Mountain Deer Densities

[splatek]

I've always been curious is the no-doe days regulation is strictly enforced. I spoke with a guy last season about cohutta and another man this season about chattahoochee wma. I was trying to pick their brain about hunting those areas and when I mentioned, off hand, that the area we were discussing was buck only I got looks like I was an alien. The one guy, later in the conversation, even said to me, where are you hunting that's buck only? Note: I was standing next to his truck on martin branch road...

 

[NCHillbilly]

We finally have no doe days. Started last season. Wish it did 20 years ago. My thoughts would be less pressure. Lots of areas have little pressure but others have tons of pressure. I'm looking at it from more of a quality buck point of view. We don't have many deer now but when you go it would be nice to have a better chance at a older age buck. I just seem to hear more folks talk about wanting a chance at a bigger buck than 2 small bucks. Everybody I've talked to that strictly hunts nf around here likes the idea. I've filled the freezer every year with 3 or 4 bucks for years now but only killed 1 buck off nf last 5 years. Rest come from wmas. I just think with 1 buck folks would be a little more picky about what they shoot. And since there's not many deer to start with why not? Obviously there's still more does than bucks because I see chasing into February and bucks still checking scrapes in March. More bucks, more does bred at same time, more fawns on the ground at same time and maybe more surive? Just my theory.

I honestly doubt if "most" mountain national forest hunters are trophy hunting. Maybe your personal circle of friends. Some folks, sure. But not most. If it's like it is here, being "picky" isn't even a remote option. You have to work your butt off for most of the season to get a shot at any legal buck for the most part. If you don't pull the trigger, you aren't eating venison this year. If I want to be picky with bucks, I'll be hunting somewhere where there are enough bucks that you can see and be picky with. Everybody isn't a horn hunter.

 

[1eyefishing]

Venison...........................................................Hillbilly
. . . . . . . ^^^^^^^^^NO STANDING ZONE^^^^^^^^^. . . . . . .

 

[NCHillbilly]

Venison...........................................................Hillbilly
. . . . . . . ^^^^^^^^^NO STANDING ZONE^^^^^^^^^. . . . . . .

I do like me some deer meat.

 

[tree cutter 08]

I honestly doubt if "most" mountain national forest hunters are trophy hunting. Maybe your personal circle of friends. Some folks, sure. But not most. If it's like it is here, being "picky" isn't even a remote option. You have to work your butt off for most of the season to get a shot at any legal buck for the most part. If you don't pull the trigger, you aren't eating venison this year. If I want to be picky with bucks, I'll be hunting somewhere where there are enough bucks that you can see and be picky with. Everybody isn't a horn hunter.

I get that. Thats why I was asking what others opinion on here was. I only know about 25 or 30 guys that hunt nf out of thousands I'm sure. Would like to hear killmaster's thoughts on this as well

 

[Back40hunter]

Just curious but how does everybody feel about a 1 buck limit on nf land? Still have 2 buck tags but only 1 can come from nf? Also instead of 2 bucks on the mtn wmas to go 1. I've noticed a lot more folks holding out for better quality bucks on nf land last several years. .most I've talked to support the idea. Most everyone I know that hunts nf these days are looking for a big buck.

Treecutter, for most of us, our hunting abilities are quite sufficient as a means of limiting our buck harvest on National Forest?. I’d be willing to bet that there are not over 3% of those hunting the mountains who have a legitimate chance of killing two bucks a year, especially since one has to have 4 points on a side. I’d be for it if the Mountain WMA’s were not included. They could still stand alone with a one buck limit per WMA.

 

[t8ter]

If anything, cutting and thinning and burning should increase deer habitat and be good for the deer population, not the other way around. The deer populations on the NF around here started to nosedive when they quit cutting timber back in the late 80s. A sea of mature timber is not good deer habitat at all.

Not what I was asking. If you read all of the report. Deer,bear, turkey and other creatures could be effected by the project. Sooooooo I’m sure it hasn’t helped an already struggling heard?

 

[NCHillbilly]

Not what I was asking. If you read all of the report. Deer,bear, turkey and other creatures could be effected by the project. Sooooooo I’m sure it hasn’t helped an already struggling heard?

I don't see how cutting timber could possibly negatively impact deer. It's a definite positive thing for them. Bear, maybe and impact. Deer and turkey, plus for them. And grouse and migratory songbirds.

 

[C.Killmaster]

I get that. Thats why I was asking what others opinion on here was. I only know about 25 or 30 guys that hunt nf out of thousands I'm sure. Would like to hear killmaster's thoughts on this as well

Here are a couple of points that come to mind for me

-We already have antler restrictions on one of 2 bucks
-We eliminated doe harvest, so all meat hunting depends on bucks
-It adds another level of complexity to hunting regulations at a time when we are trying to simplify them

 

[Thunder Head]

I thought of this the other day while talking to a realtive.

Granted i havent hunted very hard this year. I spent alot of time hunting for bear.

It dawned on me. Out of a dozen or so does ive seen. Not one single one of them had a fawn with them. NOT ONE!

How many fawns have you guys seen on NF.

 

[Jnort9]

quick question for all y’all... since it seems we all know bears are a big part of the issue. Do y’all shoot every legal bear you get a chance to?

 

[splatek]

LIstening to a podcast, The Hunting Collective, about anti-hunters and them going after bear hunting. One of the main points is what @C.Killmaster has outlined here: hunters don't show up to the various meetings, or at least not en masse. And, they emphasize that in the COVID times, it's easier than ever, because it's online and the anti groups have really taken advantage of this and are really going after bear hunting.
Sort of off topic, but I think the lack of hunter input is not a local issue, but a national issue and until we start attending these things and making our voices heard, little will change in our favor by arguing over a message board. With a lot of anti-hunters moving the north GA mountains, I would venture to guess that bear hunting will come under attack in the same way the logging and burning of trees has come under attack.

 

[ddd-shooter]

Here are a couple of points that come to mind for me

-We already have antler restrictions on one of 2 bucks
-We eliminated doe harvest, so all meat hunting depends on bucks
-It adds another level of complexity to hunting regulations at a time when we are trying to simplify them

Sorry to speculate, but would further limiting doe take on private land help? Do you see in the research where high deer densities can spread into lower density areas? I'm sure it would help the fringe areas, but don't know if there would be significant movement out of high density areas or if we would just be overpopulated in the settlement.
Seems a lot of does are killed wth archery equipment, probably over feeders. Just curious.

 

[ddd-shooter]

LIstening to a podcast, The Hunting Collective, about anti-hunters and them going after bear hunting. One of the main points is what @C.Killmaster has outlined here: hunters don't show up to the various meetings, or at least not en masse. And, they emphasize that in the COVID times, it's easier than ever, because it's online and the anti groups have really taken advantage of this and are really going after bear hunting.
Sort of off topic, but I think the lack of hunter input is not a local issue, but a national issue and until we start attending these things and making our voices heard, little will change in our favor by arguing over a message board. With a lot of anti-hunters moving the north GA mountains, I would venture to guess that bear hunting will come under attack in the same way the logging and burning of trees has come under attack.

I was gonna post in the bear forum about maybe trying to get a form letter written that has our wishes as hunters on it so we can send it en masse to the forest service, dnr, etc. I've been too busy thus far to do it. I really want to do it as that's the biggest vehicle the antis use, as you've seen in the comments.

I'd also like a form letter to the forest supervisor addressing road maintenance, food plot maintenance, burning, timber harvesting, etc. OUTSIDE of public comment period.
There's a lot of money being offered by the feds, and our forest needs to be in line. Especially with the gaoa, lwcf, etc. We should be screaming about getting those funds.
This letter also needs to go to state reps, us reps, etc.

 

[splatek]

I was gonna post in the bear forum about maybe trying to get a form letter written that has our wishes as hunters on it so we can send it en masse to the forest service, dnr, etc. I've been too busy thus far to do it. I really want to do it as that's the biggest vehicle the antis use, as you've seen in the comments.

I'd also like a form letter to the forest supervisor addressing road maintenance, food plot maintenance, burning, timber harvesting, etc. OUTSIDE of public comment period.
There's a lot of money being offered by the feds, and our forest needs to be in line. Especially with the gaoa, lwcf, etc. We should be screaming about getting those funds.
This letter also needs to go to state reps, us reps, etc.

You mean like a petition: I think they are pretty easy to setup using an online feature, not that I know how to do it, but I have seen organizations like BHA use such features. In fact, the newly formed Georgia Chapter of BHA should be all over this..I would think.

Also, doesn't the USFS have a list of animal densities that are healthy for the herd and the forest. I could've sworn I saw that somewhere in the past, but for the life of me cannot find it now. Seems like if something where to exist that the FS ought to go with the science... maybe? THose interest groups have a lot of power though.

 

[ddd-shooter]

You mean like a petition: I think they are pretty easy to setup using an online feature, not that I know how to do it, but I have seen organizations like BHA use such features. In fact, the newly formed Georgia Chapter of BHA should be all over this..I would think.

Also, doesn't the USFS have a list of animal densities that are healthy for the herd and the forest. I could've sworn I saw that somewhere in the past, but for the life of me cannot find it now. Seems like if something where to exist that the FS ought to go with the science... maybe? THose interest groups have a lot of power though.

Like the thought of a petition. I really think we also need a letter. We need the forest supervisor to get an email or paper letter from all us mountain hunters telling them what we expect from them.
Same way with our elected officials. We want some federal money to come our way and not all be spent on trail maintenance or restroom buildings or woodpecker studies. Not that there's anything wrong with that; we need all of that, but hunters need to be the squeaky wheel for once.
I'M TIRED of substandard roads, substandard food plots, substandard burns, timber harvesting, predation issues, etc.

 

[splatek]

I think we will see an influx of new hunters after the new hunting public youtubes makes it's way around the interwebz

 

[C.Killmaster]

Sorry to speculate, but would further limiting doe take on private land help? Do you see in the research where high deer densities can spread into lower density areas? I'm sure it would help the fringe areas, but don't know if there would be significant movement out of high density areas or if we would just be overpopulated in the settlement.
Seems a lot of does are killed wth archery equipment, probably over feeders. Just curious.

We did further limit doe harvest on private land when we cut out doe harvest on CNF. There is a spillover into the forest from surrounding private land, but it's mostly around the edges. I think we've reached a point of diminishing returns with private land propping up public, any further limitations are just punishing private land for no benefit to public.

Deer populations don't really spread out well, look at how many of the state parks were before hunting. Even though deer could freely come and go, populations on areas with no hunting would accumulate and deplete all the resources. Even though food resources are limited, they don't just pick up and move.

 

[ddd-shooter]

LIstening to a podcast, The Hunting Collective, about anti-hunters and them going after bear hunting. One of the main points is what @C.Killmaster has outlined here: hunters don't show up to the various meetings, or at least not en masse. And, they emphasize that in the COVID times, it's easier than ever, because it's online and the anti groups have really taken advantage of this and are really going after bear hunting.
Sort of off topic, but I think the lack of hunter input is not a local issue, but a national issue and until we start attending these things and making our voices heard, little will change in our favor by arguing over a message board. With a lot of anti-hunters moving the north GA mountains, I would venture to guess that bear hunting will come under attack in the same way the logging and burning of trees has come under attack.

Great podcast. Highly recommend. Clay basically said what we did. Need to be vocal.

 

[bfriendly]

I think it would be complicated to try and make it work like I mentioned above, but if you can drum up some volunteers I will gladly help y'all in any way I can. I think the best option would be to focus on a single WMA where we have historic data and see if you can make a measurable difference. If that works, it can help grease the skids for expansion.

Let’s do Pinelog!

Even though density is really low, it's still well above what our past restocking efforts would have accomplished. The restocking effort from 1928 to 1975 that ultimately rebuilt the deer population for the whole state was only 4,000 deer total. A WMA would have been stocked with maybe a dozen deer or so. If we were able to address the predation issue there would be no need to restock.

This^^^ it should be open season, no limit bear hog coyote bobcat, hunting for a full year or three with at least another year of NO doe days.