Deer Hunting Forums banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Vermont dropped the amount of antler-less tags this year alot. Guess it was at least partly due to a snowy winter last year. Im still hoping to get a tag. Anyone else trying for one?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
5,710 Posts
I've applied for one and usually get one every year. Yes Vermont has reduced permits this year not just for the doe permits but the amount of moose permits dropped BiGTIME as well.

Whitetail Doe permit numbers, 2010 = 25,600 - 2011 = 9,575
that ougt to do a lot of damage to Vermont hunting, considering Vermont still has too many does and not enough bucks. (poor buck to doe ratio)

Look at what the new F&W team did to the Moose permits
Moose permit numbers, 2010 = 765 - 2011 = 405

Personally I think Vermont failed to consider the monies they will lose with the reduced amount of permits (Funds we really needed) and further failed to consider the impact on the current deer and moose populations, this reduction will mean an increase in both herds (deer and moose) and the need for more feed but without habitat restorations there wont be an increase in feed and Vermont will slowly see an increase in deer and moose having decreased body weights and sizes,, basically unhealthy, underfed wildlife. Those are not the type of conditions that will help wildlife in Vermont. JMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I've applied for one and usually get one every year. Yes Vermont has reduced permits this year not just for the doe permits but the amount of moose permits dropped BiGTIME as well.

Whitetail Doe permit numbers, 2010 = 25,600 - 2011 = 9,575
that ougt to do a lot of damage to Vermont hunting, considering Vermont still has too many does and not enough bucks. (poor buck to doe ratio)

Look at what the new F&W team did to the Moose permits
Moose permit numbers, 2010 = 765 - 2011 = 405

Personally I think Vermont failed to consider the monies they will lose with the reduced amount of permits (Funds we really needed) and further failed to consider the impact on the current deer and moose populations, this reduction will mean an increase in both herds (deer and moose) and the need for more feed but without habitat restorations there wont be an increase in feed and Vermont will slowly see an increase in deer and moose having decreased body weights and sizes,, basically unhealthy, underfed wildlife. Those are not the type of conditions that will help wildlife in Vermont. JMO
I agree , there are still alot of does around, not really sure why they cut the tags so much. If anything , more does should be taken.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
5,710 Posts
the only reason the cuts were made is so our "new", "under-qualified" wildlife commissioner (Patrick Berry) can claim he's done something, even if it's wrong,
I guess in his own mind doing something is better than doing nothing which is pretty much what he is doing (nothing).

Vermont has too many Doe's, a lack of funds, poor habitat, a rise in poaching, hunters that think they're smarter than Biologists and a huge problem with posted lands
not to mention a Governor that ignores laws and pardons Criminal behavior, Pete the moose should have been removed or destroyed,
allowing it only paves the road for the next guy that decides to do the same thing.
I've rambled enough, it just helps to vent a little LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
The VT F&W has never seems to me to be on "it". Part of it is that they are not in total control of what they do. They are funded by the state and need to pass all wildlife laws, seasons etc with the state, non fish & Wildlife officials.
I am from NH originally , their Fish & Game dept is all self funded and regulated, nothing to do with the sate. IMO that is a big part of the problems here.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top