|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 2, 2010 8:42:34 GMT -5
Indiana deer survey leaves questions by PHIL POTTER Did a money crunch pare back Indiana's 2009-2010 deer kill? In an Department of Natural Resources online survey, 91 percent of hunters said license fees are an issue. The survey conducted in April also revealed opinions regarding what, if anything, needs to be done to get hunters bagging more antlerless deer. Many respondents seem to think it will happen through cheaper fees. They complain that it costs resident deer hunters $96 to obtain an archery tag, a firearms tag, a muzzleloader tag and an antlerless tag. They propose a tag bundle of the same four license types for no more than $72. They also advocate cheaper bonus (antlerless deer) tags, adding a two-day firearms (antlerless only) season in October, keeping the same opening dates, lengths of all deer seasons and expanded crossbow use during early archery season. The majority said they use both gun and bow to hunt and said any reduced price license bundle should be purchased in advance of the seasons. The IDNR opened the survey to all deer hunters, both resident and non-resident. Of the 9,516 survey respondents, 5,300 identified themselves as Indiana resident license buyers. Some 2,600 said they were Indiana Lifetime License holders while the rest consisted of 300 non-resident license buyers, 50 Youth License buyers and 10 military exempt license holders. So what else should have been asked? How about asking how much cheaper can Youth Licenses get and still help pay for state conservation management costs? Why create a two-day antlerless only October firearms season when states like Kentucky have similar seasons and allow both bucks and does? How is a survey sample of less than 10,000 valid since it represents less than 10 percent of all license holding/buying deer hunters? Obviously those who advocate long gun seasons and no change for opening or closing dates live in high deer density areas. Those who saw fewer (or no) deer the past hunting seasons cite overkill through overly long seasons as causes. And most states have increased license fees for 2010-2011. Check out what it costs both resident and non-resident hunters to deer hunt in Illinois, Iowa, Kansas and Colorado. Illinois recently hiked resident deer tags by $7.50 per tag, citing a need for more cash to keep their outdoor endeavors afloat. These four states also presell all deer tags and restrict hunters to a specific county or a zone. One flaw in this recent survey is that even though computers are in most homes those without access are left out, especially older hunters. Another is lumping opinions and not identifying those coming from the north, central and southern parts of the state as to what each thinks is best for their area. If reducing Indiana's deer herd is a main priority and license fees need tweaking, sell additional antlerless tags for $15 each, establish a set number available per county and let anyone buy as many as they choose to use with the weapon of choice. Meanwhile, conduct a follow-up survey and announce when it occurs. Maybe both the survey and expanded hunter input will reveal different wants and needs . |
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jun 2, 2010 9:22:37 GMT -5
Is he saying Indiana should RAISE tag prices?! If the info I found is correct, they are just catching up to what we already pay. You guys that hunt IL feel free to correct what I found!
"Check out what it costs both resident and non-resident hunters to deer hunt in Illinois, Iowa, Kansas and Colorado. Illinois recently hiked resident deer tags by $7.50 per tag, citing a need for more cash to keep their outdoor endeavors afloat. These four states also presell all deer tags and restrict hunters to a specific county or a zone."
2010 Illinois Resident Firearm Deer Permit Fees
The cost of a Resident Either-Sex Firearm deer permit: $25
The cost of a Resident Antlerless-Only Firearm deer permit: $17.50
The cost of a Resident Combination Firearm deer permit (either-sex and antlerless-only): $42.50
|
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jun 2, 2010 9:36:46 GMT -5
More like there is no way to know who is responding - heck you could have a bunch of PETA types flood the poll. It was absolutely worthless.
Second what Decatur posted as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jun 2, 2010 10:06:09 GMT -5
I'll throw one into the pot that most everyone will say has nothing to do with our Big Game hunting. When the hell is Detroit going to get around to producing a fuel efficient engine so it doesn't cost so much to drive to your favorite hunting area. Just traded for an '07 pickup truck that gets the same MPG as the '94 that I traded in. Don't want to hear about different engine sizes, horse power, stick or auto, just want to see gas guzzlers a thing of the past. Flame away, believe I'll just become a whiner like so many others.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 2, 2010 11:28:31 GMT -5
Comments/questions may be sent to INDeerSurvey@dnr.in.gov
For more information: Chad Stewart, Division of Fish and Wildlife, (812) 334-1137
|
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Jun 2, 2010 11:51:49 GMT -5
Indiana deer survey leaves questions by PHIL POTTER Obviously those who advocate long gun seasons and no change for opening or closing dates live in high deer density areas. Those who saw fewer (or no) deer the past hunting seasons cite overkill through overly long seasons as causes. And most states have increased license fees for 2010-2011. I thought shorter seasons caused more deer to be killed. I remember an article a couple years ago saying that Ohio and Illinois kill more deer because their seasons are shorter. http://www.outdoorswithdon.com./articles/IDNR%20dear%20management%20is%20outofstep.htm “If the goal is to cull more deer from the herd, there is no question that short, separated seasons is the way to go,” he said. |
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jun 2, 2010 12:23:43 GMT -5
I'm against ANYTHING that will cause LESS days afield!
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jun 2, 2010 14:55:32 GMT -5
Someone care to explain how shorter hours on the job, means more productivity? I'm all ears [eyes].
|
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Jun 2, 2010 15:49:56 GMT -5
I'm against ANYTHING that will cause LESS days afield! Ditto!!! That is trophy buck hunter code for don't shoot my bucks so by shortening season there will be more bucks live to next year "MY" buck mentality strikes again. |
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jun 2, 2010 20:18:48 GMT -5
Someone care to explain how shorter hours on the job, means more productivity? I'm all ears [eyes]. I think their theory is, is that with less days to hunt, guys can't afford to be as picky, and will shoot any buck that presents a shot. Where as, with all the days we have, a lot of guys hold out for a nice one, and a lot of times eat tag soup because of it. |
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jun 2, 2010 20:28:15 GMT -5
Just as I expected, it's not about deer hunting, it's about someone getting their 15 minutes of fame in the pages of Deer and Deer Hunting magazine, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter7x on Jun 3, 2010 7:50:19 GMT -5
Someone care to explain how shorter hours on the job, means more productivity? I'm all ears [eyes]. "Make hay while the sun shines" Like Decatur said its that sense of urgency that the season is going to end soon and I gotta pull the trigger on something... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2010 8:19:13 GMT -5
Just as I expected, it's not about deer hunting, it's about someone getting their 15 minutes of fame in the pages of Deer and Deer Hunting magazine, I think. Shorter seasons can work as well as longer seasons, there is no dispute and it's been proven in several areas. As it's not deer hunting.....I don't know anyone that hunts that expects to make the pages of a national magazine everyday they go out, but I also don't know any hunters, hardcore or not, that would pass on it if they get the chance. Bucks have more appeal to the hunter than do does....it's been that away since the cavemen days and nothing will change it. |
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jun 3, 2010 9:58:08 GMT -5
And a lot of CO's are going to have to learn how to turn their head when the landowners start shooting deer year round like they use to do on a large scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by vectrix on Jun 3, 2010 12:08:57 GMT -5
And a lot of CO's are going to have to learn how to turn their head when the landowners start shooting deer year round like they use to do on a large scale. Heck they already do! You ever hear of depredation permits? Where rifle toters go out and knock down every deer they see including does with fawns. I've heard some some good stories for years from guys who have witnessed the killing, some not even taken out of the woods. |
|
|
|
Post by vectrix on Jun 3, 2010 12:16:55 GMT -5
IDNR is going to change whatever they want to make some extra money and keep all the special interest groups happy, the survey don't mean squat. Let's face it no matter what they decide some of you will still complain about not enough days or how you should be allowed to kill buck after buck. There can never be enough killing to make some people happy and thats obvious. If you are a serious hunter deer season is 8 or 9 months long, from hanging stands and scouting through the late spring and summer and glassing bean fields. Usually by the time season is over I am ready for it to be over, I'm tired and wore out. Maybe thats because I hunt hard and maximize my time afield not sit around crying how unfair the dnr is.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jun 3, 2010 16:07:26 GMT -5
Been on a depredation hunt, had a good time, but that's not what I was typing about. I'm thinking of the countless conversations I was in or over heard of landowners themselves [no permits, no rules, just "if it's brown, it's down]. Varmints was the common name applied, and "I'll kill every one of those SOB's I see." This was "several" years ago when the deer population was very, very high, and fields of soybeans and alfalfa were virtually wiped out in a lot of places. That might be why the rules for Depredation Hunts no longer state that the carcass must be used for human consumption, but can also be buried [back hoe], or burned [brush and diesel fuel]. Shocked me when I found that out.
|
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jun 6, 2010 4:11:31 GMT -5
vectrix CAN'T AGREE MORE! Spent 10 hour's this week working on food plot's, mineral licks , trail cams and glassing. Have located 2 potenial shooter's allready. Both got racks with spreads to ears wotking on g 3's. 140 plus. It's the chase and not the kill to me. Deer hunting to me is a year round process. Most guy's it's Oct 1 till Jan 1st if that. Their missing all the fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jun 6, 2010 6:43:45 GMT -5
Wow! You can tell that a deer will score over 140 in the first week of June?
|
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jun 6, 2010 13:57:02 GMT -5
I said potenial shooter's. These 2 bucks are in a bachlor group of 6 buck's. Been seeing several time's week in alfalfa field out my kitchen window. The 2 buck's in question are far ahead in width and point's and body size then other 4 buck's. Which lead's me to believe that both are at least 3.5 yr olds and more likely 4.5. Which should put them in the 140 plus range? Maybe bigger maybe smaller. I do have a book by Dr. James Kroll that show's different age group bucks and photo's of antler developement starting at may 1 and additional photo's of same buck every 2 week's through velvet shed. Most growth occur's from june 1st through july 1st. Based on what i'm seeing on these two buck's head's verse what i see in Dr. Kroll's book. These two buck's are going to be very nice. You are correct i am guessing on score but i'm making a educated guess. I will let you know come July 1st. Should be able to narrow score down by then. I will try to get some photo's and post on site.
|
|
