PDA

View Full Version : Making a difference in deer management!



AR_Headhunter
February 4th, 2010, 12:55 PM
Ok guys, we have been discussing organizing for a bit & I think it's time to actually take action.

We need to figure out what our groups name will be, create a mission statement, set long & short term goals, elect officers, create a web site (Bo have offered to help out with that), spread the word about what we are trying to do & gain membership. We should also identify existing groups in Arkansas who share in some of our beliefs. This could be a huge step in uniting for common goals. We are not going to agree with every goal of every group but on the issues that we agree on we could get alot more accomplished by combining efforts.

IMO we need to establish a set of core principles that we agree on & determine exactly what direction we want this to take. Without that we are just spinning our wheels.

We will take this a step at a time to avoid confusion or rehashing of various idea's. Once we narrow down the choices then we can use the poll feature here to vote on various aspects of this.

Lets begin with choosing a name. Here are some suggestions from me but if you think of something then feel free to suggest it.

Arkansas Whitetail Stewards

Informed Arkansans for QDM

Arkansas Public Land Hunters Assoc.

Arkansas QDM Assoc.

I look forward to hearing from you guys & working with you to get results!

tmkilburn
February 5th, 2010, 12:44 PM
I'm in. If we could organize a big enough group we could probably make some headway in management. Make a few different chapters and have actual in-person meetings. Northwest Arkansas branch, Northeast Arkansas branch, central Arkansas, etc...
I cant say I have any pull or say in what the game and fish does, but with enough people in an organized group I could put us in contact with people that do.

AR_Headhunter
February 5th, 2010, 01:56 PM
I'm in. If we could organize a big enough group we could probably make some headway in management. Make a few different chapters and have actual in-person meetings. Northwest Arkansas branch, Northeast Arkansas branch, central Arkansas, etc...
I cant say I have any pull or say in what the game and fish does, but with enough people in an organized group I could put us in contact with people that do.

Welcome aboard. Your idea of different chapters is exactly what we will grow into (I hope). Actually one day I hope that we have a group in each zone, representatives which will be a part of the regional chapters. The regional chapter leaders would be providing input to the statewide leadership. I have e ton of ideas in my head but first things first, we have to select a name. Then we will move forward to the next steps to become a organization that will represent everyone who is a stakeholder & member. We will also have charter members. All that will be determined as we move forward. Like I said though. Right now we need to choose a name. I personally like Arkansas Whitetail Stewards & Arkansas Public Land Hunters Assoc. better than the others but I want all of you guys input.

To me this should be a organization were we represent a majority opinion of the members & not simply used to push any one person's personal agenda. Any member should be able to make a recommendation for a proposal to be looked at by everyone then everyone will have a equal voice in the form of a vote. Those items that receive a majority vote would move forward.

That is part of why I feel we need a new organization. IMHO the current organizations around the state do not listen to the membership. The current leaders of some of those organizations shut down the voices of members who do not agree with their opinion. I would like to see this organized so that any leader from the top to the bottom will be accountable to the membership. Thats what is lacking in current organizations IMO.

jna329
February 5th, 2010, 02:39 PM
Jack- since you started this we need to go ahead and add a poll for the name. I suggest Arkansas Whitetail Stewards, but I also like Informed Arkansans for QDM. My vote would go to the first of these two. I dont like the public land hunters for the simple fact that I hunt more on private than public. Could create an issue down the road.

jna329
February 5th, 2010, 02:41 PM
Something else that I thought of. We need to make this available to Non-resident deer hunters that come here to hunt. If nothing else we should at least make the poll available to our bordering states.

AR_Headhunter
February 5th, 2010, 02:51 PM
I'll make the poll. I'm going to make it so we can see who voted for which name. That way we can identify everyones votes. I do not mind nonresidents voting but I ask if you are a nonresident who votes then please state what makes you a stakeholder & where you hunt around the state.

bigdoglanyards
February 5th, 2010, 10:45 PM
Jack, your avatar freaked me out at first!!! I really had to look close at it....

bigdoglanyards
February 5th, 2010, 10:56 PM
Arkansas Whitetail Stewards


My pick :thumbs_up

AR_Headhunter
February 6th, 2010, 05:41 AM
Jack, your avatar freaked me out at first!!! I really had to look close at it....

But once you figured out what it was I bet you liked it.:wink: Thats my version of performing open heart surgery.

whitewolf1
February 6th, 2010, 01:18 PM
The Voice: Whitetail Management for Arkansans

Could be used for club name or a newsletter.

AR_Headhunter
February 6th, 2010, 06:51 PM
The Voice: Whitetail Management for Arkansans

Could be used for club name or a newsletter.

No matter what name we settle on I would like to see us have a monthly e-news letter. I do not see a need for a hard copy.

bigdoglanyards
February 6th, 2010, 10:13 PM
The Voice: Whitetail Management for Arkansans

Could be used for club name or a newsletter.

I like the idea of "The Voice"

AR_Headhunter
February 7th, 2010, 06:56 AM
I did to for our news letter.

jna329
February 8th, 2010, 12:02 AM
+1 for the voice

Dodgeman67
February 8th, 2010, 12:07 AM
"The voice of Arkansas Deer Hunters."

Sounds familiar for some reason. :moviecorn

AR_Headhunter
February 8th, 2010, 07:26 AM
"The voice of Arkansas Deer Hunters."

Sounds familiar for some reason. :moviecorn

To bad the group your referring to could not stop the infighting & pushing of personal agenda's over the group opinion. Look Dodge you guys had a great idea with the ADHA but it's flawed on a few fronts IMHO. Not to bash at all it's just how I see it. Since 2008 you guys have fell apart to a large extent. You've had some of your leaders resign & tell the membership as well as the population who keeps up to date on this stuff exactly why. It's kind of like when Glenn resigned. He resigned due to the leadership going against the wishes of the membership & them pushing personal agenda's. Yet when he posted his reasons for withdrawing from his position he was jumped on & bashed by many of you guys. That seriously hurt your organization IMO. Most who are familiar with exactly how that went down thought Glenn did it in a very classy way but yet many of the remaining officer proceeded to have a bash fest at Glenn's expense. That really hurt the ADHA. Then there is the issue of your secretary who fights to keep out many people who would have been very beneficial to the ADHA. IMHO he should have been removed & replaced with someone who cared more about the organization than pushing his personal agenda. It was explained to me by one of the officers of the ADHA at the time that the secretary needed to be removed but he had you guys over a barrel because he kept all the records for the ADHA & if he was removed then it would be very likely that all the records for the ADHA would be lost. So basically this allowed a well meaning organization to be held hostage by a select few. Thats one way I would like to see this group different. I want to see a organization that actually backs the majority opinion of the organization. I also would like to see rules put into place that would allow the members from each zone, district, & even statewide remove anyone in a leadership role who tries to push a personal agenda over the majority opinion of the members in the zone, region, etc.. I want to be a part of building a group which not only represents the members but that also holds all the officers accountable.

Now if you have something positive to add then I welcome the input. I do not have time to defend what we are trying to do though because you might feel it would threaten the ADHA in some way. We are not putting this group together to compete with any organization but rather to truly represent the views of members & promote hunting & proper management of our deer herd.

whitewolf1
February 8th, 2010, 10:53 AM
"The voice of Arkansas Deer Hunters."

Sounds familiar for some reason. :moviecorn


Never heard that line you put in quotes or of the organization headhunter is talking about in his post.

talon1961
February 8th, 2010, 04:02 PM
We are not putting this group together to compete with any organization but rather to truly represent the views of members & promote hunting & proper management of our deer herd.[/QUOTE]

Just curious, what "views" of hunting and management do you propose? One that benefits the "trophy hunters" only, one that is most beneficial to all types of hunting, beneficial to bowhunters and/or gun hunters, private land hunters, public land hunters, meat hunters, etc? Is it a program that enhances the quality of our herd, or the trophy potential of the herd? I can remember when it was a rare opportunity to see deer during our deer seasons. I can remember when you could hunt just about anywhere, as long as it wasn't posted, and few places were. Now, hunting leases, clubs, etc make it more difficult for the average Joe to find a good place to hunt. Now that deer populations are getting strong, and people can find a decent place to hunt on public land, why would they want to embrace a lot of the QDM principles? You don't have to convince me, I'm loving my deer hunting strategies and taking doe for freezer meat. It's the other half-million deer hunters out there that are just interested in getting a deer, any deer period that you have to convince.

AR_Headhunter
February 8th, 2010, 04:45 PM
Just curious, what "views" of hunting and management do you propose? One that benefits the "trophy hunters" only, one that is most beneficial to all types of hunting, beneficial to bowhunters and/or gun hunters, private land hunters, public land hunters, meat hunters, etc? Is it a program that enhances the quality of our herd, or the trophy potential of the herd? I can remember when it was a rare opportunity to see deer during our deer seasons. I can remember when you could hunt just about anywhere, as long as it wasn't posted, and few places were. Now, hunting leases, clubs, etc make it more difficult for the average Joe to find a good place to hunt. Now that deer populations are getting strong, and people can find a decent place to hunt on public land, why would they want to embrace a lot of the QDM principles? You don't have to convince me, I'm loving my deer hunting strategies and taking doe for freezer meat. It's the other half-million deer hunters out there that are just interested in getting a deer, any deer period that you have to convince.


First off let me say that I am opposed to trophy deer management practices being put into place on public land. I believe the average hunter would agree with me on that. I would like to see a management strategy put in place that would address the issues that most of us are concerned about. The main factors for me are herd balance & age structure. As far as who would benefit from this. I would like to see all hunters across the board benefit. There are people out there like me who only bow hunt. Others who only rifle hunt. Then there are those who hunt using any method, bow, ML & MG. Many say that meat hunters & trophy hunters can't coexist. I do not agree. I think not only can we coexist but we can benefit each other. I think we can do that with a program that enhances the quality of our herd while meeting the needs of the vast majority of Arkansas hunters. If done properly it will also enhance the number of trophy class animals as well. I'm like you & can remember when it was rare to see a deer during season. I am very glad that our deer numbers have increased & hunters now have much higher deer numbers which result in a lot more hunter opportunity than back then. I have also been blessed to see the hunting in Zone 4 during the early 90's that most hunters statewide would love to see.

Let me address one of your questions very specifically. Now, hunting leases, clubs, etc make it more difficult for the average Joe to find a good place to hunt. Now that deer populations are getting strong, and people can find a decent place to hunt on public land, why would they want to embrace a lot of the QDM principles?
Because we now have the deer numbers about where they need to be as far as herd density. What is out of whack is our buck to doe ratio & the age structure of our herd (primarily bucks). According to the latest numbers I can find we have a population of around 1 million whitetails statewide. I would guess our buck numbers to be between 100,000 & 200,000. We would benefit every hunter in the state if our buck herd was doubled in numbers while maintaining our overall herd numbers. If we have 1 million deer overall statewide I would like to see at least 350,000 of those be bucks. I also believe that average hunter would love to hunt Arkansas with buck to doe ratio's like that. We would see a much more concentrated rut & not near so many very small fawns in October.

As far as people who simply want to kill a deer, any deer. Well that is where this would get a bit touchy because to get our herd ratio's and age structure to where it needs to be then you have to have restrictions. But after as little as 3 years the herd could be very well balanced & age structure brought to the point to where we would have a herd in optimum health. Thats where a little sacrifice comes in. Most of us understand that to make gains in anything there is a certain amount of sacrifice involved. I really think that we have reached a point in Arkansas where the majority of hunters are willing to make a little sacrifice for a few years to make deer hunting much better for not only us but for the future of the sport.

If you disagree with me on anything I've stated above then please let me know. I am not approaching this with a know it all attitude & appreciate the input. :thumbs_up

jna329
February 8th, 2010, 05:00 PM
As far as people who simply want to kill a deer, any deer. Well that is where this would get a bit touchy because to get our herd ratio's and age structure to where it needs to be then you have to have restrictions. But after as little as 3 years the herd could be very well balanced & age structure brought to the point to where we would have a herd in optimum health. Thats where a little sacrifice comes in. Most of us understand that to make gains in anything there is a certain amount of sacrifice involved. I really think that we have reached a point in Arkansas where the majority of hunters are willing to make a little sacrifice for a few years to make deer hunting much better for not only us but for the future of the sport.
If the hunter just wants to kill a deer then kill then kill a doe. The concern is that some hunters wont get a buck. It will help herd ratios in most areas. In the areas that dont need to be balanced then you dont have to worry as much and you can kill a buck.
Btw. I have put a goal statement on the name poll thread. All should take a look at it and let me know if that is the direction you would like to pursue when we move forward.

TiredArkie
February 8th, 2010, 10:51 PM
I would like to see a management strategy put in place that would address the issues that most of us are concerned about. The main factors for me are herd balance & age structure.

:o That should be any and all hunters concerns....In My Opinion.


Many say that meat hunters & trophy hunters can't coexist. I do not agree. I think not only can we coexist but we can benefit each other.

:( I think that most of us in the middle can see and understand this but, those on either side can't or just plain refuse to see it.

TiredArkie
February 8th, 2010, 11:19 PM
There is several huge issues in the state when it comes to hunting. Some of these would be baiting, dogs and season lengths, what would be your personal views on some of these?

AR_Headhunter
February 9th, 2010, 08:44 AM
There is several huge issues in the state when it comes to hunting. Some of these would be baiting, dogs and season lengths, what would be your personal views on some of these?

I am going to assume your talking to me with those questions. If not then I'll answer them anyways.

As far as baiting, I do not hunt over bait. Lets look at this issue honestly though. Lets first divide this into 2 categories, food plots & food placed out. Anyone would be hard pressed to argue the fact that food plots are not beneficial to not only deer but a wide variety of wildlife. The baiting issue IMO actually has several issues contained within it. Some people only place food out to hunt over while others feed to benefit the herd. Many of us feed to supplement the natural diet of deer. Most I know who do this primarily feed late winter & through the fawning period & horn growing period for bucks. Then there is a large group of people who only place bait for hunting. There are also people who bait to hold deer inside a certain area. The debate is fixing to go into a full blown because of the illogical arguement that baiting contributes to the spread of CWD & other diseases that deer carry. LET ME SAY THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THIS but it is the reason state game & fish agencies will use to prohibit feeding. If one of you guys knows of something which makes that last statement wrong then please fill me in because I do not claim to always be right. In closing on this issue let me say I do not have any problem with anyone hunting over bait.

Now for the deer dog issue. I am going to state right off the bat that this is only concerning hunters who use deer dogs & not any other breed or type of dog used for hunting. From now on when I refer to "dog hunters" it means deer dog hunters only. Anyone who knows me knows that I hate deer dogs & make no bones about it. I grew up using deer dogs & I know first hand the type of irresponsible behavior that goes hand in hand with what some call a sport or tradition. My opposition to deer dogs was caused because of the mentality of deer dog hunters. In general the vast majority of dog hunters could care less about your private property rights. They believe their dogs should have the right to trespass without penalties. That is the root of the issue for those of us who despise the use of deer dogs. I really hate to see the few who take care to keep their dogs off other peoples property loose their right to hunt using dogs but I really see no other solution to this growing problem. The vast majority of Arkansans have no problem with the use of dogs where legal if they are kept where they belong. That is the problem though. Dog hunters have proven time & time again that most are not willing to comply with those 2 simple principles. They use the excuse that "my dogs can't read". Well everyone knows what they are really saying is that we are going to use that excuse to hunt your property. There was a time in Arkansas where very little land was posted & there were not hunting clubs, small tracts of land, people practicing various forms of management, etc.. Back then deer dogs were not a issue. We are not living 20, 30, or 40 years ago though. We are living in today & today it causes to many conflicts to be allowed to continue IMHO. The issues that arise from it reflect negatively on all of us. There have been documented occurrences where private property owners have been assaulted & threatened by dog runners because they voiced objections to deer dogs being ran across their property. A couple years ago there was a man shot in Newton County because of dog related issues. This type of behavior has to be put to a stop. I feel most of us are law abiding citizens & for this type of behavior to go unchecked is a HUGE black eye for all of us. Now lets look at my zone where I live in particular. I live in Zone 6. Approximately 80% of the land in zone 6 is closed to deer dogs but the AGFC has made the zone legal for deer dogs. This causes a huge conflict between those of us who are legal hunters & the illegal hunters using dogs because it gives them a loophole. Most property owners where I live will shoot a deer dog in a minute because the law & the AGFC will not enforce the dog laws due to the loophole. This issue will have to be addressed sooner or later or their will be deaths of people due to it. Either a dog hunter will kill a landowner or hunter, or a landowner will kill a dog hunter who is trespassing & acting aggressively. Either way when this happens it will be the end of dog hunting because it will draw the attention of non hunters who will then care enough to get involved. In closing on this issue I will say it is a pretty sad state of affairs when the Commissioners at the AGFC are intimidated enough by outlaws to let it come down to the scenario I described above before they grow the balls to deal with this issue. If you do not agree with me on this issue then feel free to let me know why.

Now for the issue of season lengths. IMO the modern gun season is way to long & needs to be removed from the peak of the rut. Of course the vast majority of gun hunters would cry foul & say it is unfair for bow hunters to get to hunt this period while they can't. This is a flawed arguement because there is nothing preventing them from hunting during that time frame with a bow or crossbow. I for 1 would be willing to not hunt the peak rut as well but I also know this would go over with the majority of bow hunters just like the majority of gun hunters, like a lead balloon. As long as we allow gun hunting in the peak breeding period we will never be able to get the age structure on our buck population that we need. As for the overall length of modern gun season. We face a couple issues here. We need to either limit the length of it or what I really think we need is simply for people to actually follow the bag limits already in place. There are a huge number of deer either not checked or checked under peoples names who did not kill those deer. I do believe if we go to a 5 deer limit structured the way the AGFC proposed this year it might help that problem but I also see room for abuses. It really comes down to personal ethics & responsibility here. To do what needs to be done we as hunters have to realize that we are responsible for our personal actions & make the effort as individuals to do all we can to promote ethical behavior. IMO this means reporting every illegal activity your aware of. Even if it's your buddy or your family member. All my hunting companions know not to violate the law while I'm around or to brag to me about illegal activities because I will report them in a minute. Poaching is no different than stealing. If you poach you are stealing from every law abiding sportsman in this state & until the population at large views it that way then we are going to continue to have a huge poaching problem.

Now those are only my personal views. I'm not saying they are right but thats how I see it. Give me some feedback & tell me how you feel about it. I'm not trying to push my beliefs as right & I value input form the rest of you guys as well.

Jack

TiredArkie
February 9th, 2010, 10:48 AM
AR_Headhunter, yes the question was directed at you. I was having power issues last night and had problems getting everything to work trying to post with my phone.

I'll keep track of this as it goes forward on here and see what's said to see if it may be something of interest to me, right now you're doing good. We're bad close on our thoughts.

AR_Headhunter
February 9th, 2010, 11:57 AM
Our power keeps going on & off to so I understand. This is one of the few topics that really interest me on here so I'll keep up to date on it. By the way, I'm Jack. It's good to have your input here.

TiredArkie
February 9th, 2010, 03:27 PM
Joe here, I actually had a guy at work show me this from a link on another board.

AR_Headhunter
February 9th, 2010, 03:48 PM
Cool Joe. Good to meet you & I hope you stick around & give us your input.

TiredArkie
February 9th, 2010, 04:54 PM
I'll hang around some but not a whole lot when the weather gets to a point I can get past the end of the driveway. ;)

I think you probably know or have talked to my friend from work. :thumbs_up

AR_Headhunter
February 9th, 2010, 06:45 PM
Yeah I am snowed in myself. It'll be a few days before I can get out of the valley. We are getting more people involved & it's going from a idea to something that I hope will actually make a difference to the sportsmen of this state.

jna329
February 9th, 2010, 09:48 PM
I am going to assume your talking to me with those questions. If not then I'll answer them anyways.

As far as baiting, I do not hunt over bait. Lets look at this issue honestly though. Lets first divide this into 2 categories, food plots & food placed out. Anyone would be hard pressed to argue the fact that food plots are not beneficial to not only deer but a wide variety of wildlife. The baiting issue IMO actually has several issues contained within it. Some people only place food out to hunt over while others feed to benefit the herd. Many of us feed to supplement the natural diet of deer. Most I know who do this primarily feed late winter & through the fawning period & horn growing period for bucks. Then there is a large group of people who only place bait for hunting. There are also people who bait to hold deer inside a certain area. The debate is fixing to go into a full blown because of the illogical arguement that baiting contributes to the spread of CWD & other diseases that deer carry. LET ME SAY THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THIS but it is the reason state game & fish agencies will use to prohibit feeding. If one of you guys knows of something which makes that last statement wrong then please fill me in because I do not claim to always be right. In closing on this issue let me say I do not have any problem with anyone hunting over bait.

Now for the deer dog issue. I am going to state right off the bat that this is only concerning hunters who use deer dogs & not any other breed or type of dog used for hunting. From now on when I refer to "dog hunters" it means deer dog hunters only. Anyone who knows me knows that I hate deer dogs & make no bones about it. I grew up using deer dogs & I know first hand the type of irresponsible behavior that goes hand in hand with what some call a sport or tradition. My opposition to deer dogs was caused because of the mentality of deer dog hunters. In general the vast majority of dog hunters could care less about your private property rights. They believe their dogs should have the right to trespass without penalties. That is the root of the issue for those of us who despise the use of deer dogs. I really hate to see the few who take care to keep their dogs off other peoples property loose their right to hunt using dogs but I really see no other solution to this growing problem. The vast majority of Arkansans have no problem with the use of dogs where legal if they are kept where they belong. That is the problem though. Dog hunters have proven time & time again that most are not willing to comply with those 2 simple principles. They use the excuse that "my dogs can't read". Well everyone knows what they are really saying is that we are going to use that excuse to hunt your property. There was a time in Arkansas where very little land was posted & there were not hunting clubs, small tracts of land, people practicing various forms of management, etc.. Back then deer dogs were not a issue. We are not living 20, 30, or 40 years ago though. We are living in today & today it causes to many conflicts to be allowed to continue IMHO. The issues that arise from it reflect negatively on all of us. There have been documented occurrences where private property owners have been assaulted & threatened by dog runners because they voiced objections to deer dogs being ran across their property. A couple years ago there was a man shot in Newton County because of dog related issues. This type of behavior has to be put to a stop. I feel most of us are law abiding citizens & for this type of behavior to go unchecked is a HUGE black eye for all of us. Now lets look at my zone where I live in particular. I live in Zone 6. Approximately 80% of the land in zone 6 is closed to deer dogs but the AGFC has made the zone legal for deer dogs. This causes a huge conflict between those of us who are legal hunters & the illegal hunters using dogs because it gives them a loophole. Most property owners where I live will shoot a deer dog in a minute because the law & the AGFC will not enforce the dog laws due to the loophole. This issue will have to be addressed sooner or later or their will be deaths of people due to it. Either a dog hunter will kill a landowner or hunter, or a landowner will kill a dog hunter who is trespassing & acting aggressively. Either way when this happens it will be the end of dog hunting because it will draw the attention of non hunters who will then care enough to get involved. In closing on this issue I will say it is a pretty sad state of affairs when the Commissioners at the AGFC are intimidated enough by outlaws to let it come down to the scenario I described above before they grow the balls to deal with this issue. If you do not agree with me on this issue then feel free to let me know why.

Now for the issue of season lengths. IMO the modern gun season is way to long & needs to be removed from the peak of the rut. Of course the vast majority of gun hunters would cry foul & say it is unfair for bow hunters to get to hunt this period while they can't. This is a flawed arguement because there is nothing preventing them from hunting during that time frame with a bow or crossbow. I for 1 would be willing to not hunt the peak rut as well but I also know this would go over with the majority of bow hunters just like the majority of gun hunters, like a lead balloon. As long as we allow gun hunting in the peak breeding period we will never be able to get the age structure on our buck population that we need. As for the overall length of modern gun season. We face a couple issues here. We need to either limit the length of it or what I really think we need is simply for people to actually follow the bag limits already in place. There are a huge number of deer either not checked or checked under peoples names who did not kill those deer. I do believe if we go to a 5 deer limit structured the way the AGFC proposed this year it might help that problem but I also see room for abuses. It really comes down to personal ethics & responsibility here. To do what needs to be done we as hunters have to realize that we are responsible for our personal actions & make the effort as individuals to do all we can to promote ethical behavior. IMO this means reporting every illegal activity your aware of. Even if it's your buddy or your family member. All my hunting companions know not to violate the law while I'm around or to brag to me about illegal activities because I will report them in a minute. Poaching is no different than stealing. If you poach you are stealing from every law abiding sportsman in this state & until the population at large views it that way then we are going to continue to have a huge poaching problem.

Now those are only my personal views. I'm not saying they are right but thats how I see it. Give me some feedback & tell me how you feel about it. I'm not trying to push my beliefs as right & I value input form the rest of you guys as well.

Jack
Very nice explanation!! In agreement with you all the way.



I'll hang around some but not a whole lot when the weather gets to a point I can get past the end of the driveway. ;)

I think you probably know or have talked to my friend from work. :thumbs_up
The more input we can get on this the better the chances of actually accomplishing something meaningful. Glad to have you as a part of it. --Jeff

talon1961
February 11th, 2010, 10:47 PM
The point I was trying to make in my last post was that it's going to take a lot of effort to convince people to change their concept of "deer hunting". Remember, for many years bucks were all we in the Northern half of the state were allowed to kill. No does, except for a few exceptions. I "preach" to my students all the time the importance of keeping the herd in balance. Generally we have way too many does compared to buck numbers in several areas of the state. I agree on strategically identifying areas that need the buck:doe ratio improved. Many "older" set in their way hunters I have had contact with don't think does should be killed at all. Their view is based on the days when deer weren't quite as plentiful. They still see "momma does" as the way to increase the population. They remember the days when seeing any deer was a good day. They point to the numbers of deer we have today to the prohibition of killing does. I have been blessed with good hunting areas, both private and public over the years. I have seen the benefits of the "3 pt. rule as now I am seeing several two and three year old bucks compared to just a few years ago. Education is the key! I would like to see an increase in the number of doe tags in certain areas with one buck tag only. One "bonus" buck tag could be purchased only after the doe tags were filled first. This would encourage the buck harvest to be a little more thoughtful, and would encourage the harvest of does. However, not all parts of the state can handle that pressure. One one WMA hunt this year, I saw 22 does and only 1 racked buck in two days of hunting. I don't believe there was a buck checked in during the 2 day gun permit hunt, and only a few does. It was an either sex hunt and most hunters (myself included as I only had one tag left) just waited to take a "nice buck". Some of these WMA hunts would be better served if the tags were "bonus" tags to encourage the harvest of does.
The AGFC needs our help. We need to work in cooperation with them to help maintain our public and private hunting lands. The habitat is shrinking every year and many farming practices are not conducive to better nutrition and herd maintenance. I like the imput I have read so far from concerned hunters and sportsmen/sportswomen in the state. Thanks for having the initiative to try to get something organized and helping to educate our current hunters and future hunters/stewards as well. Keep up the good work.