mobow

Absolutely. If that is what is needed to not only balance the herd, and make for more, bigger bucks, and also to have a healthier herd that is not plagued by diseases, you bet I would. One year of not shooting a buck is worth the investment of a continuing herd.

recurver67

Yes, it would be a blessing in parts of my state.

johnch

buckeyebuckhntr YES
I use Ohio's urban tags to fill the freezer early.
Then I do some rack hunting.
I would preferr to see the Earn a buck idea go into efect first.

Fieldmouse

The state I hunt is so over run with deer it doesn't matter. They went to unlimited on Does. I plan next year on one hunt dropping 6 deer with my 6 arrows in my quiver.

IL-Cornfed

I would indeed suppot a Doe only season...... heck this past season was just that!!! All kidding aside, I take several Does every year and have NO interest in shooting a buck unless he is a true trophy class animal anyway. WOW..... just imagine if ALL those yearling bucks could just get past that first season. Even in a quality state like IL, we still have 75% of our buck harvest ending up as yearlings! I couldn't imagine the increase in overall sex ratios...... it would be awesome!

Jollyarcher

As far as the state of PA, my answer would be a resounding NO. If your state is out of balance, certainly. I've lived here and seen the change in the deer population, which contrary to what the PGC will say, is far less than when I was a child. You can still succeed here and I don't mind the challenge, but we cannot support a mass harvest of doe deer in this state.

BOWFANATIC

Yep! Pretty much did that last year. My area was EAB and I harvested three doe myself (no bucks) to try and insure that this year wouldn't be EAB. Guess what , this year my area is EAB again.[:@]

Nope! Has no scientific proof of helping the health of the herd!
I would agree to doe only season only to balance the sex ratio.

Soilarch

Wow!!!

I don't know what the ideal is, but the immediate area where I hunt in southern illinois has AT LEAST 10 does to every buck. I had no idea that other areas were so different.

nodog

Well the powers that be haven't consulted me in the past, I doubt they would on this one, but if they did I would say no, I do not support it. More trophy bucks running around makes them cheaper to everyone except the people selling them like the state. I maybe mistaken but wasn't there a post awhile back about Ill. wanting to charge $450. for a out of state tag. Don't you guys ever pay attention to what has gone on around you. Any thing like this would have the same effect that has caused baseball to become what it has. You tell me, How many kids can afford to go down and watch their favorite team play when their in town just once? Support yet another law? More further loss of freedom so it can cost me and my kids more? You want more trophy bucks go find them they are out there now. If you can't that's your problem. Keep your freedom grabbing hands off me and mine.

The income tax is only around 100 years old. When it was past with much debate one man stood up and said something like If you pass this I guarantee that one day it will be 10%. At that time it was 1%. You guys want to protect bow hunting? Start protecting freedom of any kind.

gibblet

in my western section of north carolina i would support a 2 year total ban on deer hunting. short of that i would support a ban on anything with less that 4 pts per side (which would just about accomplish the same thing), and a 2 yr ban on does. if we did that i may not have to move, but as it stands, when i have my teaching certificate, i'm outta here. i love everything here, except the deer hunting. now, i'm 37 yo and am back in school because of a on the job injury, and while things are getting a little better over the past 5 yrs, a 2 yr ban would really put this area right. the genes are here, i've seen it, but not much gets darn chance, and the numbers are low. we're talking .5 antlered bucks per sq. mile or less on average.