|
Post by turkeyscout on Jun 28, 2007 20:27:50 GMT -5
I wouldn't have as much of a problem with the "nuisance deer permits" if deer actually did half the damage they are blamed for.
|
|
|
Post by turkeyscout on Jun 28, 2007 20:42:14 GMT -5
i agree with mbogo and freedomhunter, i think some or alot of the blame should go to the d.n.r. district biologists, i talked to a couple of district biologists on this subject and they said most the damage is raccoons and if they are called out to check it out and it is mostly raccoons, they will give the permits to them just to satisfy the property owner or farmer and deer are killed for no reason..this is not right!!!......turkey scout
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Jun 29, 2007 6:10:38 GMT -5
The farmer I hunt on down south gets 20 permits a year. It is nothing to see 30-40 deer a night in his alfalfa fields and bean fields and they do cause a lot of damage to his crops. I can't blame him for getting them and Its just an earlier season for me. I guess I have to take the farmers side on this one because I wouldn't want anyone eating my paycheck.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jun 29, 2007 8:30:28 GMT -5
The government eats my paycheck every week, can I kill them?
"Farmers" get TONS of subsidy from the goverment each year, THAT should offset whatever loss the "deer" are causing!
How many acre does your farmer have, and how many folks hunt it. I bet if he doubled or trippled the amount of hunters, the deer would not be near as thick!
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jun 29, 2007 9:18:01 GMT -5
More than 10 years ago a big acreage farmer told me he figured it cost around 500.00 a year for crop damage from each deer on his property. In todays standards thats more than a 1000.00 a deer.
While I don't like the permits I can understand the farmer's point of view. How many of us donate several thousands of dollars a year to feed wildlife?
I think one of the reasons they don't want hunters taking the deer with the permits is retrieving the shot deer and dragging them out would cause a lot more damage to crops by knocking them down.
I don't know if there is a solution to depredation permits that would satisfy both hunters and farmers. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Jun 29, 2007 11:45:23 GMT -5
The government eats my paycheck every week, can I kill them? "Farmers" get TONS of subsidy from the goverment each year, THAT should offset whatever loss the "deer" are causing! How many acre does your farmer have, and how many folks hunt it. I bet if he doubled or trippled the amount of hunters, the deer would not be near as thick! He lets as many people on his property that ask. I think there was six of us one day and it is only 80 acres. If they didn't do the permits who would pay for the loss. We would
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jun 29, 2007 14:45:13 GMT -5
i agree with mbogo and freedomhunter, i think some or alot of the blame should go to the d.n.r. district biologists, i talked to a couple of district biologists on this subject and they said most the damage is raccoons and if they are called out to check it out and it is mostly raccoons, they will give the permits to them just to satisfy the property owner or farmer and deer are killed for no reason..this is not right!!!......turkey scout Don't underestimate the amount of damage fox squirrels do as well, especially if the corn is not picked promptly. Unfortunately, deer are much more visible to the average farmer and receive most of the blame. Some farmers are willing to accept that they need to work with wildlife in the spirit of the law and some that aren't. I have little sympathy for the latter because I have seen more than enough of that type in my line of work.
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Jun 29, 2007 15:19:21 GMT -5
Without a doubt squirrels and 'coons do damage, anyone that's sat in a treestand on a cornfield edge has seen critters drag ears of corn back into the woods so they can eat them. However, there's no way that a small game animal can even come close to the consumption rate of an adult deer. Anyone who questions the farmers use of dep tags / nuisance tags has never had any interaction with farmers and heard what damage is caused by deer. I've got relatives in KY who farm thousands of acres and they shoot deer on sight because of the damage caused. It's really no different than setting a mouse trap to catch a mouse trying to sneak a piece of your cheese. It's not up to us, or anyone to tell a farmer to double or triple the amount of people he lets hunt......that's THEIR property to do with as they see fit. Again, I'd like to see bucks "protected" out of normal hunting seasons since it's ridiculous to try to manage bigger bucks when you literally open the season on them with the nuisance permits. If you have a field of 50 deer in it, without a doubt 80% or better will be does. IMO the permits should be antlerless deer only......but let's be realistic, most of your hardnosed farmers are gonna do what they want anyway, and monitoring these hunts would be next to impossible for ICO's.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 29, 2007 15:44:22 GMT -5
Without a doubt squirrels and 'coons do damage, anyone that's sat in a treestand on a cornfield edge has seen critters drag ears of corn back into the woods so they can eat them. However, there's no way that a small game animal can even come close to the consumption rate of an adult deer. Anyone who questions the farmers use of dep tags / nuisance tags has never had any interaction with farmers and heard what damage is caused by deer. I've got relatives in KY who farm thousands of acres and they shoot deer on sight because of the damage caused. It's really no different than setting a mouse trap to catch a mouse trying to sneak a piece of your cheese. It's not up to us, or anyone to tell a farmer to double or triple the amount of people he lets hunt......that's THEIR property to do with as they see fit. Again, I'd like to see bucks "protected" out of normal hunting seasons since it's ridiculous to try to manage bigger bucks when you literally open the season on them with the nuisance permits. If you have a field of 50 deer in it, without a doubt 80% or better will be does. IMO the permits should be antlerless deer only......but let's be realistic, most of your hardnosed farmers are gonna do what they want anyway, and monitoring these hunts would be next to impossible for ICO's. What Travis said.....
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Jun 29, 2007 16:33:24 GMT -5
Woody - we discussed this problem at DAC the year JB brought up the situation tenring was referencing. The suggestion I made (as a landowner/farmer rep) was that farmers claiming damage be put into a "priority hunting system" in which hunters would register for a draw and get permits specific to that property, including location on the farm, and that deer taken would not count against the normal bag limit.
As a landowner/hunter/farmer, I understand the alleged damage issues, but I also have a major problem with a system that creates wanton waste (improperly disposed animals and fawns left to starve) and has negative impacts on herd management relative to sex ratios, not to mention flying the face of normal hunting ethics.
There are better ways to exert herd control than the current depredation permit system, but the first hurdle is getting IDNR to buy into alternative concepts... after that, I think farmers could be brought around to a different method if they see results.
Bottom line is... we have never, nor will we ever, use these permits on our farm...
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Jun 29, 2007 18:57:00 GMT -5
The problem is Kirk, that the farmer would not have any "say-so" on who is allowed to hunt their property. I agree that in a perfect world, where we have ZERO slob hunters, it would be a perfect system to utilize their private land almost as if it were State property.....however if I am Joe Farmer, I want to use MY set of criteria and yes...predudices of sorts...on how I choose or don't choose who hunts my land. I suppose a compromise would be that farmers that request Dep tags are "encouraged" to allow hunters who ask permission to participate in their Dep hunts. I do NOT like the idea of forcing a landowner to let people on their property..... It's another issue of property rights, and we were just fighting Marion Co. who was trying to infringe on those same property rights.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jun 30, 2007 10:04:33 GMT -5
The government eats my paycheck every week, can I kill them? "Farmers" get TONS of subsidy from the goverment each year, THAT should offset whatever loss the "deer" are causing! How many acre does your farmer have, and how many folks hunt it. I bet if he doubled or trippled the amount of hunters, the deer would not be near as thick! He lets as many people on his property that ask. I think there was six of us one day and it is only 80 acres. If they didn't do the permits who would pay for the loss. We would 20 permits for 80 acre?.........Tell me there aint something WRONG with the system!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jun 30, 2007 10:20:30 GMT -5
......that's THEIR property to do with as they see fit. Except for erecting a high fence around thier property, right?
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jun 30, 2007 10:33:22 GMT -5
The bottom line is the system is BROKEN......... 20 out of season permits for an 80 acre farm? ? Antler hunting in July? It very well may be the farmers property, but the deer belong to all citizens of the state. Every farmer I have ever known gets some sort of farm subsidy, weather it's tax free fuel, payments direct from the goverment or subsidy from crops......they are getting something. With all the perks the farmers qualify for, I would say it more than makes up for whatever loss they suffer from deer. Go to any high school in rural Indiana and take a look at the kids that are driving their parents "farm" vehicle to and from school, BURNING TAX FREE FUEL....... The simple solution is for the farmer to sign up on a list and the IDNR provide safe, educated deer hunters, DURING DEER SEASON. Deer hunters that are going to shoot the first (and second, third, ect) deer they see or have an opportunity at. I am 110% against out of season permits.....I don't see a need for them!
|
|
|
Post by hornzilla on Jun 30, 2007 12:48:56 GMT -5
I dont agree with the permits, but it still is the farmers land (he should have the rights to say who and when people use it). Also if farming is SOOOO great, with all the subsidy, tax free fuel, goverment hand outs, ect. Then why wouldn't EVERYONE become a farmer?
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Jul 1, 2007 6:47:34 GMT -5
The simple solution is for the farmer to sign up on a list and the IDNR provide safe, educated deer hunters No way. Nobody should be forced to let people on their land that they haven't picked and given the permission themselves. Take the entire Farmer thing out of the equation, there's not a single person that would want IDNR telling them they have to let their "selected" hunters to be allowed to hunt their land.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 1, 2007 7:11:04 GMT -5
The simple solution is for the farmer to sign up on a list and the IDNR provide safe, educated deer hunters No way. Nobody should be forced to let people on their land that they haven't picked and given the permission themselves. Take the entire Farmer thing out of the equation, there's not a single person that would want IDNR telling them they have to let their "selected" hunters to be allowed to hunt their land. Nobody is forcing anybody! The farmer is contacting the IDNR for help, to get out of control deer under control........ just like they do now! Instead of issueing out of season permits..................... The IDNR provides a list of willing deer hunters to help out, the farmer contacts the hunters on the list, conducts interviews, or what ever and chooses the deer hunters. The deer hunters hunt the farm DURING DEER SEASON, kill as many deer as possible.....PROBLEM SOLVED! The farmer STILL chooses WHO hunts their land. If the farmer is not willing to go along with the program, then they should live with the problem (if there is really one). There is NO NEED to kill deer out of season when the issue can be taken care of during the regular deer season.....PERIOD!
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Jul 1, 2007 7:53:06 GMT -5
Soooo, let me get this straight. If I am a 70 year old farmer, and have a problem with crop damage. I call IDNR, they send out a biologist and they issue.....100 tags.....Then, to use those tags I have to use the hunters on their "list" to conduct the hunts, despite the fact that I have 5 kids, 14 grandkids, and friends who would normally do the hunt? Seems like blackmail to me...... USE THE LIST HUNTERS OR YOU DON'T GET THE TAGS!!!! I'm not saying there should be some tinkering with the current system, but I'm opposed to anything that corners the farmer in anyway. IDNR SHOULD have a list of property owners who welcome and invite prospective hunters to come out and ask for permission to hunt.....but to tie that into the nuisance tag is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 1, 2007 8:41:36 GMT -5
despite the fact that I have 5 kids, 14 grandkids, and friends who would normally do the hunt? If there are already 5 kids, 14 grandkids, and friends, hunting the property AND THE DEER HERD IS STILL OUT OF CONTROL.........then YES!......the farmer needs better hunters! Actualy, if 5 kids, 14 grandkids, and friends are hunting, the farmer probabaly DON"T have a deer herd problem,AND IF HE IS GETTING OUT OF SEASON PERMITS, it's probabaly abuse!
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Jul 1, 2007 8:51:30 GMT -5
Guess it's easy for you to say, since you aren't the landowner.
|
|