Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

All hunters are tools

T

THEBAD

Member
Ok ...now that I got your attention...this is for all of you that complain there are too few deer.

We as hunters are a management tool, but the thing most hunters don't understand is that we as hunters have all the power. Just because the state issues Doe tags DOES NOT mean we have to shoot does or fill all the tags available to us. We as hunters need to do whats right for the properties we hunt and whats right for wildlife on those said properties. Of course this must be done within the rules of the state . But in the end it is all up to us and what we decide to shoot or not decide to shoot....be it buck or doe.

So if your not seeing enough deer don't shoot every doe you can. Same goes for pheasants....the decline in pheasant numbers is very obvious, but the DNR is not doing anything about it....So we as hunters should do what we can do improve habitat, food sources and remove predators so the pheasants can at least try to hold their own. I dont think you would see guys out shooting hen pheasants even if it was legal. I would also bet pheasant hunters understand the hens are the ones that have the babies and roosters breed multiple hens....sound familiar.... I enjoy the hunt as much as anyone else, but we are only a tool in the DNRs eyes.

I seen a prime example of this on a farm my relatives hunted down in Oklahoma when they moved their for a job. The one farm they had to hunt the farmer didn't allow any does to be killed off that farm, and all of the surrounding farms had the does just get pounded. Year after year there were always more deer on this farm and some how they always managed to pull a buck or two out of their as well. I talked to neighbors who hunted just as much and didn't do very well, and even got worse when Oklahoma`s DNR caved to the pressure from big business and insurance. Lessons to be learned...I bet the guys from Wisconsin could say the same thing right now.

I know I have ranted long enough...but remember that you as a hunter can help manage the properties you hunt, its you that decides to pull the trigger or not.
 
THEBAD said:
Ok ...now that I got your attention...this is for all of you that complain there are too few deer.

We as hunters are a management tool, but the thing most hunters don't understand is that we as hunters have all the power. Just because the state issues Doe tags DOES NOT mean we have to shoot does or fill all the tags available to us. We as hunters need to do whats right for the properties we hunt and whats right for wildlife on those said properties. Of course this must be done within the rules of the state . But in the end it is all up to us and what we decide to shoot or not decide to shoot....be it buck or doe.

So if your not seeing enough deer don't shoot every doe you can. Same goes for pheasants....the decline in pheasant numbers is very obvious, but the DNR is not doing anything about it....So we as hunters should do what we can do improve habitat, food sources and remove predators so the pheasants can at least try to hold their own. I dont think you would see guys out shooting hen pheasants even if it was legal. I would also bet pheasant hunters understand the hens are the ones that have the babies and roosters breed multiple hens....sound familiar.... I enjoy the hunt as much as anyone else, but we are only a tool in the DNRs eyes.

I seen a prime example of this on a farm my relatives hunted down in Oklahoma when they moved their for a job. The one farm they had to hunt the farmer didn't allow any does to be killed off that farm, and all of the surrounding farms had the does just get pounded. Year after year there were always more deer on this farm and some how they always managed to pull a buck or two out of their as well. I talked to neighbors who hunted just as much and didn't do very well, and even got worse when Oklahoma`s DNR caved to the pressure from big business and insurance. Lessons to be learned...I bet the guys from Wisconsin could say the same thing right now.

I know I have ranted long enough...but remember that you as a hunter can help manage the properties you hunt, its you that decides to pull the trigger or not.
Click to expand...

Yep too many people brainwashed into the too many deer mentality. Ya got to hold em or fold em and I say we fold em for a couple years and let the population get back up and show the DNR WE control our deer herd. I'm sure what would happen then would be, a damn earn a buck regulation thrown in there like Wisconsin.
 
Absolutely agree with Bad & G6.
We as hunters sit back and complain amongst ourselves about a lot of issues. Tell the DNR,tell your legislators, they are the ones that need to hear your concerns. The DNR can make recommendations/issue tags but as hunters only we can decide if there are too many deer. Sometimes we lose sight that a deer tag has to mean a dead deer. That tag gives you the opportunity to decide if it goes on a leg,antler or becomes soup.
 
The DNR wants their revenue. There going to keep issuing tags no matter what. I bet even when the population reaches their target levels we still wont see them drop there county quotas.

The problem with the mentality is that if I dont get the deer someone else just will. Its greedy human nature.

Let the DNR raise the price of doe tags to about $50 each and see how many doe are shot :)
 
Great points BAD. I'm all for taking the bull by the horns and making the necessary management decisions, I know I cut back on harvest this year. I only wonder what other tool the DNR will pull out of the box when collectively we don't meet their harvest goals.
 
Iowabowtech said:
Great points BAD. I'm all for taking the bull by the horns and making the necessary management decisions, I know I cut back on harvest this year. I only wonder what other tool the DNR will pull out of the box when collectively we don't meet their harvest goals.
Click to expand...

Here is the real trouble ahead.
 
Last edited:
The only thing I would disagree with BAD is that we hunters are THE ONLY MANAGMENT TOOL for the IDNR to use. We are it with the exception of threat they made a couple of years ago about hiring sharp shooters, like some of the cities have done. I just vented in the thread on interesting trends so won't start over. You are absolutely correct we responsible hunters need to speak out and try to make people understand, if nothing else at least the economic problem. How long will 350,000 deer hunters continue to buy 410,000 licensed and only harvest 100,000 deer? If you calculate the cost of the deer licenses as well as the cost of the regular small game hunting license there is the potential for loosing up to $15,000,000.00. :thrwrck:
 
had a guy tell me he shot seven button bucks this year thinking they were does bad is right if you are not seeing them quit shooting them everybody should be reminded of this next october. Im betting a bunch of shed bucks will be killed during the january doe season what a complete waste makes me sick wish there was a way to get rid of these doe only seasons I also wish you couldnt by doe tags then party hunt the gun seasons then go buy a late muzz tag but thats my opinion
 
Well I know I am helping out. I have 6 doe tags from 5 different counties that won't get filled :) I always hate that I feel like I have to have a doe tag for every county I hunt for a "Just in case moment". Its almost pointless to buy them because I know I won't fill them when I hunt a mile to a mile and half off the road but it always sounds good at the time. In a way its like hoarding tags, but in another way it might save 12-18 deer next year. I guess I donated $87 to the DNR.
 
I think education is the only tool that will really help at this point. If not planned already, there should be some long term education goals set by the DNR and maybe even other Iowa hunting groups. Maybe put a management session in Iowa Hunter Safety Courses. Beyond that, what can we do but get the word out ourselves. Bend your buddies ears and like Elkhunter said...make your important contacts.
 
Last edited:
G6 and others,
How would you do this to areas where there are still too many deer?
We all talked about hotpockets before and I still believe some areas have too many. Or are we saying that just because we have not seen 30 plus deer during every sit that we have to do something and let the other areas continue to over populate?

Not everyone is seeing fewer deer while they hunt.

I just wish I could get to the 1:1 deer ratio so I could benefit from it. :confused:



G6 said:
Yep too many people brainwashed into the too many deer mentality. Ya got to hold em or fold em and I say we fold em for a couple years and let the population get back up and show the DNR WE control our deer herd. I'm sure what would happen then would be, a damn earn a buck regulation thrown in there like Wisconsin.
Click to expand...
 
risto2351 said:
G6 and others,
How would you do this to areas where there are still too many deer?
We all talked about hotpockets before and I still believe some areas have too many. Or are we saying that just because we have not seen 30 plus deer during every sit that we have to do something and let the other areas continue to over populate?

Not everyone is seeing fewer deer while they hunt.

I just wish I could get to the 1:1 deer ratio so I could benefit from it. :confused:
Click to expand...

1 buck 1 doe? That seems crazy if thats what you would like to see. I think the original post said manage your property as you think it needs to be managed. If you think does need to be shot shoot em if your not seeing any don't. Guess I'm not 100% sure if thats what you mean when you say 1:1 to one and I'm curious as to how you would benefit.
 
Last edited:
JNRBRONC said:
Tell me why this is crazy.
Click to expand...


I wasn't trying to piss anyone off. I was just wondering how it would benefit? There wouldn't be any deer left. The hunters would have to kill 3/4 of the deer and then there wouldnt be anything for the guys who want meat.If it was 1:1 around here I'd be lucky to see a deer. Not everyone wants a wall hanger. The group I hunted with would not shoot a doe because we couldn't find any deer. They want to rebuild the population. I on the other hand would love to have that ratio as long as there were still deer to hunt. Alot of the guys I hunt with don't have time to hunt for 2 months to shoot a deer. They have a 5 days or less and would like a chance at one. I'm sure there are areas where you can see as many deer as you want but some place they are getting few and far between.
 
I've heard a lot about the 1:1 ratio thing through the years and having managed ground hard along with a group of friends/bowhunters, I don't want anything to do with a 1:1 ratio anymore. I'm not sure we got there but we were very aggressive on the does in the past several years. I would concur that our ratio was in fact too high but we are now at the point where we are seeing waaaaaaaaaaay fewer deer of either sex than we have in the past and in the past we pretty consistently shot good bucks.

Experts say that the benefit of 1:1 is that the bucks will supposedly be of higher quality. Well, we saw many more high quality bucks in the day of high doe numbers. We are now aiming for something more in the neighborhood of 2:1 or perhaps 3:1.

I can see where the 1:1 thing might work on a highfence operation where you can control the exact herd number and it's dynamics but I'm not seeing the benefit for free ranging deer. Just my opinion based off years of trying it both ways. Other's results may vary greatly.
 
dblmainbeam said:
I wasn't trying to piss anyone off.
Click to expand...
Can't offend me, I'm just looking for a discussion.



Alot of the guys I hunt with don't have time to hunt for 2 months to shoot a deer. They have a 5 days or less and would like a chance at one. I'm sure there are areas where you can see as many deer as you want but some place they are getting few and far between.
Click to expand...
So here is what I think the key issue is: hunters want big numbers of deer so that they can go out at their leisure and shoot a deer, maybe even a trophy. Right? It's a convenience factor? If they can't do it in a couple of days, deer numbers are too low?

I'm just trying to understand all of the issues involved with deer management. Farm Bureau and the Insurance lobby want "all deer dead", some hunters want to go out for one weekend a year and see tons of deer then complain that their 48 hours of recreation was derailed by the need to have a sustainable herd?

Also, the bow season is what, three months long? The rut saw warm weather, standing crops, night time rutting, less than "hunter friendly" factors and some threw in the towel and start complaining about what a crappy season it was? I'm sorry, the season isn't only the two weeks around the rut, though some hunters would lead a person to think that: adapt and spend a little more time in the stand.


Not saying I'm right, just think it's up for discussion.
 
Good post!

The key here is - hunters make a management decision each time they choose to pull the trigger thus we could all be considered Deer Managers.

We essentially control the buck to do ratios and overall deer populations, which I would like to point out are independent of each other. We could as managers choose to have a high deer population with 1 to 1 ratio or a low population with 1 to 5 buck to doe ratio.

I've seen a number of comments recently that made me think of a book called "Deer Management 101" and I think many would benefit from reading this as hunters or "deer managers".

Deer Management 101
 
Dbl.
I agree with managing your property as you think it needs to be managed.
But all I keep hearing is there are no deer in Iowa. This is not true. Some areas have a long ways to go yet and others are starting to reach the appropriate level.Remember though that some people have no idea about the deer population and if they jump on board the train we will be right back where we started with the population which will not be good.


I for one will not be telling the DNR we have no deer but would be in support of the specific areas limiting the doe tags which they are starting to do.
We had way too many deer and they had to be thinned out.

As far as the 1 to 1 ratio I would love to see it. I want to see real big deer. To each his own. There would be one heck of a rut and I would see a lot of mature deer. Not as many but more quality which I would love to see. They could then worry about putting back on the weight and fat for a grueling winter. They would not be still running after does into Jan., Feb.

Seeing 30 plus deer a sit is not healthy for a deer herd nor do I want that.

They will rebound in the areas where the population is low in a very short time but hopefully not to the levels we seen a few years ago.

Just my .o2




dblmainbeam said:
1 buck 1 doe? That seems crazy if thats what you would like to see. I think the original post said manage your property as you think it needs to be managed. If you think does need to be shot shoot em if your not seeing any don't. Guess I'm not 100% sure if thats what you mean when you say 1:1 to one and I'm curious as to how you would benefit.
Click to expand...
 
It really comes down to deer density and then the ratio. The place I hunt is sposedly 1:1.5 buck to doe ratio and I would say low deer density and I will be the first to say its a tough hunt. I am not complaining about it being tough. I only hunt public ground and we know how that is.

What I see is a herd that primarily consists of 1.5 year old does that carry 1 fawn a year. The bucks absolutely maul each other leaving them either hurt or run down. The bucks seem to shed much earlier than what I would call normal. During late season I would say 40-50% of the bucks had shed from what I saw last year. The deer sightings are slim. During the rut the does vanish. The bucks still move good but once there is a hot doe there may be a dozen bucks on her. The buck quality actually decreases from hunters not seeing the quantity of quality deer when compared to high deer density. This is where population comes into play. A 1:1 buck to doe ratio sucks under low density situations. I have never seen it under high density areas and I doubt I ever will anywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom