|
Post by birddog on Jan 8, 2009 12:22:42 GMT -5
Then why couldn't the DNR do it by county? ??
|
|
|
Post by old3arrows on Jan 8, 2009 13:16:22 GMT -5
Not as crazy as Madison County having 8 bonus county tags, and an annual harvest of a little over 500. You could make that number a 1000, and the harvest would still not go up because there is no public hunting access and very few people or farmers that will let you hunt, and yes, the herd is down in that area.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 8, 2009 15:41:58 GMT -5
Then why couldn't the DNR do it by county? ?? They do!
|
|
|
Post by raporter on Jan 8, 2009 15:54:54 GMT -5
Not as crazy as Madison County having 8 bonus county tags, and an annual harvest of a little over 500. You could make that number a 1000, and the harvest would still not go up because there is no public hunting access and very few people or farmers that will let you hunt, and yes, the herd is down in that area. This is one of the craziest things ever. Believe it or not though I do know someone that took at least 8 deer in Madison county.
|
|
|
Post by schall53 on Jan 8, 2009 16:33:05 GMT -5
Old ironsights, It sounds like most of the deer you are talking about are city deer, where access to hunt is limited. I know for a fact that there are alot of areas in LaPorte co. that the deer are not very plentyful. With an 8 deer quota for the county those areas could get hit hard if it is hunted much at all. I have said it before and I will say it again, just because the DNR says you can kill that many does doesn't mean you have to. Hunt your area smart, if you are not seeing as many deer as you think you should LEAVE THE DOES ALONE. You can't kill your breeders and expect to hunt their offspring in future years.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 8, 2009 16:44:40 GMT -5
Old ironsights, It sounds like most of the deer you are talking about are city deer, where access to hunt is limited. I know for a fact that there are alot of areas in LaPorte co. that the deer are not very plentyful. With an 8 deer quota for the county those areas could get hit hard if it is hunted much at all. I have said it before and I will say it again, just because the DNR says you can kill that many does doesn't mean you have to. Hunt your area smart, if you are not seeing as many deer as you think you should LEAVE THE DOES ALONE. You can't kill your breeders and expect to hunt their offspring in future years. I don't know the first the thing about LaPorte county but I do agree with the rest of your statement about "Hunt your area smart". As we all know, it is physically impossible for the state to manage deer in smaller areas than counties. No way can they go township by township. A county can have an overabundance of deer in one part and not enough (for us hunters) in other parts. The DNR gives us upper parameters. Like you said, we should all attempt to know what is in our area and hunt accordingly taking what we think is right..
|
|
|
Post by old3arrows on Jan 8, 2009 17:03:19 GMT -5
Raporter, what part of the county if I may ask? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jan 8, 2009 17:07:21 GMT -5
Agreed. Hunt Smart. No quarrel there at all.
In fact, at Kingsbury FWA you are not allowed to use Bonus Tags. You want a Doe on Kingsbbury, shoot a MUzzy/Bow.
My only point is that the DNR has, at least in my area, some justification for their Numbers.
Would I shoot all 14+ deer I am "allowed to" if given the opportunity? Of course not... though I would be sorely tempted to take all 4 "Extra" Urban does if I got the Shots.
There is a LOT of UDZ north of I-94... and almost as much "unhuntable"/"safe haven" on Fed/Steel/Hippie properties.
Lots of deer to kill, not many legal places to kill them.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 8, 2009 18:18:54 GMT -5
Very few people kill all they are allowed anyways.
We've all heard, and maybe some of us have said, that there are too many "bonus tags" issued.
I ran the numbers on the "Deer Contest" kills to see whhat percentage of the hunters were kiling a lot of bonus deer.
This was a couple days ago, so it will not have any later entries included.
This shows that 74.7 percent of the hunters took 2 or less deer.
Kill Total (number of hunters)……% of hunters
0 (39) – 30.7%
1 (27) – 21.2%
2 (29) – 22.8%
3 (11) – 8.6%
4 (8) – 6.2%
5 (7) – 5.5%
6 (2) – 1.5%
7 (0) – 0%
8 (2) - 1.5%
9 (1) - .8%
10 (0)- 0%
11(1)- .8%
|
|
|
Post by raporter on Jan 8, 2009 22:25:57 GMT -5
Raporter, what part of the county if I may ask? ;D Right on the north side of Anderson. They were taken by my step grandson. I think he got most of them with his bow.
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Jan 8, 2009 23:00:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greenhunter5364 on Jan 12, 2009 1:25:02 GMT -5
I doubt that there are many hunters out there killing their limit of antlerless deer in the county they hunt in. I could have killed 16 antlerless deer and one buck this year. No one in my party took more than two deer this year. Its not because they could find the deer, it was because they only shot what they needed. so the limit is moot.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 12, 2009 2:20:01 GMT -5
I doubt that there are many hunters out there killing their limit of antlerless deer in the county they hunt in. I could have killed 16 antlerless deer and one buck this year. No one in my party took more than two deer this year. Its not because they could find the deer, it was because they only shot what they needed. so the limit is moot. Exactly!
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Jan 12, 2009 9:16:12 GMT -5
I guess it just depends on what county you hunt.
|
|
|
Post by varmint101 on Jan 12, 2009 9:44:34 GMT -5
I have a cut corn field next to my house that every year there are 10-20 deer in the field every evening this time of year usually starting with the last week of gun season. I haven't seen one deer. Not one. Very very little prints also. John is still using the same combine so I'm thinking the only different variable is the abundance of deer.
I'm still getting some deer on my cam, but nothing like in the past. Maybe there ARE too many bonus tags now.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Jan 12, 2009 19:10:57 GMT -5
Matt, I know of at least one area within shouting distance of you that was a war zone the season before last on opening day of firearms. We've had two bad seasons in a row up there. I'm thinking someone decimated the local population in the 2007 season.
|
|
|
Post by deerpreacher on Jan 12, 2009 21:26:10 GMT -5
I think DNR is doing a great job dealing with the deer population, beyond that every man must be able to be game managers on the property they hunt. If the herd needs thinned then take the limit on doe, if there is not as many as should be, take less.
|
|
|
Post by batchief909 on Jan 12, 2009 21:29:20 GMT -5
Kinda like commom sense,,,, ??
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Jan 13, 2009 6:29:53 GMT -5
Hunters are finding out that deer are not the renewable resource that they used to be in some areas after the last couple seasons.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Jan 13, 2009 7:20:20 GMT -5
I believe it is certainly possible to over harvest an area if you don't use a little common sense and restraint. I also think there are some out there who only hunt for the thrill of the kill and will take everything that crosses their path whether they make legitimate use of the harvest or not, then hunt a new area the next year and repeat their M.O. Just a hunch I've developed from hunting on the same piece of public land for 30 years and witnessing the hunting methods of those on adjoining private properties. After an opening morning of well over 100 shots coming from the same piece of private property, it ain't too difficult to put two and two together.
|
|