Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2010 18:15:16 GMT -5
Wrong again...the DNR has no choice but to issue dep tags, it's better than the alternative of letting them shoot deer without them like in the older days. At least now they have some record of what is shot. Crop damage complaint are used as a method of zoning the counties for number of antlerless allowed. IF you idea was put in place, the legislature would have it reversed in a New York minute and then control of the deer herd is gone down the drain.
From what I've found, some farmers would rather have crop damage than letting slob hunters on their property. Some have allowe hunting at one time or the other, but someone screwed the pooch. Some of them lease because of what hunters have done in the past. Maybe your one of them, you seem to have very little respect for landowners and farmers try to make a living off their land. Try thsi, net time you get a pat check from where you work, get it cashed and on your way home, throw 10% of it out the window for the deer to feed on. See how you like it.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Aug 2, 2010 18:33:47 GMT -5
deerman,
You'd better listen to what Timex is saying. If the DNR does not issue the nuisance deer permits the farmers will do one of two things and neither of them are very good for deer hunters:
1) They will shoot them anytime that they please and as many as they please. Does S.S.S. mean anything to you?
2) They will go to the legislature and the legislature will set a season for the farmers to shoot deer. It would probably start about January 1 at half time of the big game and go through to when the everyone is tooting horns and saying HAPPY NEW YEAR! IOW - anytime that they want..
As far as farmers allowing hunters (NRs or residents).. they can or they don't have to.. their choice. Last I looked we are still the home of the free and as free persons we have that choice what happens ON OUR OWN PROPERTY.
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Aug 2, 2010 18:56:24 GMT -5
deerman, You'd better listen to what Timex is saying. If the DNR does not issue the nuisance deer permits the farmers will do one of two things and neither of them are very good for deer hunters: 1) They will shoot them anytime that they please and as many as they please. Does S.S.S. mean anything to you? 2) They will go to the legislature and the legislature will set a season for the farmers to shoot deer. It would probably start about January 1 at half time of the big game and go through to when the everyone is tooting horns and saying HAPPY NEW YEAR! IOW - anytime that they want.. As far as farmers allowing hunters (NRs or residents).. they can or they don't have to.. their choice. Last I looked we are still the home of the free and as free persons we have that choice what happens ON OUR OWN PROPERTY. Here is an Idea read my sugestion about 3 or 4 posts up and then my reply to Timex not just Timex"s poat and part of what I wrote . They do have a choice and plenty of deer will get shot wonce they agree to be paired with a or some hunters to shoot those deer that are now being waisted andland that is likely posted . I farm And we hunt I have no pitty for farmers who do not allow hunting or hunt them with thier family legaly its their choice and they cry in the dinners like little girls until a hunter speaks up or a landowner that allows hunters or his family hunts the farm ground that they spend their lives working like ours has for 125 years! . Not buyin either of what you are saing its not that bad I KNOW!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2010 19:04:38 GMT -5
Quick question...How well did the "call a hunter" list work last year.....how many did you let hunt? Know anyone that got a call???
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Aug 2, 2010 19:49:02 GMT -5
In defense of the hunter/farmer list. The six farmers, and uncountable number hunters I talked to about this program had never heard a peep about this program. This was last year when I asked them, so maybe people are more aware now? It's too bad the DNR didn't charge a one time $5 fee for hunters to sign up on the list to help pay for advertising costs so hunters and farmers alike would have had a better shot of learning about and utilizing this program.
|
|
|
Post by omegabl on Aug 2, 2010 20:36:49 GMT -5
Quick question...How well did the "call a hunter" list work last year.....how many did you let hunt? Know anyone that got a call??? I signed up as a hunter and got one call. The farmer said he had 4 days open to bow hunt..all the other days were full. He had 2 people hunting in the morning and two in evening, every day but 4. Needless to say I passed on the opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by woodmaster on Aug 2, 2010 21:32:35 GMT -5
Deerman,
I really think that if you owned a farm you wouldn't have the same opinion. You wouldn't want the state telling you how to manage YOUR property.
|
|
|
Post by thecommissioner on Aug 3, 2010 2:18:37 GMT -5
Still waiting on someone to answer the 10 questions correctly! Still waiting on you to tell us the prize to see if the effort is worth it.
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Aug 3, 2010 5:58:31 GMT -5
Deerman, I really think that if you owned a farm you wouldn't have the same opinion. You wouldn't want the state telling you how to manage YOUR property. Where did I say that the state was telling Us how to manage it The farmer still has ever right to do what he wanted before .And I do own a farn Sorry do not call ne a lier .The farmer under my plan has the right to participate in the program or not and he can hunt itr or not or still heve whoever he wants hunt it .But instead of Dep tags that allow the deer to go to waist in the off season. He would get the opperatunity to be introduced and have a or some hunters do the deer shooting and at any time can tell them no thanks its not a locked in type deal .I fail to see where that is telling us farmers how to manage our land As I said I do not lie skippy .?The home farm is right at 100 acres. Thankou very much and I was running fence just yesterday . But who are you to question me anyways??
|
|
|
Post by woodmaster on Aug 3, 2010 7:38:23 GMT -5
Deerman, I really think that if you owned a farm you wouldn't have the same opinion. You wouldn't want the state telling you how to manage YOUR property. Where did I say that the state was telling Us how to manage it The farmer still has ever right to do what he wanted before .And I do own a farm Sorry do not call you a liar .The farmer under my plan has the right to participate in the program or not and he can hunt itr or not or still heve whoever he wants hunt it .But instead of Dep tags that allow the deer to go to waist in the off season. He would get the opperatunity to be introduced and have a or some hunters do the deer shooting and at any time can tell them no thanks its not a locked in type deal .I fail to see where that is telling us farmers how to manage our land As I said I do not lie skippy .?The home farm is right at 100 acres. Thankou very much and I was running fence just yesterday . But who are you to question me anyways?? First off my name isnt "skippy". My name is Mark Williams and I don't agree with your original post...that's who I am. 2nd off, I never called you a liar. I said "I really think that if you owned a farm you wouldn't have the same opinion." That's was just my opinion. Congrats on owning a 100 acre farm. Would you be willing to let strangers hunt it if the state gave you an"incentive"? Sounds like the state would be "sub leasing" farms. 3rd...when the state gives you a "tax break" or "incentive" not to lease or deny hunters, in my opinion, they are indirectly telling you how to manage it. This is a public forum and people are going to disagree. I believe you took my post wrong. There is no reason to get personal.
|
|
|
Post by jgrimm on Aug 3, 2010 21:57:43 GMT -5
Can't We all just get along. ;D
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Aug 3, 2010 22:22:51 GMT -5
Explain what the difference is in these two senarios: 1. A NR leaser vs. a R leaser? 2. A leaser "locking up" a tract of land vs. a non-leaser "locking up" a tract of land? 3. The color of money that a NR has vs. a residents? 4. How a NR has more of a chance to lease land vs. a resident doing the same? 5. A tract of land managed for hunting by a NR leaser vs. a tract of land managed for hunting by a resident hunter, leaser or not? 6. Incentives offered to Residents for shooting more does vs. incentives offered to NR to shoot more does? 7. The dollar amount you spend "in state" on deer hunting vs. what a outfitter/leaser/land locker might spend. Don't post the amount....just what number you think is larger? 8. The specific amount of money you, as a resident, spend directly to the DNR on licenses and tags vs. what a NR spends. 9. How the rule changes effect you as a resident more than they effect a NR who spends 6 times the amount that the resident spends (or more if they have a LTL). 10. The deer manager vs. a common weekend deer hunter. Who does a better job benifiting the resource including non target species? That's 10, get those answered and there will be some more spin offs. Get them all correct and there will be a prize offered. Timex, Some folks will never "get it" regardless of how many times it smacks them in face!
|
|
|
Post by rwtaxidermy on Aug 4, 2010 2:16:40 GMT -5
WOW alot of various opinions here, some with very good points and some not.
I am not saying all farmers or land owners would have to participate. Only those who choose to do so, and not all land owners are hunters.
I have access to 300 acres of farm land for hunting, 12yrs ago the farmer wrote up a 2yr lease with a local business owner, upon expiration of the 2yr lease the farmer had been offered more money from a group of guys from the big city than what the previous leaser was willing to pay so again the farmer had leased to a new group for the next 2yrs.
4yrs of leasing and the doe population had gotten out of control, why , because the lessees were only shooting bucks. the last lease was a group of 5 people, they cut open fences, left gates open and the cattle escaped, and 1 guy told the farmer he could not wonder around on the property while they were deer hunting, and even went as far as telling the farmer they are in a lease so not only do they have right to deer hunt but also turkey hunt the land......this put an end to lease and hunting for almost 4yrs.
4yrs ago I was asked to come in and Bow hunt this property to thin the herd, he made several things very clear, #1 A Lease is and will always be out of the question, #2 the deer need thinned, if caught passing them up he would find another hunter to hunt the land and my access would be lost.........plain and simple!! But this doesnt solve his problem, why because all of the neighboring farms have banned hunters from hunting their land, why? again because of the same scenerio as above, when they leased or allowed people to hunt some think they have all rights to the land....the areas that are leased or do not allow hunting are very over populated with deer and the state continues to jack up the bonus antlerless for these areas...still doesnt solve the problem...This is where farmers or land owners can be given an incentive of some sort by the state, again "ONLY IF THEY CHOOSE TO ACCEPT OR PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM", to allow some form of reduction to the deer herd, "JMO" if they choose not to participate then the insurance companys should step in and increase property insurance to help cover the avg. cost of deer related vehicle accidents in these areas.....
|
|
|
Post by rwtaxidermy on Aug 4, 2010 2:36:58 GMT -5
Explain what the difference is in these two senarios: 1. A NR leaser vs. a R leaser? 2. A leaser "locking up" a tract of land vs. a non-leaser "locking up" a tract of land? 3. The color of money that a NR has vs. a residents? 4. How a NR has more of a chance to lease land vs. a resident doing the same? 5. A tract of land managed for hunting by a NR leaser vs. a tract of land managed for hunting by a resident hunter, leaser or not? 6. Incentives offered to Residents for shooting more does vs. incentives offered to NR to shoot more does? 7. The dollar amount you spend "in state" on deer hunting vs. what a outfitter/leaser/land locker might spend. Don't post the amount....just what number you think is larger? 8. The specific amount of money you, as a resident, spend directly to the DNR on licenses and tags vs. what a NR spends. 9. How the rule changes effect you as a resident more than they effect a NR who spends 6 times the amount that the resident spends (or more if they have a LTL). 10. The deer manager vs. a common weekend deer hunter. Who does a better job benifiting the resource including non target species? #1. No Difference! #2. No Difference! #3. No Difference! #4. NR Has Better Chance! #5. NR will usually only harvest bucks and a resident will harvest either! #6. Incentives for Resident will be cheaper than NR #7. Outfitter or Leasee will be Higher! #8. My amount will be considerably less! #9. Since I only Bow hunt it really does not affect me much! #10. Of course someone who manages is going to benefit more!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2010 7:54:55 GMT -5
Close, but you missed a couple. Good try though #1. No Difference! #2. No Difference! #3. No Difference! [glow=red,2,300] #4. NR Has Better Chance![/glow] someone on the internet miles away has a better chance to approach a farmer than someone who has hunted the property for free for years or a local person.....doesn't make any sense how your answer is possible [glow=red,2,300]#5. NR will usually only harvest bucks and a resident will harvest either![/glow] I can prove that is not correct, but it is true that NR's don't/won't kill many at $150 for the first tag. So you answer may be 50% correct? #6. Incentives for Resident will be cheaper than NR #7. Outfitter or Leasee will be Higher! #8. My amount will be considerably less! #9. Since I only Bow hunt it really does not affect me much! #10. Of course someone who manages is going to benefit more![
|
|
|
Post by rwtaxidermy on Aug 4, 2010 8:19:22 GMT -5
Close, but you missed a couple. Good try though [glow=red,2,300] #4. NR Has Better Chance![/glow] someone on the internet miles away has a better chance to approach a farmer than someone who has hunted the property for free for years or a local person.....doesn't make any sense how your answer is possible [glow=red,2,300]#5. NR will usually only harvest bucks and a resident will harvest either![/glow] I can prove that is not correct, but it is true that NR's don't/won't kill many at $150 for the first tag. So you answer may be 50% correct? #4. NR has a better chance IMO for many reasons. (#1) Most NR looking to lease are usually a group of hunters...could be an outfitter, hunting club, etc...with a large sum of $$$ to their disposal for lease land....(#2)Dont know about where your located but in my area the "Local Guy" is barely getting by week to week, so dumping a large sum of $$$ on a lease is out of the question, opening the window for NR..... #5. KEYWORD.."USUALLY"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2010 9:22:00 GMT -5
#4. NR has a better chance IMO for many reasons. (#1) Most NR looking to lease are usually a group of hunters...could be an outfitter, hunting club, etc...with a large sum of $$$ to their disposal for lease land....(#2)Dont know about where your located but in my area the "Local Guy" is barely getting by week to week, so dumping a large sum of $$$ on a lease is out of the question, opening the window for NR.....
I know some guys that can't afford to get on a portion of a lease, you can find them at the counter of the store buying scratch offs and smokes sometimes. Even a lot of NR's are hurting last year and still today. There is no difference.....none. Most of the money woes stem from prioities and dedication to the sport. And I'm fully aware that some folks aren't as gung ho about hunting as some others but it's not limited to residents of Indiana.
As for most NR's being in a group, again not always. That's why I do clubs, to suit the needs of individuals needing hooked up with a group....both residents and NR's.
#5. KEYWORD.."USUALLY" [/quote] Yep, same with residents. Some usually kill does, some don't
|
|
|
Post by steve46511 on Aug 5, 2010 0:54:10 GMT -5
I'm sure it's not universally true but a lot of the leases I KNOW OF are guys hunting "for that big one".
That is beginning to backfire here in a few places. I've gotten access to areas not before open to me and might have 2 others soon simply because I WANT TO SHOOT DOES too.
While not a direct quote, this is the response I've gotten from three local landowners.
"I'm getting pretty fed up with "trophy hunters". I let them in to SHOOT SOME DEER yet year after year they shoot a nice buck, if they find one but if they might only shoot one or two does. I NEED SOME DEER SHOT!"
Part of the problem too is a large majority of the landowners are NOT hunters and it takes some gently offered information that "the more the merrier" is not necessarily going to take out the most deer either.
Some I am politely asking for permission to hunt, making it plain I DO want a nice buck but I WILL take out multiple does if the chance arises......AND offer meat to the landowner out of deer I take from his land if he would like some.
The "new" Hunters Helping Farmers" program didnt get much use last year but I think that may grow on some farmers in time. Lots of information on what the hunter wants, his experience, etc is available to the farmerd to sit down and go through to pick one or two.
The down side I feel with this program is that most farmers wont "bother" till they think of it RIGHT before season when they are VERY busy......or maybe even DURING season when they see damage or herds milling about. In time I think they will make an effort to contact hunters before it's time to harvest the crops but being new, they just dont think of it right away.
A lot of areas are "tied up" with the landowner's grandson, neighbor, friend of a friend etc whom want the experience of hunting without other hunters around. Most landowners will oblige until the number of deer is out of control. I know LOTS of places like this and the "trophy hunting" story above covers most of the same areas.
It's going to be a slow process, I feel, for landowners to make that choice between attempting to give long time hunters of their land what they WANT .......or.........open it up, at least for a couple weeks, to others to take multiple deer out.
The few places I've recently acquired are PURELY because someone had refered me to the landowner due to his disgust with current hunters putting trophy hunting first and foremost and the landowner's desire to take multiple deer out is put on the back burner.
Since other hunters ARE hunting there I attempt to discuss with them the best methods where we can all hunt with minimal interference from one another. Sadly, the few I've spoken with were bound and determined to "have it all".......forever and two ended up losing the priviledge to hunt because they made the mistake of verbally attacking the landowner because "it was THEIR hunting area". They learned quickly that it was not only NOT theirs, and their actions made them unwelcome back.
ALL of us would like to have undisturbed deer to hunt and to do so exclusively but that is becoming the case for those only with enough money to lease, as mentioned.
SHOULD YOU HAVE exclusive rights or a lease.........be forewarned......WHAT THE LANDOWNER WANTS......needw to be first priority for a successful long time relationship. Grab some buddies and have a "doe hunt" in late season, share photos with the landowners and offer help and / or venison. Make sure YOUR BUDDIES are welcome first. You may have to explain why they are needed should the landowner have what he feels to be a serious crop damage situation.
An improvement here would be if the IDNR and biologist would offer WINTER depredation permits for more than trees, nurseries, hay etc and include Indiana's MAIN crops of soybeans and corn.
It was only this month I was informed by a state bioligist that corn and bean permits were "only offered during the growing season". Politely, I informed the biologist that FEW true hunters would shoot summer does with fawns and while I realized the "logic", summer hunts were, IMHO, a waste of paper to print tags on. Literally NO hunters I know will shoot summer does........for any reason.
The biologist and I agreed to disagree on the subject of deer taken out in Jan being "corn and soybean" depredation deer. Growing season or not, it's still my opinion that deer ALIVE in January WILL EAT beans and corn thru the summer. It's not like they move out of state or anything. (ok, off my soapbox now, LOL).
I agree, there has to be a functioning method to encourage farmers to let hunters in but as it has always been in the past.......it's OUR actions or lack of action that will speak loudest to the landowner.
A buddy and I are joining "forces" so to speak, and discussing with local landowners attempting to offer landowners a couple or maybe 2 more hunters whom will not only hunt for their wallhanger but will put equal amount of time into taking a predetermined amount of deer out for the landowner's satisfaction.......within reason.
Unfortunately some farmers want them ALL taken out and it takes a lot of patience and information to convince the landowner that not only is that not possible, it would also be beyond what I and my friend would agree upon (even if legal).
Hopefully , this situation will improve but as the herd grows, as does the landowner's frustrations.
It may be well worth incorporating a few "doe hunts" in your future seasons to share with landowners. Nothing I've found yet will match it for producing a happy landowner and bring out the welcome mat for future seasons.
God Bless
Steve
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2010 7:09:11 GMT -5
Dang a guy shoots a nice buck and one or two does and gets damned for not doing enough? What's up with that?
What I've seen most is that most landowner/farmers don't know what you shoot, nor do they care. They know that bucks eat their livelyhood as well as does. And that 90% of them don't want deer meat in return for hunting rights. If they did, they would ride a tractor with a high powered rifle in tow and gets some.
Not a lot of difference shooting does with fawns on the ground vs. fawns in their belly. Those on the ground just take two or three shots instead of one.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Aug 5, 2010 7:22:25 GMT -5
Dang a guy shoots a nice buck and one or two does and gets damned for not doing enough? What's up with that? What I've seen most is that most landowner/farmers don't know what you shoot, nor do they care. They know that bucks eat their livelyhood as well as does. And that 90% of them don't want deer meat in return for hunting rights. If they did, they would ride a tractor with a high powered rifle in tow and gets some. Not a lot of difference shooting does with fawns on the ground vs. fawns in their belly. Those on the ground just take two or three shots instead of one. You must know some of the same farmers I know.
|
|