Car vs deer accidents

[newB]

I've been reading about how states are using the car vs deer accident ratios to determine how many deer should be taken in a season. Just wondering what other hunters think about this idea? Illinois is beginning to lean heavily on this information from insurance companies. Does anyone see this as a good thing or bad?

I haven't formed an opinion yet.

What is a good way to determine how many deer should be taken?
Should a year or two of hunting be doe only?
Will hunters hunt if this is the case?

According to State Farm insurance info WI car vs deer accident rate went down 5% in 2008, how does that happen. WI has earn a buck program and some reports say that the hunters don't like it.

Still working on my opinion.

Personally if there is a deer problem (over population or disease) why not make it does only until the problem is under control.

A negative impact of allowing the taking if more deer is the thought that what is the hunter going to do with all that meat. I went to SD in 08 and we had tags for 4 deer, took 3 and said "what am I going to do with all that meat", so we stopped shooting. This year SD raised the # of tags to three per hunter in the same areas, again "what to do with the meat" Intended to go and HELP with the problem ($ didn't work out) I planned to donate the deer. Even donating the deer cost up to $70 each, often paid by the hunter.

Is all this a perception that we as hunters have learned? We have to take only bucks and keep the doe's to make sure the herd survives? I know that is what is done for game birds, should it be the same perception for larger game animals?

I know that the more does are encouraged to be taken in WI. WI allows up to 4 free tags in the CWD zones DAILY and in the Herd control zones they are $2 each. And after all that they are still having problems.

A few years ago I went to KY because I was invited to come and cull the doe herd on a piece of property. I filled 2 of 4 tags. Only buck I saw was the one my buddy took. This year I've been wanting to go to WI but am getting resistance from the manager of the property I hunt. He Doesn't want me disturbing his bow hunting, I plan on only taking does, but with the earn a buck program I could potentially take 1 buck for each doe I take.

I've read that for Quality Deer Management the ratio should be 2 does for every buck. How does one actually achieve this ratio?

Enough for now.

God created we manage!

[gd357]

Considering that in the midwest a lot of places are overrun with deer, it's probably not a bad idea. Earlier this year in one 5 week span, my brother hit 3 with his truck. They definitely need thinned out in a lot of places.

If you're looking at balancing the the herd, consider restricting everyone on the property to one buck per year (in some states, this is a law - very smart). Also, fill every doe tag that you can. I've hunted areas before that were so unbalanced, seeing a buck after the first 3 days of gun season was unthinkable. Does however, were everywhere. What is the buck to doe ratio when you don't see any bucks, and an average of 20 to 30 does per day? Kill off as many does as legally possible, bring the population down to reasonable levels, and balance the herd (where needed).

JMHO

gd

[fabsroman]

In Maryland we have a deer disaster. Just to give you an idea, about 6 years ago I killed 8 does in one morning and could have probably killed another 8 if common sense didn't get the better of me. As it was, it took me until 4:00 in the afternoon to get them all out of the woods and on the truck so we could drive them to the local processor that processed them for the Hunters Feeding the Hungry Program. Of course, that processor was 30+ minutes away. On another afternoon, I killed 3 does easily, and could have killed a couple more.

Here, there are counties where we can kill as many does as we want in a day and in the season. There is no limit. It used to be that you could kill a single buck, then you had to kill 2 does, and then you could pay an additional $10 to get another buck tag or you could continue killing does for free.

FYI - I have been suffering from something for about 2 months now, and while none of the doctors' tests have come back positive, we think it is Lyme and I am taking the antibiotics for it. I have started to get better since I started taking the antibiotics, so I am keeping my fingers crossed. Anyway, the reason I bring this up is because I did some research on Lyme disease. It turns out that Maryland is #6 in the country, with the states ahead of it being north of it and on the east coast (e.g., Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, and I believe New Jersey). Maybe they can use vehicle/auto accident statistics and Lyme disease statistics to determine how many deer to kill.

Me, if I can get out to the fields this year I am going to kill almost every one I can see. The farmers prefer that too.

[Swift]

I don't feel that big money should determine the amount of deer that need to be taken.

Educated biologist are the ones that need to be the voice of reason to determine the carrying capacity of the land for said species.

[popplecop]

Car kills are just one of the factors used in setting deer seasons. Other factors are: last years harvest antlered vs. anterless, over winter serverity, summer deer observations etc. In Wisconsin every lawful deer has to be presented to a registraion station to be tagged. A form is filled out stating where the deer was killed, sex etc. Does make for an accurate count of the legal kill. Also CK deer are accounted for and tally kept. Probably missed some factors, but have been retired 21 years.

[fabsroman]

Originally Posted by popplecop

Car kills are just one of the factors used in setting deer seasons. Other factors are: last years harvest antlered vs. anterless, over winter serverity, summer deer observations etc. In Wisconsin every lawful deer has to be presented to a registraion station to be tagged. A form is filled out stating where the deer was killed, sex etc. Does make for an accurate count of the legal kill. Also CK deer are accounted for and tally kept. Probably missed some factors, but have been retired 21 years.

Yep. I was going to say the same thing after reading Swift's post. While car/deer collisions should not be the sole determining factor, it should be taken into account along with other factors. What happens if the biologists making the decision based solely on their observations are not the sharpest tool in the shed, the brightest light bulb in the chandelier, or they happen to be as sharp as a doorknob?

[Adam Helmer]

NewB,

Welcome to the Forum.

I would suggest you get documentation for the footnotes on car/deer collisions. Last year allegedly State Farm Insurance said PA was #1 in those accidents. My truck is insured with State Farm, so I called my local agent and got the National State Farm Insurance phone number. I called and asked for the deer/car collisions per each of Pennsylvania's 67 Counties. No one could give me ANY data! What????? I asked who at State Farm said "PA is #1" and no one could be found for the basis of that widely publicized statement.

Adam

[popplecop]

Wisconsin ussually kills between 12 and 14K a year, may be down some last couple of the years. Anyway those are the ones accounted for and not the ones that run off and die. My experience on I 80 some (25) years ago is that the State never picked them up in Pa. so I don't know if they ever had an accurate count.

[newB]

Hey fabsroman sorry to hear about the Lyme disease. I found other info regarding the possible link between the reduction of Lyme disease and deer populations. Though I haven't researched it further it would seem to make sense.

http://www.deeralliance.com/index.ph...&articleID=144

The following link reflects how Illinois is using the car/deer info to adjust herd size.

http://www.thetelegraph.com/articles...dents-car.html

I think that such info could be part of the tool box, but wonder how similar information could be used to justify some other influence on other aspects of what I call "Traditional Sports" i.e. Hunting and Fishing. The seat belt laws came about because insurance co's showed that usage resulted in less deaths... just food for thought.

The following links justify my comments about statefarm insurance.

http://www.statefarm.com/_pdf/deer_map_increase.pdf
http://www.statefarm.com/_pdf/deer_chart_2009.pdf
http://www.statefarm.com/_pdf/collis...elihood_09.pdf
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/.../deerfacts.pdf

One thing I'm noting from some of my reading is the committee concept. With a bunch of information gathered a committee makes a CENSUS about what should be done. Is that anyway to manage any natural resource?

I'm thinking if Hunters were more verbal ABOUT HELPING to control deer populations, the DNR would listen. Hopefully by making it less restrictive ($) and more rewarding ($).

Side Note: Sundays Parade Insert (Oct. 18, 2009) had an article about how states are trying to collect sales tax on Internet sales. Said that $20 billion is lost to states each year . . . only makes me wonder what citizens really think about taxes.


Just rambling...

God created we manage!

[fabsroman]

Thanks for the well wishes. I'm actually starting to feel better, but I have been on antibiotics for 20 days now.

My mother was talking to me on Sunday about the sales tax issue. She must have read it in Parade also. No problem here in Maryland since the raised the state sales tax from 5% to 6%. They should be making up the difference with that extra 1% to account for the money lost on internet sales. I can tell you one thing that will really be hurt by sales tax on internet sales, and that is ebay. All the small time sellers will have one heck of a headache trying to figure out all that paperwork, unless ebay figures out a way for them to do it electronically within the sale. I might have to read that article to see exactly what it says.

[skeet]

When it comes to regulations it really IS all about the money and control. The states have been trying this for years. When you stop to consider how much tax you pay every year it would be amazing. Like 50 cents a gallon or more just on gas. BTW in Wyoming..when you come into the state if you bought something out of state you are supposed to stop and pay Wy sales tax on the items.. Many here shop in Montana which has no sales tax. You do know how many stop and pay tax on Montana items don't you??

[fabsroman]

Skeet,

You do know that in Maryland you are supposed to download a form and pay the Sales & Use Tax on an item that you purchase over the internet or out of state. If the item is purchased out of state, Maryland charges a Use Tax on it when you enter the state kind of like they do in Wyoming. Ever wonder what that Use Tax in Sales & Use Tax was? Now you know. Guess how many people complete that form and send in the money.

Now, there has to be some taxation. Roads, schools, police departments, fire departments, and the Court system cannot fund themselves. Well, maybe the police department and Court system can. Anyway, I'm sure you get my point. With that said, I will agree with you in that taxes are just way out of control with almost no accountability for where the money goes. With government being so big, it is hard to track what the heck is going on.

[Swift]

As a fellow PAyvanian I gotta agree with skeeter. $$$$ sure seems to be driving the PA harvest over the last decade.

[newB]

Kind of agree that $ are running the hunting. With most states coffers going broke (see Illinois) states are trying to make departments self reliant so they have to charge higher licenses and throw in some new funding fee(s).

In WI when they first started the Chronic Wasting Disease deer management program they offered FOR FREE a certain # of tags to land owners and if the land owner wanted to they could let friends and family hunt for nothing. No out of state license was needed. I took full advantage of the opportunity and helped reduce the herd. 2 years ago they decided that anyone hunting in WI needed a license, for none res. is $160 dollars. As a matter of fact I received a letter thanking me for hunting in WI but because of the need for DNR funds they would need to charge for all hunters.

Certainly has made me think twice about HELPING control the deer population.

The worst part about higher $ is they are getting the same $ as in the past but are drastically cutting staff as well.

I've certainly been lucky to be able to hunt and fish in many places but if DNR's want our help make it worth our while.

For now,


God created, we manage.