Jay... Which begs the question...."Laws aside", who's the better manager of his resources? Is it the guy who doesn't take extra deer, because the laws tell him it isn't legal? Or, is it the man who knows best what's right for his herd, and acts accordingly? Is it the man who realizes taking that extra buck (or 2...or 3) would be detrimental to his herd dynamics....and declines? Or, is it the guy who knows it's not "right", but goes with what's "legal". I'm not advocating breaking the law. I'm asking a philosophical question. IMO, "ethics" and "legal" are sometimes mutually exclusive.
Is knowing what is going on, deer wise, on your (not you specifically) 200, 500 even 1000 acre area really "knowing your herd"? In my opinion, "knowing your herd" involves a whole lot more information than a person's observations, even with trail cameras, on their little 100 acre parcel. How would a person know whether the increase in animals they saw this summer and fall was due to more births, more animals and not because there was old timber being sold to a lumber company on the property a half mile away?
Rhetorical questions to highlight why I think we need a group (DNR in this case) to manage the herd for large areas (states). Herds cover large geographical areas and unless there is all-encompassing, well thought out, well researched plan (not saying all DNR's do this) then you will end up with haphazard results at best or an unhealthy herd situation at worst. One man doesn't know what's best for "his herd" because he doesn't even know what the makeup of "his herd" is.
I had a really elaborate post typed up at work, but I got busy & I'll have to get back to it monday. In short, since I hold a very low opinion of the average hunter, I dont think they know squat at managing "thier" herd. You've got both ends of the spectrum with little middle ground from what I;ve seen. Guys who will shoot everything until its gone, and guys who will shoot nothing so they can always see deer & have a lot around.
We had that happen a few years ago with blue tongue.Our season wasn't changed.We saw fewer deer that year but the next year we killed as many deer off our farm as ever before. Do other states not give each area a "zone" and dictate what can be taken from that "zone"? Ky is zoned county to county.With 120 counties,this breaks things up quite nicely and we can "micromanage" if you will.Then some WMA's have their own regs.
Unfortunately there are a bunch of morons hunting and the dnr system is designed around people doing what they are supposed to based on the guidelines. I have had casual conversations with two individuals this season that remind me of exactly how hard a job it must be to try and predict where the herd is at. One hunts in VA and has killed 5 bucks and "lets the does go" and another in NC who has killed more than that, last I heard it was 6 or 7. And these aren't wallhangers they are 4, 5, 6 pointers maybe a couple of small/decent 8's. What the hell is the point of that and they are hunting with clubs so you know they are not the only ones with that mindset. I am never surprised by the modern hunter, depressing. I honestly think they would kill every deer in the woods.
Unit 43 where I gun hunt in Northeastern, Wi is at least 20% under goal and this season it was buck only for both the bow and gun hunters. Yes I am for missing a year up there actually. T
I don't understand this. How does that one man that hunts a particular area not know the makeup of the herd? How does someone else know more about that herd than the person hunting it, studying it, scouting it, etc........? How does someone miles and miles away decide how many does should be takenofff the land (or not)? Or what size/age/genetic bucks should be taken or not? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
I've seen supposed seasoned hunters on this site talk about 1:10 and greater buck:doe ratios. Prime example of many not having a clue.
Do you think "the herd" is just the deer that one guy sees on his 100 acres? Someone miles and miles away should be taking in information of a very large geographic area to get the real make up of "the herd". That would include one man's information about his 100 acres. Unless someone can control the comings and goings of the deer in a small geographical area they can't control the makeup of the herd. Does pregnant for the first time will find their own birthing area, young bucks move out of and into the area as they are looking for a core area after being expelled from their birthing area and so on. How many times does someone see a new buck on their trail cameras? They probably see new does too but they don't have readily identifiable features like bucks. When you see a doe at 50 yards do you know whether you have seen her before or not? Do you really know if she is a member of your "herd" or just passing through while looking for a new core area? If you can't readily identify and differentiate one doe from another how can you know how many does are actually in "your herd"?
What would lead you to believe I think this about "the herd". Someone is getting the makeup of "the herd" in a very large area..... called New York State. Not exactly sure why you think I hunt 100 acres. within about 1500 acres I'd be willing to bet more times than not she is a member of "the herd " When I see a doe and 2 fawns in the same general area abou 32 times I'm going to assume they are part of "the herd" and not 32 different doe fawns looking for a new core area. Over a decent size chunk of land, trail cams, spotlighting, sightings, scouting etc..... believe it or not you can get an idea of your buck to doe ratio. Exact science? I'll concede that..... probably not. Lot of variables and things that can skew the numbers .... yep. Mortality rates due to harvest, predators, poaching, vehicle collisions, etc..... are tough to keep up with. What we do know pretty close is an idea about the density of "the herd" and harvest rates. IWe are by far biologist or QDM specialists. But gathering all the info we can on our land before the season is about the only tool we have. Right wrong or indifferent we are going to try to learn "the herd" we are hunting. Either way I still contend I know more about "the herd" on my land than the guy miles and miles away in some office. Oddly enough I've never seen him around my land trying to gather information about "the herd"
Don't know what you believe about the herd. That was why it was a simple yes/no type question. That is my point. I have no idea how much acreage you hunt. 100 acres was my example as used in previous posts. I am willing to agree but how do you know you are looking at the same doe when the majority of the does are indistiguishable at most distances. And that only accounts for 1 doe and 2 fawns. In the area that you hunt and know well can you give a count of how many does and fawns (non- bucks) live there now, 2 years ago, 5 years ago? What percentage would you rate the accuracy of your count? Within 10%, 20%, etc. of the actual number. If you know the actual number how do you know it? The state wildlife biologists are doing the same things but, since they actually are wildlife biologists, they may have more of an idea how to do it to get accurate numbers. They also have access to statewide harvest data, data formulated from crop damage permits (how many issued/used) and information sent in by people like you. I highly doubt they just sit in their office miles away and pull numbers off of the top of their heads. When you kill deer on your land do they get replaced by just births or do deer from outside your land move in also?
You probably do but, you are not the average guy. You have said yourself that the guys that hunt the same land as you don't put in a tenth of the effort you put in. If they didn't get information from you about "the herd" do you think they would have any idea about its makeup?
