Deer Licenses

[Shockwave]

Everything should stay the way it is. Who cares who gets what tags, how many, and what seasons they hunt. I love hunting and everything that comes with it. However, what I love most is raising and watching my kids get into the sport. The only thing I would ever change with our system is give the kids more than 10 days to hunt deer. Everyone wants kids to get into hunting, than give them more time to succeed in filling their tags.

 

[NDSportsman]

So when are they going to mail out the deer licenses?

This is what I got from them:

• Successful applicants will receive their deer license after they purchase a valid 2018-19 general game and habitat license or combination license in addition to their deer license. All deer hunters, regardless of age, are required to purchase this license. If you've already purchased this 2018-19 license, you do not need to purchase another one.
• Tags for both the first and second lottery, youth and gratis will be mailed in late August.

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

 

[dust in the wind]

So when are they going to mail out the deer licenses?

I saw a post the other day that the tags were going to be mailed out at the end of August. So.... they should be showing up any day now.

 

[Obi-Wan]

What is the magical number when it does become a contributing factor? 10% - 20% - 30% of harvest

However - the archery tags are not a contributing factor in the management of the deer herd as of this time. With that said, it can remain as it is until it does become a factor.

 

[dust in the wind]

What is the magical number when it does become a contributing factor? 10% - 20% - 30% of harvest

I have no idea - I had asked that but never got a response.

ETA: I think we're close to that point though. If deer numbers continue to rise and archery success stays where it is - it should be ok.

If archery success continues to go up and deer numbers remain the same or go lower - I suspect it will be a factor.

 

[Bfishn]

What is the magical number when it does become a contributing factor? 10% - 20% - 30% of harvest

Why don't you let game and fish figure that out. The reality is if deer numbers keep rebounding there wont be any change. If they plummet again after a few hard winters there may be a change, in the mean time get your ass out there and enjoy the opportunities you have, and quit crying about everyone else.

 

[Obi-Wan]

I'd say eliminate rifle and muzzy hunting altogether then. Everyone can get an OTC bow tag, everyone can hunt and our deer population will continue to expand since success rates will be less then with rifles. You should be all for that, right?[/QUOTE]


muzzy success was lower than archery last year so maybe we should do away with rifle and archery

 

[Bfishn]

muzzy success was lower than archery last year so maybe we should do away with rifle and archery

Muzzy was 1% less success rate than Archery and the season is only 15 days long. I'm sure you wont be able to grasp what that means, but those are the facts jack.

 

[Mort]

More cowbell please...I need more cowbell.......dang it you people....

 

[Lungdeflator]

So using simple economics (in reality the situation isn't this simple) supply of deer tags is limited and demand for deer tags is high. So should the price of deer tags increase? Would you be willing to pay 50$ for a tag if you are only drawing every 3-6 years?

Number of tags and system would stay the same. I am not sure how much of the tag monies the G&F puts back into habitat development, but if it is a significant amount, wouldn't increasing the price be beneficial to the states habitat and herd health as a whole? Thus increasing opportunity for everybody?

 

[eyexer]

I’m not sure how anybody can claim archery isn’t a contributing factor when they have absolutely no idea what the number of deer are that get harvested via bow. Those are the most tight lipped people on the planet. No way in hell would they ever get a straight answer on any surgery etc. and the bow hunters aren’t stupid. They know if they claim to have killed deer via bow there is a good probability that it would not be in their best interest if they claimed to have harvested. It’s not rocket science.

 

[JMF]

I’m not sure how anybody can claim archery isn’t a contributing factor when they have absolutely no idea what the number of deer are that get harvested via bow. Those are the most tight lipped people on the planet. No way in hell would they ever get a straight answer on any surgery etc. and the bow hunters aren’t stupid. They know if they claim to have killed deer via bow there is a good probability that it would not be in their best interest if they claimed to have harvested. It’s not rocket science.

That's probably the dumbest statement of the day.

 

[db-2]

On the survey I have gotten on bow other than days hunted as I sure do not mark it down I do answer the harvest part correctly.
At the same time I do think about not saying I shot a deer if I had. Yes, I agree it is not to my benefit to tell I have harvested a deer so will see if a survey comes one day after I have shot a deer with the bow. Have found quite a number of bucks but not a shootable one yet this year again. Only deer for the future if they make it.
Maybe I need to focus on mule deer with the bow so I can get some mule deer rifle hunters on my case.

And yes I am tight lip about my hunts as talking will only bring heartaches to me and my bow.

However, not sure how many rifle hunters answer the bow survey correctly after they have shot one with their rifle and put a bow tag on it. I believe it happens more often than one thinks as I have seen it more that once. ( I seen a father showing off a buck his son shot with a rifle, when a person asked his son's age it became a archery kill, then enter into the deer show with the father as one of the judges and he took second for a bow) Most bow tags are sold the end of October or November.

As I stated, as mainly a bow hunter, I am fine with the way it is and that only makes sense to feel that way for a bow hunter. We have very little rules on us compare to rifle, long season and the whole state and that is one reason I gave my rifle up besides it brings a lot more enjoyment than a rifle.

But I also stated, before this is done us bow hunters will be in a lottery and I have stands in two different units so there goes one unit to hunt in and ect. And as I stated earlier I will need to adapt as before when rifle's tags were hard to get, as for some they cannot adapt but need to find a edge for themselves. db

 

[espringers]

i agree with eye (and i think kdm said it earlier)... until there is mandatory reporting of harvested deer, we will never have a true grasp on the harvest %s. the surveys mailed out have the potential to be very inaccurate for self serving interests of the person being surveyed. its always possible that harvested deer would still go unreported in a mandatory reporting situation. but, if the failure to report meant loss of privileges if you got caught not reporting, then i think you would see a much higher accuracy than simple surveys.

 

[guywhofishes]

- - - Updated - - -

will you guys be mad if I stick a big one over bait this year?

 

[MuleyMadness]

So using simple economics (in reality the situation isn't this simple) supply of deer tags is limited and demand for deer tags is high. So should the price of deer tags increase? Would you be willing to pay 50$ for a tag if you are only drawing every 3-6 years?

Number of tags and system would stay the same. I am not sure how much of the tag monies the G&F puts back into habitat development, but if it is a significant amount, wouldn't increasing the price be beneficial to the states habitat and herd health as a whole? Thus increasing opportunity for everybody?

I have always thought that resident and non-resident deer tag prices are too low. It went up a whole whopping $10 years ago. I think it should be $50. I would even pay more. Everyone out there is walking around with a $500-$1200 rifle...whats $50. It definitely would not hurt for the G and F to throw some of that money into habitat.

 

[SupressYourself]

I'd be for raising prices, only if it somehow went to habitat.
Hunting is increasingly a rich mans game. Couple that trend with habitat loss* and public land privatization*, and soon only lords like GuyWhoBaits will be hunting, complete with horses and hounds.


* I cringed when mentioning those topics, but maybe it will be ok without GST lurking about?

 

[Obi-Wan]

I have always thought that resident and non-resident deer tag prices are too low. It went up a whole whopping $10 years ago. I think it should be $50. I would even pay more. Everyone out there is walking around with a $500-$1200 rifle...whats $50. It definitely would not hurt for the G and F to throw some of that money into habitat.

Hell if money is no object 1st tag $ 50.00 2nd tag $ 250.00 Third tag $ 500.00 all non refundable and all would have to be purchased or applied for on the same date. That should keep quite a few guys from doubling up

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -

will you guys be mad if I stick a big one over bait this year?

I for one could care less what you do with a fat chick at an all you can eat buffet

 

[dust in the wind]

- - - Updated - - -

will you guys be mad if I stick a big one over bait this year?

i think someone has been preparing things in your neck of the woods....

 

[Kurtr]

I'd be for raising prices, only if it somehow went to habitat.
Hunting is increasingly a rich mans game. Couple that trend with habitat loss* and public land privatization*, and soon only lords like GuyWhoBaits will be hunting, complete with horses and hounds.


* I cringed when mentioning those topics, but maybe it will be ok without GST lurking about?

17 pages pretty sure we as a collective are pretty good at fucking drag shit out. Maybe it wasn’t gst????