SCDNR Deer management meetings

[rp]

SPECIAL NEWS RELEASE #15-17 Aug. 26, 2015 DNR News (803) 667-0696

Public meetings scheduled to discuss deer management legislation

The S.C. Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has scheduled seven public meetings to receive input from hunters concerning DNR supported legislation related to future deer management in South Carolina.
Senate Bill 454 was filed on behalf of DNR by Senator Chip Campsen of Charleston in February of this year. The legislation proposes a limit of four antlered bucks per year and that all deer harvested are tagged. The Antlerless Deer Quota Program (ADQP) that many landowners and hunt clubs utilize would continue to be available with quotas being issued for both bucks and does. The bill passed the Senate in March and currently resides in the House of Representatives where it will be considered when the legislative session begins in January.
According to Charles Ruth, DNR Deer and Wild Turkey Program coordinator, "The state's deer population has changed in recent years and although there are still some areas where deer numbers and reports of agricultural damage remain high, the overall population has decreased as indicated by a 35 percent decline in harvest. Reasons for the decline include habitat changes related to forest management, extremely liberal deer harvests over the last two decades, and the colonization of the state by coyotes since the turn of the century."
Although there is a 5-buck limit prescribed in the two upstate Game Zones these limits have never been enforceable. In the coastal Game Zones, state law specifies there is "no limit" on antlered deer, a situation that has never been a function of DNR. This lack of a reasonable bag limit on bucks is in stark contrast to other states and to the approach with other fish and game species in South Carolina, which typically have limits. From a management standpoint, tagging all deer is beneficial because it would allow better regulation and manipulation of the harvest of antlerless deer (doe deer). This is important as we attempt to mitigate the impact of coyotes on future deer management.
The meetings are an effort by DNR to work with leaders in the House of Representative to address any remaining questions or concerns related to the legislation. Each meeting will include a presentation by DNR on the background and data related to the legislation, as well as, public comment and questions.
Contact DNR at (803) 734-3886 with any questions about agendas or sites.
All meetings will begin at 7 p.m. and the dates and locations are as follows:
* Tuesday, Sept. 22, Florence, Pee Dee Research and Education Center Auditorium, 2200 Pocket Road, Florence, SC 29506
* Thursday, Sept. 24, Lancaster, University of South Carolina-Lancaster, Stevens Auditorium 476 Hubbard Drive, Lancaster, SC 29720
* Tuesday, Sept. 29, North Augusta, North Augusta High School Auditorium, 2000 Knobcone Ave., North Augusta, SC 29841
* Tuesday, Oct. 6, Pendleton, Pendleton High School Auditorium - 7324 Hwy 187, Pendleton, SC 29670
* Thursday, Oct. 8, Greenwood, Piedmont Technical College James Medford Family Event Center Auditorium (Building N), 620 North Emerald Road, Greenwood, SC 29648
* Tuesday, Oct. 13, Orangeburg, Orangeburg-Calhoun Technical College Roquemore Auditorium, Building R, 3250 St. Mathews Road, Orangeburg, SC 29118
* Thursday, Oct. 15, Walterboro, Hampton Street Auditorium, 491 Hampton Street, Walterboro, SC 29488 #

[britton40]

"the 35% decline in harvest"

They have no idea how many deer are killed. Tags will somewhat give DNR a better idea but only if they implement some sort of call in system, which could be funded by the tags.

Problem solved by my Whitmire -USC education.

[raybird]

The idiots that run our DNR never cease to amaze me.

[Edisto life]

They say there has been a decrease in the population but they don't take into hand that there are half as many dog clubs than there has been in the past 4 years. And the people who trophy mange the clubs now kill no where near as many deer and they do so therefore they think the population is decreasing because the harvest numbers is down

[rp]

They say there has been a decrease in the population but they don't take into hand that there are half as many dog clubs than there has been in the past 4 years. And the people who trophy mange the clubs now kill no where near as many deer and they do so therefore they think the population is decreasing because the harvest numbers is down

At the same time I have heard of peanut farmers riding around and dropping the deer in their fields and these are not reported.

[britton40]

They say there has been a decrease in the population but they don't take into hand that there are half as many dog clubs than there has been in the past 4 years. And the people who trophy mange the clubs now kill no where near as many deer and they do so therefore they think the population is decreasing because the harvest numbers is down

Valid point.

[Silentweapon338]

Reasons for the decline include habitat changes related to forest management,

I hope they brand this in everyones mind that shows up at the meetings.

At least this is now getting air play!

This is by far the single biggest reason for the the deer decline.

By running a monocultural environment you set the stage for all kind of problems.

When any ag is planted because deer can't eat pine trees they all congregate to the field that is planted.

This causes a issue for the man who planted the field and actions are taken to reduce crop damage.

What a better hunting opportunity for predators than to have all of your prey congregated at one location. Screw a fatal funnel you have a perfect hunting situation for song dogs.

The last and hopeful nail that doesn't come in is due the exaggerated high densities of deer around these ag fields you set up a wonderful scenario for disease and death to spread rampantly if a out break of anything happens.

All of the current problems stem from the "pine tree culture"

What is the answer? I'm not totally sure. But at least they are openly diagnosing the problem rather than making a boogie man out of coyotes and farmers. That is merely a symptom not a cause.

Hardwood forest take a long time to mature. In some case 100 years is not that long. None of us will live to see a old hardwood forest that actually has diversity cut down and regrown in our life time.

Why not capitalize on existing stands by giving tax breaks or some sort of economical advantage to those landowners who are willing to keep their hardwoods rather than letting them be destroyed and replanted with pines.

It comes down to the all mighty dollar at the end of the day, but if you can make it advantageous or even ceteris paribus to leave a old hardwood stand monetarily we can at least start to stop the bleeding and turn this ship around.

It would have to be almost a 2 part plan. Taxes would have to be raised on the harvest and sale of pine trees. This encourages the end user to find alternatives to pine trees as well as discourage land owners from growing pine trees and keep hardwoods and or farm land.

[britton40]

Reasons for the decline include habitat changes related to forest management,

Why not capitalize on existing stands by giving tax breaks or some sort of economical advantage to those landowners who are willing to keep their hardwoods rather than letting them be destroyed and replanted with pines.

They already pay to keep farm land available for use. I agree with the the reasons why. I would agree to this as well.

[2thDoc]

we all have our conspiracy theories....

its all about coyotes.

Oh, and farmers with permits.


and pine trees.

and all those does I used to stack up years ago.

and dog drivers.

but its mostly coyotes because I said it was so.

[PBiz]

It has nothing to do with killing every doe you have a tag for..

[2thDoc]

yes it does. (or yes it DID....)

are you saying that PAST doe harvest has nothing to do with the population decline?

[PBiz]

Word of the Day ~ Sarcasm

[ricequacker]

I've said it a hundred times, , fuck a pine tree. ...we've cut all of our pine trees and replant hardwood or natural regeneration. ....

[ricequacker]

Basic game management. ....habitat, habitat, habitat. ...

[Quackhead22]

I've said it a hundred times, , fuck a pine tree. ...we've cut all of our pine trees and replant hardwood or natural regeneration. ....

Some of the biggest deer I've ever seen killed were killed in pine trees, albeit old growth longleaf, and in areas with a very healthy herd . Pine trees are just fine for deer habitat if they are managed properly and a proper food source and cover area is near by. Some of the healthiest deer herds I've ever laid eyes on we're on very large wild quail plantations with lots bi-color patches and brood rearing habitat. I realize that you are probably talking about plantation pine managed for wood production...

[Silentweapon338]

Some of the biggest deer I've ever seen killed were killed in pine trees, albeit old growth longleaf, and in areas with a very healthy herd . Pine trees are just fine for deer habitat if they are managed properly and a proper food source and cover area is near by. Some of the healthiest deer herds I've ever laid eyes on we're on very large wild quail plantations with lots bi-color patches and brood rearing habitat. I realize that you are probably talking about plantation pine managed for wood production...

2 totally different set ups.

Large tracks of premium quail habitat isn't what is being grown and causing the problem.

That all being stated I like were BigTimber is going.

I'll further that and ask were or what year is DNR basing all their numbers from?

Is it the year before every year?

How about the boom they always refer to that had its crescendo at the turn of the century.

Are we basing all our numbers off the highest point or the norm prior to the boom in the 80's?

Numbers with out a base can be misleading.

If I said gosh gas is 1.89$ today in 1998 you would say: "NO WAY" I'm walking.

If I said gosh gas is 1.89$ today in 2007 you would say: "were I want a tanker full."

Today gas is fallen to 1.89$ yep its lower than it had been and folks are wanting it to go lower but it isn't as low as it should go.

The point is if I don't give you a time reference numbers are relative to what you perceive as normal.

[FEETDOWN]

PBiz :hearts: Charles

[PBiz]

Charles - What do you guys think?
Everyone else- Well Charles.....
Charles- (interrupting) aarhhhhh wellllll,let me tell you how its gonna be, ok? I am a genius, and all you are idiots and don't know anything.. I'm gonna make it where turkeys and buck harvests are limited.. Ok?
Everyone else- but.....
Charles- Like I said, I am a genius, you are peasants.. STFU

[porkchop 13]

I see both sides since I have dog hunted and still hunted.

A lot of dog clubs did kill A lot of deer. At same time there usually wasn't any still hunting on dog clubs and when you take into account amount of acres being hunted vs. Amount of deer killed they usually weren't to far from normal.

Another side. The talk about still hunting clubs manage property better. I disagree in most cases but not all. Reason is qdma or trophy clubs are hurting future deer numbers more than a normal still hunting club due to they are going to shoot does for freezer meat and let all bucks walk unless they are something to write home about. Let more does walk and shoot small bucks for freezer meat and deer numbers will in return start to rise again.

If you kill 4 small bucks for freezer meat you only kill 4 deer.

If you kill 4 does for freezer meat you have killed 4 does plus the offspring that they would have had that year which in return would have more offspring from here and so on.

This may step on someone toes but it is how number of deer were increased in couple clubs I hunted with. They put limits on does and asked you take a small buck for freezer meat and now both of those clubs have more deer than they know what to do with.

But it is really worth going to sit when you are seeing 20-50 deer in one sitting giving you a lot more time to be selective of that wall hanger

Not to mention taking a kid hunting. Kids don't get discouraged when you have deer all over the food plots but sitting day after day and not seeing anything kids lose interest in the sport.

So if you are one of those that are hung up on worried about killing b&c deer in Sc and not the future generations to be able to fill up their freezer for their families then I have no use for you. It is about the future not how big of a deer you killed to brag about.

[Bigtimber2]

I may be wrong but I think statistics works in SC like the rest of the world and if data is collected using the same method for a couple decades at the very least trends will be accurate.