Did Richard King know something our DNR does not know?

[mirage243]

The responsibility for a good deer herd with quality bucks and healthy does lies with the hunters themselves, the DNR don't have a damn thing to do with it. Most deer hunters only care about the deer population from opening to close of season, the key to quality deer, is year round food plots, and hunters that know what to harvest. I hunt in a county where 120" deer is considered good, we routinely harvest bucks in the 140"-160" range, 10 years of hard work, patience and money have provided that. F*** the DNR.

 

[Bear44]

The responsibility for a good deer herd with quality bucks and healthy does lies with the hunters themselves, the DNR don't have a damn thing to do with it. Most deer hunters only care about the deer population from opening to close of season, the key to quality deer, is year round food plots, and hunters that know what to harvest. I hunt in a county where 120" deer is considered good, we routinely harvest bucks in the 140"-160" range, 10 years of hard work, patience and money have provided that. F*** the DNR.

I agree with much of what you say, but why "F*** the DNR"? I have been a member of several clubs and have also hunted Public Land. The best deer hunting and the biggest bucks I have seen have ALL been on Public Land. The last club I was a member of was a very heavily managed trophy club that cost me over $1300. I ended up doing most of my hunting on Public land even that year. Why? Because it was more fun, had more deer and I saw a much bigger buck on the Public land than anything I saw on the private club. Granted, it was more difficult to get into the area I was hunting on the PL, but that's all part of the sport. The DNR are the only ones managing those herds and they are doing a GREAT job.

 

[Remmy]

I may be totally wrong but I don't think the DNR are the only people managing our deer heard.I was told by 2 DNR officers that I know personally that the 12 limit was greatly put in and affected by the auto INS companies because of the amount of claims they have in GA.They said its all a political game now.And it don't matter how good of a hunter you are,if your property or area of the state don't hold or have big deer your not going to kill a big deer.You can't kill what ain't there.

 

[Dantethegolden]

I may be totally wrong but I don't think the DNR are the only people managing our deer heard.I was told by 2 DNR officers that I know personally that the 12 limit was greatly put in and affected by the auto INS companies because of the amount of claims they have in GA.They said its all a political game now.And it don't matter how good of a hunter you are,if your property or area of the state don't hold or have big deer your not going to kill a big deer.You can't kill what ain't there.

I think the insurance companies make plenty of money with the threat that deer pose. I work in the car industry, and I've seen plenty of people with older (read: paid off) cars that ordinarily would only have liability coverage, but they keep Comprehensive coverage with an extremely low deductible on their policy and gladly pay the extra money for it bc of their fear of hitting a deer and getting stuck with the bill. However, it wouldn't surprise me if they continued to sell these policies using the story of "Well, what if you hit a deer?" while simultaneously reducing their own exposure by lobbying for higher bag limits. I just have no idea if that's actually occured.

 

[loadnplenty]

I can't remember if it was New Jersey or Delaware that took bucks off for two years, but they have reaping the success ever since. They had more record book deer the first year they brought them back and continue great success with bucks!!!

 

[GeauxLSU]

In 1860 Captain Richard King went to South Texas and started a scientific upbreeding experiement, using only the biggest and healthiest bulls to breed cattle. The result of which became the Gertruids breed of cattle, the first recognized new breed of beef cattle in America. Today the King Ranch spans 146,000 acres and is the largest and most progressive cattle and horse ranch in America.
It causes me to wonder if we implemented a program in Georgia for a 3 or 4 year period where we allowed One buck and 2 does per year. The buck would have to be 8 points or less leaving the biggest and healthiest buck to breed. I wonder what our deer herd would be like in 4 years? I also wonder why anyone needs a 10 doe bag limit when Coyote predition and over harvesting is now an apparant cause of a reduced deer population. The DNR's answer is fewer doe days. Does that mean that the greedy hunters will just kill 10 days on fewer days than before? It causes me to speculate that perhaps the wrong people are making these decisions that affect all of us serious and consequential hunters.
Just my two cents!

Wow, the responses to this thread are all over the place addressing so many issues I lost track but few are answering your two points.
One is would reducing the buck limit and putting trophy rules on the one buck allowed change the tropy characteristics of the herd. I think we have enough trophy managed counties in the state now to test that theory. In large part it has little if any effect. Yes it may slightly increase the age structure of the bucks but you aren't going to get every other buck walking by to be a B&C freak. Age is certainly a factor but obviously so are genetics and nutrition.
Secondly you are asking about the concept of doe days. I'll not go on my rant again about that but I have discussed it with Mr. Bowers (Chief of game management largely responsible for our hunting regs) and let's just say, he and I have decidely different concepts of the 'logic' behind doe days. I will shoot the same one or two does regardless of the allowable number of doe days (as long as it's more than about 2 days). I'm pretty sure it won't be any more or less dead.
If I was made king Georgia would have a 5 doe, 2 buck limit with the same restrictions (4 points on one side) for one of the two bucks. The problem with any over harvesting (to the extent it exists) is just like "gun control laws". Only the legal citizens obey the laws. I've lost about all my faith in the hunting community, as you don't have to talk to a hunter for 5 minutes before they tend to reveal how they pick and choose the laws they justify breaking. I'm by the book, 100% when it comes to taking game. If I don't like the law, I'll lobby to change it. I'm not going to break it. It's not that important to me to shoot anything and since hunting is almost strictly by the honor code, I try and retain some.
Two last points to consider (not related to your question but since everyone is all over the place anyway....)
1) Alabama until a few years ago, had a "limit" of one deer per day. You could literally shoot over 100 deer and be legal! While there was a lot of complaints, the herd sure didn't go extinct.
2) Regarding "supplemental feeding" - I'm pretty sure a deer has never starved to death in Georgia. Leave the corn at Walmart and go spend that same $10 or so on a bag of fertilizer and spread it around some white oaks, honey suckle, muscadines, crabapples, etc.... Or... do nothing and hunt.
Y'all be safe this year....

 

[loadnplenty]

Reading what some others have put on here about DNR, I know from talking with several game wardens they are getting fewer in numbers. As an LEO when we catch poachers or have other issues, when we call them they are several counties away. It seems right now a lot if their funding is going to lake areas where there are typically more game wardens assigned. You don't see many politicians hunting anymore. But they all love to go lake communities for their fundraisers. So funds aren't going into deer heards like they use to be. Fish, turkey, dove, etc.., just not deer!

 

[Dantethegolden]

Reading what some others have put on here about DNR, I know from talking with several game wardens they are getting fewer in numbers. As an LEO when we catch poachers or have other issues, when we call them they are several counties away. It seems right now a lot if their funding is going to lake areas where there are typically more game wardens assigned. You don't see many politicians hunting anymore. But they all love to go lake communities for their fundraisers. So funds aren't going into deer heards like they use to be. Fish, turkey, dove, etc.., just not deer!

At one point in time, I considered being a DNR Ranger...until I looked up what they made per year. Georgia pays their DNR folks less than almost every other state in the union. California pays almost twice what we do. I think that's part of the problem right there, which as you said is a direct result of funding.

 

[Bear44]

Wow, the responses to this thread are all over the place addressing so many issues I lost track but few are answering your two points.
One is would reducing the buck limit and putting trophy rules on the one buck allowed change the tropy characteristics of the herd. I think we have enough trophy managed counties in the state now to test that theory. In large part it has little if any effect. Yes it may slightly increase the age structure of the bucks but you aren't going to get every other buck walking by to be a B&C freak. Age is certainly a factor but obviously so are genetics and nutrition.
Secondly you are asking about the concept of doe days. I'll not go on my rant again about that but I have discussed it with Mr. Bowers (Chief of game management largely responsible for our hunting regs) and let's just say, he and I have decidely different concepts of the 'logic' behind doe days. I will shoot the same one or two does regardless of the allowable number of doe days (as long as it's more than about 2 days). I'm pretty sure it won't be any more or less dead.
If I was made king Georgia would have a 5 doe, 2 buck limit with the same restrictions (4 points on one side) for one of the two bucks. The problem with any over harvesting (to the extent it exists) is just like "gun control laws". Only the legal citizens obey the laws. I've lost about all my faith in the hunting community, as you don't have to talk to a hunter for 5 minutes before they tend to reveal how they pick and choose the laws they justify breaking. I'm by the book, 100% when it comes to taking game. If I don't like the law, I'll lobby to change it. I'm not going to break it. It's not that important to me to shoot anything and since hunting is almost strictly by the honor code, I try and retain some.
Two last points to consider (not related to your question but since everyone is all over the place anyway....)
1) Alabama until a few years ago, had a "limit" of one deer per day. You could literally shoot over 100 deer and be legal! While there was a lot of complaints, the herd sure didn't go extinct.
2) Regarding "supplemental feeding" - I'm pretty sure a deer has never starved to death in Georgia. Leave the corn at Walmart and go spend that same $10 or so on a bag of fertilizer and spread it around some white oaks, honey suckle, muscadines, crabapples, etc.... Or... do nothing and hunt.
Y'all be safe this year....

We are SOOO on the same page about this. I can't tell you how many times I have carried in backpacks full of fertilizer. (BTW folks, this really works.) But most of the time I simply hunt.

I find a specific area and spend years learning that area and deer herd. This is another reason I prefer public land. I don't have to worry about changing lease agreements or club rules. Public land also gets MUCH less pressure than a typical private club as long as you're willing to hike in a bit. Most private clubs make access way to easy. If you can't get close to an area in your truck, you just jump on your ATV. For some reason people think that a deer that will be aware of a snapped stick you step on from 150 yards away is oblivious of a horde of ATVs that invade the woods during deer season. One of the stand locations I currently have averages an 80% shooting opportunity. Eight out of ten times on the stand you can kill a deer if you want to. However, we call the stand location "Bowels of Hell", because that's how difficult it is to get to and, more importantly, how difficult it is to get a deer out of.

Also, hunting is a sport. The goal is to win the game, not just kill something any way you can. Anyone that breaks ANY game law is a poacher, not a hunter. How can anyone take pride in a trophy they got by cheating? It's not about a head on the wall. It's about what it took to get it there.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of heads on the wall and am proud of every one of them because of how I got them. Many of them are from Africa and Africa is a game rich environment, to say the least, so getting a shot on game is not difficult. However, getting a shot at truly quality game takes a lot of effort and if you are hunting true Africa and not some South African canned hunt there are other factors to the hunt that you just don't deal with here. I have been in several nose to nose stand offs with Cape Buffalo, have quietly slipped away from a Black Rhino that was closer than 30 yards in thick cover and have literally run for my life from an enraged elephant. Real hunting can manifest itself in many ways, but it does not include shooting animals that you have gained the advantage over by breaking the law.

 

[jpr444]

More government is always the best answer.

thats funny!!! LOL LOL LOL