Emphasis on havesting does hurting deer herd

[philray]

Has the emphasis on harvesting does hurt the deer herd on public land in Oklahoma? I have hunted on Honobia WMA for the last 25 years and it seems like I am seeing fewer deer than what I used to. I hunted with my dad and my brother during the blackpowder season and during the first weekend of rifle season and I saw three deer, my dad seen about five does, and my brother didn't see any deer. We have had similar results for the last several years and my father in law has even quit hunting on the WMA because of not seeing deer. The only thing I can contribute it to is the increase in number of days to kill does and the emphasis on killing them. Have any other Oklahoma WMA hunters had similar experiences?

[wtnhunt]

Not in Oklahoma, but YES absolutely does can be overhunted and it can hurt the overall herd. Deer densities here have taken a huge hit since this state implemented liberal limits on does and we do not see near the number of deer we used to.

[The_Kat]

Your not the only one seeing less deer in Oklahoma. My gun season was awful, but I did see lots of deer in the three weeks prior. I talked with our game warden and he told me the entire state is having a record low harvest. Even out in NW Oklahoma kill numbers are way down. He said unless things pick up this could be a record low kill in the past 14 years.

[hoosierhunter]

What you have to remember is that overall numbers are down in a lot of places. We are down in IN as well, but in reality I would say that deer densities were too high and now that they are coming back to the correct level it seems low to most of us.

[pointing_dogs_rule]

The Iowa DNR had really srewed up this state. For the last three years they preached "too many does". They sold tons of doe tags and the hunters bought the tags. Three years later I hope to see a deer when I hunt.

At a local DNR meeting last night the hunters voiced this compliant and now we are organizing and will fight back. NO harvesting of does on private lands around me.

good luck to all

the dog

[philray]

I am with you. It is getting were we consider it a good day if we see a doe and that is sad. I don't expect to see deer everywhere, but when you put a full day hunting I expect to see at least one deer.

  pointing_dogs_rule said:

The Iowa DNR had really srewed up this state. For the last three years they preached "too many does". They sold tons of doe tags and the hunters bought the tags. Three years later I hope to see a deer when I hunt.

[ruttinbuc]

No one to blame but the hunters themselves. States make money selling tags, regardless. They claim to know. Do they? There is such a thing as overkill on does. Some guys will never understand that they are the keepers of the herd. The same hype that is driving the greed is killing the does

[Ethan Givan]

  pointing_dogs_rule said:

The Iowa DNR had really srewed up this state. For the last three years they preached "too many does". They sold tons of doe tags and the hunters bought the tags. Three years later I hope to see a deer when I hunt.

the dog

Same here. They allowed hunters here unlimited antlerless tags for several years. Because of no limit on does, plus the blue tongue outbreak a couple years ago, deer sightings have went down over the years. I have been passing up every doe I see for a while now. I dont know why people cant understand that you need does to keep the herd number up. 1 buck and 5 does will make alot more deer than 3 bucks and 3 does will. Its common sense.

[pointing_dogs_rule]

  ruttinbuc said:

No one to blame but the hunters themselves. States make money selling tags, regardless. They claim to know. Do they? There is such a thing as overkill on does. Some guys will never understand that they are the keepers of the herd. The same hype that is driving the greed is killing the does

ruttinbuc, agree!!!! Why do these hunters believe what the DNR says. We the hunters must also take some blame. It's time we the hunters and landowners regulate our own lands and deer numbers.

good luck to all

the dog

[jcot2773]

You know, where I hunt in florida hasn't had a deer herd hit like that, in fact the only time I can legally harvest a doe is in early archery, and the fawns still have spots on them. So I don't even get to harvest a doe down here.

[bghunter777]

Pa is no different there are a few private lands with very healthy deer herds and good numbers of deer but overall they have reduced the herd to very low levels especially on public hunting land. The deer numbers are way down in PA. The notion that you would have more bucks is also wrong 3 pts on a side simply doesnt save enough bucks I see at least 75 percent of the yearlings sporting at least 3 on a side you add in youth and seniors shooting the spikes and 4 pts and the antler restriction is useless. Why they cant just put a law where it is illegal to shoot a 1.5 year old buck is beyond me its easier to age the difference between a 1.5 year old buck and a 2.5 year old buck than it is to determine number of pts. there are many states with laws governing what is legal game full curl rams male and female ducks ect it is the hunters responsibility to learn and be responsible enough to harvest the appropriate animal. 10 years ago I would see around 10 different bucks on an opening day now im lucky to see one same land! The Pa game commission has very few hunters that truly understand the game they manage

[Jorden]

  wtnhunt said:

Not in Oklahoma, but YES absolutely does can be overhunted and it can hurt the overall herd. Deer densities here have taken a huge hit since this state implemented liberal limits on does and we do not see near the number of deer we used to.

Just look at Wisconsin. Many years of the DNR shoving doe tags down hunters throats, saying there are too many deer, earn a buck, shooting large amounts to deer to "control" CWD. After a while it takes its toll. The harvest numbers here have been way way down the last few years.

  pointing_dogs_rule said:

The Iowa DNR had really srewed up this state. For the last three years they preached "too many does". They sold tons of doe tags and the hunters bought the tags. Three years later I hope to see a deer when I hunt.

At a local DNR meeting last night the hunters voiced this compliant and now we are organizing and will fight back. NO harvesting of does on private lands around me.

good luck to all

the dog

Same thing here. I use to go hunting hoping to shoot something, now its just hoping to see something. Hunters voiced their displeasure here a few years ago and got the earn a buck removed in a lot of the state but numbers are still way down and wont be back for a while unfortunately.

At some point though hunters need to realized what is going on and take it upon themselves to do something. My dad worked helping a butcher take in deer this year and he talked to the people bringing in the deer. He would talk to people who would say that they saw very few deer and then bring in 70lb fawns. Well sorry to say it but just because you have that tag, doesnt mean you have to shoot something. Especially when its almost impossible to run into a hunter in this state that wont have something to say about the low deer numbers. And its important to remember that when you shoot a doe, you potetial remove three deer for next year. Sure there are pockets of larger numbers of deer but over harvesting has brought the herd numbers down a lot in this state. Its different on every property too. People need to stop listening to what the DNR is saying and look at what the situation is in areas they hunt. On our land last year we had almost no deer sightings so we decided to shoot no does. This year there are noticably more deer but still not like there use to so we have limited it to one doe. Overall its up to us hunters to decide when enough is enough. We control how many deer are taken

and dont have to fill every take we get, especially if deer numbers are down.

[need2hunt]

  philray said:

Has the emphasis on harvesting does hurt the deer herd on public land in Oklahoma?

I don't hunt in Oklahoma so I can't say if it has or hasn't. I guess the question I have is what do you mean by "hurt the deer herd"? If you mean be shear quantity #'s only then YES that is typically one of the goals that the DNR's have when they start pushing the taking of more does. I don't know about OK but in Illinois I know there is input (and pressure I'm sure) from not only hunters but also Insurance agencies who have an issue with the # of deer/car accidents as well as farmers with deer/crop damage issues and the people that are in the positions to make these decisions hear it from all sides.

If you mean actual health of the herd by allowing less competition for the available food and habitat then NO it should be helping the actual health of the herd in that aspect.

I'm sure there are other scientific stuff that I know nothing about that others could discuss on the topic of helping or hurting the deer herd I just find it odd that a lot of hunters only concern is the # of deer they see. Your instance where your talking about public land where you yourself can't control the # of deer others take is out of your control except for pressuring the DNR for specific quotas for areas, etc. For private land hunters, in my opinion it's your job to manage your own property and you would be to blame for your own actions as much as any DNR agency and you would need to figure out what you want your deer herd to be and start rebuilding it as you see fit or curtail it as you see fit.

Deer management has always been a hot topic in hunting so for the record I'm not trying to poke anyone with a sharp stick, I'm just trying to widen the discussion to something other than healthy = quantity only

[wtnhunt]

  hoosierhunter said:

What you have to remember is that overall numbers are down in a lot of places. We are down in IN as well, but in reality I would say that deer densities were too high and now that they are coming back to the correct level it seems low to most of us.

Ummmm, well some biologists that work for the states may not necessarily use the best information for forming their suggestions to those who implement the harvest limits. I know this state uses harvest data still for their herd estimates, at least last I read they did, and from what I have read that may not be the best way to guess how many deer are in an area for pretty obvious reasons. Was estimated sometime around 2000 that the density in this county was 15 deer per sq mile, I figured it was higher in pockets and this specific area had a good deal more due to the bottoms and ag crops giving deer pretty well everything they needed and I had at times seen as many as 20 deer on our property. At that time there were no liberal limits for does and there were only limited numbers of does allowed to be taken with firearms. Certain counties back about 7 or 8 years ago they began to implement liberal limits, first counties were those with deer densities above 45 deer per sq mile. With the liberal limits they now allow for 3 does a day to be harvested for the duration of the season from the first day it opens(4th Saturday in Sept) up until season ends in January. You get a high concentration of hunters to any areas and they can really do some serious damage in places where there were already not real high deer densitites to begin with. Factor in die offs from ehd in years like 2007 and the herd can take huge hits that leave areas with very few deer and hunters sighting will most certainly also go down. Floored me that after some places saw dieoffs above the 35% range that they were still left in liberal limit units, but biologists must have some reason.

  ruttinbuc said:

No one to blame but the hunters themselves. States make money selling tags, regardless. They claim to know. Do they? There is such a thing as overkill on does. Some guys will never understand that they are the keepers of the herd.The same hype that is driving the greed is killing the does

Would agree to some degree, burden does also fall back on the biologists who make the suggestions to the commision on where they set limits. They have to know some guys have no self control.

On the guys who don't understand, there are those who will do their dangdest to try to see just how many they can kill, shooting everything they see, even though they will not eat the meat. Funny thing is those same guys might complain about seeing fewer and fewer animals. Some people just don't get it and unfortunately probably never will despite trying to educate them.

  pointing_dogs_rule said:

ruttinbuc, agree!!!! Why do these hunters believe what the DNR says. We the hunters must also take some blame. It's time we the hunters and landowners regulate our own lands and deer numbers.

good luck to all

the dog

Unfortunately a lot of the problem is not the landowners, but who they allow to hunt their land and in some cases also poachers. Guess we could say shame on the landowners for not being more up on what is going on, but you got some that just don't care. Heck the woman who own the property behind us that gets leased does not have a clue, sure there are plenty similar situations.

[huntnfish]

Great debate. DNRs use hunting to help control deer populations. As hunters that is what we do. We are the ultimate conservationist not these liberal anti-hunting groups. We need to take it upon ourselves and not kill everything we see.

My deer sightings this year have decreased in the hunt club I hunt in NC. But this does not mean I am going to kill the first thing I see. The "if its brown, its down" mentality has to go and we need to take a more responsible approach. The control of the deer herd is ultimately in our hands.

[ChrisSeb53]

  hoosierhunter said:

What you have to remember is that overall numbers are down in a lot of places. We are down in IN as well, but in reality I would say that deer densities were too high and now that they are coming back to the correct level it seems low to most of us.

agreed... it is frustrating to see less deer, but if it means the deer aren't eating themselves out of house and home and starving to death because of high numbers, then i am all for it because that means i can hunt them in the future.... plus it means my hunt isnt over right away and i can enjoy the great outdoors a little longer

[Grady269]

Virginia

Virginia struggled with over abundant deer and responded with full season for does with unlimited bonus tags that could be purchased. This along with the sudden infestation of coyotes where coyotes had not been present for 100 years has had a very sudden impact on the deer herd. It may not be long before everyone is gathering around to take pictures of a deer track because they never saw one before.

[Stinger-Hunter]

I have hunted Indiana for years and the last two have been horrendous. I see deer only in the beginning of the season and then they are gone. Yes, of course they are going nocturnal, but to go two entire years without taking a deer is ridiculous. I've hunted private and public land and the result is the same.

More doe tags = more $$ for the state. I believe that is the DNR's main priority. All thing eventually lead to politics and where there is politics there is greed.

Minnesota was aweful as well, even though there are still alot of deer in NW near Park Rapids.

[TN Bucknasty]

  wtnhunt said:

Not in Oklahoma, but YES absolutely does can be overhunted and it can hurt the overall herd. Deer densities here have taken a huge hit since this state implemented liberal limits on does and we do not see near the number of deer we used to.

Our daily limit is 3 and you can kill 3 every day the entire season. Also, we have a very long rifle and ml season.

We could probably deal with this if hunters in this area were a little more educated. However, I hear stupid things from so many of my clients that I just have a hard time seeing management "put in the hands of the hunter" as TWRA likes to put it.

Here are a few of my favorite things people say:

"If you kill more does, your bucks get bigger."- Only if your deer are starving and ours are nowhere close. Take a trip to southwest TX in the winter time, look around at the food that is available, look at the number and size of the deer, then come back to TN and tell me that these deer are starving.

"Our bucks only weigh 120lbs., and they never have more than 6 points, they're starving to death."- No they are not starving, they are yearlings, idiot.

"Deer are destroying all of the farmers' crops."-That's why the warden issues as many out of season tags to those farmers as they want.

"We need to balance the buck to doe ratio."- Yes, we do, but it would be much easier just to kill fewer young bucks. Then we could have proper age structure and a balanced herd. I don't care what kind of propaganda TWRA says or publishes about the "high quality" age structure of our deer, our age structure is pathetic. They want to compare us to KY all of the time. I've been there. There is no comparison.

My favorite from this season was a call I got about a full body mount.- "This piebald deer I just killed was starving. It only weighed 60lbs. It's got white spots on its hind quarters and front legs."- It wasn't a pie bald. I'll give you one guess what it was.

Trust me, with the kind of culture we have here, we don't have to worry about the overpopulation of ANYTHING.

Edited December 8, 2010 by TN Bucknasty

[hoosierhunter]

  Stinger-Hunter said:

I have hunted Indiana for years and the last two have been horrendous..

2008 was a banner year for bucks in my area and I tagged a great one after several sightings on Nov 4th.

2009 all my shooters disappeared on Aug 18th and I didn't see any during the season. I shot 4 does

2010 bucks were everywhere again and again I tagged another buck on Oct 29th this time after several sightings while hunting.

Our doe numbers are down considerably though.

[wtnhunt]

  TN Bucknasty said:

Our daily limit is 3 and you can kill 3 every day the entire season. Also, we have a very long rifle and ml season.

We could probably deal with this if hunters in this area were a little more educated. However, I hear stupid things from so many of my clients that I just have a hard time seeing management "put in the hands of the hunter" as TWRA likes to put it.

Here are a few of my favorite things people say:

"If you kill more does, your bucks get bigger."- Only if your deer are starving and ours are nowhere close. Take a trip to southwest TX in the winter time, look around at the food that is available, look at the number and size of the deer, then come back to TN and tell me that these deer are starving.

"Our bucks only weigh 120lbs., and they never have more than 6 points, they're starving to death."- No they are not starving, they are yearlings, idiot.

"Deer are destroying all of the farmers' crops."-That's why the warden issues as many out of season tags to those farmers as they want.

"We need to balance the buck to doe ratio."- Yes, we do, but it would be much easier just to kill fewer young bucks. Then we could have proper age structure and a balanced herd. I don't care what kind of propaganda TWRA says or publishes about the "high quality" age structure of our deer, our age structure is pathetic. They want to compare us to KY all of the time. I've been there. There is no comparison.

A lot of truth to that and agree on some of the misinformation that this state puts out. Bad thing is some people just don't know any better.

On the uneducated to be perfectly honest I don't know how much of it is a matter of uneducated as it is people who just don't seem to care. Have noticed that a number of the people we have around here that simply just don't care. You hear these guys that talk a good game and say they want to better the herd and they say they will pass up deer, and then you get to opening day and the very same guys each and every year blast away anything and everything they see. Don't know how much of it is ego driven for those who attempt to kill as many as they can to better their buddies. I have been told I am nuts for passing up some of the deer I pass up, perfect example the 17 inch wide 8 point I passed up the rifle opener. Personally if I don't kill a deer in a single season I have nothing to prove and am fine with that, would much rather go without taking a deer one year to take a nice buck a year or so down the road.

Don't suspect food is an issue for deer in these parts where it would be necessary to bring densities down in order to sustain deer from starvation. These deer are not the big bodied subspecies like the borealis or dakota deer, however they can and do go over 200 lbs.

Bottom line, if there are not enough does around you will not have deer to hunt in the future. With the mild climate here winters can sustain much higher densities than I believe we actually currently have.

  TN Bucknasty said:

My favorite from this season was a call I got about a full body mount.- "This piebald deer I just killed was starving. It only weighed 60lbs. It's got white spots on its hind quarters and front legs."- It wasn't a pie bald. I'll give you one guess what it was.

Trust me, with the kind of culture we have here, we don't have to worry about the overpopulation of ANYTHING.

Never seen a piebald anyhwere here, not even at a taxidermist. What you post here really does not suprise me much though, a testament to the ignorance of some.

[TN Bucknasty]

  wtnhunt said:

On the uneducated to be perfectly honest I don't know how much of it is a matter of uneducated as it is people who just don't seem to care. Have noticed that a number of the people we have around here that simply just don't care. You hear these guys that talk a good game and say they want to better the herd and they will pass up deer, and then you get to opening day and the very same guys each and every year blast away anything and everything they see. Don't know how much of it is ego driven for those who attempt to kill as many as they can to better their buddies. I have been told I am nuts for passing up some of the deer I pass up, perfect example the 17 inch wide 8 point I passed up the rifle opener. Personally if I don't kill a deer in a single season I have nothing to prove and am fine with that, would much rather go without taking a deer one year to take a nice buck a year or so down the road.

Don't suspect food is an issue for deer in these parts where it would be necessary to bring densities down in order to sustain deer from starvation.

Bottom line, if there are not enough does around you will not have deer to hunt in the future. With the mild climate here winters can sustain much higher densities than I believe we actually currently have.

Never seen a piebald anyhwere here, not even at a taxidermist. What you post here really does nto suprise me much though, a testament to the ignorance of some.

I agree with everything you've stated here. Its nice to see that there are other people who are actually on the same page.

I kill between 8 and 15 deer a year, but those are coming from different states and areas. I usually kill a trophy or two a year, and the rest are harvested to feed the family. That's about all we eat besides fish and small game. I wouldn't dare kill that many off of any one place that I hunt.

As far as piebalds go. They seem to pop up in the same little pockets. I've seen three in the wild. All were different deer for sure, but they were within 3 miles of each other. I saw a buck, a huge doe, and a button at different times. I've seen 4-5 in the shop.

[victor3ranger]

Here is my take on it for what it worth.

On the property I hunt we take only mature does and of those we only take twice the number of doe as buck that were killed that given year, for example, if 4 bucks were killed on the property then 8 mature does will be harvested.

We have done this for the past 10 years and the results so far are encouraging. As for the bucks that are harvested, only 8 points or better and they have to be wider than the tips of the ears, we put these self-empossed restrictions to let the bucks grow up.

On occasion if a buck shows up that is something like a huge 4 point or 6 point those will get culled.

I have gone 4 years without harvesting a buck, only because I didn't see one that I wanted to harvest, each of those years I would see 20-30 bucks that I would pass.

I think that most hunters want to see a big buck to shoot at but for some reason they can't seem to keep their finger off the trigger.

I know that some of the states have changed the doe harvest to pull the total population of the herd down, in some places maybe they should do just that, but for the most part the average hunter needs to research which deer are good to take from the herd and which ones should be allowed to walk.

[TN Bucknasty]

  victor3ranger said:

Here is my take on it for what it worth.

On the property I hunt we take only mature does and of those we only take twice the number of doe as buck that were killed that given year, for example, if 4 bucks were killed on the property then 8 mature does will be harvested.

We have done this for the past 10 years and the results so far are encouraging. As for the bucks that are harvested, only 8 points or better and they have to be wider than the tips of the ears, we put these self-empossed restrictions to let the bucks grow up.

On occasion if a buck shows up that is something like a huge 4 point or 6 point those will get culled.

I have gone 4 years without harvesting a buck, only because I didn't see one that I wanted to harvest, each of those years I would see 20-30 bucks that I would pass.

I think that most hunters want to see a big buck to shoot at but for some reason they can't seem to keep their finger off the trigger.

I know that some of the states have changed the doe harvest to pull the total population of the herd down, in some places maybe they should do just that, but for the most part the average hunter needs to research which deer are good to take from the herd and which ones should be allowed to walk.

Very well put.

[smokinya]

Here in Alabama around 12-13 years ago we seen alot of does on most hunts but then they open doe days from 7-10 days to the whole season (mid October through end of January) and now in alot of places you go days with out seeing deer. The does are pressured the same as bucks and do not move as much because of the pressure. I believe the numbers are still pretty good but they just do not move as much so I am guessing it is the same in your neck of the woods.