Harvest Report - 2016 vs. 2017 - Numbers Down

[TX300mag]

I checked current harvest to date for the Unit L counties I hunted this year (off the top of my head): Henderson, Madison, Carrol, Gibson, Stewart.

ALL of them have MORE bucks being killed than does-and it's really not even close.

Sure, everybody has that person that they heard of (neighbor's brother-in-law's cousin's roommate from college's mechanic) that kills a bunch of does. I get that and I believe it (I've killed up to 10 myself) but when those add up it's STILL less than the number of bucks killed under the two buck limit.

I'm having a hard time blaming the 3 doe/day limit. I'm one of the exceptions that has killed 3 in a day on multiple occasions, but I do so out of convenience and to keep hunting pressure down on an area. If I can kill three does in one hour, it's much less pressure than hunting an area multiple times to kill them one at a time. Admittedly, I haven't killed three in a day in a few years. Rarely do I kill two in a day, really. We just don't kill as many does as we used to AS A WHOLE.

 

[TX300mag]

I think the single biggest factor is hunter expectation. Many hunters kill very few deer, but expect to have lots of deer to look at when they go. The areas I hunt are high pressure, so I don't expect to see a lot of deer consistently at any of them. But they are there.

I tend to prefer a herd below carrying capacity as opposed to constantly at or above. Sure, it means less deer to look at while in the stand, but which is better for the herd? How about for the farmers? How about for gardens, fruit trees, etc? It would probably be more FUN if I saw 20 deer every time I went out, but I don't think it's best for everyone (including the deer).

I don't hunt east TN, so I can't say this applies to much of that region. I haven't hunted anywhere in Unit L that I can think of that doesn't have a decently healthy population. Some areas are better than others, sure, but generally speaking.

 

[larry ipock]

Definitely the EHD effect for my area anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree

 

[Grnwing]

Overall the total deer kill numbers are trending down since 2011(last year I looked at), each year less and less are killed. In 2012, 94k bucks were killed compared to 75k this year. Same year doe harvest went from 63k down to 51k. A 19k drop in buck kills and 12k drop in doe kills, or about 20% drop in deer kills over 6 years.

I can see the 2 buck limit AND change in the antlerless definition impacting the buck harvest and have some impact on the doe harvest, but the overall drop has to have some other explanation.

Is hunter recruitment dropping at similar rate? How many deer is the average deer hunter killing? Is the overall herd declining/stable/growing? Is the quality of our deer hunting going up or down?

Lots of questions and I am sure there are many different answers.

 

[lightsareout]

This is my first year hunting TN that I haven't taken a deer yet.

my 2 cents

 

[TheLBLman]

I can see the 2 buck limit AND change in the antlerless definition impacting the buck harvest and have some impact on the doe harvest, but the overall drop has to have some other explanation.

I agree.
As stated previously, the actual harvest may not have decreased as much as it appears "on paper".

But to what extent it really has, I believe the main 2 reasons may be existing hunters are simply spending less time hunting, and being more selective, i.e. purposefully by choice killing slightly fewer deer. For many, the "new" of killing a bunch of deer has worn off, and it's sometimes seen more as "work" than "fun" to kill a deer.

 

[ronnycl]

I really wish I knew how many hunters killed the three does a day that everyone blames for lack of deer sightings and low harvest numbers. I would wager not many hunters killed 3 doe a day.
I would blame depredation permits and EHD
I think people really overlook EHD I would bet no one that hunted Laurel Hill WMA pre 2007 will tell you that deer numbers have made it back to pre 2007 numbers.
You listen to farmers next time your at the local breakfast spot talk about there dissatisfaction in only killing 25-30 deer last night. And you will quickly realize where the numbers are going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not the actual number of people that kill three a day that is the problem. It's the mentality that there is a limitless supply of does that the three a day limit fosters. I don't know how many times I've read on this site of someone who lives in East Tennessee say "I'll just go to middle and kill a doe". That plus people have a number of different hunters "come kill a doe, it's three a day ". Friends family kids, it all adds up. The liberal limit says there's actually NO limit and people don't manage their property to sustain good populations.

ding ding ding we have a winner! you are correct with the 3 day doe limit....hunters perceive it as an unlimited amount of does. been saying it for years

 

[UpperTully]

I pulled the Lauderdale Co totals for the past 10 years since that is the county I spend most of my time hunting. In the past 10 years,out totals have dropped 60%. I wouldn't venture to say it's all because hunters are being more selective. I believe years of liberal limits and the 2015 flood have resulted in the decline of seeing deer altogether. I believe the Unit L mentality for us is completely absurd. It's as if TWRA has the mentality that we have endless amounts of does to harvest, because we don't. Out of the hours I've spent in a tree in Lauderdale Co this season, I've seen hardly any does.

 

[TheLBLman]

. . . . Lauderdale Co . . . . I believe the Unit L mentality for us is completely absurd.

Agree with you, and feel the same about my more familiar Lake County.
That is one of those counties I mentioned earlier that was more recently "placed" into Unit L for the sake of regulatory simplicity.
IMO, these counties simply cannot support the amount of deer hunting available under Unit L regs,
and maintain a deer population that's much above "pretty low to very low".

I do understand why TWRA did it, and maybe some of these Mississippi Delta counties should remain in Unit L, IF the Unit L regs were tweaked a bit?

 

[Mike Belt]

Just going on mine and my like minded friends that deer hunt, the doe population is way down in Hardeman and Fayette counties. If the doe populations are down you don't have as many fawns hitting the ground which consequently also means less bucks available. Less of both sexes just means fewer deer are going to be killed. I suppose TWRA's stance was to drop the overall numbers by allowing for 3 does a day for the duration of the season. They should be happy. That's exactly what has happened. Since that regulation is still standing I also suppose they want to keep it well below carrying capacity. I don't know if or for how long they'll continue this trend but I sure wish they'd back off some.

 

[UpperTully]

. . . . Lauderdale Co . . . . I believe the Unit L mentality for us is completely absurd.

Agree with you, and feel the same about my more familiar Lake County.
That is one of those counties I mentioned earlier that was more recently "placed" into Unit L for the sake of regulatory simplicity.
IMO, these counties simply cannot support the amount of deer hunting available under Unit L regs,
and maintain a deer population that's much above "pretty low to very low".

I do understand why TWRA did it, and maybe some of these Mississippi Delta counties should remain in Unit L, IF the Unit L regs were tweaked a bit?

I'm in agreement with you, these counties simply do not carry the deer densities to support such liberal doe harvests. I feel it is negligent for TWRA to make such a change for counties for the sake of simplicity. I'm concerned for our future.

 

[TheLBLman]

. . . . Lauderdale Co . . . . I believe the Unit L mentality for us is completely absurd.

Agree with you, and feel the same about my more familiar Lake County.

I'm in agreement with you, these counties simply do not carry the deer densities to support such liberal doe harvests.
I feel it is negligent for TWRA to make such a change for counties for the sake of simplicity. I'm concerned for our future.

I understand where you're coming from.
There needs to be a happier medium.
But I do like for TWRA to focus on keeping things as simple as possible, and good, if they can find a way.

Just I don't know if or for how long they'll continue this trend but I sure wish they'd back off some.

How much "opposition" from a small minority of real avid hunters . . . . .
. . . . . should TWRA expect if there was a recommendation to simply make the annual antlerless limit the same as the annual buck limit?

Such an idea still allows every hunter that opportunity to kill 4 deer annually,
we already know very, very few are going to kill even 3, and the "average" hunter is currently only killing one, or less than one annually.

Unless we could micro-manage multiple units within each county,
there will be no great "statewide" solution --- but I do believe TWRA is trying to do something generally good, and keep it simple.

 

[Mike Belt]

I understand keeping it simple and I'm not necessarily advocating doing away with the 3 doe limits. Change it from 3 doe/day (or even 2) to 3 per season. Not many kill 3 in a day as is but with that regulation many kill far more than 3 in a season. I think that "worded" like the regulation is, the take away is that there is an overabundance of does and they can be indiscriminately shot all season long. It's simply not true and that misconception has lead to a substantial decrease in deer numbers in most of the state. Surely TWRA can't think this steady decrease is just some sort of an occasional anomaly.

 

[ImThere]

I really wish I knew how many hunters killed the three does a day that everyone blames for lack of deer sightings and low harvest numbers. I would wager not many hunters killed 3 doe a day.
I would blame depredation permits and EHD
I think people really overlook EHD I would bet no one that hunted Laurel Hill WMA pre 2007 will tell you that deer numbers have made it back to pre 2007 numbers.
You listen to farmers next time your at the local breakfast spot talk about there dissatisfaction in only killing 25-30 deer last night. And you will quickly realize where the numbers are going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not the actual number of people that kill three a day that is the problem. It's the mentality that there is a limitless supply of does that the three a day limit fosters. I don't know how many times I've read on this site of someone who lives in East Tennessee say "I'll just go to middle and kill a doe". That plus people have a number of different hunters "come kill a doe, it's three a day ". Friends family kids, it all adds up. The liberal limit says there's actually NO limit and people don't manage their property to sustain good populations.

ding ding ding we have a winner! you are correct with the 3 day doe limit....hunters perceive it as an unlimited amount of does. been saying it for years

if there not killing the does what the hell does perception have to do with it? Remember we are talking about less deer being killed not more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Belt]

The damage has been done over the last few years with the 3 doe/day limit and that "perception" is why. It didn't just affect deer numbers because of this past season alone although it surely didn't help the situation. With fewer deer around it just stands to reason hunters are going to see and kill fewer deer.

 

[ronnycl]

perception has everything to do with it. the does have been slaughtered in the past due to 3 doe daily limit. the perception tells the average person we need to kill more does which may not be the case. Doe numbers are down in fayette and hardeman over the past 4 years. I agree 3 doe a season will change hunter perception. contact TFWC and voice bag limit concerns

 

[Buzzard Breath]

YTD;
Antlerless harvest: 55,130
Antlered harvest: 71,777

If we are "slaughtering" the does, what word describes the buck harvest?

I personally don't think the 3-does a day limit has anything to do with the reduction in kill numbers. It may have an effect in very localized areas, but not overall.

 

[TX300mag]

YTD;
Antlerless harvest: 55,130
Antlered harvest: 71,777

If we are "slaughtering" the does, what word describes the buck harvest?

I personally don't think the 3-does a day limit has anything to do with the reduction in kill numbers. It may have an effect in very localized areas, but not overall.

I hunt several unit L counties, Buzard Breath. I can tell you it has little (nothing) to do with the reduction in kill numbers. Hunters are simply bored with killing does and don't want the hassle. It has everything to do with trying to blame somebody else for something that may not even really be a problem.

 

[UpperTully]

I understand where you're coming from.
There needs to be a happier medium.
But I do like for TWRA to focus on keeping things as simple as possible, and good, if they can find a way.

Your an educated man and I always appreciate your posts on these issues. What would be a happier median?

In 2015 they recognized this specific area to shut down for deer hunting when the river reaches a certain stage. That same area needs to be Unit A. Mississippi, Arkansas and Missouri manages their flood plain on the Mississippi the same way.

Here is the Lauderdale totals.

 

[TheLBLman]

What would be a happier median?

I wish I were educatated enough to know that answer, but I'm not.

It may be that these Delta counties need to be redesignated as Unit A counties, but even that might not be enough.

Over the past couple be years, some of the statewide changes TWRA has made will be of some help for these counties.

My hope is TWRA can come up with something this new year that will be of more significance to you, but not get all these Delta counties out of Unit L.

I believe there is a lot of merit to changing that Unit L antlerless limit from 3 a day to 3 a year. That could mean 2 antlerless per year in the other units, etc.