With a near record winter in the Gunnison Basin still a sharp memory, the Colorado Wildlife Commission last week agreed to reduce all doe deer licenses in the basin to the bare minimum.

Commissioner Dick Ray of Pagosa Springs, citing “sociological pressure” from Gunnison residents and the “national news” broadcasts of the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s emergency deer feeding program, initially sought to eliminate all doe licenses in the second and third rifle seasons.

“We heard from a lot of people” that there shouldn’t be deer season at all this year, said Ray. “The deer herds need to be protected this year.”

The commission opted to drop the number of licenses to seven per season in each of the five game management units around Gunnison. A total of 70 licenses will be available for units 54, 55, 551, 66 and 67.

For related reasons, all elk licenses for the December hunt in units 80 and 81 also were dropped to seven each.

Ray initially sought to eliminate the Gunnison licenses but was informed that seven is the fewest number of licenses the DOW can post in a unit that’s been advertised in the big-game brochure as having hunting opportunity.

Seven is enough to meet the state’s requirement for the 15 percent set aside for landowner preference licenses.

The Gunnison Basin decision eliminates about 400 doe licenses that DOW biologists had recommended.

Losing those licenses won’t affect herd management, biologists said.

“The commission was on the side of being very conservative and our staff recommendation was to be a little less conservative and offer some hunting opportunity,” said Scott Wait, terrestrial biologist for the DOW Southwest Region.

Last year, deer hunters statewide recorded a 46 percent success rate, with doe success close to 70 percent.

Biologists this spring will be monitoring does and fawn production to see how well those fawns survive their first summer. Reproduction depends greatly on the health of the doe and whether she has the strength or desire to raise her fawn.

Mule deer often have twins, but the rigors of last winter may have caused many does to lose one or both of their fawns.

“The condition of the does could have an impact on this year’s reproduction,” Wait said. “There could be a low birth rate, or the does might not be as attentive. But how many fawns will be born this year and how they’ll survive the summer and fall are unknowns.”

Fawn survival after hard winters hasn’t been studied because those winters are uncommon. The last time a comparable winter occurred was 1983-84 and research then indicated that after one year, fawn survival and recruitment (reaching that first year) was back to pre-stress conditions, Wait said.

“Apparently (a hard winter) doesn’t have a long-lasting effect as long as the habitat is in good shape,” he said.

Snowy winters, while hard on big game, prove beneficial to range conditions because of the increased moisture. There might have been some winter range impacts around Gunnison, but those were localized to where deer were congregated, biologists said.

Wait said the public land agencies around Gunnison have expressed concern about range conditions in the area.

“One of the advantages of these winters is the range generally responds in a pretty positive fashion,” said Rick Kahn, acting DOW state terrestrial manager. “And deer are very responsive to range conditions. They need and utilize green vegetation and the shrubs should rebound with all the moisture.”

Elk licenses in the Gunnison area weren’t reduced because those herds continue to be above desired population levels. Some winter mortality was expected, and in some cases welcomed, because it helps reduce elk populations to desired levels.

Hay was tossed out to elk in several places, but that was an effort to keep the animals out of ranchers’ hay stacks.

“We spent a lot of money trying to mitigate elk complaints but it actually was counter-productive to our long-range goals,” Kahn said. “We’re still well over objective in those units but there are lots of social issues, too. The public doesn’t like to see animals starve, period.”

The commission’s decision to eliminate nearly all elk licenses in units 80 and 81 came after the panel heard complaints from San Luis Valley residents that elk were hard to find and that late hunts kept the animals in the high country out of the reach of hunters.

License numbers were dropped to seven in each unit for the December hunt.

The drastic reduction in licenses was more confusing because the decision goes counter to a new elk management plan put in place less than one year ago.

“We know the winter was tough on the elk but we also know from a lot of experience that elk are relatively bullet-proof when it comes to recovering from a bad winter,” Kahn said. “We were making serious headway toward getting those elk down to our population objectives.

“When you get there, there always is going to be group of people who remember the last 10 years when we were so far over objectives and there were lots and lots of elk and lots and lots of licenses.”

The seven licenses won’t go far in alleviating conflicts with private landowners and local wildlife refuges, Kahn said.

•

E-mail Dave Buchanan at dbuchanan@gjds.com.