Buck vs Doe

[Spikebuck]

...Hunting laws are made by close association with game biologist. They know whats best for the health and numbers in any given location. This applies to all species. Simply do not kill what is not allowed and the animals and game birds will thrive.

As a general statement, I hope that is true. Unfortunately it may not always be the case.

Here in Minnesota, our deer population a few years ago was so low that screaming hunters finally caused our legislature to perform an audit of our DNRs processes. In short, it wasn't pretty for our DNR who was apparently working more for farmers and insurance companies to absolutely minimize the herd an ignoring the ones that pay their salaries...a major stakeholder.

In another example, in my area that is very heavily hunted for small game, the grey/fox squirrel population was nearly decimated, mostly by Hmong hunters that are very good at it, but the limits are just too large, so legal harvest was actually gross over harvest. The Hmongs complained and the DNR did a three year study. I stayed in touch with the lead biologist. I read his paper at the end of the study which concluded that the squirrel population on state lands in the area were so low it was at tipping point where it might not ever recover. He made several recommendations to the DNR HQ bureacracy for season reductions and harvest limitation. He was very frustrated when the response he got was "The season has always been the way it is and we don't want to change it." WHAT?! They wasted funding and resource for three years for a predetermined result. So while the biologist knew what needed to be done, the bureaucrats refused to act on it.

These examples are the reasons I tell other hunters that taking the legal harvest might actually be harmful. Just because the state says a hunter can take X number of game, birds, or fish doesn't mean they should if everything they see in the field says otherwise. Sometimes those of us that spend lots of time in the field year around know more than desk jockey DNR bureaucrats who spend almost no time in the field or are gutless to take action.

 

[Dave Marsh]

As individuals, I don't think we know enough to let our opinions be our guide. Hunting laws are made by close association with game biologist. They know whats best for the health and numbers in any given location. This applies to all species. Simply do not kill what is not allowed and the animals and game birds will thrive. When does days or weeks are permitted, the game authority knows the herd can not only tolerate the deaths, but it will also be good for the herd.

You can't trust the bureaucrats to do anything right. They know nothing and are only interested in the almighty dollar. Sure, there are conscientious biologists out there, but they can only report and recommend. The government agency in charge then does what gutless wonders do. Thats what we pay them for.

 

[Dale Lilly]

When I was a kid in Colorado [about 200 years ago] we could shoot one deer and some years we could not find many. In Kansas, when I was a lad about eleven, there was no deer population at all. Oh, how the deer population has grown. We gripe about our fish and game folks, but I think the deer population now confirms their success.

 

[Rawhide67]

Years ago, I hunted out of a camp in the southern tier of NY, just north of the PA border. The owner and other old timers did not like to shoot does. For the reason stated.above.


Unfortunately, they never really changed their thinking. The deer on that property were tiny. A fawn might be 50 or 60 lbs going in to the winter. A 2 1/2 year old buck would be 115 lbs with unimpressive antlers. You couldn't leave the camp without stepping on a deer.

I showed them articles about taking does, letting small bucks walk, etc. didn't work. Despite all that, it was a great group a guys and a fun place.

Now, does are off limits in the regular season where I live. If I have a shot at a doe during bow or muzzleloader, I'll take it. Meat is meat, and ya can't eat the horns.

 

[Mike in FL]

You can't trust the bureaucrats to do anything right. They know nothing and are only interested in the almighty dollar. Sure, there are conscientious biologists out there, but they can only report and recommend. The government agency in charge then does what gutless wonders do. Thats what we pay them for.

I suppose that's true to some extent. I just would not presume to know what's best for statewide herds. I live in FL where deer are small and to me are not worth the effort to go after. I lived all my life in VA and I still go there to hunt. The wildlife authorities are certainly doing something right because there are more deer, healthy deer, than ever before, even in those areas where more cleared land is not responsible for the increase. I often wonder if I would have been happier being a game warrden instead of a trooper, because I absolutely to believe in game laws. A great portion of the hunting public has little regard for those laws and see nothing wrong with not buying licenses or exceeding legal limits.

 

[Zapadach]

I'm 76 this month and when I grew up in NJ we could only shoot bucks. As I got older there were option like a doe day to shoot does. I was taught that when you shot a doe you killed 2 deer for next year, witch there is probably some truth to. Wonder what other think about this and in colonial time what did they think or do. Imagine when hungry they did what they needed. To be clear I have shot doe, not many.

I grew up in n.j. as well, I just turned 70. The last time I hunted there, you could take a doe during doe season, a doe during archery season, a doe during muzzleloader season. You could also take a doe during winter archery season in January. This was back in the 1980s.

 

[Flint1]

I would imagine in the colonial days they would shoot whatever was available for food. I've read the old hunters of that era actually preferred bear meat over deer, believing the deer taste was inferior. Interesting to see there was a conservation law in Virginia as far back as 1635: I never knew that and doubt most here would have thought that would have been in effect during colonial times. Of course that would be hard to enforce against the original inhabitants, and probably difficult to enforce on the frontier as well. As far as today, I suppose state biologists know the herds in their states and the various states impose the limits best for their conservation efforts.

 

[Trigger]

Funny... I've hunted..

Sitting purity looking for nice bucks.

looking for a deer.. any deer.

I've been more public lands around home. Looking to fill the doe tag.. but there is some nice big buck.

I'd like one of those bucks.. when your just looking to get any deer. Even though I'm hunting any deer. I'm looking for that buck in there.

I get it though. You plant a gun shack.. a good plot.. a little heat in there. shooting rail. a chair.. wait for him. You do all that work too sit pretty and shoot that buck year after year.

 

[Trigger]

The first person I met sitting pretty when I was a kid.. my grandfather brought me to meet him and learn. Because I wanted to shoot big buck you know.

He showed me...

Nice cabin. Lazy boy near the fire. Nice window looking the garden from the chair next to the fire. He shot the big bucks.

He was good in the woods too. All the spots we hunted were his spots over the years he found.

 

[flatcreek]

I grew up in n.j. as well, I just turned 70. The last time I hunted there, you could take a doe during doe season, a doe during archery season, a doe during muzzleloader season. You could also take a doe during winter archery season in January. This was back in the 1980s.

I'm going back to 50s thinks in the 70s or 80s is when the changes took place. Not sure just going from memory and sometime it's a little foggy.

 

[kipcarter]

I would imagine in the colonial days they would shoot whatever was available for food. I've read the old hunters of that era actually preferred bear meat over deer, believing the deer taste was inferior. Interesting to see there was a conservation law in Virginia as far back as 1635: I never knew that and doubt most here would have thought that would have been in effect during colonial times. Of course that would be hard to enforce against the original inhabitants, and probably difficult to enforce on the frontier as well. As far as today, I suppose state biologists know the herds in their states and the various states impose the limits best for their conservation efforts.

The major reason for killing so many deer during the Colonial period was not hunting for food but rather hunting for deer hides which were a major export item to England due to the fashion of leather breeches among the English. Deer skins were near the top of the list when you look at export shipping manifests in most ports.

 

[oldschoolhunter55]

I'm 76 this month and when I grew up in NJ we could only shoot bucks. As I got older there were option like a doe day to shoot does. I was taught that when you shot a doe you killed 2 deer for next year, witch there is probably some truth to. Wonder what other think about this and in colonial time what did they think or do. Imagine when hungry they did what they needed. To be clear I have shot doe, not many.

Think if they were hungary probably shot the first one they seen. I know i would

 

[Flint1]

The major reason for killing so many deer during the Colonial period was not hunting for food but rather hunting for deer hides which were a major export item to England due to the fashion of leather breeches among the English. Deer skins were near the top of the list when you look at export shipping manifests in most ports.

You're exactly right. What I was referencing was strictly for eating purposes, but still you're exactly right about the taking of so many deer and the reason for doing so. I don't know if that was why Virginia had a conservation law that far back or not, but possibly so. Virginia was settled much earlier than SC. The English settlers who came to stay didn't arrive in the current Charleston area til 1670. I've read about the "hide trade" in SC during the early 1700s, may have stated as late as the late 1600s, where wagons full of deer hides made their way from the current upstate to Charles Towne to be shipped to England. BTW, I see you're in Heath Springs. Did you graduate from Andrew Jackson? I did in 1976 and my wife in 1980. We're both originally from Kershaw, but she passed away in January 2021 and is buried in Kershaw. I still live in Mt. Pleasant across the river from Charleston, where we moved in 1987 after I resigned from the Army. Most of her remaining family and mine are still in the Camden-Kershaw-Heath Springs and Lancaster area.

 

[Northwoodstrapper]

In lower Michigan you can shoot up to I believe 20 does. The muzzleloader season you can now use a rifle as well as a muzzleloader. I spend 5 months trapping and I don’t see the deer that the DNR says we have. Maybe in the farmland. Yet they don’t let the people that hunt in the lower use bait but they are allowed to hunt standing corn as long as they don’t spread it on the ground.
I hunt in the upper and dear population is pathetic but we deal with it.

 

[cynthialee]

It is rare the yearly regulations allow us to take doe.

I wish they did a better job counting the deer here on the east side of Washington state. If they did and considered how many hunters we actually have yearly I believe we could take doe or 2 every year. But they have weird math that takes road kill into consideration and extrapolates how many deer there are in the area combined with sightings and further extrapolation....If they would send teams out at night to count deer in fields on back country roads these pencil pushers in Seattle and Olympia would realize that we have a vast herd much larger than supposed numbers. get me started lol

I much prefer a doe over a buck and I prefer a juvenile over an adult. The meat is better.
Considering how many deer we have EVERYWHERE I have no problem shooting doe or fawn. I don't let sentimental distractions to dictate my menu.

 

[Trigger]

In lower Michigan you can shoot up to I believe 20 does. The muzzleloader season you can now use a rifle as well as a muzzleloader. I spend 5 months trapping and I don’t see the deer that the DNR says we have. Maybe in the farmland. Yet they don’t let the people that hunt in the lower use bait but they are allowed to hunt standing corn as long as they don’t spread it on the ground.
I hunt in the upper and dear population is pathetic but we deal with it.

Private farm land after opening day are stocked full of deer.

I seen them. It's not maybe they are there.

 

[BJHabermehl]

I'm 76 this month and when I grew up in NJ we could only shoot bucks. As I got older there were option like a doe day to shoot does. I was taught that when you shot a doe you killed 2 deer for next year, witch there is probably some truth to. Wonder what other think about this and in colonial time what did they think or do. Imagine when hungry they did what they needed. To be clear I have shot doe, not many.

I’ll gladly harvest the first legal deer I see and have a tag for. With the exception that I try to not shoot lone antler less deer. They’re too likely to be button bucks or spikes. I am usually a 1 and done hunter. As my son and I are the only ones that eat venison. BJH

 

[Yanqui]

This past summer my brother was driving down a highway going to work. A deer leapt across the rd and in mid-leap (as the air bag never went off) went thru the windshield. We weren’t sure he’d survive for over a month. Since then he’s recovered but with short term memory issues and all but 50% vision left in one eye. He was to have retired next May. Now he’ll never drive again among the many other life changes. So you bet your GD bippy we need to shoot excess deer. The ONLY thing that bothers me about that is that what seems to be happening in many places is deer constantly being displaced by urban sprawl. So, because of our cultural excesses we have to react to too many deer on less and less huntable land and just clobber the resource back to socially acceptable limits. It’s just sad.

 

[Ponderosaman]

Even good biologists can be fooled by bad data. A well respected turkey biologist in AZ saw a sharp decline in turkeys when they changed the method of estimating their number. He was very concerned about the decrease, but from my own experience, I rarely see wild turkey here in the West when I am traveling on dirt roads at less than 30 MPH. At that speed they don’t have time to leave when your car shows up. I wondered if the biologists counts were counted incidentally while they were going somewhere, thus the higher numbers. While the new counters were traveling slowly through the woods looking for turkeys and seeing less.

It’s all conjecture and I know we are talking about deer, but unless there are true indicators, like die offs, disease, low hunter harvest surveys, and complaints of animals being pests, it is not always easy to determine an animal population. Here in the West especially, where there are miles between animals sometimes.

 

[Daveboone]

Especially with so many hunters "antler centered", the buck harvest is way out of proportion to does. Especially in modern times (I will refer to here in NY) where deer populations in many area are way too high, it is vital for more does to be taken to help control the herd and keep it healthy. I certainly have no hesitation in taking a nice big doe for the freezer. My opinion...in Colonial times, if you were hungry, you shot the deer you saw. Certainly the market hunters shot everything they saw (Boone, etc). Antler restrictions in a lot of areas are steered towards providing more older bucks. I think it is a bad licensing practice here that a hunter licensed with a regular tag, ML tag and bow tag can take three bucks...and many do. The state keeps looking for ways to spred the buck take out more. Like, duh! Limit the buck take to one per hunter a year, Does taste just like (or better than) the bucks.