• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Mass hunters blew the old record away. Again.

The extended archery season in 10-14 yielded an extra 700 deer according to the article I read.

And another 300 deer from added wachusett lands. Which will be a lot less next year.

This year absolutely should have been a record. As expected.

I havent looked at the data vs previous years in the west. Thats what’s important. The east will continue to rise because the deer are protected there.
 
And another 300 deer from added wachusett lands. Which will be a lot less next year.

This year absolutely should have been a record. As expected.

I havent looked at the data vs previous years in the west. Thats what’s important. The east will continue to rise because the deer are protected there.
From what I saw they didn't post the zone by zone data yet just the total
 
The problem with the herd size (over population) revolves around access more than tags or the numbers of hunters though... Places that have problems are places that also have prohibitions against hunting, or discharging a firearm or archery tackle.... Places like New Bedford - or the Blue Hills, etc.

Take a walk through Freetown State Forest - one of the largest WMAs in the state, and you'll be lucky to see a deer. Take a walk through the sand pits in the north end of New Bedford up around Sassaquin Pond and you're tripping over them - but no no - you can't hunt them or NB's finest will lock you up.
 
I’d need permission from at least a dozen homes to hunt the deer in my backyard and I would still have trouble meeting the 150’ setback from a road requirement. It would be completely safe to hunt back there, particularly bow hunting from a tree stand. But here in MA the setback limits for bow hunting are the same as the setback limits for shotgun hunting. It’s totally moronic.
 
Last edited:
I’d need permission from at least a dozen homes to hunt the deer in my backyard and I would still have trouble meeting the 150’ setback from a road requirement. It would be completely safe to hunt back there, particularly now hunting from a tree stand. But here in MA the setback limits for bow hunting are the same as the setback limits for shotgun hunting. It’s totally moronic.

MAronic! ;)
 
The deer herd also has to be at record levels in MA.

Not places you can legally hunt. Its really a tale of east and west. And in 30 years its gone totally assbackwards. The Berkshires which used to have the highest kill is low and near Boston which had no deer now is crawling with them in suburbia.

Your lucky to see a deer in the big woods in the central western part of the state. Just because you see a few in the backyard means nothing. It means that they are thriving in little pockets of unhuntable territory and will continue to thrive. Everyone knows that, its a game preserve for the most part.

Open the area up to hunting, and you will get a large increase in kill for one or two years, then it will stabilize. Like the 300 extra deer from Wachusett lands this year, that will be 150 deer next year. Less the year after that....like the Quabbin is now not even any different than hunting the surrounding area anymore....

The east will continue to gain deer due to the lack of hunting areas, those need to be opened up to control the herd. The state needs to shitcan setback rules and tell the towns that bowhunting is the only solution. Much like CT did in the early 2000's.

Some towns in SW CT, like Ridgefield and Redding, even paid for night sharpshooters....the ones that throw all the deer in a dump pile and bury them after picking them off at night. That will be the future in Eastern MA. No doubt, unless they open up more areas.

The state needs to look at the west and make some hard decisions....do they keep the same fairly poor deer per square mile ratio? Or do they want to have a better deer per square mile ratio where there is plenty of room for a decent herd. That would require hard choices....like shutting down all doe permits and only letting harvest of one buck per year, and maybe antler restrictions on top of that. Certainly more deer could be supported out here, there were a lot more in the 90's than there are now.
Hunting the big woods behind my house now is like hunting northern Maine with 1-2 deer per square mile. I've had to adopt methods to tracking in the snow to even see deer at times, when in the 90's a simple stand hunt you would see several deer each sit. The state insurance lobby does not want that....they will keep deer population down to squat...as evidenced by the Wachusett hunt, that was probably not even needed, because most of the surrounding area is huntable.

To those of you that haven't travelled, seeing one deer per a weeks hunt is not the norm, or seeing a few deer is not equal to having plenty of deer. Ive gone to states where seeing 10-30 a day is normal, and no one is shooting the shxt out of does, and calling for all sorts of deer to be killed. No one is saying you can't be successful in Central/West MA, but killing the one deer you see....I question it. You'll always have a healthy herd with few mouths to feed, but what could it be if we practiced continued restraint to try improve deer numbers.

If one deer is not enough, go to CT or eastern MA...shoot all the deer you want...its not like its that hard. That's what I do.
 
Last edited:
I only hunt right around my house in Groton and see deer nearly every time out. No reason to travel anywhere else with so many deer handy. I don’t doubt that it’s different in areas with more hunting pressure.
 
Mark is spot on. Come out to the Berkshires and tell us the herd is doing great. Although I do think it's more about improving habitat than it is reducing the harvest numbers. The habitat is nearly all open hardwoods which doesn't support much life. 1-2 deer per square mile may even be an accurate number in some spots.

I will say I'm surprised at the numbers in zone 2, 4N and 4S. I heard less shots , and saw less trucks this year than ever before.
 
Mark is spot on. Come out to the Berkshires and tell us the herd is doing great. Although I do think it's more about improving habitat than it is reducing the harvest numbers. The habitat is nearly all open hardwoods which doesn't support much life. 1-2 deer per square mile may even be an accurate number in some spots.

I will say I'm surprised at the numbers in zone 2, 4N and 4S. I heard less shots , and saw less trucks this year than ever before.

I agree with this.....just shutting down doe tags won't bring it back.....it has to be some serious forest management.

The state can't clear cut enough out there to create edge and young cover that deer grouse and alot of other animals love. Too many mature forests in that area, not enough real farming anymore to support deer with food crops either. Plus a lot of real predators as well. Its a bad situation, especially when you get greenie treehuggers out there that think they are doing good by being anti wood cutting. Retards.
 
A whopping 147 deer in my zone 6, where its surrounded by the quabbin and mostly all wooded and once was one of the best areas of the state to deer hunt, and where everyone went. Yeah....talk about mismanagement.
 
A whopping 147 deer in my zone 6, where its surrounded by the quabbin and mostly all wooded and once was one of the best areas of the state to deer hunt, and where everyone went. Yeah....talk about mismanagement.
How many folks actually hunt it?
 
A whopping 147 deer in my zone 6, where its surrounded by the quabbin and mostly all wooded and once was one of the best areas of the state to deer hunt, and where everyone went. Yeah....talk about mismanagement.

This.

More than half of the deer killed came from 21 % of the deer management zones (3 of the 14). Sounds like sound management to me./s

Bob
 
This.

More than half of the deer killed came from 21 % of the deer management zones (3 of the 14). Sounds like sound management to me./s

Bob
You have to consider the hunting pressure to use that data. If there are far fewer hunters in zones 1-6 then the data on total harvested is not valid.
 
You have to consider the hunting pressure to use that data. If there are far fewer hunters in zones 1-6 then the data on total harvested is not valid.

Meh. There are a lot of factors. It is a complex problem.

I’ve been hunting a long time and some things are indisputable:

The deer densities in western Mass are abysmal.

It is common to hunt a week out here and only see a few deer.

A fair number of doe tags from eastern mass get filled in western mass.

DFW doesn’t care as there is no real management of the deer herd in western mass. Aside from the pellet count at Quabbin there isn’t anything done to verify deer numbers.

Bob
 
Meh. There are a lot of factors. It is a complex problem.

I’ve been hunting a long time and some things are indisputable:

The deer densities in western Mass are abysmal.

It is common to hunt a week out here and only see a few deer.

A fair number of doe tags from eastern mass get filled in western mass.

DFW doesn’t care as there is no real management of the deer herd in western mass. Aside from the pellet count at Quabbin there isn’t anything done to verify deer numbers.

Bob
I'm not disputing that the herd may be small in those zones. Just stating the facts. When you look at total harvest data by zone that alone does not alone indicate low deer numbers. Number of deer harvested as compared to number of hunter days afield would be the statistical data to be used.
 
How many folks actually hunt it?

That area of the state has a
How many folks actually hunt it?

That area of the state is full of hunters. Almost everyone I know hunts.

Unlike the eastern half of the state.

The state destroyed the quabbin which was our best sanctuary.


People near me are now going east.... which is really retarded because we have tons of land out here.
 
Its a bad situation, especially when you get greenie treehuggers out there that think they are doing good by being anti wood cutting. Retards.

100% truth. These are people that don't even go in the woods.

A fair number of doe tags from eastern mass get filled in western mass.

Sadly I think this is true. I've seen guys sneaking a doe out of the woods before. I've also tried for years and have never drawn a doe tag in 2, 4N or 4S. I don't know anyone who has ever gotten one in one of those three zones.

They got some big problems out that way. Doesn't seem like anyone cares. The state can't blame the landowner, they are the landowners in most cases.
 
sadly some of the zone 2 deer were definitely taken illegally. during bow season i heard atvs bombing around (on state land) and shooting intermittently, so i assume trying to spook em up then blasting em. its a known group of knuckleheads too. i would assume their proud harvest pictures have bait piles just out of view as well as they are known for that too.
 
I've also tried for years and have never drawn a doe tag in 2, 4N or 4S. I don't know anyone who has ever gotten one in one of those three zones.

I used to hunt a lot in zone 8 a lot and always got a doe permit. Since the state changed the doe permit draw I have gotten a doe permit once. They lowest odds to draw in that zone was 73%.

I swear my ID number is cursed. I am going to apply for zone 4S this year so I will probably get one. :D

I have been going out west as I ge t a bear tag and would like to get one before I am forced to quit hunting completely. It is very difficult for me to get around these days.

Bob
 
I still hunt deer but I don't kill them anymore. I like going out and finding their beds and travel routes. And I really like finding active buck runs. This year I set my ladder stand on an old run that hadn't seen much use the last few years but was all torn up with rubs and scrapes this year.
I had a small 4 prong little buck walk up and start eating the tea berries that were growing around the base of my ladder. If I didn't move quick and just talked quietly I could sit there within a few feet of him for an hour.
3 does showed up and they didn't seem to mind my presence either. They may have been the ones I was feeding earlier this year.
I finally saw the buck that was doing all the marking. He was a nice sturdy fellow with nice, wide, thick-tined rack. I counted 4 on one and five on the other side. Would have made a nice trophy rack if youre into that. Im not, Ill shoot for meat or not at all. Anyway, He wouldn't come as close. He stayed near the woodland and about 30 yards from where my stand is. He would watch me and the other deer but he never relaxed. His tail was always flicking up and once in a while he'd snort and stomp until the females went away. I don't think the liked them getting friendly with me.
I saw them again a few times as the season went on. I know at least two survived be a use they've been in my back yard scrounging under the bird feeds the last few nights.
It's fun practicing my hunting skills and knowing I could get meat if I needed it. All the pleasure of hunting without having to drag and process a carcass.
 
Back
Top Bottom