South Carolina Bill S. 454 to Establish Hunting Limits of 4 Bucks & 4 Does, Feb. 2015

Scrub Buck said:

Wonder how long it takes Ga. to smarten up? Best thing I have seen in along time as far as it comes to responsible management of a deer herd. Getting a true harvest total that holds hunters accountable for breaking the law.

Click to expand...

yea , another law will certainly stop lawbreakers.

A DEER HERD . A DEER HEARD. A DEER cERD.

RECRUITMENT ! BLAH BLAH . What you been reading anyway?

Exactly where is the Georgia DEER HERD tonight????? There ain't no singular deer herd tonight, last night, and never will be. If we need some. Some will jump the Savannah and be here in the morning. I sent enough over there , ya'll can send some back if need be.

I'm not really surprised by the replies on here. Some think that hunting is about the number of deer they see instead of the right number of deer there should be.

sman said:

I know a guy who killed 30 last year and about 50 this year. Sees deer every time he goes. Reminds me of GA in the early 90s before the invasion.

Click to expand...

I know three guys that hunt every day. They own land and rent / and/or have permission to hunt on family land a lot more land. They are within a three mile radius of me. They kill one about everyday. More than what they own and rent could support per acre wise. If I was to worry about it, it might drive me crazy or crazy jelous. They been doing it for 15 -25 years. I'll admit, none go to waste. The old widows do have to pay the processing fee for the meat though, most/some times. It has not affected me and I live in the middle of them. How about the guy that rents ten acres and kills just one? Raises cain if he hears a dog bark way off? Acts like a bigshot big land owner?? Wants to stawmp but ox if you step foot on it? Calls you a poacher/trespasser for setting foot on it for whatever good reason? How about if he kills two? He is also overshooting what the habitat can produce, or in modern terms is "sustainable" . So there you go, Take over, I'm listening with an open mind.
I got no problem with declaring how many deer you kill in a season, same as me about ducks. The purpose is a true Census. That's all. It's legal, so declare it. Used to be when I duck hunted hard and the season would not go so good, I might have a tendancy to lie and claim I was doing better than what I did. All they need is a true Census. Not have to adjust 50% up or down for imbaciles and nitwits. We'll end up with another Gloable Worming Fiasco adjusting data if so.

And you really believe passing another law is going to get the truth out of liers?

NCHillbilly said:

QDM: turning wild deer into livestock in a state near you.

Click to expand...

Im LOLing while I kind of dis agree. But not strong enough to be disagree - able. I don't agree that QDM is Ag oriented , which whether I like it or not , Agriculture is a science, like it or not. Ag has a plenty of opportunities to see who's hypothesis has dome been decided. For example, a many years ago, No-til farming was coming(excuse the play on words ) seeds planted needs not a lot of Foreplay(disking) to sprout. That went against a lot of Ag teaching about a "well prepared seed bed". So there was quite a commotion , research trials were done for years. Low and behold as a student in SC, I decided that KMC was the best notill planter going. KMC was manufactured in Alabama , for ya'll with no history knowledge much. It was a dang good unit and a bunch sold here before the researchers ever realized it and passed judgement in writing about it , Except for Alabam. Seems they had always recognised it for the best even before the research started. But that led to a question in researcher's mind, What was going on?? Maybe payoffs? Maybe tenureships? . Maybe just supporting their home team. ??? I am here to tell you after all them years it was the best one on the market at the time and it should not have took researchers years to get it figured out. And I don't, and never have owned a nickel of stock in it and ain't got a clue how they are doing today.

So NCHillbilly, I take issue but not dis agreement with you. Agreed, QDM is not science based.Nor Ag. Trouble is, it has been around so long, it would have caught on better if it was that much superior. Snatch some wisdom from Revelations and some from Genesis, a little smacklin from the Koran and native Americans and some from Budah and you get QDM with a sales pitch. Bless their heart.

For example, In the past ten seconds I look out the back door and find a doe and a yearling in my garden. I could have got two in thirty steps of my back door with buckshot in one shot, Most of the blast noise would have come back in the house. My closest neighbor is 1/4 mile and he asleep likely. #1 its a doe and yearling. #2 its out of season. #3 I have lived here all my life and deer hunted some and coon hunted lots and I ain't never shot a deer at night in my life. So! what you gonna do about suspected, possible, illegal activities???? Write a LAW ? Require me to move to the city for the State's DEER HERD! ????????? See you in the funny papers chum.

Before I start, I ask for all forgiveness from ALL Ga and SC hunters. My mother was from McDonough and wound up in Fl where I grew up for 42 yrs. I'm an outdoorsman through n through, I hunted about 10-15 yrs, then started hunting in Ga, ( the forgiveness part), I have gone by all rules n regs while hunting here. To me it's the respect part of my mother, I have always felt that I was "from" Ga. and proud of that. As far as hunting Fl, I did it with dogs, still hunted, blinds, sat covered on the ground. I will tell you unequivocally it's the hardest type of hunting you can do. Swamps, been neck deep in them, literally. Tracked deer in the worst you can imagine. Now to the real topic. Fl can kill a buck a day, in the last few yrs they have gotten more doe days, during archery was really the only time you could swing away so to speak before that. The mentality was so bad that it got to "brown it's down" and start a chicken train to get the deer out. Guys just wanted to be able to hunt, feed their families... Fl still has a way to go to get things right. Whatever that is... I've hunted SC and found its pretty much the same as Fl. The differences I've seen is the self-regulation of the hunt clubs which I fully agree with. Yes, as hunters we have more of a grasp of what is real vs research. I spend over 45 days a season hunting deer, I've seen over 65 per season, yes maybe the same but we're not on first name bases either but I know some I had already seen before. I'm not a trophy hunter headgear wise but will not turn it down either. If it's legal to shoot, I'm shooting arrows, maxi-ball, or hot lead at it... No matter what, I can watch it walk or watch it fall. The choice is mine... My thoughts are this: yes I want be in the woods chasing whitetails or turkeys or small game. I am a steward of the land and believe that to my core. My decisions depend on what DNR has made in the rules and that's where it lies. I would like to shoot everything that comes in front of me, common sense says that's irresponsible. As far as meddling with seasons, dates, quotas, it's a necessary evil. If YOU want things different than what we are being given then step up to the plate and make your way into the DNR, legislation that help make those changes. We are no longer in the old days of self-regulation, think Great Plains Bison and ol' Teddy Roosevelt, we almost eliminated them completely. We have an obligation to try to better conserve our wildlife for not just us but for future generations and yes even "invaders" as some have put it. Some things work and some don't, hopefully we have the common sense to correct that when we see it. History has shown the unexplainable way how people thought and believed back then and were some proven to be completely ridiculous. Maybe that's what we are seeing now, and hopefully a better outcome will happen. Until then, we are stuck with what is decided. Don't forget- there are open forums that each of us can attend to voice our thoughts, disagreements, and even offer something outside the box that could lead to something better. Food for thought my fellow hunters...

There are several issues that should be considered before rushing out and changing deer limits that have been set in place for decades. Remember, the all-time high of 1 Million animals occurred while there was an unlimited buck harvest in the low country.

First, is there really a problem with our current deer herd that justifies an arbitrary 4 deer limit on buck deer? When the deer herd was slightly over 1 million, the DNR was doing all they could to reduce the herd size and in many counties 20-22 doe days were authorized and two does could be harvested on each day. If the DNR wanted the doe harvest decreased when the herd was at 1 million animals and the deer herd is now at 750,000 animals what does the DNR believe is the proper number for our statewide herd? It is foolish to pass a four doe and four buck limit if we have no idea what the proper balance should be.

According to the DNR the SC deer herd is currently 750,000 animals. This number is down from the all- time high of 1 million animals and that all time high occurred between 1998 and 2002. The DNR indicates that the reduced numbers of animals is a product of mature pine habitat, coyotes, and liberal antlerless permits. Of particular note, the DNR does not mention that the unlimited buck season found in the Low Country is a cause of herd reduction. You can see this information for yourself on the DNR website: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/2013DeerHarvestReport.html

The DNR also indicates that the deer herd grew rapidly from 1972 to 2002. During this time period there was always an unlimited buck season in the low country. This information demonstrates that having an unlimited buck season has no detrimental impact on herd growth. This information can been seen here at the DNR web page: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/2013DeerHarvestTables.pdf#page=18

The DNR indicates that fawn mortality in S.C. is 70% and that coyotes account for 80% of that mortality. This means that 7 out of every 10 fawns do not survive to maturity and that coyotes are accounting for the bulk of those deaths. It is likely that bobcats and automobiles account for most of the remainder, but that is just my guess, not direct info from the DNR.

The DNR also indicates that they performed a three year study in which intensive trapping was conducted on properties to determine what impact it would have on fawn mortality. The study indicates that aggressive coyote trapping resulted in a 40% decrease in fawn mortality. This means that during aggressive trapping the fawn mortality is 30% instead of 70%. Apparently Senator Campsen was unaware of this study or ignored it before he came up with the arbitrary number of an 8 deer limit. You can see this information from the DNR about coyotes and trapping here: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/2013DeerHarvestTables.pdf#page=18

The DNR currently only allows three months of trapping and requires a $25 permit to trap coyotes. With coyotes having such a tremendous impact on fawn mortality, I do not understand why there is any fee required for trapping coyotes and why the trapping season is just three months long. Assuming trappers could have as much success trapping coyotes in the 9 months that the trapping season is closed as they do during the 3 months of open season, trapping alone could increase the coyote harvest by a very substantial amount and bring the fawn mortality rate up to very desirable numbers.

The DNR should put a bounty on coyotes and open trapping season for 12 months out of the year. Bounties have worked in the past to eradicate the Wolf from the western United States and a bounty was used in Louisiana to reduce the Nutria by hundreds of thousands of animals. In the case of the Nutria, Louisiana offered $3 per Nutria tail and many Cajuns made extra money by shooting and trapping the Nutria. If there are no funds available to offer a cash bounty for the coyotes, then a free doe tag could be offered for every coyote tail submitted or whatever number of coyote tails the DNR feels justifies the issuance of a doe tag. Hunters and the DNR need to come up with a workable solution to the coyote problem or else we will forever have problems with fawn mortality.

Additionally the DNR should allow less restrictive night hunting for coyotes. Though night hunting is currently allowed during the deer season it is only allowed with a bow and arrow, a pistol, a .22 rimfire or shotgun with BB's. These are hardly effective weapons for the taking of coyotes. Night hunting for coyotes can be conducted after the deer season but it must be done from an elevated stand 10 feet above the ground. These rules are far too restrictive for effective coyotes hunting. Many other states offer night hunting for coyotes, and therefore, considering the tremendous impact coyotes are having on our deer herd the DNR should allow less restrictive night hunting for coyotes.

Senatory Campsen was recently quoted in the State Newspaper as saying: “We're hoping [the bill will mean] better deer and better hunting experiences on private and public land. I hope it will help encourage an ethic that focuses on harvesting mature bucks in their prime and letting young deer who haven't reached their prime grow into those trophies you can be proud of.”

Additionally Senator Campsen said: "We have a small percentage of hunters who kill 20-30 deer a year. This will be very effective in letting some bucks grow up. I'll bet I let six or eight (8-point bucks) walk this year. I'd rather kill a really nice one. By reducing the number of bucks an individual can take we're going to increase the population. If you let a small buck walk, he's going to grow into a nice buck you can harvest. If we harvest more mature deer, we'll have a better, more quality deer herd.”

Senatory Campsen clearly has a Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA) agenda, and in fact, QDMA supports this Bill. Senator Campsen admits he passed up eight 8 point bucks, but yet, that was not good enough for him. It is hard to imagine a person who passed on eight 8 point bucks complaining about the condition of the deer herd. Apparently, Senator Campsen does not enjoy taking a deer unless it's a "trophy". During my visits to deer processors in Bamberg County I see lots of smaller bucks ready for processing. I have never heard any of the hunters taking these smaller deer complain that there hunting experience was not rewarding, in fact, most were taking pictures with friends and family and anticipating enjoying some tasty venison. Senator Campsen and the QDMA clearly want to impose their ideals and agenda on the entire state.

Senator Campsen and the QDMA are not satisfied that they can and do operate under QDMA guidelines on their own leases, they want everyone to fall in line with their agenda as well. As you can see from his quote above, Senator Campsen also wants more “quality deer” on WMA lands. I guess it is not enough for him that multitudes of WMA’s such as Crackerneck already impose antler restrictions. There are literally thousands of WMA acres where a man can hunt on WMA lands that have imposed some sort of QDMA style restrictions, yet this is not enough for the QDMA crowd. In a nutshell, Senator Campsen wants a four buck limit so hunters so that the entire state will fall in line with the QDMA principles he mentioned in his interview with The State Paper.

I have no qualms with QDMA hunters who choose to shoot only mature bucks on their own leases; however, I do resent their efforts to pass this Bill so that their personal agenda will be promoted statewide, especially when they know that unlimited buck limits have no detrimental impact on the deer population as is evidenced by the all-time record that was set in 1998-2002 when unlimited buck harvests had been in place for decades.

Holy wall of text batman

slidellkid said:

The DNR indicates that fawn mortality in S.C. is 70% and that coyotes account for 80% of that mortality. This means that 7 out of every 10 fawns do not survive to maturity and that coyotes are accounting for the bulk of those deaths. It is likely that bobcats and automobiles account for most of the remainder, but that is just my guess, not direct info from the DNR.

Click to expand...

This is incorrect, South Carolina's average recruitment rates are much higher than this, in fact they are higher than Georgia's. Those recruitment rates were documented only on the Savannah River Site research project and do not apply statewide.

Page 35
http://www.qdma.com/uploads/pdf/2015_WR.pdf

C.Killmaster said:

This is incorrect, South Carolina's average recruitment rates are much higher than this, in fact they are higher than Georgia's. Those recruitment rates were documented only on the Savannah River Site research project and do not apply statewide.


Page 34-35

http://www.qdma.com/uploads/pdf/2015_WR.pdf

TRENDS IN FAWN RECRUITMENT RATES

Click to expand...

Good point. South Carolina is in the Top 5 for U.S. fawn recruitment rates.

Let's include images from the annual 2015 QDMA Whitetail Report to make it easier to view above.

Hey we have the same recruitment rate as Illinois!