|
Post by jkd on Jul 2, 2007 15:54:23 GMT -5
Travis - when we discussed this at DAC, the system I was proposing didn't force farmers to accept hunters. It was suggested as a means of putting farmers in contact with H.E.-qualified hunters in their area to increase hunting pressure on farms that were experiencing deer damage. In other words, the farmer had the option to agree to the concept of a hunter referral system, but they still controlled access to their property.
If such a system were put in place, it could be done as a replacement for existing depredation permits, or done as an alternative parallel system.
Under the current system, I don't see where shooting a bunch of bucks mid-summer is accomplishing anything in terms of real herd control.
As a matter of fact, the existing county-by-county antlerless system was an outgrowth of discussions at DAC meetings as a means of increasing hunting pressure within a given county. The problem with that is that you still have a lot of farmground where hunting isn't allowed, so no county permit or quota system is going to be able to deal with that.
If INDR and say Purdue and Farm Bureau, for example, worked together to develop a system and get farmers on board with providing increased hunter access to their properties, that would do more in the long term for controlling crop damage than the current depredation system accomplishes. You could set up whatever hunter certification/experience requirements you wanted for application to get into the system, and the farmer could select the hunters he/she wanted from the local pool and establish rules for hunting the property, and if there becomes a problem with a given hunter, the farmer would have the option to terminate access, notify IDNR, and that hunter or hunters is permanently out of the system.
The concept was to give hunters increased access to local hunting opportunities and provide farmers with a more effective long term solution to crop damage issues. Part of the problem with existing urban zone deer control is that there is no system to link up hunters with property owners who might give permission to hunt on their land. The onus is on the hunter to go around door-to-door seeking permission, and a lot of hunters don't have the time it takes to do that on a routine basis. A referral system would make it simple for landowners to get their name out as a potential hunting spot and for local hunters to get in contact with them.
|
|
|
Post by allegiance on Jul 2, 2007 21:18:03 GMT -5
I very seldom get involved in these discussions but for someone to say that farmers get millions of dollars in subsidies is just wrong. In your job Camby if your cost go up all you have to do is pass your expenses on to the customer. I as a farmer do not have that luxury. I cannot pass on my cost to the customer all I can do it try to market my crops for the best price I can get and take it . I must figure out ways to be profitable during record fuel prices, fertilizer cost and landlords wanting more money for cash rent. So the government gives the farmer a little extra money to offset his cost. Just remember it is a farmer that puts your food on the table.
|
|
|
Post by hoosiercanuck on Jul 2, 2007 23:14:20 GMT -5
Amen allegiance!
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 3, 2007 3:23:18 GMT -5
I don't think u run a multi million company....common Camby you just work there.... My Job Title Is : senior vice president / general manager, there is only one person above me and he owns the place. you can check this information with the Indiana Sec. of state or the BBB. Timex, No, I can't name one, I was asking, should farmers that lease their ground to deer hunters get out of season permits, because right now they aint disqualified.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 4:46:09 GMT -5
I don't think u run a multi million company....common Camby you just work there.... My Job Title Is : senior vice president / general manager, there is only one person above me and he owns the place. you can check this information with the Indiana Sec. of state or the BBB. Timex, No, I can't name one, I was asking, should farmers that lease their ground to deer hunters get out of season permits, because right now they aint disqualified. Why would someone want to pay money to have someone else kill deer out of season and leave them lay to rot. Most people that lease want to protect their deer herd and improve the age structure, not shoot them during the summer time.
|
|
|
Post by solohunter on Jul 3, 2007 4:50:40 GMT -5
Odd, but I do not think anyone has said WHY the permits are issued at that particular time of year. The deer are killed BEFORE the damage is done. When my district biologist was out it has to do with the devolopement/stage of the plant. Milk phase if I recall. Within the last 2 weeks I had to SLAM the door shut on a guy who I was going to allow to hunt our farm this year. I allowed him to come out last year with another hunter, he killed 2 does and a nice buck. |So this year |I was going to allow him to come and go, not now. he won't be allowed period. Then an adjoining land owner came by and his name came up. Goodbye. No landowner/farmer should be told who hunts their ground or not be given the chance to get depred permits regardless, that is just stupid. There are flaws with many programs, but nothing is flawlesss Solohunter
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Jul 3, 2007 5:55:02 GMT -5
Camby if it wasn't for farmers you wouldn't have a #2 business don't forget! Couldn't have said it better Allegiance
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 3, 2007 8:59:19 GMT -5
www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=20689www.mulchblog.com/2007/06/full_disclosure_who_really_ben.php ..................... ""For decades, American taxpayers have provided tens of billions of dollars in federal farm subsidies to some of the largest and wealthiest farm businesses in the nation. But thousands of people who benefited from the subsidy flow were shielded from public view behind layers of partnerships, joint ventures, limited liability corporations, cooperatives, and other business structures that obscured their personal subsidy claims. Some 350,000 people who previously have not been identified as direct recipients of federal farm subsidy money by EWG have actually been the beneficiaries of almost a third of the $34.75 billion in crop subsidies provided by American taxpayers between 2003 and 2005 alone.".................................. I think you folks get the idea
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 3, 2007 9:32:03 GMT -5
I haven't been following this very close, but what does farming subsidies have to do with nuisance deer permits?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 3, 2007 9:42:11 GMT -5
JKD,
It is a shame that your proposal never got off the ground.
It's a double shame that the DAC doesn't exist anymore.
The problem that I saw from my one and only attendance was there seemed to be no consensus on what was brought up - just brainstorming ideas and no follow through.
Maybe that is what that committee was designed for - the IDNR picking deer hunter's and farmer's brains and then doing whatever they want??
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Jul 3, 2007 9:43:32 GMT -5
EDIT... stay on the subject, please..
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 3, 2007 9:47:38 GMT -5
I haven't been following this very close, but what does farming subsidies have to do with nuisance deer permits? The point I was trying to make Woody was that farmers receive crop subsidys and other things from the federal goverment, including tax free fuel..... that should more than make up for any loss deer are causing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 10:49:52 GMT -5
I'm not aware a farm program that pays money for deer or other animal depredation??? There's plenty of farm subsistance, but each address a specific problem and need....none of them relate to deer damage.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Jul 3, 2007 13:54:49 GMT -5
It is the poor farmer that barely gets by that I think needs the depredation when they need every bushel they can get, and the deer are eating 10% of their beans. But who is to make a determination between the haves and have-nots. Nobody said they are all good farmers, either, so many issues. I hate to see them selling ground for houses, etc., because they can't make it every year.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jul 3, 2007 14:20:50 GMT -5
Not a bash to any of the farmers as I have great respect for most that I know, and they do work their tails into the dirt for not a lot in return.
But don't give me the "We feed you" as an excuse for certain items. Most people just work for a paycheck. Rising cost of fuel, healthcare, eggs, milk, cereal....and we just get a check the same as last year. If we don't work we don't buy. If we don't buy you don't sell.
Bottom line is we all choose what we do in life, try to tell me you deserve anything for a choice you make and it kind of makes me bristle. Now accepting what is offered and being gratefull for these breaks is a totally different story and that is how I see most of the farmers I know.
Back to depredation hunts??? I don't care one way or another. There is tangible damage, can it all be blamed on deer, not likely. I don't see depredation tags for coons/squirrles/or what ever. Actually based on some of the after harvest loss of grain I see it should be a requirement to have a more effecient combine. Or pay a laborer to pick the unharvested ears, goose hunting in some fields is pretty remarkable the amount of waste.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Jul 3, 2007 14:41:46 GMT -5
last year a saw a corn field in an area that I hunt that had more corn left on the ground than any other I've ever seen after the harvest. The farmer either didn't need the money or was too lazy or broke to fix his combine. It made for good goose hunting and the deer were all over it when it good freezing cold. So that field lost more corn to poor farming than deer!
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 4, 2007 6:40:51 GMT -5
Not a bash to any of the farmers as I have great respect for most that I know, and they do work their tails into the dirt for not a lot in return. But don't give me the "We feed you" as an excuse for certain items. Most people just work for a paycheck. Rising cost of fuel, healthcare, eggs, milk, cereal....and we just get a check the same as last year. If we don't work we don't buy. If we don't buy you don't sell. Bottom line is we all choose what we do in life, try to tell me you deserve anything for a choice you make and it kind of makes me bristle. Now accepting what is offered and being gratefull for these breaks is a totally different story and that is how I see most of the farmers I know. Back to depredation hunts??? I don't care one way or another. There is tangible damage, can it all be blamed on deer, not likely. I don't see depredation tags for coons/squirrles/or what ever. Actually based on some of the after harvest loss of grain I see it should be a requirement to have a more effecient combine. Or pay a laborer to pick the unharvested ears, goose hunting in some fields is pretty remarkable the amount of waste. I couldn't agree more, Duff.
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Jul 5, 2007 5:57:52 GMT -5
Not a bash to any of the farmers as I have great respect for most that I know, and they do work their tails into the dirt for not a lot in return. But don't give me the "We feed you" as an excuse for certain items. Most people just work for a paycheck. Rising cost of fuel, healthcare, eggs, milk, cereal....and we just get a check the same as last year. If we don't work we don't buy. If we don't buy you don't sell. Bottom line is we all choose what we do in life, try to tell me you deserve anything for a choice you make and it kind of makes me bristle. Now accepting what is offered and being gratefull for these breaks is a totally different story and that is how I see most of the farmers I know. Back to depredation hunts??? I don't care one way or another. There is tangible damage, can it all be blamed on deer, not likely. I don't see depredation tags for coons/squirrles/or what ever. Actually based on some of the after harvest loss of grain I see it should be a requirement to have a more effecient combine. Or pay a laborer to pick the unharvested ears, goose hunting in some fields is pretty remarkable the amount of waste. Nuisance Animals A resident landowner or tenant may take, using legal methods, without a permit, a beaver, mink, muskrat, long-tailed weasel, red fox, gray fox, opossum, skunk, gray squirrel, fox squirrel or raccoon that is discovered damaging property. You must report the taking of the animal to a conservation officer within 72 hours. If the animal is released, it must be released in the county of capture. The conservation officer will direct you as how to dispose of the animal. Ground hogs (woodchucks) may be taken at any time using any equipment. Landowners may take coyotes at any time on the land they own or provide written permission for others to take coyotes on their land at any time.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jul 5, 2007 7:50:51 GMT -5
You're right.
What about the waste grain?
|
|