# Deer Management Meetings Announced



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Deer Management Meetings Announced

The State Game and Fish Department has scheduled eight public meetings in February to discuss deer management in North Dakota.

Department officials will present an overview of the current deer population and prospects for the future, and look for input on possible options for changes in the way deer licenses are allocated.

"We're all aware that the state's whitetail and mule deer populations have declined considerably in recent years," said Game and Fish Department wildlife chief Randy Kreil. "In 2013 we had approximately 40,000 hunters who applied for a deer gun license and didn't get one. We're looking at some ideas that might help get more hunters in the field if deer populations remain similar to what they are now."

In the long term, Kreil said Game and Fish's strategy is to build deer numbers to a point that would provide a reasonable chance for anyone who wants to hunt to be able to get some kind of license. "Right now we have a high public interest in deer hunting in North Dakota," he said. "We're hoping to come up with some solutions to help us maintain that."

Each meeting will begin at 7 p.m. local time.

Feb. 17 - Devils Lake, Lake Region Community College Auditorium
Feb. 17 - Casselton, City Fire Hall
Feb. 18 - Dickinson, Ramada Grand Dakota Lodge
Feb. 18 - Anamoose, Community Center
Feb. 24 - Tioga, Farm Festival Building
Feb. 24 - Fordville, Community Center
Feb. 25 - Bismarck, North Dakota Game and Fish Department
Feb. 25 - Jamestown, The Bunker


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Time for 1 buck license per person.You choose the weapon and season.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

seeing this stuff makes me happy I didn't stay in fargo and loose my sd residency. Would suck to not get a license and also suck to have to shoot a buck just to get meat.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Sorry Kurt....I misstated.It should be 1 deer per person.Not 1 buck.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

KEN W said:


> Sorry Kurt....I misstated.It should be 1 deer per person.Not 1 buck.


wow that would even be even suckier I had 5 deer tags last year counting rifle and bow granted I only shot 2 as I was chasing muleys west river and never found one I wanted but did get a white tail do with the any antlerless tag I had and shot the whitetail buck east river. Drove to Jamestown yesterday and there seemed to be a load of deer from linton south.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

KEN W said:


> Sorry Kurt....I misstated.It should be 1 deer per person.Not 1 buck.


I would much rather go several years without a gun license at all than to see this type of restriction.


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

I agree Ken. one deer per person per year is enough.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

It's basically come down to having bow hunters have the same chances to hunt deer as rifle hunters.It's what is fair.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

KEN W said:


> It's basically come down to having bow hunters have the same chances to hunt deer as rifle hunters.It's what is fair.


Or buy a bow and join the crowd. Gun hunters have three times the success, so fair? Some states say purchase a single license, but you can use any weapon you want. That would let people bow hunt for a month, then switch to rifle or not. One license, would not be as destructive to the bow hunt as applying for one or the other. States who have done that have lost up to 80% of their bow hunters. That affects the economy and actually increased number of deer killed when compared to states that issued a license for any weapon. If they must restrict us to one license then let it cover all weapons.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

KEN W said:


> It's basically come down to having bow hunters have the same chances to hunt deer as rifle hunters.It's what is fair.


Fair? I take it you have never hunted deer with a bow. This is the kind of statement that comes from jealous gun only hunters who think that bow hunters are killing all their huge bucks, and it's complete crap. It is no trick at all getting to within 200 - 300 yards of a big buck, and that is a chip shot with a rifle. Getting to within 30 - 40 yards is another matter altogether.

You want to be fair? Move the rifle season away from the peak of the rut so that bow hunters can hunt during the prime time without being hampered by wearing orange.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

Fair would be restricting everyone to a unit, and allow your applied for tag to be used in all seasons. I have more but do not want to type them now.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

So I should be forced to bow hunt in order to be able to hunt deer????Not hardly.

Why should some hunters receive 2 permits every year,when 40,000 rifle hunters don't.?

Jealous.....I don't think so.All I'm asking is for an even playing field.Why can't we all be given the same opportunity?Everyone in the same lottery.If you draw a tag you can fill it with any weapon you want during that season.That's fair.The way it is now doesn't come close to being fair.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

Life is not fair kinda how it goes.............


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Ok, Here's fair. Every one applies in the lottery and if you get a tag it is for the unit you applied for. You can use it during the rifle of muzzleloader season in that unit. You can also use it during the archery season anywhere in the state. Once you fill the tag you are done deer hunting. If you don't fill it with your bow, you can use a rifle or muzzleloader in those seasons, but are restricted to the unit you applied for. The season dates would be changed as follows:

Archery - Sept. 1 thru Nov. 15 
Rifle - Nov. 16 thru Nov. 30
Muzzleloader - Dec. 01 thru Dec. 20

Granted the archery season is shortened, but archers could hunt the first part of the rut without competing with rifle hunters. If they shot their buck they would not be able to shoot another one during the gun season, and that is the big *****, right. Seems fair to me.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

That's what was talked about at the meeting I was at.It seems the best way to give the same opportunity to everyone.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

The post above was written tongue in cheek. Deer populations, like all wildlife pops are cyclical, right now we are low. Gun hunters see less deer in the field, and then they get on the Internet and see a few guys posting pics of nice bucks they shot with a bow back in Oct. Then the sky is falling, "bowhunters are shooting all the big bucks". And we get this knee-jerk reaction to a perceived problem. Gun hunters have a bigger voice, there are considerably more gun hunters than bow hunters. As with most things, the loudest whiners get their way. For every bow shot big buck you see on the Internet there are at least 100 guys, maybe more, who never get a shot at a big buck.

I have not seen a compelling reason to change anything. The deer population will cycle up again and the G&F will increase the number of licenses available.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

There is equal opportunity for everyone. Everyone can buy a bow license now. Everyone can apply for a rifle tag now. Everyone can apply for a muzzleloader tag now. If I choose not to apply for a rifle tag so be it. If others choose not to purchase a bow tag so be it. The situation we have now is as fair as it gets.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

huntin1 you are delusional, The issue discussed and talked about is opportunity to the resource. Since the G&F are charged to provide opportunity to all from watchers, hunters and non hunters the issue at hand is providing a balanced opportunity for a currently and looks to be in the future a reduced herd statewide.

Most hunters see unlimited tags and unlimited access to a license every year as unbalanced with the demand as high as it is. They get even more upset when one person while low in number draw three tags in a year and others are waiting years and draw none.

So they are seeking a solution of sorts to this. When 140,000 tags where issued the subject was less of a concern but has been a concern for the last 10-15 years and has been talked about repeatedly at advisory meetings. So a varitety of solutions have been floated. Those include limiting people to choosing one season to apply for, to as stated above a one tag system that allows any weapon for any season with variations to that allowing statewide use of the bow tag and unit specific on rifle to going to unit specific across the board.

Some changes would require leg action to change others can be implemented by the G&F and those are the solutions I would prefer and keep the Leg out of it.

The one constant that keeps surfacing s bow hunyers thinking they should not share in any opportunity reduction which is simply put bull**** at its finest! The deer tag is a shared resource and all hunters regardless of weapons choice should be and by law entitled to an equal opportunity.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Not delusional, realistic. The delusional ones are the rifle only hunters who have it in their heads that bow hunters are shooting all of "their" big bucks before they get a chance at them. They have the same opportunities as any one else, they can get a bow license and try to take a big buck before rifle season too, instead they *****.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Again your delusion shines through, bow season where it is at and when is not an issue, harvest levels however are pushing up to the point that deer harvested in numbers do matter. Not the quality of the animal but the total numbers. I really would suggest looking at the website of the G&F and listening to the 45 min presentation to get a grasp of what I am saying.

So stop with the idea that gun hunters overall worry you are shooting to many big bucks. That is not the issue! You may have a small segment that hold that view but they are also the ones opposed to youth tags etc...... that was not the sentiment of any of the two meetings I attended. It remained about the opportunity and balancing demand of that opportunity equally across the board so that all hunters regardless of weapon choice where not having a distinct advantage over others.

I will say this that with the continued attitude that many bow hunters are displaying in not wanting to work for a equatible solution that they could see a lot of what they enjoy be taken away because of attitude. We heard enough superior attitudes and self serving wants at these meetings from bow hunters that the mood in the rooms moved towards the most draconian positions to limit bow hunters including making them stay within a unit and elimination of the state wide tag as well as the tag being good for any species whitetail or mule deer and to limiting dates etc...

It is the attitude that somehow a bow hunter is a superior or more deserving hunter than someone else that pushes these feelings. In speaking with others who attended meetings other than those I attended when bow hunters discussed the issues and expressed their wish to maintain a statewide tag and did not take the superior attitude the mood from the crowds remained very accommodating in support of this. Not so much when bow hunters played the superior card!!

So understand that some sort of change is likely to come in 2015 and it would be better coming from the G&F without the Leg having to act. Keep pushing a superior attitude or making the claims like you have that this is all about big bucks being taken before gun season and you are likely to see some gun hunting legislator strip away statewide tag and put you and others into units as well as a lottery draw. I have already heard from a few sitting Leg after these meetings that where really riled up about the attitude and that maybe it was time they felt the pain that everyone else has. Including the reduction in opportunity.

If the G&F does it, and things rebound they can act, but if it is legislated they then have to wait on the Leg to change things. Thus why I prefer the G&F finding a solution that meets the wants of the majority without being punitive to bow hunters to an extreme but give is going to have to be made on the bow hunting side willingly otherwise as I said some very harsh actions could come down via the Leg.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

I'm not delusional, nor do I have a superior attitude. I bow hunt, I gun hunt, I can do either, but prefer both. I sometimes fill both tags, more often than not just one. I have not been to any of these meetings, what I've gotten has come from the gun hunters that I know who do not bow hunt. They may come up with this fairness issue at these meetings, but is that really the driving force?

What I don't like is knee-jerk reactions to perceived issues. the deer heard is reduced not because of hunting pressure, either gun or bow, but because of a combination of factors that include hunting and several hard winters. This has happened before and the deer herd has rebounded, it will again.

Although the post I made earlier in reference to tags and seasons was tongue in cheek, I could live with something like that. But are the gun hunters willing to give up the peak of the rut to bow hunters? In other words, are the gun hunters willing to give up something that they have had for years in an effort to make this work? Or is it the bow hunters who will have to give it up either willingly, or forced?


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

how about charging so much a day to hunt deer based on your season (type) length. doesn't matter what type of license you buy. it is x amount of dollars per day to hunt deer. you want to hunt the long bow season than it would cost you more. this isn't meant to drive a wedge between hunters. it is meant to show that this is about hunting opportuntites. not about a guarenteed harvest. 
one deer per person per year is enough.

just a question?


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Thus you would be tying hunting to economic status. Leg has rejected this approach in the past and they are the ones that set fees. Highly unlikely it should fly


----------



## Badlandsreeper (Mar 7, 2014)

I've read all the comments to this and none of you guys are looking at this issue in a way I thought most would. It All comes down to being selfish, why complain and cry you haven't had a tag in 2 years? If the dder herd can't handle the pressure let it be. I personally think they should start charging for bonus points.Then the extra money can be used for crp enrollment etc.$ 20 a point times however many applicants could help out in a positive way. Just deal with what we have cause you all sound like a bunch little kids. Let the game and fish do there job.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Evidently you weren't at the meetings.I was.The GNF told us they want lots of input.THAT is their job right now.No one is a little kid.Everyone has an opinion and that is exactly what they want to hear over the next year.So everyone keep on "crying and complaining."

Well put Ron.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

I have to agree that the driving force is by whinny gun only hunters jealous about a bow hunter shooting their big buck. Nothing more than a bunch of crying "it's not fair" by a few children. It's all I heard over the last couple years leading up to this. Grow up, life isn't fair.


----------



## Badlandsreeper (Mar 7, 2014)

I think its funny because I know both of the guys that write back one sided awnsers are not bow hunters. I do both and there are about 10 different options. Let alone they don't even think about the mule deer herd. They will be managed on a more strict basis I would think. I spent damn near 100 days the last three years in the badlands and I can assure you they don't need extra pressure. With the game and fish not allowing mule deer fdoes to be harvested has helped the herd far more then a 3 day a year deer hunter would ever notice..


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Badlandsreeper said:


> I think its funny because I know both of the guys that write back one sided awnsers are not bow hunters. I do both and there are about 10 different options. Let alone they don't even think about the mule deer herd. They will be managed on a more strict basis I would think. I spent damn near 100 days the last three years in the badlands and I can assure you they don't need extra pressure. With the game and fish not allowing mule deer fdoes to be harvested has helped the herd far more then a 3 day a year deer hunter would ever notice..


I am a former bow hunter and could still hunt legally with a crossbow if I desired, the issue with mule deer is quite different and also on the radar of the G&F dept in regards to possible additional pressures that are likely to come with the influx of new people in the west.

In regards to doe closing again this issue was discussed in length at the meetings and as to why they would or would not do it. But like it or not change is coming and what it is will be a results are going to be driven by input from the public which was the intent of the meetings in the first place.

I have never been a proponent of three buck tags for any one person even when deer numbers where high. I have advocated for this change way back in the 90's for a host of reasons but dating back to the 2008 meetings we have heard the one buck per year being talked about at meetings both spring and fall. So the issue is not something new and it remains to be seen at the upcoming meetings what the thoughts are going to be regarding deer tags.

I will be the first to state that the last few years the dept has missed the boat on doe tags in a lot of areas.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I have never been a proponent of three buck tags for any one person even when deer numbers where high.


I am 65 years old and have only had that happen once, and then I only filled two. I think if you looked at the number of people who get three tags it would be less than one percent. It's sort of a dream to pull it off one more time. At my age it' sort of a bucket list thing. 
More than the tags I just hate to not hunt with one of my weapons in the fall. The worst case scenario would be applying for one or the other. Better to get one tag and hunt until you kill one, then I can pass on a buck with the bow, pass on a buck with the rifle, and try seriously late in the year with the old smoke pole. I just need an excuse to be in the field. With one tag at least I can go sit on a hill and shoot coyotes with my 300 win mag.


----------



## bornlucky (Jul 24, 2007)

This is good discussion. I think ol' Plainsman and I are on the same page regarding deer season. I hunt with both bow and rifle, but rarely kill more than one deer. i just love to be out there. I started bow hunting 6 years ago, and I would choose that weapon if I had to choose. I don't usually start bow hunting until the end of October and usually hunt with my bow during rifle season as that is the best time to be in a tree.

Just an observation, but I am seeing a lot more deer this spring in my travels than the previous two years. So they are definitely on the rebound and hopefully the G and F won't have to take such drastic action. Looking at the number of tags being issued in some of the units it appears that drawing a tag will be a low probability event anyway. So even though they haven't made any changes yet, it appears to me that many rifle hunters will be tagless this fall.

That is really unfortunate and I don't blame them for the low deer numbers. But as one poster said above, the deer herd goes through cycles and this is just part of that cycle. So my last advice is to manage, but don't over react.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I usually reserve my bow tag for a nice buck and use my gun tag for filling the freezer. As such I usually only harvest one deer. I think what bothered my most about the multiple tags that were available is the guys that would fill all those tags then search for an outlet to dispose of all the meat.

Actually the biggest whiners seem to be the guys that 1) own land 2) bait deer and 3) use at least a 1/2 dozen trail cams.....They EXPECT a big payback for their investment..................

Deer numbers are down not simply to over hunting but due to hard winters, poor reproduction, heavy predation, loss of habitat and a bit of over hunting due to slow reaction to the population drop. Keep in mind that when the G&F does its population surveys for licensing purposes it is done before the fawns are born. A bad production year screws up the numbers and having it happen a couple years in a row even more so. If they calculate for 80 fawn per 50 does and only get 10 or 20 things go to heck in a hurry.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

I've had three buck tags twice, both times only talking one.
I do know a few others who take at least two each year, not even counting their wives tag, a kid's tag, etc. they do this year after year and kill all these bucks, most od them BIG too, by running multiple baits ( one guy had 8 bait stations on 1/4 section) and lure ever onto their places from miles around, shooting them with scope sighted center fires and scope sighted modern muzzle as at 15-20 yards! Real challenging! Sarcasm button pushed! :roll: 
So after putting up and seeing this kind of thing year after year, I'm all for one buck tag per hunter and fill it how you want! That'd be fine with me! Makes much more sense than denying a lot of hunters the opportunity to go afield with their weapon of choice. 
And yes, I hunt with rifle, flintlocks when there is an extra tag available or the rare muzzy tag I draw and archery a bit. Should be plenty of deer and opportunities out there for everyone to have a quality outdoor experience without having to be a game hog/ killer.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

so you are jealous that some one has taken the time and put in the work to kill big deer. that seems like a real reason to cut tags down. No different than the guys that shoot 4 bullets a year telling me it is unethical that i kill deer at 500 yards plus. Deer should be managed with science not on some ones personal ethics


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

KurtR said:


> so you are jealous that some one has taken the time and put in the work to kill big deer. that seems like a real reason to cut tags down. No different than the guys that shoot 4 bullets a year telling me it is unethical that i kill deer at 500 yards plus. Deer should be managed with science not on some ones personal ethics


I agree with that Kurt, and I don't want to have to decide between archery and rifle. If I have to give up a muzzy license for a bow or gun I could live with that. Then I agree with Habitat H when it comes to the game hogs. Some guys shoot four five deer with their rifles. I don't know about South Dakota, but that is illegal up here in North Dakota. No party hunting is allowed in this state, but they do it. They buy a license for the wife, the son, the daughter, the grandpa, etc and shoot all the deer themselves. We don't have enough wardens to catch them. There would be no problem with a bow and a rifle license if we could stop the illegal party hunting.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Nope, if they LEGALLY shoot their deer every year, I'll say OK. But baiting deer from miles around in a no baiting area and shooting your own, your wife's tag, your Kids gratis is what gets me.
Did you read the latest edition of ND Outdoors? The one listing the game violations? Not a single prosecution for baiting in a closed unit, yet I'm about the only guy in a 10 sq mile area who doesn't bait. On a still evening you can hear automatic bait stations going off in every direction. 
Seems the G &F. Doesn't take their own rules seriously. Either enforce it or drop it! So far I've obeyed the law, but it seems nobody in the area that I hunt does, though most of them certainly call themselves " sportsmen!" They all smugly claim that the warden would need a formal warrant to enter their property! Especially if they keep the gate to their property locked! dunno if this is true or not.
In any case, they could solve a lot of complaining unsuccessful hunter applicants by simply saying one buck tag, fill it anyway you want! Not TWO or THREE (legally) some years. Or in lean years, one deer tag! And there might be a bit less greed involved in sport killing.....oops.....hunting. Less incentive to cheat the rest of us if you only get one tag and can fill it as you want.
Yes I know, I should turn in these greedy lawbreaker or shut up! You are probably correct. Might do that this year and risk vengeful vandalism to my own deer camp and equipment that so far has been untouched as long as I keep my mouth shut! 
I suppose you will say that midnight shine poachers go to a lot of trouble and effort to kill big deer too! ? Should respect them, too? 
I guess my peeve is more the blatant law breaking than the two or three big bucks per year. Both are irritating, though.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

your first post you never said any thing about baiting in a no baiting zone that is a whole different thing than doing it where you legally can. The guys at night are not legal either so that is a pretty poor comparison. I get tired of hearing the same people year after year whining they dont get a big deer when the only time they look is during the season not willing to put the time in to (legally) find one. Really never had to deal with baiting as it has never been legal here. For the last 7 years i have had 2 any deer every as they dont make people shoot little bucks here for meat if that is what some on wants and shot 2 bucks lots of does i like back straps. After having worked up there i was glad i never lost residency here as the whole system seems to be horribly miss managed. in the end you want any thing to change nut up and make the calls to the right people. set trail cams up at the camp then you can double wammy them if they tresspass or vandalize any thing.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

You are correct, Kurt. My main issue is with plain old lawbreaking! That's number one! I repeatedly hear and have preached myself on websites about turning in poachers, but from personal experience it's not always that easy. Over my long lifetime I,ve learned the hard way that people you consider honest, ethical people are not always who we think! Especially with wildlife, laws and hunting access greed,etc. I think the big " numbered deer attitude" from the Outdoor Channel and websites has a lot to do with it, but often I think I'm just too old and conservative for the new hunting ethics and values.

But number two is multiple buck tags for hunters in ties of low deer population while a lot of hunters go without any tag. Thus me suggestion of having no fixed rules for issuing tags, but fluid numbers depending on conditions. In times of plenty, loosed them up somehow and issue more, but when deer numbers are way down then tighten Numbers up, the result would be having as many NDans afield as possible. 
After all, the overall number of tags is based on deer numbers, so increase hunting opportunities as the resource allows. IMO all tags issued whether for muzzy, rifle, bow should go up and down accordingly. One buck any weapon would help this. Plenty of deer out there to allow every hunter shunting opportunity with whatever food gathering tool the want.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

HH I could live with that setup as long as it was really fluid and did not become permanent. I like big bucks, but that's not my primary interest. My primary interest is days afield, and because I don't wait for mr big my seasons sometimes don't last long. It would help some if I could get that picture of sizzling backstrap out of my mind as they walk across the pasture.


----------

