Deer tag meetings

[Sparkleberry Ridge Runner]

Someone do a poll with the following:
The deer tag proposal should be:
A. Thrown out
B. Remain as is
C. Based upon the needs of each county or game zone due to drastic differences
D. 8 deer tags - of which no more than 2 may be for does (we are worried about the numbers right)

[Bigtimber2]

The tags will be sold. The state will make extra money. When all is said and done they still will not know how many are killed. These tags will be as worthless as turkey tags! Oh yeah and some poor fucker hunting national forest land will use the wrong doe tag and get a ticket for 465 dollars. Same guy can kill a hen turkey and only be ticketed for 200 and some dollars. Makes great sense doesn't it.
The bottom line is it is a money racket, from tags to tickets.

DNR already receives money from doe tags. The cost of the bill will likely be revenue neutral. The DNR would like for the bill to pass and to do so they knew that it needed to be revenue neutral. The Senate has passed the bill. The House needs to see the 75% support is still there.

[usrgce]

Why does the DNR want it to pass? All they care about is the revenue from tickets that can be written. In the low country at least there will not be a significant number of tickets written for not using tags.
Has there not been a limit in place in the upstate for years? Was or is that enforced?

[JBtflo]

Why does the DNR want it to pass? All they care about is the revenue from tickets that can be written. In the low country at least there will not be a significant number of tickets written for not using tags.
Has there not been a limit in place in the upstate for years? Was or is that enforced?

Without tags how do you enforce it? Our state essentially has no limit.

[porkchop 13]

Use Georgia for example.
They went to this limit thing and it was 2 bucks and 8 or 10 does. Due to population decreasing.

Last year for a month during December they couldn't shoot does. So what good did it do Ga to have this limits/filling out data on license on what you killed every seasonfor the last 7 years?

They set these limits there and they were complete opposite of what they should have been. Better limits would have been 2 does 8 or 10 bucks so deer population could increase. This is what they are trying to do to Sc and it is stupid.

If only people would let all the does walk in the upstate for 3 years the tagging system would be a thing In the past.

[Bigtimber2]

How is 4 does and 4 buck tags like Georgia's 8 does and 2 bucks? Plus a large portion of SC property is enrolled in the ADQP were deer tags will be issued based on the individual property. If you want to shoot more than 8 deer lease more property.

[usrgce]

How is 4 does and 4 buck tags like Georgia's 8 does and 2 bucks? Plus a large portion of SC property is enrolled in the ADQP were deer tags will be issued based on the individual property. If you want to shoot more than 8 deer lease more property.

And that brings up the question about the ADQP program. How is it determined how many deer are on a property and how many should be killed?

[Bigtimber2]

Likely the same method that determines the number of antlerless tags. I haven't heard any complaints about the program in years. I guess when adding horns to equation it will be flawed.

[quack stacker]

Why not just have a system for wma lands? Some people care about antler size and some don't. For those that only care about shooting record book bucks, then that's a management practice they should practice. If those people are whining about what everyone else is shooting, they need to buy or lease more land.

[Bigtimber2]

Let's say a guy buys 250 acre recreational tract at retirement to hunt and grow timber. Three neighbors are on board with similar management ideas. One neighbor to the North kills 10 bucks on 40 acres and one to the West kills 6 on 100 acres. Two small tracts unfolds the management plan of 4 others.

What is more like captialism, the 2 hunters shooting more deer than the land they hunt support aquiring enough land to support their take or throttling back to what they hunt or the other landowners purchasing/leasing more land to help offset what the other 2 shoot.

Your idea is like increasing taxes to help fund another social program taxpayers do not use. What is wrong limiting a deer harvest to the amount property you hunt?

[quack stacker]

Sounds like he knew what he was getting into when 2 of his neighbors didn't believe in his management plans. But he still has his timber, so it wasn't a total loss.

[Bigtimber2]

Yeah, about like earning a salary, you know in the beginning there are some that you will support via taxes, but you still get keep around 65% of what you earn. I like the mentality, I bet the House vote will follow party lines.

[quack stacker]

But, back to the question...Why not implement this system on wma lands first, provide some honest results, and it may get some support. Until that happens I'm just fine with the way it is now.

[Bigtimber2]

With 47 states using deer tags and SC using tags for deer and turkeys a trial run probably isn't needed for bucks.

[porkchop 13]

And 47 states have shorter season and redicoluos restrictions that takes away from the sport tremendously.

No 1 state has anywhere close to a season some of Sc has but if tags ever come into play they will see vast majority aren't filling their tags so they take away even more opportunities thinking there must not be very many deer left if everyone is only killing 2 per person

[Bigtimber2]

SC may have buck tags but the season length will not change. There is no will to change the seasons in SC. Domestic terrorist will show up at the Captial and Rembert Dennis building if the August 15th opener is changed. With proper limits bucks can be hunted from full velvet to antler casting.

Some opposed to tags continue to say if tags pass something else more restrictive will change there is no fact to base that on other than pure speculation, only a scare tatic. DNR has wanted bucks tagged for almost 15 years now and the process has been slow. If Senator McGill (D) had not stepped away the bill would not have the passed the Senate.

Having an enforceable limit for whitetail bucks is not a bad thing.

[Sparkleberry Ridge Runner]

Having an enforceable limit for whitetail bucks is not a bad thing.

Why?
Deer numbers are down yet ANYONE can purchase 4 doe tags as well as shoot does on doe days. Wouldn't cutting back in these two areas solve the problem?

[Bigtimber2]

4 doe tags limits the damage a guy next door can do on a small parcel, unlimited bucks does not. What is wrong limiting bucks too? If a hunter has enough access to kill more than 4 the ADQP is an viable option. The only problem I see is some clubs have a few members killing most of the bucks and those members do not like the idea of evenly dividing the bucks tags evenly like most do with doe tags. I am guessing the casual members do not follow game laws, but given the opportunity they would support evenly dividing buck tags.

[raybird]

Big timber, do you vote republican?

[porkchop 13]

Why?
Deer numbers are down yet ANYONE can purchase 4 doe tags as well as shoot does on doe days. Wouldn't cutting back in these two areas solve the problem?

This is what people don't get.

Everyone complains about deer numbers but doesn't want to hear the part doing away with for tags/days in areas population is down.

Fixing the population is easy without dnr If Hunters wasn't so caught up in killing big bucks to BRAG and quit shooting all the does problem would be solved and it wouldn't matter what neighbor was doing cause deer would be plentiful.