MDWFP email

[huntersmky]

the way I see it, if you like to bow hunt then bow hunt, if you like to rifle hunt then rifle hunt. No one is going to stop anyone for choosing to bow hunt the whole season. It's personal choice. Last year I only shot my rifle once and bow hunted the entire season, this year I chose to rifle hunt more because my hunting ground was different than I'm used too. I don't have a problem with the new proposal and I will stand behind it all the way.

[quacker11]

Yea, I have never bothered to sign up over there because of exactly that reason.

[cwink]

I don't think too many kids start out bowhunting...In fact most all new hunters don't start out bowhunint.. Most are going to start out gun hunting.. If you can get them "hooked" early they will naturally progress to bowhunting..

[bigoak]

A kid can shoot any gun they want durring any firearm season ....even muzzleloader.

I am all for it and I and Peyton are huge bow hunters. All this BS about them going nocturnal ya ya ya is what it is BS. Deer change habits from one thing "PRESSURE".....if you bow hunt everyday they get pressured........I will take you any time you get ready put you in a food plot with 8- 15 deer and get somebody 100 yrds away to fire a rifle off and maybe, maybe 2 of them will even look around.........

I do wish they would have kept at least one weekend for just the kids......

If the department is behind it so am I......if we do not have faith in them then why waste tax money on them.....

So if the bill passes and the primitive weapon season starts on Nov 1st then youth hunters can shoot any rifle? It don't have to be a primitive weapon? I did not know that. Great news!!

[quacker11]

I'm not talking about "starting out" bowhunting. I'm talking about progressing to bowhunting as well. I mean let's face it. Kids typically are not just going to do something that doesn't have something in it for them. Why would a kid necessarily want to pick up bowhunting. Some may do it for the challenge, and the excitement, but some are going to do it because that's the only way they can go hunting that extra month and half a year with Daddy. That's all I'm saying. Both sides can be argued all day long, but the bottom line is, why fix something that's not broke. Everybody has ample time to be in the woods as it is now, and last time I checked, there were plenty of deer and plenty of big deer being killed in the State of Mississippi. If it really had to do with needing to kill more deer, like Dacus and them are saying, then why haven't they made the last two weeks of January rifle season before now? It is my understanding they have had the legislative power to do that for many years now.

[cwink]

I'm not talking about "starting out" bowhunting. I'm talking about progressing to bowhunting as well. I mean let's face it. Kids typically are not just going to do something that doesn't have something in it for them. Why would a kid necessarily want to pick up bowhunting. Some may do it for the challenge, and the excitement, but some are going to do it because that's the only way they can go hunting that extra month and half a year with Daddy. That's all I'm saying. Both sides can be argued all day long, but the bottom line is, why fix something that's not broke. Everybody has ample time to be in the woods as it is now, and last time I checked, there were plenty of deer and plenty of big deer being killed in the State of Mississippi. If it really had to do with needing to kill more deer, like Dacus and them are saying, then why haven't they made the last two weeks of January rifle season before now? It is my understanding they have had the legislative power to do that for many years now.

I know Chad Dacus.. He has done lots of work with our camp in Simpson County. We collect deer observation reports from all hunters and provide the data to him and he handles our DMAP program. Every year he comes out to our camp and goes over the data with us and works very closely with our camp.. He is not trying to make "extra money" for the state, he is doing what is best for the deer herd. I am gonna trust someone who has spend thier entire adult life studying deer herds as opposed to a bunch of weekend warriers that think they know best..

[quacker11]

Hey, we're on the DMAP program as well, and I am sure that those guys want what is best for the deer herd. I just can't logically believe that this is really "JUST" for the deer herd. Do you think we have a deer herd problem in MS? No way. Anyway, this is something that we could argue all day and neither one of us is going to compromise. Each to his own. I just believe that there is no since in trying to fix something that's not broke, and I sure dont' believe that the legislators introduced this bill because they thought that our "deer herd" needed it.

[cwink]

Not sure where you hunt, but we don't have a deer problem in my neck of the woods.. Rankin/Simpson county.. But if you go up north a little bit just look at the number of dead deer on the side of the road.. Like I said before.. In the counties where there are an abundance of deer this will help thin the herd a little.. In the counties like mine, I welcome the extra days to try and get a deer.

[country_20boy]

My biggest arguement, and it has been stated by others on the MDWFP forum several times, is that the increase in rifle hunting days is not going to increase doe harvest. That is the argument that I have seen most often as justification for the season changes. Everybody I know, that hunts in areas with an abundance of deer, already kills as many does as they want to and then they concentrate on hunting for bucks. Most hunters in this state will kill a hand full of does, as many as they want to eat or feel like skinning, and then they quit shooting them. The only people that I know that kill more than a few does are the farmers that have crop damages every year. I agree that the Department probably knows a lot about herd management and that increased doe harvest is needed in many areas (but not all), but these season changes are not going to get that job done IMHO.

[cockandlock25]

I got it and thought it was ok. I can see where some people may think that a longer gun season will make the deer more nocturnal and pressured, but that is kind of a broad statement. Deer act different everywhere. About the people who shoot a few does and then quit, that's not always the case either. The exceptions are people that are in a club who have regulations. Some clubs make you shoot a certain number of does before you can shoot a buck. If the biologist for them tells them to shoot 100 does, then they should make that rule to the members to get the buck:doe ratio back on track. I'm not going to knock it until I see the results after a year or two.

[JLT]

It will not make a difference in my opinion. If the gun hunters can't get it done in 65 days then somebody needs to take up another sport. Gun hunters even get the best of the year with the colder weather and rut. Having an earlier gun season will not change how many does people shoot or the balance of the heard. I would love to hear their logic. They might be right, but I am not convinced at all. I think it is pressure from insurance companies and $$$$$$ that's all......

[armyduckman]

I am a firm believer that in order to control the population and balance the herd the state needs to go to a tag and check system that forces a hunter to assist in management of the herd. As a serving member of the army, I have hunted in many different states and in several, your ability to kill a first or second buck is dependent upon your killing a doe or two. I do know I have many friends in MS who never kill any does, but annually kill 3-5 bucks, which does not help keep the buck to doe ratio or herd numbers correct.

[BBR12]

Another reason I don't believe it will do much or any good is A LOT of people have quite hunting by mid january. They have killed what they want or they are just burnt out on going. If they start two weeks earlier they will quite two weeks earlier on most occassions. I know there are the die hards but most have hung it up by this part of the season. And If its about #'s make the whole state go till Feb. 15 doe only there's two extra weeks without screwing up bow season. Or how about 3 buck tags w/ a large fine for untagged buck and a doe a day like alabama. If its all about the #'s increase the bag limit for does. I'm no fanatic bow hunter but it is the only time of season around where I hunt to have a chance to kill witha bow and see deer acting unpressured. The bottom line is your taking away from hunters to give to killers for the biggest part.

[CBRADGO]

My solution: Don't allow any bucks to be harvested the next 2 years, after that decrease to 2 bucks a year (2 with archery, or 1 with archery and 1 with gun) and increase to 4 or 5 does a year (for a couple years), implement a physical tag system where you have to check the deer in at a check station, and change the zones (antler regs for Delta and SW, or your typical "big buck" areas of the state) and dates hunted according to actual population numbers. Oct 1 thru Nov 15 archery with 1-2 weeks youth starting Nov 1, then guns until Feb 15.

No one would like the first couple years but we'd have some sho nuff bruisers after that! [/sarcasm]

There is no clear cut answer but what they are proposing is not going to "improve" deer hunting IMO. It may have a chance at improving the herd, but deer hunting will suffer...

[mottlet]

Don't deer hunt in Mississippi anymore, so disregard if you wish...

A tagging system that requires physical checking of deer is a huge, gigantic pain in the booty. For the state running it and the deer hunter. We used to be on that system here in VA. Whole sets of new issues come into play. The state has to find locations to serve as check stations. Lots of em. And there are never enough. Because if you shoot a deer, but have to drive twenty minutes the other way, before turning around and driving back home, how likely are you to check it? Sure if it's a big buck and you wanna show it off, it's no sweat. But what if it's your second, third doe of the season? Sometimes even finding a damn check station is a pain. And there's not any additional information that is gained from a physical tagging of a deer that isn't gained from a tel-check system. I suppose it's possible that there could be, but for that to happen, the checking and tagging system becomes even more of a burdon, as checking each deer is going to take even longer.

Theoretically, a required physical checking of a harvested deer should cut down on illegal activities, taking of too many deer, too many bucks, etc. I only hunted VA for two years before they went to a tel-check. But of the three or four deer I killed and tagged in the old system, NONE were even looked at by the designated agent of the state. All were checked at some mom and pop country store. I just walked in, handed em my license, told em what I had killed, guessed how much it weighed and told em(all were does), got my tag and left. I could have been checking a bald eagle or whooping crane. The state wouldn't have known.