Bowsite.com

Deer hunters have been asking, so a tally of deer harvest reports for the archery and shotgun/rifle seasons has been added to our website. It will be updated weekly:(supporting link) http://go.usa.gov/cZm8z

If your desire is hunters killing less deer, then this is a favorable outcome (and we didn't even have to lower bag limits to get it.).

Who here knows someone that shot a deer and didn't tag it????

I know someone...

Lots of people are not reporting. I bet at least 1/4 of them.

Or, there are less deer killed because of acorn crop and less movement.

I'm leaning towards less deer to start with and we are finally starting to see the effects of it. Toonces, if this is true, we really need the DEEP to adjust tag allotments to effectively manage our resource.

And yes, Buckiller, I know of people who don't report.

Why?

If the end game we want is less deer killed, and we are getting that now, why do we need less tags? You are creating a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

It would make sense to have less tags if harvest rates were increasing. Then you have a problem (too many deer being killed) and the solution (less tags).

If the harvest rates are already decreasing, what good is tag reduction going to do?

because some people kill more than what they're allowed or at the very least they kill all they're allowed, which I believe can be as many as 14 deer if you were to hunt all seasons in CT.

Again - I don't think you can say all of CT should have the same bag limits! Some area can take more while others take less.

I also have heard of people hunting with no license....so of course they can't report anything if they killed any.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that most of the people on this site know of or have heard of guys that don't tag or even buy a license to hunt. Thus....all those deer go unreported.

So even if the tags got reduced it wouldn't matter to any of these guys. But to Toonces point, if there are less deer to go around we could reduce the tags so the herd can rebound. Your example holds no merit. It's like saying all the fishermen are catching all these fish so let's let them keep catching all the fish....as a matter of fact, we should give them higher creels so they can catch even more! Mmmm, no, we should monitor their catch more closely and scale back so they can continue to have this very valuable resource for years to come.

I appreciate your thought process in your post, but you are not taking into consideration that if you have less to start, and you keep taking a certain amount, you will ultimately have less. Now if you curtail the amount taken, you will have a stable or growing number from which to reproduce. We have become too efficient as killers and it's far easier to kill a deer because of it through technology.

I fished once next to a guy who filed his bucket to the brim with cat fish because he could and was telling stories about hunting deer with .22 on state land. Modus Operandi was: drop off at forest edge, hunt with subsonic ammo, then call driver for pickup once deer was down, night or day. I said few words and never saw him again at that fishing spot. He was a clear case of greedy opportunist.

Decrease in deer being killed means too many deer are being killed.

Increase in deer in deer being killed also means too many deer are being killed.

Is the deer harvest ever going to decrease enough for any of you not to think we need a tag reduction to further decrease the harvest?

I have to think you have a number in your head for annual harvest that is acceptable. The fact that some of you are offended by the idea of someone legally killing 10 plus deer is not material. The total harvest is decreasing. That is what you want to happen. I just don't understand.

If your going to disregard the official number because people cheat the system, then ignore the harvest numbers all together as completely meaningless and neither supporting nor repudiating your position that less tags are needed.

The deer harvest numbers are going down now. That is my point. Even with all these tags available, the deer harvest numbers are going down.

So why the need to reduce tags when the harvest numbers are already trending the way you want them to trend without a tag reduction?

I have seen multiple deer nearly every time out this year, because of the abundance of acorns where I hunt.

Factor in bears, bobcats, coyotes, and vehicle collisions, there is a chunk of deer right there. These are things that some guys don't consider.

Last years deer report had 56 percent of hunters reporting that the deer numbers where they hunt are stable or increasing.

Not everyone agrees with the arm chair biologists that are on this site that the numbers are down.

As I said earlier, if you are so concerned with the numbers where you hunt, shut down your season and 2016 and 2017. Come back in 2018, and limit yourself to one deer.

Guys need to stop worrying about what others kill, as long as its legal, and worry about yourself.

I know that those same deer are hiding somewhere in all those Oaks and will be very healthy this winter.

HOWEVER....

Acorns will not result in the massive decline of deer. I have heard some people found massive winter deer kills.

Taking a look at 2014 numbers and comparing 2015 numbers it would be safe to say 9200 kills would be a realistic if not high estimate. (I took 2014 numbers of last years BSeason, Muzzleloader and january seasons...added it to the total harvested so far in 2015...then added 1000 deer additional for rifle/shotgun on private land/public land still left to hunt).

The last time the harvest was 9200 wasn't in 2002-03 , 07-08 or 10-11 when acron production was higher. It was 1998-99!!!!!

What's interesting, is that as their have been fewer deer here, I'd argue that we are willing to shoot more.

If you see deer often, you may be willing to pass one (assuming you are hunting for fun and to provide healthy food for your family) or two - there will be another tomorrow. But when numbers are low, and the deer in front of you may be the ONLY deer you have a crack at all year... It's taking a ride in the bed of your pickup.

There have always been group drives here done among families and friends. It's tradition for many and has a lot of importance to those that enjoy it. But when numbers are down, you absolutely have more massive gang drives that develop beyond those group drives. No one is seeing anything, so big gang's push areas and share the deer.

Point being, fewer deer seems to increase the odds that we take the first one we see (Ill admit, that's become my mantra - take the first 1 you have a good crack at then go from there pending meat supply)..

You also have to figure they have their winter coats on right now, which I would guess it means more layers of fat, which I would think would also contribute to the deer not moving much with the warm weather and the extra fat they've put on for the "winter". Be interesting to see what Dr.Williams thinks if he reads this thread.

Once you knock out a 3rd leg it's pretty much done as a working stool and all 4 legs, well, that's pretty obvious.

Regarding the deer herd it's got a lot in common with the stool; you've got weather, food, natural predation and hunting predation. You don't discount any; all can factor in but not necessarily in equal amounts based on a number of factors. One shouldn't be in a rush however to ascribe an overly high impact, with a few exceptions.

A bumper crop of food will, in my opinion, quickly separate those who have a firm handle on their craft versus those who are overly reliant on hunting travel corridors or have come to rely too heavily on bait. Witness the reports from some this year in spite of a bumper crop of acorns.

Weather can play a major role but moreso in years where you have both deep snow and a hard crust on top as that leaves deer struggling to move while lighter predators, such as coyotes and bobcats can run without breaking through. For the bulk of last year this wasn't the case. As deer tend to migrate towards woody browse less emphasis should be given to depth of snowpack from a foraging standpoint.

Natural predation is definitely having a more pronounced impact, nowhere more apparent than in the NW corner of CT. As we are limited to coyotes we need to push the state to allow hunting of other predators lest their impact not only continue, but grow.

Lastly, human predation has an impact; some have called for a reduction in tags; while not necessarily a bad idea in my opinion what should take precedence is the elimination of unlimited replacement tags for antlerless deer in Zones 11 & 12 given all the aforementioned factors.

If we were talking about the standard 10-15% drop-off in harvest numbers I'd be much less concerned; we're not; we're talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-35% and that should be a wake-up call.

It's one we ignore at our peril.

I hunt the central part of the state a lot during bow season and the northwest corner during the gun and muzzleloader seasons. I think the deer numbers are way down and I think the only table you need to look at is Appendix 4 in the 2014 Deer Report (Non Hunting Mortality) on the DEEP website. If you pull the 2005 Report and look at Appendix 8 it takes the data all the way back to 1998.

From 1998 to 2005 roadkills fluctuated around 2700 with a range of 2300 to 3100.

In 2006 there was an unexplained drop in the average to 2000 and it hovered there until 2010. In 2010 there was a drop in the average to 1500 for two years and then the last 3 years have been dismal, around 1100 road kills.

To me you would have to have the entire western portion of the state stop reporting road kills to see this drop. So even if the drop of 60% is not purely based on the population it has to be a significant contributor.

I gladly leave just about all of my tags unpunched every year. My daughter is 16 months and my son is 6 years old. I hope they have the opportunity to experience hunting in this state the way it was in 2000-2003.

Welcome aboard! I would imagine with a 16 month old at home you're being kept pretty busy! If your 6 year old son is anything like mine was he's probably chomping at the bit to fish and hunt and get into all your tools to boot-great fun to be sure!

Kudos on your personal decision to hold onto tags if you decide that is the proper course. I think it speaks to a person who knows exactly why they hunt and does not feel a need to measure himself by anyone else's yardstick.

I am optimistic that there can be a reversal of current trends and your kids will grow up with the same opportunities you had. In the areas you hunt, especially the NW corner we've got to address natural predation, and the sooner the better. I would highly recommend when you fill out your survey report comment in great detail about what your seeing for predators; coyotes, bobcat and bear.

With the pushback that's a given from anti-hunters we'll need a mountain of evidence to add seasons for bobcat and bear.

Best to you and yours-have a great Christmas!

Now you are blaming the police for your failed wildlife management skills......do you have proof of this? You should really give some thought to a career change; possibly a teaching type position.