Where is, or is there, a public lands safety net?

[squirrel]

I got to watch as a state went from a buck/year, to a buck/doe, to a buck n 2does, buck n 4 does, buck n 7 does if does were on the right side of the fence (private). the slaughter was crazy up until the private lands owners realised there were just about zero deer left after the final days of the season. While tags were still printed with reckless abandon the access to land to hunt dried up, keeping the city folks trapped at home with a pocket full of paper tags un-filled. Slowly the private herds crept back to some semblance of healthy populations. This is still a work in progress in this particular eastern state. Public lands are still very much a wasteland in many cases (though quality of the bucks has dramatically improved!)

In a heavy public lands western state have any of you nimrods had the chance to witness the effective bottom of tag printing? What was the effective "bottom" or safety net level and what caused it? Lack of hunter success making people stay home? A gov't epiphany (is this even possible?). Did public pressure ever have any effect? If so what avenue was it channeled through? (grass roots, species specific organisations, etc.)

Or did it just become a big deal to see a real live deer, to the point that you would pull over and watch it for awhile, just because you could. I found myself doing just that the other day when I saw a huge herd... of 5 does.

 

[Blackcats06]

Most western states have a limited number of tags so there is no unlimited printing of tags. Colorado is the only example of unlimited tags with their otc elk hunts. And more people every year go on those.

 

[squirrel]

Most western states have a limited number of tags so there is no unlimited printing of tags. Colorado is the only example of unlimited tags with their otc elk hunts. And more people every year go on those.

But "limited" does not mean few, nor is it synonymous with sustainable by the resource. It is the sole discretionary realm of the guy whose finger is on the print button, who in turn gets a direct share of those $.

In counties with 50-80+% public lands there is no reserve of consequence for population replacement, if the animals are slaughtered to a virtual extinction level on the public, actual extinction being difficult to achieve. (but they do seem to be giving it the 'ol college try)

In the east with the reversal of public/private ratios of land ownership landowners have the final say on what levels of game they will tolerate/insist upon, barring trespass issues, of course.

So far pressure seems to be inexhaustible, just as in the eastern example, with the Non-res and the dwellers of cities emptying out for their one week safari. I was curious if anyone in a place further along this path has seen it reach the tipping point and taper off.

Or, barring that, if public sentiment ever reached critical mass and enacted changes in the "counting ability" of these wildlife pros.

I heard an interesting exchange the other day from a non-hunter who used the term 'back when they allowed us to have deer" when speaking to another non-hunter in reference to a big pile of shed antlers at a trophy ranch's entrance gate.

This gives me hope that it is being noticed, but that hope does not hold up when it comes to influencing the only ones who could actually enact changes.

 

[Blackcats06]

In AZ most game is on public. People won't stand for a lack of game.

 

[3855WIN]

Is the OP speaking of Pennsylvania?

With CWD coming on, many states would rather have less deer than more.

 

[Dakotakid]

Many western states have far more game than what they had historically. Populations do ebb and flow substantially. Where is the example of extinction level game management?
Disease and habitat loss impact wildlife far more than regulated hunting. At least in Montana. Population numbers become very political, as seen in our current legislature. Everyone is maneuvering for a piece of the pie, lots of slices but I don’t see the pie as a whole shrinking.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Where is the example of extinction level game management?

Trumpeter swans and wild bison are a couple. Read the published documentation of Montana history of wildlife management entitled BACK FROM THE BRINK, for stories that illustrate the dire wildlife situation at one time.

 

[Dakotakid]

Those are great examples of the progress made in 100 years of actual game management. Because of conservation and public value, both examples have regained population. Certainly black footed ferret are a more current risk.

 

[antlerradar]

Many western states have far more game than what they had historically. Populations do ebb and flow substantially. Where is the example of extinction level game management?
Disease and habitat loss impact wildlife far more than regulated hunting. At least in Montana. Population numbers become very political, as seen in our current legislature. Everyone is maneuvering for a piece of the pie, lots of slices but I don’t see the pie as a whole shrinking.

The pie may not be shrinking but the filling is sure spending most the season were you can not stick a fork in it unless you pay extra.

 

[Straight Arrow]

The pie may not be shrinking but the filling is sure spending most the season were you can not stick a fork in it unless you pay extra.

And the extra pay is for taking only the plums and cherries, which seldom cross the pie crust edge.

 

[Dakotakid]

I am not sure I see the doom and gloom. Their are numerous wildlife management posts on this forum that directly contradict each other. Hunters can’t agree on a best management practice, let alone adding other self interests that have a say in the issue.
Frankly I think FWP does a good job. I don’t think there is ever enough access for some people and they would like to see Montana their own personal preserve. They want large ranches purchased and made available to the public. What is overlooked are the costs to maintain paradise.

 

[RobertD]

Is the OP speaking of Pennsylvania?

With CWD coming on, many states would rather have less deer than more.

I don't know, but I would like to know. In my eastern state (Georgia) we're at two bucks/ten does (yes, ten lol) and I've actually had a biologist complain to me a few months back that we don't even come close to the doe harvest they'd like to see, and that they could make it one buck/thirty does and most hunters would shoot their buck and go home. She's probably right, too!

Not to cast doubt on OPs experience, but we've always had super generous allotments but have only seen population fall in regional cases.

 

[Badlandcat]

Being old enough to have hunted SE Montana before FWP started the doe slaughter of the mid 80's, back when you could knock on any door on the powder river and they would let you hunt or when you could see 200 -300 deer a day on the Custer NF.
In my opinion the deer herd has never recovered from from the slaughter.

 

[pj2578]

I can tell you that here in KY we have different zones for different counties based on deer population. I live in a zone 1 (high deer population) county which is one Buck and unlimited does. The trouble is, all the farms are being bought up and turned into sub divisions. The deer population keeps climbing and the department wants people to go out and harvest more does, but there is nowhere for people without their own property to hunt. I think KY is something like 3% public land, and most of that is limited entry and not worth hunting anyway.

When I started hunting in the early 90's it was one buck and one doe and you could only kill a doe the first 2 days of season. After that it was buck only for the remaining 9 days. Back then you were lucky to see a deer. Now you see deer every time you hunt, so it's kind of an opposite problem to what you describe, but equally severe in terms of healthy herd management.

 

[squirrel]

The pie may not be shrinking but the filling is sure spending most the season were you can not stick a fork in it unless you pay extra.

Pie crust here has a halloween icing around the rim! Very orange... and not real shortage of orange once they get inside either, just a better grade of rifle/scope.

 

[squirrel]

I can tell you that here in KY we have different zones for different counties based on deer population. I live in a zone 1 (high deer population) county which is one Buck and unlimited does. The trouble is, all the farms are being bought up and turned into sub divisions. The deer population keeps climbing and the department wants people to go out and harvest more does, but there is nowhere for people without their own property to hunt. I think KY is something like 3% public land, and most of that is limited entry and not worth hunting anyway.

When I started hunting in the early 90's it was one buck and one doe and you could only kill a doe the first 2 days of season. After that it was buck only for the remaining 9 days. Back then you were lucky to see a deer. Now you see deer every time you hunt, so it's kind of an opposite problem to what you describe, but equally severe in terms of healthy herd management.

Pretty much the polar opposite of what I'm describing. A few years ago after a hard winter I counted to 336 dead deer within sight of my house as the snow melted out. There were more for sure but I could no longer keep track of what I had seen/counted already, so I quit counting. This winter I have had 7 total deer show up, and a fawn just got hit a couple days ago on the highway.

Told the wife the first 3 that showed up had no hair down their backs about 3-4 inches wide... she bit of course and asked why that could be... "counted 'em so many times from the chopper they wore the hair off 'em".

Gotta get to 20K else they might have to take a pay cut.

 

[JDH]

I got to watch as a state went from a buck/year, to a buck/doe, to a buck n 2does, buck n 4 does, buck n 7 does if does were on the right side of the fence (private). the slaughter was crazy up until the private lands owners realised there were just about zero deer left after the final days of the season. While tags were still printed with reckless abandon the access to land to hunt dried up, keeping the city folks trapped at home with a pocket full of paper tags un-filled. Slowly the private herds crept back to some semblance of healthy populations. This is still a work in progress in this particular eastern state. Public lands are still very much a wasteland in many cases (though quality of the bucks has dramatically improved!)

In a heavy public lands western state have any of you nimrods had the chance to witness the effective bottom of tag printing? What was the effective "bottom" or safety net level and what caused it? Lack of hunter success making people stay home? A gov't epiphany (is this even possible?). Did public pressure ever have any effect? If so what avenue was it channeled through? (grass roots, species specific organisations, etc.)

Or did it just become a big deal to see a real live deer, to the point that you would pull over and watch it for awhile, just because you could. I found myself doing just that the other day when I saw a huge herd... of 5 does.

You are talking about something similar but not quite the same as my state. The last 10-15 years buck quality has gone up. Our quotas are set by county so you could theoretically go to all 92 counties and kill a deer. But only 1 buck-unless you participate in special hunts or special zones. The DNR has been in a herd reduction management mindset for a few years and it definitely seems to be working. They have been reducing the quotas during the last couple of years but you could still kill roughly 180 deer a year if you wanted to pay for the tags and travel across the state.(if my calculations are correct) One in this county, two in this county, three in this county, etc. I'm seeing less deer on my drives to work and less in the field while hunting.

 

[JDH]

But to answer one of your questions, I've been hearing more and more private land owners going back to the don't shoot a doe mentality they had many years ago. It's a pretty week safety net but something.