|
Post by greghopper on Oct 16, 2016 9:40:52 GMT -5
IWDHM PRESS RELEASE. 10-14-16
Last Tuesday members of the board of IWDHM met with directors from the DNR and DFW. The meeting was called by Senator Mark Messmer and Senator Jim Tomes. Attendees included Cameron Clark (DNR DIRECTOR), John Davis (DNR DEPUTY DIRECTOR), Mark Reiter (DFW DIRECTOR), Senator Messmer, Senator Tomes, Greg Kazmierski (VICE CHAIR WISCONSIN NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD), and board members of IWDHM. Greg Kazmierski was in attendance to provide the DNR and DFW with the details of how Wisconsin's CDAC (County Deer Advisory Council) works, and how the public has participated.
The intention of the meeting was to provide more detailed information to the DNR and DFW on the proposal of CDAC's here in Indiana. Director Clark, Director Reiter, and Deputy Director Davis were very receptive and interested in the possibility of CDAC's giving the public the opportunity to give their input on deer management on a much more local level.
The directors have asked IWDHM to spearhead a pilot CDAC program in 6 counties. They pledged their support for this endeavor, and pledged to use DNR and DFW websites and social media to help organize the formation of the committees, and help inform the public of the committee meetings schedule.
Currently IWDHM is working to assess which counties should be included in this pilot. We are looking to choose 6 counties with a variety of different habitat and terrain, so as to see how the CDAC works across different county situations. The DNR and DFW have asked that we try to have this pilot ready to start by early next year.
This will be a large endeavor, but the benefits of CDAC's are well worth the effort. IWDHM would like to thank Director Clark, Director Reiter, and Deputy Director Davis for having an open discussion about the future of deer management in Indiana and for supporting this endeavor. We would like to thank Greg Kazmierski for traveling from Wisconsin to attend this meeting and for providing the details and the benefits of the CDAC program. We would also like to thank Senator Mark Messmer and Senator Jim Tomes for calling this meeting and supporting a positive change for deer management in Indiana.
pop2
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 16, 2016 9:50:49 GMT -5
We've been there done that some 10-15 years ago. It was composed of 3-5 landowner/farmers, 3-5 deer hunting groups, 3-5 independent/non-hunters and an animal rights rep..... It's like Deja vu all over again!
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 16, 2016 11:23:24 GMT -5
I've had some conversations in private that posed some very interesting questions on this subject...
What will the 6 county study cost and who will pay for it?
Who will set the parameters of the study and how will those parameters be guaranteed to be followed?
Are the individuals in this group qualified to run a study like this and if so, who determined that? If not, who will hire a professional to help run the study and again, who will pay for that?
Who will study the data collected to determine it's value?
|
|
|
Post by medic22 on Oct 16, 2016 11:36:09 GMT -5
Studies can be skewed towards the results a biased party wants.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 16, 2016 11:38:23 GMT -5
Studies can be skewed towards the results a biased party wants. Thus the reason for my questions and concerns.....
|
|
|
Post by medic22 on Oct 16, 2016 11:40:32 GMT -5
Studies can be skewed towards the results a biased party wants. Thus the reason for my questions and concerns..... I have the same concerns. Maybe im being biased myself, but I dont have a lot of faith in IWDHM. Im sure that horse has been beat to death here, but they seem to use fear mongering to gain supporters.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 16, 2016 14:18:24 GMT -5
Thus the reason for my questions and concerns..... I have the same concerns. Maybe im being biased myself, but I dont have a lot of faith in IWDHM. Im sure that horse has been beat to death here, but they seem to use fear mongering to gain supporters. welcome to the real world. Most groups feed off the fear of something. Change is not accepted easily!
|
|
|
Post by GS1 on Oct 16, 2016 17:36:34 GMT -5
I spent some time several nights ago searching the Web and talking to a few Wisconsin hunters. It seems the DNR still does what it wants regardless of the recommendations of the CDAC.
In reality it is just that. A recommendation.
|
|
|
Post by mkfrench on Oct 16, 2016 18:34:42 GMT -5
Bunch of conspiracy theorist bullies...in "my" opinion.
I had bodily harm threatened to me by them last year after I questioned their educations/degrees in wildlife management(of which NONE of them have). I also questioned their scare tactics and pity pictures they spread all over Facebook of just random dead deer that may have been EHD, CWD, dumb deer, roadkill, drowned deer, clumsy deer, poached deer, legally harvested but wantonly wasted deer, dead deer from urban zones, crossbow killed deer, PCR killed deer, Sasquatch killed deer, deer killed by the mountain lions DNR and insurance companies allegedly released to control the herd, oh and let's not forget about the rattle snakes released by DNR..."allegedly" to control turkey populations that MAY have incidentally killed a deer or two.
I hope you are picking up on my sarcasm because I'm laying it on pretty thick.
PS I have heard all those conspiracies mentioned by probably well intentioned but sadly naive individuals in our fine state.
You can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
Post by medic22 on Oct 16, 2016 18:41:01 GMT -5
^^winner.
It seems lately nobody can accept that they arent good hunters. "DNR decimated the heard" is easier to believe I just cannot accept that the herd is on the verge of extinction when im seeing more qaulity bucks than ever before.
I saw 7 deer in 30 minutes on public land. I cannot in good conscious support anything this group proposes.
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on Oct 16, 2016 18:59:00 GMT -5
I don't think we have a shortage of deer around here, but I'm all for more.
Every time I've visited that page, though, I've left feeling disgusted. The way they talk down to and belittle people is ridiculous. All without knowing how to spell, use punctuation, or conduct any sort of civil discourse.
They may be fine people offline, but they really need to work on representing themselves better.
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Oct 16, 2016 19:17:19 GMT -5
I spent some time several nights ago searching the Web and talking to a few Wisconsin hunters. It seems the DNR still does what it wants regardless of the recommendations of the CDAC. In reality it is just that. A recommendation. I agree. I know that these guys are hoping to have legal leverage, but I just don't see the DNR turning over deer management to lay people. Heck, it could even backfire on them if tons of citizens (farmers and those who have hit deer on the road) show up to the county meetings calling for more deer to be killed. Heck, vehicle-deer accidents went from 65 in my county in 2005 to 200 in 2015!
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on Oct 16, 2016 21:52:44 GMT -5
So that's where all the rattle snakes are coming from...
|
|
|
Post by ms660 on Oct 16, 2016 22:12:40 GMT -5
So that's where all the rattle snakes are coming from... Rattle snakes I can live with but those damned Sasquatch I'm having a hard time with. Can't keep them from killing deer in my food plots.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 17, 2016 7:55:44 GMT -5
Let me first and foremost say keep it civil gentleman. Many of us, myself included have been in the cross-hairs from this group or past group members.
This news I can't help but see the positive in it, but I also have some rather significant concerns as jjas outlined:
-------
What will the 6 county study cost and who will pay for it?
Who will set the parameters of the study and how will those parameters be guaranteed to be followed?
Are the individuals in this group qualified to run a study like this and if so, who determined that? If not, who will hire a professional to help run the study and again, who will pay for that?
Who will study the data collected to determine it's value?
-------
I simply cannot get excited because I doubt IWDHM can be impartial in the construction of the CDACs, the execution of them, the collection of data and then the examination of it.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Oct 17, 2016 15:38:24 GMT -5
I have more of a wait and see attitude with this group. I joined but learned pretty quickly if you questioned what they were doing or disagreed with them on a subject you were harshly criticized and bullied into their way or highway philosophy. (No longer a member needless to say.) Will something come of this I guess anything that brings light to our states deer management would be a bonus.
|
|
|
Post by span870 on Oct 17, 2016 16:15:24 GMT -5
Let me first and foremost say keep it civil gentleman. Many of us, myself included have been in the cross-hairs from this group or past group members. This news I can't help but see the positive in it, but I also have some rather significant concerns as jjas outlined: ------- What will the 6 county study cost and who will pay for it? Who will set the parameters of the study and how will those parameters be guaranteed to be followed? Are the individuals in this group qualified to run a study like this and if so, who determined that? If not, who will hire a professional to help run the study and again, who will pay for that? Who will study the data collected to determine it's value? ------- I simply cannot get excited because I doubt IWDHM can be impartial in the construction of the CDACs, the execution of them, the collection of data and then the examination of it. Just curious what positive you can see in it? You take members from a group that has certain ideas and stances on a subject and let THEM run a study, what outcome do you think will be? I can guarantee you they can go to any county in indiana with their members and come to the conclusion that less doe need to be killed, season shortened,... If you start a "study" looking for a certain outcome, odds are you are going to come to said conclusion. No different that gun control. HCI takes the exact same data that NRA takes and comes up with two different stats. I hate these "studies" with an expected outcome. It's zero difference than most coyote vs. fawn and calf predation studies. Look at most with an open mind and you will see the flaws. What exactly outcome do you see coming out of this? Too few deer. You and I both know if you go north of 70 there are "too few" deer. Where are they going to go. They even have guys on there saying Lawrence and Washington county needs more deer. Are you kidding me. If you can't kill a deer in either of those counties, public or private, give it up and fish.
|
|
|
Post by whitetaildave24 on Oct 17, 2016 18:58:34 GMT -5
Now Span, your actually thinking logically and using some sense. You can't do that now a days. I totally agree with you on what the outcome would be.
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 17, 2016 19:05:04 GMT -5
I was the Orange County Manager for about 9 months. Myself and about 75% of the other Managers were told we weren't doing enough to help the cause and were kicked out. I pointed out before than some of the things some of you all have been pointing out and was HEAVILY criticized for it. I think that CDAC is a great idea if done correctly, but as with everything these days it seems that someone wants something out of it for themselves. So I doubt that it will be handled correctly and will ultimately fail.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 17, 2016 19:30:47 GMT -5
Set up to fail IMO....just to appease and shut them up.
|
|