Utah Wildlife Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
What are other solutions for this BS depredation problem and the attitudes of these individuals who are just a hopeless cause to help. The DWR has been fair I feel around the state trying to compensate for these issues. The amount of mitigation tags is ridiculous, we have CWMUs to help compensate landowners, they offer buck deer tags for land that supports wildlife, pay fees for some, pay for fencing for others. I mean really... And these kind of actions are still taking place? What else can be done to make both sides more tolerant of one another, because actions like that are really drawing the line in the sand for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Based on your experience, do you think what you witnessed is the exception or the rule? (I fear my question will come off snarky--I don't mean it that way at all. I'm genuinely interested in your opinion/experience.)

Personally, I think the current system is imperfect, but still better than many and worth keeping if it's working. Thus, if what you witnessed is the exception, I'd say the best way to combat it is to make the penalty so terrifying that it serves as a deterrent to all but the most reckless and obstinate law breakers (who you generally can't do much about anyway). If, however, what you saw is very common, or worse yet the rule rather than the exception, then the whole system needs an overall because it doesn't work.

I lean more toward making the penalty so severe that it terrifies potential wrongdoers, even if they know there's only the slightest chance they'll get caught. I don't know what that looks like: 5 year loss of hunting/fishing privileges and 1 year suspended drivers license plus a fine? (Of course if they don't hunt/fish that's meaningless. But the suspended drivers license and a hefty sum would get people's attention.) The harsher the better in my mind (within reason/court discretion)--there's a reason nobody drives drunk in Bulgaria...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Based on your experience, do you think what you witnessed is the exception or the rule? (I fear my question will come off snarky--I don't mean it that way at all. I'm genuinely interested in your opinion/experience.)

Personally, I think the current system is imperfect, but still better than many and worth keeping if it's working. Thus, if what you witnessed is the exception, I'd say the best way to combat it is to make the penalty so terrifying that it serves as a deterrent to all but the most reckless and obstinate law breakers (who you generally can't do much about anyway). If, however, what you saw is very common, or worse yet the rule rather than the exception, then the whole system needs an overall because it doesn't work.

I lean more toward making the penalty so severe that it terrifies potential wrongdoers, even if they know there's only the slightest chance they'll get caught. I don't know what that looks like: 5 year loss of hunting/fishing privileges and 1 year suspended drivers license plus a fine? (Of course if they don't hunt/fish that's meaningless. But the suspended drivers license and a heft sum would get people's attention, I bet.)
No worry about being snarky to me, I'm used to it and I deserve it most the time.

I do believe the current system works, and I do believe this is the exception, but over the past couple years things have gotten increasingly more tense between the division and landowners in my area. Another landowner in Piute county killed several does and a bunch of bull elk. I just happened to catch this so I can't say for sure it doesn't happen more often. In Piute, Wayne, and Other rural counties of Utah I can see this happening quite often though. I also know of DWR employees and volunteers being threatened when they try to address the situation. Can you imagine what it's like to be a BLM or Forest service officer now days with all the BS going on? I can't stand this welfare farming crap anymore though. They are fairly compensated and are dealt with in a reasonable way. Actions like I've listed above are probably the exception but completely unwarranted.

I would absolutely be for harsher penalties for poching and actions like these. Some don't care about hunting privledges. It should come with 5 years of hunting privledges revoked, $10,000+ per animal, and jail time if you have more than one offense. You're right harsher penalty would make people think twice, and respect law enforcement more than they seem to now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,784 Posts
That sounds strange, why would they only shoot once in a herd of deer if they were trying to rid their fields of the deer? Why wouldn't they shoot 5 or 10? shooting just one wouldn't help their situation, unless they would shoot one a night over a period of time.

I have heard of ranchers/farmers that felt the DWR weren't doing enough and have shot several and just left them.

I know of a couple of ranchers in the area where the DWR put up 10' fencing around their fields to keep the deer out.

We have a small resident herd that live on the farm year round and I have never been tempted to shoot one. However it is not our livelihood so I enjoy seeing the deer when I do the chores.

I'm sure it is a tough line when wildlife is costing you money or damage and with the amount of farmers and ranchers in Utah it is probably very hard for the DWR to compensate of please them all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,968 Posts
I hate this kind of stuff too.

But honestly 1-I aren't these depredation kills compensatory? Wouldn't your efforts be better off seeking to improve habitat?
Or hoping for good weather?


Why is a couple hundred deer getting shot up on the winter range an impact on the deer herd?

Or is it that we should address this issue because it's annoying to you and I?

Honestly because I can go for addressing the issue either way. I just wanted to clarify why we were doing it.

Because it matters or because it's annoying?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,017 Posts
But honestly 1-I aren't these depredation kills compensatory? Wouldn't your efforts be better off seeking to improve habitat?
Or hoping for good weather?
The world is flat in your eyes, isn't it IB? One bad winter and we are right back where we started with our deer herds...coyote bounties or not! Hate to tell you, but that is reality. But, whatever...keep fighting the fight, IB. No matter how little evidence you have to support it...keep fighting, man. You are a true crusader by every definition of the word!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
That sounds strange, why would they only shoot once in a herd of deer if they were trying to rid their fields of the deer? Why wouldn't they shoot 5 or 10? shooting just one wouldn't help their situation, unless they would shoot one a night over a period of time.

I have heard of ranchers/farmers that felt the DWR weren't doing enough and have shot several and just left them.

I know of a couple of ranchers in the area where the DWR put up 10' fencing around their fields to keep the deer out.

We have a small resident herd that live on the farm year round and I have never been tempted to shoot one. However it is not our livelihood so I enjoy seeing the deer when I do the chores.

I'm sure it is a tough line when wildlife is costing you money or damage and with the amount of farmers and ranchers in Utah it is probably very hard for the DWR to compensate of please them all.
I was watching from above them, another vehicle came up the road and I believe that is why only 1 shot was taken.

As for it costing them. They got 3 crops of hay off the land before the deer showed up. The alfalfa isn't growing now. It is not there livelihood either, it is a family tradition, they all have normal jobs as well. These deer are not residents they'll be gone before the alfalfa starts to grow to be cut again, and I just don't see the point in this. They aren't doing any harm. I get they have nothing more going on in their life than to worry about a few deer on their land, but that doesn't give them the right to shoot them to waste. And no the DWR does a good job for the hand they're dealt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,968 Posts
The world is flat in your eyes, isn't it IB? One bad winter and we are right back where we started with our deer herds...coyote bounties or not! Hate to tell you, but that is reality. But, whatever...keep fighting the fight, IB. No matter how little evidence you have to support it...keep fighting, man. You are a true crusader by every definition of the word!
Back to 12/100 bd ratios? And unlimited buck harvest? Keep dreaming.

Come on 1-I lets play.

Do you understand the principles of compensatory vs additive kills? You should.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
I would absolutely be for harsher penalties for poching and actions like these. Some don't care about hunting privledges. It should come with 5 years of hunting privledges revoked, $10,000+ per animal, and jail time if you have more than one offense. You're right harsher penalty would make people think twice, and respect law enforcement more than they seem to now.
I think jail time's excessive unless you get a serial offender. It's hard to justify incarceration for actions against a deer when you don't necessarily even get jail time for battering a human being. I'm not anxious to do go any further down the "animals are greater than or equal to people" road than we already are in society.

The more I think about it, the more I think a substantial drivers license suspension (in addition to a fine) is the way to go. That's a devastating deterrent and a sharp rebuke that would really throw a wrench into almost anybody's life. It hits their wallet, it hits their freedom, and it hits their pride. I think it's perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Back to 12/100 bd ratios? And unlimited buck harvest? Keep dreaming.

Come on 1-I lets play.

Do you understand the principles of compensatory vs additive kills? You should.
As I've said before, believe as you please. I don't care to argue with you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I think jail time's excessive unless you get a serial offender. It's hard to justify incarceration for actions against a deer when you don't necessarily even get jail time for battering a human being. I'm not anxious to do go any further down the "animals are greater than or equal to people" road than we already are in society.

The more I think about it, the more I think a substantial drivers license suspension (in addition to a fine) is the way to go. That's a devastating deterrent and a sharp rebuke that would really throw a wrench into almost anybody's life. It hits their wallet, it hits their freedom, and it hits their pride. I think it's perfect.
I agree that to jail someone it would have to be a multiple offender, but if actions continue jail time is sometimes necessary.

A huge fine is necessary and losing hunting privledges has to be done. Maybe some service hours added on top of that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,784 Posts
I manage a small farm and 2 small ranches for my wife's family and we don't have time to ranch and farm so the property is leased out for grazing rights.

We have elk, deer, lions, coyotes, etc etc on all 3 properties, and for me, the more game animals the better, I love having them on the property.

My thoughts on it are if I put a bowl of candy in the middle of a kindergarten class, I am not going to punish the kids for taking the candy. It is my responsibility to protect the candy, or hay fields. I have to figure in those losses in my business plan.

I know it is expensive to build a 10 foot fence around a piece of property, but most of the property that has problems with game animals have been in operation for generations and if they would put up a certain amount of high fence per year it could eventually be all fenced. And as has been said, they can get help from the DWR.

Anyway, that is some of my thoughts and again it is not coming from someone who's land is their livelihood.

That being said my biggest problem with the OP is the statement that they wound the animal intentionally a let it wander off to suffer and die. That is where I would like to see the harsher punishment dished out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
maybe I am ignorant but if these people who want the game animals off their land would simply just allow hunters on their land wouldn't this help resolve their issues with animals destroying their property?
I understand that some people are disrespectful and clueless and would cost more than the game animals do to the farmers, but I think the majority of hunters would respect anyone's property. If the farmers have time to illegally kill game they probably have time to go out with a guy who has a tag and wants to harvest an animal legally. but I guess if they did that they wouldn't get the kickbacks from the DWR of the fed's.
I offered on this forum that if anyone was interested in letting me on their land to help with their game problems I would supply a list of references from land owners that I have hunted on their land, I would give them all the meat they wanted from any animal I shot and I offered to donate meat to any charity I could if that would help. Not to my surprise I did not get one land owner to contact me.
This tells me they don't want the game off their land they want a hand out.
but again maybe I am just ignorant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I understand that I'm not at as experienced as many of you on these forums, but let me share with you two examples that I have seen in my own life.

Throughout high school I worked on a farm. The farmer I worked for received (no longer wants then) mitigation tags to shoot does on his land. Usually 10. He had deer in his land year round eating his feed and usually filled the majority of tags within the first few weeks. The deer never left. They're there all the time. Simply hunting them and shooting a few off isn't going to solve much FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN. His property backed up against the mountain, public land, so putting a fence would benefit him in the winters when deer come down and the crops are harvested. It would keep the deer that are already down in the valley down though.

Next scenario. My wife's parents are dairy farmers. They own a good amount of cows and a good chunk of land as well. They have deer and occasionally elk coming onto their property. Have you ever seen how much damage a small herd (5-7) of elk can do to a corn field? It's ridiculous. They loose a lot of crop to the elk annually. I think this extends beyond what we think is fair.. Farming is their income. If they lose corn to the elk stomping it down, how are they going to feed their cows? My brother in laws and father in law have all been hunting the family farm since they could legally hunt. But the problem still exist. My father in law has been known to keep a dog near the field to keep the elk out, as well as pushing the elk out of his fields with a truck. The farm is his livelihood. Its how he feeds the family.

His farm backs up to a mountain as well (a different one though, more like a big hill) and he can't simply put up a deer fence because another farm owns that hill and farms it. The whole hill is private.

I don't know what the solution is. I think the plan that is enforced right now is a good one but definitely has it's flaws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
I understand the concern. BUT in some of these units ya take a look at all the TOYS some of the land owners have in the yard behind their HUGE homes F 350 Fords, A few. Fifth Wheels, A Few. Boats A Couple> Wheelers and Razors a Few, Large Herds of livestock..And the crops you depend on to make a livin are being destroyed> A few cases I'am sure,, If thats the case lets do what we have to do, so you can make a livin.But in some of the high rent areas it's just not right>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
another train of thought I have looked at and seen it work was the pay for trespass idea, the land owner keeps a list of all the folks he has hunting on his property and any damage done he has a list of suspects, the animals on his property will in all likelihood look for greener pastures and the land owner get s some financial aid. what I see around here is folks complaining about the deer and elk but complaining even more about letting hunters onto the property. if they would allow a few folks on there for a fee not only would they get the animals to leave but those who have permission I am sure would tell on those who were trespassing again just a thought
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top