What would you like to see changed, seasons-wise?

[dennishoddy]

Honestly I don't care what I have to do for the second tag, they could go to a 1 buck limit and I wouldn't care. I usually take 0-1 bucks a year anyway. Just don't mess with the first tag.

My land with could not support that many does being killed off of it every year (limiting out on does for a second tag). We had a severe overpopulation in the 90's, but it is in check now. Between the poachers, locals, and neighbors making a dent on it, we kill about 6-8 does a year usually (we=legitamte hunters on the land). That is about right. 12-18 is too many for my 160 acres. I would quit after the first buck kill, try to shoot shoot a doe or 2 then call it a year.

Just judging by the amount of deer you kill, your place is a little different than others.

To be real blunt Dennis, look at the numbers. In 2008, Archery hunters killed 7,936 bucks in over 3 months of season. Look how many gun hunters killed. 39,081 in 16 days.

Who do you think is killing all the young bucks?

Fix the gun season yearling buck slaughter, problem solved.

Doesn't make much sense to make us bowhunters jump through hoops to get a chance at a buck tag when we damn sure aren't the ones hurting the buck survival rates.

http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/deertotals/08totals.htm

Just my ramblings.

For your situation my solution may not work. I agree with you.
Certain areas need to be micro-managed not by the state, but by the individuals owing and hunting the land. Thats what conservation is all about.... the individuals responsibility to the land and its animals.
Certain factors like poachers and maybe a bad reproduction year in a small area would require the area landowners to restrict the hunters that are on them regardless of what zone one is in. The zones are so big, they can't cover everything.

the numbers you posted about the bow VS Gun is more than likely by the efficiency of the weapon used? Lots of young deer are killed by bow or gun hunters, and its the hunter that makes that decision. The chosen weapon with ranges of 50 yds, VS 300 yds probably makes no difference percentage wise at the end.

There are so many variable on this subject, I'm not sure anybody knows the "answer".
All I can say is I'm glad I'm not a biologist with the ODW, and have to make these decisions.

I'm thinking that our check-in system probably influences how the zones are set up, and if we did away with the check-in system, how would we know what areas need special attention?

Texas does not require a check in, but their deer herd is managed by private ranches with biologist on staff.

Just my ramblings, like yours

 

[tjones96761]

I've posted on this subject before, but here it is again. Without a way to enforce EAB or antler restriction, neither will work. I support both, but I'll be the first to admit that I will cheat the EAB by buying a tag, checking in a non-existing doe through online check in, and go back to hunting a buck. Obviously doesn't help the population any, I don't care for deer meat enough to clean my own, and don't want to have to drag it out of the woods for someone else, or let them into my place to pick up a deer. I am perfectly OK with shooting a doe and letting it lie where it fell, but that is also illegal.
Antler restriction would be great, but online check in would have to go away. We use the 'honor system' in hopes that people will let young bucks walk now, and it doesn't work very well. antler restriction + online check in = inaccurate data that the OWD uses to set season limits and restrictions, so laws would only become less helpful to the actual population.
Again, I'm all for ANYTHING that generates trophy bucks. But if we're going to be productive in getting the regs changed, we need to recommend complete policies, from design to implementation to enforcement to revenue increase (or cost) to positive effect on population, instead of a "wish list".

AND open a season on all species of hawks.

 

[RidgeHunter]

^^^^^^^

So you want a trophy buck managed herd but won't shoot does because you don't want to get your hands bloody?

 

[dennishoddy]

I don't care for deer meat enough to clean my own, and don't want to have to drag it out of the woods for someone else, or let them into my place to pick up a deer. I am perfectly OK with shooting a doe and letting it lie where it fell, but that is also illegal.
Antler restriction would be great, but online check in would have to go away. We use the 'honor system' in hopes that people will let young bucks walk now, and it doesn't work very well. antler restriction + online check in = inaccurate data that the OWD uses to set season limits and restrictions, so laws would only become less helpful to the actual population.
Again, I'm all for ANYTHING that generates trophy bucks. But if we're going to be productive in getting the regs changed, we need to recommend complete policies, from design to implementation to enforcement to revenue increase (or cost) to positive effect on population, instead of a "wish list".

AND open a season on all species of hawks.

My way of thinking is that if you want to eliminate does, and don't want to get your hands bloody, then let someone that does, help you manage your herd.
I'm not asking to hunt on you, but I hunt on a guy that has a doe problem ,and I don't have a problem getting bloody. Gets me a great place to hunt and make him happy.
IMHO Okla has more trophy bucks than we have ever had because the mindset of the hunter is changing. I don't have any problem what-so-ever with a young hunter, first time hunter, and so on taking whatever buck they want. Its the start of the hunting experience. If the parent/mentor has done their job, they will recognize the need to let the little bucks grow.
Its all about knowledge, mentoring, and conservation.

Take a kid hunting, and teach them.
OK I'm off my podium now

 

[tjones96761]

^^^^^^^

So you want a trophy buck managed herd but won't shoot does because you don't want to get your hands bloody?

yes and no. I DO manage the herd in my area, I DON'T get my hands bloody. (I'll let you read between the lines) But what I do personally has little affect on the overall population in my area because my neighbors don't adhere to any management practices of any kind. there are not any deer that stay on my property exclusively. so I would like to see some regs put in place to help my neighbors make better management decisions. However, some of my neighbors have little regard for the current regulations, so I don't know that changing the rules will have any affect on our herd.
Just to clear things up, it's not about getting bloody, or field dressing, or any of that. For me, a kill is the end of the hunt for that season. The climax, if you will. So shooting does is somewhat of a killjoy for the rare occasions when I do get to drop the hammer. I haven't killed a buck in 2 years now, rifle or MZ. I still hunt every chance I get because I enjoy the chase much more than the catch.

 

[RidgeHunter]

yes and no. I DO manage the herd in my area, I DON'T get my hands bloody. (I'll let you read between the lines)

I'm not good at reading between the lines, can you explain?

Thanks,

 

[DrTurkenstein]

yes and no. I DO manage the herd in my area, I DON'T get my hands bloody. (I'll let you read between the lines) But what I do personally has little affect on the overall population in my area because my neighbors don't adhere to any management practices of any kind. there are not any deer that stay on my property exclusively. so I would like to see some regs put in place to help my neighbors make better management decisions. However, some of my neighbors have little regard for the current regulations, so I don't know that changing the rules will have any affect on our herd.
Just to clear things up, it's not about getting bloody, or field dressing, or any of that. For me, a kill is the end of the hunt for that season. The climax, if you will. So shooting does is somewhat of a killjoy for the rare occasions when I do get to drop the hammer. I haven't killed a buck in 2 years now, rifle or MZ. I still hunt every chance I get because I enjoy the chase much more than the catch.

I'm not too good at reading between the lines either. Please clarify what you mean.

I'm running the risk of not using the proper forum etiquette here but it sure sound like you are talking about shooting does and letting them lie. Hopefully by managing your herd you mean you let others take the does off your place. Wanton waste is a crime. If you don't want the meat, hunters for the hungry would gladly accept it. If it's too much work leave the gun at home and take the dslr with a telephoto lens.

If I misread between your lines I am honestly sorry for my rant and if not well.....read between the lines.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The trout stamp, at $10 per year - for up to 6 fish per day, for up to 365 days per year, is the best bargain in the history of the universe for these delicious farm-raised, fairly easy to catch delicacies!

I guess tjones means that he wears gloves when gutting.

 

[dennishoddy]

Intrestingly enough I got a survey from the ODW yesterday in the mail, asking about what game, and harvest information for each.
At the end of the survey, They asked if one would support a 16 day MZ season, and a 23 day centerfire season.
Another question was if one would support crossbow hunting for anybody, not just disabled hunters, and hunters over 60.
So, I'm thinking they are looking to see if they have enough support to maybe lengthen the deer seasons?
I read a report from Georgia several years ago that questioned if a longer deer season would result in more deer being taken. At the end of the study, they found that the number of days spent in the field by hunters didn't really increase, and the total number of deer killed didn't go up that much.

 

[tjones96761]

Interesting that no one mentioned increasing harvest limits, only extending seasons. From what Dshod said about the Georgia study it seems like the only way to decrease the population.