Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516
Results 301 to 319 of 319

Thread: Big Bucks and Tags

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chapin
    Posts
    4,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieG View Post
    Not sure. I know I heard him say the average buck harvested in SC was 1.5 years old.
    Once again, and I'll type it slow, Ruth is full of shit. How does he know the avg age is 1.5? Did God tell him that? Or, does that tidbit further his agenda?

    The issue boils down to selfishness. The ones pushing hardest for the tags are selfish. Me, me, me. Where in the Bible, Geneva Convention, or constitution does it state "the proper ratio for the deer herd is 1:1? This is a man made idea. If you want to manage for that, awesome. Until you start paying my lease fees, have a cup.

    Again, 4/4 is enough for anybody. But, it won't stop there.

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Irmo
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparkleberry Ridge Runner View Post
    If you want to manage for trophy bucks and I want to manage for consistent numbers and neither of us are depleting the resource, what is the problem. I understand that you want to have trophy deer. I get that and have zero problem with it. But how are we depleting the resource by killing 120-140 bucks a year off 10,000 acres. We are hurting no one, yet this proposed plan has zero way for us to continue doing what WE love while at the same time allowing you to continue doing what YOU love. This plan has too many what ifs and hopefullys. I would bet some of you wanted Obomacare when it first came about. Now that you have read the entire thing and see all the what ifs and hopefullys that did not happen your premium is steadily going up and you hate it. I honestly do not see this proposal as being much different. If it had a telecheck system in order to truly monitor what is being harvested (those of you in favor because of the smoke everyone is blowing about harvest data do realize that just because tags are given out, we will still have zero harvest information don't you) as well as a way for private landowners to continue managing for total deer numbers while not damaging the resource then I would be all for it. Both of these could be done while at the same time stopping the 50 deer on 50 acres guy and allowing those who want to manage for trophies to do so. THAT IS WHY I WILL NOT LET IT GO. THERE IS A BETTER WAY THAT SATISFIES EACH SIDE.
    Who's to say you wouldn't get 140 buck tags on 10,000 acres?

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    11,021

    Default

    Ok so I missed almost 3 pages of non sense.

    But basically in a video nothing changed Ruth said he is the front man and if you want to kill more than 4 bucks he has news for you....he will cut you down to 4 and only 4.
    [ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJlN9jdQFSc[/ame]

    Cotton Top is trying to help folks enrolled in the "snap" program with all of his kills from the oasis.

    Pbiz doesn't care about his woman's feelings and said get on the back of the moped
    [ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGhoLcsr8GA[/ame]

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Irmo
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MorningWoody View Post
    Ok we get it, whats keeping Bubba from not tagging his deer? How will this be enforced? I am not driving a deer from my lease/club to a check station or telecheck. How do they plan on making sure this new great rulebook is adhered to?
    The same thing that causes Bubba to shoot deer at night or out of season, or to shoot doves or ducks over the limit. Those willing to break the law will. Shall we get rid of all bag or creel limits because we'll never catch all the ones that break the law?

    The only thing preventing that is finding Bubba without a tagged deer. Just takes one. It's the same as with turkeys, not all will get tagged, but you'll get burned if it's not and the man finds you. Of course, it's a lot harder to hid a deer than a turkey.

    Not being able to enforce every and all instance of deer tags is a straw man argument. Just because you can't catch everyone is no reason to throw you arms up and walk away.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sparkleberry Swamp
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBtflo View Post
    Who's to say you wouldn't get 140 buck tags on 10,000 acres?
    Ruth is to say. In fact he said it at the Florence meeting. Part of my frustration is that many people type stuff on here without knowing the facts.(Imagine that).
    For those coming late to the entertainment I will type it again. Actually I will copy and paste.
    Ruth used a "study" DNR did in the Kingstree area in which 6,600 doe tags were issued to hunters under the doe program. Only 3,300 were used. DNR feels that 6,600 does should have been shot but only have were. So in order to FORCE the hunters to harvest the number of does that DNR feels should be taken, the number of buck tags will be reduced so the hunters will run out of buck tags quickly and start shooting does. Straight from Ruth's mouth.
    So, a property that is enrolled in the doe quota program will receive buck tags using 60% of the USED doe tags as the basis. They had 100 tags but only used 50 so their buck tag allotment will be 30 along with 100 doe tags.
    Or your club shoots 30 bucks and only 30 does. So now your allotment will be 18 buck tags and even more doe tags. Now shift 5 years down the road. The population has increased and we are in need to harvest many more does. You have only shot 2 bucks a year because you are managing for big antlers and age and Bubba has been next to you reaming the 4 points for years. Your personal little piece of paradise is enrolled in the quota program and you receive your tags in 2018 only to realize they sent you 130 doe tags and 1 buck tag because of the numbers established for said county. Or here is a real kick in the balls: You are not shooting what DNR thinks you should shoot so they open your property up to the public (Don't laugh. It can easily go both ways. It was brought up at the Florence meeting)
    Become one with nature then marinate it.

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sparkleberry Swamp
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwilliams View Post
    10000 acres a man ought to manage how he sees fit within reason As long as it doesn't abuse the resources
    Amen. I do not understand why anyone would have a problem with this and why it can not be added to the bill. Something like this would be the compromise that several keep speaking of.
    Become one with nature then marinate it.

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Willie g you never answered the question.
    If everybody else should deal with the compromise of 4 and 4. What did you have to change due to compromise?

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Irmo
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparkleberry Ridge Runner View Post
    Ruth is to say. In fact he said it at the Florence meeting. Part of my frustration is that many people type stuff on here without knowing the facts.(Imagine that).
    For those coming late to the entertainment I will type it again. Actually I will copy and paste.
    Ruth used a "study" DNR did in the Kingstree area in which 6,600 doe tags were issued to hunters under the doe program. Only 3,300 were used. DNR feels that 6,600 does should have been shot but only have were. So in order to FORCE the hunters to harvest the number of does that DNR feels should be taken, the number of buck tags will be reduced so the hunters will run out of buck tags quickly and start shooting does. Straight from Ruth's mouth.
    So, a property that is enrolled in the doe quota program will receive buck tags using 60% of the USED doe tags as the basis. They had 100 tags but only used 50 so their buck tag allotment will be 30 along with 100 doe tags.
    Or your club shoots 30 bucks and only 30 does. So now your allotment will be 18 buck tags and even more doe tags. Now shift 5 years down the road. The population has increased and we are in need to harvest many more does. You have only shot 2 bucks a year because you are managing for big antlers and age and Bubba has been next to you reaming the 4 points for years. Your personal little piece of paradise is enrolled in the quota program and you receive your tags in 2018 only to realize they sent you 130 doe tags and 1 buck tag because of the numbers established for said county. Or here is a real kick in the balls: You are not shooting what DNR thinks you should shoot so they open your property up to the public (Don't laugh. It can easily go both ways. It was brought up at the Florence meeting)
    I suspect that might be either a misunderstanding or not quite what was said. I would think that if you have a good history of harvest x number of bucks, there is probably a good chance that you'd get that amount of tags.

    Now if you were a new property, there might be more of a generic formula placed on the property.

    Or you all could get 4 buck and 4 does tags apiece.

    Has anyone else heard of a 60% formula at other meetings?

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sparkleberry Swamp
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBtflo View Post
    I suspect that might be either a misunderstanding or not quite what was said. I would think that if you have a good history of harvest x number of bucks, there is probably a good chance that you'd get that amount of tags.

    Now if you were a new property, there might be more of a generic formula placed on the property.

    Or you all could get 4 buck and 4 does tags apiece.

    Has anyone else heard of a 60% formula at other meetings?
    Man read back through the post about the Florence meeting. Everyone heard it that was listening. I am not pulling crap out of thin air. I specifically asked Ruth if I had heard him correctly that the buck tags would be 60% of doe tags used, not issued. He said yes. He also went on to state that DNR would decrease the number of buck tags on a property in order to force the hunters to harvest more does.
    People need to quit assuming and go to one of the meetings and ask direct specific questions, not loaded questions like Ruth's survey questions.
    Become one with nature then marinate it.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,443

    Default

    do they think that the farmers turned in or "counted" all of the deer that they actually killed?

  11. #311
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greenville
    Posts
    4,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparkleberry Ridge Runner View Post
    And I will go out on a limb and say that either your reading comprehension is limited or possibly you have not been reading the many posts on the tagging proposal. At the house we shoot mature deer except for kids (which most who hunt my place are still choosey about what they shoot) or someone who has never killed a deer. I may go a year and not kill a single deer depending on circumstances. I may kill 10 a year. As long as I am not hurting the resource, what difference does it make?
    Just because you do it "right" from a management standpoint does not mean that your neighbors do. Sometimes, rules or laws need to be in place that apply to everyone (including those doing it "right) in order to protect the resource. While I think zone-based regulations would be ideal, I doubt the state has the resources to implement thoughtful, data-based regulations in separate zones.
    Carolina Counsel

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greenville
    Posts
    4,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MorningWoody View Post
    Someone explain to me how the state owns the deer. Nobody owns the deer so please stop making these statements.
    Yes, people, please stop making factually and legally correct statements. South Carolina owns the game on its lands. State resource.
    Carolina Counsel

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    11,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparkleberry Ridge Runner View Post
    Man read back through the post about the Florence meeting. Everyone heard it that was listening. I am not pulling crap out of thin air. I specifically asked Ruth if I had heard him correctly that the buck tags would be 60% of doe tags used, not issued. He said yes. He also went on to state that DNR would decrease the number of buck tags on a property in order to force the hunters to harvest more does.
    People need to quit assuming and go to one of the meetings and ask direct specific questions, not loaded questions like Ruth's survey questions.
    I was there. He SRR is correct. The 60% was the number given.

    While the by zone is a great idea what most of you are missing is this will be accomplished via the tags.

    As bigger tracks enroll in the deer quota program DNR will set the limits based off of data they have for different regions. Basically this will allow different zones to be managed differently as a whole. DNR will be calling the shots not the individuals.

    Now as SRR has pointed out this is 1 area that disturbs me. How did DNR come up with this data. Ruth's answer is surveys and "other methods" what are these other methods of data collection?

    I'm in favor of some sort of tags, but he is correct in what he posted and I understand some of his angst.

    I like the idea of having enough property a hunter/manager can call the shots and decide what is best for his property. BUT. The problem with this is there are so many "hey bo's" out there surrounding these properties it makes it hard not to make a blanket policy that can control them. This is a unfortunate side effect, but one that must be tolerated if the deer heard as a whole is to ever get back to a normal healthy sex ratio.

    Yes, one of the major side effects of all of this will be larger more mature bucks at harvest, on average.

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,439

    Default

    Who is this "Bubba" everyone is referring too? I would venture a guess a nice way of saying someone below you on a social scale. If you were to poll the game wardens of South Carolina I bet more tickets are written to people for major violations (baiting ducks, turkeys, no hunting license) to middle upper class than anyone else. Yes I know this has nothing to to with this topic.

  15. #315
    jwilliams's Avatar
    jwilliams is offline 2th Doc's Fishing understudy
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sumter
    Posts
    18,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usrgce View Post
    Who is this "Bubba" everyone is referring too? I would venture a guess a nice way of saying someone below you on a social scale. If you were to poll the game wardens of South Carolina I bet more tickets are written to people for major violations (baiting ducks, turkeys, no hunting license) to middle upper class than anyone else. Yes I know this has nothing to to with this topic.
    negative...you don't know bubba. bubba probably has drake sec gear. BUbba has the right to kill 30 deer a year because that's what he has done for years, as did his daddy, and his daddy's daddy.

    Now, theoretically speaking, bubba could be financially disadvantaged, but he could also be financially independent. Financial status has no affect on bubbaism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn View Post
    Does Elton John know you have his shotgun?

  16. #316
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,733

    Default

    Bubba comes in all forms, the trait is shooting many more deer than the property they hunt can support.

    4 and 4 tags will cover almost every property in SC. Other places manage with much less.

    The problem with 4 and 4 is there are club members killing more than 4 and some less than 2. Dividing buck tags is a sore spot for the more than 4 group, they only speak for a small portion of their lease not the majority.

  17. #317
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Summerville
    Posts
    5,583

    Default

    The only person I personally know that kills more than 8 deer a season is a farmer. How many of you know for a fact that some of these "bubbas" kill 30 deer a season?

  18. #318
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    florence sc
    Posts
    1,426

    Default

    Jesus Christ some of y'all act like you can't kill but one now. I do not see where 4 buck tags are going to hurt anyone at all people just don't like people telling them what to do I think. I understand getting upset over just getting one tag but come on 4 buck tags and 4 doe tags that's alot of meat. I think it could help in some situations but with 4 tags you still have people that are gonna fill thos 4 with what ever size they want.
    Last edited by riverrat8991; 10-01-2015 at 10:37 AM.

  19. #319
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat8991 View Post
    Jesus Christ some of y'all act like you can't kill but one now. I do not see where 4 buck tags are going to hurt anyone at all people just don't like people telling them what to do I think. I understand getting upset over just getting one tag but come on 4 buck tags and 4 doe tags that's alot of meat. I think it could help in some situations but with 4 tags you still have people that are gonna fill thos 4 with what ever size they want.
    I don't think it is 8 tags is the prob.
    My issue with it is if you want everyone to stop at 8 deer that is fine. Issue 8 tags and let the leasees determine what deer (doe or buck) needs to be taken off of land.
    No one knows land better than the ones that lease the same land year after year

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •