Proposed new hunting regs concept

[fairchaser]

Based on the comments by James Kelly of the TWRA they are proposing for discussion some new regs this fall to take out some of the highest risk deer which are older bucks. Essentially they would increase the August hunt to 2 bucks and could be taken with a rifle and it would not count toward your two buck regular season limit. They would add public lands too. This is only for the CWD high risk zone. Also any buck taken during the regular season that tests positive will not count toward that hunters buck limit.

 

[cbhunter]

That sounds pretty wild to me but they know a heck of a lot more about it than I do, that's for sure.

So they are considering adding rifles to the August velvet hunt (in the hot zone)?

Just making sure I understand what you was saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bloodtrailing]

How is that targeting older bucks? CWD is not age discriminatory. The symptoms just show up later on sometimes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mike243]

Wow do overs,reckon they have to do something to keep hunters interested in hunting the hot zones,horn hunters may rack up ,sad situation imo and no easy remedy :cry: , I hate it for the deer the most as they don't deserve this but they are not the first to be hit by some thing man has created on purpose or accidently , It's easy to point fingers as to what caused stuff but nobody can change what has happened. A lot of folks are trying to find a solution but mother nature may have to sort this 1 out :pop: :pray:

 

[Grnwing]

Fairchaser,

Thank you for posting. Was there any comment on the structure of the deer season, ie allowing rifles from archery on through normal season dates? The proposed regulations sound very reasonable and not as drastic as some other states.

 

[Tiny]

Interesting...
seems everywhere a different to slightly different approach to population n spread threats are being used n or tried..once its found in an area..

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Levee Jumper]

I may be reading that wrong but Rifle hunting a WMA in August for Bonus Bucks while the leaves are on would hairy at best. :shock: In that flat ground where one could find a WMA, I would have to be 40 foot up a tree before daylight to feel safe.

 

[AT Hiker]

The hot zone public lands will be a complete zoo. I might go just to see the circus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheLBLman]

Based on the comments by James Kelly of the TWRA they are proposing for discussion some new regs this fall to take out some of the highest risk deer which are older bucks.

Just how much "riskier" are "older" bucks than "older" does?
And aren't there more "older" doe in the herd than "older" bucks?

Hunters already heavily target "older" bucks?
Why not allow hunters to also target "older" doe as well during this August hunt?

Essentially they would increase the August hunt to 2 bucks and could be taken with a rifle
and it would not count toward your two buck regular season limit.

They would add public lands too.

So, if the buck limit is hereby effectively increased to 4 (maybe more),
won't that have the practical effect of actually reducing the doe harvest?

What about all those "older" does? They would then get killed at a reduced rate, right?

Forget biologically sound deer management, but the deer herd should grow larger (and less healthy) by going back to the mid-90's style of killing mostly bucks.
Hate to point this out to some, but this is not going to be much so much about killing more "older" bucks.

It's also not so much about anything to do with CWD as it is about increasing (or maintaining) non-resident license sales.

When we get to the actual harvest stats, the average buck will not be "older".
The average buck killed will in fact be a 2 1/2-yr-old buck.
Albeit, a huge increase in the killing of 2 1/2-yr-old bucks will certainly decrease the number of "older" bucks in subsequent years.

But what about all those "older" does, and their growing numbers?

The proposed regulations sound very reasonable and not as drastic as some other states.

I agree some aspects are not as "drastic" as some of the MISTAKES some other states have made in their attempts at dealing with CWD.

But are the proposed regulations really that "sound",
and are they really more about increasing or sustaining non-resident license sales than about CWD?

 

[fairchaser]

LBLman, they didn't want to chance orphaning unweened fawns in August and they felt that with 3 does a day limit that more opportunities to kill does was unnecessary.

 

[TheLBLman]

Also, looking a few years farther down the road . . . . . . .

Exactly what make the average deer hunter want to hunt deer?

The answers can be diverse,
but there are two most common ones:

Trophy buck antlers and venison for the table.

IMO, the proposed plan (summer buck hunting and doubling the buck limit)
will greatly decrease the number of 3 1/2-yr-old & older bucks in the subsequent years.

Will that also decrease the deer hunting in these future years?

What will happen?
Hunt other game instead?
Hunt other states instead of Tennessee?

I hope the Commissioners will really put a lot of thought into all this.
My fear is they already have.

 

[TheLBLman]

LBLman, they didn't want to chance orphaning unweened fawns in August and they felt that with 3 does a day limit that more opportunities to kill does was unnecessary.

Fully understand that, and in terms of sound deer management, agree.

But here's the rub:

"Practical" limits most hunter already have.

"Practically" speaking, most hunters already have no desire to kill more than 2 or 3 deer annually,
regardless of sex of those deer.

So here's what happens:

Allow hunters to take a couple of bucks during the summer,
and they will have both less desire and less need to take any more deer during the traditional deer-hunting dates of fall & winter.
This summer-time velvet buck hunt will actually reduce the amount of deer hunting in the fall & winter,
while greatly skewing the annual harvest more towards bucks.

And, considering these 2 summer-time bucks will not count towards the "regular" buck limit,
I'd say the chance now becomes high the average buck killed may be only 1 1/2 yrs old?

Think about it.

If this greatly increases non-resident sales, and these hunters are ONLY coming for the chance at a "velvet" buck, how many of them will just kill a "younger" velvet buck, since they won't be hunting Tennessee come November?

Heck, how many resident TN hunters will suddenly have no qualms taking a 1 1/2-yr-old velvet buck when it doesn't count against their regular buck limit?

These new regs could quickly set us back to the early 90's deer herd structure in terms of buck:doe ratios and buck age structure.
Well, then we could legitimately call a 2 1/2-yr-old buck an "older" buck.

 

[fairchaser]

I think the goal is to thin the herd, build interest for residents and non residents and try not to penalize hunters unnecessarily.

 

[TNGunsmoke]

If the goal is really to get more samples to check, and to potentially stabilize/slightly reduce populations exposed to CWD, Why not include a doe tag or 2 in the regular hunting license instead of forcing the special season antlerless permit purchase to be able to shoot does with a rifle. I know its a non-issue for folks that buy a sportsman's license, but it should be included in the regular big game license.

 

[TheLBLman]

I think the goal is to thin the herd . . . . .

At least in terms of this summertime buck-only "velvet" hunt,
"thinning the herd" is total horse hockey.

In terms of thinning the herd, this summer-time buck-only hunt
actually would end up doing just the opposite because the ongoing herd density
it controlled by the doe harvest.

When "thinning the herd" is the true issue,
it is accomplished by increasing the doe hunting opportunities
while decreasing the buck hunting opportunities.

Generally speaking, collectively, when hunters kill more bucks, they will kill fewer does.

 

[fairchaser]

I think the goal is to thin the herd . . . . .

At least in terms of this summertime buck-only "velvet" hunt,
"thinning the herd" is total horse hockey.

In terms of thinning the herd, this summer-time buck-only hunt
actually would end up doing just the opposite because the ongoing herd density
it controlled by the doe harvest.

When "thinning the herd" is the true issue,
it is accomplished by increasing the doe hunting opportunities
while decreasing the buck hunting opportunities.

Generally speaking, collectively, when hunters kill more bucks, they will kill fewer does.

I agree LBLman to some degree. For me anyway, there is zero incentive to kill does. I did before for the one deer I consumed and for several of my non hunting friends who wanted venison. It's not worth the effort now. With more buck tags, I might be incented to kill more deer but there isn't anything you could do short of a bounty to make me kill does. Under CWD even QDM is out the window. Natural attrition will supersede hunter attrition. Bucks aren't needed like does are to maintain/grow the herd. QDM will be a real challenge going forward.

 

[AT Hiker]

I took a screen shot of the April 9 meeting Fairchaser referred me too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JJ3]

For me I have no interest in the August season — too hot, too many ticks, too many mosquitos. So changing the limits and adding rifle have no impact.

They are trying to increase the kill in the hot zone and high risk counties, I think they should consider opening rifle at the traditional start of muzzleloader and perhaps open muzzleloader in mid October in the high risk counties.

Either of those 2 options I would exercise. I've passed on shots in ML season that I would have taken with rifle. We see the most deer movement from mid October to Thanksgiving.

 

[30-30]

IMO, the proposed plan (summer buck hunting and doubling the buck limit)
will greatly decrease the number of 3 1/2-yr-old & older bucks in the subsequent years.

That's exactly what the plan is designed to do. Since older bucks are the most likely group to have and spread CWD, you decrease the number of older bucks in and around the CWD zone to try and contain the spread and decrease prevalance

 

[AT Hiker]

That's on the table too for the entire state of CWD spreads.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bowhunt25]

After eight
years of surveillance, the currently identified
geographic distribution of CWD is substantially
larger than was known in 2002, and is likely
increasing, despite moderate deer population
reduction during that same time. Given the
difficulty in managing CWD in free-ranging deer,
the magnitude of deer reductions required to
meaningfully affect disease progression, and the
declining legislative support, eliminating CWD
from Wisconsin using currently available tools
is unlikely. Nonetheless, given the importance
of deer and deer hunting to Wisconsin and the
threat that CWD poses to the long-term viability
of both, there still is a need and a responsibility
to take steps to effectively manage this disease.
In other words, its here to stay.

 

[fairchaser]

After eight
years of surveillance, the currently identified
geographic distribution of CWD is substantially
larger than was known in 2002, and is likely
increasing, despite moderate deer population
reduction during that same time. Given the
difficulty in managing CWD in free-ranging deer,
the magnitude of deer reductions required to
meaningfully affect disease progression, and the
declining legislative support, eliminating CWD
from Wisconsin using currently available tools
is unlikely. Nonetheless, given the importance
of deer and deer hunting to Wisconsin and the
threat that CWD poses to the long-term viability
of both, there still is a need and a responsibility
to take steps to effectively manage this disease.
In other words, its here to stay.

This falls into the category of " we must do something even if won't help". At least this puts salve on the wound and satisfies the public that we are trying. Can it be slowed? It's not something that can really be tested. So, you take your best scientific guess and try.

 

[TheLBLman]

This falls into the category of "we must do something even if won't help".

You talking about the August trophy buck hunt
which has the (perhaps unintended) consequence of fewer females being killed during the rest of the season?

Then more females give birth to more young bucks, which acquire CWD,
then disperse FARTHER from their birth range than older bucks "rut" range?

 

[bowhunt25]

I meant to add the link to Wisconsin's CWD response plan and historical data. Lots of good reading, if you're interested
https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/cwdplan.html

 

[fairchaser]

This falls into the category of "we must do something even if won't help".

You talking about the August trophy buck hunt
which has the (perhaps unintended) consequence of fewer females being killed during the rest of the season?

Then more females give birth to more young bucks, which acquire CWD,
then disperse FARTHER from their birth range than older bucks "rut" range?

You make a lot of assumptions which can't be tested without spending millions. A wild herd is a dynamic force each thing affected by the other. I'm not saying it illogical but it's not a given either. One thing is for certain, support from hunters is required for any chance for success going forward. I think the state is thinking short term right now because if the lose the hunter, there is no long term.

 

[huntintn]

Make them kill 2 does in the 19-20 season to earn 1 buck in August 20-21 season. 4 does 2 bucks.

Sent from my LG-K371 using Tapatalk

 

[TheLBLman]

Which deer generally travel farther from where ever they are now to where ever they end?

A) An older rutting buck?

B) A yearling buck dispersing from his birth area?

So, we kill more older bucks, and one consequence becomes more yearling bucks are born to disperse?
Just saying, summertime buck-only hunting results in more yearling buck dispersal (not immediately, but in the coming year & beyond).

A wild herd is a dynamic force each thing affected by the other.
One thing is for certain, support from hunters is required for any chance for success going forward.

Catch 22.
If "doing something" with the regs does more harm than good,
we go backward even more?

The argument that hunters can already kill all the doe they want doesn't hold water.
Because when they kill more bucks sooner in the year, they will WANT to kill fewer doe with any subsequent hunting that year.
The ongoing deer population (and the resulting "new" buck born to disperse) is mainly a function of the doe kill, not the buck kill.

Yes, each thing does effect the other.

 

[MickThompson]

This falls into the category of " we must do something even if won't help". At least this puts salve on the wound and satisfies the public that we are trying. Can it be slowed? It's not something that can really be tested. So, you take your best scientific guess and try.

Is this that different from turkeys, except that we know what's causing the issue and how bad it can be? Someone says my turkeys are just fine, another says change bag limits,another says change opening date, another says outlaw decoys- we expect the agency responsible for the resource to "do something" to see what happens but whose "something" should they choose? the most popular one? These are both complicated long term challenges and with wildlife, the equation is constantly changing.

 

[TheLBLman]

. . . . . complicated long term challenges and with wildlife, the equation is constantly changing.

Totally agree.

It's just that we've been told with CWD it's very important to reduce the deer density.

That density is mainly manipulated by the antlerLESS harvest.

All other factors remaining same . . . . . .
Deer Management 101 says we increase the doe harvest by decreasing the buck limit.
. . . . . . . we decrease the doe harvest by increasing the buck limit.

Again, in the "hot" zone, this is proposed to be a centerfire rifle "buck only" hunt with a "bonus" 2-buck limit,
and to be before the opening of our traditional "either-sex" archery season.

Having a very first hunt of the year as "buck only", doubling the buck limit from 2 to 4,
how does that NOT reduce the doe harvest?
How does that NOT cause more bucks (the next & subsequent years) to disperse to OUTSIDE the "hottest" CWD areas?

 

[TheLBLman]

And again, the idea of even having a summertime "velvet" deer hunt was formulated & implemented BEFORE CWD was discovered in TN, catering to a small minority of TN hunters wanting it (most did not), but implemented mainly for the purpose of increasing non-resident license sales.

It remains more for these purposes, and little to do with fighting CWD.
As proposed, the velvet hunt increases ongoing deer density,
counter-productive to fighting the spread of CWD?

If it were really about fighting CWD,
all hunting would be either-sex, perhaps even an increase in antlerLESS hunting hunting days,
and the more effective way of increasing the DEER harvest (not just the "buck only" harvest)
would simply be to open rifle season earlier in the "hot" zone.

Put it this way, if you want to kill more DEER (what we're told needs to happen)
just make our traditional archery & muzzleloader seasons "rifles allowed".
You'll still kill a lot more bucks "pre-rut" as well as a lot more antlerLESS deer.

Of course, those who consider a "velvet" buck an important trophy will jump on the bandwagon of promoting this trophy buck hunt as a means of fighting the spread of CWD.

Just to be clear, I am not disagreeing that taking out more bucks pre-rut isn't helpful in slowing the spread of CWD.
Just saying that is absolutely not the main purpose an August buck hunt has been proposed, and it may in fact even be counter-productive as proposed, since it will reduce the doe harvest.