OUT IN THE OPEN: A look at the recent deer rifle controversy

"As a Hoosier deer hunter, depending on your particular viewpoint and degree of self-interest, the sky is either falling or blue as the sapphire sparkle of a kitten’s eye."

http://www.journalreview.com/sports/article_baa82430-fb74-11e5-9956-fb65d3e0cd49.html

Reduce the amount of bonus tags, do away with the late season Doe slaughter, move fire arms back out of the rut and shorten and keep the OBR, keep rifles off the F&W properties, they are a war zone as it is come gun season .... and maybe rifles will work .....maybe

That sounds good and almost logical to me so God knows we won't do that

Too late for this year BUT you could submit these ideas for the next biennial rules amendment package.

Jack

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/7373.htm

I already gave my 2 cents worth to 'em, can you do it twice ?? I didnt touch on this rifle BS ...

First, how many states have wiped out their herd with rifles? Second, the new rifle law only allows rifles on private ground so their shouldn't be anyone on F&W properties. How about shortening the 90 plus days of bow season or limiting each hunter to one deer per season regardless of equipment used.

You can give as many ideas as you have...

One deer per season would suit me fine...either buck or Doe....I only take one or two per season as it is.... It seems like most of the complaints are from to many deer killed with firearms, you dont hear that about archery gear.... all rifles do is make it easier....try getting out and doing it with a bow and keep it under 30/40 yds..

The reason more deer are killed with firearms is because there are more hunters using firearms. My complaint is if I had 90 plus days a year to take a deer I could take a lot of deer in that very large window of time. Bow hunters obviously don't need all that time to take one deer but for some reason gun hunters who get 20 days a year in some of the nastiest weather around are blamed for taking multiple deer just because it's easier.

Here we go again.....

Usually takes firearm season two days to eclipse the 90+ day harvest total of archery/crossbow season .... and that was before the new rifle regs. Think HERD IMPACT...not days afield.

For the record, I'll take a day of "nasty weather" in Indiana during November rut over any day in October...any time.

I think The most days afield with the least Herd Impact Is the goal to be met

Everyone is worried about the herd I get that. What chaps my azz is when people start talking about shortening & moving the firearms season out of the rut. By the way the peak of the rut is usually over by the time gun season starts anyway. If each hunter was allowed only one deer a year regardless of equipment I would think that would have a bigger impact on the herd then shortening seasons and limiting bonus tags. You wouldn't have hunters taking 2 or more deer which is what most people complain about on this forum. For myself & a lot of the guys i know who hunt in November trying to balance work and family and the weather during that 16 days of firearms is always a challenge every year.

In 2010, 77.5% of hunters took 0 or 1 deer. Only 10% took 3 or more.

We have had relatively stable deer harvests for many years.

It is shameful that a few members of the legislature felt the need to waste time on this issue.

Having different firearms available will have no impact on harvest numbers.

HPR Will effect The seasons and the harvest !! The More effective the Weapon What ever it is That success determines The time in the field to reach harvest goals Im not arguing for or against
No one can say HPR will not be more effective Success will go up And with that success there will be a cost ,, Shorter Seasons IWould imagine the first to go will be Late Antlerless. If the success is Antlerless kill If it's buck kill look for shorter general Firearms
That's what I see happening

States with shorter gun seasons and out of the rut generally have a more mature and stronger buck population.... .... for those that dont think a more effective tool like rifles wont INCREASE the kill are fooling themselves and who ever they try to convince ....... I can think of quite a few years I went "buckless" even when I hunted with a firearm(shotgun/ML/Handgun) that I would have killed a buck with a rifle because of the increased range... and yes, I am one who can kill deer at those increased ranges with a rifle..If I would choose to do so... I dont, and wont ...

Well good for you. Those that choose to can and will. I get so tired of the elitist attitude and this is coming from someone who has hunted many seasons only using my bow through firearms season and all. The sky isn't falling.

I frankly don't understand how killing a deer from 300 yards away is remotely rewarding. Seriously, you could go straight from work, stand behind a tree and wait for a deer to come out into a food plot and boom. Done.

Just doesn't do it for me. To each his own though...I guess.

I have never killed a deer at 300 yards. I don't even have a place to hunt where I can see 300 yards unless I'm looking straight up or across the lake. But I sure would find the big pile of free range meat at the end of a 300 yard shot a real nice reward.

I still won't kill more than 5 deer for the whole family (4 hunters), the same as I have for several years. I might not even kill that many since my son's going away for college.

It will be fun to kill one with the .30-06.

Everyone has their own "ethics", for lack of a better term. Myself, I don't understand how killing a deer in a food plot is rewarding, even with a bow. It's definitely not for me, but I don't look down on those who do utilize them.

As for rifles, why does everyone think that you have to shoot 300 yards to use one? I'll be packing a .308 this fall, and my shots will most likely be well under 75 yards, as usual.

I was thinking it would be kinda cool to shoot one with my selfbow, one with a glass recurve, one with a muzzie, one with a shotgun, and one with a rifle. Choices are good. Freedom is good.

If the goal is to reduce the harvest amount and reduce the number of bucks harvested, maybe outlawing elevated hunting blinds/stands would accomplish both.

That may work perfect with the new HPR's ...LoL

Everyone has the freedom to make this as challenging as they want. I know a bunch of people who restrict their hunting to ground only with traditional archery equipment. That is a very fun way to hunt. I spend more time stillhunting with my selfbows than hunting with firearms. I like having the freedom to choose other methods as well. Freedom is cool.

Very well said!

Bet the deer farmers and high fence clients are singing the exact same tune... :rolleyes:

Play it safe.....hunt public land.

When this first passed I will admit I was completely against it. I have done some reading and listening to the dooms day posts on here and I really do not think it's any more dangerous at all. Statistics say there are between 700 and 1000 hunting accidents annually in the entire U.S. of which only 100 are fatal. When you compare that to the amount of hunters in the woods that's a relatively low % guys. That's the entire U.S., and sure 1 life is 1 too many, but I highly doubt allowing HPR in Indiana will raise this number. Not to mention the precision that a rifle allows. Let's face it the recoil on a .243 is nothing compared to a slug gun of any caliber! I think guys and girls using a .243 will be able to make more precise shots thus reducing lost or unrecoverable deer. Now, will they always ID what's beyond the target? Well we need to start teaching this in Hunter Ed, right or wrong its not going to change until 2020! You as a hunter have a freedom to choose to use an HPR, use it or not its our choice. Make your choice and hunt safe.

Yes, I'll be state land... and with a bow ...

I listened to this morning's Outdoor Indiana show where Bryan Poynter (Chairman of the NRC) and an outdoor writer were discussing the HEA1231 and how this happened. Seems Bryan wasn't real happy about the end run that was done BUT he plans on using a 30-30 this year.

Jack

Personally I believe a lot folks within the System supported Rifles or it would not of passed...but I also believe many within are upset in the way it happed!

My question is whether or not the newly legalized rifles will be allowed during the youth season and late antlerless season? Currently youth can use any legal weapon except handguns during the youth season now. While I may be completely wrong......The way I read the bill was that this was limited to the "firearms season" ONLY....per the "letter of the Law"

Anyone know the answer to this?

Somewhere I read that youth season & late anterless would allow HPR's. I'm sure DNR will clarify this as we get closer.

Jack

I'm not against the rule, just wish they would have allowed it on state and federal public areas as well. Whole bunch of Hoosier Nat'l forest down South. If your going to force a new law into place make it for everyone. Just my 2 cents

Yeah. If HPR isn't safe for the HNF than its not safe anywhere.