Response for IWDHM?

Boy, my Facebook feed is filling up with these posts from the IWDH group. I have to admit, without any response from the men at the stakeholders meeting, they have some points that should at least be addressed.
Anyone here involved in the meeting care to answer or engage in a civil discussion about their claims?
Not trying to incite an argument, but like many others I have some questions and would like to know which side best represents my interests.

Give some examples of questions you think need answered!

Please tell what is being claimed also...

Ferb - empty your mailbox please.

I watched the videos of the meeting and it seems like the IWDHM members there weren't happy with the process. They were offered a seat @ the table but refused as they wanted the "group" to be able to respond, not one person.

As far as the quotas go, it would appear that those decisions have been made. The IWDHM gave their input, but apparently aren't happy that their suggestions weren't fully adopted.

It really wasn't a stakeholder meeting according to the CO that was asked that very question ..... it's all in the video that was edited for public viewing!

Anyone know when,where,date& time of next IDHA Meeting is
Also I would like to become a member but can't seem to find answeres to these wuestions
Thanks

Troll... Troll .... Troll your Boat!

ferb55,

I would like you to contact the Public Relations Officer at IWDHM Group. His name is Gary Walters, RN. He left a message on your Facebook messenger; as well as a voicemail on your association's phone. Most of the officers of IWDHM Group have been banned from this site, so the few speaking out here can say unchallenged whatever they desire. Most of it very inaccurate, even every comment above.

IWDHM Group has met with US Senator, Governor Holcombs Senior Advisor, State Senators and Representatives in both Natural Resources Committees. They have been assisted by Dr. James Kroll and the Vice Chair of Wisconsin's Natural Resources Board appointed by Governor Walker. They have meet with many DNR staff confidentially, with two or more verified sources saying the same thing. They have published on their Facebook page details, including the entirety of the unedited video of the stakeholders meeting hosted by the DFW on 5/8/17.

There is many videos explaining everything in detail that IWDHM Group has found out. There is a post of the email chain from the DFW calling this meeting on 5/8/17 a stakeholders meeting, that they themselves say a stakeholder is any person or group that has interest in the whitetail deer. The public was not advised of this meeting. However, the emails from DFW clearly state it is a stakeholders meeting. They have posted the emails. Again just screen shot without any editing.

In the response to DFW in those emails the IWDHM Group stated he would do his best to notify every stakeholder of the meeting though the few at the "table" knew about it before hand, IWDHM Group was not made aware of the venue of the meeting until 5/4 at the end of business for a 5/8 Monday meeting, that should have been publicized for everyone. The IWDHM Group posted on their page once they had the information.

Matt Barton the founder of IWDHM Group, advised that everyone in the "audience" was a stakeholder that he alone would not sit at the table as they can represent themselves at this public meeting. There were county chairmen and members of the County Deer Advisory Councils IWDHM Group developed, as well as IBA Rep, and two others not affiliated with IWDHM Group.

Just to catch your eye, one post shows the presentation of the urban deer program in video. How the DNR gave Beverly Shores $55,000 dollars for a confirmed 2014 3 deer dead, 2015 12 deer dead, 2016 they gave $25,000 of the $55,000 but as of 5/8/17 they had no idea of the number of or if any deer were taken in the 2016/17 season. Five months after completion of the season, they did not have the "information yet". How hard is it to report how many deer were killed at least 5 months earlier if you are reporting off to the stakeholders of Indiana. There is so much details of mismanagement within our DNR. IWDHM Group is exposing it. This very post here will more than likely be deleted prior to you seeing it. It is very scary what is happening with our resources.

Please check your Facebook messenger and your office voice mail in case they delete this or ban me. I will also post some specific emails or posts answering people's questions about what is going on in deer management.

No .... the scary part is a group of FB bullies want to take over the antlerless quotas!! That's the scary part !

No need for negative comments Brew. I asked when the next IDHA meeting was, time date place. This is the forum for the IDHA, and a reasonable place to ask a reasonable question. Should be simple if the association "exists" any longer. It is this childish banter that gets us no where. I have not been a IDHA member for years, but I didn't leave a debt of any kind whatsoever. That is defamation of character, has nothing to do with anything other than a distraction from the real deer management problems at hand. .

You should practice what you preach.... look in the mirror the picture should get clearer!

Brew, we are advocating for County Deer Advisory Councils that have all stakeholders in a county Hunters, non consumptive users, agriculture, toursim, transportation, disease specialists, forestry. Anyone that as an interest in deer. Then each county makes a "recommendation" prior to quota's being determined. Simple. DNR can still override recommendations if scientific reason to do so. Although all deer are managed currently for social carrying capacity. CDAC's do exactly that. Typical behaviour from you. IWDHM Group has said for two years CDAC is our goal. WE facilitated Kaz , Vice Chair of Wisconsin's NRB who facilitated with CDAC's in Wisconsin to a meeting with Director Clark and Director Reiter. Final agreement in meeting was IWDHM Group would facilitate 6 pilots (though we had 10), and the DFW would use the recommendations of the counties that had pilots they did not. Simple facts. So how exactly are the "FB Bullies" attempting in any way to take over antlerless quota's. No we are attempting to facilitate CDAC's in each county that are free by the way to allow a portal for all stakeholders to have a say and keep the deer herd stable from year to you. You know all this quite well, you, as always attempt a distraction from the true facts. I am not engaging in an argument with you. I would also like to say I have never attacked you, like you are attacking and calling names. It would seem the moderator of this forum should remove you for name calling and intentional misleading statements in response of someone asking a legitimate question, that we have video proof of the answers we provide. UNEDITED VIDEO that you have publicly stated it was edited. In no way was it edited. I really don't understand what a FB bully really is by the way????

Brew we are trying do find out facts about the next IDHA meeting, period, and answer some general questions in regard to the gentleman's question. Can you please allow us to do that now without your rude interruptions and name calling. By the way I was just on the IDHA FB page in the upper right hand corner, it still says it is a nonprofit association. Sorry it is not. It is no longer a corporation, dissolved 1/14/98, it has now bank account, other than a personal one dba IDHA, it's tax records show the same officers for several years now. Just saying before we even go there for validation for the gentleman's question. WE reach almost 300,000 some weeks, have a following of 19,000 and official members per our bylaws approximately 2,500 individuals that filled out an application in person or online. Join up Brew it is free, but no alcohol at any of the events we manage a booth at. So may not be able to help us much, but you are welcome.

And you wonder why so few take your group seriously...

Exactly.....laughable at best!


BTW Tim..... thanks for invite to group but my security clearnce at work doesn't allow me to join a group that has a convicted Felon as a PR person! Thanks...

We posted this a few days ago on our FB page to answer a gentlemans question:

Thank you for calling your regional biologist, glad he listened. Great, lucky you even have one since there are now only 10 instead of 21. Did you call the Governor Eric Holcomb, legislators, news media, social media. Post your constructive ideas here? Well here is just a little we have done in the last three years.
• Spend $30,000 out of our pockets , just a rough estimate.
• Formed a group with bylaws we didn’t even need to jump through some imaginary Hoop to get a seat on the FWCC, that is basically worthless and been the same few talking heads for decades now. Pounding their chest feeling important, but have you or anyone you know even know about the FWCC, what it is, been asked your opinion on the issues, been briefed after the fact on any issues???
• Manned booths at Hunting shows and spoke at those shows.
• Developed a group that reaches towards 300,000 people some weeks, 19, 000 Facebook followers, more than either Governor, and between 2000-2500 members that have filled out a membership form for inclusion in the group at no cost.
• We have spoken with most CO's and regional biologists in this state. As well as Dr. James Krolll whom formulated the idea of CDAC's in Wisconsin. We have talked with Wisconsin DNR. We have talked with Governor Walker's' appointed Vice Chair of their NRB. We facilitated him coming to Indianapolis to meet the DNR and DFW Directors with us.
• We have written millions of words. Contacted all kinds of media and outdoor venues. Written Letters, Emails, Facebook Messages with most Legislators and two Governors.
• We have met with DNR-DFW twice.
• We have met with many legislators, driving all over the state for a few minute to one hour meetings.
• We have met the Governor's Senior Policy Adviser, but that was a ruse, because we have in house information from DNR Staff and CO's that She wanted us to tell them the names of our confidential informants, that are all verified with second sources. We have these same people telling us we are spot on on everything we say. Jeopardizing their very livelihood at jobs they love.
• We have requested information under the freedom of information act in 2016 and sorted through thousands of pages and graphs.
• We were informed confidentially of in house emails that will enlighten you and others. We have requested them under the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, after already reading them from our informants but desiring a copy to publicize. Just last week we had to file a complaint with the PAC office, as we still have not received on piece of information requested.
• We piloted 10 County Deer Advisory Councils in 10 different counties, involving all stakeholders at the expense of hundreds of man hours. All these meetings and such were vacation time and economic loss from our family budgets to accomplish this. The DNR DFW Directors agreed to use the results of these pilots and then did not.
• The stakeholders meeting we have posted in part and in whole so many times I cannot even count. The emails with the invitation, and our response. Three deer stakeholders sat at the table and was part of a preconceived presentation for the next 3-5 year management plan.
• Did you get an invitation, email, see it on the news or in papers, see it on DNR DFW DLE webpages or social medial. So, when we asked a legitimate question of whom are the people at the table representing and approximately how many deer hunters were being represented at the table, the director had his outburst to distract from answering the simple question, that all stakeholders had a right to know.
• Their own presentation and own testimony to our questions state that they use hunter and landowner surveys in their science. Though as of that day, 5/8/17, they had not assessed data from those surveys done in 2013 or 2016. Not only did they not assess them to see how much impact was being done in the reduction management plan the last five years, they still had not assessed them for the next 3-5 year plan they were presenting that very evening. All out of their own mouth.
• They talked about an urban plan for overpopulated deer in Beverly Shores near the Dunes. They to date had threw $55,000 at the problem, and at the time of the meeting on 5/8/17, they could only confirm 15 dead deer in 3 years with $55,000. 15 !!!!!!!!!! Joe Bacon from the IDHA, one at the table in talking about the program said it was a good idea. It is in the video. Unedited. This would fund CDAC's for all stakeholders in all counties for 50 years to a century. So now we are pointing all this out for all the stakeholders that were not invited to the meeting or represented in any way for the preconceived management plan.
• The three at the table were thanked for being there and their input and working with the DNR DFW five years ago to develop the reduction plan. How many know about that, or where invited to that stakeholder meeting, or were briefed after that meeting? Have even now any knowledge of that meeting?
• They have no data at all from forest depredation by deer!
• They manipulate the deer/vehicle collision data to make sense of harvests already complete. Not apples to apples in per billion or million miles traveled in the areas.
• They do not have accurate crop depredation data!
• The harvest structure in their SAK model is not existent, due to electronic check in without biological assessment.
* If you correlate the quota.s for total land mass and deer habitat in each county and the quotas set, there is no correlation what soever, even statistically.
*One of the board of directors has a farm in Parke County. All the counties around it were reduced to a 4 or less. Parke county was kept at an 8. This after the most vocal of the group, used Parke County as an example of the overharvest after years of EHD outbreaks and such. Is theree a correlation. Why does the counties around Parke with similar geopgrahy and deer numbers all have quota's half of Parke????
• They have no idea of prevalence of disease as hundreds to thousands of deer die due to disease that are never checked by the DNR even if reported.
• They have no population estimates in any geographical location county region or statewide period. They also state they never will. Nor do they have any goals as to what population levels they desire in any county.
• If you look at their presentation they state the objective was to maintain the herd levels with <3 bonus antlerless permits per county. They got the nod for approval from the “stakeholders” at the table all three of them. Which this would end the late antlerless season, that was put in place temporarily for herd reduction. Yet when they came out with the Quota map the state is covered with quotas of 4-8 retaining the late antlerless season. So with no science just playing number for a foregone conclusion, they set these quotas.
So if informing the public about this, and so much more we have uncovered along the way, we are wrong well Tim Freeze thanks for your opinion. IF that is really your name. We have caught and the talking head at the table have admitted to using fake names to spread their misinformation via the internet. Then lying and saying we banned him. No we banned a fake account of a fake person. He has commented on our page many times, though usually misinformation, we have not banned Mr. Bacon or anyone else. So if this is you Joe, let us know, you don’t have to hide. We cannot hunt, lol. We have fooled people to say the same things from all walks of life over our entire state, lol. Keep up the good work Tim Freeze, but if you do not know what we are doing and where we have been, educate yourself first please. You can go back for three years of posts and see it all. We informed every step of the way brother. To the best of our ability all posts are in individuals own words and name. Of course it has been hard with people like Mr. Bacon using fake accounts instead of standing up for his leadership of Indiana deer hunters, that represent maybe 200 people. Is not longer and organization, nor nonprofit per the Office of the Secretary of state. The bank account is in his name dba IDHA. Ironically he is the one that stated we must have bylaws and a membership to exist. We have that in writing too, but he cannot follow his own rules. He is still sitting on the FWCC after resigning 5 years ago, but per their memorandum of understanding if a group leaves the FWCC it has to repetition which it never has. Also by their own admission they market their “association” saying they have a paid lobbyist as being a part of a larger organization. However, when asked that is not true either.

Interesting documentation posted as a picture with the above post.

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1616333835044959

So the truth comes out...

You came here to attack Joe Bacon and the IDHA... again...after spending the last couple of weeks going after the Director of F&W...

And you wonder why those in power don't seem to take your group seriously....

How about acting in a professional manner instead of throwing a fit when you didn't get your way?

+1.... thanks jjas!

Interesting documentation posted as a picture with the above post.

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1616333835044959

OK not going to clutter up your forum. Here is the link to our FB page. Just reposted the emails defining this meeting as a stakeholder's meeting. Along with repeating some other posts regarding the stakeholders meetings. As well as the links to see the Stakeholder meetings unedited only in two parts was too much video to do in one on YOUTUBE, but still entire video of Stakeholders meeting. Despite what Brew is trying to do with a distraction. Video speaks for itself.
https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/

LOL, JJAS and Brew, what attack. We spoke the truth, that is all, to defend ourselves against blatent lying by your group. Also if you click the link one of the posts above you will see the attack from the president of the IDHA, well before anyone at IWDHM Group spoke to anyone including Bacon and his group. Not arguing with any of you to facilitate a ban, as you have so many others, so you can spill this vomit our of you mouth, or in this case keyboard, that is totally misleading, incorrect, and has no value whatsoever in deer herd management. Thank you for proving our point quite well.

Well, if nothing else, you can go back to Gary and tell him you came here and stirred the pot... :rolleyes:

LOL, JJAS and Brew, what attack. We spoke the truth, that is all, to defend ourselves against blatent lying by your group. Also if you click the link one of the posts above you will see the attack from the president of the IDHA, well before anyone at IWDHM Group spoke to anyone including Bacon and his group. Not arguing with any of you to facilitate a ban, as you have so many others, so you can spill this vomit our of you mouth, or in this case keyboard, that is totally misleading, incorrect, and has no value whatsoever in deer herd management. Thank you for proving our point quite well.

Not stirred the pot, gave correct information, with video proof. Thank you for reacting as we figured you would.

Here is part of an email from IWDHM Group:

This has been like a junior high dating game. DFW, AND OLD GROUPS CAME OUT ATTACKING US FROM THE VERY START. Then called foul when we defended our position: poor implementation of Indiana statute, waste of the funding they do receive, or pointed out lack of science we still can prove with this new management plan you seen in the video. It isn't rocket science, or science at all period. Anyone with common sense can see it for themselves. How do they plan a new management plan off of surveys they have not even completed in 4 years. No information on forest depredation, true crop damage reports, no true demographics of the population, no numbers of deer vehicle collisions based on billion miles traveled.. . . . . . Little cart before the horse no matter how PC you slice it. The entire deer harvest summary is full of errors and manipulated data working to support a preconceived conclusion, PERIOD. That is not the scientific method. The old groups pretending to be representing all deer hunters when it is same handful of guys. You both state you know that as well as every political alley we have spoken to. It is like an old schoolmate hitting you but the teacher walks in only after you start defending yourself. Then the one that started it pretends to be a victim. The video of the stakeholders meeting clearly shows it how we handled ourselves and how they handled themselves, as well as the discrepancy as to what they proposed there that night and what quota's were actually used. To say they dropped 30 counties is ridiculous. Again, it is wording to satisfy the politicians who only look at the surface and listen to a few words. They are pro's at it. We have pages and pages of dated documentation to support what I am saying here, all of it.

Secondly CDACs are not about one group. They involve all stakeholders and in a perfect world the DNR would control facilitating and administration of CDACs. They have a stakeholder meeting that had four reps at the table. One forestry and three wildlife. No one else. We were thirty strong in the room. Everyone of us a stakeholder. CDAC's are that every stakeholder invited in a timely fashion with all groups, farming, deer, tourism. . . . you know the drill. Then every stakeholder that wants to be heard is heard and report goes to DNR. Simple, and basically free. To say one group wants to control it is just ludicrous BS. Right now one man sits in the Director of the FISH and Wildlife's Chair controls all of it with no accountability. To even hint that one group wants to control it is a **** cop out. If you looked at anything we ever wrote, or listened to Wisconsin's Greg Kazmierski, co Chair of Wisconsin's NRB that drove down, at his own expense, to inform you exactly how a CDAC works and how much cheaper it is. Anyone can look at the video, and I would beg them to tell me how $55,000 of OUR MONEY being spent on the harvest of 15 deer in an overpopulated community makes sense at all. Give me a couple dozen arrows and a couple three days with my bow and I can accomplish that for free, or better yet you could make money off charging me to participate. What a novel idea. I can assure you I can kill that many deer with a bow up there in 2-3 days.

Then the $55,000 they already spent plus the $25,000 they are going to throw at it again this year, would pay for the CDAC's for 50 years. So now we are talking throwing away a minimum total of $80,000 dollars of sportspersons monies. I am sure the Department of Interior would frown upon the current uses of the PR funds along with the license fees. You are not stupid, you know exactly what I am saying. However, because a group of very intelligent rednecks, speak up and speak out we are not being nice enough. Hog Wash. If they would have been smart, all they had to do at the start would have been nice, let us on the FWCC, we would have believed they listened, our following would not have even grown, and we would have ended up the same as the old groups in the end. We knew better, and so did they. These people have known me for thirty plus years. They know I will not be a part of corruption or cheating the deer hunters we are to represent, period. You have no idea of the corruption, but I do. As soon as they seen me, they knew we would tell the truth and involve the public. They tried to silence us before we ever really began. See how that worked out and they have not seen anything yet. There is a country song there. YOU AINT SEEN NOTTIN YET! People fighting for their family will never give up. Sooner or later, money or not, we will prevail.

Thirdly everyone can see the Director of DFW's outbursts. Not to mention the crap he pulled off camera. However there was enough on camera. As well as every single government official we have talked to from legislators on down to Conservation officers have stated they cannot work with the ******* including you two senators. Matt didn't come to the table because we had 30 +/- CDAC COUNCIL members there from across the state that were stakeholders as well as anyone else at a semi-secret Stakeholders meeting put on by the DFW. We even posted the email chain about the scheduling and notice of the meeting. The stakeholders meeting was not a meeting at all rather a dictation as to what they were going to do, though even that proved to be false. Period it is all there in the video. You are not that stupid to say that because we are negative, Matt didn't go to the table, or IWDHM Group wants to dictate DFW deer management, we shot ourselves in the foot. Every bit of negativity is based on fact with confirmation of sources, period. That is bullshit. Flat out. That might not be politically correct cheery speech to confuse and talk around the issue; however, it is bullshit and you know it.

I thank God our forefathers did not live in this politically correct world that doesn't care about individual citizens rights and responsibilities. I seen a video clip of one of Senator Tomes town hall meetings. Some of the people there did the same thing as Reiter and the old groups at the table. 3 people, period, saying they were the voice of the deer hunter and wildlife enthusiast. THREE THREE THREE. Just as in that town hall meeting, Senator Tomes called them out. Talked about Tom Brokaw's book THE GREATEST GENERATION, how those of us that work hard, give respect to everyone's rights (as you can see in the videos as well we did). The outbreaks were from the Director only. So like Senator Tomes we were pissed off, are pissed off, and will be pissed off until this wrong is righted. We still have the courts if we can figure out how we can get the money. We will. We also have the power of a lot of people, and I have a lot of outdoor writers contacts all over this country from my work in that field. Actually I edited a book for the DNR DFW/IDHA for twelve years for no pay or compensation. NONE. Two Governors, wrote forwards to those books for me in each edition. Both Governor's praised how sportsmen and the DFW worked together to get things done. One Governor even come to our annual family picnic by helicopter one summer. We have lost that. I already know M R James has an article ready for publication on a National level. It will not take me long to organize all I have written for regional and national magazines as well. We have some pretty powerful people ready to help in publication, online publications, and outdoor TV. That is not a threat. However, don't talk to us like we are children that must play nice when the people we pay to do their job do not! Reiter called Wisconsin DNR Peers and said I personally was a nut job and he would take care of me. Straight from Kaz and with other things straight up the ladder in Wisconsin Executive branch. The IDNR and DFW lie, misappropriate funds, misuse funds, manipulate numbers and attempt to throw it out there as science using a couple of big words that people don't understand, just think OH WELL it is the DNR they know what they are doing. I agree they know it and are doing just the opposite. They evidently forgotten who they serve, and who any state bureaucrat should answer to. Then who are we do trust and believe in for the majority of middle class families. Who advocates for us. **** they have been taught they can do whatever they like, no one can take them to court to fight it. Well I think the deer farmer proved that wrong, but at what cost to us citizens in that litigation process. We to will find a way.

You know the Greatest Generation had a strong influence of many in my generation. Some of us raised our kids with those same principles and values. We call a spade a spade. We are not going to sugar coat blatant mismanagement of our resources. We are not going to stand by and be apathetic to the lies, that are destroying our way of life that we worked **** HARD for. I am just a Redneck with PTSD, many may think I am just a hothead. Nope I am just not apathetic, don't trust bullshit, and smart enough to recognize such. You are correct most today are apathetic towards government. They are in debt, work all day, get their kids from daycare, feed them, tuck them in, only to get up the next day and do it all again. Over and Over and Over. They save their vacation for that week or two of hunting with their family and friends. Most don't have time to fight the DNR, they got to feed their kids first, most don't have time to even vote. That what you guys are elected for to represent your local citizens. represent us, fight with us for something bigger than ourselves, something to be remembered by, maybe not in a personal sense, but in the sense individuals will know the generation before them proved to be great stewards for their resources. Some may think it is just a **** deer. No sir it is a lifestyle that many of us enjoy, that is historically, biblical, and morally ethically right. Right is on our side.

We in good faith spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of manhours pulling of not just 6 but 10 pilots. They did not even use them. Except reduce a few in thirty counties without significantly making a dent in the problem for even the thirty. Well if you are not going to introduce legislation, they are not going to keep their word, we will have to come up with something else. We will. I does piss me off as well, that we jumped through every hoop, time after time, just do this one more thing. We did it at costs in money and time, that took away from our families and responsibilities. All because we see what is going on, we are trying so **** hard for our kids. Then the DNR tells you well we reduced 30 counties by one or two bonus tags, and they are not going to not relinquishing control to us, which you **** well know was never the plan. So they say what I can type in one sentence and we speak the truth about everything negative or positive, it is the truth, so that makes their results look like a bowl of cherrys that don't need to be accountable. Even the old groups little forum of a handful are saying what we are. Look on the DNR LAW ENFORCEMENT FB pages, I tagged you in one. Look in the comments sections of their posts releasing the county quotas. But hey we all just a bunch of negative rednecks. We are not stupid either. Thanks for the hoops you assisted in putting before us, evidently knowing full well you would not take on the DNR.

quincyhunter ????

I would ask you to explain the above, but I really don't care.

Have fun on facebook...

crap, thats hard to read...just who the heck is this guy ??

He just throwing his usual dung hoping it sticks somewhere! It will blow over...

Thank You Mr. Bacon

August 5th at the Indiana State Fair Wild Game Cookout 9 am

Wheres Dew!! Lol

I'll bet that is going to be an "interesting" day....

BTW, I've watched that video that is continually being posted on facebook over and over and over again. Did the director show his frustration? Sure, but given the circumstances I can certainly see why. Was it as heinous as some would have us believe? In my opinion, no it wasn't and I can't see why members of the IWDHM are still complaining about and apparently trying to get the guy canned over it...

It seems like a complete and utter waste of time and resources to me...

Time too ban this Troll

If you don't agree with their agenda they ban you from the FB page so it seems like everyone is for it

Kyle don't bring that up... LOL

Just telling the truth. lol

Enough of the BS!

Let's start with the supposed "stakeholder meeting".

It was not advertised as a "Stakeholder meeting" but a "stakeholder group meeting". It has been common for more than 2 decades IDNR met with "groups" to discuss management ideas.

IDWHM demanded to have multiple members present and IDNR made a decision to allow them there. Did anyone one else get an invite???? NO, it was not intended to be a public meeting at that point. IDWHM was invited to set at the table like the other invited guests, they decided to set back and become a martyr.

IDWHM had tried to get the legislature involved and was successful for their CDAC drive. Once they demeaned and insulted IDNR employees the legislators have divested themselves of the IDWHM.

Now let;s get to Tim Moore and Gary Walters, NEITHER of these two individuals stole any money from the IDHA, PERIOD! What they did participate in was spending of about $3000.00 that the IDHA did not have funds to cover. Notice how both ofthem will say "I never had control of the checkbook", correct, but as a board member you spent money you did not have.

I was elected president of the IDHA, I was shooting in an archery league when a gentleman came in and presented the delinquent bills to me in front of friends and strangers. I paid those bills out of my personal checking account, the IDHA paid me back over the next couple of years.

That is the story as it happened both past and future.

While the IDWHM thinks they can "bully" their way into management ofthe deer herd the IDHA will continue to work as a partner.

Joe Bacon President IDHA

Further.........

IDWHM wants to claim the IDHA is a sham and does not exist. They could be right, we had a Treasurer who did not file corporate documents correctly. But I can say with certainty that income taxes have been filed as a "non profit" with both State and Federal agencies EVERY year. The IDHA has filled out the proper corporate documents and paid needed fees to correct any errors.

I want anyone who views this to look at what the IWDHM is doing, they demean any group that has worked with IDNR in the past, they question the integrity of our present and past biologists.I thought we hired professionals to manage our wildlife?

Finally, Tim Moore says he wants to be a member of the IDHA,it wont happen. Tim wants to disrupt our mission, not on my watch.

"martyr"....now thats funny and true in many ways!

I Think the Group has been given enough rope that they have hung themselves
Demanding that they be heard and the suggestions presented be the final say I just cannot understand ?? I'll stick with the "Old Groups " and the Prooven Leadership !!

The BIGGEST problem that group has is there PR person.....remove him and there path goes foward!

It's no secret that I've had my differences with some of the positions the old groups have taken in the past. My biggest issue was (and still is), that I don't want a small number of people purportedly speaking for me (and yes, that includes CDACs).

I would much rather the IDNR and F&W find a way to poll hunters, landowners, business owners, non-hunters, etc online with an ID number of some sort that prevents multiple posts from individuals and/or groups. I've watched the videos from the meeting (that is continually being posted and complained about by the IWDHM) and the biologist said they are working towards a system that will allow for more input from citizens.

IMO, that's what many want and I personally feel that's what we need.

The DNR is definitely on the right path...here's an email I sent to Dr. Joe Caudell right after that meetings.

Here's what I know,Joe is a good dude that has worked a long time to improve deer hunting in Indiana. He has sacrificed his time and money to get to tje point of influence he and his organization have. While many may not completely agree with their stance on all issues, it is better to work with them than against them. The IDNR has done an awesome job of makingour state a great whitetail destination. I'm hopeful the legislature will continue to see the DNR as more than capable of making wildlife resources and keep sound management in charge of decision making instead of emotionally driven groups.

Mr. Bacon
Please post your Bylaws sir
I don't remember this being your private club when I helped write those Bylaws 30 plus years ago !!!!
Or that the IDHA was private Club
You are the Founder
But you called a man at the Boat sport and travel show a liar that his son didn't harvest a buck
Remember sir we are all human
All hunters we forgave and helped you grow the IDHA and all you did was throw us under the bus and treat us as if we were common thieves and unethical hunters!
And sure I could say when I took over as President from you there were several unpaid bills
That was the norm back then because most membership dues were due around the Boat Sport and Travel show !!!!
So much for your bad mouthing of myself and Gary
Remember Joe our Fathers took you hunting to lots of places
I even remember you leased a place right across the road from one of our Hunting spots !!!!!!
Joe I am not here to fight you or anyone else ( well Brew might be the exception) see you can't see the forests for the trees you've been at along time done Lots of Great things !!
But when you say IWDHM pushed for all those folks to be there , well we did send an email to Mitch and said we would be bringing the CDAC chairs and hoped that would be okay
These folks had the pulse of the 10 pilot counties they knew more than we did see Joe
Gary and I don't want a seat at the table we want 92 seats for all counties to be involved IWDHM basically goes away after that
I really don't see your problem with this it is managing deer population in a smaller area instead of an entire state it also gets the voice of the hunter localized from the county grassroots remember those days Joe Grassroots is what the IDHA was founded on Kids helping out where some thought they shouldn't butbecame leaders and better hunters than there fathers and forefathers
Think about it

Thanks
Tim Moore

Tim,

While you say your group wants 92 seats @ the table, I would rather strive for a method that allows for all hunters/non-hunters to let the IDNR know exactly what they want/think, not what 20 people in any particular county that are members of a CDAC say they want for the county (or counties) I hunt in.

Your group hasn't, and never will speak for me and that is the message I (and others) have sent to everyone from the Governor on down...

jjas

There is no membership in a CDAC it's for all hunters and non hunters deer enthusiast deer watchers photographers citizens to decide what's right in your County

IWDHM
JUST WANTS CDAC IN ALL 92 COUNTIES
We want all citizens and hunters of a County to participate
IWDHM
DOES NOT WANT A SAY AFTER THE CDAC's ARE IN PLACE
ITS THAT PLAIN AND SIMPLE

Thanks

Tim Moore

AMEN...+1

I don't want a few members of ANY county CDAC purporting to speak for me. Just as I didn't want the old groups speaking for me when prop 1 was being debated.

And FWIW, even if I agreed with some of the positions of your group, I can't support it due to your tactics.

Jjas and Brew

You two enjoy
Because if you watch Stakeholder Group meeting there were only 3 count them 3 sitting at the table speaking for you me and everyone else in Indiana
Wake up
You two can't see the Forest for the Trees either

I don't want three people agreeing on what I want to happen in a conference room in Indianapolis which is exactly what happened!

So give me 20 rednecks in 92 counties sending a recommendation to Joe Caudell than what happened

Perhaps re-reading what I posted earlier would make things clearer for you (as far as my position goes)...

I don't want a few members of ANY county CDAC purporting to speak for me. Just as I didn't want the old groups speaking for me when prop 1 was being debated.

So as far as seeing goes, I see just fine...

Have a nice evening...

LOL

You don't want anyone speaking to DNR except You??

That's Funny

😂😂😂

Sounded more like he can speak on his own behalf same as anyone else.

Exactly, I've never felt like I had no avenue for giving my opinion or feelings to the IDNR or anyone else for that matter.

Joe Caudell is going to see this is expanded even more, excluding no one and placing ZERO between a hunter and giving his opinion to the state, that is better than anything I've seen proposed.

I also have faith in Joe being able to understand opinions are measures of emotion more than fact sometimes...tough to measure but very importanr.

+1....

I never said that. I understand what the IDHA and other groups have tried to accomplish over the years. And while I completely disagree with the tactics and attitude of your group, I understand why you are trying to have your voices heard.

What I'm saying, is that I don't care for others purporting to speak for me and many of us want to improve the existing abilities to speak to the IDNR directly.

Based on what he proposed during the meeting, my hope is that Joe Caudell can bring forth a better way to communicate with residents. And I agree with Tynimiller that doing that would definitely be better than anything else I've seen proposed.

Tim how's come IWDHM bans people from posting if they disagree?

To be fair to Tim, he is not someone with moderator powers on their Facebook page. At least that is my understanding. That lies elsewhere.

oh heck, I just want to know what happened at the state fair with this guy ;0)

wait what did I miss?

look at the bottom of page 2 ..

If I may, clearly there are enough emotions and drama circling this topic. Some good info and some bad. I have followed, unfollowed and followed again the IDHWM and their posts on FB. I have disagreed with a few tactics and maybe even some of their conclusions, but one question or line of questions that has been posed and to my knowledge ignored is this.

How many deer hunters/deer "stake holders" does the IDHA represent and how do they gather that information?

Was there a survey taken, results compiled and those results shared with the IDNR?

Is this an organization with a common goal reporting to the government or is it an outdated group with little input and simply acts as a conduit for a few to influence the many?

Thoughts?

Why not ask Joe yourself? He posts here under the name of jbwhttail.

I know who Joe is (I have zero animosity to him or the IDHA) and I thought I just did.

It doesn't matter how many IDHA members there are IMO. I'm not one, nor plan on becoming or ever was.

Whether that figure is 1 (Joe himself) or 10,000...to me nothing changes.

My apologies...Your post didn't read as if it were directed @ Joe...

Perhaps a PM to him (Joe) would get the response you are after in a more expedient manner?

Exactly.... that should be a DNR question if they think a certain number is needed!

My wife watches "Big Bother" and "Dance Moms" for her weekly drama...Me? Hoosier Hunting Deer Hunting section.

#getyourpopcornready

Ok guys, so to be clear. I don't really care for the way the IDWHM handled their movement. Well intentioned and truth be told they make some fair points. But in the end, they came in with a hammer and expected everyone to take their word. Just doesn't happen like that.
To my point above though, If the president of an organization sits on a board or attends a meeting and is introduced as the representative from that organization he/she is clearly representing the members of his/her group. Numbers don't really matter here, although it is clearly implied here that the president does have a significant number of members and has his finger on the pulse so to speak of those members. However, in this instance are the actual "deer hunters of Indiana" being honestly represented? I would ask how? Even without numbers, when was the survey distributed and completed? What was the rate of return? what were the results? How do we expect to have any real influence at the state level when what we really are is an unorganized group of hobbyists who truly cannot even unite themselves?
I am all for the IDHA in some form representing me at the state level. But, to have one person claim to be that voice...my voice..without every attempting to reach me is not it.
I am well aware of who the president is and choose not to use his name here only because it doesn't matter who is in that position, only that the position further the agenda/comments/desires of his or her membership.
So again...was there a survey taken, were the results compiled and reported and how many active members does the IDHA have? These are simple, objective questions with no slant either way.

jjas, thanks for your suggestion, but I prefer this question be posed, debated and answered publicly.

It's why I created this site.

Ferb.... could you explain the topic of the survey you are asking about and why would've there been a survey done?

What decisions/rules where made at this meeting that you wasn't in favor of?

While I can appreciate the time and effort that the IDHA and IWDHM have given, it makes zero difference to me how many members the IDHA has or how many likes the IWDHM has on facebook as I don't want either one speaking for me and I've made that abundantly clear from prop 1 to now.

I hope that Joe Caudell can figure out a method of allowing ALL citizens (hunters and non-hunters alike) to have direct input with the DNR and let them know what we like and don't like about the present regs, our perceived state of the deer herd and new reg proposals in the future.

Sure. IF the IDHA represents the deer hunters of Indiana in planning and strategy meetings, I would think a questionaire or survey with questions regarding opinions on harvest numbers, legal weapons, season dates, etc would be helpful when speaking on behalf of the states deer hunters, or the very least the members of the organizastion. The president of the IDHA was clearly introduced at the "stake holders meeting". (whatever that was)

That doesn't seem to be crazy to me. Seems like standard practice.

Do you disagree?

so umm wtf? [img]https://i.giphy.com/media/11vsrRFqhjOcKI/giphy.webp[/img]

Doesn't anyone trust anyone any more ??
Inre I know Joe well enough and have followed the IDHA since the 70,s
I've got a pretty good idea how the IDHA and Joe Stand on most issues .I Don't have to be involved or go to every meeting The ones I think need me I attend The others I trust those going from the groups I belong to state a view I will agree with
I Trust IDHA to take a stand I can live with that's all there is to it

I am happy that you trust the president of the IDHA absolutely with your hunting. Frankly, I do trust him to a point. As I recall, I was against the one buck rule, BUT several years into it I have certainly changed my opinion. I believe he and the IDHA were for it.
However, I do take a peek at the checkbook every once in a while even though I trust my wife and she handles our finances.
So, for me, its not so much a trust issue because I don"t know the people making decisions and recommendations on my behalf.
Surely, there is a way to take the pulse of the hunters in this state AND compile AND analyze AND consider that information.
Make sense?
Or is just allowing allowing a very select few with no real constituency ok?

Ferb.... where have you seen a "few" make a decision on deer hunting rules and the DNR not take public input on the subject?
Please do tell.... maybe I am missing something!

DNR has done random hunter surveys by mail over the years, using the mailing address info on file from license purchasers. I've actually gotten one or two of those surveys. They also provide the on-line input form when there's a significant issue up for consideration. The most recent one I recall participating in was the center-fire rifle issue. That was before our illustrious state legislature took over and over-rode the DNR's decision on that one. But they seem to take input from all-comers whether it is groups or individuals, and consider the various sources of input. I highly doubt they are naive about this in any way. You can bet though, that the various DNR powers-that-be have their own personal preferences on these issues, and those preferences will always be meaningful toward any final policy.

Not exactly what I am asking about. I have the right and the ability to give my input to the IDNR directly at certain meetings. I get that.

My question was simply does the IDHA have a mechanism for polling its members and relaying that information to the people who do make decisions. OR does the president simply relay his agenda and assume it is what everyone else wants?

The simple answer and the one that most organizations in this country would give is that they value the opinions of their membership and seek to enlighten themselves and those hunters outside their membership by representing the opinions/desires of their members in one united voice. Not sure the IDHA actually exists anymore.

I have my answer. Thanks for engaging in a civil manner. All my best.

Why hire a biologist that has specialized in Deer Management And insist tha a bunch of Laymen call the shots an then throw a fit when you don't get your way I've fill out a small game survey for years it Ask buck ,doe ,fawns and how many there are How long it took you to see them what county hunted morning , Evening Predators seen and ask for comments
The problem People don't return them , hate to admit it but I've been one
Join a group you can align with and give them credit for being your mouthpiece or get envolved with some other outfit
About all I can see is constant praise and the explaining on the virtues and good things about canned hunting and Deer. Farm I don't agree with that and don't want to be even remotely associated with that kind of reasoning

Look
I really don't care what you guys think but the Three at the table helped make the antlerless quotas by agreeing with DNR
Joe has said he has learned how to get along with the DNR
Good oleBoys Club as you would like to say
The Three at the table represented less than 750 folks

IWDHM HAD in TEN COUNTIES OVER ONE THOUSAND HUNTERS NON HUNTERS AND NON MEMBERS TAKE VOTES IN THEIR PROSPECTIVE COUNTIES !!

I get it jjas Brew Throwback you don't want people speaking for you but Three do so and have for more than Thirty Years!!

Kinda like congress
Think about it

Ferb, for the record, I totally understand what you're asking. I agree that in order to speak for hunters you probably need to know what it is hunters want, right?
I'm burnt on all this stuff...and you know why because I told you...

But I think things are looking up here in Indiana. I'm seeing FAR more deer in my travels than I've seen in a few years. I bet, not withstanding bad weather and or a ton of corn standing this fall, that this years harvest numbers will improve. I really think EHD thumped us good. I know it did around me.
I think if you're lucky enough to still have a decent place to hunt, or are dumping thousands into Basecamps early retirement fund...you will have a great deer season this fall.

Also
Hunter survey not been looked or used since 2013
Landowner since 2008
At time of meeting in May

So who they listening to you ???

You want to work for the IWDHM have @ it. I can't support the group due to their attitudes and tactics.

There is a better way and hopefully what the biologist @ the meeting was talking about will come to fruition in one form or another.

That's YOUR version of how things works ... many other know different!
Thank God...

And here's the thing jjas would you know about what the Biologist said in said meeting if IWDHM and the CDAC's chairmen weren't there and one of them filming that so called Stakeholders meeting
That one of the Three said is this going to be a working Group ????
What's that tell you??
Greg
What have you ever done for the good of deer hunting ???
All I've ever said was do something get the your voices heard if you don't like IDHA IWDHM IBA
Get more involved and not here behind a screen name because you don't want folks to know who you are !

Think about it
When was the last time you were in front of anyone downtown trying to make any type of change
As a matter of fact who beside Joe Doug Gene
Matt Gary David Tim Kyle Rick Steve Kevin John Chad
Tried to make a difference in deer hunting for Future Generations and that our Heritage of Hunting is carried on

Think about it
Tim

Instead of complaining and lecturing people to "think about it" why don't you take your own advice and go back to your group's leadership and ask them if they realize that their inexperience and lack of tact has caused many of their problems.

Think about it....

+1... Best post in the thread!

Think about it....

Here is the Email in Question!!

On Apr 13, 2017, at 3:45 PM, Marcus, Mitch wrote:

Back in 2010, the DNR/DFW met with stakeholders and agreed that together we should focus deer herd reduction in a strategically targeted manner to more adequately balance ecological, recreational and economic needs of the citizens of Indiana. We reviewed lots of data, had good discussion and ultimately worked with the Natural Resources Commission (NRC) to make deer regulation changes. We promised each other and the NRC that we would get together 5 years after regulation changes, and evaluate. It is time to gather again and evaluate. We are proposing an evening meeting in central Indiana on May 8th, 10th, or 11th. Please respond to me, by COB next Tuesday (4/18/17), on your availability for those evenings. If we choose a date that you are unable to attend, please attempt to find an alternate to represent the Indiana Whitetail Deer Herd Management Group.

Mitch Marcus, Wildlife Section Chief
Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife
402 W. Washington St., Rm W273
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2781
317-234-4914 (W)
317-232-8150 (fax)
The Division of Fish and Wildlife manages all fish and wildlife species for the citizens of Indiana. Fish and wildlife management and public access are funded by fishing and hunting license revenue, donations to the nongame fund, and also through the Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Programs administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Find out more information about fish and wildlife management in Indiana at www.in.gov/dnr/

Now then which one you You has agreed to make changes with DNR ??? Who you BREW YOU JJAS

Mitch,

Thank you for the invitation. Wen. or Thurs., May 10th or 11th, would be best for our board. We all have varying schedules. The board will attend as possible, dependent on what day and time is decided. Monday May 8, would be the worst day for us. We will work to have as many of our board members attend any day.

FYI, our entire board, dependent on scheduling, will be attending, as well as any regional reps, County Deer Advisory Council Chairpersons, or Council members will be welcome to accompany us. From the very foundation of our GROUP, we have made it perfectly clear, there would be no individual ever "representing" IWDHM, nor would there be any money involved in the way of dues and so forth. With that said we will also record the meeting to share with our Group. Even with the very strict rules of the FWCC (that not one person in 7 CDAC meetings has heard of) we had the one representative at the table, while many of us were there texting him information in real-time.

We do this, to prevent what our older deer groups/organizations have become, whereas such a very few represent themselves and their personal agenda, without polling their members or giving any post meeting briefing to their members. We will pray you would understand this, and welcome all that would desire to attend, and be open to a record of the meeting that will be available to all stakeholders that participate in our group. Total, unbending transparency.

We also do not consider this to be a replacement meeting with DNR leadership regarding the completion of our CDAC pilots. We would also pray, that in a meeting regarding the future of deer management in Indiana, CDAC's will be part of that discussion from the start.

Matt Barton


This was our response
Never ever did we get told No that no one else could come
We also explained In the email not one person would represent IWDHM

From the original correspondence sent by Mitch Marcus....

If we choose a date that you are unable to attend, please attempt to find an alternate to represent the Indiana Whitetail Deer Herd Management Group.

When the original correspondence was sent to you, it clearly states that if you are unable to attend, please attempt to find an alternate to represent the IWDHM. AN alternate (as in one), not a whole group. Instead of doing that...the group took it among yourselves to reply, (and I quote)... .

Then...@ the meeting the IWDHM was asked to send one person up to join the group and the IWDHM wouldn't do that either. Instead the members of the IWDHM chose to interrupt the meeting over and over again.

So once again, your group's lack of tact and the inability to work within the framework presented, resulted in your group not getting it's way, and since then it's been nothing but a temper tantrum on your facebook page about how the director was "mean" to all of you.

Think about it....

JJAS
You hit the nail on the head It was NOT their meeting they were looking for a fight before they even set foot in the door there was nothing done other than the director Trying to stay on topic and remain in control of their meeting not Theirs . They should have sent the one rep ask for recorded the meeting and then reported back to the group imo

No Fight Just Transparency as stated
Question still has yet to be answered how many stakeholders did the Three at the table represent ?

What constitutes a Stakeholder of the entire state of Indiana ?!
We did not go looking for a Fight
I was unable to attend but was on the web watching and listening!
Joe Caudell will be as good as his bosses allow him yo be his hands will be and are tied
As in the video he wanted the entire state to have three or less bonus antlerless quotas !!!
That didn't happen now did it
Fight **** we all should be fighting for Future of Hunting but


You Gentleman have a Great Weekend

Quincy Hunter

I don't remember him saying that, but for the sake of argument, let's say he did. How many deer do you figure that would have "saved" last season?

Give me a bundle and three bonus tags and I could kill six deer with my county being a 3. If a person hunts multiple counties (I hunt in 3), I could kill far more than that. The reality is, if a person wants to kill 6 deer (and last season that was only 198 hunters in the entire state for a total of 1188 deer) they will just spread the harvest out and use multiple equipment/seasons/counties to do so.

BTW....if you add up the number of deer killed by hunters who killed more than 6 deer last season it only totals 1272 deer harvested by 160 hunters in the entire state.

So other than doing away with the late antlerless season, what will that really accomplish?

Where did anyone at the table say they where representing anyone other then there self???? Go ahead and post up the quote and video to back the claim!!

I am sure If the IDHA had free memberships and a like button for anyone in the world to click there membership would triple....and of course be in partnership with Deer farmers would push them over the top! SMH

jjas... save some deer/Does from getting killed.... we dont need the late season kill the does season... period... what we also need is a state limit per hunter ...

As I stated previously....

Give me a bundle and three bonus tags and I could kill six deer with my county being a 3 (meaning no late antlerless season). If a person hunts multiple counties (I hunt in 3), I could kill far more than that.

Your point about a state wide limit doesn't appear to be on the agenda of the IWDHM. Going after the number of bonus antlerless permits is. But for the sake of the discussion, where would you say that number should be and what do you base that on?

And don't forget that even if you did away with every bonus antlerless permit in the state (which isn't going to happen), hunters could still kill 4 deer each.

The above reasons are a part of why I think they are wasting their time going after the bonus antlerless permits/late antlerless season, as the effect on the overall harvest would likely be minimal.

I can understand and to a degree (being a bowhunter) see no point in the late antlerless. That said it has become an incredible time frame for a lot of land managers to make antlerless harvest decisions. It is after the onslaught of firearms season where the vast majority of the harvest occurs...and land owners can see how their specific localized doe population was affected and act accordingly.

I personally rarely will go after a second doe until after gun season...and I hunt 3 (arguably 4) very different localized deer herds in my area with little to no overlap (especially in doe families). However, I do this in part knowing that should numbers really show not many got harvested I can go the safe and swift route in late season, put bow down, grab ML and harvest a doe on late season food.

I'd argue personally it is not the season itself that is the issue...it is the small number which abuse it...I mean incredibly small if we start putting figures on it.

As for the statewide hunter limit...okay but at what? How do you tell a guy who owns and invests a ton into deer habitat work that between his 100 acre farm in county "x" plus his 45 acre spot he lives at in county "y" plus his 500 acre private farm he has access to one county over from "y" in county "z" that he can only take 2 does and 1 buck (the most common thing I tend to read).

I've only one year I think (two maybe if a younger year one is slipping me) have harvested more than 2 deer. So I am not speaking to any of this with any biasness at all.

Another thing to remember is just how miniscule the amount of hunters exist each year that harvest say 3 or more...go further to 4 or more and the number is crazy small. The difference made to the herd by removing that TINY figure would barely be measurable and hunters wouldn't even see a difference in sightings IMO....shoot some by me know swear the deer are extinct...others view them as numerable as mosquitos

Sorry to rain on your parade there Ty, by late antlerless, does are yarded up or herded up for the winter. Times you will see 50 together, but it will not be the fifty in your area, they may come from miles around and give a false sense of population, though you may not have a single deer the rest of the year. This is fact, anyone that hangs in the deer woods as much as you should know this. We have one area that consistently brings all ages of bucks from up to 10 miles away for that winter food source. That is fact.

Secondly, you all keep playing numbers to benefit your agruement. No since even going there. In either 2010 or 2011, hunters taking 4 or more deer amounted to 38,000 deer.

Even Dr. Kroll says, you cannot ever know exactly how many deer you have, impossible if not behind a fence, tagged, collared, or marked somehow. You may think you know, but you never do Dr. Kroll, little more expert than SMALL ACRE HUNTING BLOG. . . .

Valovich, dead on. The idea is to save some does and give our kids the same opportunities we had. Period. However, you all want to act like some back yard biologists. LMAO. The DNR even says they are managing for social capacity. CDACs lets every single person THEMSELF< JJAS< speak for themselves and come to an agreement between farmers and hunters, photographers and foresters. . . . . So all get heard, a concenses it obtained in front of every SELF JJAS BREW. . . The recommendation goes to the deer biologist, who then uses it, UNLESS there is a scientific reason not to. ALL FREE.

Big problem here you all are not seeing in overthinking this to make only you 3-4 correct is we just need to save some does. Most people are trained to not kill what they don't eat. So DFW puts big numbers to give the impression there are lots of deer and need to kill as many as possible. There own words to present a impression to harvest more in those counties. Secondly, they override guilt going against what our father's taught us. OH YOU DON'T HAVE TO FEEL GUILTY IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO EAT IT. DONATE IT TO THE HOMELESS, OR WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER PROGRAM TO SHARE WITH PETA PEOPLE THAT DON'T HUNT BUT WANT HEALTHY VENISON. SO DON'T WORRY KEEP KILLING AS MANY AS YOU WANT, UNLIMITED RESOURCE.

Valovich has it, just save some **** does for our kids, use some common sense and tell hunters the truth. Most hunt a couple days a year and don't have an idea about biology or anything else. They trust the DNR is managing them correctly. **** they want us to have HPR's and all these tags 4-8 bounus counties, late season during herding up period on food sources. Heck yes, lets get us one of them their AR15's and kill us some of them their deer.

CDAC's JJAS BREW Valovich Ferb, anyone gives you all as your SELF and opportunity to give real hard core valuable input into your areas. You are too dang dumb to see it. Flat out, or your ego's being Jr. Biologist has clouded your minds. Brew by the way, Joe Bacon clearly states he is at the table as President of the IDHA. So where are the meetings, were did they ask any members, were have they shared about the stakeholders meetings before and after? Where Where Where? You have been following so long you all have lost sight of the big picture. Deer hunting is supposed to be fun, we want to see and have our kids see deer. We want to kill a couple to augment our diets. We want to watch them on our farms, taking sunday drives with the family in the evening to look for deer. Do all the things that stimulate the economy d/t DEER DEER DEER. Is it that **** hard, seriously.

Thanks valovich, not in total agreement but you get it.

Yea, I know I do... Ive typed it multiple times on here...when a county is listed as a 8 or 4, it give the impression there is an over abundance of deer... ok, so many dont kill more than two or 3...but if there's 3 or 4 guys on the neighboring property taking those numbers, or trying to take thos numbers it all add's up .... but hey, the DNR SAYS there is an over population problem or they wouldnt have us at a 4 or 8 county bonus.... Ive always been against the late "kill all the Does" season and firmly believe we need a hunter limit...I aint changing my mind on this either....

Okay too tired of this all to let some stuff just roll of the back like normal so let's go piece by piece:

Unlike you I never will say definitive 100% statements when it comes to such non-definitive things like what localized deer do in any given area. In some area you are 100% correct that should areas lack in any kind of food those doe groups (which may or may not be multiple summertime groupings together or not) will travel miles or transition to a wintering spot. Very true, but do not belittle me as I've never done that to anyone with statements like "anyone that hangs in the deer woods as much as you should know this"...I never said the contrary. In many areas with multiple land managers implementing food plots, often the doe family groups you see together in late December can be just the local 4 or 5 separate summer groups that already utilized the area now simply together that you see. Nothing is for sure, it is mother nature afterall.

Also the last part about bucks, never once even discussed bucks in my post...

Um...that figure includes the first 3 taken which would have been taken if limited to 3. The true measure of impact is when you add up only the 4th deers and the 5th deers and so on. So if only 380 hunters take a fourth deer and you limit it to 3 antlerless...you essentially save 380. I am in no way saying that is bad or good and no I am not playing any numbers for my favor, what you stated as you stated it is 100% correct no doubt (I didn't check it but as you stated it and memory remembers similar so no question)


Dr. Kroll saying no one can ever know is 100% CORRECT and I've never claimed otherwise. Take your back handed comment about Small Acre Hunting home, it was just pure childish. I've never once claimed to be an expert, know more than a biologist or for that matter more than any other serious hunter, land manager, consultant or anyone else. I know countless hunters that in my opinion are better than me, countless land managers with more knowledge & experience than me and would surely pray all biologists associated with the cervidae family would have an expansive amount of knowledge which drawfs not only mine but anyone else here for that matter.

Have zero clue who you are Mr. Quincy Hunter, but obviously with the attacks and falsehoods you don't know me. I'd never state definitive statements on things subject to so many unknowns (deer numbers), never claim to know more than someone who went into a profession and obtained a degree in something...most importantly though, I'd never attempt underhanded or backhanded jabs at someone, just not my nature at all.


Right now I have numerous outlets and have never once felt I didn't have a voice which could be submitted. I've said countless times if my county had a CDAC I'd go, but wouldn't depend on it for my voice to be heard. I would go because nearly anything deer related I'm at least going to give a fair shake. Again leave the backhanded comments of "back yard biologists" at home, NO ONE HERE IS MAKING THIS CLAIM, stop.

And the vast majority of naive hunters will remain naive whether CDAC's form, whether quotas change...that will not change unless education and conservation is hammered into people. PETA folks don't eat meat typically fyi.

So.....now I don't care about the kids and I lie if I don't blindly agree...as Cris Carter would say "C'Mon Maaaaaan"


C'mon...be better than this.

Fun yes, easy...not necessarily, it isn't shopping at the grocery store. It teaches failure happens more than success which is the sole reason my father got me into it. As for your last statement...is it hard to simply be courteous and respectful?

-----------------------------------------

In the end, the attitudes are the serious issue here IMO. I could care less how right someone may be in ANY discussion or topic...if you cannot act respectful and mature you lose all credibility. I personally am not 100% I know who you are Quincy but I can tell a couple things. You are passionate about deer hunting. You care for its future. Both are things I would bet my life's savings EVERY person that has posted in this thread believes...however I don't truly think you believe that. Which is why zero discussion will ever occur which has any kind of true discussion of thoughts or sides...it is merely one side share and the other side attack...just incredibly sad truly.

Blessings to all and good luck this season. May your bow or gun be true and may you always return home to your families safe and sound.

Ty, done with it all.

Tynimiller,

Good post! You made many of the points I was going to, and you did it with a civil tone than I may not have been able to muster.

Have a good evening!

Listen gang,
We Hoosiers over-harvest everything in this state...Deer, rabbits, quail,pheasant, bass,crappie,walleye...Hoosiers are really into the outdoors, yet we have very little land and water compared to other states.
Ever hear of anyone from out of state coming here to hunt or fish for ANYTHING other than deer? And I'm willing to bet the majority of them own or lease land, which if you have either, all these limits mean very little. It's your land, manage it the way you want. If you own a pond or lake, you manage it the way you want, right? I know deer can cross boundaries but if you lease or own 150+ acres and have a couple neighbors who have the same...you oughta be able to agree to not over harvest.

My point is this, and I've said it many times, this isn't a DNR problem, it's a WE problem. If you go to Iowa, Illinois, Kansas...talk to the locals...they are managing themselves. They let little bucks walk, they keep an eye on the does...take more when they see a ton of them and back off when they don't see them. Illinois is TWO bucks right? Are they killing them all? Left only with 1 1/2 yr olds? No.

We have so little land access for the amount of hunters that it's a problem because guys spend their hard earned money on guns, bows, crossbows, releases, arrows, tree stands, camo, gas , FOOD PLOTS, TRAIL CAMERAS, LEASES, LEASE INSURANCE etc...and after all that, they don't wanna stop hunting on OCTOBER 1st after they killed their ONE BUCK that they had patterned by trail cam coming to their food plot every evening!!! Son, they're are gonna whack some antlerless deer. They gonna whack them and give them away if they have to. But they're gonna get they're moneys worth.

We need to SPREAD THE WORD. Spend your energy at hunting shows, Boat shows, Trailer Parks, Amish communities, any place hunters gather...telling people that we can take the DNR and insurance lobbies OUT OF THE EQUATION if we work together.

OR, just keep fighting with each other about who's right and who's wrong, and keep watching the herd disappear.

HS strut,

You say that Iowa and Illinois police themselves, yet I've read countless articles about perceived over harvesting in both of those states. As a matter of fact, there are residents in just about every single state in the Midwest that have been throwing a fit over the last several years due to herd reduction that most Midwest DNRs (including Indiana) have implemented.

You know....that's the thing that people continually forget when they debate this issue.

Herd Reduction...

The herd numbers were supposed to drop as harvest numbers came up. And while it's apparent that many don't agree with it, that was the plan.

And for those of you who continually harp on the number of deer killed with bonus antlerless permits (during herd reduction), I have a couple of questions for you...

Last season, what percentage of successful hunters took more than the 4 deer you can in this state without ever purchasing a single bonus antlerless license?

The answer is 1%.

And what percentage of the last year's total harvest is the number of deer taken by these successful hunters?

The answer is 4%.

So we're arguing about 4% of the harvest taken by 1% of successful hunters... during herd reduction . Ridiculous...

Finally, there is one point HS Strut made that I've made myself many times.

If you aren't happy with the number of deer you are seeing, quit killing deer...

jjas,
I'm not saying things are perfect in those other states. All I'm saying is NOBODY comes here to fish, hunt,boat etc...There's a good reason. Our fishing and hunting for everything but deer, sucks. Our lakes are PACKED with boats.

I agree with you that it's a small percentage of people killing lots of deer "Legally." Although I like the check-in online...I think we just ended our ability to really know the harvest numbers. Just too easy to cheat. I agree that having counties with a limit of "8" is giving the impression that they're overcrowded.

But again, it's always up to the individual. A limit means nothing if we choose to not pull the trigger.

You may want to check the the out of state lic. Sales before you make the statement "nobody"....because that's a FALSE statement

They come here to deer hunt, I believe I said that in my previous post? No, I know I did. They come here to deer hunt IF they have access to nice private land or if they lease. There's a LOT of people with big money who lease up large parcels and come here to hunt for a week or two. Why not? Our Non-Resident deer tags are priced like every other state prices a Non-Resident Fishing license. I think we should take advantage of that and at least DOUBLE the price for Non-Residents. If you used a corporate spending account to lease 1500 acres, you aren't letting a $350 deer tag keep you from hunting.

Agree on the NR pricing. IMO the deer license fee should be reciprocal to your home state's NR fee. If you come here from Illinois to hunt, a deer license would cost you about 500. From Iowa, about 550. Michigan about 170. And etc.

HS Strut I agree with both of you on the out of state pricing for deer. It's way too cheap....

That 8 bonus antler quota counties really seem to be the lightening rod when people complain about the bonus antlerless system. But if you look @ the data from last year, it's really kind of eye opening.

Last year (according to the harvest report) there were 78 hunters (statewide) who killed 8 deer (or more) during the deer season for a total of 698 deer.

Were these hunters feeding large familes? Where they game hogs? Were they landowners who own multiple properties in different counties? Perhaps they were hunters who leased multiple properties in different counties.

IMO, it would be interesting to see the breakdown...

As I stated check the Out of state lic. sales!

Yup, out of state licenses for deer is grossly too cheap. 100% agree. I also don't personally agree with landowners simply getting to hunt a resource the entire state citizens "own" (God really only owner). I own enough land to qualify for this but wouldn't...granted I use my lifetime license anyways but my father who owns land, harvests deer off of it, still purchases a license every single year because he'd rather fund the DNR and assist in conservation than not. I am a firm believer that yes, landowners should get a drastic cut but free is to me not justified.

-Private landowner myself.

Oh, and if one begins to truly look at the amount of deer killed over 3 (which could be covered in bundle) or 4 (which could be covered with regular tags if buck is harvested in firearms season) you really begin to see just how tiny of an impact bonus quotas make:

2015 Year
4,230 - The number of deer harvested which wouldn't be covered under a limit of 3 (or bundle currently)
2,688 - The number of deer harvested above 4 (which CAN be accomplished with regular tags).

2016 Year
3,686 - The number of deer harvested which wouldn't be covered under a limit of 3 (or bundle currently)
2,372 - The number of deer harvested above 4 (which CAN be accomplished with regular tags).

By the way Brew, sheep in Indiana, all over the state have scrapie. Scrapie and CWD are the same prion, name only refers to the species carrying the prion. Look it up, do something constructive. Do you see mass killings of sheep in a 10 mile circle? Don't you think it is already in Indiana but they don't want to find it yet. If found in wild first, DFW would be responsible with our dollars, if found in captive deer BOAH would me. Would say all these sheep with scrapie are around a few deer. So you check your facts. Convienient wipe off handy with them sheep, hope there was no srapie on the sheep farm you visited way back in the day.


Ty thought you were done, hear you go again, playing numbers and attempting to be smarter than everyone else. Though you said you were done. You all are hurting hunting more than you even realize. I hope someday you open your dang eyes.

Done with you 😁 others still have my ears as they've been respectful.

I'm not going to re-hash forum rules, they're clearly spelled out on the registration page.

I will say that nobody has ever been suspended from this forum for sharing ideas. That should be easy to understand.

Exactly..... Quincy Hunter aka Tim More with IWDHM has moved to a new low with his latest childish Banter! SMH