2005 Results


Chrud

Recommended Posts

Re: 2005 Results

ROFL!!!!!!!!!

Alabama has absolutely 0 statistics to prove they killed that many deer, 0, 0, 0.

No tags, no checking system whatsoever. This state does not know what is being killed. I doubt that is even close. Do you think we killed 1/4 of our estimated population? ROFL, ridiculous.

States need to take some lessons from the TWRA (Tennessee). Now they know what is going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

I agree Gary. Chrud is certainly awesome! cool.gif

[ QUOTE ]

Do you think we killed 1/4 of our estimated population? ROFL, ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not ridiculous in Ohio. Our herd is estimated around 600,000, and our harvest this past year was over 190, 700 which is dang near 1/3 of our total herd.

I chatted with Mike Tonkovich once (he used to be Ohio's deer guru on the DNR level), and he told my buddy and I that you actually have to kill close to 1/2 of all the does in the state just to keep pace with the newborns every year. crazy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

NO! Ridiculous!

They say they have a survey but I've been buying my license here (I actually live in Alabama) since I was able (16 y/r old) and I've never seen one and neither has anyone else I know.

I do not know of a club that kills anywhere near 1/4 of their deer herd down here, not one.

I'll even go as far as saying that even if we did, how in the world do they know the numbers? I've heard all the ways they use to come up with them but without tags or checking stations, it is impossible to know. Heck, most clubs don't even know how many they kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

I'm not sure how accurate those numbers are that I copied. I probably should have check them out more before copying them to here. Wisconsin's DNR site says that the number of deer killed is significatly less than the number I got from the other forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

[ QUOTE ]

You want to see real time, accurate numbers, go look at Tennessee's results.

They are hands down the very best with their check stations. Their new electronic check in is very nice. You can actually see total numbers for counties every day as it is updated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only problem is there continues in Tennessee to be those who do not check deer, and not enough manpower in twra officers to enforce the laws. So the inconsistencies will continue somewhat.

I am kind of surprised not to see PA in that list of the top 5. Seems like last year or maybe the year before they had somewhere in the neighborhood of half a million deer harvested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

[ QUOTE ]

So, you don't register deer in Alabama or what?

[/ QUOTE ]

We don't in Mississippi either Chrud. The DWF&P tried to implement a telephone call in program (telecheck)on a voluntary basis 4 years ago (was supposed to become mandatory) and only about 1.5% of the licensed hunters called in their deer kill the first year. I don't know why but the program was never made mandatory. We're still on the honor system. smirk.gif

The only hard numbers Mississippi gets comes from hunting clubs enrolled in the state DMAP program, individuals signed up for the FEMAP program, hunter surveys, and those that call in to Telecheck. The numbers reported under those programs are a drop in the bucket compared to the total annual deer kill from all licensed deer hunters.

The average annual deer harvest in Mississppi over the past few years is estimated to be about 275,000 deer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

I was wondering, why Kansas is not on the list?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was wondering the same thing, I thought Kansas would have made the top 5 for sure... confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, kind of have to wonder about Montana too. Sure would have thought they would be in the top 5 in B&c bucks taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

[ QUOTE ]

Really? So you guys are able to just shoot deer and not worry about registering them? Seems strange to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems strange to me too Chrud. If they had implemented the mandatory Telecheck registration system we'd have data available (on line) on a county basis now. Unfortunately there were too many hunters moaning and groaning (to put it mildly) about Big Brother watching over them. The politicians won out in the end. smirk.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 2005 Results

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

I was wondering, why Kansas is not on the list?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was wondering the same thing, I thought Kansas would have made the top 5 for sure... confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, kind of have to wonder about Montana too. Sure would have thought they would be in the top 5 in B&c bucks taken.

[/ QUOTE ]

Montana is best known for having large numbers of deer in the 140 class range. They produce some B&C class bucks too but not as many as you'd think.

Also, remember deer have to be entered in B&C to be counted in those numbers. I know for a fact that many are never entered in B&C both in several of those top 5 states and states not in the top 5 too.

Trust me, it's sort of a hastle to go through the entry process, not to mention the application fee you have to pay so some people won't bother entering their trophy B&C class bucks. Heck we have some members here that have killed deer that would make B&C and didn't enter them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.