|
Post by freedomhunter on Jan 9, 2014 10:07:13 GMT -5
On a side note I do not blame any weapons for any reduction issues or over harvest .The same hunters who were out there aside from a few women and kids with a gun or vert bow are also the ones out there with a xbow . I say whatever cal rifle or archery gear does not have a thing to do with slanting limits towards doe herds . I am convinced the late antlerless season will continue to be point of contention with ma and other hunters who understand ,that the deer from miles around tend to all congregate in the best food sources in an area a single field with dirty harvest or woods with giant acorn production. A few hunters on one property may collect every deer from every immediately surrounding sq mile .This leads to easy kills and a false perception of too many deer .When they all go back in the spring or move to the next food source then what ?Where did all the deer go I saw last winter ? Well they are now elsewhere or because you or another group did their worst on them they may not be back because they were shot up . If say 10 of 30 were killed what 10 were they were they your deer from your farm or the deer from the next block west or a combination of herds ? Not a single person can answer that question in good faith . This is why aside from shed bucks being shot and the fact I already thought that our season was too long prior to the new season I dislike it .It was not needed in many areas of this state if any IMHO. You sound like your only agenda is a better deer herd. I respect that a lot! I also agree with your points about the late antlerless season. Crossguns are part of the problem and will remain so because of the money they bring. Long firearms seasons will also remain part of the problem, most likely. DNR will figure it out when license sales plummet, it really isn't rocket science. Oh wait, it is the coyotes lol
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 9, 2014 10:23:35 GMT -5
People's ignorance, ignoring science, and sole dependence on their feelings will always be the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2014 10:44:03 GMT -5
It will always come down to one thing. Don't kill more deer than you should. Use your common sense. Use your observations, talk to neighbors, get a general consensus of how many deer are in the area, and decide the maximum number of deer that should be taken, if ANY, from your properties each year. What kind of weapon is used and what part of the season the deer are killed in make ZERO difference if everyone just uses common sense.
Using this approach, your property might be able to sustain many deer harvests and some years maybe very few, or even none. It's going to be a different game every year.
It really should be that simple.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 9, 2014 10:59:47 GMT -5
It will always come down to one thing. Don't kill more deer than you should. Use your common sense. Use your observations, talk to neighbors, get a general consensus of how many deer are in the area, and decide the maximum number of deer that should be taken, if ANY, from your properties each year. What kind of weapon is used and what part of the season the deer are killed in make ZERO difference if everyone just uses common sense. Using this approach, your property might be able to sustain many deer harvests and some years maybe very few, or even none. It's going to be a different game every year. I really should be that simple. But, but but... It is easier to point fingers at a piece of equipment that you never liked in the first place. The drop in antlered kill from 2011 to to 2012 gave the DNR the clue that the herd population was going down like they wanted it to be. Thus the cut back in over 20 counties on bonus permits. Cutting back in the 2014 season, especially taking a county to a 3 bonus where that county would not be eligible for the "special antlerless season" will tweak it more. The naysayers are disregarding that the DNR said this would be a "strategic reduction" and I say it is progressing as planned.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Jan 9, 2014 11:02:31 GMT -5
It will always come down to one thing. Don't kill more deer than you should. Use your common sense. Use your observations, talk to neighbors, get a general consensus of how many deer are in the area, and decide the maximum number of deer that should be taken, if ANY, from your properties each year. What kind of weapon is used and what part of the season the deer are killed in make ZERO difference if everyone just uses common sense. Using this approach, your property might be able to sustain many deer harvests and some years maybe very few, or even none. It's going to be a different game every year. I really should be that simple. 90% of hunters cant regulate themselves and think if they see a few deer in a field one night that the population is fine. So, they kill two or three for themselves and maybe a couple for needy friends (heck they have 43 days of firearms). Ehd cant be controlled, poaching and hunter opportunity can. If it continues to get worse, there will be pockets of deer in good areas that are managed and have low pressure or outstanding habitat. So it will be the haves and have nots and nobody to blame but ourselves and our lousy DNR. The above is an example from a hunter I know near one of my properties that is representative of a lot of hunters in the area, I know not everyone kills multiple deer.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jan 9, 2014 11:06:23 GMT -5
People's ignorance, ignoring science, and sole dependence on their feelings will always be the problem.
|
|
|
Post by throbak on Jan 9, 2014 13:32:12 GMT -5
Rifles added where there were none, killed twice as many deer as xbows.. putting a long range 200yd plus weapon in use when deer are herded up in picked crop fields in the middle of winter is THE problem not xbows
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 9, 2014 15:25:36 GMT -5
drs has got the correct answer.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jan 9, 2014 15:35:06 GMT -5
Providing answers when the problem is not even identified ....
Until I know how many deer we have .... how many we can support ... and how many we want .... I cant say if there are too many, too few ... or just the right amount.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2014 15:43:52 GMT -5
Providing answers when the problem is not even identified .... Until I know how many deer we have .... how many we can support ... and how many we want .... I cant say if there are too many, too few ... or just the right amount. Exactly why common sense would dictate everyone manage their area. No one knows better how many deer are in an area than the land owners and leassors who actually are the "boots on the ground". I don't care what the state says about how many deer there are or how many should be harvested. There is no way they can micro-manage at that level. I spend hundreds of hours a year in the woods on the properties I hunt. That gives me intimate knowledge of how many deer are THERE...and THERE is all I can really control in the end. It's our job as land owners and hunters to be good stewards of our natural resources.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 9, 2014 15:50:11 GMT -5
MET but unfortunately many hunter's arn't. It's all about them and not what's best for the deer herd. ME,ME,ME mentality. And most don't want to put the work in to be sucessful. If they don't harvest a good buck or deer period it is the states fault and not their fault.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jan 9, 2014 16:07:01 GMT -5
It is a bit more complicated than that ......
an example ....
I have an extremely high deer density on my place which in turn creates a bit lower densities on the neighboring properties. If a person on those properties kill based on what they are "seeing" they are missing the boat on what needs to be done in that county or in that square mile. Neighboring owners would not shoot anything while it would be impossible for me to shoot enough.
Properties vary .... and where deer live varies. Trying to do the right thing is not a sure thing. There are many variables.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2014 16:12:06 GMT -5
It is a bit more complicated than that ...... an example .... I have an extremely high deer density on my place which in turn creates a bit lower densities on the neighboring properties. If a person on those properties kill based on what they are "seeing" they are missing the boat on what needs to be done in that county or in that square mile. Neighboring owners would not shoot anything while it would be impossible for me to shoot enough. Properties vary .... and where deer live varies. Trying to do the right thing is not a sure thing. There are many variables. Deer hoarder!
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jan 9, 2014 16:20:57 GMT -5
lol ... it is borderline ridiculous this time of year. You can see the edge of my farm from the highway (about 1/2 mile away) and I have gotten 3 phone calls / texts this week telling me the number of deer feeding each evening. A single field with 80-100 deer in it.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 9, 2014 16:30:30 GMT -5
Swilk I am in a similair situation as I have one neighbor with 265 acres of prime Switzerland county land. He himself hunt's and will shot 1 buck and on rare occasion a doe. He's a good guy but won't shoot does regularily. And allows no other hunters on property. Some year's I will bring in a friend or 2 just for the purpose of doe reduction. This year we shot 11 does off my 150 acre's. It's really a perfect set up. His farm is a great sacuary for the deer and I provide them with approx. 12 acres of food plots so I see alot of deer activity. Any given everning now I will see 30 to 50 deer in our two fields. Also have another neighbor with 255 that recieves limited hunting. This year off all 3 farm's. 4 bucks were taken and 13 does.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 9, 2014 16:52:51 GMT -5
You sound like your only agenda is a better deer herd. I respect that a lot! I also agree with your points about the late antlerless season. Crossguns are part of the problem and will remain so because of the money they bring. Long firearms seasons will also remain part of the problem, most likely. DNR will figure it out when license sales plummet, it really isn't rocket science. Oh wait, it is the coyotes lol Actually I believe that every word you posted here is wrong because of the reasons you posted them not because you disagree with others here, with exception of hunters quitting .That is correct and on its way in just a few years .Hunters will not set out there day after day to watch the wind blow and squirrels chew nuts. That is my opinion and you are letting your clear thinking mind take a walk on the wild side here . Hateing a weapon type because you wont or dont use it and blaming season that have been in play ever since the start that helped grow a great herd makes no senseat all .Your reaching hereand grabbing air..
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 9, 2014 16:57:39 GMT -5
People's ignorance, ignoring science, and sole dependence on their feelings will always be the problem. I ageee with all those things plus the short list of big gov involvement ,old buddy system and money lining pockets is the biggest issues we have here .Not weapons or seasons .Deer tag limits are set for all the wrong reasons and that included the OBR. Read this guys and do a funds search on your past Governor and legislators who lined who's pockets .I bet the Insurance lobby's and Farm Bureau will be in the coffers of the major players in or government here who have direct influence on our DNR and deer herd rules. This could be interesting . I think that as long as backroom deals without hunters being directly involved that do not have a title from some club are setting our wildlife rules and limits we will never be set the way that is equtable or fair to all parties here especially the animals and hunters . www.fieldandstream.com/articles/hunting/2013/10/dirty-politics-deer-management
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 9, 2014 17:32:26 GMT -5
Crossguns are part of the problem and will remain so because of the money they bring. Long firearms seasons will also remain part of the problem, most likely. DNR will figure it out when license sales plummet, it really isn't rocket science. Oh wait, it is the coyotes lol Actually I believe that every word you posted here is wrong because of the reasons you posted them not because you disagree with others here, with exception of hunters quitting .That is correct and on its way in just a few years .Hunters will not set out there day after day to watch the wind blow and squirrels chew nuts. That is my opinion and you are letting your clear thinking mind take a walk on the wild side here . Hateing a weapon type because you wont or dont use it and blaming season that have been in play ever since the start that helped grow a great herd makes no sense at all .Your reaching here and grabbing air.. C'mon now...don't confuse them with facts... We have had a two week gun season for about as long as I can remember AND WE WERE GROWING THE HERD THEN and the DNR did it quite well. Probably too well in places....
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 9, 2014 17:34:07 GMT -5
It is a bit more complicated than that ...... an example .... I have an extremely high deer density on my place which in turn creates a bit lower densities on the neighboring properties. If a person on those properties kill based on what they are "seeing" they are missing the boat on what needs to be done in that county or in that square mile. Neighboring owners would not shoot anything while it would be impossible for me to shoot enough. Properties vary .... and where deer live varies. Trying to do the right thing is not a sure thing. There are many variables. That is why one should try to coop with their neighbors and set a common goal.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 9, 2014 17:38:56 GMT -5
Providing answers when the problem is not even identified .... Until I know how many deer we have .... how many we can support ... and how many we want .... I cant say if there are too many, too few ... or just the right amount. I agree with this . The part about how many deer we have county wide or state wide is the main issue .What better way to do damage control when you over do the doe harvest than to say we just were not sure how many were there or were not awear the herd was so low if you are the DNR. But I think that every hunter with more on his mind about deer hunting every time he walks into the woods than spilling blood has a very good grasp on how many deer the land they hunt can support , how many the hunter himself wants to see and may have .As an added bonus most hunters that are not just trigger pullers like many here know how many deer the land they hunt can actually handle with out sever habitat damage and browse lines . They know better than any DNR biologist setting behind a desk that has never seen the land he hunts what right for their areas how many is too few and too many and the number of hunters around them to almost the man know what is just right. That is my feeling on it and why the DNR needs to listen to those who actually take the time to contact them and speak intelligently with them,their word should carry more weight than that of what a paper said because of a harvest 3 years ago or even last year. are there some who really do not know and just want too much ??Sure are the majority of hunters who contact the DNR about county limits and herd info wrong ?No way they are likely money and a invalubal tool that the DNR simply dismisses like second class citizens most of the time after playing like they actually care or listen to you on the phone or even in person .Its easier that way you do not have to argue with them .
|
|