JayD's Link
Based on the same info gathered for the article, we also harvest 3.4 bucks per sq mile but only 2.4 doe's per sq mile. We lead the nation in bucks harvested per square mile. I'm not sure harvesting more bucks than does is a good thing when we lead the nation in deer auto accidents.
Things are getting better. I still advocate a two buck limit with aprs on one or both bucks, with a change in license structure, and an emphasis on education.
As to APRS - I still think there could be some use for it - if it were made simple to follow. Such as a buck needs to have 5 or more points total period. None of this points to a side or so many inches nonsense. I think it would help to protect some of our younger bucks and we all know that another year of education for them will mean a better chance at avoiding hunters the next year - relating to more 2.5 yer olds surviving and it continues down the age bracket. And unless your our dealing with a fenced property the high grading factor is nonsense as well - a 1.5 year old 8 point gets shot no matter what the buck limit is - by some hunter unless you are following APRS with inch restrictions - and then he may just be found laying somewhere because he didn’t meet the inch requirement and some low life let him lay in the woods.
I also like the earn a buck for any buck after your first of the year. It use to be like that here in Berkeley County but it changed several years ago. I need to check regs and make sure it hasn’t change back though for this year.
I still think the biggest change for our WV Buck population will be through continued education and better Land/Timber management. Things are changing towards the positive with this but let’s face it - here in WV a bag of corn is still the most popular food plot!
I hate the early seasons for many reasons and most of the guys I know tend to side with me here. I also know there are quite a few others who disagree with me here and love the early seasons.
My reasons are: I think it makes it much tougher on the fawns. I know studies show fawns can handle losing their mother and maybe they can but my mind tells me different. Back when they had the September bow and muzzleloading seasons for does - I watch a buddy kill a doe with his muzzleloader - she had two fawns - after she fell they came back to her and nursed off of their dead mother. Sicken my and my friend’s stomachs just a bit. Needless to say - neither one of hunt the early season now. I am sure that is not the norm but it happened that day and I have heard similar stories. Of course the heat and bugs influence me as well to just go golfing instead! LOL Next and i know they say less does make for a better rut - but the 3 day does season there at the end of October - well those guns cracking sure do seem to make the bucks around here to go in hiding a little quicker for some reason. Guess they are more cowardly here than what they are lovers. So here in about a 2500 acres area - i know of no one who hunts does then because the talk between me and my neighbors we all pretty much don’t want to add pressure to the deer then except for bowhunting.
And the list goes on - now how to combat : I have my own opinion - I would prefer number one - shoot a doe before second or third buck requirement. Later doe season and even extend it into January some. (I do get the hey some bucks have dropped by then arguement as well. If you shoot a buck then make count towards the persons limit then for the next year.) I would also like to see a longer muzzleloading season - in which I think more does would be killed. Make it at least two weeks - i never get the chance to take my muzzleloader out anymore because I am normally busy that week. I just think there are things that could be done to work on the doe numbers in the areas where it is needed.
In my experience of hunting in 1 buck states, knowing and communicating with hunters in those states what it does is make people more selective in their home state and keeps them hunting for longer periods in their home state. I can't quote it of the top of my head but there are studies that show states with a 1 buck limit the "average" hunter hunts longer because they are more selective in what they do shoot.
I don't think OH, KY, and PA Game and Fish Departments planned their deer limit in order to help WV by pushing their successful hunters to WV to kill another deer.
gobbler's Link
I find it funny that a one buck limit promotes hunters to spend so much time in their home state because they will be much more selective. But then I hear other hunters talk about how the hunter from OH, KY and PA come here to WV to get their 3 scrub bucks - all these studies saying they are staying in their own states. The one thing I have learned about studies - is they normally tend to lean towards favoring the writers opinion.
Gobbler I have also heard from one buck state that it has hurt the hunting retail economy. You know like I said in one of my other post - we can continue to debate because there are facts out there that I guess we can use to support each of our sides.
But I have yet to see one thing that supports the success some of these one buck limit state are having is solely because they have one buck limits. There are so many reasons but the fact of the matter is they more than likely would have still happened if they had a 2 buck limit. Again prove to me that in our BOW ONLY counties that some of the monsters coming from there is because its one buck limit and not that it is because it bow only. Do you think there would be a drastic change in those 4 counties if they increased the limit to 2 but they remained BOW ONLY?
And i will agree with you that some hunters may become more selective because of a one buck limit but there will still be quite a few who just want to be successful and kill any buck.
Gobbler I do have a question for you - do we have a confirmed number landowners who hunt in WV yet? I was wondering if its a confirmed number or just an educated guess. Last year the number of deer hunters that are in WV is around 330,000 and that didn’t count landowners - seems to me we start counting landowners like PA does and we inch closer towards them. Plus - I don’t see where you have trouble in seeing how a one buck limit does not force the successful hunter to go to other states to continue to buck hunt.
In my opinion it should be obvious that PA is an outlier in terms of hunter density. The 330,00 or so number that you refer to includes landowners because every hunter regardless of license buyer or landowner has to have a DNR ID # to check any game in so with this being the 3rd year of e-check it's probably the most accurate number of hunters than we have ever had.
In my honest opinion, considering we are kinda comparing apples to oranges in the case of the 4 bow counties, but after hunting all 4 counties over 26 years I do think it would be different down there with a multiple buck limit. Exactly how much of a difference it's impossible to know but most of the hunters that I know or have known while hunting there are selective because of 2 reasons. 1. They only have 1 buck tag and 2. They know the buck of a lifetime could walk by at anytime. But, there is no doubt that being bow only is a big factor also.
Come to the panhandle and you will hear of similar numbers hunting as PA. There is one little farmette that I know of that is 45 acres and he allows 24 different people on it. Just here surrounding me i know of 230 acres that at least 11 hunters are on - heck 32 acres sounds pretty good to me!
LOL I was going to make the same comment about the good ole days - this site has been slow!
We cary the doe harvests across the state. I imagine bucks should be managed differently too. Never hunted a bow only county but I don't think it has the deer numbers to support a two buck limit. I think big changes would be seen in only a few years.
Again, I see both arguments about PA. For whatever reason the one buck deal didn't work but add in apr's and it has improved things. PA and some of your other better states have different zones with varying differences whether that is bag limits or hunter numbers.
Said all of that go basically say i don't see a statewide solution being the best option and no matter what it is impossible to satisfy all hunters when it comes to managing the deer herd.
Some people just want to fill tags. So if they have three buck tags they will kill three. If they only have one, then they will kill it and the other two live. Yes, someone else may kill them, but altogether there would be Bucks leftover that were normally killed.
Yes, those are just statewide averages. I'm sure in parts of the deep woods in both states there are areas with zero hunters per square mile.
Good debate buddy!! And good luck hunting this fall! BTW, I'll take any national recognition we can get
You claim people want to take Pennsylvania out of the equation, which I see no evidence of, so I want to discuss Pennsylvania from a different avenue.
How different would Pennsylvania be with a two buck or a three buck limit? You say you haven't seen any proof that a one buck limit is any better than a two buck so let's just hypothesize what would happen in Pennsylvania with a higher limit. One argument our DNR has is that so few kill a second or third buck that it doesn't matter so what would happen in Pennsylvania if they raised their limit?
Here's some info
Extra buck gun stamps(resident) 1999. 67,642 2015. 23,200. A 63% DECLINE!!!
Extra buck bow stamps (resident) 1999. 27,263 2015. 17,746. A 35% DECLINE!
License Revenue 1999. $15,493,693 2015. $14,948,081. LESS REVENUE THAN 16 years ago? How?
And a majority of those 8 states that have seen a decline in population have seen a decline in license sales well. But oh yes the reason for license sale drop is because of quality of our deer. Sorry I just don’t buy it.
JayD's Link