Whitetail State Harvests, Georgia in Top 5 for Buck, Doe, & Highest Fawn %, Jan. 2015

[TurkeyDreamer]

^^^ +1. Page 8 is what really concerns me. We are at the top of antlerless harvest and second in antlerless harvest per square mile. Add these to being a top five fawn harvest (an indication to me hunters don't exactly know what they're shooting at...could be buck or doe) and no wonder why we are seeing a declining deer population.

I personally have decided not to shoot any does on our family land the past two seasons. Even my little girl who hunts with me has no interest in shooting a doe even though it would be relatively easy. She's already learned the importance of patience and restraint in hunting.

 

[DAVE]

Georgia has a great deer herd and very good deer hunting. The DNR has done a great job on bringing the herd to what it is today. Despite the predictions of doom and gloom from key board biologist I feel the DNR will continue to do a great job if hunters will let them.

 

[mauser64]

The good thing is that we hold the answer right in our own grubby little paws. Herd numbers can rebound ( where needed ) very quickly........if we let it.

 

[7Mag Hunter]

i'm not sure placing #1 in antlerless deer harvest is something to be proud of. Imo that can't last long.

x-2.......

 

[Lilly001]

State to state rankings mean very little on the local level.
Each hunters own experience is the perspective each knows to be true.
As I have said many time Ga. is way to large and diverse a state to have it be managed in two sections. The state needs more of a local, maybe even county by county, management.
The harvest in one area may be appropriate or even to low, while in another area no does and a severe limit on bucks may be better suited.
I say let the DNR have the authority to set limits on a more local level.
And realise that that may mean NO does in some areas.

 

[quality hunter]

There are many hunters that are not aware of this site so they have no clue what's going on so they continue to shoot every doe they see. Unless the limit is reduced no matter how many doe days we have hunters will continue to deplete the herd!

 

[shdw633]

There are many hunters that are not aware of this site so they have no clue what's going on so they continue to shoot every doe they see. Unless the limit is reduced no matter how many doe days we have hunters will continue to deplete the herd!

I keep hearing hunters talk about reducing the doe limit but there is some math here that you have to understand. This article will show a lot of that:

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/forecasts/georgia-deer-hunting-forecast-2014/

Basically in a nutshell you have nearly 300,000 gun hunters in Georgia last year, not including bow and muzzleloader. If each one of those hunters shot just 1 doe you have 300,000 does dead.....just 1. The issue here is not the limit but the number of hunters that you have in the state, which increased from the season before. Leases that 10 years ago only needed 5 to 10 members, now require twice if not 3 times the members just to pay their leases. Now figure in the pressure that others put on everyone about not shooting a young buck and only harvesting mature whitetails or rules of leases that restrict the harvest of younger deer, that takes a lot of deer out of the picture in regards to an individuals meat harvest goals. Tack on the pressures that come along with wanting/needing to bring home some meat for all the time/money and effort that you put in and who comes out on the losing end of this equation.....the doe. It's not a bunch of hunters out slaughtering 10 to 12 deer a year; although there are some out there, it is most hunters taking just 1 or 2 that can cause this.

IMO, unless you go to a draw system where you know exactly how many does are to be killed due to the number of tags you allow out each season or you reduce the doe days down dramatically, which will limit the number of opportunities you have to harvest the doe, this trend will continue. That being said you have to also consider the economic impact of making those types of decisions. Considering the number of does that can be potentially harvested per year and the numbers of hunters out there that could potentially harvest them (10 x 300,000+!!!) I think the number killed is quite acceptable, as does the State of Georgia, according to what was stated in the above article.

 

[DrWally]

I don't see how those numbers are accurate. Ive never been polled on how many deer I killed. Don't personally know anybody that has either.

X2- these are just estimates no one really knows the factual numbers

I am not seeing any decline in deer population in GA where I look for them.

 

[Atlanta Dawg]

Yes !

X2- these are just estimates no one really knows the factual numbers

I am not seeing any decline in deer population in GA where I look for them.

I completely agree-that has totally been my experience and have been hunting in Georgia for 24 seasons. The lowest point I can recall was in 1993 where on the lease I currently have and in which I was a member at that time was 13 kills in total. We now average 42 deer each season and have for the past 8 seasons with fewer members than were present in 1993. This is the exact same land-I have operated this lease myself since 1995 at which time the club was disbanded because there were no deer !

At one time I had a boss who's most often repeated quote was :

It Ain't The Land-It's The Man" !

If a hunter lacks skill or enthusiasm or is unwilling to plant food plots, trim shooting lanes, relocate stands when areas dry up, or just won't hunt because they aren't seeing anything it is on them-not the deer !

But-----it is what it is and we are where we are !

 

[mguthrie]

State to state rankings mean very little on the local level.
Each hunters own experience is the perspective each knows to be true.
As I have said many time Ga. is way to large and diverse a state to have it be managed in two sections. The state needs more of a local, maybe even county by county, management.
The harvest in one area may be appropriate or even to low, while in another area no does and a severe limit on bucks may be better suited.
I say let the DNR have the authority to set limits on a more local level.
And realise that that may mean NO does in some areas.

They've already done this. The state is broke up into DMU's. Mountain cty's have less doe days than south Ga. Same old issues. If your not seeing deer, learn to hunt or find somewhere where there's more deer

 

[Josh B]

Has anyone else ever noticed on quota hunts that you go to check in station and there are hardly any deer checked in but when they post the deer kill numbers in the book there is always a lot. I some times think they just make these numbers up!

 

[Lilly001]

They've already done this. The state is broke up into DMU's. Mountain cty's have less doe days than south Ga. Same old issues. If your not seeing deer, learn to hunt or find somewhere where there's more deer

I see plenty of deer. And while I probaly am an ameture compared to some on here, I consider myself a reasonably good hunter.
But that was not what I was referring to in my post.
In a nutshell, there are areas of the state that have a deer population that is well below the areas capacity. There are also areas that have an abundance of deer to the point that the deer are a nusience. And many areas between the two extremes.
My point is that each area should be managed for its unique circumstances. A state wide bag limit does not do this. As I understand it, the legeslature sets the bag limit. I think those closer to the issues should have more control. Even to the point of a county by county bag limit.

 

[bowbuck]

South Carolina has an interesting system of deer management. The state is broken up a little more and you have different numbers of deer you can kill in each area. They also have a tag you can buy that allows you to kill a doe when you decide to. I am sure its not perfect either but I think there is some good ideas in there too. There is no perfect answer.

 

[Jeff Phillips]

It Ain't The Land-It's The Man" !

Thats awesome! You can kill deer even if there ain't any there! You need to quit your job and teach others how to kill what ain't there, you will get rich!

 

[Atlanta Dawg]

Thats awesome! You can kill deer even if there ain't any there! You need to quit your job and teach others how to kill what ain't there, you will get rich!

Struck a nerve huh ?? !!!!

 

[Jeff Phillips]

Struck a nerve huh ?? !!!!

Not really

I have killed a bunch of big old bucks on average land.

But regardless of "the man", the herd is hurting in many areas and your ignorant comments won't help.

 

[Atlanta Dawg]

Not really

I have killed a bunch of big old bucks on average land.

But regardless of "the man", the herd is hurting in many areas and your ignorant comments won't help.

Thank you very much for your opinion.

It however does not alter the absolute fact that my experience differs widely from yours and as a practical matter my comments are far from ignorant but I choose to take no offense to your comment.

People who make decisions about these matters need to be made aware that it isn't all doom and gloom nor is the sky falling everywhere in Georgia.

Have a Nice Day !!!

 

[mguthrie]

I see plenty of deer. And while I probaly am an ameture compared to some on here, I consider myself a reasonably good hunter.
But that was not what I was referring to in my post.
In a nutshell, there are areas of the state that have a deer population that is well below the areas capacity. There are also areas that have an abundance of deer to the point that the deer are a nusience. And many areas between the two extremes.
My point is that each area should be managed for its unique circumstances. A state wide bag limit does not do this. As I understand it, the legeslature sets the bag limit. I think those closer to the issues should have more control. Even to the point of a county by county bag limit.

Not putting down anybody's skills. It just gets old hearing the same complaints on here time after time. Some believe that we are killing all of our deer when the numbers show something different. The numbers in this post are nothing new. We've been killing 400,000 deer every year for a long time. If the heard couldn't sustain that the numbers would go down. If you believe the piece of property your hunting doesn't have deer on it than find somewhere that does. If you are paying 400-600 a year for a club what do you expect to get out of it. Good clubs have low hunter # and aren't cheap

 

[Lindsay Thomas Jr.]

I don't see how those numbers are accurate. Ive never been polled on how many deer I killed. Don't personally know anybody that has either.

This is how those numbers can be accurate:

http://www.qdma.com/articles/how-do-state-wildlife-agencies-estimate-deer-harvest

 

[Lilly001]

Not putting down anybody's skills. It just gets old hearing the same complaints on here time after time. Some believe that we are killing all of our deer when the numbers show something different. The numbers in this post are nothing new. We've been killing 400,000 deer every year for a long time. If the heard couldn't sustain that the numbers would go down. If you believe the piece of property your hunting doesn't have deer on it than find somewhere that does. If you are paying 400-600 a year for a club what do you expect to get out of it. Good clubs have low hunter # and aren't cheap

Peace brother.
Sorry if I got riled up.
You have a good point. But it's not that simple. There are areas of the state that would benefit IMHO from a reduced doe harvest. But in my area the population is sound and maybe even needs a little thinning.
I hunt private land that I, or my friends own. No club fees but we each spend thousands on food plots, feeders, and enhancing the habitat. We also limit, but don't eliminate, the doe harvest.
Hunter skill is part of the equation but many other factors come into play. Some of those on here that complain about reduced numbers do have a valid point.