What's your opinion?
West Virginia
This is a personal opinion poll, not associated with WVBA.
What is your opinion of the new regulation in certain counties that you have to kill a doe before you can kill a second buck during bow season? And do you hunt in one of these counties?
A simple like or dislike is fine, or you can elaborate if you wish.
Thanks
I think its wrong to make you buy the tag before the season starts to kill an extra buck but have to kill a doe that you buy the tag as needed during the season. If you could buy the buck tag as needed like the doe tag then I don't see a big problem with it. I know they want does killed but its kind of wrong to use the hunter by putting conditions on his or her buck tag. That's my opinion anyway and I did write that one down on their board along with a few other comments.
I am glad that they do ask for opinions at these meetings So my answer is no to the law and yes I do hunt in one of those counties
I have no problem with it Greg. We have lots of does (too many in my opinion) where I hunt and I think taking a doe before a second buck is a reasonable thing to ask. I'm not big on more regulations but if it takes one to force hunters to kill a doe before killing a second buck (providing they obey game laws in the first place) then so be it.
Wrong being stated that way. I agree you should have to kill a doe in gun season before a second buck and that has to bee seen at the checking station before being given credit for it.
Didn't know that was a law. Dont even know if my county is one of those or not. I am ok with it though.
The way I understand it is that you must shoot a doe before shooting a second buck. It (the way I understand it) is not bow specific It is in any season. I also believe that You can shoot the doe first and fill the obligation.
I am OK with it, but I am also OK with one (preferably), or a two buck limit.
I may have worded it wrong, but to be clear I am asking about the fact that a doe must be killed either before or after a first buck, but before a second buck be killed. And Yes, it applies to all weapons, but I'm specifically talking about a bow in this opinion poll.
Also, this is a question about that law specifically, and not the fiasco about having to buy your second or third tags before you even know if you're going to get a first deer. In my opinion, that is simply a gimmick to sell more licenses and that is wrong. I think the DNR would probably make as much or possibly even more, and have less illegal kills if they could be bought as needed. But that's a different question.
Its probably a good idea but with the online check in system how many will honor it? Now that you can kill two deer a day - will someone kill the second buck and then kill a doe or will they just say they killed a doe and do a fake check-in?
Since most people have smart phones now - this new online and phone system check in - should they require a picture of the deer also? I think it would be a good idea to do so.....
This earn a buck type regulation is on the road of a last resort effort to accomplish something before mother nature does it for us. So, I have no problem with it. From the biological side, it should be a good thing in the counties that need it and is direct in it's intention. Get the herd healthy, so it is good biology, not horn porn mentality. Horns will increase too. If it isn't successful in reducing the herd, watch it turn to an all out earn a buck in time. Boy's, we really do have the best thing going in hunting here in WV. Let's help them and do our part.
God Bless
you can cheat it if you want. I have plenty of dead deer pics I could send already on my phone and they won't know when I killed them. In fact I can photoshop the horns off my Pendleton county spikes and they will turn into a doe. LOL. You can cheat any system. And I agree with you gobbler about buying the second tag before you killed the first deer. Again, that goes back to my original statement that the DNR needs or wants more money which is why the buck limit will not be reduced.
Is there a one buck limit in the bow only counties?
Yes there is a 1 buck limit it the bow only counties. You can kill 1 buck and 1 doe.
I agree with buying your tags before the season starts but I don't agree to having to kill a doe before your second buck. What if the buck of your dreams came by and you had to kill a doe first with another buck tag allready purchased? Not right at all.
That is why I asked about the bow only counties. That is what hunters there would say and that would not work there but it doesn't matter anyway since they can only kill one buck Now as for buck of your dreams that that is subjective and I doubt the state will care about that. They want dead does. I could say the buck of my dreams is a small six point in the county I hunt in. LOL. But I see your point. It will make you wait on the buck of your dreams and shoot does until he comes along. Which isn't a bad thing either.
Hookman, in a way I understand your concern on one hand, but on the other hand that scenario would only come up if you had already killed a buck. Which begs the question if you weren't happy with the first one why did you shoot it? I'm not talking about you, just the question in general.
Here's the history behind the question.
In those counties the deer herd and specially the doe segment have been above objective, and the buck/doe ratio way out of balance. The DNR biologists initially became more liberal with the doe limit, that didn't work well enough so they started expanding the seasons. First with family seasons at the end of the year, then with the Oct. Doe season. Those still didn't get the doe numbers down enough, so they added the shoot a doe before a second buck idea.
Which should, in theory lower the doe segment more, while taking some pressure off the bucks. This should help the health of the herd by lowering the deer herd to help the habitat recover and improve. This should improve the buck quality as well and I think it's working because the last 2-3 years we are harvesting more pope and young bucks outside of the bow only counties.
From what I have heard the DNR is getting calls from bowhunters complaining about having to shoot a doe before a second buck. As I understand it the bowhunters are complaining a lot more than gunhunters. That suprises me because we as bowhunters are usually more in tune with nature and proper deer and habitat management. What That tells me is that the bowhunters in those counties that haven't been harvesting enough does in the past still don't want to harvest enough does. I'm sorry, but that's the only logical conclusion I can come up with.
While I'm sure it can happen I have trouble believing that in a county with a doe overpopulation problem that the only 2 deer that someone gets a shot at during a season is 2 bucks.
The idea is being floated to cancel that requirement for bowhunters. I think that is a really bad idea for a number of reasons.
1) it was voted on by the public on the spring questionnaire and was supported by the public.
2) it's a bad precident to change a law that is scientifically sound and supported by the biologists because a group of people dosen't want to shoot a doe.
3) if it wasn't good for the deer herd the biologists would not have pushed for it. By canceling it, it may have a negative effect on the herd and it is against the grain of the DNR to change a positive thing for the deer herd into a negative for the deer herd because some people complain.
4) last but not least, I can't even imagine the uproar from the gun hunters if the bow hunters would be exempt from the regulation but they were not. Most of them think the bow hunters get too much anyway. Talk about throwing a can of gas on a fire.
Normally, as most of you guys know I take up for the bow hunters but in this case I just want to say give it a chance, shoot your doe whenever you can. It will make hunting better for you and your children, and grandchildren in a few years. If you don't believe me look at the state record books for the last 3 years and compare it against the ones 8-10 years ago and compare the counties from back then to the ones now.
Let the voting return, and rebuttals begin.
I like one buck per year, you pick the size. doe tags distributed responsibly by issuing agency. some counties you can get more than one doe .....some not. Ive never thought 2 bucks a year per person was a good idea......just me.
gobbler is talking the right stuff....you have to shoot does....not ALL of them ala Pennsylvana....but you have to shoot them, the health of the herd depends upon it. Responsible harvest......
Well why don't they just increase the number of does killed until te reach their objective?
And based on what you are saying gobbler hunters want to kill bucks so I find it hard to believe they will get on board with the buck number reduction. I think we are in a minority and I have said that all along
And based on what you are saying gobbler hunters want to kill bucks so I find it hard to believe they will get on board with the buck number reduction. I think we are in a minority and I have said that all along
I have said this so many times you guys think I am kidding but I do not ever see trophy bucks where I hunt in Pendleton county so that law doesn't bother me. Like I have said I kill deer to eat in we and then hunt for big bucks elsewhere.
I know but you and I are fortunate that we chose a career that allows us the ability to do that . I am just working and trying to do what I can so that the average guy in WV can have that chance in WV.
I like it because it is based on biology, not social pressure.
Good deer management and horn size go together like peanut butter and jelly. Can't have one without the other. It just doesn't happen. I commend the DNR for addressing the real issue and not the social challenge some hunters want to put on the table as necessity. Horns will follow if we get our herds to healthy buck/doe limits, and population limits that match the habitat.
And I very much agree it has to be on bowhunters too.
God Bless
I think that would be great.
I think shooting a doe before your second buck is the next best management move, opening doe season during buck season being the best management move
I am in favor of it. I am happy that Calhoun was added to the list. I have questions about how it will be enforced and how it will contribute to unchecked deer or fake deer check ins.
I hate that hunters complain about EVERYTHING. I guess the next step is earn a buck if hunters do not kill enough does.
What counties are affected by this?
So much of this depends on where, and how you hunt. I hunt Barbour and Mon counties primarily. If I kill a buck first in Mon county, I can go to Barbour and kill another buck without first having to kill a doe, HOWEVER if I kill my first buck in Barbour, I have to kill a doe before I can kill a buck in Mon county.
They're making this way too hard, and even the NRP Officers don't always understand the regs. You can get 2 or more answers to the same questions, just depends on who you ask.
Like. Rather have a one buck limit.
This year it includes Berkeley, Brooke, Cabell, Calhoun, Doddridge, southern Greenbrier, Hampshire , Hancock, Hardy, Harrison, Jackson , Jefferson, Lewis, Marion, Marshall, Mason, Eastern Mineral, Monongalia, Monroe, Morgan, Ohio, Pleasants, Putnam, Ritchie, Roane , Taylor, Tyler, Wetzel, Witt, Wood.
So you can get around it by hunting in 2 different counties? One that has the law and one that doesn't.
Well you don't really get around it. It's managed on a county by county basis. In some cases, even parts of counties. It's just set up to manage that specific county.
I wonder why Preston is not included?
IDK, may have to do with last years harvest? Preston has a 3 doe limit this year. As I understand it the counties may change from year to year based on the doe harvest. Monroe wasn't included the first year but was last year and this year.
