Bowsite.com

sad....

No doubt, leftover bucks from last year and near perfect weather so far the first 3 days of this year has a major impact. I think the main rut was on the downslope but still going a bit. No acorns this year made them move more to look for food, including corn piles .

E-check may have made it easier for some to check in.

It will all be evaluated in due time after all the data gets in.

When will WV put quality over quantity? Never, they are in it for the money and nothing else.

Why is killing 30K + bucks in 3 days impressive? Next year there will be a low buck kill and you will be asking why? Because they got wiped out this year.

Remember , white oak species like white, Chesnut, etc. Complete their bud to nut cycle in one year, from spring to fall.

Red and black oak species , it takes 2 years to complete the bud to nut cycle.

Last years total buck kill was about 37,500 if I remember correctly . In your senario that would be almost double the buck kill.

EHD tends to be localized. But they had large areas in Iowa and Montana several years ago that the deer are still recovering from. Thankfully, we haven't had any wide spread kills like that YET. Buck even in localized areas it can wipe out 80% of the herd. It takes a few years to bounce back from that . Mature bucks really take a big hit from EHD.

Shaky, emotional people use emotional adjectives to express their feelings because they refuse to acknowledge reality. Some of those same people were on here whining last year that the deer herd was already decimated because a 4.5 year old buck wasn't committing suicide in front of their trail cam they'd checked weekly and, dump 100 puns of corn in front of at those visits. Seems deer prefer acorns.

I agree with gobbler that excess deer, more ability to check them, rut still in during gun season, and lower food amounts all equaled more deer checked. I personally believe that buck kill has been misrepresented for years due to poaching and non checking. I think after 5 or so years of the tele check numbers to average, we will see it in the increase of checked deer over years past prior to it.

I just have one obvious statement. With all the truly big deer that have been killed this year, how was this possible if the age structure of our buck harvests, provided by the dnr, are incorrect? I mean a deer doesn't jump age class. Only horn size when fed well through the winter.

I blatantly disagree with anyone who suggests that a state, that is 78% forested, will not have a buck kill that is dependent on the previous years food sources. It is being naive to think that the common denominator in carrying capacity should have no effect on harvest numbers. Because if deer didn't get hungry or, experience the urge to breed, we'd never kill many of them. Period. And, food supply affects both of these activities extensively. Which effects harvest numbers extensively.

Instead of worrying about doom and gloom, we should be enjoying the great season we've had. All are not equal. Nor, ever will be. This was one for the books. God Bless men.

Once you use "doomsday" you lose any credibility to blast someone for using "decimated."

Wvmountaineer,

You can't talk about people refusing reality then go so far away from reality with the 4.5 year olds committing suicide and dropping at their feet in a hundred pounds of corn.

See my comment about year class in another post but I do agree that this is a season to remember.

Once you use "doomsday" you lose any credibility to blast someone for using "decimated."

Wvmountaineer,

You can't talk about people refusing reality then go so far away from reality with the 4.5 year olds committing suicide and dropping at their feet in a hundred pounds of corn.

See my comment about year class in another post but I do agree that this is a season to remember.

That being said I would be for nonresident lottery or at least a nonresident draw for public land hunts and an increase in cost of nonresident licenses.

It seems to me the only people that are pushing for this change own a lot of land or, are bowhunters by preference. Kinda weird and selfish to want everything on a wish to fit your agenda when the science doesn't support it. Don't you think?

Hey gobbler, why don't you give the proof that surrounding counties are already experiencing an over kill of bucks. Lets talk the facts, not your opinion. God Bless

I own five acres, so it is an incorrect generalization to say the only people wanting this are large landowners.

Again I love how article is written by someone saying one buck limit will result in more recreation time - as he goes off to hunt Kentucky! Sorry - not buying it!

No matter what you one and doners say - people want to kill bucks not does. I know does need to be harvested and I do harvest does - but can tell you right now my hunting would virtually almost come to an end after I harvest a buck under a one buck limit. My choice would be to either go else where to hunt - tell me how that will help the economy in WV???

Or I would go and kill a doe or two - must admit I have never had a problem killing a doe - so I go out for one day and then thats it - and I put the hunting gear away for another year! Truthfully, one and done limit would probably push me out of hunting.

Heck I would prefer what is in place now before a one buck limit to be quite honest with you...

jayD I agree. there are ALOT of hunters who wont just settle for shooting does all season long and just eventually quit. me for one. the whole reason we are even having this conversation is for horns. is it true a 6 year old buck is better for breeding than a 2.5 year old? all this hoopla centers around horns, period. I don't see the state ever killing as many does as needed and then to decrease the number of bucks killed just adds to the population. but hell what do I know. im still waiting for the biologist to get on here and tell us all the way it is. so far we have a dentist, an er doc, a teacher, and QA technician trying to solve the deer herd problems in wv. id love to see the wildlife biologists get in the mix

All I am saying is with a 2 buck limit with AR's on both bucks - then people like me who could care less about going to another state to hunt whitetails could stay here in WV. And I have yet to see one bit of research that says one and done without AR's is any better than a 2 buck limit with AR's! Plus - how many 2nd bucks do you think would fall with AR's in place?

And it cracks me up when 20 some years ago when some of us were pushing for the extra tag - biologist said sure its great - will give hunters extra recreation time - and now they write in papers - go to one buck limit - it will give hunters more recreation time!

Remember some of these guys are the same who said shoot the inferior spike!

Also my buck season would have ended because I shot a buck that someone else wounded! If it were one and done - I really cannot say if I would have put that buck down. I would hope that I would do the right thing but that 2nd tag sure does make the choice an easier one!

But if I were going to bring up a county, maybe I might use whichever county you were in while hunting Cranberry where you saw 6 deer in 5 days."

gobbler, you made the statement that surrounding counties from the coal fields have been experiencing to heavy a buck harvest. Based your whole idea of that post on it. Then say you don't have to prove it to me. Well, you don't. But, when a person has a view that doesn't coincide with the science of the subject, it is their job to prove the science wrong with facts. Not opinions. Regardless of what you think, you saying it doesn't make it the Deer Hunting Gospel. The numbers and Science do.

Once again for you to understand. These debates are not personal. It is common for disagreement to be present. That doesn't mean respect for the other man isn't present. It just means we disagree. If a man isn't capable of disagreeing without wishing ill will, then he isn't much of a man in my opinion. So, whether we agree or disagree, God's best are all that I wish to you all.

Once again, I don't use "God Bless" to make me right. The science says I'm right. I'm telling you what the numbers say. We have been through that countless times. My refusal to discuss it as your opinion doesn't mean anything other than what has been said. Your opinion means nothing to WV deer hunting until it coincides with the facts. Right now they don't. So, expect every single time that you state your opinion as fact, this is going to be pointed out. Don't take it personal. It isn't.

You and a few others accuse me of twisting things. Why? I don't twist anything. I recite the FACTS of our own DNR's studies. As they present them. That is it! It appears to me my refusal to say your opinion is more correct than biological studies, makes you incapable of seeing this. What ever the case causing it, get real with yourself. A person quoting and reciting the science of any subject versus a person talking opinion is NOT twisting anything. Only the OPINIONATED people are doing that.

As far as the County, it was Pocahontas. Shot out in the Cranberry Glades? Nope. Starved out? Absolutely. You and I both know that. So, using it as an example would be a poor representative of your opinion. Besides, I'm sure the agriculture areas in Pocahontas did just fine with buck harvest.

God Bless men

In 2013 they submit info for 2011 and we have a greater 3.5 percentage than Ohio or Indiana. Once again, we are waaaay better than Penn with a one buck limit and a p r's.

In 2015, they submit info for 2013.

Also, the info is derived from the first three days of buck season at various check in locations.

Btw, according to qdm, estimated buck harvest in 2010 was 58k 2011. Was 78k 2012 was 71k 2013 was 75k

Shouldn't use buck gun harvest numbers to decide who is killing two bucks a year. Must use numbers submitted to QDMA by our very own dnr to have a better estimate.

So from 2010 to 2013 wvmountaineer uses 215k bucks when the state uses282k bucks, an increased amount of 67 k in bow and muzzleloader seasons for those years. I do not have the info for 2014 so I didn't include that year, but it's easy to see close to 80k bucks are missing during those years. We are harvesting more bucks than one thinks.

If the numbers of the QDMA were being used, that is 15,000 more bucks a year on average is my glancing through, quick math is right. That alone says exactly what the DNR field collected statistics state. We are no longer wiping out the 1.5 year old deer. Doubt it? That's my whole dang point. My opinion doesn't matter. Your opinion doesn't matter. No ones opinion matters. The numbers do.

Hopefully this system will provide concrete answers. It'll stop all the filling in the blanks. But, you have got to believe they are right in order for that to apply. I choose to believe what the DNR has done up to this point is as right as possibly can be. No conspiracy to do it wrong. And, until seeing unbiased info to prove otherwise, see it as the only dependable source.

As far as the quote about a 4.5 year old committing suicide in front of the camera, it wasn't for emotional effect. It was directed at the guy that whole post was meant for. Because I remember seeing trail cam pics he posted. Might not have been a hundred pounds of corn at a time but, as many pics as he posted over the time frame with corn in front of his camera, it is more than safe to say my analogy applied to him. Because of this reality and, the devastation term he used to describe here. Emotionally motivated? Nope. Just the absolute truth of it. Go back and find last years trail cam pic threads and you will understand.

I've said it before. I'll say it again. This needs to be right. There is give and take in everything. To do away with what we have, that is working pretty dang well, we had better get some science behind what we propose. Copying other states with different circumstances isn't the answer unless we get the info to suggest it is. Until we know how many deer were killed here, there, by landowners, non residents, how many killed two bucks, three bucks, etc..., the only numbers we do have are the ones we are working with now. And, the results they are giving aren't shabby. God Bless

Plus we killed more older bucks than Ohio we must have a boat load full of 3.5 year old deer! So if we did harvest more but they took bigger bucks than I guess there is something wrong with the genetics here in this state!

Again when I see these numbers it really makes me question what is really going on! Would love to know which checking stations they were at!

QDMA uses numbers given to them by state agencies. Those numbers came from our dnr years after the fact. You can't suggest bias by the facts given by our dnr. The numbers came from the WVDNR.

THIS YEAR IS ALL THE FACTUAL EVIDENCE WE NEED THAT WE CAN DO BETTER. ONE YEAR OF A CONSERVATIVE BUCK HARVEST LEADS TO AN EXCEPTIONAL YEAR. PASSING BUCKS BY ANOTHER YEAR, CHANGED THE HERD DYNAMICS INSTANTLY? UNFORTUNATELY, LIBERAL LIMITS, CROSSBOWS, BAITING, AND THE UNDERSTOOD DESIRE TO HARVEST A TROPHY WILL NEGATE THE GAINS IN ONE YEAR.

2010 buck harvest was 43226

2011 buck harvest was 59,835

2012 buck harvest was 56,173

2013 buck harvest was 56,333

That equals 215,567

67,000 extra is roughly 16,750 more a year. Out of an estimated herd of 800,000 animals, that equals 2%. You guys aren't unhappy about a 2% error in accounting because I used only rifle buck kill numbers. I'll gladly use all the numbers if you'll tell me where to find them. Then we can redo the math with that extra 2%.

FWIW, based on what you say, which I don't doubt, 16,750 more bucks a year. Across 300,000 licenses equals 6% more hunters killing more than one deer. I know not all license holders deer hunt but, until we can break it down better, we must use all the numbers we do have, as you have pointed out. No sense in leaving out that 2% and, then guess at how many truly deer hunt. So, from here on out, lets use what we do have.

Last time I checked, the QDMA didn't do age studies of buck kills in this state. Or, any where else for that matter on a state wide basis. They are using data derived from the states you Quote. Ours are behind due to issue related to staffing I'm guessing. Besides, I don't buy the conspiracy theory idea that the DNR is purposely "cooking the books". There is no gain in it for them.

What isn't debatable is the parameters of the study here no doubt had the same intent as the other states. To be as correct as possible. There is no gain to be wrong. So, why the skepticism? Unless the other states did age every deer, there are no bigger flaws in our studies than theirs. We all know they didn't.

Through all this, stating one year will be the difference is kinda out there and in my mind is just an emotional charge. Especially when the numbers we do have say that isn't the case. That the results have been trending this way for the last half decade.

WBOWHUNT, I do agree buck to doe ratio is a very important factor in all this. And, until we can get a better grasp of what it is in certain areas, there are even more gaps. Micro management is the key here. Our DNR is working that way with it's limited funds and resources. So, why change anything solely based on what deer hunters think? Stats and numbers are where it is at. And, where it has to be to get it right for the greatest good. Not wants and desires. Every deer hunter I know wants to kill a big buck with minimal effort: Me included. However, those two don't coincide in any state. Especially one that is 78% forested and rugged. God Bless men.

With gun hunting, you still have a base, if they want the extra buck stamp then buy before gun season. If they kill two during gun season, and want a third, they go into the lottery and could be chosen for muzzleloader or late season archery if they bowhunt.

I know it kinda sounds jumbled and what not, but I think it could reduce the buck kill, raise the doe kill, better herd control with more does killed, but still possible to kill 3 bucks where possible.

Ok, have at it with the complaints, holes I've left open, or just plain dislike :}

Decimated...

And your numbers are flawed....add in every deer killed ...poached, EHD, crop damage, etc...

I bet we hit and kill as many deer with cars as we do with guns, or more. What does that due to the population ratio now?

Now, go back to the gun season. Think of all the bucks that made it from last year. Lots of nice big deer this year, better than your average year....Now do that every year with a 1 a done....lots of big-healthy deer.

But instead, we are happy to accept that we kill and decimate our bucks by killing every yearling or 2.5 year old the first 3 days of gun season....

So again, in context, we decimate our bucks and shoot ourselves in the foot on herd health....The science is there. The buck to doe ratio is outta whack.

Change is hard for some people, but what do we have to lose? Give it 5 -7 years and see what happens? Cant get any worse..I mean, these yearling bucks will still be there for you to decimate, sorry, I meant, kill...LOL

Now I still say I have a hard time believing those numbers. We need to get better at getting the numbers and I think the new system will do that. We also need to look at the research - you know something - maybe a 1 done will work in some of your counties where hunter numbers are low. But in quite a few counties it will not work like it did not work in PA or Minnesota because there are too many hunters and too many bucks will still be shot.

I still think you need to look at the big picture - deer, economy, recreation time, will reducing limit be enough or do you need to add antler restrictions to the equation also??? Then do we want to add more for hunters to contend with and say ok these counties will be one and done or 2 and your thru. Then these counties will be one and done with AR's or 2 and your thru with AR's and not say it will be good for the whole state. Unless the big picture is dealt with - then just let it be and don't go by OH and KY did it so it must be good!

At some point there has to be an a gray area that we all can meet at say great this is allowing us to seeing nice bucks but I am not limited to the point where I have go to another state to hunt something other than a doe. Its out there somewhere - with me it would be 2 buck limit with AR's on each buck.

For the record, before they can be truly considered factual, you must show us where the dnr submits those numbers. Until you do, they are just numbers published by a pay to play group.

For the record, the numbers you did supply were put into the math. And, that math still says you are WRONG.

For the record, you basing your argument on your opinion is why we are even having these discussion over and, over and, over, etc....

JR, what does money have to do with this?

Fellas, last year all the deer were dead. The insurance companies had succeeded. We were getting played by the dnr. There were no mature bucks in the state. etc...

In one year, we have grown a record number of mature deer, harvested more deer than in a long time, and have a age structure of bucks that most states can only dream of. I want to thank each and every one of you responsible for going and importing these deer and big bucks for us to hunt. We owe it all to you guys. So, here's my tip of the hat to you all. Whoever you may be. :^)

I don't care who you are, that was funny.

God Bless men

Greg, I remember. All in all, you were one of the few saying everything was fine with the deer population. However, we are wired different. FWIW, I don't dismiss what could be done in some areas. Where we differ is I REFUSE to DISMISS what the RESULTS of DOING so would be. My wires cross anytime anyone dismisses the warnings of what solely managing for big bucks cause and, what it has done to negatively impact hunting in every location it has been implemented. When you consider what we currently have in comparison to that, It simply blows my mind that anyone would be willing to trade it for that. So, yeah I guess we are wired differently.

I'll sum it up as I'm not willing to trade something that the science says is working REALLY well, for something that will produce numerous problems detrimental to hunting's future in this state, until the science says we need to. God Bess men

Just think if you used common sense on this?

Again, simple math dictates your sentence above.

And to say that we what the deer managed for big bucks is also way off.....Bigger bucks comes with a better, healthier herd. Its a win ,win situation.....Sadly, most don't care as they hang up their 40th spike buck in their career.....good job, carry on.

a more balanced buck/doe ratio huh? finish this equation for me: reducing the number of bucks killed while at the same time not making a drastic increases in the amount of does killed = ?

and remember: the petition we all signed says NOTHING about changing the doe harvests in the state, only various options for reducing the number of bucks killed and APR's.

tell me how to look at it from a conservation standpoint and not a greedy ass way to attain bigger antlers and again ill shutup.

Thank you Cory. I'll assume that you don't have any literature from the DNR stating that these are the numbers they submitted. Or, some link that shows a statement saying they provide them to the QDMA.

God Bless you all

I do not work for the dnr. I am not a secretary for the dnr. Until then, I can not validate them to your desires. Did you ask for validation from newspapers when they release harvest numbers?

When QDMA said the data on the next eight pages are from state wildlife agencies, I just assumed they were from state wildlife agencies. My bad.

So Shaky and Mountaineer........How does this help the herd? The buck to doe ratio?

I know we will knock down more does in doe season, but with everyone already filling their buck tags, it may not amout to much...

So there you go.....3-1 kill rate or worse..

Maybe I am naive but is there one state out there when buck season opens up or a gun season for either buck or doe opens that the numbers are balanced?

Sorry none of you can convince me that a 2 buck limit with AR's won't give close to the same numbers as a one buck limit - and I think it would actually be better than a one buck limit without AR's. And please convince me how a 2 buck limit would be pounding the bucks?

Gobbler - really not picking on you here - just want to get your take on what you would do. One buck limit goes in to effect - do you still get a lease in bow only area or just hunt your farm? Past two years I have really been looking at several different properties to lease in bow only area - got to admit now I am going to wait and see on the limit - to me how can I spend the money on a lease - should I get a nice buck here in Berkeley county then I just threw money down the drain? How does that help the economy?

Please tell me the effect of a one buck limit in areas where most properties are less than a hundred acres? Any research on that?

Dr. Dave stated in the article states with long seasons don't do well with one and done - we have a long gun season compared to most states - so will they shorten gun season?

Again how does this affect a state whose has lost the coal industry - relies heavily now on tourism and hunting is in that equation? And don't say it has worked in other states - there are different situations here that I am listing out that I believe make a big difference.

Really would like for someone to explain to me how a 1 buck limit is a better overall plan than a 2 buck limit with AR's? And I don't buy the high grade theory either in an open hunting situation and not in a high fenced area. Really - you think a rare 1 year old 10 point will not get hammered rather it is a one buck limit or 12 buck limit?

How about 3 buck ar on second buck?

Kentucky has a ten or fifteen day season and one buck has worked for them.

As far as numbers, yes the gun season looks higher skewed towards bucks and it should during buck season. However, add the early doe season, doe season, and it evens out quickly. I would assume bow season is fifty/ fifty does and bucks. I think muzzleloader season is highly skewed towards does. So I think it evens out by the new year.

However, with last year's dismal harvest, counties with a robust doe population, such as Preston and Upshur, were put in a one doe limit. Many other counties that needed to be left on the earn a buck light regulation, were taken off.

Reading everyone's posts, it's pretty clear this is a very divisive topic. I don't claim to have an answer to this puzzle, but I will tell you there is nothing, and I mean nothing as exciting as sitting in a tree stand watching a P & Y buck walking in your direction.

In all fairness, I'm not a lover of venison. I always give the deer I take to a family member, so it's not like I feel the need to fill the freezer.

I've passed on probably 10-12 bucks this year waiting for the one I want. If he doesn't show up, which it's not looking good, I'll wait another year.

On the bright side, I'm taking my step-daughter hunting this evening and I plan to video her taking her first deer with a bow. I'm as excited to make this trip to the stand as any I've made so far.

I know that Cory but, since you tried your best to discredit my post, I simply returned the favor.

God Bless men.

WV_bowhunter - I completely understand about the first time hunter (kid that is) being able to kill any size buck. I think the way you take care of that under a program with antlers restrictions is to have a youth hunt where any deer, buck or doe is legal. Now I know some of you are going to scream but a lot of fathers will just hunt and check one in for the kid! Please tell me under what regulations can be put into place where there won't be someone who will try to find a way around the law? It does not matter what we do - unless we start requiring hunters to wear a hat-cam that records everything we do! LOL

Don't get me wrong I can see a 1 buck limit working in some areas of WV but in others areas it won't like here in the panhandle - too many hunters and not enough large land owners - buck here will just get passed up on one plot and run over to the next and get shot.

And I keep hearing you come up with different one buck states but Iowa, WI, MI just to name a few big buck states don't they allow 2 bucks? So again - why drop to one if 2 will give similar results?

I'm assuming the debate you loose every time based on facts, leaves you with this as your final action. Trying to discredit your nemesis. What you are missing is this isn't about you or I. This is about WV deer hunting.

For the record and, you know this, I have never claimed to kill a lot of big deer. But, you know that. Everyone here knows that I have said there is no shortage of them. And, that I see them every where I work. I have stated the deer are getting bigger every where. Something the DNR numbers prove. Work 200 days a year in the woods and you will have the same experiences.

Come on down Greg. We might would better understand one another's side if we could set down in person. This is getting old on line. But, we can look at the ones the Lord has blessed me with. I only have 1 that makes your 150 mark you have stated many times as a trophy. But, I killed him on public land in WV, with a bow. So, I'm proud of it. Bring pics of yours that are that big. I'd like to see them too. If you don't have any that measure that high, bring any in the 140's, 130's, 120's etc. 120-130 inch deer are real trophies antler wise in my opinion. 110 inch mature deer are every bit as big a trophy too. Especially when killed on public land in WV. PM for arrangements

God Bless men.

So post em up...show us all the public land bucks you've killed in your life....let me see your life before the money....

As for there being a ton of big bucks in WV...ha

Yes there are some, and it is getting better every year..Except maybe next year due to the killing of so many this year....but not nearly as many as u keep claiming there is.

But, it will get better , because change is in the air, maybe not next year or the year after...but its coming...so shoot your yearling bucks with all 3 of your tags while you can while telling everyone you are the original Buckmaster....killer of all bucks...LOL

But,

Just think if it were one and done.....gun kill would still be around 45-50k.....With left over bucks going into next year...Think od the 2.5 year old and 3.5 year olds that would be running.....people would get excited about the nicer bucks and pass the yearlings...

Then in 4-5 years....It would probably scare people witht the amount of big, mature bucks and does coming out of good ol WV.......

again,

Simple math...