DEEP WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND ONE BAD APPLE
Connecticut
Over the last several years CT DEEP Wildlife Division have become negligent in their duty as Wildlife Managers in Connecticut. Their recent actions in Fairfield County zone 11 and coastal zone 12 leave DEEP law enforcement officers and local sportsmen shaking their heads in disgust as they watch Howard Kilpatrick and the CAES mastermind the destruction of the few remaining whitetail deer in Redding and surrounding towns in Fairfield County.
For the last 13 years sportsmen of Connecticut have assisted the CT DEEP with deer management on open space land to include Devils Den in Weston, CT. In recent weeks this area along with a growing list of other similar properties in CT have become private hunt clubs. Only a select few are now invited by Audubon staff and the CT DEEP to participate in these controlled hunts.
More disturbing are the unchanged policies and manipulated data that continue to encourage gluttonous, yet legal, deer hunting behaviors that border on poaching by many opinions. More evident is CT DEEP’s complicity with David Streit’s "Deer Alliance" and "Be Safe Redding" as they continue to promote the destruction of deer with no regard for conservation or enforcement of laws in many cases.
In 2014 Streit has checked in 28 deer from several towns under the DEEP replacement tag program. To hunters concerned with Conservation - this number of deer is outrageous. Given the profound downward trend in whitetail deer harvest figures, and logical decrease in populations, it raises several question: What methods might he resort to in order to maintain such an abnormally high kill tally?
What does he do with that many deer - butchered about 1200 lbs.? As the meat has not been donated locally, where is it going? Is it being sold? Through his obsessive-compulsive behavior Streit has shown no regard for other hunters and selfishly deprives them of a chance at a successful hunting experience. CT DEEP Wildlife management owes the sportsmen of Connecticut an explanation as to why they should buy a hunting license and tags with a rapidly diminishing chance of success. They also need to explain how this behavior represents game management grounded in conservation.
Howard Kilpatrick`s (DEEP Deer Biologist) most recent comments to the Danbury News Times states the deer population in Fairfield County is at 42 deer per square mile. DEEP Conservation Officers that patrol zone 11 along with locals that live and hunt here put the number at around 10 deer per square mile. This is half of the 20 per square mile that DEEP claimed to be a standard for a healthy herd.
CT DEEP wildlife management needs to reevaluate failed management tools like Baiting, Unlimited Doe Tags as well as manipulative and inaccurate deer population estimating techniques that have led to Wildlife Mismanagement.
The CT DEEP has some very important decisions to make in the near future...........As the saying goes; "One bad apple spoils the whole bunch"
I think alot of people are at fault here. Im wondering how many hunters took advantage of the endless tags? Then they complain theirs no deer left. If hunters took the four original deer then came back for more and more tags thats just greedy. Im sure WB took alot of deer but with hunters knowing this they shouldnt have taken the extra tags. Just a sucky situation and now only the DEEP can change it.
I honestly wish we could get rid of replacement tags all together. As well as Get rid of the earn a buck program and go back to paper tags and check stations. There is just way too much of a temptation for the honest guy to bend/break the rules. You will always have the jerks no matter what you do. But at least the paper tags and check stations eliminated a lot of the unreported harvesting. I also disagree with the rules on small spikes and buttons being counted as does. It's a buck plain and simple. I'm sorry that you pulled the trigger and shot it but it's a buck not a doe. Yes we all have made a mistake a time or two and have shot a button. Thinking it was a doe, that's why I personally do not shoot small does anymore, unless I can be 100% certain it's not a button. I know of too many times guys harvesting 3 small bucks/(doe in the states eye) and getting not only replacement doe tags but a replacement buck tag as well. When not a single doe was harvested. The entire system from the top down is in a sad state of affairs. It's a shame thinking back to just a few years ago, and how our herd has been decimated.
its pretty simple....stop shooting does and the herd will be back in 2 years easy...
its that simple...do you need a LAW or a bag limit to follow that
Well said, airrow. I totally agree.
Its also some of the "local old timers" in Zone 11 who shoot everything that's brown. They have done it for years and don't care about the future of the deer population. I know 2 old timers in Zone 11 that shot 9 deer in 2 days of gun hunting.. Why shoot 9 freakin deer!!!
Time to start hunting out of state if you want the opportunity to consistently see mature deer
I am a old timer and haven't even shot a deer this year !!!!!!!!!!!!! and not that I couldn't have !!!!so your theory isn't really true .STEVE
Steve - you're not one of the two he knows, and I don't hunt that area so it's not me.
Who's left, raise your hand. :)
I'm all for bucks only better yet with point restriction we do have and can have more trophy size deer if we just manage the deer we have a few years left alone a fork can de a real wall hanger
The problem is Jax. YES!!!!! People need laws to follow, you and me and the guys on this site can all say stop shooting the does etc. but unfortunately there are 1,000's of hunters in this state, all with different opinions. They need rules to follow, and people to enforce those laws. I personally only harvest select deer from my properties and rarely ever more than 2 does from the same property in a season unless I see a consistent over abundance of deer in the particular location. It's the guys that wipe spots completely out that ruin it for everyone.
Silverado you nailed it there.
jax, very easy to say and I agree that this would increase the herd. My situation, and I am am sure I speak for others, is that I only get to hunt maybe every other Saturday and my family loves venison. I will shoot any deer that is in range. I do not have the luxury of passing up doe as I need deer in the freezer. Every situation is not the same. If you see that many deer and can pass on doe and young bucks - more power to you. That is simply not the situation for all hunters.
Rob
You CAN'T pass up does and young bucks Primo, or you CHOOSE not to? "Need" deer in the freezer, or want deer in the freezer?
Jax (Scott), that last post is exactly why Silverado (Dave) is dead on. If it's legal, some will keep dropping the string until they have no more tags or no more opportunities.
I'm afraid we'll have population issues in some areas of CT for quite a while.
While I agree the population is down....there is no way I hell it's at 10 deer per Sq mile...I'd put it at 25-30. You guys wanna see 10dpsm come to western mass. Sorry guys but most of you have not seen the population that low. As a matter of fact I don't know if we could get it that low....
Slayer:
Spoken like a true out of towner/stater that listens to DEEP and Be Safe Redding for local hunting knowledge. 25-30 may justify or make you feel better about your travel time and gas. Coming to a place like Redding you may find a pocket where the deer are in a small family unit over your bait next a swing set, but that is not representative of the whole picture. Maybe its time to ask Dave and White Tail Solutions for a spot in Weston or Brookfield?
Early this season we ran into a guy from MA that has hunted around here for years and was on his third trip down. He said, " Three weeks straight and no deer. I am out of here, you guys don't have anything left" Have not seen him since.
Save your gas Buddy.
I managed to shoot a button buck in MA this year and while most would probably have passed it up it turned out to be the only deer that was shootable so far this year and I have no regrets. It is probably the best tasting deer to date and being a buck in my low population area it did no damage to the herd number although Im sure the 12 gun blasts on opening day may have. Like said above if your passing up deer every season then you have more then 10 psm im sure of that. I hunted state land in CT a few years ago and took an 8pt in five eve sits and the place was loaded with sign. I can only say I wish we had the numbers you have here. I just hope that everyone does not take advantage of all the doe tags as id like to come down and hunt there again sometime in the near future. In case your wondering ive hunted in the Stafford and Union areas.
One spot I hunt in the NW corner of CT there are a few MA hunters I see there year after year. This is an area that is just south of Rt44 and is one of the biggest single tracts of state land we have in CT.
For me the area is just ok, but for them they say it's deer heaven. Years ago I would see deer EVERY time out, and usually more than one. The last several years I'd be lucky to see 4-5 deer a season.
I guess things can always be worse, so count your blessings!
Ace, I absolutely CHOOSE not to pass doe and young bucks. I hunt Redding as well and even when the population was heavy, I never took more than I could use. I have hunted for 36 years and until someone tells me I can't kill a doe to provide food for the freezer i will keep doing the same. I have seen so few deer this year that getting an archery shot at any is a big deal. Do I "need" deer in the freezer? Of course not. I doubt many on this forum rely on venison to survive but it is a food my family enjoys and I enjoy hunting. If I waited for a mature buck i would not have shot a single deer in the last 3 years. The White Buffalo has absolutely done a number on the deer population in Redding. My buddy hunted seven days both mornings and evenings the week of Thanksgiving and did not see a single deer. That is terrible! I would have no issue limiting the number of tags allowed in zones 11 and 12 and going back to the hard tags and check stations. I believe that would make a difference. Too easy for people to not check deer in with the current system. I do not abuse the system. I hunt within the given laws and take what I can consume. I think it is great that some of you are willing to pass on deer and wait for a mature buck. Wish i could as well but with the current situation that is not the case.
Lets keep it real here guys, many were stacking up deer like cord wood in Zones 11 & 12 during the great times. Some of the same people that are now backtracking. Now with lean times, we hear a different story. There was a thread a while back on how many years have you been hunting and how many deer have you killed. I was surprised at some of the numbers. I bet if we do that again with how many CT deer have you killed it would be interesting. If you have been hunting 5 years and have taken 20 deer with the bow, you were legal in doing so but that's a lot. Thats not even including the replacement tags within these zones. Add in all of your firearm permits and that is even more. Need to regulate through laws, we as a group cannot self police as previously stated. It just doesnt work if only a few are doing so.
One of the easiest things to do in the world is to confuse "anecdotes" with "data". When posters here mention passing on deer in only that context you really can't draw a conclusion on the overall population just from that snippet of information.
Too much is missing; for example, how many days/hours were spent at that site? How many days produced sightings versus the number that didn't? What was the current year's trend relative to prior years? Even with those questions answered absent a concurrent census it boils down to a best estimate of that particular area's deer herd.
One of the biggest bones I've had to pick with the CT DEEP's population estimation method is that they perform the aerial survey during the winter months when deer are known to yard up. To take that number (even without a "correction factor") and extrapolate it out as a town-wide "estimatated population" is disingenous. What you inevitably wind up with is an inflated population estimate and if you keep the current harvest limits in place you arrive at a point where those limits are unsustainable.
Respectfully, in my opinion we have arrived at that point. Leave aside our own observations and/or the CT DEEP estimates; the barometer that really tells the story is the incidence of deer vehicle collisions. When that number has been declining in spite of increased numbers of vehicles and miles logged on our roadways it is a telling indicator of a population trend downward in our deer herd.
Posters who have related (here and on other threads) about seeing stable or increasing numbers may be seeing the results of natural migration to particular "favored areas"; favored perhaps because of a preferred food source, lower population of predators, less hunting pressure or other factors. The hunter who is in deer heaven could be in deer hell simply by relocating a relatively short distance in the same town.
We can have a future where all of us can have greater opportunities and take more deer. We can if we, as a collective group recognize that we only secure that future by better stewardship practices in the present.
You are correct BBB, I may go down to CT and consider a spot looking great while CT hunters there think its heading down hill. I havent hunted there since the 44 dollar license days though. I saw the one buck in five eves BUT with the amount of sign I know there is a good population I just was in the wrong tree at the wrong time. I also saw the biggest tree rub of my life there and can only imagine what that buck looks like. One mans trash spot is another mans treasure. In the other spot in Union I jumped deer on every scouting trip and saw good sign but no deer on stand. Once again they are there just wrong tree at wrong time.
Mike
I find it interesting that you think that road kill number is the best indicator of deer population, I wouldn't have picked that one.
I'm not sure I agree, because other factors can cause deer to be hit. For example: heavy snow could force deer to yard up and not move during the winter. Or heavy acorn crop could cause deer to stay with the food source and not wander. An increase in predator population could cause deer to be chased from safe places into the roads. Other changes in food source could cause deer to cross roads to get to new food sources.
What I can't explain is years ago I used to hunt the MDC area by Hogback Dam, just south of the MA border. The only major road was old Rt8 on the other side of the lake from where I hunted, so not close. I was seeing 20+ deer while on stand each time out (1975 - 1985). The area didn't change, no development, no major logging, nothing that I can identify; and yet the deer population is nearly gone today. I know I only shot a handful of deer there, so I wasn't taking 3-4 doe each season. So what happened??
I'm not saying road kill is the wrong number to use, but I guess we could argue EVERY indicator has some flaws built in.
Bob,
When I speak of looking at the trend in deer/vehicle collisions bear in mind I'm talking about a trend observed year after year. Additionally, all other factors being equal you'll still see 2 major "peaks" in movement; one in the May/June timeframe when does start birthing and try to push out last years crop and obviously during the rut in November (peak).
While we can and occasionally do get snowfall in November we certainly don't in May/June and over the past 10 years we really haven't had significant snowpack to the extent that would provide a noticeable impact on movement.
We've also, as I mentioned seen a huge increase in traffic volume over the same timespan. Is a comparison an absolute indicator? Of course not, but when a trend develops it's a good idea to at least try and see if a cause/effect relationship is at least possible, if not probable.
The past few years have also seen a pitiful acorn crop; given the need to pack on fat for the winter that alone would seem to mitigate additional travel to find food sources and should translate into at minimum a static curve (deer/vehicle collisions).
Mike
thanks for the explanation. What you say makes perfect sense and would not have been something I would consider when thinking where to hunt (deer density).
I no longer get into all of the data around the deer herd, I did a lot of that when I was younger. Today, the only thing that matters to me is "Are there deer where I'm hunting?"
I have a few different spots in the NW cornmer that I'll rotate year after year, and I find that works pretty well for me. This is the "homework" part of hunting that for me is more valuable than reading a report from the DEEP.
I agree with Silverado's last post.
Rooster just a FYI I used to live in Fairfield co....as a matter of fact I lived and hunted there in its hayday when it was deer everwhere in the 90's early 2000's . But if you really still think there's 10 deer per Sq mile you have obviously never hunted a area that truly has 10 dpsqm. Heck I will even invite you to come hunt some land that is 10dpsm then you can decide. Not trying to start a pissing Contest but it is the truth. If I had to give a honest estimate I'd say Fairfield Co herd is 1/2 - 1/3 of what once was. Hell the last 7 days of hunting in ct for me I saw zero deer....but it is hunting
Don't assume that all of Fairfield County is the same. It's not even close. If you haven't hunted or scouted in Redding for a few years you'd be shocked at the deer numbers there now.
If I was a conspiracy type I'd wonder if the DEEP's inability to publish a town by town report this year was related to the crash in deer population is some places.
But then what do I know?
