An argument against separate weapon seasons

[bj139]

Where I hunt only rimfire rifles are allowed due to supposed safety reasons. I can use slugs from a shotgun.

 

[Nutterbuster]

Preach! The why to this question in NC is due to the North Carolina Bowhunters Association and their lobbying for their own self interest over the benefit of hunters as a whole. The state has considered making changes to our seasons many times and they have fought them every single time.

Yeah, you really don't wanna get me started on alabama bowhunters and the treatment they've given dog hunters, small game hunters, gun hunters, etc.

 

[mattsteg]

I figure they're managing a pile of resources.

• Deer
• Days in the calendar
• Hunter $$$
• Other things that deer eat or eat deer
• Other activities that people do in the deer woods
• Hunter activation and retention

Other than "tradition" archery seasons give the chance to open up larger chunks of the calendar without

• Dragging down deer numbers too much (even bag limits are tough to manage down to highly-local levels. Archery is tough enough to limit pressure on marginal areas.
• Bring in the bucks
• Reduce impact on other uses in multiuse forest. A dude with a bow cuts a smaller footprint than a guy wth a gun. Less of a concern on WMAs, more of one on e.g. state and federal forests, timber company land, etc.
• Archery can safely support a higher hunter density on the same land. We want more hunters...right??? Just on someone else's spot.
• Archery is a lower-impact activity on the landscape. Guns you get guys bushwhackin', deer' drivin', gettin' all tactical on the deer. That's all fine - but even with well managed bags a heavy load on the resources of deer and time on public land.

I don'y think of it as "hard so I deserve more opportunity " as mach as "tough to succeed especially if numbers aren't great, so we can get away with opening more opportunity without expecting too much harvest.

Your perspective from a land of a 2.5 month rifle season and liberal bag limits is gonna be a lot different from mine in a land of 2week+2day rifle season that amounts to a coordinated tactical assault on our deer herds. We're probably both wrong.

 

[Nutterbuster]

I figure they're managing a pile of resources.

• Deer
• Days in the calendar
• Hunter $$$
• Other things that deer eat or eat deer
• Other activities that people do in the deer woods
• Hunter activation and retention

Other than "tradition" archery seasons give the chance to open up larger chunks of the calendar without

• Dragging down deer numbers too much (even bag limits are tough to manage down to highly-local levels. Archery is tough enough to limit pressure on marginal areas.
• Bring in the bucks
• Reduce impact on other uses in multiuse forest. A dude with a bow cuts a smaller footprint than a guy wth a gun. Less of a concern on WMAs, more of one on e.g. state and federal forests, timber company land, etc.
• Archery can safely support a higher hunter density on the same land. We want more hunters...right??? Just on someone else's spot.
• Archery is a lower-impact activity on the landscape. Guns you get guys bushwhackin', deer' drivin', gettin' all tactical on the deer. That's all fine - but even with well managed bags a heavy load on the resources of deer and time on public land.

I don'y think of it as "hard so I deserve more opportunity " as mach as "tough to succeed especially if numbers aren't great, so we can get away with opening more opportunity without expecting too much harvest.

Your perspective from a land of a 2.5 month rifle season and liberal bag limits is gonna be a lot different from mine in a land of 2week+2day rifle season that amounts to a coordinated tactical assault on our deer herds. We're probably both wrong.

Some really excellent points. Agree on it probably being different in your state than mine. Whitetail habitat is incredibly diverse, and that complicates things. We have counties bigger than some states and they're 95% timberland. A lot different to manage that than a place that's maybe 90% suburban.

Ultimately, I don't suppose I have a problem with a bow season, really, if there's a sound management reason behind it. One thing that's been brought up by several individuals is the success factor thing. It sounds like some folks would rather have a longer season, even if the result of that season is less successful than a shorter season.

I'm conflicted on that one. Just not wired that way and will need time to try and see that viewpoint. I may shift if I can digest it.

 

[TreeMunkie]

Lest we forget, equipment rule changes /specific seasons = equipment purchases. Seems about every couple of years the manufacturers/retailers and their lobbyists push through a new rule change and suddenly equipment is flying off the shelves. In Michigan nobody was buying cross-bows when they could only shoot them during rifle season. Now they are everywhere. Straight-walled cartridge rifles were gathering dust in the gun stores until they were allowed in the "no-rifle" zone. Now everybody has a .450 Bushmaster setup. Not saying these things are good or bad just that not all the rules/legislation concerning deer are about managing the herd. How many bows would your shop have sold if there was not a bow-only season?

 

[mattsteg]

Some really excellent points. Agree on it probably being different in your state than mine. Whitetail habitat is incredibly diverse, and that complicates things. We have counties bigger than some states and they're 95% timberland. A lot different to manage that than a place that's maybe 90% suburban.

Ultimately, I don't suppose I have a problem with a bow season, really, if there's a sound management reason behind it. One thing that's been brought up by several individuals is the success factor thing. It sounds like some folks would rather have a longer season, even if the result of that season is less successful than a shorter season.

I'm conflicted on that one. Just not wired that way and will need time to try and see that viewpoint. I may shift if I can digest it.

We've got vast swaths of timberland here...but like 5 deer per square mile in those areas.

I also wouldn't say a less successful season (I'm more successful with archery because I'm stupid and drive 5 hours to rifle hunt with tbe Timberwolves) - if the harvest is managed to be equal either way...the approach with lower success rates is whatever draws more hunters.

I look at it as the goal is a sustainable harvest, $$$, hunter recruitment and retention, while minimizing other resource conflicts and impact. A lot of 75 year old tradition comes into play in how that's accomplished.

We kill about as many bucks as AL and half as many does. And both states are about 85/15ish rifle/other (a tad more muzzloading her

e and bow there). Our rifle season is 16 days.

2 weeks to kill what y'all put on the ground in 2 months. Maybe that's a sign everything just balances out? I dunno.

 

[kyler1945]

I thought about a fun way to do it. You allow half the deer hunters to hunt one year, and half to hunt the following. October - January. Figure out the bag limits, open season any weapon. Half as many folks in the woods at once solves the hunter density issue. Solve the weapon snobbery. Figure out a simple way to divide folks that lets families, deer camps, whatever exist just like thy always have. I would gladly hunt every other year, and spend the opposite fishing, camping, hiking, shooting, traveling, reading whatever that falls off from my obsession with hunting. Bet it would save a lot of marriages. Bet it would repair a lot of parent child relationships. It would also solve a crucial supply demand incentive in that you’d be asking hunters to kill more deer than normal to maintain herds instead of less. Less trash. Less damage to roads and trails on public land. Easier for the fuzz to keep tabs on riffraff.

 

[DroptineKrazy]

I thought about a fun way to do it. You allow half the deer hunters to hunt one year, and half to hunt the following. October - January. Figure out the bag limits, open season any weapon. Half as many folks in the woods at once solves the hunter density issue. Solve the weapon snobbery. Figure out a simple way to divide folks that lets families, deer camps, whatever exist just like thy always have. I would gladly hunt every other year, and spend the opposite fishing, camping, hiking, shooting, traveling, reading whatever that falls off from my obsession with hunting. Bet it would save a lot of marriages. Bet it would repair a lot of parent child relationships. It would also solve a crucial supply demand incentive in that you’d be asking hunters to kill more deer than normal to maintain herds instead of less. Less trash. Less damage to roads and trails on public land. Easier for the fuzz to keep tabs on riffraff.

Only problem with that plan is I'd rather be kicked in the n**ts than skip a deer season. Also, what if you couldn't hunt on your year because of injury or something? Go three years without deer hunting? NO THANK YOU!

 

[EricS]

I think you’ve gone and lost your nutterbustin mind again. Either way it may not be long until you get your wish. Just not the way you wanted it.

 

[raisins]

This decision would vary based upon location. We could also view this from fairness, pragmatism, or personal self-interest (or a combo).

WV has WAY fewer deer than the deer-density maps show. Those maps are created using harvest-based models. I worked in an out-of-state lab where they made them for various states and talked with the people that made them (I made spatial, computer models of other things...not related to game management). I recall the assumptions in those models being such that they were biased and everyone kind of knew not to trust them (but they were working on grants to make them...so they didn't complain and somewhat kept that info to themselves). Those models just require one geek at a computer and don't require you to actually go out and estimate deer populations in a better way (which takes way more time and money). The DNR in my state don't know this about the models or don't care (if you don't know how the sausage is made, then you'd probably think sausage was a magical thing not to be questioned). They would think that extending rifle season increased deer numbers due to a momentary spike in harvests....at least that is how they would justify their policies (see it's working!).

Allowing folks longer to use their rifles and in warmer conditions and during the best parts of the rut would decimate our deer populations and make the lack of mature bucks on public land way worse.

Also, we have a really bad poaching problem here (in rural areas people openly admit to it to strangers, as if everyone does it and it is not even an ethical or legal concern, they recently busted a huge operations where they were selling deer parts/meat out of state and killing 100s of deer per year for years). At least now, when you hear a high powered rifle crack once at sunset, you know you have a poacher (what other probable reasons do people have for shooting a 270 one time at dusk in an open field in the country?). Extending gun season would provide more cover for this activity, as rifle shots would not seem out of place. (people actually justify poaching as "he's just feeding his family"....well his family is morbidly obese and have food stamp cards)

The DNR did something similar by allowing bear hunters to run bear with their dogs (without shooting them) over an extended period. This was a bad decision as before if you saw a guy with a truck full of bear dogs in July, you knew you had a poacher. Also, they are hectoring the bears 24/7 which is another concern.

 

[kyler1945]

This decision would vary based upon location. We could also view this from fairness, pragmatism, or personal self-interest (or a combo).

WV has WAY fewer deer than the deer-density maps show. Those maps are created using harvest-based models. I worked in a lab where they made them for various states and talked with the people that made them (I made spatial, computer models of other things...not related to game management). I recall the assumptions in those models being such that they were biased and everyone kind of knew not to trust them (but they were working on grants to make them...so they didn't complain and somewhat kept that info to themselves). Those models just require one geek at a computer and don't require you to actually go out and estimate deer populations in a better way (which takes way more time and money). The DNR in my state don't know this about the models or don't care (if you don't know how the sausage is made, then you'd probably think sausage was a magically thing not to be questioned). They would think that extending rifle season increased deer numbers due to a momentary spike in harvests....at least that is how they would justify their policies (see it's working!).

Allowing folks longer to use their rifles and in warmer conditions and during the best parts of the rut would decimate our deer populations and make the lack of mature bucks on public land way worse.

Also, we have a really bad poaching problem here (in rural areas people openly admit to it to strangers, as if everyone does it and it is not even an ethical or legal concern, they recently busted a huge operations where they were selling deer parts/meat out of state and killing 100s of deer per year for years). At least now, when you hear a high powered rifle crack once at sunset, you know you have a poacher. Extending gun season would provide more cover for this activity, as rifle shots would not seem out of place. (people actually justify poaching as "he's just feeding his family"....well his family is morbidly obese and have food stamp cards)

The DNR did something similar by allowing bear hunters to run bear with their dogs (without shooting them) over an extended period. This was a bad decision as before if you saw a guy with a truck full of bear dogs in July, you knew you had a poacher. Also, they are hectoring the bears 24/7 which is another concern.

your argument is that poaching will become more prevalent because there’s more opportunity to illegally kill deer under the cover of others legally killing deer? And your evidence is that poaching is already a wide spread problem even without a long gun season? Wouldn’t that be evidence to support that folks breaking the law don’t care about the law?

A lot of other things I’d enjoy bantering about here in your post but I gotta get coffee first!

 

[Nutterbuster]

I thought about a fun way to do it. You allow half the deer hunters to hunt one year, and half to hunt the following. October - January. Figure out the bag limits, open season any weapon. Half as many folks in the woods at once solves the hunter density issue. Solve the weapon snobbery. Figure out a simple way to divide folks that lets families, deer camps, whatever exist just like thy always have. I would gladly hunt every other year, and spend the opposite fishing, camping, hiking, shooting, traveling, reading whatever that falls off from my obsession with hunting. Bet it would save a lot of marriages. Bet it would repair a lot of parent child relationships. It would also solve a crucial supply demand incentive in that you’d be asking hunters to kill more deer than normal to maintain herds instead of less. Less trash. Less damage to roads and trails on public land. Easier for the fuzz to keep tabs on riffraff.

Ok, wife just woke me up. Said I was staring at my phone and then my eyes rolled back and my tongue fell out and I collapsed.

If we're gonna big-brain this thing and be open to ideas that initially sound like the ramblings of a urine-soaked madman....

What if we just Thanos-snapped half the population? We'd have to take out some hunters probably. Maybe the ones who fist pump and say "smoked him" and manage to spray scent killer with the logo facing out go first?

 

[Vtbow]

I hate that they can tell me what I can shoot animals with on MY OWN property. Why do they care if I shoot it with a bow or rifle as long as I obey seasons and limits?

 

[raisins]

your argument is that poaching will become more prevalent because there’s more opportunity to illegally kill deer under the cover of others legally killing deer? And your evidence is that poaching is already a wide spread problem even without a long gun season? Wouldn’t that be evidence to support that folks breaking the law don’t care about the law?

A lot of other things I’d enjoy bantering about here in your post but I gotta get coffee first!

Even criminals care about getting caught and modify their illegal activities accordingly. If you make them even more sure that they will not get caught, then I think it would only make them more bold and more poaching will happen. (I see where this is getting into a gun control analogy, but with the gun control issue non-law breakers are put at a "defending yourself" disadvantage...and I don't see where that side of it exists here)

It will also provide cover in the following way: right now, if you are creeping around a field on public land with a scoped 270 in October, then you are seen as a poacher. Under the new law, they can do that, not check the deer in, once they get away with it, then they can just go out and do it again....effectively poaching on public land out in the open for a great length of time each year. It would extend their ability to "poach in plan sight" from 2 weeks in November to several months.

 

[Tr33_n1nj@]

The problem in Alabama is archery season is still in the summer. I pick up the gun as soon as it’s legal, but I’m still waiting on the weather. I’d bow hunt a lot more if it wasn’t 90 degrees, or if I already had meat deer in the feeezer. I’m in favor of moving the first 2 weeks of bow season to the middle of February and hunt 11/1 - 2/28.

 

[Nutterbuster]

Even criminals care about getting caught and modify their illegal activities accordingly. If you make them even more sure that they will not get caught, then I think it would only make them more bold and more poaching will happen.

It will also provide cover in the following way: right now, if you are creeping around a field on public land with a scoped 270 in October, then you are seen as poacher. Under the new law, they can do that, not check the deer in, once they get away with it, then they can just go out and do it again....effectively poaching on public land out in the open for a great length of time each year. It would extend their ability to "poach in plan sight" from 2 weeks in November to several months.

Electronic game checking, doing away with in person check stations, had a similar effect. People used to feel pressure to check in deer that were hanging off the back of their trucks on their way home ("what if I get pulled over with this deer?"). Now, they go home, butcher the deer, and once it is in the freezer...they just call it good.

My issue with that line of thinking is you're governing for criminals and not citizens.

Down here we have hogs. Dcnr says that's bad and begs folks to shoot them during deer season. Folks don't wanna mess up a buck hunt for a hog, and ask why not let us shoot them in the summer when it's not deer season. Dcnr says because then you could poach deer. Folks shrug and flip the finger and say since ya don't trust me, figure the hogs out on your own.

My argument has been that if you legalize being out there with a rifle in the summer, you have more eyes in the woods to notice somebody dragging a funny-looking pig out.

 

[bj139]

My issue with that line of thinking is you're governing for criminals and not citizens.

Down here we have hogs. Dcnr says that's bad and begs folks to shoot them during deer season. Folks don't wanna mess up a buck hunt for a hog, and ask why not let us shoot them in the summer when it's not deer season. Dcnr says because then you could poach deer. Folks shrug and flip the finger and say since ya don't trust me, figure the hogs out on your own.

My argument has been that if you legalize being out there with a rifle in the summer, you have more eyes in the woods to notice somebody dragging a funny-looking pig out.

Groundhog season in PA is open year round and many people use a centerfire rifle. It doesn't cause any problems I ever heard about.

 

[raisins]

Even criminals care about getting caught and modify their illegal activities accordingly. If you make them even more sure that they will not get caught, then I think it would only make them more bold and more poaching will happen. (I see where this is getting into a gun control analogy, but with the gun control issue non-law breakers are put at a "defending yourself" disadvantage...and I don't see where that side of it exists here)

It will also provide cover in the following way: right now, if you are creeping around a field on public land with a scoped 270 in October, then you are seen as a poacher. Under the new law, they can do that, not check the deer in, once they get away with it, then they can just go out and do it again....effectively poaching on public land out in the open for a great length of time each year. It would extend their ability to "poach in plan sight" from 2 weeks in November to several months.

So, the folks that are already poaching would have gasoline thrown on their behavior. Folks that have no ethical qualms about poaching, but simply don't because of fear of consequences, will be more likely to start poaching because the probability of something negative happening to them has decreased. So, we'll have new poacher recruits as well.

 

[raisins]

My issue with that line of thinking is you're governing for criminals and not citizens.

Down here we have hogs. Dcnr says that's bad and begs folks to shoot them during deer season. Folks don't wanna mess up a buck hunt for a hog, and ask why not let us shoot them in the summer when it's not deer season. Dcnr says because then you could poach deer. Folks shrug and flip the finger and say since ya don't trust me, figure the hogs out on your own.

My argument has been that if you legalize being out there with a rifle in the summer, you have more eyes in the woods to notice somebody dragging a funny-looking pig out.

We govern for citizens and criminals all the time though, don't we?

Your hog argument is valid, but this points to how solutions are location dependent. We don't have a hog problem here.

EDIT: I think in a lower pressure state where people are less inclined to poach (Kansas), that your original idea would work a lot better than here.

 

[raisins]

Groundhog season in PA is open year round and many people use a centerfire rifle. It doesn't cause any problems I ever heard about.

Good point. But you can usually tell a groundhog hunter from a deer hunter (location, setup, type of rifle)....but most groundhog rifles will drop a deer (I've hunted deer with a 22-250 before). However, folks can have a rifle and be dragging a deer out, so that would separate them from the groundhog hunters.