Three (3) to Two (2) Antlered Bucks per Hunter per Year
A Briefing Report
April 17, 2019
Background
The annual antlered buck bag limit was 5 from 1989 through 2004 with the one year exception of 1995. In 1995, the annual antlered buck bag limit was reduced from 5 to 2 by the Natural Resources Commission after 65% of the sportsmen that returned their annual Hunting, Fishing, and Trapping Regulations questionnaires approved of the idea. However, the Commission did not include the limit for the 1996 deer seasons, in part because of sportsmen expressing opposition to the regulation. The annual antlered buck bag limit was reduced from 5 to 3 antlered bucks by the Natural Resources Commission for the 2005 deer seasons and continues in effect to present. Currently, the total maximum annual bag limit for deer (excluding special Youth/Class Q, Urban, and State Parks hunts) in West Virginia is 11 deer. This current total annual bag limit of 11 deer may include no more than 3 antlered bucks. Maximum annual bag limits by season are currently as follows: 3 deer in archery season (2 of which may be antlered bucks), 2 deer in traditional buck firearms season of which both must be antlered bucks, 3 deer in antlerless season of which all must be antlerless deer, 2 deer in muzzleloader season of which both may be antlered bucks, and 1 deer in the Mountaineer Heritage season which may be a buck. Thus, WV hunters have an option to harvest up to 3 antlered bucks. Annual bag limits for antlered bucks of states surrounding West Virginia vary. Kentucky, Ohio, and Pennsylvania limit hunters to 1 antlered buck annually while Maryland and Virginia have their state divided into regions with separate antlered buck bag limits that give hunters the opportunity to harvest a maximum annual bag limit of 3 antlered bucks.
Evaluation Brief
The harvesting of adult males from a deer herd has little effect on subsequent year population as long as the majority of the animals are not taken prior to breeding. This practice has been the major reason deer populations have flourished in West Virginia and other states. The harvesting of the female segment of the population has a much greater effect on the subsequent year deer population, and must be monitored and adjusted according to desired deer density estimates to maintain stable deer population levels.
The setting of season lengths, time of year, gender restrictions and bag limits not only regulate the harvest of deer numbers, but manage the distribution and density of hunters and recreation opportunities. Although a large deer bag limit exists, a very small proportion of hunters reach this limit. An evaluation of hunter participation by season is presented in Table 1. Tracking individual hunters via the electronic game checking system indicate over 90% of successful hunters from the 2015 to 2018 deer seasons harvested less than 3 deer (Table 2). Further, over 98% of successful hunters harvested less than 3 antlered bucks (Table 3). Since a large proportion of West Virginia deer hunters harvest two or less antlered bucks it is unlikely that an annual 2 antlered buck bag limit would reduce the overall mortality of adult antlered bucks to influence antler size.
Most hunters judge the quality of deer by antler size. Antler development of deer is influenced by nutrition, age and genetics. Nutrition and age are the dominate contributing factors to antler development and in most practical situations, the only factors that can be addressed. Nutrition is determined by the quality of habitat and thus influenced by the density of deer. Age structure can be influenced by the annual proportion of yearling bucks removed from a population. Current accepted guidelines for quality buck management suggests no more than 50% of the adult male deer harvested should be yearlings. Wildlife agencies have adopted an annual one antlered buck bag limit and other harvest restrictions to reduce the mortality on the male deer population segment to achieve this 50% yearling harvest. Although limited, age information on harvested adult male deer in West Virginia collected at game checking stations clearly indicates that the percent of yearling bucks harvested in West Virginia is currently well within the quality buck guidelines of 50% (Figure 1).
The ability to change the distribution and density of hunters is important in managing deer populations that are unevenly distributed with regard to desired population densities. Given a finite number of hunters, bag limits, season timing, gender restrictions and recreation opportunities incentivize hunter participation by management unit (i.e. county) and result in increases or decreases of deer densities. However balancing these opportunities with biological and sociological realities is difficult.
A deer hunter participation survey conducted in 2017 indicated that 51% of all resident deer hunters participated in deer season combinations that would permit them to take more than 2 antlered bucks. Although hunters were not surveyed in 1995 when the 2 antlered buck limit was in effect, harvest records and license sales indicate that hunters that participated in multiple deer seasons do make choices either not to hunt or to hunt antlerless deer when the perception of success or opportunities to harvest antlered bucks is reduced (Table 4). Clearly hunter recreation and license sales revenue was altered by the “2 buck limit” of 1995. Thus it is estimated that hunter recreation days will decline and license revenue will decrease by approximately $220,000.00 if an annual 2 antlered buck limit is imposed on West Virginia deer hunters. Combining the altered license sales that resulted in 1995 and remembering the genesis of additional deer stamps was to increase antlerless deer harvest, the reduction of the annual antlered deer bag limit from 3 to 2 could lead to higher deer densities with poorer antler quality from less nutrition and habitat degradation.
Advantages of the Reduction: 1. There may be a perceived positive perception by the hunting public that the Division of Natural Resources is attempting to grow deer with larger antlers, a trait that most hunters desire. Disadvantages of the Reduction: 1. Present biological data indicates yearling antlered buck mortality is not excessive and any benefits to antler size would be minimal. 2. Only a small number of hunters harvest 3 antlered deer at the present time but perceived opportunity to pursue antlered bucks appears to be a strong motivation for hunters to deer hunt. 3. An adoption of this proposed change would be misleading to the public because it will not produce a noticeable shift in the age structure of bucks. Recommendation: The West Virginia Division of Natural Resources recommends that at the current time the maximum annual 3 antlered buck bag limit for the base license remain the same.
Figure 1. Percent yearling bucks in harvest for 1955-2017 (N=51,211 total bucks 1.5 years of age or older examined).
APPENDIX I
Impact of 2-antlered buck regulation on revenue compiled by Hall, Brown, and Crum 8\4\94 for Bob Miles.
LICENSE CLASS NUMBER LOST DOLLAR VALUE R-B 4,250 $42,500 RR-B 750 $18,750 R-G 8,300 $83,000 RR-G 1,700 $42,500 TOTAL 15,000 $186,750 ASSUMPTIONS: 1) 5,000 Bow hunters who prefer to buck hunt during bow season and also like to gun hunt will not buy R-B or RR-B stamps. 2) 10,000 Bow hunters who have killed 1 buck during bow season will not buy an R-G or RR-G because they won't be able to use it during gun season.
Note:?This briefing report evaluated the reduction of the total annual antlered buck bag limit from three (3) to two (2) while not changing any bag limits to the base license. Financial evaluations are different from previous briefing papers because previous requests included modifications to bag limits included with base licenses.
Pretty sure he said during the last meeting that lowering the limit to 2 would pretty much do nothing. Now I may not be exact on this but I think I am close - think he said going to a one buck limit would be devastating for WV.
I tend to agree with him on all of this - where I disagree with him is - I think he is ok with lowering the limit for the perception point of view for guys like you. To me that is just crazy to allow perception to be how our DNR is run.
Figure 1. Percent yearling bucks in harvest for 1955-2017 (N=51,211 total bucks 1.5 years of age or older examined).
APPENDIX I
Impact of 2-antlered buck regulation on revenue compiled by Hall, Brown, and Crum 8\4\94 for Bob Miles.
LICENSE CLASS NUMBER LOST DOLLAR VALUE R-B 4,250 $42,500 RR-B 750 $18,750 R-G 8,300 $83,000 RR-G 1,700 $42,500 TOTAL 15,000 $186,750 ASSUMPTIONS: 1) 5,000 Bow hunters who prefer to buck hunt during bow season and also like to gun hunt will not buy R-B or RR-B stamps. 2) 10,000 Bow hunters who have killed 1 buck during bow season will not buy an R-G or RR-G because they won't be able to use it during gun season.
Note:?This briefing report evaluated the reduction of the total annual antlered buck bag limit from three (3) to two (2) while not changing any bag limits to the base license. Financial evaluations are different from previous briefing papers because previous requests included modifications to bag limits included with base licenses.
Like you said very few kill 3 bucks but they buy the tags and it brings in more funds for running our DNR.
1- some of the best biologist in North America saying lowering the limit will not make a difference. The director agrees with them it won’t make a difference - it will only be a perception to do so!
2- we already have areas being managed for more mature deer. We have WMA that have antler restriction, the Wilson Cove deer study area. The 4 bowhunting only counties make up the largest bowhunting only area in the lower 48. Add that to the fact that every hunter in WV has the opportunity to shoot 3 bucks or they have that same opportunity TO NOT SHOOT 3. Plus there are more areas being added to that type of management.
3.i don’t have the numbers with me right now but I will look them up later for you. The states you mention - you realize they are losing hunters at a higher rate than WV - so it doesn’t seem like that change is doing so well for them.
I brought it up at the commission meeting at Cacapon a few days ago - we are in a fortunate situation here - we have the opportunity to do some research and see if lowering the limit or managing for more mature deer amounts to anything - let’s start collecting some data from our WMA areas that have some restrictions and those such as Sleepy Creek WMA that has none but has went through quite a bit of habitat improvement. There are some really nice bucks coming out of Sleepy Creek now.
Let’s let facts and data be our guidance and not perception - is all I am saying! If that data and our biologist determine that lowering the limit may have some significant effects then by golly you might get me to change my mine.
Yea I think the director was leaning to side with lower buck limit guys because they are a loud squeaky wheel - he was doing it because of perception and not what would be an outcome of significant improvement - I think that is sad to base anything off of perception.
You keep asking me question and I try to answer but then you won’t answer my questions. Why follow what other states are doing when they are losing hunters at a higher rate than what WV is?
Go back to one of my earlier post - wouldn’t it be nice to see some data from our WMA that have some of the restrictions in place and compare to those that don’t? Some good info could have come from that.
Combining the altered license sales that resulted in 1995 and remembering the genesis of additional deer stamps was to increase antlerless deer harvest, the reduction of the annual antlered deer bag limit from 3 to 2 could lead to higher deer densities with poorer antler quality from less nutrition and habitat degradation.
Haha. Remember the great habitat loss from 2005 when we reduced the buck limit from 5 to 3? Lol
Are we the only state in America that doesn't have a single county that kills more female than male deer?
Or maybe 5,000 Bow hunters who prefer to buck hunt during bow season and also like to gun hunt will not SHOOT A BUCK SO THEY CAN GUN HUNT.
Or 10,000 Bow hunters who have killed 1 buck during bow season will not buy an R-G or RR-G because they won't be able to use it during gun season will decide to kill an antlerless deer.
I tried to read all that, but just skimmed it over because i have seen and read it all before, straight from the same people (Biologists/Commissioners) who gave up all that. Your statement and posts are from anti- QDMA people, how about we (me) throw in a couple world renowned biologists...the ones who taught these guys, lets see what they say?
WV does have some very intelligent biologists...to bad their leader wont let them do their thing, and insists on just having "CRUMmy" deer and crum-my buck /doe ratios..Hopefully you can catch what i am throwing out about Crum? and his outdated policies..again, great back in the day, not now.....
The same people feeding this non-sense on lowering the numbers, tell all who is listening about how they in fact do pass bucks and have QDMA in place on there on place, but dont want others too? Why?
Again, we all have argued your outdated numbers and statements....As i am sure your buddys and the 1 criminal, put all this together in a cancel that we would "slip " up and say that the recent commission regs were a back door deal for limits......again its not..
You keep bringing up nobody shoots 3 buck, agreed....again...750/800 or so,,,,and again i will point out you cant measure how many 2nd bucks are killed knowing they have a 3rd tag..........or even that 1st tag knowing they just have 1 after......Lets impliment it for 7 years or so and see.......As stated , The Director said their would be minimal revenue lost if done now(then)....why not try? again, you and your group say you all only shoot 1maybe 2 bucks, use QDMA , what does it hurt? and before you say the avg hunter, i will say this, you guys shooting 2-3 buck , actually take away from the guy that works all the time and can only hunt a few days ( usually your excuse for not lowering) in that his buck was shot 3 days before, then the other yesterday..
Again, no back door deal............lets gets the new Commissioners in...then talk...Get our biys in there...LOL.....Since thats what everyone thinks....It will be an honor when i represent the people of WV ...LOL....again, kidding..
Man this talk of the lobbyist that I was told about by several people who were actually in Charleston sure has stirred some of you up!
I know you don’t like our biologist- this has been clear for years - when are you going to turn on the director? I would assume it’s coming - he said at the last meeting that lowering the limit would have no effect whatsoever. He said the guys running our deer program would be his dream team and some of the best in North America! You guys give our deer management a big ole fat juicy “F”. Seems like you all have a problem with the everyone not just our biologist.
Instead of repeating it here - go to the commission post - about the natural resources committee- answer that one for me. LOL I wanna hear some more bs from ya! ROFL
Lobbyist talk has stirred me up because it's literally crap you threw against the wall and hoped it would stick. Just say your side lost and the sportsmen will be better represented because of it.
LOL Cory true to your form it doesn’t surprise me! I already have told BOJ to be happy you all won. That’s the problem you all can never be happy.
You words and all the others who have responded here or by messaging me are proving what 514 was all about. My stance has all along been I don’t want to see the limit lowered because it doesn’t need to be and it won’t amount to a hill of beans if it is lowered. I don’t want our policies changed because of perception. Now you say my side lost - I thought this was about representation and not the limit? Keep talking - just continues to solidify what I and many others already knew.
Sure didn’t seem like we were represented when it was pulled from the natural resources committee. LOL just too funny. Again to make sure you see this and read it clearly - be happy your side won! It’s just sad that there has to be sides here - your’s is the rear-end side! LOL
You and your group have made it about sides since day 1, and continue to do so....Thats all you do..........Try and divide......
Before you make another incorrect inference
My side= those who supported sb 514
Your side= those who did not support sb 514
The rear end side? Really?
Again everyone I talked with was for representation for the whole state but it sure didn’t need to be done the way it was. I think there were quite a few better ways maybe if it had gone thru committee some better ways could have take place as well. But hey it wasn’t and here we are. I say time will tell if this was good for sportsman - you all are spiking the ball already. Guess what you might be able to rub it in my face later and say - ya see I told ya so - again time will tell.
You all are some sore winners for sure. Again be happy! Time will tell us what we need to know.
Yea the rear-end side - all I did was state what I had heard and believe me it’s not by people who any of you think it is. All you had to do is say oh wow really I don’t believe that. Nope you had to go and talk about crap and everything. Same ole same ole you always do when people don’t take your side.
The first day of rifle season used to sound like a war zone. In those days, you would have to shoot the first antlered deer you saw because the odds were you wouldn't see another for 2 weeks. If you didn't get one in the first couple of days, you didn't get one.
But today, times have changed. The number of shots one hears on the first day has gone WAY down. There just aren't the number of hunters anymore so bucks live longer and are growing nicer racks. Years ago, killing an 8 point of any size was a trophy. Now, its more the norm.
Today, I see the hunting world divided into 2 camps. 1) Those that hunt multiple days per year and 2) Those that get a week off and/or are weekend warriors.
Those that hunt multiple days are the ones I've seen more in favor of restrictions. They tend to believe more in the QDMA thinking and see the deer herd as "theirs" - akin to ownership of a free-ranging cattle herd per se. That's why they want restrictions - they don't like someone else killing off "their" herd. It's understandable, a lot of these folks put in small fortunes planting crops, cutting trees, etc. to build up the herd.
The weekend warriors or the Thanksgiving hunters aren't into this as much. They just want to fill their tag(s) and go home. Size doesn't really matter to them as much. These folks tend to oppose restrictions because it limits their ability to fill their tag.
The question becomes - which are there more of? Historically, its the weekend warriors. Probably still is. So, that's where the focus will be.
There are less hunters . As to why there is less shooting , I don’t think there’s any doubt a part of that is less hunters , but another part is that today people may not be shooting the first antlered buck they see. I would like to see a study on that.
I do think a lot more people are doing habitat work on their land whether it be food plots , TSI, etc. But I think it’s wrong to assume that they think any deer on their land is “their” deer. Yes, they improve their land to provide what deer need in hopes of holding them on their property but most know deer are free range and belong to the state until they are legally killed and tagged. Are there some that think it’s “their” deer, I’m sure there are but I think that’s the minority. There’s people that pick out hit listers that they try and focus on but I think most still realize they are free range and could just as easy be killed by someone 2 miles away during the rut. That’s just part of hunting and most realize that .
As far as what people want whether they hunt every chance they get or a weekend warrior, I would suggest to look at every survey and questionnaire done over the last several years and you will see that each and every one shows a majority of sportsmen and sportswomen support a lower buck limit .
I think we'll just disagree about "deer management" folks. Again, just going by my observations and even posts on here. Not to mention, it also goes against human nature. If I spend 20K fixing up my property by doing what all the horn porn stars on TV say - planting the latest, greatest crops, cameras on every corner of the property, hinge cutting, giving all the deer names, etc. it would be against human nature to not think of them as "mine". I've spent my money, I've done all the work, I've "raised" them since they were fawns, I've saved them until they meet my standards, etc. its hard for a person not to think that way. Especially when the shooting starts.
Let's say you and your two sons have bought the land next to mine. I've done all the work above. You and your two sons only have the first week of rifle season off and each has 2 or 3 tags to fill because that's what you eat year round. You guys aren't selective because you don't have time to be. It makes sense for me to get a little out of sorts when the deer I've been growing for 150+ get killed when they are 120-.
I read that on here all the time, in one form or another. I see and hear that out in the community from the people I talk to. People naturally want to shoot a bigger buck. But, in the end, will it (restrictions, numbers, etc) make any real difference? Is it worth it in the long run - for the deer, for the hunter, for the state?
But, at what point is a 125 not good enough? A 140? A 150?
I guess I'm not one of those guys who fell for the "horn porn". It was always about the experience. It was always about the story. I have several deer hanging up on my wall but most wouldn't be a deer most people would bother to hang on theirs. But each has a story.
As I stated before, its all about the time I get to spend outdoors. It's all about the experience. I have more time now than when I was younger but I try to make the most of it.
That's one of my worries about limits. It not only limits the deer you can kill, but it also limits the amount of time you would get to spend hunting. I think that is something most people haven't thought about. Plus, it would make people focus more on the size of the horn and less on the story that goes with it.
A friend of mine has an 11 year old son. Has already killed several bucks with crossbow, rifle, and muzzleloader. Now, he wants to hold off for a "big one". At what point does the kid not kill any more deer because they aren't "big enough" and quit hunting in frustration?
As more people begin doing some form of QDMA on their own little private land, I've noticed that less and less allow others to hunt their land. Hunter access is one of the biggest detriments to hunting there is. Others with bigger spreads lease out their land and only allow those within the clique to hunt.
All these things are hurting hunting as it is. Doing something that would lessen the time spent afield of those few who still do, I have to question. I'm not set one way or the other, just want what is best for new hunters rather than me because they are the future of this sport and our state.
I know lots of guys and girls that actually spend more time in the woods because they’re looking for a mature buck.
I’ve spent countless hours in the WV woods since 2015 and have killed 3 bucks in WV. 2 bow and 1 rifle. Each year I could have killed 3 bucks in 3 days of hunting.
The majority of the successful guys that kill the big deer in the bow counties hunt a lot. They’re not shooting the 2 yr old 8 Pt that walks by first day. And they may go a few years before they shoot one. Doesn’t keep them out of the woods and doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy each hunt. They don’t shoot the small ones because they know there are bigger ones there and that’s what keeps them going back. I know some people are hung up on a certain score but I think most are just wanting a chance to hunt mature bucks whatever the score might be.
I know lots of guys and girls that actually spend more time in the woods because they’re looking for a mature buck.
I’ve spent countless hours in the WV woods since 2015 and have killed 3 bucks in WV. 2 bow and 1 rifle. Each year I could have killed 3 bucks in 3 days of hunting.
The majority of the successful guys that kill the big deer in the bow counties hunt a lot. They’re not shooting the 2 yr old 8 Pt that walks by first day. And they may go a few years before they shoot one. Doesn’t keep them out of the woods and doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy each hunt. They don’t shoot the small ones because they know there are bigger ones there and that’s what keeps them going back. I know some people are hung up on a certain score but I think most are just wanting a chance to hunt mature bucks whatever the score might be.
We have counties where deer population is high enough to legally kill 9 does but in those counties a person can kill up to 3 bucks and not a single doe. I’m not sure that’s the right approach for a healthy herd in regards to buck/doe ratio AND maintaining a herd that is in balance of the carrying capacity of their habitat.
Doe meat is as good as buck meat.
I’ve been keeping records on my place since 2015 we’ve killed 4 bucks and 48 antlerless deer during that period of time .
Still think it would be interesting to seeing how Sleepy Creek WMA is comparing to the other WMA that have restrictions in place - where Sleepy Creek has had quite a bit of habitat improvement done over the past 15 to 20 years. JR again you would not recognize some of Sleepy Creek anymore with the grouse restoration projects and timbering done. Still need to work on the food plots some - a couple of us are working on that though. I still think the path to better hunting for all here would be better land and timber management across the state. We probably lost a great opportunity to improve our National Forest since we had the previous administration who was eliminating regulation - I don't see that type of opportunity happening under the current administration.
So since the buck harvest has been dropping dramatically - and apparently some think we need less bucks harvest - just what is that number?
I still think WV DNR is getting it right - maybe not perfect but offering something to all. WV has the largest bow only area in the lower 48. Quite a few of our WMA have restrictions and you have the WIlson Cove deer study area. There are many tracts of lands now that are leased where members can manage as they wish. There are more areas being added to these areas as well such as the Canaan area, plus more are being talked about. Then just through education and many learning from TV or magazines - hunters are changing the way they hunt or what they want to harvest. But for those others who want to be able to hunt for a second or third buck in WV - they can do so and it effects others hardly any at all. The numbers back that up! All the bubba's in WV are not killing 3 spike bucks and every out of stater does not as well.
Again numbers show that the buck harvest has dropped dramatically, numbers show that very few kill 3 bucks or even two. Heck the numbers show that anymore very few hunters even kill one buck!
LOL just love the call that WV needs to change the product they are offering and we would have hunters coming in from all over to hunt here. Funny thing is when you look at the numbers from the US Fish and Wildlife Services - those other states that surround us are losing hunters at faster clip than WV. Again maybe look at why more bear stamps are being sold?
For some though we need to follow the path of perception instead of the data or numbers.
One, raising the price for tags to compensate for lost revenue simply isn't good economics. It actually has a counterproductive result by reducing the number of hunters in an already shrinking market. More simply put, you're pricing a certain demographic out of hunting. Most likely, they'll just begin to hunt illegally.
Second, where are these out-of-state hunters going to be allowed to hunt? It's extremely difficult for even resident hunters to find anyone that will allow them to hunt good private land. Now, with lots of folks following this QDMA stuff and spending thousands of dollars in the process, are they suddenly going to start letting several folks hunt their farms and killing off what they've spent thousands of dollars to raise?
Third, as JayD has mentioned, WV has 4 counties that are bow only. The only problem is, as has been mentioned, a person may hunt there for 3 weeks or 3 years and never even see a deer, much less kill one. Most folks have watched these horn porn shows to the point they want to star in a show of their own making. You see these guys with 3 or 4 cameras filming everything from every angle. How they have time to kill a deer by moving and adjusting all these cameras is beyond me. But, its doubly worse when you get skunked day after day or you never see "Gigantor" or whatever silly name they've given a certain deer (he must have been poached by the neighbors - that's always the fallback answer). That's not how it works on the horn porn channel. Some advice, just go to one of those hunting preserves, bang a couple of pots together, and wait for the deer you want to mosey on by. He'll even wait while you adjust your cameras. It'll save you money in the long run and you'll have a trophy you can show the guys on your cell phone.
An the old we want horn porn gets old as well.....Thats a JayD crew terminology,,,Why go to a high fence canned hunt when WV can have good bucks on its own, if people would quit being greedy or shoot some does...But its to easy just to make dumb comments like that.
Again, its not biologically sound to kill more bucks than does year after year...Show me a study that says that? That continued 2-1 buck to does kills will work ? I will wait..
Show me a study that says a prolonged 3 month rut is good, or a 3 month fawn birthing cycle will work....Again, i will wait..
Like it or not, times are changing and more and more people see what shooting more does, less bucks will do . They pass more and more young bucks to do that as well..
And with the times changing, so will the buck limit in WV, eventually.....In typical WV fashion we will wait until the damage has been done and will take a decade or longer to fix, because that's what we in WV are good at, being last in everything that is good, and first in everything that is bad....
If buck limits dont matter, and no one kills a 3rd buck, then lets just make the limit 2 bucks a day, unlimited tags at $25 each and see how much money we can raise, and keep the balance in check.....Thats what it sounds like when you all say it doesnt matter
To begin, I'm not coming on here to get into some petty "us versus them" 5th grade playground squabble. I'm not on anyone's "side" but my own. These are my own views and nothing else.
That being written, there are some things you and I agree on. Some we don't.
First, I don't agree that there needs to be a change in license price. As you say, there is no budget shortfall so there's no reason to change anything. I have no problems with the DNR or wardens and have never mentioned it on here at all. But to say, "we need to lower limits and raise tag prices because we haven't done it in X years" just doesn't make good economic sense. Allow me to explain... We agree that WV is last (or close to it) in a lot of good things. Using the latest Census information I could find (2016) WV had a population of 1.8 million. That number has gone down and we can all agree this next census numbers will show it. Our median age is 42 and that number is likely to rise slightly (compared to 38 nationally). Our median household income is 43K compared to about 57.5K nationally. We have roughly 1 in 5 who live below the poverty line (18% compared to 14 nationally). What do these numbers tell us? We're a state with an aging population on very small incomes. Raising tag prices would be detrimental to our DNR. The way it is now, a person buys his license and any additional tags have to be bought before the season begins. This is good because 1) most hunters aren't filling their tags and 2) it works the same as a de facto license increase. By arbitrarily raising tag prices, it causes that hunter who buys his tags early, in January let's say, to think to himself "well, I didn't kill any extra deer the last few years and had to eat those tags, now I won't buy any extra tags at those prices". It's created an opportunity cost that he isn't willing to accept anymore. Now, that budget begins to become a shortfall. Yes, you get more deer but you also create a host of other problems with it. For example, WV has some of the highest car insurance rates in the country (maybe the highest - it was a few years ago) because of all the car/deer collisions. What will happen to insurance prices if this goes through? Less income means an even greater shortage of wardens because of layoffs. I could go one but this is just a few things most people don't see or even consider. They only think about Harvey Wallhanger and what needs to be done to best help them get him.
Second, we disagree on the horn porn. I like that term because it describes a certain group of hunters very well. These are the folks that spend small fortunes on all the newest fads, gadgets, seed crops, etc. All because so and so in Buckmaster magazine or the Outdoor Channel swears will work. And these people are the "experts". You can tell because they kill a 150 every week! What they don't tell you is their hunting is "canned" just like you or me going to a high fence hunting preserve and doing it. How many times can a person fall for that hunter killing that huge deer he's been after on the last day in the last 5 minutes of the hunt? C'mon! WV is the only state with bowhunting only counties. Notice how you don't see those "porn stars" coming to Wyoming County to hunt? Think there might be a reason? Yet, the average Joe falls for that silly garbage, spends his fortune, then gets mad when 150's don't show. Obviously, it just HAS to be because their neighbor killed him with his 15 tags or his other neighbor poached it. Next, we agree and I believe that everyone should be free to determine what constitutes a trophy in their own eyes. I don't want anyone - not you, the DNR, Jayd or anyone else to make that decision for me. Just as you don't want me mandating it for you. The "stats" are just a way to make that argument, no matter the logic behind it. If the government says its 1, 3, or 5 so be it - that's the law. If that law is based on good, sound policy that benefits everyone and everything I'm all for it. But, to arbitrarily change it, just to appease the loudest Joe Smoe in the room, whose only bottom line is a bigger buck to hang on his wall, I'm not. And that's what I see from most people.
We also agree that more does should be killed. The state has done about everything it can to make it as cheap and easy as possible to do so. Now, it just becomes a matter of choice to do it. It benefits everything and everyone. About the only thing the state can do they haven't is just ban buck hunting altogether for x year(s). Of course, we both know that'll never happen. Personally, I haven't killed a buck (in any season) since 2017. Not because there hasn't been opportunities; it's because I've wanted to thin the doe herd. It's been my choice, and that's what I want to keep - choice.
A lot of the other stuff you wrote I'm not going to respond to because I never wrote any of that. I think you have either confused me with someone else or just lumped me in with them. It (limits) does matter. But a balance has to be had - between the resource, the people, and the money. It isn't as simple as choosing between X and Y to get Z. Anything you tweak affects something else, most of the time negatively. All of this, along with their opportunity costs, have to be weighed in the whole - no matter what Joe Smoe with the loudest voice wants.
If the goal is to get the deer population down in a certain area, besides making them a flat fee, the state could also offer buy as you go doe tags until the kill numbers get addressed instead of having to buy any before the season. Hunters could then share extra meat with family and neighbors. Might incentivize it a little more, especially with the rising cost of groceries and the likelihood of inflation in the near future. Everyone and everything wins.
Let a nice 10 go the first morning that probably would have been my biggest to date. My uncle killed it that evening and it was his biggest. Helped him track it. I was hunting for a deer that others had seen that would have gone 160 or better (I never saw it once). If not that, then a doe. I got the doe.
Missed a great opportunity on a drop tine with my bow but that's another story...
hoppies56's Link
WV has some great public hunting areas and there’s no shortage of it. Most of it is underutilized.
It’s not 1800 anymore, we have 330 million people in the USA and it’s increasing daily. There is a finite amount of land. Our country is based on private property and the landowners have a right to decide what they do with their property. The majority of loss of hunting privileges are due to liability concerns, destruction of property, and trashing up a place. Just because someone manages their property doesn’t automatically mean they don’t let people hunt.
There are many reasons that have some input into the loss of hunters and in my opinion the main factor is lack of success. Again we have went from killing almost 100,000 buck during gun season to the mid to high 30,000! Yes, we had too many deer but with the drop in harvest by over half - did anyone really think we would not lose some hunters? Yet even though in just 18 to 19 years we have decreased the number of bucks harvested by over 60,000+ - there are still calls to lower the limit.
I think the thing that upsets me most is misleading info that is put out. It wasn't that long ago I was for lowering the limit to 2 because I heard many or here and elsewhere say way too many hunters were killing 3 bucks. Then I starting searching to see just how many hunters were doing it and found it it was about 1/3 of 1% of hunters who kill 3 bucks and a little over 2% kill 2 bucks.
Yet we continue to hear the misleading info - it went from calls of too many killing 3 bucks - to when the real numbers came out - the switch was on - well heck no one is killing 3 bucks so why do it! LOL Great switch-a-roo! Then there is the ole - we need to change the product because we are losing too many hunters. So I am not going to post the numbers here because I will be accused of lying by some - so I will just tell those of you who want the truth -just go to the US Fish and Wildlife historical licenses sales page. You will see as I did that those states who some want us to change our product to - LOL they are losing more hunters than WV and at a higher rate! Then one of the whoppers of them all - all my gosh we have a 3 month long - prolonged rut! ROFL Most of our does are bred during November just like with most of the states surrounding us. And the states surrounding us - yes they too have some does that don't get bred during November and it goes into January as well. Its mother nature at her works - but yet some will try to convince others this is a problem and the sad part is some will listen to these tall tales!
Fact of the matter is WV is doing something for all of us - its just that some like to complain and will always complain. Fact one is: the average age of bucks harvested in WV has gone up. Number 2: around 700 hunters kill a third buck across the whole state - so "NO" your neighbors are not killing all of the bucks. 3: WV offers a lot of public land for us to hunt and if you don't own land there are quite a few opportunities out there to lease land across the state. Plus there are quite a few areas restricted for trophy hunting if that is what you want to do.
The one thing I would like to see is a better system that allows us all to see the facts and data - and not the tall tales that like to be spun by some.
BOJ please tell me when I have used the term porn horn? I will be waiting a long time for that as usual with you.
We’ve got counties where a doe is required before a 2nd buck can be taken . Monroe is one of those counties. I noticed for first time since I can remember a few more doe were killed with a rifle than there were bucks killed with a rifle. That’s a good thing. Helps even out buck /doe ratio and keeps population more in line with available habitat . We also have areas where deer populations are low and we don’t need a high doe limit or harvest in those areas.
We have counties where we can legally kill 9 does but people can kill 1-2-3 bucks without having to kill a single doe. There wouldn’t be a 9 doe limit if the biologists didn’t think the deer herd in those counties couldn’t tolerate ( or need) a higher doe harvest but yet nothing is required. Little things like requiring at least one doe being required before 2nd or 3rd buck would improve the herd
Like I said, what you do with your choices and your money doesn't bother me at all. Keep doing what you're doing if it makes you happy. That's what it's all about.
