|
Post by jkd on Mar 6, 2008 15:27:57 GMT -5
Folks clamoring for a two-weekend, nine day season need to take a good look at what happens with the antlerless harvest from the last Monday thru end of season...
Antlerless 26-Nov 795 27-Nov 1316 28-Nov 1282 29-Nov 1175 30-Nov 1740 01-Dec 5190 02-Dec 1673 Total 13171 10.61%
10.6% of the total harvest, and 17.5% of the TOTAL ANTLERLESS HARVEST is taken on those days...
Looks to me like things are working just fine the way they are...
|
|
|
Post by bschwein on Mar 6, 2008 15:43:56 GMT -5
If people are so concerned about keeping bucks around, they need to be petitioning the DNR to change the license structure. Having an either/or tag for firearms (or a single buck tag good for all seasons at a slightly higher price...) will help the "one-and-done" hunters make an easier decision. Most of them don't care if they shoot a buck or a doe, and many simply buy a firearms tag and take the first buck they see.... Change the license structure first, then get back to me about changing seasons... The way everything else is set up, the license structure makes no sense. I agree, the license structure is terrible for the people buying tags every year.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Mar 6, 2008 17:16:28 GMT -5
The cost of all licenses and fees go to the DNR and keep it going. Paychecks, etc. How many DNR related jobs do you want to cut? For simple reference look at all of the free fishing ramps that have been closed because there is not enough money in the DNR to fix them and keep them open. Loss of revenue could impact hunting by the closing of public areas. Granted it would be cost effective for hunters to be able to buy one license for bucks and then a bonus tag for antlerless. Granted that is a dire outlook and I for one sure don't want to see anything remotely like that in my lifetime.
So just leave everything as it is and just hunt. If you are a trophy (antler worshiper [MO])hunter, or a meat hunter just hunt.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Mar 6, 2008 18:21:55 GMT -5
For the record, I don't believe the majority of posts on this board represent a true cross section of Indiana hunters. I've always felt like the majority of posters here were more of a "quantitiy over quality" crowd. Nothing wrong with that opinion, but I don't think it is a true representation of statewide feelings amongst deer hunters. The group of guys I run with, most hunters I talk with, etc. are VERY interested in improving the trophy caliber via new restrictions, changes, etc. As an example, other than here, I find it pretty darned difficult to find a hunter who is, or ever was opposed to OBR.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Mar 6, 2008 18:26:47 GMT -5
Folks clamoring for a two-weekend, nine day season need to take a good look at what happens with the antlerless harvest from the last Monday thru end of season... Antlerless 26-Nov 795 27-Nov 1316 28-Nov 1282 29-Nov 1175 30-Nov 1740 01-Dec 5190 02-Dec 1673 Total 13171 10.61% 10.6% of the total harvest, and 17.5% of the TOTAL ANTLERLESS HARVEST is taken on those days... Looks to me like things are working just fine the way they are... Oh, but Don says if we shorten the days allowed, those numbers would go up!
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Mar 6, 2008 18:38:46 GMT -5
I don't think this group or the group you run with steiny represent the majority of hunters. I'm betting the majority shoot the first one they see come gun season.
|
|
|
Post by RoadKill on Mar 6, 2008 18:39:59 GMT -5
Oh, but Don says if we shorten the days allowed, those numbers would go up! Yes, we'd better be careful. If they shorten it too much all the deer would be killed. Or at least all the antlerless deer would be killed. Then the bucks might go somewhere else to find does. Another method to limit the number of bucks taken is to have a "trophy fee" assesed at the check in station. Something like $100 for a button, $80 for a spike, $70 for a 4-6 pointer, $60 for an eight pointer, $100 for a ten point and a whole bunch of buck$ for anything over ten points. That way the whole deal would be self regulating, just "pay to play". I believe the meat hunters would avoid the cost of shooting non-trophy bucks and the trophy hunters wouldn't mind the little extra charge.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on Mar 6, 2008 20:14:15 GMT -5
For the record, I don't believe the majority of posts on this board represent a true cross section of Indiana hunters. I've always felt like the majority of posters here were more of a "quantitiy over quality" crowd. Nothing wrong with that opinion, but I don't think it is a true representation of statewide feelings amongst deer hunters. The group of guys I run with, most hunters I talk with, etc. are VERY interested in improving the trophy caliber via new restrictions, changes, etc. As an example, other than here, I find it pretty darned difficult to find a hunter who is, or ever was opposed to OBR. I think everyone on some level is always interested in bigger bucks or "improving the trophy caliper" as you say but I don't know of a single hunter other than the few on here that want to give up time in the field. On another note I don't know of a single hunter that likes the OBR and isn't opposed to it. It's a failed attempt to get something out of nothing. We have what we have here in the state and no matter what we do we aren't going to change the DNA of the herd or add nutrients to our soil on a large enough scale to make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Mar 7, 2008 6:45:17 GMT -5
For the record, I don't believe the majority of posts on this board represent a true cross section of Indiana hunters. I've always felt like the majority of posters here were more of a "quantitiy over quality" crowd. What you fail to realize is this board is here to promote all kinds of hunting. We are not a chat site affiliated with special interest groups or organizations like the other two main Indiana hunting sites. We promote more opportunity, more weapon choices, and getting our youth involved. Limiting the harvest or opportunity of others for personal gain is not on our agenda. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by danf on Mar 7, 2008 6:58:12 GMT -5
Another method to limit the number of bucks taken is to have a "trophy fee" assesed at the check in station. Please tell me you are not serious about this... It has got to be one of the worst ideas I have ever heard, short of cutting days out of the season with the justification that "more deer will be killed". I have a hard enough time finding the money to pay for tags every year. I am sure there are many more like me in this respect. To have to pay the State a "trophy fee" would pretty much drive myself and many others out of hunting. If I want to shoot an 8 pointer, a 10 pointer, or even a small spike, that is MY decision. I shouldn't have to pay more for it. If I wanted to PAY for antlers, I'd give 'ole Rodney a call. That ain't happenin', BTW.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Mar 7, 2008 7:01:28 GMT -5
Amen.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Mar 7, 2008 7:17:56 GMT -5
For the record, I don't believe the majority of posts on this board represent a true cross section of Indiana hunters. I've always felt like the majority of posters here were more of a "quantitiy over quality" crowd. What you fail to realize is this board is here to promote all kinds of hunting. We are not a chat site affiliated with special interest groups or organizations like the other two main Indiana hunting sites. We promote more opportunity, more weapon choices, and getting our youth involved. Limiting the harvest or opportunity of others for personal gain is not on our agenda. h.h. Everyone put their hands together for hh. Could not have said it better! ;
|
|
|
Post by RoadKill on Mar 7, 2008 8:17:52 GMT -5
[quote author=danf board=deerhunting thread=1204050467 post=1204891092...If I want to shoot an 8 pointer, a 10 pointer, or even a small spike, that is MY decision. ....[/quote] I agree with you 100%. I don't think the wildlife resource should be managed for trophy experience.
I was just offering up another option to those that are fearful I'll shoot "their" trophy. Compared to the price of game cameras, treestands, leases, food plots, etc... the trophy fee would be quite modest. The trophy fee could be applied only after the first buck.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 7, 2008 8:31:07 GMT -5
I was just offering up another option to those that are fearful I'll shoot "their" trophy. Compared to the price of game cameras, treestands, leases, food plots, etc... the trophy fee would be quite modest. The trophy fee could be applied only after the first buck. Interesting concept. How about a $100 tag for a second buck? Only the real serious trophy hunters woudl more than likely buy into that one.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Mar 7, 2008 8:52:50 GMT -5
All this "tongue in cheek" elitist talk is funny and all, but, it isn't going to do anything for the trophy hunter that isn't big money and is mostly just working hard to find a mature buck on public ground or what private ground he manages to scratch out. That hunter just wants a new challenge and doesn't have the money to go out of state.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 7, 2008 9:11:56 GMT -5
All this "tongue in cheek" elitist talk is funny and all, but, it isn't going to do anything for the trophy hunter that isn't big money and is mostly just working hard to find a mature buck on public ground or what private ground he manages to scratch out. That hunter just wants a new challenge and doesn't have the money to go out of state. That is why they call it "hunting". Not to sound like an old man (that I am), but I do remember when any buck killed was a "trophy". Heck, any deer was a trophy. Seeing a deer was special.. When I first started deer hutning there was a gentleman named John Trout Sr. that had killed 4 deer with a bow. One was a decent buck. He was everyone's bowhunting hero. They even put him on TV when he killed that buck. He would be looked down on by some today as his buck was not all that big.. The first year I deer hunted I saw 6 deer total - for the entire season. The times have changed...... The gist of what I am trying to say is that we have it great now and most do not even realize it. Most started deer hunting in a time of plenty and don't really appreciate what we've got now. Now the group that got us from the point where we were extremely lucky to even see a deer to a point hat if we don't see a half dozen deer every time out we are disappointed is our own Indiana deer biologists. The ones that we pay to manage our herd for us. We owe them a HUGE debt of gratitude and we should all stand out of their way and let them do their job that they have done so well in the past. For some of the ones wanting a shorter or moved firearms season it is a win at all costs that matter. Some have embraced Don Mulligan's article to fit their agenda. Look for it to be brought up as supporting evidence that we "need" a shorter season.
|
|
|
Post by bschwein on Mar 7, 2008 9:23:37 GMT -5
The cost of all licenses and fees go to the DNR and keep it going. Paychecks, etc. How many DNR related jobs do you want to cut? For simple reference look at all of the free fishing ramps that have been closed because there is not enough money in the DNR to fix them and keep them open. Loss of revenue could impact hunting by the closing of public areas. Granted it would be cost effective for hunters to be able to buy one license for bucks and then a bonus tag for antlerless. Granted that is a dire outlook and I for one sure don't want to see anything remotely like that in my lifetime. I totally understand that the license fees are much needed. No problem here paying someones salary in the DNR. However, Its almost getting to the point where they are going to do more harm than good. For example, I don't have a L.L. So I buy tags every year. I used to buy 4, 5, 6 antlerless tags every year along with my 2 bow tags, a firearms tag, and a muzzleloader license. Now I buy 1 bow tag for sure, 1 bonus tag, Firearms tag usaully and a muzzleloader tag if I need it. Why don't you start calculating the loss of profit off just me. I know of many, many people who don't buy as many tags anymore. Now also what i'm really starting to see, are the people who are now "landowners" or finding land owners to tag there deer. I worked at a sporting good shop for about 6 years. Sold licenses every year and watched the same O'l faces either stop buying as many or stop buying period. I don't know how many times I heard, Give me a buck tag, If I see a doe, I'll shoot it and worry about it later. I don't think this is the majority of people but its starting to become a decent percent now. I"m not at all saying this is right, however the license structure is whats causing it. I believe a "sportsman license" is much needed. They need to come out with something where the hunter doesn't feel like they are getting the raw end of the deal every year. Now if the state doesn't have a problem with the "loss of income" off myself then I guess I don't have a problem. Don't think its that way though. Sorry for changing the subject at hand.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Mar 7, 2008 11:58:42 GMT -5
Gas, yes we are off of the primary subject, but this could well be thought of as a major artery off of the main road. The loss of income has already been felt and has had an effect. The closing of many ramps at fishing locations. The loss of attendants at some and their closing. Yes I understand how the cost of licenses has changed the IDNR. More loss of income will impact it more. I can see a single buck license good for the season. Bonus tags extra, that includes bonus buck for the military, park, etc hunters, bonus does of course. As for the length of time for the various weapons, it is fine leave it alone and just hunt.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Mar 7, 2008 12:56:17 GMT -5
I've only been deer hunting 15 years (I didn't start until my early 20's as I didn't have anyone to take me), so I don't remember the old days of less deer. I do hunt some areas with few deer where I go for days without seeing one, because these low pressure areas are where the giants are that OBR is producing. I would like to see some of the high pressure areas be able to produce a more balanced age structure with more bucks that make it to maturity. Otherwise, it seems there are "honey holes" right now that are low pressure areas with fewer deer,and buddy, good luck getting in on em and keeping them, because they are getting found out. Shortening the firearms and moving it later would change this situation and produce more good areas for older age class bucks. JMO
|
|
|
Post by RoadKill on Mar 7, 2008 14:44:52 GMT -5
.... I don't know how many times I heard, Give me a buck tag, If I see a doe, I'll shoot it and worry about it later. .... I wonder if it is ever done the other way? You know, buy an antlerless tag that is good for any season and just deal with a nice buck if it appears.
|
|