Should separate methods-based seasons be a thing of the past?

The recent proposal to create a single general season for both the north and south regions brings to mind if separate seasons based on hunting methods are still necessary. There's no denying that methods-based seasons were originally created as revenue generators by requiring hunters to purchase additional permits or tags to hunt outside what became known as the General Season. And there's also no denying that equipment manufacturers liked the idea as a way to get hunters to purchase more equipment. Now that most states no longer require hunters to purchase additional tags or permits to hunt outside the General Season, are they still necessary.

What benefits are there in having separate, methods-based seasons other than those which benefit equipment manufacturers?

Bowhunters will argue that firearm hunting makes the deer skittish, and lowers their chances, thus the reason they need to go first.

As a firearm hunter I think all the bow hunters make the deer skittish before the gun season ever opens.

Bow hunters have a much lower success rate, so combining seasons would handicap their ability to harvest a deer. I see no issue in keeping a separate bow season.

I was unaware that most states have done away with separate seasons.

Separate seasons still exist.

I should also correct the statement made about additional fees. Texas hunters are still required to pay an additional $7 in order to hunt during the archery only season. Of course, the state benefits from those who pay for it with their Super Combo license, even though they may not need it.

To both the above quotes, any hunters that make deer skittish are poor hunters. Deer should never know you are there. deer should never become skittish when being hunted from close or far. Deer becoming skittish is the result of poor scent control, poor noise control, or poor movement control.

I will agree there are a lot of poor hunters out there. Including myself. But the deer becoming skittish is the result of us being poor at our craft.

My reply was meant as a joke.

These questions come up for a simple reason, entitlement. As much as anyone wants to argue, the separate season argument becomes one of "don't shoot my deer before I get a chance"...as if the deer was yours in the first place.

If you feel this question has any merit on its face, then you can build you a high fence around your place and "control" your herd as much as possible and not let anyone else shoot "your" deer. If you can't afford to build a HF, then make some money and build a HF. A HF is the only answer that will give you some "control" in the decision making, unless you are in politics.

As anyone that has bow hunted can attest, we let so many deer walk that we could have shot with a gun it is laughable. I also gun hunt and will say by far the gun season is much easier than bow season from a preparation and consideration standpoint (noise, scent, movement, wind etc). I enjoy both for different reasons.

I also think being a bow hunter makes you a better hunter, not universally, but for the majority of us. So if separate seasons makes more bow hunters (and therefore more hunters becoming better), I am all for it.

I also think a combined season would lead to more people not taking up bow hunting and becoming mediocre gun hunters as the need to be a better "hunter" when gun hunting isn't as important. I would rather have better hunters than mediocre hunters.

Just my opinions, doesn't make them right or wrong, but they are my take on the OP's question.

You may have been joking but the opinion has been tossed round before by others. So not totally an invalid response just because you were joking...

It takes me all season bow hunting to do what you guys can in a weekend. Heck I couldn't even get a shot on a doe in four weeks of hunting the end of the season.

This proposed change has already taken place on millions of acres across the state. It’s called the MLD program. We were not on this program the first 5 years but have been the last 5. It’s made no difference in successful mature buck kills on average each season except for less broken horns. The deer being easier to pattern in October has nothing to do with weapons being used to hunt them.

I will hand it to you Dan, it was getting quite boring in this thread lately, lol.

I think one of the best reasons to keep separate seasons is public hunting. I would hate to be bow hunting on public land when someone else is out there with a high powered rifle. I know, if you bow hunt during general season that is what you get but at least you can make the decision whether you want to take that chance. I remember the days when I used to hunt public land and bow hunted during the opening of squirrel season and kids are in the woods shooting up into trees at squirrels with .22's.

Again, it was the recent proposal by the TPWD Wildlife Commission to set the same end date for the General Season in both the South and North regions that prompted my OP. Still, I feel questioning the value to hunters of having separate seasons without regard to the revenue it creates for state wildlife agencies is quite valid.

I have a suggested solution that might bring a little unity to the issue but will let the pot cook for a while before sharing it.

I saw this on a small tract that I hunt in East Texas. We were unaware that a small group of hunters leased an open pasture that's adjacent to our tract where they setup feeders near the bordering fence line. It was only well into the general season when we didn't see near as many deer as in seasons past that we discovered their feeders. The hunting has returned to normal since we started checking our fence lines the weekend before and on the opening of bow season.

I am confused why checking your fencelines would make a difference to a neighboring property...were you doing something to the fenceline or to their feeders on the fenceline? Just asking as I had a neighbor once put up folding chairs on the major trails at a fenceline of a property I was leasing, in an attempt to keep deer from travelling across the fence was my guess?? But it didn't impact deer activity one way or another.

Our tract is small (about 100 acres) and heavily wooded with good, deer-holding habitat. Naturally, an open pasture is not. For that reason, the hunters were not really hunting the pasture they leased, but the deer on our tract. The hunting activity along the fence line had a definite impact on deer movement on our tract. Once the hunters realized there would be legal activity just across the fence from their feeders during bow season, they stopped leasing the pasture and deer movement on our tract returned to normal.

The lesson learned was that even though a neighboring property may not be good, deer-holding habitat, don't assume someone may not lease and hunt it.

So you were being a good neighbor and keeping your deer on your side of the fence by driving along the fenceline during season...or some other legal activity that wouldn't be construed as hunter harassment or anything like that.

As long as it is on your side of the fence...

As an aside, what if someone did that to your place, lets say the neighbors started driving up and down the fence lines during legal hunting seasons and honking horns and all that and you saw deer movement turn to nothing. What would you do then?

All hunters should be treated equally by the State.

The bad thing about an early bow season is many bowhunters only bow hunt because they get a 30 day head start. Many bow hunters have no business bow hunting.

Such things always boil down to what are you bringing to the table. If you have good habitat on your side of the fence, you bring just as much to the table as your neighbor who likewise has good deer habitat. If you don't, you're just mooching off your neighbor. It's just plain old common sense.

But in today's world, I have no problem recognizing there will be those who feel "entitled" to the resource even though they bring little if anything to the table.

Texas Dan, not trying to rain on your party, but you brought nothing to the table other than paying to use someone else's land...I have seen deer (big numbers of deer) use a small area for bedding during the day then travel close to a mile every night across a 3/4mile field and a road, searching for food, then come back and bed in the same small spot every day until sunset when they get up, move across the same field and it was clock work. So by your analogy, because you "leased" the small spot, you have all the rights to the deer and could "control" their movement by being active along the border of the small spot and the field preventing them from doing what they naturally wanted to do, which was go find food? You do realize the state owns the deer and you don't even own the land?

And you are lecturing about those feeling entitled to a resource even though bringing little to the table?

What if the folks across your leased fence line were spending more money than you were on corns and protein? Isn't that bringing more to the table? Sounds like it might have been the case if you were losing deer form your side to the other due to a couple of feeders. What if the deer bedded down in your leased land but wanted to stretch their legs a bit and get out of the shade to more open sunny spots, maybe an open pasture...100 acres is a small habitat for a herd of deer. Maybe the neighboring property had some significant pastures with food sources the deer like, such as green briar or plum or other sources you never saw since you weren't there. There is a lot that could have been a possibility that you might have overlooked.

There are so many things wrong with what you stated there...entitled. The only person that felt entitled in your story was you. You felt entitled to the deer so you felt you had to harass the other hunters away so they wouldn't shoot "your" deer

Spoken like a true gun hunter

Rationalization for sure.

I bet you also wait to see where other boats are headed instead of working a little harder to find your own spot to catch fish.

While it may bring more money into state budgets, we can already see that separate seasons creates division between hunters.

So once again, if you remove the financial benefit to wildlife agencies and equipment manufacturers, where are the benefits to hunters?

Spoken like a true bow hunter.

& by that, I mean "Gotta have that extra month to shoot that deer on your little place before the neighbor has a chance."

Oh you got me there....funny thing is you generalize things all the time but don’t ever ask questions about my situation to know. So I will ask you, what do you consider a small place? Second, why do you think I need the extra month to shoot a deer my neighbor has every right to shoot if it were on their property? Third, do you know any of my neighbors and how they hunt?

Rationalization? Really? That’s your answer? I gave you concrete examples of how you are the one acting entitled and you throw “rationalization” at me, as if I was the one who performed acts of hunter harassment.

Pot meet kettle, because you just aren’t seeing the big picture here dude!!

Keep bringing it to the table man, it seems to be working for you.

It seems you are all about calling out divisions but when you are the one causing the division you fail to see it that way. You admitted to hunter harassment in an earlier post yet call out bow hunters for wanting a dedicated season where they don’t have to worry about gun hunters? Again, pot meet kettle. Sounds pretty hypocritical to me. Am I missing something you aren’t disclosing?

Post #2. Explains in great detail what kind of "hunter" you are.

http://texashuntingforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/7069461/Re:_For_the_Small_Tract_Hunter#Post7069461

Maximus, reading comprehension...if you read my post you would have seen it was a response to a post about small tract hunters, and I said “I HAD two leases....” emphasis on HAD

Yes, I started on small tract leases because I wasn’t born rich of marry into money, but current isn’t that. I earned the right to call myself a land owner

Yes, because I know you are going to ask, my current place is my owned 400 acres. I am surrounded by hunters who bow hunt, some exclusively and some also gun hunt as well. But unlike your 1000 acres, I don’t own my deer or worry if my deer are shot by neighbors. I do try to make my place as inviting to deer as possible and hold them on my place, but I am not the hunter you think I am. Sarcasm is thick in that post you quoted, and I didn’t hunt fencelines or shoot deer on the fence lines. I can’t help Which way the deer came from, but always solidly hinted inside the property and not fence lines.

I am sure you can understand not all hunters can start hunting on large tracts of land, but I had the ability to jump up. 400 acres isn’t big enough for you and you will still call it too small and I propbably still hunt fences or my neighbors deer, but that’s just life. It doesn’t mean your perception or preconceived notions are reality

Benefits of separate seasons outside of increased license and equipment revenue?

Benefits: not too many deer killed, keeps numbers up. If gun hunters had an extra Month then most would probably tag out. Keeps deer from being killed too young as more deer survive the season.

Equipment would be purchased regardless as some people like the challenge of bow hunting over gun hunting. Maybe not as much, but there are a lot of states where gun season is very limited or nonexistent, so bow hunting is the only way to go, so equipment costs will be there. License fees will be there regardless too. If the bow hunters didn’t subsidize your hunting license costs, then you would be lying more, so you should thank bow hunters and not chastise them. The money will show up one way or another, so that’s not a concern to me either.

What’s your answer to the problem? Seems we are the only ones discussing this, so throw your answer out...

The sheer mention of going to a single season for all methods brings out an immediate, defensive response from bow hunters who feel they're being singled out. My original post made no mention of bow hunters because they're NOT the only group who would be impacted by such a change. They're just the first to cry foul at any mention of removing exclusivity, as they did at the first mention of allowing crossbows. Those who enjoy hunting with muzzle loaders would also be impacted, the only difference being a loss of exclusive access to the resource after all other groups. But because they come last, what do they really have to lose?

You made an assumption that a single season would start earlier so that an increased harvest would result. If an all methods season started around the same time as the current general season, a longer season that runs into the current muzzle loader season would likely produce the same harvest numbers, given that 90% of any given harvest occurs during the first two weeks. Everyone ends up with a longer season and less division because no group has exclusive access to the resource.

Or perhaps we should create true equality by flipping that cards every other year and let the ones who hunt with a muzzleloader have first access to the resource. That would surely increase sales of muzzle loaders.

I'm just goin by your own words, describing how you hunt TB.

Now that's settled, we can concentrate on your ridiculous arguments in this thread, like the "benefits" you just described.

Texas Dan, I guess I just assumed the season would be expanded to the front because that is really all that makes sense. Extending it backward doesn’t do much for most hunters and could create situations where people are shooting bucks that have shed thinking they are shooting a doe. So I don’t imagine the state doing that. It really only makes sense to extend things forward.

I would have no problem with your suggestion of Muzzleloaders alternating with bow hunters for the early part, I don’t think you would see a huge increase in ML purchases, but of course you would see some. Gotta remember over all the US, some states don’t even have a rifle season, it’s SG or ML or archery only. So the overall ML numbers wouldn’t be affected much by Texas enacting such a change.

Yes I am sure there would be some bow hunters against your suggestion, but...there’s some gun hunters against a separate bow season, so what’s new? Haha

Ok, whatever you say. Where did I ever describe how I hunt? I made a few sarcastic remarks in one thread about the sizes of laces I have hunted and that defines me as how I hunt??

How do you hunt?

Having one long season for all weapons won't increase the bag limit or the limits landowners have adopted or put in place already. It just extends the season...it could mean the LO might adopt his own rules and season regulations. Sometimes you get more than you wish for when asking for more. You could end up with a shorter "hunting" season in some instances if the LO chooses to regulate how long and when you can hunt.

Good to see you sharing your comments again stxranchman.

I must admit I didn't expect my post to draw the attention of those who purposely hunt fence lines when their property has far less to offer. But it does make sense that those who hunt earlier might try to create even further advantage by adopting the tactic.

I believe you got that right. I personally think the seasons are too long already. Those LO's that feel different have ways to extend the season if they choose. In my opinion a hunter is going to shoot X amount of Deer. If there is a long season they will drag out the killing and sometimes may wait too long. If a shorter season they will get the killing over with as the opportunity presents itself.

I don't hunt the neighbors chairs on the fenceline.

Bwahahahaha, neither do I! That post was full of sarcasm and rich with humor, two styles of thought that elude you I guess??

I said I hunt those chairs hoping to catch a buck taking a rest in the chairs (paraphrased), if you can’t see the humor and sarcasm in that then you need help...

Since this thread is pretty much been me and you talking I am guessing that reference to fence line hunters is for me....Texas dan you dont Get that I was playing devils advocate and trying to show the flaws in your logic. You supposed that someone who owns the cover owns the deer. I hate to tell you but deer need more than cover to survive. I was just trying to show you that. Assume what you want about me, but your assumptions are wrong. Again, flawed logic, flawed lines of thought, just trying to point that out, but you don’t care to listen. You are set in your thoughts and that’s ok.

In any discussion, comments may appear to be directed at someone but are really directed at a comment or position that could be shared by many.

All wildlife belongs to the State of Texas until it is harvested by a hunter. However, the water, food, and cover (habitat) that it takes to maintain the existence of wildlife belongs to landowners, public and private. If you have no habitat on the property you hunt, your success rests on the shoulders of those who do.

I support a one season for all. I actively bow and gun hunt and will continue to do both if the state moves to a combined season.

TB, I may be mistaken, but havent you posted pictures from your stand where your looking at your neighbors fenceline? Seems like you were bragging about it also.

If your neighbors are putting up stuff on the fenceline to discourage your hunting, you are too close.

Now you can spew some more of your gas about what a great hunter you are.

And that is what I am trying to get you to see, even though you THINK you had a monopoly on all that stuff, maybe your 100 acre deer mecca wasn't all that you thought it was and the deer were looking for something else. Why I gave the example of seeing deer travel from the small bedding area everyday to go over a mile for food and something (??) only to return every morning and bed down all day, repeat, repeat, repeat. The small tract owner that had the bedding cover for the day was the one who put the chairs along the fenceline in an effort to thwart deer from crossing (yes, the same chairs I was accused of hunting over by Maximus above), but guess what, they still crossed. Every evening, the deer would come out, cross the fence, and travel across a 3/4 mile long wheat field, cross the street to go to something (I never could figure out what they were going to as I never trespassed or knew the other owner across the street), only to return in the AM and be in the bedding cover property by sun up. So who in this example brings more to the table? Is it the owner with the bedding cover? Is it the owner with the travel corridor and wheat field? Or is it the owner of the ultimate destination these deer would travel to every night? And who has the right to shoot these deer?

My point is, if you are complaining of someone hunting your deer by drawing them out with feeders from your 100 acre tract, and then you go an harass the fence line to ensure no deer cross over that fence line, you are no better than the fence line hunter whom you so vehemently decry (or the bow hunter who wants an extra month, or whatever other postulation or situation you are bemoaning at the time). The simple reality is most people don't make enough money to get onto the lavish, awesome leases or own great tracts of land. The state owns the deer, and the state says it doesn't matter what you "bring to the table" if you are doing something in an effort to reduce or restrict another's ability to hunt, that is hunter harassment. While your movement along the fence line might have well been very legal and not prosecutable in the moment, your admission of intent is enough. Your intent was to stop the hunters from hunting close to your lease. You were successful. I just hope your group didn't discourage some kids or young adults from a lifelong pursuit in the outdoors by being unfriendly.

Deer just aren't that important in the grand scheme...

I don't ever remember pictures of my stand overlooking a neighbors fence, I don't ever remember putting a stand close enough to a neighbors fence to have pictures of such a thing...but I did take some pictures of the chairs in question because I thought they were a hilarious attempt to stop deer movement, but I have no idea the real intent. I did joke abut the chairs and said something to the effect of "I guess they didn't like how close I was..." but I wasn't close.

One of the problems with this lease was perception by the neighbors. The main draw was a large wheat field where deer would travel and eat, and if I set my blind on the outside looking in, the neighbors complained it was too close to them (even being 200 yards off the fence in the middle of a wheat field was too close), If I set it up in the middle they complained I might shoot toward them. I think the real issue was the place was never hunted in the previous 5-10 years and the hunting status was unknown or simply mislead, but when I set my stuff up, the neighbors got offended with whatever I did and the land owner wasn't real assertive with the neighbors so I just did what was asked. I am off that place now, so it is a bittersweet memory, some good numbers of deer, but tough to hunt given the neighbors demands I had to deal with. Yet in all my hunts out there, I never once saw a neighbor hunt and only saw one of them there one time, which happened to be opening evening of the first season I was on it and they were driving several cars around the tree line where the deer bedded down right around sunset up until dark. Never saw them again after that and never said anything to anyone about it except my wife. I am sure it was their effort to keep me from hunting, even though I wasn't on their fence line or even close to it. probably some anti-hunters that just wanted to keep their deer alive or something??

Somewhat a weak argument because even a gun hunter can have an equal chance during "bow season" because crossbows are legal now, and a gun hunter can learn to shoot a crossbow in about 15 minutes, and hunt with it.
So getting out in the woods a month early is now no excuse for a gun hunter who wants to be able to hunt during the bow season.

Since when is a crossbow a gun?

You are so full of BS on this, your signature issue. A broken record. The history of the separate bow seasons and a bunch of other arguments have all been made to you - you don’t care. And you have the guts to lecture others about being “divisive” on other issues.

Pick up a bow or quit whining. (Fat chance of that).

Yes.
Unfortunately, anything more than surface level analysis eludes many.
There’s not a darn thing to complain about in Texas. Long regular rifle season, MLD for those that want it, generous bag limits, etc.

This topic is one big non-issue.

I'm "out in the woods" year round.

I've made my stance obvious. Many here can't argue the points of fact.