What would you change...

[Mirage]

Re: What would you change...

sunday hunting nwould be great for me in maryland no sunday hunting last year they aloud 2 sundays on private land i hunted one of them. It was a great day missed a doe but had a blast!!

[Doc]

Re: What would you change...

The one change that I would make is to treat each parcel of public land as an individual game management unit and assign antlerless permits accordingly. Currently, here in NY and probably many other states, public lands are managed exactly the same as private lands even though the levels of hunting pressure are in no way similar. Increased hunting pressure on public lands is going to continue to be a problem as more and more private land gets developed or posted up by non-hunting or anti-hunting landowners, or gets fenced off and posted by hunters trying to farm their own perfect herd. Meanwhile, deer herds on public lands get blown to bits every year because hoards of hunters fill these areas and each is armed with a pocket full of antlerless permits because the general area appears to be over-populated.

Doc

[M00N]

I have to say Doc an I are on the same page as far as law change ideas. We may be in different states even, but I think his idea is a really good one. I never understood why our state considered the public hunting lands and the private hunting lands as one single entity when estimating doe populations in order to give out doe tags for that area. The two lands have such different hunting pressure on them. I think it'd be a whole lot more logical to give the public hunting lands their own separate WMU and the private hunting lands to use the WMU based on counties again. That way they can control exactly how many doe tags are going to be used on the public hunting lands to better prevent overharvesting of does. Also this would allow the private land owners more freedom to get the correct amount of doe tags for their hunters that hunt on their lands and to manage their deer populations how they see fit. The private land owners would no longer have to battle against the public land hunters for doe tags and only amungst themselves in the same county.

[WIwhitetailhunter]

I'd like to see an antler restriction and extending the gun season another week.

[hunterDWL]

I would change the dates on rifle season here in Nebraska, so they weren't during the rut. That would eliminate all of the success road hunters have.

i would have to agree with you they are also bad in my area so bad that last year people were cutting trees across back roads so they could not ride them

[nutz4bucks]

[ QUOTE ]

You guys that say Earn-A-Buck might have a different opinion if you actually had that rule. Although the zone I mostly hunt has never been EAB, most of the people I talk to don't like the rule.

I would have antler restrictions. Either a certain number of points or the width of the ears.

[/ QUOTE ]We're in it again.(67B) I personally feel EAB is a good thing. Since they first started it we are seeing a more even buck to doe ratio, and seems to be a healthier herd. It has also aided in some of the neighbors seeing how good it feels to be able to pass on the first little buck that walks by opening morning of the gun season. Thus putting some age structure on the herd as well. Of course this is, JMO!

First off your unit wouldn't be in it again if you (hunters) did what your suppose too....LOL

The dnr gives specific units certian quotas and also gives you (hunters) certian number of years to get that unit to the desired # (how they come up with that # beats the heck out of me)....

And second off I think if possible do everything you can by encouraging people to shoot more does and I myself will kill more does, heck this last year we dropped 5 does before 11 a.m. And note that i said DOES not fawns thats the sad part about EAB people shot anything just to get thier sticker To me that's sad.....

I'm in 60a and that unit is on the edge of EAB If we (hunters) don't do our part it will be in EAB in 2008

JMO

[Washi]

I would like to have an antler restriction

To hopefully help some younger buck make it.

Bite your tongue. We don't need any more restrictions than we already have.

If you hunt public land you may have a different point of view than me. I don't know since I only hunt private land.

[arrow32]

I would have to say set in place an antler restriction. There the year before they dropped down the number of bucks you can kill but it still is to many more than likely but just the antler restriction would help.

[Guest shedman6o]

I would change

I would make it legal to hunt on sundays in Pa

[Randyman]

Earn a buck. Our doe herd appears to be outta control, and there are those that REFUSE to shoot a doe, but would kill a small buck

AMEN to this!

[bulldawg]

Earn a buck is not good, if there are huge tracts of private lands that are only open to 3 or 4 hunters, and they go on public land to take thier does! I talked to several groups of individuals whom have been doing this, and the 63A public area where I hunt is getting overrun with people doing that!

As long as this practice is going on, there is no way that the DNR can get EAB to work! It is a useless effort that is turning into heated arguments according to the news about a meeting that took place in one of the town halls west of here. Hunters that only hunt small parcels of private land, or public land are not seeing any deer. Some spots that just a few years ago were litterally filled with deer are for the most part, wiped out because too many does were killed. When the season starts, the deer funnel into these huge tracts of private land, and only come out nocturnally until the hunt is over. The only way they get moved out of there is if someone drives them out, and that doesn't happen either.

EAB seems to be Wisconsins only answer to doe control, and it is not working. When private lands show most of the deer concentrations in fly overs during the season, the DNR is going to have to make it so the landowners Have to make it accessible to more hunters, or do away with this useless EAB practice. Figure out another alternative, and antler restrictions is not the answer.

Dawg

[Dogg6]

You guys that say Earn-A-Buck might have a different opinion if you actually had that rule. Although the zone I mostly hunt has never been EAB, most of the people I talk to don't like the rule.

I would have antler restrictions. Either a certain number of points or the width of the ears.

I do hunt EAB and think is a good thing. IMO If people took the time to understand how it works now with the new rule changes, they would like it too. For instance, my Dad and I filled all our antlerless tags in 06 and now we prequalified for our bucks in 07. This way if another big buck comes along this year I can take him. People need to read and understand the rules before saying they don't like them.

[Doc]

Actually, I am not in favor of any of these "one-size-fits-all" regulations. Even within a state, populations and herd make-up can vary all over the place. There isn't any of these ideas that wouldn't be completely out of place in certain portions of any state. Imagine being stuck with antler restrictions or EAB in an area where the average hunter would be lucky to harvest 1 deer per season. How many hunters do you think we would be frustrating right out of the sport by doing that. I'm sure there are a lot of hunters that are relegated to hunting public lands because of a huge variety of reasons. Not all public lands are over-run with deer, in fact most are in pretty tough shape. Now throw a few of these kinds of restrictions on their hunting, and next year they will be taking up bowling instead of hunting. In this age of shrinking hunter numbers, I don't think we should be doing that. At any rate, it is just plain wrong to be heaping unrealistic restrictions on any hunter. If you have specific wildlife management units that are over-run with deer, then those kinds of restrictions might be appropriate. But to just arbitrarily spread these rules over a whole state without any regard to local conditions is most likely a good way to pare down our ranks even further.

Doc

[bulldawg]

Dogg6,

One of my cousin's kids stole a big old doe I shot last year, just because of that rule.

Our big group usually puts down at least 15-20 deer a season on public land. 2/3 of them are does, but that's on a 15000 acre tract. We have been doing those numbers and higher since before the T-Zones started up that way. They started that rule where if you tagged a doe in 2005, it was good for 2006. So, alot of people hadn't caught on about that until last season.

I was in a wheel chair and shot a doe at about 40 yards. She dropped within 15 yards, and the one kid tagged it, and said he shot it. Found out later that I had shot it, but he desperately wanted that buck tag for this year. I couldn't get my wheelchair out in the swamp to assess the situation. That rule should be EAB for everyone starting from scratch the year it is in effect. Our group only saw a smaller number of deer last year, and only tagged 10 of them. That is the worst I've seen it since about 20 years ago. Deer are still being sited in large groups up there now on the private fields, so the actual population is not taking a hard hit, except on the public. They are making it so the goofy ones who refuse to shoot does on thier big tracts of land, are raping the public lands now, just to earn that tag. I know too well how the EAB works.

Dawg

[Doc]

Isn't it funny how everytime we concoct some new regulation, somebody always finds ways to corrupt the intent. You would think that we would learn. Everytime we try to add complexity to the game laws, there always seems to be some negative unintended consequences that come along with it. We already have a condition where the volume of laws, restrictions and regulations make it impossible to know for sure that you are not breaking some law or violating some fine print somewhere.

Personally, I would be in favor of an effort that simplifies the laws instead of adding to them. Pretty soon you are going to have to consult a lawyer before pulling the trigger.....lol.

Doc

[brad dryden]

I would have a antler restriction like the deer should be at least the width of its ears and for kids 16 and younger they can shoot a small buck.

[Michiganbowhunter_SQ2]

i would like the earn a buck thing here for a few years, to get the buck/doe ratio close to even...then enforce some sort of antler restriction. i personally shot a small buck this year, BUT it was the first deer i have ever shot...the quality of deer around the areas i hunt aren't very good (rack wise) and while i consider myself a meat hunter...i would occasionally like to see or have a shot at a nice wallhanger. i can see myself taking a lot of Does for the next few years, and thats fine by me.

[Dogg6]

Bulldawg, It is unfortunate what happened to you, but that situation is not the regulations fault, it is the fault of that unethical hunter. I do understand completely what you are saying though. I fortunately get to hunt private property, and that is all I hunt. My Dad and I do our best to fill the freezer every year to feed our family. That is our main concern. If we get a chance at a good buck, great, if not we are just as happy with a full freezer. We know we are doing our part to try and control the deer numbers. A true hunter not only abides by the laws and regulation that are in place, but also respects and has a common ethical courtesy for his fellow hunters. We will never be able to rid the hunting world of the unethical, people who chose to play by their own rules. They will get theirs in the end.

[bulldawg]

I commend you for taking those does, Dogg6. If eveyone did thier part, things wouldn't get out of control. Like Doc said, there are always ones around who make it so programs don't work. And you are right Doc, the laws are getting so complex and numerous, that the lawyers will soon be the only one's who can interpret them.

Dawg

[beagleboy]

I would like to see an early muzzleloader season. Perhaps before the gun season.

[elkoholic]

In Montana there are three things that I would change, but if only one change was allowed, I would go with issuing a deer tag with your archery stamp. We can currently only shoot one deer per year unless we are lucky enough to draw an antler-less deer tag. If given a second change option, I would go with making it illegal (strong enforcement) to "road hunt". Given a third change option, I would begin a muzzle loader season, but limit it traditional muzzle loaders.

[Randy]

First off your unit wouldn't be in it again if you (hunters) did what your suppose too....LOL

The dnr gives specific units certian quotas and also gives you (hunters) certian number of years to get that unit to the desired # (how they come up with that # beats the heck out of me)....

And second off I think if possible do everything you can by encouraging people to shoot more does and I myself will kill more does, heck this last year we dropped 5 does before 11 a.m. And note that i said DOES not fawns thats the sad part about EAB people shot anything just to get thier sticker To me that's sad.....

I'm in 60a and that unit is on the edge of EAB If we (hunters) don't do our part it will be in EAB in 2008

JMO

Well, we killed 15 deer off of 120 acres, 12 of them were doe. I still have neighbors telling me there are not as many deer around as there used to be!! LOL They don't want to shoot them as they feel we'll kill them all!! See, by us most people don't even walk in the woods until the day before gun season. They have no idea what is running around on their land. Then opening day they see deer running all over the place and then by Mon. the deer know what's going on and hide. Well, nobody gets up and moves the deer around like they did 20 years ago so these people think there are none left or there must be a different area in our unit that has more deer!

[MichiganHunter]

Lets see Well Michigan has two different hunting areas....upper and lower peninsula... in the upper and upper lower i would say only bucks over a 4 point and upper peninsula one buck only. lower peninsula have to shoot a doe to activate one of the two buck tags

[Guest BearTrackFarms]

tighter regs. in MS you dont have to check your deer with the DNR or anything....a lot of people take advantage of this

[Doc]

Relative to deer take reporting, we have a similar situation here in NY. I always thought that reporting a harvested deer was a mandate of law, however the DEC treats reporting as though it is merely a suggestion. In fact they have accepted these failures to report so thoroughly that they have developed a statistical process that comes up with a "reporting rate" so that they can factor that into their harvest counts. That is simply a ridiculous and unacceptable way of approach law enforcement and game management.

There IS a better way! First of all, all harvest reports should be made mandatory and should apply whether the hunter was SUCCESSFUL OR NOT. That means, one license (or antlerless permit).......one report (successful or not)......no exceptions.

Our reporting system is completely computerized by phone and now by PC as well, so hunters are already feeding the DEC computers when it comes to harvest numbers. It should be no big trick to run a sort on licenses issued vs. reports received. A list of non-compliant hunters should appear shortly after the season has concluded. Warnings with deadlines should be sent out, with summonses issued at the end of the deadline if the non-compliance persists. Pretty simple, eh?

What penalties should accompany failure to report harvest results? .......... I'd leave that up to others to thrash out, with the thought that it should sting enough to encourage 100% compliance. Personally I would look at things such as a 1 year suspension of hunting licenses, or ineligibility for issuance of antlerless permits, or fines, or combinations of any of these depending on the number of such offenses.

Yeah it's pretty tough medicine, but why should our under-resourced DEC people be running around collecting data at deer processors, taxidermist, etc. just to come up with a deer reporting rate, which may or may not be completely bogus anyway?

Non compliance with deer reporting is a problem that has no business even existing. The fix is simple and for those sportsmen who are law-abiding, it is a rather painless way to get at least one major phase of guestimation out of our deer management systems, and probably save some money in the process.

Doc