buck tags good or bad?

s.c.hunter
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:25 am

buck tags good or bad?

Postby s.c.hunter » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:32 am

buck tags do u think this will be good im all for it . i think all deer should be tag to much area and not enough officers
I hunt because my wife cant climb a tree!!

ripper7
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 2:06 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby ripper7 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:38 pm

HOW DO YOU SEE THIS WORKING. WHO WILL MAN THESE STATIONS? I SAW SOME POST ON THE WISCONSIN STATE SIGHT MENTIONING IT CAN BE FRUSTRATING TO FIND AN OPEN STATION. I BET THAT AN OPEN STATION THAT WILL DOCUEMNT A DEER IS NOT GOING TO BE CLOSE TO A DEER PROCESSOR. IN FACT THE DEER PROCESSOR I HAVE USED DOCUMENT MY LISCENSE ETC. THE OPERATOR SAYS THE DNR GUYS COME IN REGULARLY AND CHECK HIS RECORDS. WITH THE CUT BACKS IN THE DNR I DO NOT THINK IT IS ONE OF THERE TOP PRIORITIES.

1Morgan
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:49 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby 1Morgan » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:33 am

Buck tags will not affect my hunting at all. I think it will be a good thing for SC. The need to implement a telecheck system with the tags so there won't be a need for check stations. It will give a means for enforcement. Right now if a LEO stops you he can't know if you are toting your 1st buck out or your 40th. No tag on it=ticket. Processors won't be able to accept any deer w/o a tag. Some people will circumvent this by not leaving their property until the processing is complete. But, those are few and far between.
South Carolina Low Country

shadow357x2
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:35 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby shadow357x2 » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:04 am

Excuse my ignorance , Ive been out of the country for awhile with only one visit back in October to hunt a few days, but is there a new law being proposed for tagging in SC or is this just a what if thread?
To me it doesnt matter what they want as long as I can put meat in the freezer every year. I wont shoot anyhting under about 120 lbs (guestimate under scope) so when I do bring one down Im sure to get enough meat. Its a shame to see some of the deer that are brought down that are 90lbs and less, to top it off the "hunter" is proud of it.[:@]
Back to the subject, I think the telecheck system would be the best bet if it was to come around. Check Stations as mentioned above would not work as we are already under staffed with the dnr and the stations would only create more of a financial problem,then our license fees would go up.
Ok Im off my soap box, you all have a good one back home.. 

1Morgan
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:49 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby 1Morgan » Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:17 pm

They are proposing 4 buck tags and 4 doe tags state wide.
South Carolina Low Country

shadow357x2
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:35 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby shadow357x2 » Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:56 am

Thats really not a bad number. Im good with that, being that I only need 4-5 a year when Im home. 2-3 when Im away.
Figure a total of 8 a year, that would make people more selective about what they hunt.
On the other hand will it have a negative impact on the over population that we have, quite a few times in a few areas Ive been the quality of deer is very low due to the overpopulation, I guess its a give and take situation.

1Morgan
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:49 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby 1Morgan » Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:05 pm

I'm good with it too. I think you are right about the overpopulation especially here in the low country. I can't see it lasting. The farmers and auto insurance companys will have a lot to say. It's gonna be fun to watch. Another SC forum I'm on is exploding about it already and the bill hasn't even been introduced. The only thing that has happened is that DNR is recommending the tagging system w/4 and 4.
South Carolina Low Country

Gutrunner
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 5:01 am

RE: buck tags good or bad?

Postby Gutrunner » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:09 pm

I remember when SC DNR had meetings many years ago about raising the cost of licenses. DNR said it would put more officers in the field and increase hunting opportunities by adding more WMA land. Fast forward 20 years, WMA land has all but disappeared in the upstate, fewer enforcement officers and check stations are gone. Now they want, to my understanding, charge for the tags. Enough is enough! SC hunters have been purchasing doe tags for years and as a result DNR has reduced the number of either sex days. I don't have a problem with DNR lowering seasonal limits, but we're paying enough already with little return on our investment with higher license fees. So many people joined hunting clubs back then to avoid the increased WMA permit fees. What will the response to tags be? I don't know, but hopefully 20 years from now I'll around to say "I tried to tell you it wouldn't work". [:D]
Talked with game warden 02-27-10 and he said DNR would charge for each tag issued. Still a good idea? Don't think so.
I am just a simple caveman. I am not accustomed to your sophisticated ways.

Bill Stepp
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:08 pm

Re: buck tags good or bad?

Postby Bill Stepp » Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:05 pm

I hunt SC out of state from NC. I have emailed SC DNR and the proposal is just that at this time. There was a recommendation of a fee for each tag. For out of state hunters as much as $25.00 per tag. This may or may not seem much but with the economy now, this could really make or break some. I lease property, maintain the roads and food plots, purchase food and fuel each trip, etc. The expenses are adding up and like everyone else I am trying to justify the cost. I do appreciate SC DNR addressing the issue of the deer population just be easy on the expenses put on the hunters.

User avatar
rthomas4
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:07 pm
Location: Hampton, SC

Re: buck tags good or bad?

Postby rthomas4 » Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:02 pm

Evidently the new tag program will possibly take effect in the upcoming 2013 season. I am opposed to it for several reasons. The first one is how many deer will end up dead and left in the woods. According to people on other hunting sites, this is a common problem in states with these type of restrictions. The second reason I'm opposed is I hunt deer with dogs. It's hard to be selective in the swamp when an obvious buck comes running through the water and briar thickets at mach 1, and I'm trying to judge the deer and put the bead of the shotgun on it at the same time. My third reason is simply from a food standpoint. My step grandson and I live off of venison. Last year I put 6 deer in the freezer and we were out of everything except a few packs of burger before Aug. 15th. We actually do eat venison at least 4 or 5 times per week. This season I have put another 6 in the freezer, but I have also provided another deer to my aunt in payment for hunting her tract of land that adjoins mine. I have had seasons where I've killed 20 or so deer, and then seasons where I've only killed 4 or 5. Depending on the hunting clubs that I've dog hunted with, I might get a piece of meat from a kill, or I might get the whole deer. For clubs that have a share the meat program, many of the hunters may never kill a single deer and others may kill several but end up with a meat equivalent of less than 1 deer for the season. How will the new program affect those individuals? Fourth and this is my biggest gripe about the process, DNR claims that surveys were sent to 90% of the licensed hunters in the state. I have attended some of the meetings on this topic and have yet to meet or hear of a single person who received such a survey. I know I never did! It appears to many of us down here in the low country that if such a survey was sent out, it apparently was only sent to the upstate and the non-resident hunters. Since the upstate already has more restrictions on bag limits, seasons for archery, rifle, and shotgun/muzzle loader, and no dog hunting or baiting is allowed; it's only natural that there would be support for implementing some of those same restrictions on game zones 3, 4, 5, and 6. Then the non-residents who flood into the state from NC, Georgia, and Florida also have an agenda of wanting to change our game laws to accommodate their land leasing opportunities that are contributing to hunting properties becoming too expensive for clubs and resident individuals to acquire. If the two sides succeed in getting buck tags instituted, banning of hound hunting won't be far behind. In a state where snipers are hired to eliminate herds of deer at night using spotlights, do we truly need to limit hunter kills? Especially considering that Charles Ruth of the DNR stated at one of the meetings I attended that the ultimate goal is to also eliminate antlerless days and eventually limit the tag program to just 4 bucks and 1 doe!!! How many of you are in favor of that little known piece of information? The way I view the tag program is the same way I view the gun ban debate: if we give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile!!!!!!!!
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, The Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, QDMA, DU, NWTF, ASAdisabled sportsmens' alliance, EDH, and Proud SC redneck REBEL for life.


Return to South Carolina

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests