Thoughts on the new deer survey

13»

Replies

  • binellishtrbinellishtr Posts: 7,666 Admiral
    eeeew.. so your saying that the decision on how to manage deer is not a science based decision? IMO, if that is indeed the case, what a fallback they have when or if this new management practice fails!
  • Walker DogWalker Dog Posts: 1,723 Captain
    Not sure where you pulled.that opinion out of but I would have to disagree. The different management options available all use science to guide them.
  • H20dadH20dad Posts: 853 Officer
    Not sure where you pulled.that opinion out of but I would have to disagree. The different management options available all use science to guide them.
    Lol. That right there is some of the funniest stuff I have ever read. Fwc uses no science. They don’t have harvest data, zilch. You can’t use science related to harvest if you have no data. 

    Do you even understand what science involves?
  • Turner River TerrorTurner River Terror Posts: 5,375 Admiral
    Well H20 , That's why folks should take surveys and not cower in Fear.
    Hard to do Big Science when nobody hunting is telling you anything.
    You can only have it 2 ways
    Big Bucks and tight Harvest..Or Thousands of rag Deer and a Shoot um up.
    Killin and Grillin :grin
  • Walker DogWalker Dog Posts: 1,723 Captain

    Do you even understand what science involves?
    Please, enlighten me!
  • H20dadH20dad Posts: 853 Officer
    Well H20 , That's why folks should take surveys and not cower in Fear.
    Hard to do Big Science when nobody hunting is telling you anything.
    You can only have it 2 ways
    Big Bucks and tight Harvest..Or Thousands of rag Deer and a Shoot um up.
    That is a snappy thoughtless retort. Enough people have been around to see how “the science” is used as an excuse to eliminate hunting opportunities for the public for no gains in anything, when in fact no science is used to arrive at the conclusions, only politics.  Bears are a recent example where there was actually harvest data and the science was ignored for the sake of politics. (Total fault of the commissioners and that guy running for the senate who you should never vote for) A survey is not science for a harvestable population of animals. It is something however that can be used to explain political decisions. 

    See guys like walker dog get realy impressed when people throw around terms they don’t understand and they get emotionally involved in the defense of those terms instead of admitting they got hoodwinked for their ignorance. 

    Credability would be a primary reason many wont respond to a survey or will lie on it based upon their perceived opinion on its political outcome. The Fwc has no credibility with a lot of hunters. So many aren’t willing to contribute fuel to their “political science”. If the Fwc wants credibility they need a harvest program like many other states have used when their game populations were in disarray. Tags and mandatory reporting are often part of that process.  

    Trying to make a finite public resource a place for trophy hunting through huge acts of public banishment from the resource (wmas permit system) in a state that couldn’t grow a trophy buck without importing the genes is a freaking embarrassment. 
  • lookinlookin Posts: 1,255 Officer
    No doubt they botched the bear hunt deal and lost hunter trust.

    I took the survey anyway.  I was surprised by how short it was and obviously they are just trying to get harvest data.  Look, I hunt public land 99% of the time in FL so I agree with much of what is being said about access but I don't go so far as to think they are going to use the data to affect public land hunting and access negatively.  I wasn't a proponent of the AR's as I like to hunt for deer, not bone, but I guess I'm okay with it.  I was already hunting WMA's with ARs so I was used to passing on fork horns.  The 10" rule is mostly a 2 year old deer anyhow.  Also, 15 and under being exempt from those rules makes it more palatable.  That said, if they reversed the ARs today it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit.

    Anybody know what phone # they would be calling from for a survey follow-up call?  I took the survey a couple of days ago and got a call from Tally yesterday - # 850.270.2180 - but I didn't answer cuz I get a lot of BS calls.  They didn't leave a message.  If it said FWC on the caller ID, I would have answered...if they had left a message, I would call them back.
    God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy
  • bgeorgebgeorge Plant City FLPosts: 1,371 Officer
    Can anyone explain the reduction in gator permits on certain lakes, when in fact 100% of the eggs are harvested still?

    They will tell you they do not collect 100% of the eggs.  Just 100% of what they can find.  Then they tell you that they can reduce the number of permits because there is not enough big gators but they can take all available nests because they population survey indicates there are plenty of baby gators..  Then you find out that a person who collects and receives the eggs and hatchlings  is actually being employed part time by the FWC to do surveys that helps determine how many eggs and hatchlings he gets to take.  Better yet why does the "recreational hunt" generate 4/5 of the alligator revenue and takes less manpower to operate the program? 
    The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones. Hopefully the next man is not dropping his stones on the mountain you are trying to move.
  • pighunterpighunter Posts: 15 Greenhorn
    On the subject of science based facts, Walker Dog has more than enough knowledge on the science based facts of deer management.  A quick search of this forum and his posts will confirm that.
  • binellishtrbinellishtr Posts: 7,666 Admiral
    bgeorge said:
    Can anyone explain the reduction in gator permits on certain lakes, when in fact 100% of the eggs are harvested still?

    They will tell you they do not collect 100% of the eggs.  Just 100% of what they can find.  Then they tell you that they can reduce the number of permits because there is not enough big gators but they can take all available nests because they population survey indicates there are plenty of baby gators..  Then you find out that a person who collects and receives the eggs and hatchlings  is actually being employed part time by the FWC to do surveys that helps determine how many eggs and hatchlings he gets to take.  Better yet why does the "recreational hunt" generate 4/5 of the alligator revenue and takes less manpower to operate the program? 
    BOHICA
  • Walker DogWalker Dog Posts: 1,723 Captain
    H20dad said:
    Well H20 , That's why folks should take surveys and not cower in Fear.
    Hard to do Big Science when nobody hunting is telling you anything.
    You can only have it 2 ways
    Big Bucks and tight Harvest..Or Thousands of rag Deer and a Shoot um up.
    That is a snappy thoughtless retort. Enough people have been around to see how “the science” is used as an excuse to eliminate hunting opportunities for the public for no gains in anything, when in fact no science is used to arrive at the conclusions, only politics.  Bears are a recent example where there was actually harvest data and the science was ignored for the sake of politics. (Total fault of the commissioners and that guy running for the senate who you should never vote for) A survey is not science for a harvestable population of animals. It is something however that can be used to explain political decisions. 

    See guys like walker dog get realy impressed when people throw around terms they don’t understand and they get emotionally involved in the defense of those terms instead of admitting they got hoodwinked for their ignorance. 

    Credability would be a primary reason many wont respond to a survey or will lie on it based upon their perceived opinion on its political outcome. The Fwc has no credibility with a lot of hunters. So many aren’t willing to contribute fuel to their “political science”. If the Fwc wants credibility they need a harvest program like many other states have used when their game populations were in disarray. Tags and mandatory reporting are often part of that process.  

    Trying to make a finite public resource a place for trophy hunting through huge acts of public banishment from the resource (wmas permit system) in a state that couldn’t grow a trophy buck without importing the genes is a freaking embarrassment. 
    As suspected. No explaianation of what science is or how it's properly used to manage wildlife.

    I can respect your opinion but I'll go elsewhere for facts.
  • binellishtrbinellishtr Posts: 7,666 Admiral
    So what science is used in your reply to managing per the public's request? FWC should in fact be making decisions based on scientific facts so I would love to be enlightened as to how the new;y implemented management practice relates to this
  • DUCKWHACKERDUCKWHACKER Posts: 333 Deckhand
    I took the online survey and received a follow up phone call on Thursday. I was asked about archery, muzzleloader and general gun season. How many days, how many deer taken and county of harvest. 
    Should I be expecting a black helicopter to land in my yard at any moment?
  • Walker DogWalker Dog Posts: 1,723 Captain
    Which newly implemented management practice are you referring to?
  • binellishtrbinellishtr Posts: 7,666 Admiral
    You said the state is managing the way the public wanted  to manage the state, so what is that? QDMA, max sustainability per acre? 
  • H20dadH20dad Posts: 853 Officer
    edited June 9 #77

    Walker Dog said:
    H20dad said:
     Bears are a recent example where there was actually harvest data and the science was ignored for the sake of politics. (Total fault of the commissioners and that guy running for the senate who you should never vote for) A survey is not science for a harvestable population of animals. It is something however that can be used to explain political decisions. 

    If the Fwc wants credibility they need a harvest program like many other states have used when their game populations were in disarray. Tags and mandatory reporting are often part of that process.  
    As suspected. No explaianation of what science is or how it's properly used to manage wildlife.

    I can respect your opinion but I'll go elsewhere for facts.
    You clearly are rather clueless. This is the specific discussion of how we had scientific data for bear harvest and an example of how other states gain harvest data for deer. 

    You cant “science” without data. What part of that concept is too hard to fit between your ears?


  • Walker DogWalker Dog Posts: 1,723 Captain
    Actually the OP didn' say anythi.g about bears. I never said that no data was being used. That would be you.
  • swampwalkerswampwalker Posts: 1,273 Officer
    Got to agree w pighunter. Walkerdog does have the science as indicated in his posts record. Some of you only have an ax to grind and a chip on your shoulder. Comparing Florida hunting  to any other state is comparing tangerines to grapefruit. Our tremendous nonstop growth with tons of different user groups clammoring for access is an insufferable headache. We can either support FWC or go the private route. Somethings as in locked up state lands are very wrong. Being able to have beautiful state properties to access is a gift we hunters should cherish. Antler envy and wanting to kill a deer every hunt can often change our reasons for even going. Every typical mature buck I see makes me glad to be hunting the critters. We're all so different in what we desire to accomplish in the woodlands. I'm somewhat of an old timer - before feeders, tree stands, camou, and the other things that make hunting easier. The biggest changes I've had trouble accepting are the "antler crazed fanatics" and the orneriness of folks about "their spots". 
    The original - "Renaissance Redneck"
  • N. CookN. Cook Posts: 1,957 Captain
    If you attend the FWC Commission meetings there is a presentation of 'rule changes' for hunting...usually on a long list of WMAs....In most cases the hunting opportunities are expanded...some drastically....Over the years more areas are open without quotas....especially for hogs....more land has been added to WMAs.....Small Game seasons have been expanded...and hog hunting allowed during many if not most of them on the WMAs...Of course, deer hunting gets most of the attention and the new program being worked on now for over five years has redrawn the Zones and added the DMUs in an attempt to better "catch the rut" in a very complex state to do that....ruts are all over the calendar...and the map!....The reduction in opportunities to take does....and the ARs do ring in some bag opportunities, but the hunters mostly were commenting on "not seeing deer" and "poor antlers"....so, more doe means you see more deer, including bucks and somewhat better recruitment will result....and ARs, not really high ones as for a QM program, but a modest 3 point on a side...type plan, will protect the very young bucks and some better antlers will result...The hard issues are ....the two a day bag......annual bag limits.....an enforced "tag and report" system...These have not been seriously addressed to date...
  • Ghostrider11bGhostrider11b Callahan, FlPosts: 14 Greenhorn
    spangler said:
    Please yes! Doe!  I'm swimming in doe!

    Pretty sure you're making a point though ;)  That in spite of the obvious numbers of doe, we still aren't getting to hunt.  I can hardly wait for the 15th.  0 for 2 last two years on the antlerless permit.  Fingers crossed.
    Seriously!!! I'm counting it down like a child counting to christmas!!! lol I know they wont post results immediately. how long after do they usually post??
  • bowhunter4lifebowhunter4life Posts: 958 Officer
    By the following Wednesday we should know what we have..
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.