Unlimited doe tags.

[Xtreme]

I know this has started all out fire fights on this as well as other sites and I've been one that has been right in the middle of them. But seriously folks. How many of you just don't like the term "unlimited"attached to the whitetail. I think it devalues them and places less emphasis on the importance of checking them in etc.

I have spoken with hunters from one end of the state to the other and I'm fully aware that there are places where they are out of control. For those zones I have no problem with very liberal limits. I also know there are zones where they are not.

What are your alls honest and civil opinions on this and what are some suggestions. Who knows, someone may have a brainstorm.

I will say that it is to the Depts. credit that they have done a super job of re-introducing the whitetail. I remember when there were none where I lived. I guess that's why the term unlimited sticks in my craw. Lets hear it folks and remember no fights<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

[Multidigits]

You already know I'm again'it!!!!!

[ez]

lets see and look at the choices?????????......limitless; infinite; unrestricted; unrestrained; boundless; unconstrained; ontap; indefinate; ad lib; adnauseam; bottomless; and limited (antonym).........just a few to pick from.............ez

[Big58cal]

It's like they say on one of the Saturday morning hunting shows, "Shoot more, Shoot more often!"

I think that in a way, the term devalues the whitetail, however, there isn't a really good term for this. I too believe that there are some Zone 1 counties that shouldn't be. However, I also believe that there are "pockets" in Zone 1 counties. These pockets can be either loaded down with deer (thus earning the county the Zone 1 ranking), and there are pockets that don't really hold many deer, with the rest of the county being overpopulated.

[ez]

oh oh .......here we go again......never ending; into the blue yonder;
no one watching; running loose; katie bar the door; shoot all ways; keep pulling the trigger; what i drink after i shoot; hunt all day and night,why not year round; till you get sick; shoot em with your pants down; unimaginative.......these all coinside with above post...............ez

[RutNBuck]

when it was first announced that there would be unlimited doe tags in zone 1....i was fuming mad i live in /hunt in Zone 1 i deff didnt see the OVER whelming populations of deer as the limits might suggest..

i was sure that everyone would be busting does left and right some without even making an effort to find the does that they wasnt sure they hit or not...BUT i have to say i was wrong...
i have yet to talk to a hunter that "SLAYED" them since the law allowed it to happen...most i know of is maybe 3 does and at that they were harvested by bow...
so i guess its like bungy jumping its there for the ones that are willing to go for it....for most will still only take/harvest deer they feel they can use for personal needs..

"A wise indian once said,the more you move the less you will see,the less you move the more you will see"

" I live to hunt, but my wife says i may hunting a place to live"

[ez]

sorry there x-treme/mr. PREZ! ( bowing down in humble homage) ...........i am trying not to make fun of anyone or anything......in some states they split areas into zones...even splitting some counties......this maybe something to look at.......thanks for taking off the xtra post..........ez

[GSP]

I think that if killing that many does is TRUELY needed, they should base it off what RutnBuck posted. Sell 3 tags or such, not a "unlimited" tag. There has to be true "value" attached to these tags and not the de-valueing of a wonderful resource we have.
You think about it, how many people will use more than 3 does and 1 buck per year? Plus add in the quota hunts???
If a county was TRUELY hurting, make it 4 or 5 tags. How ever it is "marketed" by the Dept it should not say unlimited. By using the word "unlimited" they are only inviting Machine Gun Kelly to come on down and giving the preception that deer killing is really not worth keeping up with.

[JSI Kodiak]

Amen gsp.

[MULESKINNER]

Does anyone KNOW of any persons who "slayed em'" after the unlimited tags were issued? The only guy I know that shot more than 2 ate everything he killed before June. He shot 3. But if he can eat 20 and there is an "unlimited" rule, then let the bodies hit the floor.

My point is...most every hunter has unique attributes. Some may still be in the shoot everything you can phase and some may be in the later stages of very selective shooting. It all evens out in my humble opinion.

Just like with poachers. We will never rid KY of them, and some kill all year long, but somehow KY has still become a P&Y heaven.

"Unlimited" sounds much worse than it actually is.
We can argue the symantics of it, but still not get anywhere.
L A T E R . . .

[rlb165]

I just read this today in Outdoor Life. I would like to see some actual harvest #'s to see what Mr. Kemmermeyer means by "negatively affected".


http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/hunting/whitetails/article/0,13285,334478,00.html

One paragraph reads:


"Kent Kemmermeyer, Georgia’s deer specialist, says that doe populations in some of the state’s QDM areas were hit so hard they negatively affected the success of the programs. Kemmermeyer says, “States have to be careful not to allow hunters to overharvest does when they start a QDM program. The impulse is to pound the does to equalize the buck-to-doe ratio. The problem is that the buck-to-doe ratio is often so out of whack that if you are too aggressive your herd will be reduced too much. It’s better to do the adjusting over the course of four or five seasons. Game managers have to be especially careful, because when hunters can’t find a harvestable buck, they will often use a doe tag instead.”

[Xtreme]

May the Gods be praised! RLB finally found us! Welcome my friend!

Muleskinner. To address your point. I think the mentality varies with regions. I've spoken at great lengths to different folks all over the state. Some have huge numbers of brown hair shooters where as some are only buck hunters. I don't like it when I hear of folks shooting 8 or 10 and they give them away. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with someone sharing game animals. It's when I hear of folks getting into a "target rich enviroment" and shooting 3 or 4 at one whack and then they scramble to give them away and sometimes they spoil. This has happened.

Also I heard of a kid in a county. I won't mention any counties or names but the CO of that county told me he knew of a kid that had taken 31! Now you know that kid needs 31 deer. And unless he is the son of some hugely wealthy property owner he is taking them off one or two farms. I admit there are some counties that could probably use this kids services but the county he was in does not need this.

Even states like AL. have a one a day rule. I'm not saying we need a drastic overhaul of the whitetail program I just think it needs a few minor adjustments.

[MULESKINNER]

Xtreme,
You complimented my point exactly.
The 31 doe kid is definetely the exception, not the rule. Sure it really sucks that one kid may have a negative impact on an area, but he is definetly an exception. Another way to look at it is...If the kid could actually kill 31 does in a season then the area may have been super saturated with does. I don't know the facts and I personally think that 31 deer is just too many under almost any circumstances (except legitimate severe crop damage), but the fact is that KY deer hunting is better than ever. That one kid or even 100 kids like him probably can't negatively impact the state herd.

Mother nature is pretty resilient.
There will always be story after story about some exception, but we must not use them to justify changing the rule.
In my opinion...the rule is Kentucky deer are not negatively affected by "unlimited" doe kills. Not yet at least.
Just my opinion.
Glad to hear yours.
L A T E R . . .

[Highbow]

Xtreme, just as I told you Saturday, I don't like the use of unlimited in the bag limit. Yes, we have areas that need doe numbers reduced but if our CO number aren't increased you won't have to worry.I know in the east we have way too many poachers getting away with year round shooting of deer. We just found two bloody arrows with Broadheads on our target range last Sunday.

[CSS archer]

I like some things about the liberalization. Even with it we're taking more bucks than does in most counties. I only took 5 deer last year, they were gone in April. Sure wish I had some jerky for CO! In fact I wish season opened Sept. 1st!

I believe more deer would be killed if we had a 4 or 6 extra antlerless limit, then some would take them to say they tagged out. As it is it's like catching a limit of bluegill....

Ya'll be easy on me, I'm sensitive

[KYhunter]

I agree with CSS on the "catching a limit of bluegill" idea and do like the liberaliztion of the limit as well. I do have a couple of questions for him however. Do you specifically "hunt" for does, or do you arrow the first ones that happen by? How do you feel harvesting does plays to your hunting bucks like the ones you posted under the "bachelor groups" post? Does it not give away your stand site, along with excessive human activity of fooling with the harvested does?

[Highbow]

Good point there CSS, I like the idea of a 6 doe limit per hunter. CSSis the Dept. still allowing the CO's to pass out the crop damage tags?

[taggedout]

It seems to me that the zone by Co. is a bit screwy. In my home Co. of Boone one farm I hnt has a real good buck to doe ratio and I seldom take a doe and if I do I'm very selective in that I try and leave the older more productive doe alone so she can continue the cycle which is already at hand, good bucks and a healthy age structure. Another part of that same Co. I hnt has does out the wazoo, but still has good bucks, in this area I'm not nearly as selective with the does. This area has farms that are in the 300 plus acre range and the land is not nearly as accessible wareas the 1st mentioned is smaller plots of property thus more accesible.
I enjoy harvesting the does and WILL take more than I can put in my freezer but only if I already have it set up ahead of time with some one who will take the deer. I take the deer myself to a processor of my choice and that person pays the fee, that way I know the person is serious and not going to wast the deer. If that person would back out on me there are plenty of others waiting and the next person can have it (that has'nt happened yet). I feel it keeps good relations and gives others who might not other wise have a reason to stick up for the hntrs a reason to. Ya keep that belly full!

Grummybear

Edited by - taggedout on 08/15/2002 10:37:51 PM

[MULESKINNER]

Buck to doe ratios can be tricky. Rouge and I hunted the exact same farm pretty hard last year within 75 yards of each other. My buck to doe ratio at the end of the season was 8:1. Rouge didn't keep count but said he saw a lot fewer bucks than I did. I harvested an 8 pointer from the farm and rouge harvested a doe or two.
I'm sure if you asked him (without my imput) if the farm had more bucks than does he would say no whereas I would say a resounding YES.

Point is...Some areas that may have reports of upside down buck to doe ratios may actually be full of bucks. They are a lot more wiley.
Wayne, let me know if I'm misrepresenting what you saw.
Any thoughts.
L A T E R . . .

[shogan]

Lets remember, "while I don't want to see any buffalo bill stuff" the state is encouraging and begging us to take does and lots of them. Why? Because here soon we will have a low mast production and a hard winter and dead deer everywhere. They are the experts and they are begging us to take them. If some folks from out of state can afford the tags I ecourage them to come here and help us eat some of these deer.

Seems like in another thread someone was talking about the lack of acorns due a late frezze in Southern KY.

Any how if everyone who is after the big buck would also take a doe (take a young one they have more years of fawm bearing than old ones and taste better) then we would probably see a balance occur. I'm no expert but that's my two cents worth.

[CSS archer]

KYHUNTER, I take every adult doe I get the opportunity to. I don't take doe fawns because it's too easy to take buck fawns that way, sometimes they don't have buttons. If it has a short stubby face, it walks. I don't think it messes up my buck hunting, I've even had bucks sniff a doe under my tree. I leave the gutpiles there too, maybe a coyote opportunity.

Bottom line is it greatly increases the buck to doe ratio, not only do you keep the fawns that doe raised but you'll recruit the neighbor's bucks that aren't harvesting a lot of does. I see twice as many bucks as does, it's just tough to get shots at does where I hunt.

Highbow, Officers and Biologists are still issueing damage tags, although the requests are not as much in zone 1 counties. It's easier for landowners to let hunters deal with it than request the tags and turn in the unused tags each year.

[Highbow]

Thanks CSS, I have seen so much misuse of the crop damage tags. I too much rather take a mature doe than risk shooting a young buck, it helps keep the young bucks in the area too to harvest the older doe.

[rlb165]

I'm against the unlimited tags. I don't have any proof of this, but I think they create a mindset something like "The Dept. says we need more does killed anyway, why should I pay $12.50?" I know that won't turn a real hunter into a poacher, but its kinda like the saying "A lock on a bicycle will keep an honest person honest".

CSS and Highbow, you've brought up another tenet of QDM that I don't get. The thing about shooting mature does so the BB's don't disperse. As I understand it, the doe runs the BB off to prevent in-breeding. So if the mother is not around to run the BB out of the country, what's to keep him from breeding his relatives? Is the thinking just that it probably won't happen enough to have any real impact?

[Marvin Campbell]

The problem with unlimited doe tags is, that it devalues the whitetail, not just the does in zone 1, but bucks and does in all zones.

[Boss Gobbler]

I believe we are so outta wack in some areas because of the diverse levels of hunters. Some just want to knock them all down, some just shoot does, some dont want to shoot does because they want a big buck, and some practice QDM and the herd is in check and heathly. But what can you do?

[Multidigits]

Well...that's the issue as some of us see it. Most people rely on the the Dept. "to mangae" the deer herd and not let someone's frezzer capacity dictate how many deer they kill. To get the level of management most of us want, the dept. will have to micro manage some areas, not all, but some of them. They are a long way from wanting to do that. I don't know many people who believe the deer herd has climbed to as high of levels that the dept. says it has. The computer model has had bad data entered for several years because the dept. doesn't have a handle on the unchecked number of deer, whether it's the fault of tele-chek or not. Road kills lay in the road till the cars and trucks beat the hide off them, and nobody ever counts them. It's only an estimated number. Lots of other reasons we need more management, and lots of reason why we'll never get it.

[Highbow]

RB 165, If you set in the woods and watch through a couple of ruts you should get to see that inmature bucks do not get to do much more than run around and make rubs, they know relatives and the big boys make sure when the does are actually ready they do the breeding I watched four young bucks chase a doe around for about three hours last season, finally a nice big 8 point walked in took the doe and bred her right in front of the little bucks and then stayed with her as she walked away. I have been able to see such action three times in about twenty years.

[Multidigits]

True...but in the next years, if they survive, the're still there and do get to breed, on ocassion.

[rlb165]

One situation I was thinking of is if you have a brother and sister, and their mother gets shot. Under good conditions, the doe yearling has a good chance of coming into estrous, from what I've read, often in January (for this part of the country). If the BB hasn't been run off, what's to keep the BB from breeding his sister? Will there be as much competition from the mature bucks by the "3rd rut?--(and I understand there is some controversy as to whether BB's are sexually mature enough their first year to breed).

It seems like there has to be a reason for the doe to run the BB off, or nature wouldn't have come up with this behavior.

[Xtreme]

Glad to see you found us CSS! Have we been busy or what? Anyway, welcome my friend! Also I like your Bluegill idea as well. You and I agreeing is scarey but stranger things happen<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

I saw your daddy Chuck Nease at Snowshoe and I told him you and your better half were representing CSS Xtremely well as usual but you were still onory<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

Anyway we welcome you and don't be afraid to join. I promoise that Multi and me wont take to many shots at you<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

[CSS archer]

Rick, I've been lurking a lot not posting much.