Deer hunting land

[RustyTackleBox]

So you think 9492 deer taken by bow in 2016 is " almost no influence" or "simply can't be that great".

OOOOO lets play the math game here... lets say ND has 4 deer per square mile (iowa is ranked 10th with 6.3 so i know we have less than that) and ND has 70,762 square miles so that means we have roughly 283,048 deer in the state so 9,492/283,048 = 0.0335349481360052

thats 3.3% pretty close to nothing especially if you think about 109 deer per day (40k per year) are hit by a vehicle in north dakota

 

[SDMF]

the bow hunters would still have their bow only tag if they choose to they just couldn't have a rifle tag. the amount of rifle hunters wouldn't change you just wouldn't have guys doing both, this would have minimum changes to the overall deer harvest

So, unless I missed something, hunters are one of the somewhat measureable tools that G&F have to regulate/manage the resource. Why would ND G&F then want to make a change to the system that would have "minimal changes to the overall deer harvest"? What practical impact would this make towards management of the resource? Minimal by your own definition.

 

[KDM]

This thread also makes me laugh.....A LOT!!!! If you want to play the math game, take the estimated number of deer killed with a rifle and get the percentage. Take the estimated number of deer killed with a bow and get the percentage and then take the estimated number of deer killed from insurance claims and get a percentage. Then take the estimated number of deer killed by winter and add in the estimated number of deer killed by disease along with the estimated number of deer killed by predators and get those percentages. If you added them all together and subtracted that number from the estimated deer population in ND, I'm surprised I even SEE a deer in ND. What you guys have to realize is that NOBODY knows how many deer we have and what we are dealing with here is an estimate plus an estimate plus an estimate plus and estimate plus and estimate plus and estimate subtracted from an estimate. That results in what we in the military called a SWAG (Sophisticated wild ass GUESS). Yet we still have deer to chase every year. The current system IS NOT BROKE!!! It's fair and equal for all. Argue your numbers all you want. I can statistically show that the deer populations in ND or any part of ND is directly related to the number of bullheads caught at the bullhead tourney and so can any other statistically knowledgeable person. I can make a set of numbers say ANYTHING I WANT IT TO SAY. It was the very first exercise we did in Basic Stats. Compare anything to anything. It didn't matter what you compared it worked out. All I have to do is use the right set of statistical analyses and comparisons and viola, the "Chicken Little" apocalyptic panic machine is humming right along. Even out west where the winter was HORRIBLE this past year, there are still lots of deer. I went turkey hunting west of Mandan this spring like I do every spring and I saw lots of deer while hunting. Here's a thought. When you stop seeing deer throughout the year, the producers quit complaining about winter depredations, and you don't have to slow down at least a dozen times during the year to avoid hitting a deer, then you can start worrying. Dividing sportsmen over pettiness is the number one tactic for anti-hunters and this thread seems to be helping that agenda right along. Lets try to get a grip here shall we fellas?????

 

[LBrandt]

I estimate that I am going to have fun this fall after a 4 year wait.

 

[WormWiggler]

Too bad a civil discussion can't be had without panties getting all wadded up..

 

[Obi-Wan]

G&F job is to manage the heard and give as many people the opportunity to hunt that the deer population allows. More hunters in the field ( no one doubles up on tags ) with minimal changes to the overall deer harvest work to keeps these goals

This is how I think it could work

bow tags could be bought over the counter but only before the application deadline and would be for archery only, the same as it is now. Those who choose to purchase a bow tag would be ineligible for the lottery. For those that enjoy archery they would be guaranteed a tag for archery and would not loose their bow tag but would not be allowed a rifle / muzzy tag. If one decides to apply and receives a rifle tag any legal weapon could be used but the tag would only be good for the rifle season and in the unit specified. Applicants could only apply for one tag either rifle or muzzy and if successful it could only be used in that season stated on the tag. Muzzy tags recipients could only hunt with a muzzle loader and in the muzzy season. If half of those who purchased bow tags in 2016 decided to buy a bow tag that would take about 12,000 applicants out of the drawing for rifle or muzzy tags increasing the odds of all applicants. I am sure this could use some tweaking but I think it would work in getting more guys in the field.

For those guys that recommend everyone buy a bow tag you may want to think that over because if bow tags purchases keep going up, which they have in recent years G&F may be forced to make more drastic changes that you may not like.

So, unless I missed something, hunters are one of the somewhat measureable tools that G&F have to regulate/manage the resource. Why would ND G&F then want to make a change to the system that would have "minimal changes to the overall deer harvest"? What practical impact would this make towards management of the resource? Minimal by your own definition.

 

[Kurtr]

So the lost revenue comes from where to allow the gfp toanage the deer to give everyone the opportunity?

 

[Obi-Wan]

So the lost revenue comes from where to allow the gfp toanage the deer to give everyone the opportunity?

They still have their doors open and they dropped tags from over 100,000 to under 50,000. They did raise the tag price to help offset some of the lost tags. If revenue is all you are concerned about the roughly 12,000 fewer bow tags would be about $360,000 raise the tag cost another $5 to $10 at $5 the roughly 61,000 tags would bring in $305,000 and at $10 would be $610,000.

 

[espringers]

This feels silly. Imho... Nothing about the system needs to change. We just need more deer. I will buy one. Anyone know where I can buy a deer.

 

[WormWiggler]

So the lost revenue comes from where to allow the gfp toanage the deer to give everyone the opportunity?

Would the same number of tag spread over more hunters create less revenue?

I guess I am assuming the debate is elimination of multiple tags by an individual in a given year, or are you debating the reduction of overall tags to promote a more robust deer herd?

Heard an argument that the mule deer / badlands should be an entirely different lottery as it skews the way people apply. That is a new idea to me and I would need to think and research a bit more before attempting an opinion.

 

[Fly Carpin]

I have a long well thought out response but I'm way farther down the rabbit hole than I ever wanted to be. The argument was had a few years ago and the NDGF made the right decision. You can keep being bitter if you like. I won't stop you.

Would the same number of tag spread over more hunters create less revenue?

I guess I am assuming the debate is elimination of multiple tags by an individual in a given year, or are you debating the reduction of overall tags to promote a more robust deer herd?

Heard an argument that the mule deer / badlands should be an entirely different lottery as it skews the way people apply. That is a new idea to me and I would need to think and research a bit more before attempting an opinion.

If the opportunity for me to buy a bow tag and donate $30 for rifle and $30 for muzzleloader for 7-11 years (I'm sitting at 7 rifle points and 10 muzz points) is taken away for a one tag system, how is that the same revenue? Are there fewer people applying because of bow hunters? Am I wrong in assuming that I'm in the minority for donating my app dollars since they started offering that option?

Here's my final take. KDM said it well. Division amongst hunters is the beginning of the end. If archery is having such a drastic impact on the herd (Herd. Not heard. Cripes you guys) that it's affecting how many rifle tags are given out, maybe the harvest survey needs a tweak. I for one, as someone thoroughly schooled in both wildlife biology and statistics, would fully support a mandatory reporting system. You have to report results for every big game tag you buy. We all know relying on aerial survey and voluntary harvest surveys has its limitations. Make it like the big 3. You don't report, you don't hunt. But put the onus on hunters. If we want a system where every single deer is accounted for and tag numbers are adjusted accordingly, we can't also expect bargain barrel tag prices.

Furthermore, I've yet to hear an argument for the one tag system that wasn't prefaced with "I have X number of preference points and these dang bow hunters go out and shoot a buck every year. It ain't fair I tells ya!" We live in a state where the rifle success rate is 70% or higher. Kansas, Nebraska, and SD are all in similar boats. That's unfathomable. You want sad numbers, look at Michigan, Wisconsin, and even Minnesota. Sure the hunting style is night and day, but we live in a place where 70% of the time, you're going to kill. The system isn't broke fellas.

 

[Kickemup]

G&F job is to manage the heard and give as many people the opportunity to hunt that the deer population allows. More hunters in the field ( no one doubles up on tags ) with minimal changes to the overall deer harvest work to keeps these goals

This is how I think it could work

bow tags could be bought over the counter but only before the application deadline and would be for archery only, the same as it is now. Those who choose to purchase a bow tag would be ineligible for the lottery. For those that enjoy archery they would be guaranteed a tag for archery and would not loose their bow tag but would not be allowed a rifle / muzzy tag. If one decides to apply and receives a rifle tag any legal weapon could be used but the tag would only be good for the rifle season and in the unit specified. Applicants could only apply for one tag either rifle or muzzy and if successful it could only be used in that season stated on the tag. Muzzy tags recipients could only hunt with a muzzle loader and in the muzzy season. If half of those who purchased bow tags in 2016 decided to buy a bow tag that would take about 12,000 applicants out of the drawing for rifle or muzzy tags increasing the odds of all applicants. I am sure this could use some tweaking but I think it would work in getting more guys in the field.

For those guys that recommend everyone buy a bow tag you may want to think that over because if bow tags purchases keep going up, which they have in recent years G&F may be forced to make more drastic changes that you may not like.

I was was going to stay out of this thread but after a 12pack of beer. I've come to realize this is the stupidest thing I think I've ever read. The G&F don't have a clue how many deer we have in the state. And until they actually do a decent survey they are not going to change what is going on. I bow hunt every year that is my right if someone don't like the fact that I have the chance to get 3 bucks tags in a year and they don't that is there problem not anyone else's. I have friends that are farmers and they shoot 2 bucks every year. Should I complain that they get 2 tags every year? When I'm lucky to get 2 tags every 6 or 7 years.

 

[WormWiggler]

If the opportunity for me to buy a bow tag and donate $30 for rifle and $30 for muzzleloader for 7-11 years (I'm sitting at 7 rifle points and 10 muzz points) is taken away for a one tag system, how is that the same revenue? Are there fewer people applying because of bow hunters? Am I wrong in assuming that I'm in the minority for donating my app dollars since they started offering that option?

I did not realize you were donating every year, I get my funds back if I am unsuccessful.

Here's my final take. KDM said it well. Division amongst hunters is the beginning of the end. There already is a division between landowner and joe six pack... If archery is having such a drastic impact on the herd (Herd. Not heard. Cripes you guys) that it's affecting how many rifle tags are given out, maybe the harvest survey needs a tweak. I for one, as someone thoroughly schooled in both wildlife biology and statistics, would fully support a mandatory reporting system. You have to report results for every big game tag you buy. We all know relying on aerial survey and voluntary harvest surveys has its limitations. Make it like the big 3. You don't report, you don't hunt. But put the onus on hunters. If we want a system where every single deer is accounted for and tag numbers are adjusted accordingly, we can't also expect bargain barrel tag prices. I agree 100%, I suppose dishonest people would skew results a bit...


Furthermore, I've yet to hear an argument for the one tag system that wasn't prefaced with "I have X number of preference points and these dang bow hunters go out and shoot a buck every year. It ain't fair I tells ya!" We live in a state where the rifle success rate is 70% or higher. Kansas, Nebraska, and SD are all in similar boats. That's unfathomable. You want sad numbers, look at Michigan, Wisconsin, and even Minnesota. Sure the hunting style is night and day, but we live in a place where 70% of the time, you're going to kill. The system isn't broke fellas.

Tricky subject, maybe the units need to be changed too

 

[Vollmer]

My cousin and I went for a drive last night, scouting, and glassing for deer. I am not sure about other areas, but in our neck of the woods, the deer are thick! We seen a ton of deer, and quite a few real nice bucks. He is an even more avid hunter than I, and he even stated "I have not had a drive around like this in awhile". We took the full brunt of mother nature last winter, but the deer seem to have pulled through nicely. We also seen quite a few twin sets. Looking forward to this season.

 

[Coyote Hunter]

If the opportunity for me to buy a bow tag and donate $30 for rifle and $30 for muzzleloader for 7-11 years (I'm sitting at 7 rifle points and 10 muzz points) is taken away for a one tag system, how is that the same revenue? Are there fewer people applying because of bow hunters? Am I wrong in assuming that I'm in the minority for donating my app dollars since they started offering that option?

Here's my final take. KDM said it well. Division amongst hunters is the beginning of the end. If archery is having such a drastic impact on the herd (Herd. Not heard. Cripes you guys) that it's affecting how many rifle tags are given out, maybe the harvest survey needs a tweak. I for one, as someone thoroughly schooled in both wildlife biology and statistics, would fully support a mandatory reporting system. You have to report results for every big game tag you buy. We all know relying on aerial survey and voluntary harvest surveys has its limitations. Make it like the big 3. You don't report, you don't hunt. But put the onus on hunters. If we want a system where every single deer is accounted for and tag numbers are adjusted accordingly, we can't also expect bargain barrel tag prices.

Furthermore, I've yet to hear an argument for the one tag system that wasn't prefaced with "I have X number of preference points and these dang bow hunters go out and shoot a buck every year. It ain't fair I tells ya!" We live in a state where the rifle success rate is 70% or higher. Kansas, Nebraska, and SD are all in similar boats. That's unfathomable. You want sad numbers, look at Michigan, Wisconsin, and even Minnesota. Sure the hunting style is night and day, but we live in a place where 70% of the time, you're going to kill. The system isn't broke fellas.

^^^^^^
This is dead-on!

 

[Obi-Wan]

I do agree with you that the that G&F needs to upgrade their methods in determining the states deer population and how the determine the amount of tags to give out each season. What I don't agree with you on is your claim of " I bow hunt every year that is my right " hunting is not a right it is a privilege, if hunting was a right I would have the right to rifle hunt every year also.

I was was going to stay out of this thread but after a 12pack of beer. I've come to realize this is the stupidest thing I think I've ever read. The G&F don't have a clue how many deer we have in the state. And until they actually do a decent survey they are not going to change what is going on. I bow hunt every year that is my right if someone don't like the fact that I have the chance to get 3 bucks tags in a year and they don't that is there problem not anyone else's. I have friends that are farmers and they shoot 2 bucks every year. Should I complain that they get 2 tags every year? When I'm lucky to get 2 tags every 6 or 7 years.

 

[NDSportsman]

G&F job is to manage the heard and give as many people the opportunity to hunt that the deer population allows. More hunters in the field ( no one doubles up on tags ) with minimal changes to the overall deer harvest work to keeps these goals

This is how I think it could work

bow tags could be bought over the counter but only before the application deadline and would be for archery only, the same as it is now. Those who choose to purchase a bow tag would be ineligible for the lottery. For those that enjoy archery they would be guaranteed a tag for archery and would not loose their bow tag but would not be allowed a rifle / muzzy tag. If one decides to apply and receives a rifle tag any legal weapon could be used but the tag would only be good for the rifle season and in the unit specified. Applicants could only apply for one tag either rifle or muzzy and if successful it could only be used in that season stated on the tag. Muzzy tags recipients could only hunt with a muzzle loader and in the muzzy season. If half of those who purchased bow tags in 2016 decided to buy a bow tag that would take about 12,000 applicants out of the drawing for rifle or muzzy tags increasing the odds of all applicants. I am sure this could use some tweaking but I think it would work in getting more guys in the field.

For those guys that recommend everyone buy a bow tag you may want to think that over because if bow tags purchases keep going up, which they have in recent years G&F may be forced to make more drastic changes that you may not like.

I have an even better idea. Let's shut down rifle and muzzy seasons and only allow archery hunting. Everyone can get a tag and the number of deer killed will likely drop there fore increasing the deer herd even more. Win/win!

Now your system still limits the number who can hunt mine doesn't so which is better?

 

[gst]

bamberg, welcome to NDA where a simple question turns into...............


If you are one of the greedy bow hunters that receive special treatment by the state and it gets to the end of the season and you want to fill your tag with a doe, we are not in 3B3 but shoot me a pm.

 

[NodakBuckeye]

Where do we stand on slot limits?

 

[NDSportsman]

Where do we stand on slot limits?

I'm for them. Only folks between 5'10 and 6' get tags!