with the more scattered and diverse quantitative data 

 available (e.g. early censuses), and both are interpreted in 

 light of findings from our studies during 1960-87, we believe 

 that reasonable estimates of mule deer numbers and trends 

 during the period can be derived. 



Deer were still considered scarce in 1940, but 

 immediately thereafter and through 1947, the narratives 

 (Appendix D) indicated that mule deer populations increased 

 rapidly. Concurrently, range and forage conditions were 

 considered "excellent" through 1947. A deer drive count on 4 

 mi 2 in autumn 1944 produced an observed density of 8.5 mule 

 deer/mi 2 . More recent information from that same area 

 indicates that the actual density could have been as high as 

 11-17 mule deer/mi 2 . In 1948, deer were considered 

 sufficiently abundant to permit hunting of bucks within the 

 Game Range for the first time since it's establishment in 

 1935. Also, Game Range managers and state personnel were 

 starting to discuss the "unmentionable proposition of opening 

 the season on does . " 



The first substantial quantitative data on mule deer 

 populations were collected by aerial strip census during 

 September 1947 (Brown 1947, Appendix D, Table 3.13). Aerial 

 strip censuses were also conducted during February 1948, 1950, 

 and 1951. These censuses recorded observed densities ranging 

 from 3.4 to 5.7 mule deer/mi 2 . Our adjustments of those 

 figures (Appendix D, Table 3.13), based on the areas flown and 

 our more recent comparative information, indicate actual 

 densities of 7-12.5 mule deer/mi 2 . The lowest estimated 

 density (5-8/mi 2 ) was observed during mid-late winter 1950, 

 the second of 2 consecutive severe winters. Pre-hunting 

 season density may have been as high as 15-18 mule deer/mi 2 in 

 autumn 1951 (Appendix D) . 



Good forage conditions prevailed from 1951-1954, but 

 drought and poor forage conditions occurred from mid-summer 

 1955 through 1958. Fawn survival was good during the early 

 period, but had declined by 1958-59. 



An attempt to remove all deer from a 3.13 mi 2 fenced 

 pasture adjacent to our study area in February 1958 indicated 

 a minimum density of 7.7 mule deer/mi 2 (Appendix D, Table 

 3.13) . 



The accuracy of early population estimates is subject to 

 question, especially when the individuals reporting and 

 interpreting them did not do the work. We believe, however, 

 that the estimates, and especially the ranges presented (Table 

 3.13, Appendix D) , are reasonable. 



78 



