[jlh42581]

Im certain most have you have read my idea on the dmap style format for game lands so I want to see how everyone feels, am I out in left field or does this make sense.

Basically, all game lands would be handled via a dmap system in which a recommended allocation of antlerless permits would be given for that specific game lands. The catch being though that no other antlerless tag would be valid in this area(this is the change from standard dmap). What I think this would accomplish is spreading out the pressure. Just like a normal DMAP system the tags would be taken from the general pool for the containing WMU. All remaining tags would be valid only in state forest or on private land.

Lets see where we stand.

 

[hunter4095]

Looks good on paper to help over harvest on GL's , but we have a lot of them that are way to small. It would be a battle over who is awarded tags.

 

[indianahunter]

I think this would make alot of hunters happy. No issue with handing out tags with the computer system, with county treasures doing it... another story. The computer system is capable of doing something like this, NY state does a method for handing out tags that would work great for this system. I would also go this way with state forrest and state parks. one stipulation, if you dont report the required harvest info you will NOT get a tag the next year.

 

[Pepsi's Dad]

Go back to the old Doe days "Period" , raise the License fees to keep the Greedy Politicans Happy ,that'll do it, What's the worst that could happen. ????? More Deer the following Season . **
I have seen this in NY now is happening in Ohio , Game Commissions have the same "PLAN" in ALL those states . What They don't realize is that They are dong away with Their Own Jobs in The Future and the Folks and interest in Deer Hunting along with Their Jobs .How They Figure Thst's a Good Idea....DUH

 

[JasonN]

***

 

[pumpgun]

i would if it included SF land as well. and somehow we have to figure out how to thin the herds on private posted property in a lot of areas without PO'ing the landowner. that is the key and the hardest part of all.

 

[pappybear]

I see too many private property owners driving public land that adjoins their property for this proposal to work.
It would be a nightmare to control.

 

[DDX]

Managed access is the key to quailty hunting on any property. Google "The Tragedy of the Commons" Its a classic metaphor used to illustrate the conflict between individual interests and the common good. It pretty much shows that "public" anything is doomed to fail.

 

[yellodog]

i'm not opposed to this, and i'm not trying to argue, but i'm not sure how it can work in the real world. one reason sgl's get pounded is cuz everyone goes there. where are those hunters going to go now that sgl's are permit only for antlerless deer? iv'e been told for years theres no access to private ground, so those hunters would get shut out if they didn't have a permit. i'm just not sure this solves a problem, but it does create a new one.

 

[jlh42581]

Maybe it would need some sort of preference system to go along with it. Hunters like in western states would have to accept that they might not draw a tag in their favorite area every year.

Maybe you pick 3 sgls for example and if you dont draw your #1 pick you get 1 preference point going into the following season. This would only be an issue on highly sought Game lands until things stabilized and many became just as good as the next.

 

[DDX]

iv'e been told for years theres no access to private ground,

There is plenty of access to those that put the time and effort in to find it. Its does take work but to me the real trophy is getting access that that amazing piece of ground. When I draw the bow on that big buck, thats just icing on the cake.

 

[hunter4095]

I see too many private property owners driving public land that adjoins their property for this proposal to work.
It would be a nightmare to control.

I know many places like that are are my most productive areas. I can set my watch to what time I know they're going to walk past me..

 

[BlackBruin]

So when 50 of the 75 tags are awarded to Guys that never get anything or get out but a day, it would be counter productive to the pgc goals for management.

 

[LONZO]

No you raise them the following year if the PGC doesn't get the harvest it wants.

 

[DDX]

and somehow we have to figure out how to thin the herds on private posted property in a lot of areas without PO'ing the landowner. that is the key and the hardest part of all.

Once apon a time antlerless lic. issued after the 1st or 2nd round (can't remember) were "private land only". Only lasted a year or 2 back about 10 years ago.

 

[frank1969]

posted land is what saved texas deer pop from over harvest

 

[Nathan585]

No. I don't support it. Not when all they need to do is cut the antlerless tags period. Too few deer is not just a gamelands issue, so there is no reason to limit the hunters there and there alone.

 

[jlh42581]

No. I don't support it. Not when all they need to do is cut the antlerless tags period. Too few deer is not just a gamelands issue, so there is no reason to limit the hunters there and there alone.

Its not about limiting the hunters, its about controlling land that we can control to make the experience enjoyable while preventing overharvest. You cant tell a land owner what to do on his land and the dcnr controls the state forest.

 

[Nathan585]

I can understand your frustrations if you hunt gamelands, but responsible management measures should be state-wide, not just on game lands.

And WE don't control gamelands any more than we control any other lands. Unfortunately pgc controls the statewide allocations effecting them all.

 

[jlh42581]

A prime example would be the guys who live in 5C. Over 100,000 doe tags correct? Well, the problem in 5C is an access issue, so when you take 100,000 tags and hand them out to whomever wants one with no regard for where the harvest takes place they then head to public land.