Regional Wildlife Biologist..

Here is the letter I sent. Thanks for all of the research Woody!

Mr. Hanauer,

The purpose with this correspondence to is to relay my, as well as everyone I hunt with, opinion's regarding the proposed deer rule changes. We believe that if the plan of the DNR is to reduce our deer herd that these proposed changes take a step backward from that goal.

*Shortening Firearms Season- The theory that more deer will be killed with less days afield is based on information from other states, that via there own investigations, showed that shortened seasons "may" increase harvest. Less days afield will not be beneficial to the goals of hunter success, hunter recruitment or hunter retention due to conflicts with employment and family obligations that already exist in our current set-up. This will only be magnified with shortened seasons.

*Shortening Muzzleloader Season- The same issues with a shortened firearms season also apply here as well.

*Moving the Start Date of Firearms Season- Deer Harvest Data shows, that as the opener gets later in the month, the harvest drops, it does not raise. Woody Williams has done some legwork on these figures and they, as well as a discussion by Indiana hunters can be viewed here: huntingindiana.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=deerhunting&action=display&thread=33140

*Failure to Allow Crossbows as a Legal Weapon for Anyone During Archery Season- Crossbows are an excellent recruitment and hunter retention tool, as well as a way to increase harvest numbers. Allowing crossbows for hunters aged 64 and older as a retention tool, is too little too late. Data shows that the average age for a person to stop hunting is 55. A full nine years before they would be allowed to use a crossbow. Once gone, those hunters won't be coming back 9 years later. Please see the below quotes from some of Woody William's research.

-Last year, for the first time, Michigan allowed crossbow participation in the archery season. Participation in the archery season was up 7 percent. This is after many years of a serious decline. The archery harvest went up 10.5 percent statewide. It went up an amazing 19 percent in the southern Lower Peninsula where the herd is the biggest. Isn’t that what we are after? More dead deer in heavily populated areas?

See – detnews.com/article/20100624/SPORTS07/6240390/1435/sports07/Michigan-likely-to-put-crossbow-on-equal-footing-with-bowhunting-for-deer#ixzz0ruWXsmN9

-In Pennsylvania –

The 2009-10 hunting seasons marked the first time crossbows were legal in statewide archery deer seasons for all hunters. In those 19 WMUs outside of the three urban areas, the archery harvest increased 13 percent. The proportion of the archery harvest taken by crossbows in the 19 WMUs increased from 15 percent to 30 percent. Crossbows have been legal in urban WMUs of 2B, 5C, and 5D since 2004.

See - www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/game-commission-releases-2009-10-deer-harvest-estimates-88846977.html

-Maybe Mike Tonkovich, Ohio’s deer biologist said it best when he said:

"We're expanding seasons, increasing bags to ridiculous levels, we're hunting backyards, we're offering incentives and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on processing subsidies to try and encourage the harvest of additional deer," Tonkovich told an audience at the Archery Trades Association meetings in December.

"We're removing every regulation hurdle, every logjam possible to try and encourage hunter participation. About the only thing left is to harvest the deer for the hunter. And yet at the very same regulation meeting, we are resisting giving hunters a choice (of crossbows) out of fear that we'll upset our traditional archers."

Crossbows also could help generate much needed revenue for the IDNR. You can view more on this subject, as well as hunter discussions here: huntingindiana.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=deerhunting&thread=33144&page=1


In closing, these proposed rule changes have little to do with managing our deer herd, and everything to do with special interest groups lobbying to impose rules to increase antler size, and/or average age of bucks harvested. Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response. Have a good day!


Rod DeRoo
Decatur, IN

I sent an email to the regional biologist for my area late last week when this all first hit.

Hope it helps!

How is that? I could have swore the state gets all of their supposed information from our wildlife biologists?

the depredation permits are passed out through the district biologist and that imfo is I am sure passed on, they develop conservation plans for us, they advise what we need to improve our habitats. put on and help with field days and seminars but as a liaison between us and the NRC I Just don't think that link is established IMO

"Depredation Permits"
That system has been renamed & is also in the process of being changed per INDR Biologist Roger Stonebraker.
Some sort of "Landowner Self-Issue of Permits System" will be put into use. Your regional biologist will come out & physically confirm that the minimum amount of crop damage ($500? or $600?) has occured before the permit process starts for any given landowner.

Is that going to mean that once damage has been verified, the landowner may determine how many deer may be taken? With soybeans hovering around 10 bucks a bushel, it won't take much damage to make $500 worth. Is Roger doing the changing or the trophy hunters doing it?

And where would that be?

Same as File 13?