, success for our (all Oregonians) herds.

As an aside, and certainly not to start a war, I have been a supporter of Lindsay Ball in the past, but have not seen much real direction or guidance from his leadership - at least not nearly what I would have expected. Might be time for a change.

I would desperately like to trust our biologists, but seems that time and time again their bottom line is "we don't know." That's simply not acceptable. We don't expect them to be God, but we do expect valid science and creative solutions.

In short, they need to understand that we expect success in game management, not declining herds and faltering opportunities. I remember standing shoulder to shoulder with many of my fellow sportsmen to express willingness to pay higher tags and license fees to maintain field biologists and enforcement. I expect something of value in return.

Skein

[Don Becker]

Hey, I'm sorta inclined to print this off and fax it to the fax number they gave us at the meeting (1-503-947-6330). If nothing else, maybe it'll get around that we hunters are talking about it . . . . . But, my problem is should I do that without the permission of each and every one of you contributors? It IS a forum that's available to anyone anywhere . . . your thoughts/input! Don

[gottafish]

I'll bet the ODFW is run by a tree hugger,peta lovin, hsus supporter!!!! its time for a change

[BrianMaguire]

You have my permission to fax my comments.

[fortywinks]

Some excellent discussion here. When I posted this topic, I was wondering if anyone else was seeing and hearing what I was. Obviously, a big yes. They were really saying they are clueless. And I couldn't beleive they had only talked to Washington, and did not know in any depth about what any other states were doing, and had very little data on blacktails. It's obvious it has been running on auto for a long time.

Good idea on printing out this thread if there is no reason not to.

[skein]

You certainly have my permission to fax what I've submitted. We do need permission from Ifish though.

I'll whistle up this thread and ask the admins if we can send it.

Skein

[Joe]

In my opinion this whole review is the result of some extensive whining from some less than ambitious hunters. Sure it is true that we have less prime blacktail habitat today than we did twenty years ago but the fact is that there are still lots of deer available for people who are willing to work at hunting them. I think we are expecting to much if we expected logging practices to always maintain deer population at a peak level. The numbers are bound to fluctuate with changing times. Cutting hunting opportunity will not help bring back habitat it will just make it even less likely people will put in the required effort to have a succesful hunt.

[dla]

Don Becker: I certainly think this thread should go to the ODFW meeting. At the bottom of each page is the following:

"Please seek permission at captain@ifish.net to copy any content from this web site. Copyright www.ifish.net 1998-2003 "

I certainly see no reason to deny you.

[skein]

Joe,

You missed the gist. We're not saying we're having trouble getting a deer or elk through traditional hunting methods. What we're saying is we think our herds are declining, and we don't think ODFW has the hard science to explain why. We also don't feel that the current strategies are the right course of action.

We want some real answers and are interested in coming together to pool our ideas on how best to obtain them, as well as show a unified front.

We're not whiners, Joe, but rather committed outdoorsmen who probably spend more time in the woods that some of the biologists we're questioning.

It would be great if you would join us and share your perspectives. We're interested and will listen.

PS. As an aside, I was out hunting for 10 hours yesterday, from daybreak 'til 4pm, and watched antelope, rabbits, coyotes, tundra swans, and geese, along with the usual magpies and ravens. I didn't see ANY deer tracks (fresh snow). None. I came back pretty tired, but not whining. And I brought back a little knowledge of what's really going on in that neck of the woods.

Skein

[Don Becker]

'Couple of points . . .

Skein, you and I differ slightly in our views (and, of course, that's okay) I'm not at all certain the herds are smaller. I THINK they might be. I know I hunt harder but I generally get my deer. I expected ODFW to have SOME confirmation of THEIR assertion that the herds are declining. They don't.

I have traded e-mails w/Jen and she has no problem w/me printing and faxing this thread to ODFW . . . . but, first, I'd feel better about it if more of you would "ring-in" with your okays.

Don

[TheRogue]

Send it!!

:grin:

TR

[Joe]

Skien,
I hope you dont think I was talking about anyone who posted on this thread as I was not.

My concern is that we are losing hunting opportunities as a result of this process and I have yet to talk to a single person who feels this loss of opportunities will have much real effect on blacktail populations.

I believe that due to lack of clear cuts it is harder to kill a buck so only those folks who really want to work at it are sticking it out.
From my observations the majority of complaining is coming from the casual road hunters who want to kill a deer off a landing like they could in the past.

I am all for learning everything possible about the animals we hunt I just hate to see the seasons cut if there is no biological basis to do so.

[BrianMaguire]

Joe - I agree with you, I have not seen fewer deer where I hunt. I do see fewer pickups with 5 hunters in the bed driving around. The ODFW is seeing declining hunters and deer taken. Is the ODFW mearly concerned about a decrease in revenue? Maybe they see the decline in revenue as a long term threat? A reduction in hunters is going to equate into fewer deer taken. IMO it will be harder for many to get a blacktail because they may have to get out of the truck and get wet and cold but this does not mean there are fewer deer.

As far as deer pops go I have no idea, there may less or more, I don't know. I do know that I still see deer and fill my tag. I do not see why any change to existing seasons is going to make a difference except that applying for controlled hunts will bring more revenue. They still have deer seasons in the Steens and the deer are having a much harder time than west side.

[SalmonSeason]

Let us run dogs again for the cats and bears
and open up the bait again The cat population needs to be controlled !!!

[Don Becker]

I'm not getting enough feedback re my sending this thread on to ODFW. I know it's a public forum and is probably okay but, for me personally, I would not feel comfortable without at least a majority of the contributors giving their okay . . . . . that's just me . . . if someone (perhaps someone less cautious or whatever . . .) wishes to do so, 1) you certainly have my personal okay and 2) the fax number we were given at the meeting, for feedback, is: 503-947-6330. Don

[ 03-03-2004, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Don Becker ]

[ehunter]

I have been lurking on here for some time and decided to jump into the fray. I attended the Seaside meeting and one thing that jumped at me is that they lump of all of Western Oregon into one Bio area. In Eastern Oregon I believe that they mangage each unit differently? (set different tag numbers ect.) In other words the problems in Southern Oregon are not the same problems in NW Oregon. I grew up in NW Oregon and have hunted up here for around 30 years. There is definatly a problem with deer numbers in Saddle Mt and part of the Scappoose unit. I have spent the last 2 years hiking almost every weekend behind closed gates and the most deer I have ever seen in a single outing is 5. I used to see 10 to 15 deer. My son hunted in the Baker youth hunt and we hunted hard we saw the same 3 or 4 deer and that was it. On the other hand we are seeing elk almost every trip. I can vouch that there is a deer numbers issue up here. I think that they need to start managing, Western Oregon in smaller units to help define the problems not lump all of Western Oregon together. ehunter

[Don Becker]

MIMG, GREAT input! That's the kind of observation I think they need and aren't getting . . . all the more reason for the questionaire . . . but, maybe for hunters like you, that are able to spend the kind of time in the woods that you do . . . . why not some sort of an incentive program to encourage you to turn-in a report of your trip and observations every time you go out . . . . so many reports and you get a % discount on next year's license or so many reports and you get a $100 gift certificate to Sportsman's Warehouse, Bi-Mart, whatever. This is exactly what I mean that we hunters have the "statistics" that ODFW hasn't collected.

[And, BTW, I'm disappointed in ODFW right now but, overall, I'm not as "down" on them nor as unsupportive as my posts here might seem. I'm with all of you hunters who view this as a problem that needs analysis, suggestions and appropriate action.]

[dla]

Don Becker: Good grief! Either you are or you aren't going to fax it. Stop waffling. What is the problem anyway?

[Joe]

I would think it might be more productive if people took a minute to put there thoughts in writting and sign their real name. From what I understand part of the reason for the public meetings was to get public comment. I think Tom Thorton at ODFW is the one to send comments to.