The decline of whitetails

[Mature Buck]

Have you guys read the 2016 QDMA report whitetail buck harvest in down in 39 states and in many by large margins over the past 5 years
Are we shooting too many does? QDMA also reports that coyote populations are increasing or the same in every state. What do our guys think we can do to boost the numbers? I'm thinking states should implement a rule that you can only get a doe tag of our kill a coyote in low population areas as coyotes can kill over 10 fawns a season. Of course they would sip this system and return it to normal once coyote numbers are healthy and not overpopulated as they are now. https://www.qdma.com/about/whitetail-reports/

 

[Matt/VT]

I didn't read the link yet, but I think there are far too many variables at play to make such an overarching statement as that.
You have to be careful when seeing correlation (coyote and deer numbers) and assuming cause and effect as that is not often the case.
Hunter #'s and participation jump to mind first as other causes to declining harvest numbers. Access to land to hunt on driving that- no land to hunt on, esp in the east. There may be lots of bucks that we just can't get to.
I think we do the whitetail deer a disservice if we make management choices based on buck harvest without also considering the population overall, the biological/social carrying capacity (maybe there was an overpopulation and this is a correction) and long term management goals.

 

[kenton]

Just because numbers are down, doesn't mean numbers are low. I'll use Ohio as an example since im most familiar with it. There was an 11 year span (2002-2012) where the statewide deer harvest was well above the numbers before this time. In these 11 years, the harvest record was broke 5 times and almost broke an additional 3 times. Somehow, the vast majority of Ohio hunters expected this trend to continue, they expected liberal bag limits up to 14 deer in some years. Now, people think the ODNR in bed with insurance companies and the Farm Bureau to get numbers as low as they can because we aren't having record harvests anymore. The TRUTH is, population numbers are about where they should be, a little low in some areas and a little high in others (no hunting) but they aren't over-inflated like they were a few years ago.

There are areas in the whitetail's range were numbers are low and the population is hurting, just don't believe everything you read...especially from the QDMA.

 

[Mature Buck]

The government is definitely in bed with insurance companies no doubt look at unlimited antler less harvest bag limits in many states nobody needs to kill 1000 does

 

[Elkmagnet]

The government is definitely in bed with insurance companies no doubt look at unlimited antler less harvest bag limits in many states nobody needs to kill 1000 does

Spelled gubment wrong

 

[grandejuan]

Please explain to me what insurance companies have to do with deer? The Farm Bureau I can figure out (maybe). Wait a sec, its about deer/ car accidents. I have to say, "Come on man". GJ

 

[James Riley]

They are invading traditional Mule Deer country. Colorado P&W has liberal seasons on them in these areas, or so I'm told. I used to see them in my garden and I'm up in the Rockies. I haven't seen any in a few years. Good riddance, I say. Muley are getting sparce on my place too, but big horn are doing great.

 

[Mature Buck]

Less deer means less accidents less accidents means less payouts for insurance companies and more money in their pockets

 

[tjones]

Less deer means less accidents less accidents means less payouts for insurance companies and more money in their pockets

And here I thought the decline was Obama/Agenda21's fault.

 

[Gellar]

whitetail deer numbers are not down on my hunting areas, public or private, in northeast Iowa. But harvest numbers are down. Qdma is partly to blame because many hunters are looking for a certain size deer and let tags go unfilled if they don't find that deer sometimes not harvesting a whitetail buck for several seasons, this is making the harvest lower so people think there are less deer.

 

[Mature Buck]

That's because like 99 percent of Iowa is privite and only people who own land or have money get to hunt so ofcourse deer will skyrocket on population because most people are not able to hunt but look at other states that have high amounts of public land like the upper Midwest and northeast deer numbers are down by a lot because of coyotes and too many does being killed

 

[Elkmagnet]

I apologise I've been reading and, wow!

Automotive insurance claims forums

 

[MJE2083]

I apologise I've been reading and, wow!

Automotive insurance claims forums

LOL, there is people who also believe that game agencies in the east intentionally stocked coyotes with the backing of the insurance companies to lower deer numbers

 

[Mature Buck]

I don't think anybody is stating that we are talking about unlimited antlerless deer harvest

 

[MJE2083]

Just because numbers are down, doesn't mean numbers are low. I'll use Ohio as an example since im most familiar with it. There was an 11 year span (2002-2012) where the statewide deer harvest was well above the numbers before this time. In these 11 years, the harvest record was broke 5 times and almost broke an additional 3 times. Somehow, the vast majority of Ohio hunters expected this trend to continue, they expected liberal bag limits up to 14 deer in some years. Now, people think the ODNR in bed with insurance companies and the Farm Bureau to get numbers as low as they can because we aren't having record harvests anymore. The TRUTH is, population numbers are about where they should be, a little low in some areas and a little high in others (no hunting) but they aren't over-inflated like they were a few years ago.

There are areas in the whitetail's range were numbers are low and the population is hurting, just don't believe everything you read...especially from the QDMA.

Same here in PA, prior to early 2000's we had virtually no antler restrictions and shooting spikes, 4pts, and young bucks was the norm. Also had only a 3 day antlerless season(which I believe was something like Mon-Weds.) At that time it was "normal" to see large herds of does often in the dozens of animals. I recall a time hunting as a child, with my father, where we watched a group of 18-20 does funnel down a trail in single file thinking that there must surely be a buck somewhere in the group ( but there was not). Now we have antler restrictions and longer antlerless seasons(+ an increase in antlerless tags) with the purpose of bringing the herd to a healthy, environmentally sustainable level. Sadly many people still miss "the good old days", thinking too many does have been killed, and the deer herd decimated. I think many people mistakenly and selfishly feel that seeing 20-40+ deer per day is "good" and have little concept that such numbers are not healthy for the herd or ecosystem.

 

[sbhooper]

Harvest numbers may have been a bit low here this year, but it was due to warm temps and a super-moon.

Insurance companies are going to put in their two cents, because deer/car accidents cost them tons of money every year. It is just business.

I have personally killed 24 deer so far this year, many on depredation permits. They are there for a reason and you should see some of the damaged fields because of the deer. Many farmers put them on the same level as rats in a basement. Dep permits help to mitigate some of that.

Nebraska has been putting out a lot of antlerless white-tail permits for several years, because they started way too late trying to get the herd under control. Game and Parks does not want to give dep permits, because deer is money to them, but they have no choice and were pushed by legislators to do it.

You had best take your tirades against landowner and depredation permits to your game departments. Let them give you the answer, since you seem to blame them for your problems. Maybe you had better have a farmer give you a tour of his corn field during late summer and you can see that your issues are not the only ones in play here.

 

[1_pointer]

In a lot of places I'm of the opinion that it's the loss of quantity/quality of habitat. Here in IN roughly 50K acres of open/farm land are lost to suburban/urban development per year. Grain prices made a lot of ditch banks and small woodlots disappear and lots of folks to no re-enroll for programs like CRP. Forestry practices in the non-farmed part of the state (yes it does exist!) don't lend themselves to many parcels, public or private, having much early successional phases which a whole lot of critters, including deer, really like. I'm guessing this is much the same in a large part of the Corn Belt.

As others above have said, I think some of the decline was needed for sustainability and better management. Likewise, a short sighted perspective of what is "good" is created by folks being spoiled by those over inflated numbers.

 

[noharleyyet]

^^^^good points as per usual pointer.

Urban sprawl, a 5 yr drought, whitetail cash crop economics have all impacted here.

 

[mplane72]

whitetail deer numbers are not down on my hunting areas, public or private, in northeast Iowa. But harvest numbers are down. Qdma is partly to blame because many hunters are looking for a certain size deer and let tags go unfilled if they don't find that deer sometimes not harvesting a whitetail buck for several seasons, this is making the harvest lower so people think there are less deer.

I'm not so sure about that. Harvest numbers are down from their highs all across Iowa. I'm pretty sure up in your area the first shotgun season is antlered only now.

At one time numbers were way yo high and the FB and insurance companies as well as other land owners forced the DNR to increase the antlerless tags and hunters obliged. Shooting piles of deer. This is also the same time the HUSH program was introduced to make hunters feel warm and fuzzy as they killed more then they needed.

Several years ago hunters started realizing what was going on and asked the DNR to restrict the antlerless tags and the DNR listened. For 2 years the Governor stopped them before enough hunters got on him to allow the change. Things are now getting better and hopefully we won't repeat the same cycle again.

For your reading pleasure.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/hunting/2013/10/dirty-politics-deer-management

Tom Litchfield, the Iowa DNR biologist quoted in the above article, almost lost his job for what he said.

 

[antlerradar]

They are invading traditional Mule Deer country. Colorado P&W has liberal seasons on them in these areas, or so I'm told. I used to see them in my garden and I'm up in the Rockies. I haven't seen any in a few years. Good riddance, I say. Muley are getting sparce on my place too, but big horn are doing great.

I am seeing the same thing. Whitetails are moving into places that in the past were in the past was exculcivly mule deer country. I used to think that the periodic outbreaks of EHD were horrible. Now I am not so sure. EHD might be the only thing that is keeping whitetails form running mule deer out of Eastern Montana. Don't get me wrong. I like whitetails but the nickname of "land carp" does kind of fit.