Sunday Hunting, Bowhunting for Deer management, and the Future of Small Game Hunting
Wildlife Biologists say “hunting is a wildlife management tool”. Anti-hunters who despise wildlife agencies as much as they do hunters refer to hunters as “your tools” when they confront government biologists. Hunters and anti-hunters have little knowledge about how hunting is a wildlife management tool. They both know that one function of hunting is to control wildlife populations. Biologists refer to that function as a form of “ecological service”.
For decades, whitetail deer very often exceeded their social carrying capacity and/or biological carrying capacity. Research that was been carried out for twenty years has concluded that whitetails cause permanent unfavorable changes to forest plant communities. The research also concluded that change in plant communities is impacting biodiversity. Subsequently, deer management prescriptions have changed and are devised to maintain much smaller deer populations just about everywhere.
Deer hunters, and especially bow hunters, are indeed valued by managers to reduce deer herds. Bow hunters are often valued because bow hunting is often possible where firearm hunting is not. Many states have legalized 150 foot archery setbacks, crossbows, and use of bait, and Sunday bowhunting only to increase archery harvest. Until recently, due to TV influences like the Crush with Lee and Tiffany, bow hunters would not select bucks and would take does almost as readily as bucks. Selective hunting of bucks of any size or age class is not optimum from the perspective of population control however, but that’s another story. Moreover, arrows do not put lead into the food chain, which is another plus.
This relaxing of regulations has increased opportunity for archery hunters across the northeast and the rest of the USA. So has opening hunting on lands which historically have prohibited hunting. Bow hunters have probably benefited the most from expanded access.
In every state in which it was proposed, archers were divided about legalizing crossbows. It has become obvious that it cannot be rationally denied that a pervasive attitude exists among many in the archery hunting community that seeks to reduce firearm hunting opportunities for all game. This is ironic, because not so long ago, archers were few and bow hunting was at the top of the anti-hunting agenda. In that era, some firearm hunters did not approve of archery, but as it evolved, the larger firearm hunting community fought for the archers. Eleven states do not allow full Sunday hunting privileges. Some of those 11 states allow Sunday bow hunting, but prohibit Sunday firearm hunting. As you may have guessed by now, many archers are lobbying against expansion of firearm hunting on Sundays in those states.
The perception that hunting should only exist when it is “necessary” is going to be a point of contention in the future. This perception works temporarily for deer managers and generates the most money for wildlife agencies, but it is short-sighted.
Many of the most recent and future access opportunities are the result of new research. Over browsing is not a new concept, but the parameters are changed. The goal of deer management by hunting is to restore forest understory which will result in improved biodiversity. Once that habitat is restored, deer hunting will still be needed to maintain it; however deer populations will be lower and thus access permits will also be fewer. What happens when this goal is achieved, do hunters complain about low deer numbers? Will they expect state agencies to adjust the harvest to increase the population? Or kill coyotes, which provide the same ecosystem services as hunters?
The result of improved habitat in turns increases biodiversity, including small game such as ruffed grouse, woodcock, cottontail, and perhaps even pheasant. Will these lands be then opened to small game hunting which is harder to justify based on over population?
How will the improved habitat conditions be maintained? Will some county park service use prescribed fire or other habitat management strategies to maintain the restored habitat or let it mature into less productive forest? All they are likely to do is spend taxpayers’ dollars constructing a trail system which will invite persons into dense cover that would never otherwise venture there as a grouse hunter would. The grouse hunter, however, is not welcome, Sunday or any other day.
For decades, whitetail deer very often exceeded their social carrying capacity and/or biological carrying capacity. Research that was been carried out for twenty years has concluded that whitetails cause permanent unfavorable changes to forest plant communities. The research also concluded that change in plant communities is impacting biodiversity. Subsequently, deer management prescriptions have changed and are devised to maintain much smaller deer populations just about everywhere.
Deer hunters, and especially bow hunters, are indeed valued by managers to reduce deer herds. Bow hunters are often valued because bow hunting is often possible where firearm hunting is not. Many states have legalized 150 foot archery setbacks, crossbows, and use of bait, and Sunday bowhunting only to increase archery harvest. Until recently, due to TV influences like the Crush with Lee and Tiffany, bow hunters would not select bucks and would take does almost as readily as bucks. Selective hunting of bucks of any size or age class is not optimum from the perspective of population control however, but that’s another story. Moreover, arrows do not put lead into the food chain, which is another plus.
This relaxing of regulations has increased opportunity for archery hunters across the northeast and the rest of the USA. So has opening hunting on lands which historically have prohibited hunting. Bow hunters have probably benefited the most from expanded access.
In every state in which it was proposed, archers were divided about legalizing crossbows. It has become obvious that it cannot be rationally denied that a pervasive attitude exists among many in the archery hunting community that seeks to reduce firearm hunting opportunities for all game. This is ironic, because not so long ago, archers were few and bow hunting was at the top of the anti-hunting agenda. In that era, some firearm hunters did not approve of archery, but as it evolved, the larger firearm hunting community fought for the archers. Eleven states do not allow full Sunday hunting privileges. Some of those 11 states allow Sunday bow hunting, but prohibit Sunday firearm hunting. As you may have guessed by now, many archers are lobbying against expansion of firearm hunting on Sundays in those states.
The perception that hunting should only exist when it is “necessary” is going to be a point of contention in the future. This perception works temporarily for deer managers and generates the most money for wildlife agencies, but it is short-sighted.
Many of the most recent and future access opportunities are the result of new research. Over browsing is not a new concept, but the parameters are changed. The goal of deer management by hunting is to restore forest understory which will result in improved biodiversity. Once that habitat is restored, deer hunting will still be needed to maintain it; however deer populations will be lower and thus access permits will also be fewer. What happens when this goal is achieved, do hunters complain about low deer numbers? Will they expect state agencies to adjust the harvest to increase the population? Or kill coyotes, which provide the same ecosystem services as hunters?
The result of improved habitat in turns increases biodiversity, including small game such as ruffed grouse, woodcock, cottontail, and perhaps even pheasant. Will these lands be then opened to small game hunting which is harder to justify based on over population?
How will the improved habitat conditions be maintained? Will some county park service use prescribed fire or other habitat management strategies to maintain the restored habitat or let it mature into less productive forest? All they are likely to do is spend taxpayers’ dollars constructing a trail system which will invite persons into dense cover that would never otherwise venture there as a grouse hunter would. The grouse hunter, however, is not welcome, Sunday or any other day.