|
Post by drs on Jan 7, 2014 14:19:26 GMT -5
Indiana, once again being over-run with Deer like the 1990's (?) I seriously doubt it, more like being over-run by people, development,& other construction replacing habitat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2014 14:23:07 GMT -5
I like the idea of zones as well.
I am also going to throw this out there. I think some of the "Sky is falling" attitude that is becoming so prevalent is being driven by the anti-crossbow crowd. Please understand, I don't doubt for a second that the herd is down in some areas...maybe a lot of areas. But I also know that a lot of people are very bent out of shape over crossbow introduction and are looking at this as an opportunity to strike a counter-blow. Their target will be the gun season. They will use the perception of low deer numbers, point at crossbows as a big culprit and claim that the only way to counter it is by shortening the gun season and moving it much later. They are taking President Obama's strategy of "never let a good tragedy go to waste" to heart.
I have been reading another Indiana forum (one I have long since quit posting on because I can't stand it there). They are eating themselves alive over this! It is truly amazing to watch what is going on over there. You can see where my theory corms from if you spend five minutes there. One guy actually says that anyone who supported crossbows should be tied up and "kicked in the nads repeatedly!"
I'm not making this up...sadly.
|
|
|
Post by GS1 on Jan 7, 2014 14:44:53 GMT -5
Indiana, once again being over-run with Deer like the 1990's (?) I seriously doubt it, more like being over-run by people, development,& other construction replacing habitat. ^^^A perfect example of why someone who lives out of state, only hunts one particular part of the state or hasn't hunted Indiana for how many years? should not be lobbying for statewide changes the way the system is currently set up. Ok, not overran, but a whole lot more deer than now. As far as the people, development and destruction of habitat, the only difference between now and then where I hunt is that there is a house on the neighbors farm and two less fence rows on the property I hunt. And I no longer see 20+ deer per outing.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 7, 2014 14:50:16 GMT -5
I don't get the anti-crossbow mentality either. (As I get older a crossbow is beginning to look a lot more attractive.) I used to belong to IBA and IDHA and one reason I did not renew is similair agenda's. I am for and will always be for , whatever is best for the deer herd. If that mean's I give up some hunting oppurtunities then so be it. Interesting bit on EHD. What started it ? Has it always been around ? Are new crop technoligies to blame ? What can be done to slow it or do away with it ? Is there a conspiracy theory? States have released a "fly" midge or whatever to lower deer population's?? (That one was kinda a joke) I am uncertain and am going to do some research on EHD.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 7, 2014 15:20:27 GMT -5
EHD/BLUETOUNGE Research. Was first discovered in 1955. Small Gnat,fly,midge are name's it's carrier goes by. Live's in muck/mud around ponds,creeks streams. (Cattle ponds are prime breeding area's). NO KNOWN CURE FOR DEER. Some deer farmer's use insecticide's around their farm's with some success. Only thing a guy can do is limit muddy area's around ponds. (Green vegitation, rock berm's etc.) Area's of higher densities are usually hit worse than area's of low deer densities. Peak season is late summer and will continue untill first killing frost. Some deer are immune and some are not. Researchers are not sure why? Drought year's are worse as the breeding condition's are prime for the midges. That's what I found out. Did not find anywhere why buck's seem to be hit harder than does?? But regardless it sound's like we are left at the mercy of mother nature.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 7, 2014 15:34:56 GMT -5
Personally, I can't believe any one or any thing can get to another point if they do not first recognize where they are. Nobody knows where our deer population stands. The best guess I have heard involves the DNR "estimating" our annual harvest as 25% of the total herd. I feel that is the downfall. While the 25% might work as a whole, it does not work on a county by county basis. That is why I think there is such a difference in hunter experiences.
|
|
|
Post by throbak on Jan 7, 2014 16:33:02 GMT -5
I look at the harvest records since Xbows added archery harvest stayed the same, firearms and mzl down about 7000 rifle up 6000,xbow up about 6000 looks to me that the harvest was just shifted wit h the increase no big deal with all weapons taken into consideration
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2014 16:38:20 GMT -5
I look at the harvest records since Xbows added archery harvest stayed the same, firearms and mzl down about 7000 rifle up 6000,xbow up about 6000 looks to me that the harvest was just shifted wit h the increase no big deal with all weapons taken into consideration Yes. You know that. I know that. But crossbows will still be vilified as "part of the problem" and used to push the anti gun season agenda. It's already happening.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 7, 2014 16:40:55 GMT -5
Indiana, once again being over-run with Deer like the 1990's (?) I seriously doubt it, more like being over-run by people, development,& other construction replacing habitat. ^^^A perfect example of why someone who lives out of state, only hunts one particular part of the state or hasn't hunted Indiana for how many years? should not be lobbying for statewide changes the way the system is currently set up. Ok, not overran, but a whole lot more deer than now. As far as the people, development and destruction of habitat, the only difference between now and then where I hunt is that there is a house on the neighbors farm and two less fence rows on the property I hunt. And I no longer see 20+ deer per outing. I find it rather interesting you point out how people will speak about state wide regs and then turn around yourself and generalize that we will all be overran with deer that got us to this point to begin with . Truth is that like you said there are areas in this state that have nothing in common with others aside from the fact that they have some sort of deer and its inside the IN borders .Truth is there are areas like the one I wrote about earlier in this thread that have never had a deer problem and has never come remotely close to being "over run " with deer you did exactly what you said others should not do .You assumed too much about the areas you do not hunt or maybe ever see in our state. The harvest numbers over the last 30 years do not lie especially when you throw in other known facts like land make up and human population trends and miles driven in those areas . Just saying I would pay to have in my county the number of deer that some of your counties harvest every year .Just saying especially considering we are big enough a county to handle that with little trouble .
|
|
|
Post by GS1 on Jan 7, 2014 16:51:19 GMT -5
^^^A perfect example of why someone who lives out of state, only hunts one particular part of the state or hasn't hunted Indiana for how many years? should not be lobbying for statewide changes the way the system is currently set up. Ok, not overran, but a whole lot more deer than now. As far as the people, development and destruction of habitat, the only difference between now and then where I hunt is that there is a house on the neighbors farm and two less fence rows on the property I hunt. And I no longer see 20+ deer per outing. I find it rather interesting you point out how people will speak about state wide regs and then turn around yourself and generalize that we will all be overran with deer that got us to this point to begin with. It's pretty simple really. If I have deer and you don't and the state makes changes (statewide) that increase the deer herd (statewide), then you are going to have deer and I am going to have a lot more than I do now. I never said the state was going to be overran with deer. Didn't read the rest of your post, because.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 7, 2014 17:22:46 GMT -5
I find it rather interesting you point out how people will speak about state wide regs and then turn around yourself and generalize that we will all be overran with deer that got us to this point to begin with. It's pretty simple really. If I have deer and you don't and the state makes changes (statewide) that increase the deer herd (statewide), then you are going to have deer and I am going to have a lot more than I do now. I never said the state was going to be overran with deer. Didn't read the rest of your post, because. you should of because the first two paragraphes were all that was directed at you and I explained my statement in the second.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 7, 2014 17:24:49 GMT -5
I look at the harvest records since Xbows added archery harvest stayed the same, firearms and mzl down about 7000 rifle up 6000,xbow up about 6000 looks to me that the harvest was just shifted wit h the increase no big deal with all weapons taken into consideration Yes. You know that. I know that. But crossbows will still be vilified as "part of the problem" and used to push the anti gun season agenda. It's already happening. On a side note I do not blame any weapons for any reduction issues or over harvest .The same hunters who were out there aside from a few women and kids with a gun or vert bow are also the ones out there with a xbow . I say whatever cal rifle or archery gear does not have a thing to do with slanting limits towards doe herds . I am convinced the late antlerless season will continue to be point of contention with ma and other hunters who understand ,that the deer from miles around tend to all congregate in the best food sources in an area a single field with dirty harvest or woods with giant acorn production. A few hunters on one property may collect every deer from every immediately surrounding sq mile .This leads to easy kills and a false perception of too many deer .When they all go back in the spring or move to the next food source then what ?Where did all the deer go I saw last winter ? Well they are now elsewhere or because you or another group did their worst on them they may not be back because they were shot up . If say 10 of 30 were killed what 10 were they were they your deer from your farm or the deer from the next block west or a combination of herds ? Not a single person can answer that question in good faith . This is why aside from shed bucks being shot and the fact I already thought that our season was too long prior to the new season I dislike it .It was not needed in many areas of this state if any IMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2014 17:32:17 GMT -5
Yes. You know that. I know that. But crossbows will still be vilified as "part of the problem" and used to push the anti gun season agenda. It's already happening. On a side note I do not blame any weapons for any reduction issues or over harvest .The same hunters who were out there aside from a few women and kids with a gun or vert bow are also the ones out there with a xbow . I say whatever cal rifle or archery gear does not have a thing to do with slanting limits towards doe herds . I am convinced the late antlerless season will continue to be point of contention with ma and other hunters who understand ,that the deer from miles around tend to all congregate in the best food sources in an area a single field with dirty harvest or woods with giant acorn production. A few hunters on one property may collect every deer from every immediately surrounding sq mile .This leads to easy kills and a false perception of too many deer .When they all go back in the spring or move to the next food source then what ?Where did all the deer go I saw last winter ? Well they are now elsewhere or because you or another group did their worst on them they may not be back because they were shot up . If say 10 of 30 were killed what 10 were they were they your deer from your farm or the deer from the next block west or a combination of herds ? Not a single person can answer that question in good faith . This is why aside from shed bucks being shot and the fact I already thought that our season was too long prior to the new season I dislike it .It was not needed in many areas of this state if any IMHO. You sound like your only agenda is a better deer herd. I respect that a lot! I also agree with your points about the late antlerless season.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jan 7, 2014 18:02:41 GMT -5
On a side note I do not blame any weapons for any reduction issues or over harvest .The same hunters who were out there aside from a few women and kids with a gun or vert bow are also the ones out there with a xbow . I say whatever cal rifle or archery gear does not have a thing to do with slanting limits towards doe herds . I am convinced the late antlerless season will continue to be point of contention with ma and other hunters who understand ,that the deer from miles around tend to all congregate in the best food sources in an area a single field with dirty harvest or woods with giant acorn production. A few hunters on one property may collect every deer from every immediately surrounding sq mile .This leads to easy kills and a false perception of too many deer .When they all go back in the spring or move to the next food source then what ?Where did all the deer go I saw last winter ? Well they are now elsewhere or because you or another group did their worst on them they may not be back because they were shot up . If say 10 of 30 were killed what 10 were they were they your deer from your farm or the deer from the next block west or a combination of herds ? Not a single person can answer that question in good faith . This is why aside from shed bucks being shot and the fact I already thought that our season was too long prior to the new season I dislike it .It was not needed in many areas of this state if any IMHO. You sound like your only agenda is a better deer herd. I respect that a lot! I also agree with your points about the late antlerless season. That is all I wanted as good a deer herd as any area can handle without excessive damage .The truth is I am sick of our deer herd being used by 2-4 different parties and or individuals a pawn in some sort of oneupmanship power grabbing game .They deserve better and so does every hunter in this state that just want the enjoyment of seeing decent numbers of deer and know that the herd is being managed to its fullest extent .For those who do not beleive this is the case simply look at the Fed gov for clarirty they actually shut down the country over power grabbing and oneupsmanship. Rather than being filched for money and used in power games .There are areas of this state it could much much better than it is now or ever has been and there are others that could use a bit of thinning out .Point is our DNR has no real clue where those areas are and how to go about getting there after all the butts that they must kiss are all lined up . For those who know how deer herd trending is actually done in most states and by most true deer biologists its not done by total harvest or antlerless harvest .It is done by monitoring the hunter population and buck harvest since in most state that is the most stable numbers and seasons there are . It interesting but by simply using Buck harvest info we are now close to a 20 year low in herd numbers using this way to trend deer herd and buck harvest . There have only been 3 years in the last 20 that were actually lower buck harvest and only one was fairly substantial .But know this the lowest number of those 3 was the harvest after two years where hunters could legally take 4 bucks and 3 bucks a year all seasons in consecutive years that BTW set buck harvest records not seen again until around 2005 . We killed 45,936 bucks in 2012 . 2000 -44,621 1998 -44,995 1997 -42,537 <--- the following year after two strait years of the 4 and 3 bucks per year seasons. 1993 the buck harvest was 44,424 yep that right .We are in a spiral down that has numbers that are now likely in many areas as bad as they were in the mid 1980s or worse .Time to get some satisfaction guys before its too late .Make them make changes. I predict a 25 -30 year low on harvest of bucks this year .The total harvest may not show this but the herd trend numbers will and that is the buck harvest numbers.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Jan 7, 2014 18:20:01 GMT -5
I don't agree in the late antlerless season. Thus no hunting on my farm. Also spoke with neighbors and they to allowed no hunting on their farms. (AKA micro managing) We also are seeing plenty of does and probably could have shot a few more, but if no one needed the meat then why shoot anymore?? I don't like late season pretty much for the reason's you posted. Does yarded up, some bucks have all ready dropped racks. But maybe my biggest is we all ready have some of the longest season's so why do we need more?? (Ditto on what shouldernuke posted)
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jan 8, 2014 5:33:43 GMT -5
Indiana, once again being over-run with Deer like the 1990's (?) I seriously doubt it, more like being over-run by people, development,& other construction replacing habitat. ^^^A perfect example of why someone who lives out of state, only hunts one particular part of the state or hasn't hunted Indiana for how many years? should not be lobbying for statewide changes the way the system is currently set up. Ok, not overran, but a whole lot more deer than now. As far as the people, development and destruction of habitat, the only difference between now and then where I hunt is that there is a house on the neighbors farm and two less fence rows on the property I hunt. And I no longer see 20+ deer per outing. Correction, I have hunted in several areas of Indiana, when I was a resident there. Also hunted in several States over the years, and some offered great Deer Hunting while some were marginal hunting. One reality, you must face, is that land development WILL take out many acres of habitat. Also, some of those areas where one normally hunted, that is now a housing subdivision, yes they might see Deer there still, but they can't hunt there any longer due to the homes occupying the area instead of fields & woods.
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jan 8, 2014 23:30:31 GMT -5
this state could go to at least 3 different zones (made up of counties)according to habitat and deer numbers. Each zone would have a biologist and it's own regs. We already have districts with dnr biologists so it wouldn't take too much to have deer and turkey zones. All that probably makes too much sense, though. Even better, make people hunt where they live. Charge out of county hunters license fees in line with out of state people who have no connection to where they hunt and just hop from spot to spot killing everything that walks regardless if they even want or need it. Triple the cost of bonus and doe permits or eliminate them all together. Eliminate the phony wanton waste program with hunters who don't even want what they are killing just killing game animals to give them away.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 8, 2014 23:44:45 GMT -5
this state could go to at least 3 different zones (made up of counties)according to habitat and deer numbers. Each zone would have a biologist and it's own regs. We already have districts with dnr biologists so it wouldn't take too much to have deer and turkey zones. All that probably makes too much sense, though. Even better, make people hunt where they live. Charge out of county hunters license fees in line with out of state people who have no connection to where they hunt and just hop from spot to spot killing everything that walks regardless if they even want or need it. Triple the cost of bonus and doe permits or eliminate them all together. Eliminate the phony wanton waste program with hunters who don't even want what they are killing just killing game animals to give them away. I guess that would mean that just zbout every hunter in Marion County would either have to quit or pay up, not to mention any hunter who depends on public ground and doesn't live in a county with some.....
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jan 9, 2014 7:27:28 GMT -5
Even better, make people hunt where they live. Charge out of county hunters license fees in line with out of state people who have no connection to where they hunt and just hop from spot to spot killing everything that walks regardless if they even want or need it. Triple the cost of bonus and doe permits or eliminate them all together. Eliminate the phony wanton waste program with hunters who don't even want what they are killing just killing game animals to give them away. I guess that would mean that just zbout every hunter in Marion County would either have to quit or pay up, not to mention any hunter who depends on public ground and doesn't live in a county with some..... a
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jan 9, 2014 7:27:48 GMT -5
Even better, make people hunt where they live. Charge out of county hunters license fees in line with out of state people who have no connection to where they hunt and just hop from spot to spot killing everything that walks regardless if they even want or need it. Triple the cost of bonus and doe permits or eliminate them all together. Eliminate the phony wanton waste program with hunters who don't even want what they are killing just killing game animals to give them away. I guess that would mean that just zbout every hunter in Marion County would either have to quit or pay up, not to mention any hunter who depends on public ground and doesn't live in a county with some..... Agreed; bad idea.
|
|