A Message to Kentucky Deer Hunters

dgibson

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Messages
1,671
Location
Henderson, KY
Gee, it sounds like poor, dumb, toothless, barefoot, sister-lovin' Kentucky might not be so ignorant after all.
A Message to Kentucky Deer Hunters

From the KDFWR Deer Program

First, the good news. Kentucky hunters harvested 116,540 deer last year; another record high. Kentucky continues to produce 20 to 30 Boone & Crockett Record Book deer each year. Our buck to doe ratio in the harvest is nearly 1:1 and only 1:1.7 in the standing population. The percent of the male harvest that is yearlings continues to decrease and is now about 60%. Our system is working to produce quality animals and hunting experiences.

Now the bad news. Our deer hunter base is not increasing. The average number of deer harvested per successful hunter is less than 1.5 and only 30% of hunters are successful. This is not for a lack of deer, as evidenced by the increasing number of animals harvested each year. The problem is a lack of new hunters being recruited, a lack of old hunters being retained, and the fact that hunters see hunting as recreation provided to them rather than a responsibility.

Hunters have a thousand reasons why they hunt and why hunting is important to them. But as you take to the woods this year, realize that there is an overlooked reason to hunt: it is necessary. Humans have done much to disturb the natural environment. We have fragmented the landscape and created urban and suburban areas. We have eliminated large predators from the food chain. We inflict upon deer populations a social carrying capacity that the humans can tolerate. Because deer are so adaptable however, these events have caused explosions in both their actual and relative numbers. Sport hunting is the single most effective and widely accepted method for reducing and maintaining deer numbers within biological and social limits.

Wildlife managers want to have deer forever. We want hunting to continue forever. We want successful and happy hunters. We also want deer to be healthy and viewed in a positive way by the general public. Hunters are very important to these goals, but we cannot allow deer populations to grow beyond our control simply to provide an unnatural surplus of deer for hunters to pursue. Without hunters controlling the growth of the deer herd, serious consequences will occur in the form of deer-vehicle collisions, urban deer problems, crop damage complaints and/or disease outbreaks.

Deer hunting is not just about trophy antlers or meat. It is about sound biology and management, too. The KDFWR’s commitment to our hunters is to ensure the future of the hunting lifestyle and to maintain high-quality deer herds to enjoy. Our commitment to the general public and to the deer themselves is to maintain deer numbers at biologically and socially appropriate levels. The deer hunter’s commitment should be to help us achieve these goals for the benefit of deer and our society.

You need help to achieve your goals. Hunter numbers are not increasing, but deer numbers are. Individual hunters need to harvest more does per person. We need more hunters in the woods. Take a youth hunting. Take a buddy who doesn’t hunt. Get an ex-hunter back out there. Create a positive image of hunters and show that you are passionate about more than just antlers.

Deer hunters carry a heavy responsibility. The general public needs you. Kentucky’s habitat needs you. The deer need you. The KDFWR needs you. The good news is deer hunting is fun. You love to do it. Through deer hunting, you have the chance to do what you love while fulfilling a very important social and biological need. Do it well, and do it with pride. We thank you for your help.
 

DKO

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2000
Messages
698
There are no deer in Kentucky............they all have CWD..........Wisconsin.... now they have so many deer that you have to shoot a doe before you can shoot a buck, its called "earn-a-buck" wouldnt you much rather hunt there!

im glad that the state is proud of there management practices but the more they promote this kinda of stuff the more problems they create.
increasing the popularity of an area by saying we have a ton of deer doesnt,hasnt and will never solve the problems.

prime example to learn from is Buffalo county wisconsin!

[ 07-26-2004, 06:48: Message edited by: DKO ]
 

chas031

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
326
Location
palmer, MA
DG,
Good item. Now if the lube state(as in KY) really wants to attract hunters such as myself they need to recognize the value of out-of-staters and their dollars!! Face the fact that fees increased to a point in most states offering quality hunts over the past 10 years due to pressure from many sides, mostly political. For the most part pricing out the numbers NEEDED for quality herd management.
If KY is serious about attracting me, they need a contract with me stating that each year I spend my dollars in your state they will rebate a percentage of the costs based on factors important to the state. Structure of the rebate could and should contain the following:
1. Longevity(years hunting KY)
2. # of days afield(length of stay and $ spent?)
3. areas hunted(problem areas versus trophy ares)
4. reciprical agreement with home state( :D )
5. additional recruitment(especially youth hunters)
6. SUCCESS!! No I don't mean a bent meatpole. I mean a season of opportunity, safety, and enjoyment.

So, forward this to your legislators and see how fast you get thrown down the steps!!

Chas
 

dgibson

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Messages
1,671
Location
Henderson, KY
Chas, I've always had mixed feelings about the non-res fees. We do need to control deer numbers in a lot of areas, so I should feel that any hunter is welcome. But, every year I get my hackles up when I see a bunch of Hoosier plates parked around the huntin' spots. In many places the crowding is bad enough without encouraging more out-of-staters. But crowding is also attributable to loss of hunting opportunites, not just non-res visitors. In point of fact, that article is intended for resident hunters; the need to increase local hunter numbers.

Dean, I think you'll find a bigger problem comes not from the "we've got tons of deer" promotions as much as the fact that they're now pushing KY as a trophy state. Number 8 in B&C trophies last year, consistent top 10 for 'x' years, etc., etc. I used to watch the hunting shows and wonder why they never hunted in Kentucky; in the past 2 or 3 years I've seen more shows recorded in Kentucky than the rest of my life combined. It's not the "any deer will do" crowd that worries me so much as the trophy crowd.

Look at the Arizona/USO fiasco; if AZ only had dinks and forkhorns no one would blink an eye and USO wouldn't have brought the issue of res/non-res restrictions to begin with.

Did I complete a thought anywhere in there?
;)
 

FLIPPER

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2001
Messages
1,619
Location
Tennessee
Originally posted by dgibson:
Chas, I've always had mixed feelings about the non-res fees. We do need to control deer numbers in a lot of areas, so I should feel that any hunter is welcome. But, every year I get my hackles up when I see a bunch of Hoosier plates parked around the huntin' spots. In many places the crowding is bad enough without encouraging more out-of-staters. But crowding is also attributable to loss of hunting opportunites, not just non-res visitors. In point of fact, that article is intended for resident hunters; the need to increase local hunter numbers.
;)
Well... tell me how you really feel about us nonresidents
 

chas031

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
326
Location
palmer, MA
Originally posted by dgibson:
Did I complete a thought anywhere in there?
;)
Yeah you did. Your's is typical of most state's locals toward out-of-staters. Thanks for the bucks($), now go hunt over there next to the Wally World away from MY deer!!
I guess it will take a situation like I deal with every year to wake you up!! You tag your deer AFTER being shot NOT before!! I invite hunters to join me every year, scout, plot, plan, and cultivate areas specifically for the success of OTHERS!! No, "my" deer aren't B&C quality, but that's not my fault. For 35 yrs I've screamed, held my breath and stomped my feet that there is an unbalanced herd(approx. 20/1 ratios) in both CT and MA. CT is finally waking to the prospect of devistation but still nursing the notion that it can be cured on a REGIONAL basis. BULLSHIT!!
Until hunter education includes game management technics and incorporates sound LONG-TERM goals it will simply be a case of "You can't see it from my house" mentality!! If you don't recognize the carrying capacity problems faced now by EVERY state, how do YOU explain the spread of CWD??
Encroachment, posted lands, PC attitudes, antis, and best of all....locals that want me to drop my wallet and turn around. Thanks anyway, but I'll stick with a battle I can at least recruit for if not win. I'll stay home!!

Chas
 

FLIPPER

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2001
Messages
1,619
Location
Tennessee
Darren...speaking of Ky deer, have they set the season dates yet?

If so, when is the muzzleloader opener?

I bought another muzzleloader and need to break it in at your place :D

And I will take one with a pistol there this year during rifle season
 

dgibson

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Messages
1,671
Location
Henderson, KY
Ah, Chas, so much anger, so little information. Ask Flipper, Meathead, Nut, and their assorted kids about how I turn my shoulder on non-residents.
That's why I threw the "mixed feelings" thing in there. I would like for other states to be cheaper to hunt in for the same reasons you do; so I can hunt in other states. So logically I completely understand and support your position. But emotionally I still can't help being annoyed at all of the out-of-state hunters when I go to a public hunting ground and can't find a spot to sit. I'm being honest here and I've stated several times that I agree with both sides.

Furthermore, I don't recall asking you to leave your money behind. Nor does my state. Where do you get that idea? If you pay for the license, then you're entitled to use it. Should non-residents have the same price as residents? That's debatable. Personally, I think that resident licenses are too LOW, not the other way around. Our F&W is very short on money, largely due to drops in license purchases and the unwillingness of residents to pay more for their licenses. That's not my fault, either, but there it is. Does that entitle the state to fleece NR's? No, probably not, but they take a whole lot less beotching by doing that then by jacking up resident licenses, so they take the easy way.

Finally, look at Elkgunner's tag costs thread in SI and tell me if you think KY is out of touch with the rest of the country. Compared to some states, our NR fees are a bargain.
 

chas031

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
326
Location
palmer, MA
Originally posted by dgibson:
Ah, Chas, so much anger, so little information. So little information on WHAT??

I would like for other states to be cheaper to hunt in for the same reasons you do; so I can hunt in other states. So logically I completely understand and support your position.
Actually, YOU DON'T!! Did you contact your legislation to protest costs increase for non-residents?? Of course not. Obviously your resident fees haven't kept up with the costs of maintaining public grounds or even a small portion of personnel!! By percentage, do the non-residents receive 10 times the services from the state?

But emotionally I still can't help being annoyed at all of the out-of-state hunters when I go to a public hunting ground and can't find a spot to sit. I'm being honest here and I've stated several times that I agree with both sides.
You're going to get a wedgie riding that fence!!

Furthermore, I don't recall asking you to leave your money behind. Nor does my state. Where do you get that idea? If you pay for the license, then you're entitled to use it. Should non-residents have the same price as residents? That's debatable. Personally, I think that resident licenses are too LOW, not the other way around. Our F&W is very short on money, largely due to drops in license purchases and the unwillingness of residents to pay more for their licenses. That's not my fault, either, but there it is. Does that entitle the state to fleece NR's? No, probably not, but they take a whole lot less beotching by doing that then by jacking up resident licenses, so they take the easy way.
Less?? Exactly what voice does a non-resident carry? Until residental fees FULLY fund hunting lands maintanance and new land purchases, you and all hunters are victims of the 4 yr mentality. I have to admit I DON'T know if KY has the right to hunt written into the state constitution. If not, you should lobby for it.

Finally, look at Elkgunner's tag costs thread in SI and tell me if you think KY is out of touch with the rest of the country. Compared to some states, our NR fees are a bargain.
I don't think a 10 fold cost in ANY state is warranted!! Yes the costs are low by comparison to even CT, a state I've hunted every yr since hunting was re-introduced. Also, in MA I pay as much as a resident as I would in KY as a non-resident!! I lobbied FOR the fees increases in MA for residents as well as the $5 land purchase fee responsible for more than 20% of available public hunting lands. BUT, when CT increased their archery Non-resident fees by 140% in one year, I bitched and moaned, called, wrote and campaigned against every legislator in office. All to DEAF ears. Who cares if a non-voting hunter complains??
Understand MY stance. I deer hunt 100 days a year. Of those less than 10 are on public lands. That does not relieve me of the responsibility to support, improve, and fight for more open lands available to all(carrying a sportmen's license).

Chas
 

dgibson

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Messages
1,671
Location
Henderson, KY
Chas, just what exactly is it that you want? You rant and rave and insult me on every turn but you haven't made a single salient point yet. Do you want inexpensive hunting opportunities in other states? Do you want expanded hunting opportunities in other states? Do you want proportional representation of your license dollars in the states you visit?

Here's the bottom line: all states, especially in the east, have limited opportunity. You're not going to get anyone, anywhere, to provide non-residents with greater opportunities when they don't have enough for themselves.

You're also not going to get anyone, anywhere, to give non-residents increased input on local management issues. It doesn't happen in toll booth money, it doesn't happen in sales tax, it doesn't happen in speeding tickets or baseball seats or hotel taxes, and it's not going to happen in wildlife management. What it boils down to is that you are paying for the privilege to hunt in a place you don't reside.
 

chas031

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
326
Location
palmer, MA
Originally posted by dgibson:
Chas, just what exactly is it that you want? You rant and rave and insult me on every turn but you haven't made a single salient point yet.
DG,
LMAO If you're feeling insulted, here's your cookie!! :rolleyes: As for the salient points, re-read the list I posted. It does cross the line of accepted input from non-residents.
Not sure how KY tolls work but in MA you pay the same road use(add Big Dig) regardless of your license plate!! Fenway does NOT check IDs to see if you're fromm N.Y.(although they should!).
Yes, I do want more equity in my fees paid. Yes, I do feel that the state's increased fees targeted non-residents as proven by EG's SI thread. At best you have approx. 10% of license holders(non-residents) paying in the same level of funding. Again, what additional services are provided by the state to warrant these fees??
If your business depended on non-resident traffic, perhaps you'd feel different or at least take a stance.


Chas
 

DKO

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2000
Messages
698
Darren, the ones that call themselves trophy hunters are the ones that concern me .....the sad thing is that i have personally witnessed this very same thing happen where i used to hunt in Wisconsin.....it has become more profitable for landowners to lease their land to non-residents than it is to hunt it themselves.......land that used to cost me nothing more than a helping hand or a kind gesture leases now for 5,000, its only forty acres thats 125.00 per acre.Bottom line is that 5,000 dollars is 1/4 of jeff's total annual income so i dont blame him a bit for leasing it!
hardwoods : land that was considered unusable at one time and sold for 500.00 per ac. is now bringing 1500 per ac. just because of the deer hunting..........anybody hear of Pike co. Ill. until it hit the map as a hot spot for deer hunting ? what do you think has happened to the local economy during the season now vs. 10 years ago ??? these impacts can be both positive and negative. I wonder how many farmers are now selling hunts instead of milk or cattle.... you may be surprised to learn that there has been an expolsion of outfitters trying to capitalize on this influx of new dollars.

Darren , if at all possible buy land now !! you'll be able to retire real soon!

Chas, it costs me more to hunt in my backyard than it does for me to fly to my farm in kentucky and hunt there! ........seems you just a little pissy about your own states inability to properly manage their deer herds. Ky is relatively cheap to hunt and has an abundance of quality public land to hunt on. It would probably be easier to find a huge buck in a small woodlot next to wally world in kentucky than in half the state of Mass.

if i wanted to catch fish i would go to a lake i knew had fish in it, if i just want to go fishing i would find any water hole.....Paying to incease your odds and the quality of the experience is personal choice and always will be regardless of how many people bitch about it!

dollars are at the root here for the state and the landowners, its findin an acceptable balance thats tough! so some see non-residents as stimulants to the economy and some see them as the reason they cant hunt the property they grew-up on!

just my .02
 
Top