|
Post by js2397 on Nov 6, 2015 9:31:27 GMT -5
he was probably inferring you need at least 1M, otherwise this article reads spot-on as to what is happening with our regulations in place. Only a lucky (or wealthy) few have any real opportunity to manage a local herd for having a mature buck. I see this play out more now than ever. Based on what he said for the cost it would be 4.2 to 6.6 million dollars for said 600 acres. So if he is underestimating the cost of the property I would infer that he is also quite possibly underestimating the state of the deer herd in Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Nov 6, 2015 10:13:15 GMT -5
When I purchased my property + New Home, down here in Central Kentucky, in 2008; I paid cash for it, but it didn't cost me one million dollars. My suggestion to this "Don", why doesn't he just sell his property of 201 acres and buy property in what ever State suits him. Did you buy 600 acres? My home and little chunk didnt cost me a million dollars to build either but it sure as heck aint 600 acres. I own 83 acres + a Home built in 2006, with full basement. Had a chance to buy some 700 acres+ but I really didn't want that amount of land, as I am not a Farmer, or care to own that amount of land. Where I live I have access to 1,200 acres to hunt owned by my Neighbors, as there is very few (if any) other Hunters that hunt out where I live. But I rather just hunt on my own property and take care of it, at my age <66 years old> I do fairly well.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 10:48:35 GMT -5
Hey Don....you have 200 acres.....please just shut up. Give me your worthless 200 acres and I'll make a paradise. SMH....I get frustration, I get problems exists, I get neighbors can have a crazy influence on localized herds but you give me 200 acres, shoot 100, shoot just 60 acres and I can make a pocket of worthwhile deer. But then again I don't need a Booner like he discusses in the article....this country boy is content with 4 1/2 or 3 1/2 year old Popes....maybe that is the real issue with Don....who knows. He lost me though when he's complaining complaining complaining yet owns 200 acres....seriously man, check yourself, you are in the 5% of biggest land owners we got in the state, probably 1% if you lived in Michiana like I do. LOL... I figured this article would get a rise out of you. Maybe send a picture of your latest buck to Don..
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 10:52:43 GMT -5
he was probably inferring you need at least 1M, otherwise this article reads spot-on as to what is happening with our regulations in place. Only a lucky (or wealthy) few have any real opportunity to manage a local herd for having a mature buck. I see this play out more now than ever. I realize what he was inferring .... but details matter to me. What regulation change could be made that would allow more hunters to manage their local herd for killing a mature buck? The regulation that the "group" wants is this - " If we cant get our neighbors to stop shooting 8 bucks (WW - as if that happens a lot ) so that we can have more deer then we want the DNR to force them to stop." ( I'm Paraphrasing) Sounds like a liberal idea to me...
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 6, 2015 10:56:26 GMT -5
Hey Don....you have 200 acres.....please just shut up. Give me your worthless 200 acres and I'll make a paradise. SMH....I get frustration, I get problems exists, I get neighbors can have a crazy influence on localized herds but you give me 200 acres, shoot 100, shoot just 60 acres and I can make a pocket of worthwhile deer. But then again I don't need a Booner like he discusses in the article....this country boy is content with 4 1/2 or 3 1/2 year old Popes....maybe that is the real issue with Don....who knows. He lost me though when he's complaining complaining complaining yet owns 200 acres....seriously man, check yourself, you are in the 5% of biggest land owners we got in the state, probably 1% if you lived in Michiana like I do. LOL... I figured this article would get a rise out of you. Maybe send a picture of your latest buck to Don.. Where is his latest buck ... lets see it Ty.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Nov 6, 2015 11:21:44 GMT -5
LOL... I figured this article would get a rise out of you. Maybe send a picture of your latest buck to Don.. Where is his latest buck ... lets see it Ty. At office right now and having trouble uploading images for some reason....if I get it on website I'll atleast share a link to it here.
|
|
|
Post by sharps45120 on Nov 6, 2015 11:36:35 GMT -5
The area I hunt seems to have more than it's share of little/ugly bucks that will never grow into a record buck. Wish I could kill one to get rid of the genetics and still be able to kill "nice antlers" legally. And we seem to have a hard time seeing deer during gun season and later. I do wish the farmers would leave the woods and fence rows alone.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 11:43:23 GMT -5
The area I hunt seems to have more than it's share of little/ugly bucks that will never grow into a record buck. Wish I could kill one to get rid of the genetics and still be able to kill "nice antlers" legally. And we seem to have a hard time seeing deer during gun season and later. I do wish the farmers would leave the woods and fence rows alone. True...the One Buck Rule has put extra pressure on the does... How many times have we heard. "If you want deer meat kill a doe instead of a young buck."
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Nov 6, 2015 11:47:54 GMT -5
I realize what he was inferring .... but details matter to me. What regulation change could be made that would allow more hunters to manage their local herd for killing a mature buck? The regulation that the "group" wants is this - " If we cant get our neighbors to stop shooting 8 bucks (WW - as if that happens a lot ) so that we can have more deer then we want the DNR to force them to stop." ( I'm Paraphrasing) Sounds like a liberal idea to me... all your "opportunity" has big money hunters buying up as much ground as they can afford, unintended consequences. Easy to make light of our situation here when you can go to Illinois to have better hunting with shorter firearms seasons outside the rut.
|
|
|
Post by beermanbrian on Nov 6, 2015 11:55:45 GMT -5
Is this guy serious? I don't get how he can tie having to have money to get land to the DNR mismanagement of the herd. This guy has 200 acres and I'm supposed to care that he can't kill a booner on it? Sounds like he is mismanaging his own land if he can't get a mature deer to call it home.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 12:18:27 GMT -5
The regulation that the "group" wants is this - " If we cant get our neighbors to stop shooting 8 bucks (WW - as if that happens a lot ) so that we can have more deer then we want the DNR to force them to stop." ( I'm Paraphrasing) Sounds like a liberal idea to me... all your "opportunity" has big money hunters buying up as much ground as they can afford, unintended consequences. Easy to make light of our situation here when you can go to Illinois to have better hunting with shorter firearms seasons outside the rut. If you were paying attention you would know that your so called "big money hunters" we're buying up as much ground as they could afford and/or leading a LONG time before 2012.. I haven't hunted Illinois in a few years.. Even back when I did I still hunted Indiana on about a 10 to 1 ratio.. Swilk asked you a question and I'd like to know the answer too...
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 12:20:28 GMT -5
BTW - I somehow fail to see a connection in any increased opportunity and leasing and or buying hunting ground. Please explain ..
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Nov 6, 2015 12:34:30 GMT -5
Poachers are poachers, the DNR regulations don't make them poachers.
Indiana gun season is out of the rut.
Shorter gun seasons don't make things better for the state when gun hunters account for 80+ % of the total harvest. Reducing or even maintaining the numbers would be impossible.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Nov 6, 2015 12:58:58 GMT -5
The area I hunt seems to have more than it's share of little/ugly bucks that will never grow into a record buck. Wish I could kill one to get rid of the genetics and still be able to kill "nice antlers" legally. And we seem to have a hard time seeing deer during gun season and later. I do wish the farmers would leave the woods and fence rows alone. I love that the one buck rule has raised the buck age bracket in the years since....I could care less whether a 4 or 5 year old buck has 160 on his head or 120....a mature buck is a mature buck to me. I get though guys that solely care about antlers like the ability (often excuse) to get a "cull buck" tag, which personally I don't believe in a cull deer. As Woody said though, the OBR, which I like, did increase pressure on does to an extent.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Nov 6, 2015 13:38:08 GMT -5
all your "opportunity" has big money hunters buying up as much ground as they can afford, unintended consequences. Easy to make light of our situation here when you can go to Illinois to have better hunting with shorter firearms seasons outside the rut. If you were paying attention you would know that your so called "big money hunters" we're buying up as much ground as they could afford and/or leading a LONG time before 2012.. I haven't hunted Illinois in a few years.. Even back when I did I still hunted Indiana on about a 10 to 1 ratio.. Swilk asked you a question and I'd like to know the answer too... no,I don't think I will bite. I used to hunt the same type of ground as swilk and the regs didn't affect me, either. It is pointless, here.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 6, 2015 15:12:50 GMT -5
Silly me... I thought "regs" affected every hunter.....
Some folks want regs to control how others want to hunt..
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 6, 2015 15:17:58 GMT -5
Heck I have 50 acres less ground than Don says he owns and only 25% of the 600 he says it takes...but I will concede that many things don't effect me the way they effect some others. I am genuinely curious though what regulation change would matter....especially considering we have waaaaay more hunters than we can hope will actually kill a deer each year.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Nov 6, 2015 15:23:05 GMT -5
What Don is complaining about isn't just happening in Indiana. It's like this everywhere in the United States where people hunt deer.
Years ago, we hunted deer after we hunted small game and birds. If we killed a buck, we weren't asked what it scored, we might be asked how many points it had, but score? Not so much 30 years or so ago.
When you attach financial (or self) worth to an animal because of the score of his antlers, this IS what you get. Just ask anyone in Illinois and Iowa what hunting is like for "joe average" today versus 20 or 30 years ago.
Today this quest for antlers knows no financial bounds. We have people spending thousands of dollars on leases (or hunts) to try and kill a "trophy" buck. We have people spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) buying land to hunt on. Thousands of dollars on ATV/UTVs, $1,000 bows, $300.00 treestands, thousands on guns and optics. Today's new slugs are $3.00-$4.00 each and I'd hate to guess how much money is spent on food plots, fancy camo and game cameras. H*ll, people are willing to spend $40.00 for an ounce or two of doe pee....
Unfortunately for those who think they have it all figured out by spending a mint on buying (and or) leasing land, they will likely spend as much time chasing off poachers (or complaining about the hunter on the adjoining 10 acres that killed "their" trophy buck), as they do actually hunting for the expensive trophies they are attempting to grow.
After all, our obsession knows no bounds....
|
|
|
Post by parrothead on Nov 6, 2015 15:31:56 GMT -5
Good post jjas
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Nov 6, 2015 15:59:32 GMT -5
What Don is complaining about isn't just in Indiana. It's either like this now (or will be) everywhere you look in the United States. Years ago, we hunted deer after we hunted small game and birds. If we killed a buck, we weren't asked what it scored, we might be asked how many points it had, but score? Not so much 30 years or so ago. When you attach financial (or self) worth to an animal because of the score of his antlers, this IS what you get. Just ask anyone in Illinois and Iowa what hunting is like for "joe average" today versus 20 or 30 years ago. Today this quest for antlers knows no financial bounds. We have people spending thousands of dollars on leases (or hunts) to try and kill a "trophy" buck. People spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) buying land to hunt on. Thousands of dollars on ATV/UTVs, $1,000 bows, $300.00 treestands, thousands on guns and optics. Today's new slugs are $3.00-$4.00 each and I'd hate to guess how much money is spent on food plots, fancy camo and game cameras. Unfortunately for those who think they have it all figured out by spending a mint on buying (and or) leasing land, they will likely spend as much time chasing off poachers (or complaining about the hunter on the adjoining 10 acres that killed "their" trophy buck), as they do actually hunting for the expensive trophies they are attempting to grow. That, my friend, is the heart of the situation.
|
|