|
Post by greghopper on Oct 17, 2016 19:39:53 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. What criteria did you have to have to be the Orange County Manager or did you just volunteer and they said YES? Who in the DEER Hunting world doesn't want to see more Deer when there hunting... I really don't have a problem with the message but the messenger is a JOKE...IMO
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 17, 2016 19:41:18 GMT -5
Set up to fail IMO....just to appease and shut them up. ...its called LIP service!
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 17, 2016 19:51:41 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. What criteria did you have to have to be the Orange County Manager or did you just volunteer and they said YES? Who in the DEER Hunting world doesn't want to see more Deer when there hunting... I really don't have a problem with the message but the messenger is a JOKE...IMO Yes, someone willing to be a contact person. We were supposed to setup people for a "council" in each County. I have some experience with statistical work, gathering data and working with the government.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 17, 2016 19:57:13 GMT -5
Just curious, how many people? The county I hunt and own property in is roughly 500 square miles....320,000 acres....hundreds of properties.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 17, 2016 20:40:41 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. Span if they could promise it won't be chalked full of their own members and honest results will occur I do see positive in it. However their strong opinion for anything except their exact thoughts has been made crystal clear....it is impossible.
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 17, 2016 20:52:12 GMT -5
Just curious, how many people? The county I hunt and own property in is roughly 500 square miles....320,000 acres....hundreds of properties. About 6-8 from different vocations. Farmer, hunter, someone in local insurance, county highway department, etc. People that would have an idea of deer population from different areas of input.
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 17, 2016 20:56:37 GMT -5
I proposed making an app for the general population to download and use to keep track of when and where they see deer. This would be dumped into a database for the CDAC and the DNR to use. Met with little interest.
|
|
|
Post by span870 on Oct 17, 2016 21:14:49 GMT -5
Not to argue Ty but who do we put in it. Farmers, too many deer. Insurance, too many deer, highway department, too many deer. Hunters, not enough deer. We take the hunters. What criteria do we take? How many hours in stand, how many different properties. Now say hunter spend 60 hours a week on stand across three properties. All of a sudden Mr B&C steps out at 100 yards, no shot. Now said hunter just leaves the rest of his properties alone and hunts this one property. Hunter two spend same amount of time in stand but has property that just doesn't hold deer. Hunter three spend same amount of time but hunts northern counties,patchwork wood lots that doesn't have carrying capacity. Do any of these three hunters have reliable input on their own properties let alone on county by county basis? There is zero way this will ever work unless the people doing the survey have zero interest in it. So who do they get to do survey? Can anyone tell me how this could ever work or who could be unbiased enough to be trusted? I just don't see what is wrong with the way the DNR is handling it now. I cover quite a few counties doing my job. The counties that have the highest bonus tag numbers, I see the most deer. Counties with the lowest I see the least. What input are we even looking for?
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 17, 2016 21:32:35 GMT -5
Deer count is what there looking to gather I believe !
|
|
|
Post by throbak on Oct 17, 2016 21:48:44 GMT -5
I don't see the personal being vetted to agree to meet once a year let alone people from every county in the state I've been involved in that kind of stuff ! Look at our shunts on this site trying to get together It's going to be tuff for sure
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 17, 2016 22:16:40 GMT -5
Not to argue Ty but who do we put in it. Farmers, too many deer. Insurance, too many deer, highway department, too many deer. Hunters, not enough deer. We take the hunters. What criteria do we take? How many hours in stand, how many different properties. Now say hunter spend 60 hours a week on stand across three properties. All of a sudden Mr B&C steps out at 100 yards, no shot. Now said hunter just leaves the rest of his properties alone and hunts this one property. Hunter two spend same amount of time in stand but has property that just doesn't hold deer. Hunter three spend same amount of time but hunts northern counties,patchwork wood lots that doesn't have carrying capacity. Do any of these three hunters have reliable input on their own properties let alone on county by county basis? There is zero way this will ever work unless the people doing the survey have zero interest in it. So who do they get to do survey? Can anyone tell me how this could ever work or who could be unbiased enough to be trusted? I just don't see what is wrong with the way the DNR is handling it now. I cover quite a few counties doing my job. The counties that have the highest bonus tag numbers, I see the most deer. Counties with the lowest I see the least. What input are we even looking for? The positive is it would be dialogue and hunter involvement but agreed it would be mostly leading to nowhere. I've used the example time and time again one of my best big buck properties I lose in gun season. The dude that gun hunts swears there is hardly any deer at all...one year I hunted the 4 days leading up to opener...he claims he saw zero deer Saturday and Sunday after hunting all day. Come to find out we got him on all 7 cameras on the property just walking the trails and then found out all day meant 2 hours in morning and 2 hours in evening. Or another example the IWDHM hated was my parents small place...3 neighbors...one claims too many deer, another stable and another yet claims no deer at all.....try measuring this.
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 17, 2016 22:20:43 GMT -5
Truly honest people can make something like this work. There are very few of those around.
|
|
|
Post by ms660 on Oct 18, 2016 0:24:45 GMT -5
Wonder what the preferred weapon is for the majority of the members of this group?
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 18, 2016 3:49:43 GMT -5
Reread what throbak wrote. It will be next to impossible to get that many involved on a routine voluntary basis.
It takes passion, not honesty or integrity to be that involved. If unpaid....even more so. I don't see folks outside of hunters and DNR employees being that concerned with deer populations.
It is an uphill push for this group. Sounds like they are making more emenies than allies and that will grind them to a halt.
I know their tactics turned me away. No way would I want to be associated with the group based on how a few of the leaders acted.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 18, 2016 3:52:11 GMT -5
and I think there were plenty of hunters with the best of intentions with the passion to get involved that have been burnt by these guys. too bad to waste that effort but hard to manage.
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Oct 18, 2016 5:28:35 GMT -5
Who in the DEER Hunting world doesn't want to see more Deer when there hunting... Exactly! Every county will simply be the hunters saying more deer are needed and farmers/insurance saying less are needed. Whose opinion is the correct one? I've driven through northern Indiana a few times and wonder how there could even be deer. Tiny woodlots surrounded by huge fields. Where are deer supposed to seek refuge from the hunters? No wonder they don't see many deer up there. The problem appears to be loss of suitable habitat and not killing too many deer. I'd say that with the number of hunters up there, they could reduce the entire northern half to a antlerless quota of 1 and still kill just as many annually. The harvest would just be spread out over more hunters, just like with the one-buck rule where we are seeing more bucks killed now than pre-OBR. It's just that more people get one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 6:43:09 GMT -5
Who in the DEER Hunting world doesn't want to see more Deer when there hunting... Exactly! Every county will simply be the hunters saying more deer are needed and farmers/insurance saying less are needed. Whose opinion is the correct one? I've driven through northern Indiana a few times and wonder how there could even be deer. Tiny woodlots surrounded by huge fields. Where are deer supposed to seek refuge from the hunters? No wonder they don't see many deer up there. The problem appears to be loss of suitable habitat and not killing too many deer. I'd say that with the number of hunters up there, they could reduce the entire northern half to a antlerless quota of 1 and still kill just as many annually. The harvest would just be spread out over more hunters, just like with the one-buck rule where we are seeing more bucks killed now than pre-OBR. It's just that more people get one. Right on up North. When I lived in Fort Wayne it was very different on how I hunt deer in Switzerland county. I would glass the deer in the fields and they seldom came out. The deer over time found the safe non hunting large (huge) fields. It was hard to find a woods or small patch to hide a stand in. You would stand out light a warning beacon. A Northern hunter hunts differently than a Southern hunter and the their expectations will be different.
|
|
|
Post by dadfsr on Oct 18, 2016 7:16:30 GMT -5
Reread what throbak wrote. It will be next to impossible to get that many involved on a routine voluntary basis. It takes passion, not honesty or integrity to be that involved. If unpaid....even more so. I don't see folks outside of hunters and DNR employees being that concerned with deer populations. It is an uphill push for this group. Sounds like they are making more emenies than allies and that will grind them to a halt. I know their tactics turned me away. No way would I want to be associated with the group based on how a few of the leaders acted. Passion or obsession!?!??!!??! Both can look the same on the face but can lead to very different results.......
|
|
|
Post by poc on Oct 18, 2016 7:50:11 GMT -5
The meetings are local for a majority of the folks involved 3 or 4 times a year you get together with the people in your County. Then the results are given to the State level group. Not everyone in the whole State getting together all at the same time. At least that was the way I understood it.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 18, 2016 8:33:41 GMT -5
In the end, if IWDHM wants to run and PAY for their CDAC program, I say have @ it. The DNR can take the data they provide and utilize it (or not) any way they choose to...
What I hope will happen is that the IDNR would continue setting bonus antlerless permits based on harvest data and long term goals. That doesn't mean that there aren't portions of counties that have been hunted too hard, but it does mean that to expect the IDNR to "micromanage" individual counties isn't feasible, IMO.
|
|