Worst Indiana Hunting Season Since 2003

Guys, it is unlikely this season will end up with another 10,000 deer killed. This leaves us with the worst hunting season in 15 years.

Still better than all but three seasons prior to 2004.

that was then, this is now ^^^ .... the DNR will blame lousy weather on the opening gun for the decline.... dosnt matter about the rest of the looooong gun season ..... then the loooooong ML season.... and the kill all the Does Dec. season .... there is less deer to be killed, maybe THAT is the reason, and maybe just maybe, guys have learned and are passing on Does .... I'm sure the buck kill will be drastically down also, but hey, it started so late, maybe that is the reason..... it could never be there are less deer to be killed... nah, never ... ........ btw, only a tad over 106K taken right now

Get use to it because the dnr will cut gun and ML season lengths in the next two years.
Herd is under control now, guys bitching about deer numbers being down so the only answer is to cut the gun and ML season length. They will remove the first week in each of the gun seasons so opening will be the Saturday before Thanksgiving and out of the rut. Remember, Indiana wants to be like Ill and Ohio...trophy deer and higher price license fees. h.h.

I killed 2 so far and saw more deer this year than the previous 2 years.

The lower kill is surely a result of a combination of factors but the biggest one is that opening day was a complete washout. The many hunters that only go on opening weekend just didn't do their part this year. I personally know of at least 4 parties that sat in their motel rooms drinking all day on opening day. Their trucks were still in the lot on the second day so I suspect they weren't real effective on Sunday either.

Anybody that really wants and has the skills to kill a deer in Indiana will kill a deer.

Is this just your prediction? Or, do you have factual evidence of this? Just curious...

I bet some real money that won't happen.... especially any time soon!

Just my opinion but many indicators point that way. Look at the whole picture of deer hunting in Indiana and tell me where you think its headed next? Most all the deer hunters I hear talk bitch about the numbers but cant seem to keep from buying a bundle tag and then filling all the tags. DNR let the Indiana deer hunters shoot themselves right into reduced seasons.....Merry Christmas...h.h.

You might be right but Im betting sometime in the next 2 maybe 3 years it will happen...especially if license sales drop. h.h.

They'd probably do more cutting down on the number of counties in the late antler-less season first.

They could fool around with that for several years before doing anything else.

Exactly...

You have not had your worst season yet . Unless you quit hunting this year .

I wouldnt cry if the state moved and shortened gun ... but that wont happen.... the DNR will cut back on bounus tags and counties that are in the kill all the Does Dec. season ... I dont think cutting bonus tags will do squat, cant kill what isnt there .... wait and see how low the buck kill will be, that is the indicator the biologists say ....

but as I said earlier, I'll lay odd's, it will be "the weather" and "the season gun started late" for the DNR's excuse ... just wait and see ... it will be in their 2017 summary...

So are you saying "the weather" and "the season gun started late" had no affect on the numbers?

I believe he is. That over 20,000 deer down from this opener compared to last year means nothing. It’s all the DNRs fault. Some are never satisfied until it all fits their agenda. Seems to me the reduction in the herd they were going for is working and now it’ll be time to keep it stabilized.

The opening weekend of firearms normally accounts for approximately 40% of the buck harvest for the entire deer season.

To those that say the weather (and to a lesser extent) the timing of this season wouldn't impact those numbers, IMO ignores the facts the data shows year after year.

So will the buck harvest be down this year? I would imagine it will be, but I think it's got a whole lot less to do with overall deer numbers and a whole lot more to do with the weather (and to a lesser extent) the timing of the opening weekend of the firearms season.

it was a long deer season for me, I spent around 50 hours in a stand to shoot a small 6 point last Tuesday with a muzzleloader. I'm not sure how much control the dnr has over the regulations anymore. when the state passed the high powered rules, they did not want the dnr's opinion because the dnr was against the use of high powered rifles. I was in contact with my representative, and he did not even read the proposed law as it was written. all he knew was that it was written by a republican and him being a republican voted in favor of it. I think that the politicians want total control because they are more interested in the revenue from license sales than they are about managing the deer herd. I hope that their greed comes back to bite them in the butt, because people are not going to spend near as much money on hunting gear and a license if they are not going to see very many deer.

Weather and numbers were factors here. I am sure weather in some places was a factor. Numbers and weather are factors in others.

Our numbers are really DOWN. Big time. We didn’t shoot a doe in our area and neither did surrounding hunters. Luke has gone the last month without seeing a deer. I would dare say there isn’t very many hunters who has spent more time in the stand. It has been a very frustrating year for him. I think he has missed 13-14 days since October 1. We can only control what we can.

Can't dispute that there are counties (or more likely areas within counties) that have lower numbers than in the past. Some of that is due to herd reduction, some is likely over hunting, some is habitat loss and I'm sure some is the loss of available hunting ground due to development, leasing and/or purchasing of land by other hunters (or outfitters) so as to try and increase their land holdings.

I hunted public land in the HNF opening weekend. The weather did play a factor. I didn't even hunt opening day. Camped down there for 4 days and just skipped the opening day. Way too warm and windy and of course the thunderstorms. I heard a total of 10 shots that day. Most opening days I'll hear an average of 200 shots minimum. Sunday wasn't much better as far as hearing shots. I went the second weekend as well and heard a few more shots but overall not as many vehicles in the parking lots. I saw plenty of antlerless deer and got a shot on a decent buck but missed him. I'm a single parent so I don't get a lot of time to hunt. 5 days total this year.

I told several of by buddies years ago when prop 1.0 was thrown out and they were all upset... "No worries guys, what Prop 2.0 just did will guarantee the state will shoot themselves into a reduced gun season."

......... and here we are....

I continue to believe the problem is this is a big state and it has diverse habitat. In the south there are plenty of woods and places for deer to go and avoid humans. Those counties are doing very well with deer numbers.

The northern part of the state is a different story. When corn prices went up a lot of the deer habitat was bulldozed to create more tillable land. That's why many of those counties have a reduced herd. Hopefully with corn prices down farmers will put their land into CRP and other programs. Habitat is as important a factor as hunter harvest in my opinion.

The DNR was straight up front that the goal was fewer deer. We should not be surprised.

From a 2013 article on DNR website:

108,169 .... maybe another 4000 with the Dec. kill all the Does season (I doubt that many, but who knows), and few killed the last two weeks of archery and the Reduction zones.... I say we end up with around 113K

You've made a lot of good points.

We spend so much time fussing on forums and social media over seasons, equipment, the DNR and reading the same old "just you wait till next year" posts year after year, that perhaps if we spent a good portion of that wasted time and energy on habitat improvements, it might actually help the situation...

You can have the best food plots, cameras, hunting clothing, bows, guns, optics, etc. But, if there aren't places for deer to live, there aren't going to be many deer to hunt.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all.

If you look at the end of the deer report from 2016, it shows the % of each county that is considered deer habitat. http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-DeerSummaryReport_2016.pdf

You can also find # of deer killed per hunter effort for each county (plus a lot more) which is a much better indicator than the total number killed.

108,339

That's 91% of what last year's harvest was!

Darn, down almost 10% ... ;0) ... down down down ... yea, it may be what the DNR wants, its not what we necessarily want ...

Brew It wouldn't matter if it were 99%....

It took a generation of hunters to get us where we are today, "a declining deer herd". It will take that long again to educate what MANAGEMENT is. As IDNR stated before, "We built the herd once we can do it again.".

I won't enter the argument, I and the IDHA are on public record that this is where we were headed, and now we have arrived. Crossbow,PCR, HPR, longer seasons, remember how these were all to retain and grow hunter numbers? How has that worked..... decline in hunter numbers continue while effective range in all seasons increased as well as hunting seasons length.

The lie has been exposed, now you get to reap what you have sown.

To both of you with just "year by year memory"...... what is it the percentage of the year before Prop 2.0 was introduced....where this mess started that people like Brew and jjas advocated and forced the IDNR to do? Hmmmm... don't want to put that "percentage" up unless reminded to cite what the REAL damage is??

Jbwhttail Jb,

So what's the answer?

Do you think that the state of Indiana can support a larger herd? How large? How is that decided? How do we know when that number has been reached? What determines a growing herd in your mind? Higher harvest numbers? One buck/one doe harvest ratios?

If you want to grow hunter numbers, how do we do that? With hunters struggling to find places to hunt now and being forced onto smaller and smaller parcels as the years go by, how would you suggest more and new hunters go about finding private land to hunt on? How about securing funding for more public land?

What about habitat? Do you think Indiana has the habitat (especially in the northern half of the state to support more deer? If not, how would you suggest going about improving the habitat? How would it be paid for?

You've obviously been involved on a state level for years. Are there things that you wish you might have done differently? Are there things that you feel you can accomplish in the future that you weren't able to in the past?

Do you feel that the IDNR has been ineffective? Do you feel that the leadership past/present is somewhat to blame? Do you blame those of us who didn't support prop 1? Do you support CDACs (or similar groups) like the IWDHM pushed for? Do you support the new survey being taken by hunters from the IDNR when you check your deer in? Do you think it will provide valuable input?

With all due respect, it's easy to drop the "you get to reap what you have sown." card, but in reality you've been @ the forefront of these issues during the time it took to get where you say we are, so can you see a way to "fix" it?

I hope that you will take the time to answer the above questions. I'm certainly not looking for an argument, but I would love to hear your opinions on the subject 5 years after prop 1. I'd truly appreciate it.

Thanks for your time.

Whoaaaaaa!!!!..........wait a minute pup......


LOL!!!!.......... Joe's "Being at the forefront of these issues" ended over 5 years ago when people like you jjas took the reigns from Joe and the IDNR and made them throw out Prop 1.0...... this mess to explain is not Joe's anymore........ it's for the jjas's of this State to fix/explain, but they still want to blame who they took the reigns from many years ago.

Low lifes..... that ain't leavin' the "low life"....... "blamin' someone else for the MESSSSSS they made."........"don't want to reap what THEY'VE sown"...

Keep spewin' jjas........ just keep spewin'..... It just frosts you to no end right now that as those reigns were taken from Joe and the IDNR by people like you jjas........ their prophecy has now come true...... and somehow that's "Joe's Fault and he needs to explain how to fix it".............. LMAO!!!

Like I said...

I would appreciate Jb answering my questions...

He's already answered you jjas........ it's your bait...... not his problem, and he knows it...

please read his posts more carefully.

I believe Jb can speak for himself....

And I believe a good man like Joe can type plain words for you to see, and spell out clearly his intentions....... but you just want to fight, even on Christmas with good people....

Gonna finish what this day was for...... somehow by the grace of God I hope you can too jjas.....

If jb wants to answer my questions @ his convenience he will, if he doesn't that's certainly his prerogative. And I'm not looking for an argument, only his opinions.

So...please go do whatever it is you wish as I certainly didn't (and wouldn't) ask for your opinion on this or any other subject.

Percent change is new value minus old value divided by old value (X100 to convert to %). In this case, even if no more deer are reported killed:

108,454 - 119,477 = -11,023 / 119,477 = -9.2% (.092)

So 9.2% fewer deer killed.

Realistically we should see about 4,000 more deer killed so the final might be more like 6% fewer deer killed this season from last.

But that is pretty easily explained by the rough weather on opening day. Like it or not. The limitations we have by looking solely at raw numbers killed v. a population estimate or kill adjusted for hunter effort force those big assumptions.

Bottom line is it will take a whole lot more than a 6% drop in one year before major policy change is indicated. Especially since that has been the stated policy goal for years.

Jason; Ten years,five years, even a year ago my opinions did not matter,and they don't influence policy today. So no I have have no need to answer all those questions. I do have the solution for individuals who Truely care for their long term hunting experience.......


Buy and or lease as large a tract of land you can afford. Form neighbor alliances on management goals. After that hunt and enjoy.

As things continue to decline you and others continue to change the factors/cause, it is your responsibility not mine to find answers. The paragraph above is/was my solution, it works for me every year, the only thing I can't control is EHD today.

Thanks for your candor. I appreciate it.

Well you can look at the numbers and try to determine what the size of the deer herd is, but I think that you also need to consider how long the season is now compared to 10 years ago. In addition to that consider all of the advancements that have been made to the equipment now-a-days. I'm thinking that the deer herd is much smaller than what the state will admit. Then you have the insurance companies complaining about car/deer accidents, and saying that they are getting too many claims. But they won't come out and tell you that they 50,000 more licensed drivers on the road.

John got it right.

I killed one doe in archery season. Passed many small bucks. Did not see the buck I was after in gun or ML season. got the tag in my pocket still.

So what is the question? It seems some are claiming the lower harvest is due to less deer and others are saying it is weather related. Is there a smaller deer herd or not.....

In some areas there are less deer and some areas it was weather. I think it is tough to manage such a diverse state as ours. The majority of public land and best deer habitat are in the south while most of the population is in central and northern Indiana. So it makes it very difficult to balance hunter opportunity and nonhunter opinions on deer human conflict. The DNR is in a no win and probably has to keep the entire state in a reduction mode even if the northern half is below capacity and the southern half the pressure is not spread out enough making pockets look like there are less deer.

Js2397, I think you are on the right track, and I look forward to seeing the county harvest data so as to compare the numbers from last season to the current season.

I'll take it a step farther....I think that if not for the lousy weather on the opening weekend of firearms season, we might have have topped last season's total harvest, this season. What do I base that on? The rough data posted so far...

Early archery was up by roughly 5,000 deer over last season.

The last 14 days of the firearms season was up roughly 8,500 deer as compared to last season.

The muzzleloader season was up by roughly 2,000 deer over last season.

Will the late antlerless be up? I don't know, as there are fewer counties eligible this year, but it will be interesting to see what happens.

Does that mean I think that every county will be higher or that there aren't any problems in any counties throughout the state? Of course not....

But if lower deer numbers were as WIDESPREAD an issue as some feel they are, I can't see how the overall harvest numbers would have climbed to the levels they have @ this point of the season after several years of herd reduction.

Herd Reduction plan started in 2012

Thanks Brew......... so the REAL damage that has been done is not exactly as John Scrifes has reported. "One Year" math as he put out there is a clever way to obfuscate what has really happened since 2012. If you take 136,000 deer in 2012 and in 2017 we take around 110,000 deer........ that's a 20% reduction in our harvest from where we started (and will continue to plummet with the same regs in place since the damage compounds over time). And 2016 shows that 75.5% of that harvest was taken with some type of a gun.

Now.......... you tell me.......... do we have a BUNCH less deer? Do we have a BUNCH more days to hunt them with a gun (30+ days)? Do we now have all the weapons we want with a BUNCH more range? Do we have a BUNCH of people sick of what has happened?

Hornharvester was right......... reduction in gun days is coming to a town near you.

The truly sad thing is this 20% reduction in our harvest is not evenly spread out. Some areas are well over 50% reduction while some areas remain steady as they are being protected from the IDNR "Madness Regs". The areas of over harvest continue to plummet, and reduce hunter participation.......and the areas that are protected from this craziness are managing to survive, but much smaller in acreage than those large vast parcels that are shot to pieces.

Bottom line..... the "managers have deer"...... and a huge portion of the state is shot to H E L L ..... and you wonder why the majority is going to rise up against the weapon/season that is causing the most damage.

SOOOooo, firearms was up, so how could it be the weather ? ... couldnt have been because of a longer range tool being used? like rifles could it .... nah .... and archery up, it couldnt be because of crossguns could it... nah .... just ignore the man behind the curtain ..

Archery was up from last year and crossbows were legal then, doubtful they were responsible for the extra deer killed. Most likely due to the extra days in early archery season.

Firearms harvest was down could be because of the man behind the curtain who knows.

Muzzleloader harvest was up I have no idea why maybe because crossguns, rifles, men behind curtains.

All I can say is that the past couple years for us has been bad. I feel pretty bad for Luke but know that hunting is well - hunting. I have been hunting the areas around here since 2003 and the numbers have never been this bad. I think the reasons are:

1. Numbers are way down and yote numbers are way up. With numbers down every single fawn/deer kill by coyotes makes a difference. We don’t have a lot of huge cover acres. Wood lots and drainages mostly. We did not see one fawn this year with the mature does. NOT ONE. No one will convince me that the does we seen were not bred or that coyotes don’t make a difference. We summer glass almost every evening from the roads and run several cameras. We had more coyotes on cameras than deer.

2. People shot too many deer and we have an influx of Amish around us now. More every year. Some of have started coming together and saying enough of shooting the does. We can only control some of our area but some are starting to make wiser decisions.

I am a little worried about Luke getting burned out with not seeing deer. He hunted every day but 7-8 days from bow through gun season and went 21 days without seeing a deer. If this continues I bet Indiana loses many younger hunters.

The longer this thread gets the TRUER theses words are.....

NO "man behind the curtain" here.....

Bean,

Sorry that you are having troubles. Especially for your son. I have seen a lot more deer down in Monroe Co. on properties around Lake Monroe. A few years ago we had a lot of coyote sightings, more than deer. Someone must have started taking care of that because the opposite is true now. I tried killing them but they are smarter than me Also saw a lot more deer in Jackson/Washington SF this year.

If you aren't already trying other spots, you and your son are welcome to come down south and try some of the areas I know have some deer. They are tough to hunt but they are definitely fun. It would be a blast in this snow. Glassing ridges, looking for bedded deer. Camping might be a bit cold this weekend

Don’t the numbers on everything up just about zero out the Opening day down?? , Making it a non issue ??

^^That my friends is 100% what makes the biggest difference in each of our personal areas we hunt. I'd add in habitat work (but that could fall in management goals) but this is 100% the answer!

Some of the biggest issues up here in the North side of the state is the lack of communication between area hunters. It can greatly impact harvest decisions the more area hunters talk and share herd knowledge with each other. One can quickly realize their numbers may be higher than what the localized herd is really at due to all their habitat work and not their neighbors....often triggering those neighbors asking what is working for them? I know of a handful of neighbors that have implemented habitat work or changed their hunting tactics due to this very thing!

Educate & Communicate...the best answer to resuscitate your deer numbers.

People complain about numbers all the time, but the whole point of this was to REDUCE THE HERD...

Here are a few paragraphs from a meeting in 2011 on this very subject where the difficulty of the task @ hand was noted....As a matter of fact, the northern half of the state was specifically mentioned in the second paragraph.

If you look @ the last 4 seasons harvest data (2013/16), the numbers have pretty much stayed the same (with an average of 122,500 deer). The fluctuation between seasons is somewhere around 4%.

DNR probably will lower bonus tags but that wont do much if anything unless they take the state back to A's and 1's counties. I figure after a couple years of lowering bonus tags and that not stopping the downward slide of deer numbers they will implement Prop 1. There will be no reason not to shorten gun seasons!.....might even be quicker if license sales start to drop. Happy New Year...h.h.

Time will tell, but I don't think it will happen in that time frame.

As pointed out, the data suggests the harvest numbers appear to have leveled off and significant policy changes aren't normally made from one or two anomalies in the harvest trends. So unless/until a significant downward harvest trend (that wasn't designed) shows itself over several years, I can't see much changing.

^^^^ According to the last DNR meeting where the deer herd reduction was a topic .... The words coming out of mouths was that we are in a "MAINTAIN "mode now....

Pretty sure there was a video taken at that meeting where them words were spoken!

some guys here would be crying like little babies if all you had was the Fish and Wildlife areas to hunt, ... some here do a fair job on 'em, cause its all we have ... the pressure is intense, not to mention much lower deer numbers as some here are use to ... yea, I miss hunting private (22 years of good private too), but it is next to impossible to find a good chunk up here and I'm done driving a two hundred miles round trip to hunt a lease and I'm done paying for land to hunt...no more.. .... so I and others tolerate the F&W areas and all that go with them ... for many this is all we have, and they aint getting better either ....the property managers do what they can, and do a good job with what they have for the most part.... the hay days are gone, and wont be coming back.... I'll continue to kill deer, 'cause I work my azz off to do so, I get Elmer Fudds disturbing hunts, stealing cameras and vandalizing locations, this is what it comes down to on some of these areas.. yea, some would cry like little babies ...

I would gladly work to support regulation changes that would improve public hunting. Things like archery only areas, antler restrictions, limited gun days, would help improve these areas.

I am sure and it already looks like some are...Deer Hunting can be different for many in most cases!

If you look @ the last 4 seasons harvest data (2013/16), the numbers have pretty much stayed the same (with an average of 122,500 deer). The fluctuation between seasons is somewhere around 4%.

Jason, you have for years along with a few others preached the IDNR gospel. Your group changed the IDNR reduction plan by increasing weapons and season lengths, now when people are seeing the results you still " tow the line". We understand, it is human nature not to want to admit you were wrong.

People, the majority of deer hunters, trusted the IDNR to manage the deer herd in THEIR interest. Hunters shot and shot then shot some more until they are where we are today, regional deer desserts!

I can tell you the hunting population is p..sed and IDNR has lost support. Big changes are needed next year or we will have legislative interfearence again.Massaging numbers with excuses is not going to work.

I don't need to be involved, the day has come I predicted, IWDHM didn't get it done but others are uniting and getting organized for the push.... doing it the right way.

First of all, my name isn't jason (not that it matters), second...I don't tow anyone's line but my own.

Do I agree with all the IDNR has done? Nope. Did I agree with prop 1? Nope. Did I push for hprs? Nope. Did I push for prop 2? Yes I did and I would do it again tomorrow. Why? Because I wasn't about to watch a certain segment of hunters that paid the majority of the bills and managed the deer herd get pushed out of November to appease another segment of deer hunters without having my say in the matter. It was just that simple.

As far as the data goes that I post, it comes straight from the IDNR. I don't "massage" anything...If you disagree with the data, then your issue should be with the IDNR, not me. And while I've said in the past that I'm sure there are counties (or areas within counties) that have fewer deer than in the past, I'm pretty confident when I say that the harvest numbers that are posted by the IDNR show that OVERALL the herd is in pretty good shape or those numbers wouldn't be where they are, year after year after year.

Finally, I think any new groups that come along are going to find (like the IWDHM has) that while it's easy to question the IDNR, it's a h*ll of a lot harder to not only manage a deer herd, but manage that deer herd for ALL hunters and non-hunters alike...

Thought I'd put up the chart again that Brew put up and then tore down as the data and discussion wasn't apparently going well with the data he put up.....

Simple fix
1. Shorten gun season.
2. Move gun season back.
3. Reduce doe permits.
Hunters WILL see more deer.

Dang spell check,Jjas . I never said IDNR massaged numbers, they massage the message. It needs to fit THEIR agenda the same as your message does.

You took "opportunity" for weapons, used new hunters women and kids, for the reason. Extending seasons for opportunity and recruitment all of which never produced a positive result other than longer range killing. Then you ask me for how do we recruit. Why not ask the angry deer hunters.

I will say EVERY deer hunter should demand that license rules should be trashed and rewrote! We need one antlered deer license and one antlerless license period. These are good for all seasons. Justify today's license structure, its all about money. Deer hunting revenue is the engine that drives fish and wildlife today. Follow the money and you find the deer management ....
.

Hold on.... I didn't take anything down so stop with your usual half truths and lies your best known for.... SMH

BTW.... did you click on the dot and see what is said?

Two things according to what Brew and jjas is saying when you look at this chart......

Brew.... we AREN'T "maintaining"......we are dropping.....and at a high rate of speed!! When you figure in this years approx. harvest of 110,000 we are 20% down from where we were in 2012..... when you figure in the last 2 years, we are going to be down almost 13% than where we were in 2015 till 2017 harvest totals ............ vs just a 1% drop between the 2013 and 2015 harvest totals !!!.... Can you say we are ACCELERATING FAST to much fewer deer!!! Where the heck do you see "maintaining" happening???? :rolleyes: No wonder you took this same graph down you put up!! LOL!!

jjas...... the IDNR does not report our harvest data in "averages from several years" like you do. They report the EXACT number so we stay in "reality".....so we can see where we started, and see where we are at currently. Another attempt by you to "skew" the perception everything is just fine..... :rolleyes:

My tires hold 50 pounds air pressure.......and when 10 pounds are left I don't think "oh what the heck, my tires are still averaging 30 pounds of air......so I'll just keep driving on an "almost flat"......

Are you seriously that delusional?? LOL!!!!!

.....(please don't answer that)...

More importantly.......even with fewer deer with the fix you cited, hunters will have a larger selection of age class to choose from in the deer herd which will keep them still interested in the sport. If they are asked to sacrifice quantity......they will stay interested if the age quality goes up as a byproduct.

Right now they have neither.......hunters are getting pizzed off..... and will force the hands again of our IDNR to fix that situation. And length of gun seasons will be their target since the weapon (guns/rifles) will not be taken away.....the length of time to use it will be taken away.

The DNR said we are in "maintain" mode at the meeting they had in the fall NOT me....you need to practice your reading skills...talk about delusional :rolleyes:

You are against shortening the gun season Brew...... you drive a truck and don't want your work days in the truck to force you to take vacation should the gun season be shortened....and it gives you 30+ days to hunt bucks, and to heck with shooting does.

You put up quotes that you like that appear to "delay" the need to shorten gun season. Therefore if the IDNR says we are in "maintain mode"....and it fits your "keep gun season the same" agenda...... you're gonna put up those quotes you agree with that fit your agenda.

They said it........ you liked it....... you put it up........ I simply pointed out people like you that find quotes from the IDNR that fit your "long gun season" agenda have a BIG HOLE in such misleading words.

"Maintain Mode"........LOL!!!!

lol....I'm not no "Truck driver" you get more delusional every post you make.

You need to take up the "Maintain Mode" with DNR and others at that meeting....their words not mine!

BTW ....are you now saying we need to be shooting Does not Bucks ? LMAO

Jb,

You say "I" took opportunity for new "weapons" and claimed new hunters, women and kids would benefit...

First of all, I wish I had the power you seem to feel I've had. Did I support the youth season? Yep. Unlike many on this forum who didn't. And why didn't they? I have no idea as it never made sense to me, but many felt it was because those who opposed the youth season did so because the didn't want the kids getting first crack @ "their" deer.

Did I support crossbows during archery season? Yep. Why wouldn't I? Why shouldn't kids, women, and men who want to hunt with a crossbow be able to without having to get a doctor's excuse? Obviously I (and many others) weren't alone. Look @ the states that have approved xbows since then. Why were so many bowhunters against xbows? Again, it never made much sense to me, but many feel that like the youth season, they didn't want anyone with a xbow killing "their" deer.

And...if you took the time to go back when all this was happening you would see that I proposed a "deer license" consisting of two deer tags way before the bundle was created. I'd still support that idea today.

Finally, I've said for years that if archery hunters want the firearms season shortened/moved they would need to step up and show on a consistent basis that they were willing to help manage the herd on a larger scale than they were then or now...

And yes archery hunters include xbowers.....

Dew The DNR manages the herd by looking at trends and averages....not by looking @ one year's harvest data and that's how I look @ it as well. Geez... :rolleyes:

Also, no spotlighting at all. I dont care if you have a weapon in your vehicle or not. Shine a spotlight, you get a ticket. If you want to see deer at night, buy a game camera. Too many deer are getting poached in this state.

Ah, once again, the yearly Deer numbers/DNR sucks and I can manage it better than any one else can thread is back.

I only went out opening weekend (5 hours at most) and probably shouldn't have wasted my time doing that. I had no intentions of shooting anything this year unless it was wounded or a wall hanger buck. But it was my yearly opening weekend hunting trip back home (Fulton County) so that is only reason why I went. Could have shot a big doe with my Kar98 but she didn't meet either criteria so I let her walk.

But I digress, maybe it is because I have a lifetime license and don't have feel like I need to kill something just to show for the money spent on tags. Maybe it is because I wait for deer to actually get a decent size to them before harvesting them so I don't have to kill so many to actually have a decent amount of meat after processing. I shot what had to be a 250+ pound buck last year and I have only eaten one or two packages from it.

I don't need a shorter gun season nor do I think it needs to be shorten. I manage my hunting situations by doing some basic simple things and my hunting has for the most part is getting better all the time.

I can't dispute that if the DNR did what you are saying, in a few short years hunters would likely see more deer.

But then...how long do you figure it would take the DNR to start catching heat due to more crop damage, over browsing, deer related car accidents, etc before another round of herd reductions would be ordered?

Crop damage should be addressed on a farm by farm basis. Report damage to biologist and apply for depredation permits if necessary.
Harvest numbers are trending in the wrong direction. As a hunter, I would like to see more deer.

As a hunter, we all want to see more deer, but realistically there are limits to the number of deer that our ever shrinking amount of suitable habitat can support. Plus there is also a limit to the number of deer that humans find socially acceptable before they start to complain about them and want something done about it.

Finally...many hunters say that depredation permits are used too much and that deer are blamed for damage that is often caused by other animals. Plus many hunters feel that the deer killed with depredation permits in the Summer go to waste and that many of the fawns of does killed end up dead as well and that results in fewer huntable deer in the fall.

I guess the sticking points are....How many deer are to be killed, how are they to be killed, when is that number too high and who decides that number...

Start at year "genesis"..... then look each subsequent year how far up or down the flag pole you are from year "genesis". Ya don't average out a few years that support a jjas/your agenda and ignore the "rest of the story"....and slap a label on it that "it's not that bad".

You know exactly what your up to......and you despise drinking truth serum....

What???.....

Where do you come up with some of this stuff.... Brew...

More to come I'm sure.....

Dew Your Truth serum....that's rich....

...and it gives you 30+ days to hunt bucks, and to heck with shooting does....


Just replying to the "delusional" information you are posting! :rolleyes:

Got anymore half truths or lies ....

If desiring to look at trends just look at the last 20 years or so....you'll notice harvests have always went on a up and down..and up and down process. Not until you hit 4 straight years of an increase or decrease begin to be an abnormal trend if looking at bare bone numbers.

I'm more interested to see county by county trends as I suspect many are fine, and many are declining and have been for a few years now.

That comment was directed at you Brew. You and your "type" that want to keep 30+ days to hunt with a gun is something you fight for with the pure intent of having 30+ days to buck hunt with your guns. You could care less about shooting does, and never will. All you care about is having over a month of deer season length with a gun in your hand to shoot a buck.

You and your "type" say you're all for the 2.0 reduction plan because it will be the most effective way to reduce the herd....when in reality you had NO intent of helping reduce the herd and shooting antlerless...... you were just scared S H I T L E S S you'd lose your 30+ days to hunt bucks with a gun that Prop 1.0 was proposing......and it still scares you to this day.

To prove my point........ how many does/antlerless have you shot since 2012 when the state and Prop 2.0 reduction plan you were all behind launched? Careful what you type/number you claim here little buddy....

lol.....your lost as usual
Not scared of losing gun Days at all...your the one that's in for the surprise again!

Bag limits are the problem not the tools being used!

Bingo..... always good to see people that get it!

I never said the guns/tools were the problem.... The length of time they are used is the problem.....which cut's into your buck hunting with that tool...... and that's a problem for hunters like YOU.

I assume were not gonna get an antlerless kill count from 2012-2017 out of you personally huh.......LOL!!

Starting to think we have TWO of you here that just HATE truth serum....

.........And while we're at it, since the tools and length of use of them is not the problem (according to you). What county do you hunt in Greg? Jennings and a few others? Hold a meeting in those counties and propose then reducing the bag limits (that you say is the problem), but doubling the days to hunt with your gun (since that does not contribute to the problem as you say)...maybe even year round gun hunting. Let us know how your proposal goes over with them........

What makes any difference the time limit when there a One Buck Rule in place.... the problem is Hunters like YOU are afraid the average guy may some how shoot a buck you named or been hand feeding.... gee we couldn't have that OMG! SMH

BTW .... Timmy, if you want to know my antlerless kill look it up it's public posted.... Unlike you I don't kill antlerless deer to run up a score board on a hunting contest then complain we have a deer shortage!

In case you haven't seen, there is some pretty good county data in the 2016 deer report: http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-DeerSummaryReport_2016.pdf

It doesn't give methodology in any detail but this is at least a decent qualitative (objective?) view of some of the things we hens are squawkin' about in our barnyard.

For instance, in Parke County where I hunt a lot:

- 46% of the county is deer habitat

- it took roughly 5 days (efforts) of firearm hunting to kill a deer in 2016, 12 days in 2013

- landowner attitude is fairly strongly negative but improved slightly from 2008-2013

- hunter attitude is a bit positive and barely improved from 2013-2016

- antlerless kill was down from its high in 2012

- antlered kill was pretty flat but increased in 2016

- rates of deer/vehicle collisions (DVC) were down about 20% from their highs in the late 2000's early teens

- % of antlerless in the kill was pretty consistently in the low to mid 60s but was down to 56% in 2016. Only one other time was it in the 50s from 2005-2016

Highlights from Monroe County where I also hunt a lot:

- 82% is deer habitat

- it took only 2.5 days of firearms hunting to kill a deer in 2016, 9 or so in 2013

- landowner attitude is negative but improving a bit

- hunter attitude is moderately positive and getting slightly worse

- deer vehicle collision rate is flat to slightly rising

- antlerless consistently makes up 60% of kill

Washington County:

- 3 days to kill a deer in 2016, 10 in 2013

- DVC rate going down a bit

1) Not afraid my 30-40+ named bucks that I protect every year will all be shot off..... I still get the one I want and am very happy with that.... and I'm happy for the guys that hunt with me on those same areas that get those huge bucks too that we've named and grew. And I'm also happy for the "fence line sitters" that get one every now and then too. They help keep an eye on things too and bring value to the table. Good relationships with our neighbors trump anything else we do........ And I'm not afraid to look some internet thug in the eye and let him know he resorts to trying to make good people look bad when he's cornered....AGAIN...Brew.....

2) I have no deer shortage.... I never said I had a deer shortage.......I've never complained about MY deer shortage. I just happen to be one of the few that understand how bad it is for others and want to jump in and help. And you "rag on me" as I attempt to help others sway the State to alter the regs a bit. They are stuck in a world where regs and other irresponsible hunters around them shoot all the deer they see with the long seasons and long range weapons and move on to the next place that will let them in when they run dry...... So no Brew...... once again you try and taint the reputation of good people trying to help the situation. Feels good to do that to others huh......and you try to keep fellow hunters stuck where they no longer want to be. Pat yourself on the back man.........

Also.... I've killed does since I can remember. It's a responsible thing to do when needed..... and it's an irresponsible thing to do when not needed. So, when I needed to kill does, and also put them in a contest that you never won....sorry you got you precious little feelings hurt as you were just busy using all 30+ days to hunt a buck with your gun, and coming home empty handed most years. But thank God you had one day in your life where you lobbed/hail Mary'd a slug over 150 yards from that Montgomery Wards shotgun you have to kill your 200+ inch buck. That was a great day for you....proud of ya man. And somehow made you an expert in how long gun season needs to stay as others around you suffer. You have allot to be proud of don't you........

"Intent Thug".... lol That's the pot calling the kettle black.... keep grasping with your delusional BS as usual!

I will wear that Badge with honor when it comes to dealing with hypocrites like you.... Pretty sure most know your TRUE COLORS!

Gets a little itchy for you when someone shines the light of TRUTH in your eyes.... huh

John Scifres....look into what they declare "deer habitat"

It most definitely is not what nearly any wildlife biologist or habitat person would consider deer habitat

Not to mention that data is pulled from a 2009 study...and a land use "study" but doesn't express how that was calculated exactly.

As an example take row crop ag fields as an example...pesonally I'm not including those in deer habitat as outside of 3 months of the year most of them provide NOTHING....

Also...mature park understory woods outside of maybe acorn/nut droppings in a small window again provide next to NOTHING for the deer...

Ok so I didn't read all of this but the people that complain about long gun season why? My dad doesn't bow hunt any more and that's more time I get with him and no he refuses to use a Xbow. Also what is wrong with a Montgomery wards shotgun? If it shoots something straight and you shoot enough you know your gun no matter the distance. Dad has pulled off shots with his front head sight smoothbore Tom knapp couldn't do. And lastly yes I filled my bundle tag this year. I am about as poor as poor gets so I take my passion and put it in the freezer. And before anyone says anything remember you ain't never walked in anyone else's shoes.

Why... because it IS to long ... Indiana could have one heck of a deer herd, if they had decent management ... there is no reason to have over 30 days of some kind of gun/firearms.... Illinois has a much better system with their firearms and they still manage the herd numbers to within both social and biological carrying capacity .. . the best thing Indiana ever did was go to our One Buck rule... the worst thing is the darn Dec. kill all the Does season .... two great things Indiana needs to do... one, stop the Dec. antlerless season(or drastically reduce the numbers of counties at least) and two, shorten gun and move it back to Thanksgiving.... IMO

It wouldn't matter if they changed the season some of you guys will always find something to gripe about. This is the first season in over 20 years that I haven't killed a deer. It wasn't because the herd is so small like some are claiming it was because I didn't need the meat. I saw deer on every sit except 1 and that's hunting 3 different farms in 2 counties.

In my opinion the herd is fine. I can name at least 6 people that I'm close to that usually kill 3 or 4 a year that either only killed 1 or didn't kill any because they didn't need the meat. There is other factors that determine the numbers of deer killed not just herd count.

Do you hunt in Illinois? I work with a Maintenance Manager who has a family farm and I ask him every year how his Illinois hunt went and he for several years it has said it sucked because the deer are no longer there.

What constitutes "one heck of a deer herd"? Every time you go out you see do you expect to see 5,10,20,50 deer at one time.

The loss of habitat one of the biggest reasons why herds are declining in some areas and you should know that living in LaPorte County. Most of the southern part of the County is rural and it is mostly farmland. There isn't much woods or forests left to sustain large herds.


All you've done since the implementation of the Dec hunting is complain about it so why would you support "reducing the counties" instead of being totally against it all together? I am against it, so I do not participate in it, and never will.

But I also know that when I hunt in Franklin and Fulton Counties, that whatever happens in the surrounding counties has NO impact on my hunting whatsoever. Matter of fact, what ever happens 10 miles down the road has very little impact on my hunting. Does generally spend their entire lives within a mile of where they were born and bucks generally do too, but, will travel up to 5 miles during the rut and generally return to their home range after the rut is finished.

Also, you are aware that the OBR is a misnomer right? If we as hunters have the ability to take more than one buck, then we do not have a true OBR. I do agree that it needs to be addressed though.

Season dates, length, weapons used, is all relative. It all starts with looking in the mirror. The reflection staring back at you is the biggest factor when it comes to our herd size.

AMEN!!!!

good, I'm glad some have the forsight to pass on deer if they wont be utilized ... many are killed just because a guy wont eat his tag ... this is now the second year I havnt filled my 2nd archery tag ... and that was by choice... and not seeing many Does as I would like to have also .. as for bucks... pffft ... I dont expect to see many on the F&W areas ...like I said earlier, some guys would cry for the lack decent deer and the pressure these places get ...

I hunt Illinois and there herd is managed better, The herd is more balanced and the age structure is better. Results are a more intense rut. I think in 7 days of gun hunting they killed around 80,000 deer last year. PLus they have a 3 day muzzleloader season.
I hunt western Indiana as well. Its good but not as good as Illinois. In this case, the grass is greener on the other side.

For those of you who like Illinois go ahead & move there. The whole state is run by liberal morons.

The November firearms season in Indiana is not going to be reduced in length anytime in the near future so get over it.

We're not going to set records every year on the deer harvest. I'd be more worried if we did.

that may be true, but I love to see some on here squirm every time shortening it comes up .... this place is better than daytime soap operas ... or the X Files ... "the truth is out there" .. lol

from another Site (Bowsite) and the feelings of many and the management of deer in this state

yea its tough to read, but what this all comes down to is 90% think our DNR deer management sucks ..

BREAKDOWN BY RESIDENT AND NONRESIDENT
Residents: D+ ...Nonresidents: C+

Reports and Comments...ADD YOUR GRADE ... Brent jones (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FDoe tags need to be cut back!! Worst season I’ve seen in 35 years!! Late doe season should be done away with!! Trying to keep my daughters interested with no deer is impossible!! Ridiculous! David Hutchinson (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: FBucks are covering more ground in search of the doe now days. Causes more sightings and harvesting. But they will continue and expand their faulty paper management. Jeff Swafford (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FHigh quotas, in areas where high quotas should not exist, have driven the deer population as a whole, down. Combining this with the “Slaghter Doe Season”. Mike Meisberger (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: D To many bonus antlerless tags. Brian elliott (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FNeed to limit everyone to two deer only . One antlered and one antlered. INBOWHUNTER (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FBetter than average buck size / not enough deer numbers to keep up the hunters spirits and retain young or new hunters / We need second buck to manage our buck herd /Reduce doe tags to 2 per hunter. Jacob Morrisett (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A Deer Management: A+ Lots of deer all around. Lots of big bucks. Don lawson (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FIndiana is a legalized poaching state. Shoot all you want no matter the time of year . Blind eye policy. Mark Klug (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: B- Deer Management: FIndiana is still in a reduction mode. Wake up, STOP Killing the Does. Cricket Hall (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- Just not great all around unless you hunt one of a half dozen southern counties .Its plain bad in most ! No Deer here ! Ashley Reichert (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FIndiana DNR are only concerned with generating revenue!! Ashley Reichert (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FIndiana DNR are only concerned with generating revenue!! Kevin Schuler (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: C Saw the least amount of deer that I can remember. Greg Yazel (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FWay too many antlerless deer being taken in my county. Their "reduction plan" has went way too far. Tag structure needs overhauled. They do NOT listen to their deer hunters, and the people in the f Robert (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: FWhat deer I seen was ok but not at large number of mature animals. Bucks seen 3 yr olds at best. James from ind (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FAll young bucks and need to cut back on Doe tags Nick Demop (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: FDNR is allowing the herd to be decimated! Michael W McKee (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A Deer Management: D saw numerous 130-class bucks, five to 15 does pe outing. Hunt 900 acres with light pressure (mostly gun) from other hunters. If followed the allowed DNR limits, I am certain quality and quantity wou Rick Flair (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FOverharvest for too many years has herd decimated. Steven Martens (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FI have hunted Indiana for 33 + years .... worst iv ever seen Andrew goodman (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: F ****Possibly best potential state for giant bucks but gun seasons prevent the majority of deer ever seeing that age. 17 days of high powered rifle in the peak of rut followed by 17 days of muzzleloader.**** Darrell Hildebrand (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FDNR has sold antlerless tags to the point that the herd is almost gone in only five years. One season of EHD or a bad winter should wipe out the herd completely. PATHETIC! Darrell Hildebrand (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FDNR has sold antlerless tags to the point that the herd is almost gone in only five years. One season of EHD or a bad winter should wipe out the herd completely. PATHETIC! Indeer (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FNo need for hi powers or crossbows doe limits to high no deer in the county's I have hunted this year. North central part of the state is dead Nathan Steed (resident)Buck Quality: A- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThere is no science behind the management of the deer herd! Doe tags need to be drastically reduced! Chris miller (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThe herd has been all but destroyed except in small pockets in this state. Between hunters who can’t lay off does and the idnr keeping bag limits so high allowing this behavior. Hunt Iowa Mike Bruton (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FThe big bucks are out there just have to hunt hard.to many does being shot late doe season is a joke. Robert Deventer (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FIDNR Deer management is a joke. Special anterless season is just a slap in the face to conservation. And regular season doe tags reaching 10 in some areas. It’s horrendous. Tony Olivier (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FIDNR is about 3 years behind on maintaining a reasonable herd. Should have cut the doe tags back much sooner. Only people happy with deer numbers are farmers and insurance companies. Brad Smith (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FState needs to limit bag limits drastically! IMO, 1 buck, 1 doe per season. Deer here is really low. Brad Smith (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FState needs to limit bag limits drastically! IMO, 1 buck, 1 doe per season. Deer here is really low. Mike Bruton (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FThe big bucks are out there just have to hunt hard.to many does being shot late doe season is a joke. Nrm (resident)Buck Quality: A- Deer Quantity: A+ Deer Management: B Plenty of deer in southern indiana, too many at times. After killing 50 deer with depridation permits, still more than enough deer around. Didnt even put a dent in them. Craig fisher (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FPoor management from indnr deer upper management won't listen Mark . L (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FWe don't have enough bucks or deer to consider quality . IN don't have the quantity or DFW management to keep hunters participating . Tom miracle (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- There are some nice bucks in state for sure and that is good. But doe numbers are horribly low. Seeore bucks than does. But the DNR does not listen to hunters on that issue. Colt Doster (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FToo many doe permits DNR is not in touch with sportsman they aren't the ones sitting on stand no way to keep kids interested because deer numbers are so low Richard McCormick (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: FThere are pockets of great hunting however, the F is for the states horrible antlerless quota. There are counties with horrible numbers, still allowing folks to shoot 10+ does a year. Kim lee (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: D- To many antlerless permits. Chuck case (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FPoor management Jimmy Crafton (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: D Bonus antlerless tags are out of control. ONE BUCK AND ONE DOE!!! That is what we need in Indiana for a few years. Jeff dullaghan (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: FOur dnr is horrible at managing our deer herd as well as our lakes. Indiana dnr sucks! Period! Brian Irion (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FBuck to Doe ratio has been decimated by liberal doe permits. If something doesn’t change we will go back to herd numbers like those of the seventies. James koehler (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: D Bonus season on does is crazy,need to do away with this . Your killing between 1 to 3 deer,now times that by what the total is taken,each year it will be worse if something isn’t done Josh Winchester (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: D- Doe numbers are far to low. There's no need for a doe killing late season. Only positive thing is the one buck rule. Hopefully that doesn't change Josh Minnick (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: D- Late doe season. Deprivation hunting increase and increased deer poaching. Per person kill quantity is to high. To easy to hunt from out of state. There's enough hunters already in Indiana. Hoyt EM (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D We have decent yet average bucks ..Not a lot of em though. We have bad herd numbers and DNR management is kill every deer for money .Our deer harvest has fallen for 6 years and hunter numbers are up! Kristopher workman (resident)Buck Quality: B- Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: D- With our one buck law we have some very decent bucks. But with the state allowing so antlerless deer to be killed it has really hurt the numbers in this state. Karla Birtchman (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FToo many antlerless tags issued. New hunters and those who dont care kill everything they can, and do not take into consideration that does carry the next generation. So sad! Roy Smith (resident)Buck Quality: D- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- Declining numbers for several years amen DNR has done nothing to change that. Deer sightings are becoming rare due to antlerless deer hunting and the diseases that have hit the state. Brad (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FVery few deer sightings. Doe sightings extremely low. Been seeing less and less deer over the past several seasons. State is more interested in destroying the deer herd then they are managing it. LISA THOMAS (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FQuality mature bucks are on private land, neighbors shoot everything in sight. Public land bucks average 2 years & mature bucks are nocturnal. DNR bought out by insurance industry & politicians. Carol David (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- There are a few decent bucks around the best cover .But the herd is low in numbers and the state will not make good choices only money choices . Wiliam Forger (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FPoor Deer Herd Numbers in much of the state aside from the farthest Southern Counties . Far Far too few bucks to keep good mature buck numbers up. Jaref (resident)Buck Quality: A- Deer Quantity: B+ Deer Management: A+ There are pockets of great hunting and poor hunting throughout the state but overall Indiana is in a really good place right now with agood doe/buck ratio and a good age structure. Mark Woodcox (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: C Too many does being taken. Danoliver (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: D Not seeing numbers of deer I did a few years ago. Not out hunting or driving Steve Roe (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FShooting to many does!!! John Stanley (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FManagement program has allowed far too many excess doe tags for far too many years. Deer herd decimated in large portions of State. Chuck Liddell (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FLiberal doe tags. No science behind the bonus quotas. Idnr doesn't listen to the hunters...no working relationship. JAmes Sides (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A Deer Management: A I don’t see the devastation a lot speak of huntings been good for me Eaglefeather5@frontier.com (resident)Buck Quality: D- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FWe have been hit hard by chronic waste desease, from what I can tell our herd numbers are way down but our state Dnr is still handing out liberal amounts of doe tags, when we should be cutting back Shaner (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: F Ind. is way to liberal with the antlerless tags. Each year laws are passed to make it easier for hunters to harvest a deer. In turn, tags numbers should go down, they haven't. something has to change Brayden (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A+ Deer Management: FThey offer too many doe tags and then the antlerless season is in when bucks may be shedding antlers so many people are killing bucks without horns and it’s stupid.luckily for me I don’t shoot doe’s. Rick S (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FGun Season too long. Way too manybdoes being killed. Population in some areas so low few if any deer are being seen. Nicholas landis (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FDNR has FUCKed up our deer. I'm pissed. There are no deer and they still want their quota for Franklin county Cassie Evans (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FTo many antlerless tags permitted, unnecessary late season, extended firearms, zero management, only reduction and all this leading to dangerous decline in the herd. Killing off the IN herd! Alex Mosby (resident)Buck Quality: D- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: F Piss poor management by DNR and other hunters. Too many antlerless deer tags issued, not enough fawns being bored cause of the amount of doe killed cause the Antlerless season. Craig McClure (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FState allows way to many does to be killed. Needs to go back to the days when you could only take does the last 4 days of gun season. Until deer numbers rebound. Craig McClure (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FState allows way to many does to be killed. Needs to go back to the days when you could only take does the last 4 days of gun season. Until deer numbers rebound. Rodney Langdon St. (nonresident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: D- Our deer herd is in severe decllne, due to mismanagement and being in reduction mode for far too long. A serious change is needed in the relationship between hunters and the IDNR. Troy Elmans (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- Used to love hunting this state .It takes a lawyer to understand the seasons and tags here .Its awful all out war on our doe here. Pete from IN. (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FLowest deer numbers I have seen bucks and doe in decades. Fred Claar (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: C To high doe limits and seasons too long William England (resident)Buck Quality: B- Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: FThe DNR has chosen not to listen to Indiana's hunters. Unlimited doe tags is killing our herd. Max W. (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: FCan't really say much good about the counties I hunt in . Michael corwin (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: Fbuck , Mont. CO. We have way more bucks than does . Quality they are small . Mngt , there seems to be none. Shoot them all. To many being shot and left , look into Allen clause farms. Tolin farms. Michael corwin (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: Fbuck , Mont. CO. We have way more bucks than does . Quality they are small . Mngt , there seems to be none. Shoot them all. To many being shot and left , look into Allen clause farms. Tolin farms. Sam (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: D- Ok bucks when you see one.Not enough deer by a long shot !! Too many tags for each hunter. Boone Crocker (nonresident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThe state is over hunted. The DNR should be ashamed. Rack Buster (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThis is a no brainer ..All any real hunter worth his or her salt has to do is one thing ..Compare the herd in Indiana to one of the top destination states .All F's here. Anna Kriss (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FA few good bucks where there are some good herd numbers .Overall Indiana has all but destroyed the deer herd in most counties . Christopher Brum (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: D Deer Management: FPiss poor management by DNR and other hunters Robert H Bergen Jr. (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: D Going to one buck has helped the quantity and quality of the bucks. However our doe herd has really suffered because of quotas being way too high and the extra doe season. Robert Swartzel (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FBad deer herd management by the state DFW. Wayne Clark (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThere are a few good bucks around but the doe's are over hunted. Tim Miller (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FTHE DOE HERD IS SO LOW IN MY AREA IT'S HORRIBLE .THE RUT DOES NOT LAST LONG ENOUGH TO EVEN HAVE A CHANCE A BIG BUCK . Rick Martin (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FWe don't have near enough older bucks ! Jeffrey Granger (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FToo many antlerless deer tags issued. Not enough does left to sustain a herd Kody Hunt (resident)Buck Quality: D- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FNorth central Indiana is shot out !!! Brett Shepherd (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FThere is over 25 hunters a square mile where we live and hunt and not enough deer . Josh shepherd (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FToo many doe tags available and hunting pressure is off the charts Dave Shepherd (resident)Buck Quality: FDeer Quantity: FDeer Management: FIndiana's deer herd and seasons limits are awful. Chris Hunt (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FIts bad here in many areas .Not enough buck fawns being born because our doe tags are too liberal . Bill Carry (resident)Buck Quality: D+ Deer Quantity: FDeer Management: FWe do not have enough deer any more in Indiana to sustain good hunting . Ed Hunt (resident)Buck Quality: C- Deer Quantity: D- Deer Management: FWe have basically no limit of antlerless der we can take here .Its over 350 a year here literally on a county to county basis .The herd is so low we cant reload shooter bucks every year . Jim bob (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: C- Experience Buck (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: C+ Deer Management: FIndiana needs to be on same hunting rules as Illinois and Ohio. Caleb Gaiser (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: B- Deer Management: FWe have good genetics and plenty of food in Indiana. Doe limits are too high in most counties along with too long of a rifle season makes it difficult for anyone wanting to manage a deer heard . Jeff Pals (nonresident)Buck Quality: A+ Deer Quantity: A+ Deer Management: A In Indiana, anyone who wants to get a buck, gets a buck. Crazy long gun seasons that includes rifles (dangerous in the Midwest). But, you only get ONE buck. It is making a big difference. Bows all Yr. twobows (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: C Two years of brain disease and firearms season to long and a state that does not care Philip Perry (nonresident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: B+ Deer Management: A+ After spending a small fortune, and 7 days in Missouri(to no avail) came to my families farm in Indiana, in the 10 days spent in Indiana I saw 1 booner, and choked on a 25 yard shot on a solid 150” sticksender (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: B Deer Management: D 32 days of gun season with 16 days centered on the November rut. Liberalization of weapons now includes unlimited centerfire rifles. Full use of crossbows added to all archery seasons. Peter (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: C- Deer Management: C One buck rule has been good for Indiana and should continue. Doe limits are way too high. 8 does in some counties (10 with bundle) is WAY too high and not sustainable IMO. DNR please help/reconsider. Todd Harrison (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: FIndiana could rival any state in the country if there were any type of decent managment for deer. All our DNR cares about is killing as many as possible. Dave Guggenbiller (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: C- Gun season still starts too early. Back gun off until after thanksgiving. Yes I am a avid gun hunter sean ferbrache (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: FKill em all is the state of indiana philosophy. Sad. Dan Haire (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: D+ Deer Management: FThe amount of bonus antlerless tags allowed has driven the population way down. This year's harvest will be back at the level it was 20+ years ago. Terry Rensberger (resident)Buck Quality: B+ Deer Quantity: B Deer Management: C- Indiana does a poor job in deer management. DNR is overruled by insurance companies and farm interests Livereater (resident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A Deer Management: A Had two chances on deer over 140+, did get a decent buck day before shotgun season. There were no acorns dropped so typical hunting strategies did not work. Bownut (nonresident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: D Deer Management: C- We are paying the price for a deer herd managed by politicians rather than biologists. stick slinger (resident)Buck Quality: C+ Deer Quantity: B Deer Management: B- Very few deer sightings while on the road. pav (resident)Buck Quality: B Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: FIndiana has no deer management program. Private deer management is the ONLY thing allowing the deer herd to survive. KY EyeBow (nonresident)Buck Quality: A Deer Quantity: A Deer Management: B I am lucky enough to hunt an awesome property. The rifle regs are ridiculous. Crazy why they ever moved away from shotgun only. JTV (resident)Buck Quality: D Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: D Deer numbers declining, this will be the lowest kill in 14 years this season, State lands the pressure is super intense... way to many Does still being killed in many areas ... Matt Finney (resident)Buck Quality: C Deer Quantity: C Deer Management: C NA

Many of the nonresident scores were very high. Wonder if it's like was stated earlier, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

In Harrison County I would give the DNR all A's. The numbers are great and trophy potential is high.

many of the NON's are hunting with outfitters or on choice private lands where landowners can control what is taken I'm sure.... plus they are here only for a short time.. there are other properties where the brown and down crowd hammer anything that moves, like on the Fish and Wildlife areas and other state lands/fed. lands... heck, many private lands are like that from what I hear, they just HAVE to fill those tags... of course to some "farmers" deer to them are nothing but YUUUge rats/pests, when in fact much damage is cause by 'coons and squirrels .... heck, Ive seen where muskrats and even beaver had leveled patches in corn fields along creeks ... If you have property where your trying to manage it, and allow for an older class deer and have some brown and downers next to ya, you can be screwed ... also there is a YUUUUge difference between the Northern and southern portion of this state ....

Nonresidents love the price of a deer license here.
That is what the DNR needs to address. IN charges $150. IL charges $410 for bow and $300 for firearm. Plus you have to buy a non resident hunting license($57) and a habitat stamp($5.50). Non residents are flocking here and leasing all are land up. Results are less land for are resident hunters. IN should be charging $400-$500 for a deer license. Results would be less non resident hunters and more revenue for the state. Less non resident hunters would result in more hunting opportunities for resident hunters.

So you think charging nonresident $300-$400 more when they are paying thousands to lease land will keep them out of the state?

If you want to limit nonresident leasing you need a draw system so they aren't guaranteed a tag every year.

yup, nonres.... DRAW ... plus charge more

I talked to 3 guys from Michigan of all places who were hunting the F&W area I do.... First off, why all the way down here from Michigan just to hunt a state area that gets pounded ??... he said for the $150, its hard to beat the price, plus his parents live close by so they stay there. He said he dosnt want to lease and the area is free (cant blame him for that ..lol..).. ... I see a LOT of Illinois plates here also.... most are from the Chicago/Northern Ill. area, where there isnt much for public land... so they come here ...

there is way less available private and large areas of land up here to hunt, so many more just pile into the F&W areas.... J/P, Willow Slough, LaSalle, Kingsbury, Kanakakee ... these get pounded and get quite a bit of Nonres... Willow Slough gets a LOT of Illinois people 'cause its right on the state line... same for LaSalle.....

js2397 You are exactly right about the draw system.

Limit the numbers of licenses available and raise the prices for non residents as well. $295 for an OTC, any season bundle tag is way too cheap IMO.

Yes it will. A draw system wont work. IL has a lottery system but you are guaranteed a tag because the high price of tags has reduced the non resident pool. Years ago when they charged $200 for a tag the lottery worked because you had more Non resident hunters than tags available. When the price of non residents permits went up the non resident applications went way down. You are now guaranteed a tag in the lottery system because of the price of a non resident tag.
Increase price to $400-500 will increase revenue for IN DNR and provide mpre opportunities for resident hunters. What you suggest will not help IN DNR or the resident hunters.

Thats not a knock on nonresident hunters. I feel like anybody in the US should be able to cross a state line and be able to hunt. However they need to pay a premium price for the hunt.

Raising the license prices will reduce the number of nonresident hunters on public land but will do nothing to change the amount of nonresident leasing. The license is the cheapest part of the hunt.

Actually a lot states around us are cheaper per Deer....not sure how many folks come here to kill antlerlees though! Maybe Parke county

You think our public land gets pounded....those Michigan guys know it is much worse up on most Michigan public depending on where they are coming from.

I don't put much stock in a survey conducted by a site...where most likely one or a few tell a bunch of other folks about it and to go there and share thoughts as well....really just tapping into a small group of minds that share the same feelings (could swing either direction). It is one of the biggest challenges for someone like Joe Caudell, trying to capture an overall true snapshot of hunter thoughts.

I work in a job where I only hear from folks unhappy and appealing something....while they represent less than 5% of the total section that make up the area I'm dealing with...does that mean the other 95% are happy, no. However, it does and should illustrate the unhappy will always make the most noise. (whether justified or not)

Our deer could def be managed better.
But nobody ever wants to face the fact that Hoosiers are hunting and fishing FANATICS and compared to other states have VERY LITTLE access...very little water to fish and very little land available for the masses to hunt. Leasing has made this much worse in my opinion. That said, this is America, and if a landowner wants to lease their land they should be able to.

I would like to see our state pursue CRP and walk-in areas contracts with landowners so they get PAID but we can ALL have access rather than just some rich out of state guy or a lawyer with a company expense count leasing land.

Voluntary surveys such as the one on Bowsite are not considered to be scientifically valid nor representative of the population. But they have some qualitative value. They become a problem when they are presented as representative.

Perception often is reality so we may think that overall the population is very dissatisfied with deer hunting in Indiana if all we read is the Bowsite survey.

The Deer Hunter Survey that is reflected in the county-by-county results in the DNR's 2016 Indiana White-Tailed Deer Summary report paint a different picture where most responses were in the positive range.

The bowsite survey was not intended to be scientific nor to analyze any one specific state in detail. The goal was to survey nationwide members who may have hunted deer in multiple states last year. And thereby get a general feeling as to better and worse experiences in various states with regards to numbers of deer, quality of deer, and beliefs about those state's management of deer. I doubt anyone expects any state's wildlife officials to make management decisions based on the bowsite survey

Let's be clear about the survey Jeff posted.The survey is on a national scale. All states are included. When I first saw the survey, I figured Indiana would get 8-12 responses. The number exceeded 120 responses when I counted yesterday. Indiana was tied for dead last at the time. Tells me there are alot more lurkers than posters on these websites. Heck, I check this website 3-4 times/week, but this is my first post in a year.
Regardless, the survey results echo the sentiments of most deer hunters I've talked with over the past 2-3 years.

My take on the status of the Indiana deer herd is far from optimistic. The harvest is on a downward spiral since prop 2 went into affect. Big surprise there! Too much...too fast..and no safety net. The bonus county system is a joke...always has been. Tell me again what percentage of deer hunters kill more than two deer per year? We're going to end up down roughly 20% from year one results...with the lowest overall harvest since 2003. This, despite longer seasons, longer range weapons and virtually unlimited tags. How does that NOT throw a flag in everyone's minds? BTW, you don't average a downturn to soften the blow. Would you do the same thing if we were talking about your annual income? Such logic is exactly why I cringe at the thought of the public input process driving decisions.

IMO, the primary reason our harvest is still six figures is private deer management. Both public land and non-managed private land hunters benefit from adjacent private management. Never thought I'd say it, but thank God for leasing! Might as well get on board folks, because at this rate, those who lease/own will soon be responsible for the majority of the deer herd (if not already). Kudos to those that fly their middle fingers at Indiana deer mis-management!

We, as hunters, find ourselves in a strange position. For years, we've preached hunter recruitment is necessary for the survival of the sport. We are now facing the even bigger threat of retaining our recruits. The number of people saying their hunting kids are giving up should be disturbing to us all. Please go back and read bean's post.

Got that off my chest...I'll go back to lurking now.

Very well put.


----


Let me be clear as my last post may have come across as to just dismiss such a survey as worthless...as it is not. However, it truly did just tap into an extremely small group, which then told others they knew would share the same thoughts to go post as well. I don't question any of the comments or feelings posted by any of them as I (to the best of my knowledge) don't hunt with or by any of them.

Some say it does represent hunting as a whole in the state...I simply will never pretend to have enough knowledge to state anything not inside the immediate areas I hunt. I hear extremely split opinions (nearly 50/50) from all my hunting acquaintances and friends...so I would only argue anyone stating either extreme as fact is missing the boat most likely.

From what I seen on another site where the survey link is actually posted is no one needs to be a member and any anyone can take the survey multiple times with no real name!

But as you stated it does give a pulse of some honest folks.

According to the DNR's 2016 Indiana White-Tailed Deer Summary in 2016 91.85% of successful hunters killed 1 or 2 deer.

Another 5.6% killed 3 deer.

1.5% killed 4 deer. 1% killed more than 4.

So roughly 8% of successful hunters killed more than 2 deer.

One step further....since the bundle is so popular and good for 3 deer. Only 2.4% of hunters harvested above the bundle amount...

Maybe I missed something but I think those numbers are misleading because they are focused on the % of successful hunters not the % of the harvest. If you total up the number of kills for for the hunters that killed 3+ deer you get 24538 deer. That is 20.5% of the total harvest. If you ask me that is pretty significant coming from 8% of the hunter population.

Furthermore that 8% is only the percent of successful hunters. When you consider the total # of hunters (314,283 per the data) it equates to 2.2% of the hunter population killing 20.5% of the deer.

I will echo what a couple of others have said. If you expect to let the State of Indiana manage your deer hunting, then look up Eisenstein's Definition of Insanity.

Buy or lease your hunting ground. Manage your own local herd ... yes it can be done.

Let the State continue to do it for you and you will continue to complain about crappy deer hunting.

The 314,283 is the numbers privileges not the hunter count....How would the DNR know the the number of land owners and life time hunters that only hunted and didn't kill anything?

Please explain...

Valid point Cody...but since the bundle is going nowhere really you need to state the % of the overall harvest represented by those taking 4 or more deer...which off hand I do not remember.

I used the wrong line. Let's try this again. In 2016 there were 10,186 deer that would not be covered by a bundle harvested (4th deer onward). That is roughly 8.5% of the total deer harvested. In 2016 there were 4,930 deer harvested above what could be accomplished with normal tags (5th deer onward) or roughly 4.1% of the total harvest.

It's tough to glean the total number of hunters.
There were 314,283 privileges. That is different than the total number of hunters.

169,801 licenses were sold.

But that doesn't count lifetime licenses. 21,371 deer were killed by Lifetime License holders.

Be extremely crude and not scientific but you could extrapolate a "decent guesstimate" by applying the success rate suspected amongst hunters to the known LTL holder harvests....however we don't know how many of those harvested multiples...and to be fair I'd suspect in the lifetime ranks we have some of the most successful hunters (more seasoned at least...not successful perhaps).

I edited that post before...I had used wrong line item on my spreadsheet. Truly extremely few deer harvested even with the need of a bonus tag honestly.

Ok then less than 4% of the hunters killed 20% of the deer. Still seems pretty significant to me.

I however also agree that moving around the bonus limits will have little effect and I manage my own property accordingly for what it's worth.

JB's one antlered one antlerless seems like the best approach to me.

100% correct. In my county they took us from a 4 bonus antlerless to a 2 bonus antlerless. Granted it did remove the special stupid war on does season, but the move was nothing more than a psychological game by the State. Very very very few hunters kill more than two does per year, so the move from 4 to 2 is simply a "warm and fuzzy" feels good move so the State can say "see hunters, we are reducing the limits to help you out. In reality, they didn't do chit to the herd management, but protected their bread and butter license sales in a game of smoke and mirrors.

Like I said ... manage your own land, screw the State.

JB has done this........ PAV has done this......... DEC has done this and .....

I have done this since 1991. Saw disaster coming as soon as we had to no longer draw to get a doe tag (remember those days?). So owning and leasing land that touches each other (locking up large areas), or was up against large tracts of "no hunting" ground became my formula.

People laughed at me at first as I spent much time and $$ to secure a "long LONG term" situation with these properties........ and then I managed them like I wanted.

I can remember in one area in particular I had 3 neighbors on my boundary lines back in the late 1990's due to plenty of deer and opps for all. Others around me shot and shot and shot and SHOT every year.....and they had devastating results as they "did what the State said they could do"...... and now last season we actually took a count of treestands on the property line of that same chunk of ground...... we found 51 stands and 6 ground blinds surrounding us.

It's remarkable how some real screwballs on this site will tell you "their way is the way to bliss" here in this state by leaving the regs the way they are.....and those same screwballs tell me how wrong I am in what I suggest as a management plan for this State. Yep.....I'm SOOOOO wrong, those 51 stands and 6 ground blinds are there because the way I manage is SOOOOOO terrible they just have to sit there and see how "bad" it is. LOL!!!

Go ahead.......... listen to Brew, jjas and others here that voted to get us right where we are at. And let them convince you their way is the way to stay...........

.......... and I'll show you another place where you can keep putting up treestand #52, 53, 54, etc on my fenceline and you can keep grinding your teeth on those stands as you watch from the outside all the "bad hunting management" that I preach about on the inside......

Keep your 30+ days of gun season to just do as the state wants if you want more pure H E L L....... don't confuse me with someone that cares about the pain you dealt yourself as you listened to the Brew's and jjas's of this State.

You want change? Get off you azz and quit typing here....... If you don't know what to do.......PM me and I'll tell you exactly what to do.

Dew,

Even when I haven't posted, you always include me.

I love how you manage to constantly complain about the length of the firearms season, yet last season when it suited your needs, you had no problem filling your buck tag on day 15 of the firearms season...

Now...that's classic "Dew as I say, not as I Dew"...

But the last line is my favorite... A couple of observations....

Perhaps you should take you own advice as far as the typing thing goes...

And...

After 6+ years...if you knew "exactly what to do",
wouldn't you have done it by now?

"Even when I haven't posted you always include me" .......<<<<<< Did you really just type that? LOL!!!!!!! Ummmm..... can someone please point out to jjas how many times he's posted on this thread. Poor little fella doesn't seem to have the ability to work the scroll back option here.

But I will say....... it's not so much about "you" jjas, it's about a few "like you" that want to continue to defend what you forced the IDNR to do about 6 years ago as a good plan. And now that the carnage you helped create is now on YOUR plate...... it Whizzzzzzes you off that you can't make your Zhit stick to someone else. It's your turd to fix now..... and you don't like that...... plain and simple.....

And when people like me and other States that don't need 10, 15, 20 or 30+ days to kill a buck prove year after year it CAN be done...... and effective to still manage a herd unlike you say can happen........ you're Beedy little head glows like a lit match stick ....... and you post your disdain all over threads.....but apparently forget you've done that.......LOL!!

And what grinds you even more is when a person like me has 3 days to hunt at the end of Firearms Season last year due to work and family schedule... and pops a brute again, and proves ya just don't need 30+ days or a full 15 day firearms season to get a buck...... so you then focus on "it took me 15 days to get my buck" so it then fits your filthy agenda...... and there wasn't even any mud on my boots for the first 12 of those 15 days last year. You are pathetic...... and you will continue to show that side of you here...... you just can't help yourself.... and we all know it. Keep twisting facts to try and make something that didn't happen or factually not true.... somehow "real" in your head. Did you 'eva' even once consider if the firearms season was only 7, 8 or 9 days...... I still would have gotten to work in the 3 days I took off to hunt? Nope...... you DARE not go down that path in your head.... it would just plain be too painful for you....

And finally....... We all knew when the ink dried on Prop 2.0 that you helped force the IDNR to do and to happen, we would be hauling this crap around for at least 5 years to see what the tragic results would look like. So...... if you now still think that allot of us "still don't know what to do" to change that now that the results are in.........

........ that's right where/what we'd like you to be thinking.

Dew,

You can try and justify why you say one thing and do another, but the reality is you don't want other hunters to have access to a firearms season that lasts 16 days. But....when you had work or family issues, you had no problem taking full advantage of the length and timing of that same firearms season just so you could put another head on the wall and then brag about it....

And now to address your quote, below..
So that's the plan? Posting 6+ years of "just wait till next year" tag lines that haven't amounted to squat, in an attempt to lull me into a state of inaction and THEN make your move?

That is quite the plan....

You're a regular Dr. Evil aren't you....

Yep....... I happen to have a life like most that whenever the deer gun season is planned in August, September, April or November......and no matter how long or short it is (7 or 100 days).... I still get to decide when I took/take those 3 days I needed to kill that buck.

And you can't handle that....


And when I post up my deer that I shoot....... you call it "bragging" as if it's something bad I do, but get pages of compliments from others. Kinda like DEC when he posts up all his Huge Turkey kills from all over the US, and we compliment him 'cause he's a dang lethal killer on those birds....and maybe the best Turkey Hunter we have here on this Forum. When he puts up those pics he's not bragging......he's sharing his harvest and demonstrating his pretty cool ability to just flat out Turkey Hunt with the best of them...... year after year after year. I and others understand that pic/video/skill level he has and applaud him for that which he deserves and has work dammmm hard for.

I kinda think no matter what I put up you spin it as something "bad I do"..... especially when it comes to big bucks I shoot, or holding you responsible for the mess you've contributed to in our deer hunting across this State. Sorry you feel that way jjas. Maybe someday you'll be brave enough to just even show us YOUR pic.....put a face to the "jjas name"......but for now we just get your orange Cheeto covered finger prints left from a coward on your keyboard as the "expert" on who is a "bragger" and not worth listening to.

And to tie things up..... This has not been a process of "wait till next year" by me....... this has been a process of exposing what you helped do to the IDNR the last several years, this year and years to come if you have it your way, and the disaster you helped create and compound each year. I'm not here to lull you into a state of inaction.... I'm here hoping you stay active, keep posting, and keep defending the mess you've help make in this State........

Those reading will figure out what to do with all your antics and "gospel" next.........

We just need to keep you in the limelight.....

Dew Sure you do...Just like the firearms hunters who want to continue to enjoy their season that you've tried to screw with, do as well. And when you consider the fact that you killed that buck on the last Saturday of the firearms season after spending the last 6+ years complaining about the length of that season (and demeaning many of the hunters who want to protect it), well... it fully illustrates your hypocrisy...

So while you continue to use your usual strategy of going off on another long winded diatribe to try and confuse the facts, just know that some people on this site actually remember what you've said and done in the past...and when your hypocrisy rears it's head again, you'll likely get called on it...

You call it "hypocrisy"....... I call it "I got to choose the days I hunt" and the length of season does NOT determine what three days I pick to hunt. You refuse to acknowledge no matter how short or how long the season is..... the hunter still chooses WHEN within those allotted days to take advantage of the timing of the hunt day/days they want to hunt. You're just another toy here on this forum that is trying to make a senseless point that just because a hunter chose 3 days later in the season no matter how long or short the season was, they SOMEHOW in your beedy little head needed all those days prior to the days they chose to hunt......LOL!!!!!!!!...... and as you type and then frantically revise what you type 5,6, or 7 times before you like how it looks in your head....... we all get another glimpse of how desperate you are to hold/defend a gun season that has wreaked havoc on our herd for many years now with 30+ days and longer range weapons that you support. You could care less about anything but protecting your coward identity ...... and keeping hunters that are suffering in this situation you helped create in still more years of pain.

We know how to handle you...... and THAT situation......

I'm countin' on it little buddy......

First of all....I love the way you try to rationalize your hypocrisy....It's truly hilarious!

Next...your constant need to resort to childish name calling and thinly veiled threats shows how weak your position really is....as usual.

Dew If the "we" is the same "we" that you've been talking about for the last 6+ years...I'd say there isn't much to worry about...

BTW, gun season opens on Nov 17 next season and runs for it's usual 16 days...Be sure to mark day 15 on your calendar as I'm sure you don't want to miss it...

I'm just gonna say it. You two are ridiculous. Stop now. You are embarrassing yourselves.

I know, I don't have to read it but I can't help myself. It's like when somebody says, "Ooh that stinks so bad...smell it." And instinctively I do

You're 100% correct. It is ridiculous. I told myself the last time this crap started that I would ignore it...

But I didn't. I should have, and I will do my best to try to not go down the rabbit hole again...

Thanks.

I had just got my popcorn popped too John LOL.....

Myself I want to be able to hunt more than 3 Days Kill a buck and be done ! Hunting is more than that to me Sounds to me like some people hunt just for the Kill I don’t I like being able to hunt any day of the season and like being able to choose the day I want to Kill
With a Short season you hunt and kill because you have to because you only have a couple days to get it done
I don’t manage my farm for bucks I manage for deer . Don’t name deer , have a hit list None of that stuff . And don’t like the idea of managing my farm for your bucks a Agenda to grow them . If you want to fine but leave me out of it .

We really need a "Like" button.

These guys and one other show no respect whatsoever for one another. It's one thing to disagree, state your opinion, even argue...but the name calling and constantly replying with an entire page of past arguments?

I feel like a lot of people whine too much about the deer herd...but if I saw them at the Boat show I'd gladly talk to them for a half hour and make sure that they knew me disagreeing isn't personal.

I of course do not want to get into any argument, but I highly agree with what Bean says. I hunt close to him so our issues are very alike. I, myself, had a very blessed deer season and was able to take my first big buck and a couple older does. I saw a good amount of deer this year on the farms I hunt (not as much as years past but still a decent amount). Many of my fellow hunters did not have a good season with little to no success and I know that most of them put a lot of time in the woods. I believe that some areas are more highly populated with deer than others. Around here, the farming community puts an impact on the deer because there are farmers who tend to take out deer habitat, and sometimes what I believe is too much. I have noticed a lot of habitat loss lately due to farm ground gain. BUT it's the farmers property so it's more than his right. Another big factor is the loss of predator control. The coyotes here are extremely abundant. I did not get a single fawn on trail cam all year and neither did some of my hunting friends. I did however find two dead fawns over the course of the summer who had been eaten clean by coyotes. More predator control is definitely needed and I hope that more hunters start to hunt them. Just in my innocent opinion, I also believe that reducing the number of antlerless tags (at least around our area) would be a tad efficient because there are a lot of people who shoot whatever they see first and repeat the process time and time again because they can and have the tags in their pocket. We are a high amish area and they tend to shoot what they see (which it is their right) but shooting every doe in a, suppose an 8 doe group, is not going to help the population. These are just a few little issues that I and many of the hunters here agree on that need to be handled. Less deer habitat destruction, more coyote control, and maybe just a tad less doe tags?

Magnum, excuse me for hijacking this post but if you are still looking for ladder stands Rural King had 100.00 stands for 38.00 two days ago. h.h.

I think I'll save/capture this quote for a later date...

MUST. RE. SPOND.

(be strong...resist the troll)

CAN'T. LET. TROLL. HAVE. LAST. WORD.

(don't take the bait)

IT. INSULTED. MY. MANHOOD.

(it is nothing)

BUT. IT. MIGHT. THINK. IT. WON.

(it didn't)

Bahhhhhhhaaa best post in a while !!!!!

You guys still think the DNR isn't going to change the opening dates soon..........then why hasn't the DNR updated the opening dates beyond next year..??? Might be a coincidence but nothing is listed past 2018. h.h.

https://secure.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/2715.htm

It's never been posted more then a year out as long as I can remember......

Thanks hornharvester!

Not so Brew.....they had dates up for 4 years two years ago because I had to look in order to plan a series of social events and I didnt want them to fall on the opener. h.h.

Ok I must missed that ...... but generally it's year by year,guess there always a exception now in then.

Like I stated in my earlier post I bet some real money the gunseason date and length doesn't change anytime soon!

Horn....This is the information I usually see posted this time of year!

My understanding is that the DNR is in more of a "maintain" mode as far as the deer herd is concerned. And based on that, I can't see any major changes to the seasons happening in the very near future.

I read in the DNR website that the firearms deer season is always scheduled for the first Saturday after Veteran's Day (Nov 11) each year. I use that information to schedule my annual trip to Southern Indiana to hunt with my Marine Corps buddy who I have known for 50 years since serving together in Vietnam. I'm one of your pesky NR hunters from New Hampshire! Hunting in Indiana is like a whitetail Nirvana compared to New England hunts.

Loss of suitable habitat is always going to be the single biggest reason why deer numbers will be negatively impacted.


Why, do you have a guilty one? :p

113,293 ... with maybe another 500(?) taken in the Reduction zone season ...

133.492 Now.....as we are entering a maintenance/maintain phase of the reduction mode started in 2012 I would think we will be around this figure for a few years to come.

Hard to believe that in 2003 we dreamed of a day when the state was capable of producing a consistent harvest of over 110,000.

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/8367.htm#deerharvest

113,525 right now. Urban zone season still open for a while.

Last minute checkins from Sunday ... ??

113,558 Now....probably is but if the Urban reduction zones are killing that many per day we might get to that 119,000

113,478 now. Oh no we are going backwards. Not only are the live deer disappearing from the field, the dead ones are disappearing from our freezers. Come to think of it, I haven't checked my meat supply in the past couple days.

Haven't been on here in a while but if you don't think the opening day numbers affected the totals then you are nuts. Add a normal opening day to the totals and no one is complaining

113,471 now....still dropping

Someone suggested the early archery numbers are up. Don't forget, early archery season was six days longer compared to a year ago....and those were six rut days.

Didn't see where anyone pointed out the late anterless firearms season (where applicable) was nearly twice as long as a year ago.

I get the opening day argument...but only to an extent. There was ALOT of firearms deer hunting opportunity remaining after opening day. I heard the day two harvest was down as well...which really makes me scratch my head....

Day one of firearms was down (as compared to last season) roughly 19,000 deer due in no small part to the statewide high winds that day. Day two of firearms was down very little (as compared to last season) by roughly 1,400 deer. Day 3-16 was up this season (as compared to last season) by roughly 8,500 deer.

Early archery was up (there was an extra 5 days this season) by roughly 5,000 deer .

Muzzleloader was also up this season by roughly 2,000 deer.

Late antlerless (with fewer counties but extra days) was up a few hundred deer.

As far as the opener of firearms season goes, we all know that day one is THE day and there was no way that deficit was going to be made up completely over the rest of the firearms season as there are many hunters who hunt only opening weekend and sat out that Saturday due to the weather.

All the other days that were up was probably due t”Catch up” from lost opportunities opening day you think 🤔

I would imagine days 3-16 of the firearms season being up by roughly 8,500 deer (as compared to last season) were likely hunters trying to make up for the lost opener. But nothing is like the opener. That one day normally accounts for 33% of the total deer killed in the entire firearms season. Cut it by 19,000 deer (as compared to last season) and that drops that 33% of total firearms season harvest to about 10%.

And you can't make all of that up, it's just not going to happen.

But jjas.......... you're wanting us all to believe that "19,000 more deer would have been shot on opening day" ?? ...... you're not taking into consideration how much lower that number would have been already EVEN with perfect weather conditions due to the overharvesting, several seasons of rifles and more days/weeks to shoot does from years prior.....

Some are banking on the myth/fault/reason for low harvest is that Hoosier hunters pay for tags, pay for $500-$2500 in guns, pay for ammo, pay for traveling, pay for camo and clothing and trail cams, and treestands, etc, etc, etc, etc,............and only hunt one day of gun season on opening day Saturday. LOL!!


And those same "jjas's/people/hunters" tout that it only takes "one day to get 1/3 of the harvest completed with a gun"........... but cry "foul" if you say then "ok, we don't need as many gun days then do we".......

Such a "two faced" little bunch aren't they......

I'm not going back down the rabbit hole with you Dew...

No one on this forum wants it, and I'm not going to humor you by doing so...

Enjoy your evening...

Stay strong. You can do it. Maybe it'll go back under the bridge.

"Dew as I say not as I Dew".....O it's so fitting!

Early archery was up SIX days...all of those being rut days. I have no way of verifying the 5,000 number...but not at all surprised if the early archery harvest was up by adding six prime rut hunting days to the season. Where I hunted, November 7th through the 14th were incredible for buck movement. Last three days of early archery...not so much.

Where applicable, the late antlerless firearms season went from 7 days to 13 days comparatively.
Given the frigid temps, it will interesting to see the impact...or lack thereof.

For what it is worth, the property I hunt (800+ private acres) had the same eight gun hunters the first nine days of general firearms season. A year ago, all eight guys filled their buck tags. This year only two guys filled their buck tags. The timing of the opener made a major impact on the number and quality of bucks seen/killed.

IMO, the opening day weather on November 18th could have been perfect...and the harvest would have still been down substantially from last season's November 12th opener. Based on what I saw the 12th-14th...had general firearms opened on the 12th or 13th....that group would have fared significantly better...just like last year.

We had at least three different fawns on the farm this year carrying visible spots into October. I doubt any of the three weighed more than 40lbs by the firearms opener. Definitely late births. No coincidence in my mind this happened following the early firearm opener. Way too many bucks killed before they had a chance to breed.

The math is simple. If you have a 4:1 doe/buck ratio going in (probably very good for most areas in the state), so 40 does/10 bucks....and you kill five of each prior to peak breeding dates (1:1 being the average firearms season harvest ratio), your doe/buck ratio climbs to 7:1 (35/5). You just extended the rut into the winter months. Not good for the bucks. Not good for the does. Not good for the fawns. i.e. Not good for the deer herd as a whole.

But then again, when was the last time Indiana did anything good for the deer herd?

I won't dispute that this year's firearms season harvest of older bucks would likely have been down due to the late start date. How much? Who knows...But when you throw the lousy weather we had statewide on the opener on top of that, you get what we did...a opening day harvest cut by 75% (as compared to last year).

If you have 800 private acres to hunt and you're not happy with the buck/doe ratio, then why doesn't your group take more does or limit the number of bucks taken? We have a rough idea of how many deer are on the properties we hunt and we set goals on how many does and bucks we feel should be taken. When (if) those goals are met, those properties aren't hunted again that season.

I get your overall point. And yes, in a perfect world, no one would be in the woods during November and the deer could breed 100% naturally. But you and I both know that isn't going to happen as both bow and gun hunters want to hunt during that month.

And that is, was, and will likely continue to be, the major bone of contention here...

I don't think it's possible to have a herd with the sex ratio as out of whack as 4:1. Let's say you finish last year with 40 does and 10 bucks and a 1 fawns per doe average with a 50/50 birth rate. You start the next season with 60 does, 20 button bucks, and 10 bucks, 2:1. Next year 90 does, 30 button bucks, and 20 bucks, 1.8:1. Next year 135 does, 45 button bucks, and 30 bucks 1.8:1. This is assuming you kill every buck every year and never kill a doe. Based on harvest data that's not happening, so most areas are really close to 2:1 even if specific properties hold deer at different rates due to property characteristics. The bucks will find the does during the breeding period and return to their home range.

I can't dispute that there are areas within the state that have skewed buck/doe ratios, but I've looked at the harvest data for years and if you add the percentages of antlered deer and male fawns together it comes up to roughly 50% of the total number of deer killed year in and year out. So if on a male/female basis, the deer are being killed on a one to one ratio, you would think that it would be tough to have widespread ratios that far out of whack.

Never said I wasn't happy with the buck:doe ratio on the farm I hunt. We run alot of trail cameras 8-9 months out of the year to keep a good "inventory" on the local herd. Antlerless harvest decisions are based on inventory.

That said, even on 800 acres...it is difficult to
manage without outside influence. Some deer get killed on neighboring properties and a few get poached by trespassers I'm sure. We just can't take off work and patrol the property lines 40 days/year.

By our best estimates, the farm tends to run a ballpark 3:1 doe to buck ratio on any given year (not including fawns). I'm confident that is a much better ratio than the majority of the state. There may be pockets of very low deer density with better ratios...but who wants that?

Curious Dew...for years the average amount of harvest that one small opening day of firearm has accounted for roughly 30-35% of the total firearms season harvest. You truly believe we at minimum wouldn't have been back up and around that very consistent figure?

If you don't believe so, why not?

Thanks in advance. Also please don't write diatribe with off shoot points and such, just looking for the answers of the above. Thanks.

QDMA says Midwestern states typically run somewhere between 3:1 and 5:1 doe:buck ratio. That's why I used 4:1 in my example...middle of the road. Jim Mitchell once told the Indiana Deer Advisory Council that he believed Indiana averaged a 6:1 doe:buck ratio. That was roughly the same time frame the one buck rule was initially adopted...so I doubt that ratio holds true today.

I agree the bucks will find the does...it just might take multiple breeding cycles for that to happen. Multiple breeding cycles are bad for adult deer (additional stress on bucks and does during the worst part of the year weather/food wise). Multiple breeding cycles also spread out the fawn drop....which is absolutely terrible for fawn recruitment. A shorter fawn drop period equals less fawns falling prey to coyotes.

My message here...although I doubt many are listening...is the general firearms season should NEVER open until after peak breeding dates. It would not take much of a shift in timing to make that happen.

open the gun season the Saturday before Thanksgiving, run it for 1 week, then shut it down .... either completely end the late Dec. kill all the Doe's season or drastically cut back the counties in it, drop more counties to 3 AL bonus's or less ... not everyone lives in a idealistic world where they have control over what is killed on certain properties ...

jeff valovich I've read similar comments on this forum (and others) plus on facebook, so I went back and looked @ the data from 2009/16 and what I found I think some will find surprising.

From 2009/2011 (the last seasons I have data for before the late antlerless season was implemented), antlerless deer killed with a firearm (firearms and muzzleloader seasons) made up (on average) 74% of the total antlerless harvest or 59,000 antlerless deer per season.

From 2012/2016 (after the late antlerless season was implemented), antlerless deer killed with a firearm (firearms, muzzleloader and late antlerless season) made up (on average) 70% of the total antlerless harvest or 54,000 antlerless deer per season.

In other words....on a statewide basis, the late antlerless season hasn't increased the antlerless harvest (on average) by either percentage or number of deer with a firearm.

In actuality, the antlerless harvest with a firearm has just been spread out among the firearms, muzzleloader and late antlerless seasons and that has actually resulted in lower percentages and actual numbers (on average) since the late antlerless season was implemented.

A new weapon (crossbow) was also added in 2012. More weapon choices will make the harvest percentages by weapon drop by default.

This is strictly about the number of antlerless deer killed with a firearm. And people have been saying since the inclusion of the late antlerless season that it's up, and overall, it's down on both a percentage and numbers basis since 2012.

Point being...if you did away with the late antlerless season by making all counties a 3 the way some have suggested be done, what would likely happen is we would see a rise in harvest numbers of antlerless deer in the firearms and muzzleloader seasons to offset the loss of that season.

BTW, it's impossible to tell how much of an impact crossbows have had on the antlerless harvest as the data isn't broken down that way.

What's the "consistent figure" you're referring to?? The 30-35% total harvest of opening day firearms? Or........ the total actual number deer shot that day "for years"?

Valid, I'd say either way you want to take it...but for at least the last 5 years if memory serves we've averaged well over 20K so let's roll forward with that. Thanks in advance.

For someone who has done nothing but complain about the late antlerless season, why would settle for anything less other than it being completely shut down for?

And moving all counties to 3 bonus antlerless still does not solve the problem with Does being killed off.

If you can take three extra Does and your neighbors all take three extra Does, guess what you still not going to see deer as they are still going to be nearly wiped out.

If you truly want to make a difference than the state is going to have to limit you to total amount of deer period. Personally I would like to see the state implement a quota like they do with State Park hunts.

One Buck and two Does or three Does and that is it. Also, you are limited to ONE Doe per county till you've hit your limit. Most hunters do not hunt multiple counties so it would work great and you would start to see a huge impact within a few years.

that would work also ..

"If you can take three extra Does and your neighbors all take three extra Does, guess what you still not going to see deer as they are still going to be nearly wiped out."

well heck, Ive said similar in many threads... a high bonus country number gives the impression there is an over abundance of deer, when in many areas there is not within that county... and even though most dont take more than 2 or 3 total deer, it will ad up on said property if multiple people take those 2 or 3+
.... Ive also called for a state wide hunter limit... no more than the 3 limit tag that is available ... actually I wouldnt mind a two deer limit (thats my own personal limit now), but those with the bundle would beech up a storm..

When all the bundle talk was going on, I really was hoping it would be a two deer, any season bundle instead of a three. The could have retailed it for $55.00 and then sold bonus antlerless tags after that for $24.50 each.

But...it didn't happen and I don't know that it will change anytime soon....

Let's not go by "memory"...... please find the last 5 years opening day harvest exact #'s..... the year, then the number.

Thanks

here ya go:

The last 5 years the first day of firearms season have been as follows...

2016 25,000 deer 32% of the total firearms harvest
2015 26,000 deer 35% of the total firearms harvest
2014 24,000 deer 34% of the total firearms harvest
2013 21,000 deer 28% of the total firearms harvest
2012 26,000 deer 36% of the total firearms harvest

The average per year is 24,400 deer and the percentage of the firearms harvest is 33% of the total firearms harvest

First off......."averages" don't matter in this game. Year start number to year where we are number .... matter. As I've said before...... if you have two tires, one with 40 pounds of pressure and the other with 10 pounds...... you don't still go driving around (unless you're just dumb) and say things are OK since your still have an average of 25 pounds between the two tires. You pay attention to the "here and now" and pay attention to the day/year and screwed up tire that is THEEEE problem and take a look on how to fix it. Just throwing "averages for the last 3,5 or 10 years" is just a jjas/Woody trick to "soften the appearance" of what TODAY really is compared to the year we STARTED.......... so please don't go there with me tyni.

As for your numbers...... you still didn't give me exact numbers......did you round up or down from the exact number for that year. For example was 2015 26,950 and then 2016 25050? What could appear in your estimates and look like only 1,000 animal diff........ it would be truly be 1,900 animals.

See...... I've played this game with jjas's long enough to know that "memory" and "estimates" and "everything was the same" is code for trouble....just like until jjas's were reminded recently (which they knew all along) that everything was NOT the same this year compared to last with extended antlerless and extended archery this year. They (jjas's) didn't want to pop that truth serum out till they were forced to...... and still want to live in denial of what that points to....

But being the "honest guy" you are coming from Woody's forum and camp......... lets not go by memory or estimates......

Exact numbers please.... and then I'll type what I'm thinking so you can tell me I'm wrong....

Whatever man...assumptions as to my thoughts and feelings....sorry I rounded numbers but not gonna bother getting exact as you've already written off any merit of conversation.

Zero clue who you are personally so the assumptions are amusing...have a good one.

Thought that's where this would head. Just wanted to see if you were directionally rounding numbers on some years but not the others.......and address with you the whole "averaging years together" nonsense.

Bottom line......... the jjas's/Brew's and others on so called "hunting sites" that were NOT the majority messed up our IDNR several years ago....... now it's on THEM to come up with a fix to the train wreck they initiated. They ABSOLUTELY want to portray no fault of theirs whatsoever at this point..... nor attempt to fix the spiral we are on.

But some of us here have a memory....... and some of us here know what is going to be fixed and HOW it will be fixed........

I'd be good with 3 deer (one buck max). I'm not sure it would really do much except for the potential psychological impact of creating the impression of scarcity. Maybe folks would shoot fewer deer but I really doubt it.

One thing to keep in mind is that we function with limited data that is essentially restricted to how many dead deer each county has at the end of the season. That's good for overall trends but its a small window looking at the deer population.

In 2016, there were 2,166 hunters that killed more than 3 deer (and 852 of that 2,166 killed more than 4). And while some will disagree, I don't really consider that a huge number (852) of hunters statewide when we've been in the midst of herd reduction.

FWIW...it's my understanding that the DNR is shifting more towards a "management as needed" goal and as such I'm sure there are going to be counties that are targeted for reduction as population trends warrant. Just as I would imagine that there will be more counties removed from the late antlerless season this year (as there have been for the last few years).

Additionally, I suspect few of those that kill 4 or more deer are hunting in areas that are low on deer.

You wouldn't think so, but I have no idea.

They could be hunting a county that's an 8 and taking that many deer off a single property, or they could be hunting multiple counties and/or properties and taking one deer off each farm.

Who knows?

The new post confirmation survey Joe sends out would be able to decipher this information...we may never see it but they will.

That is if everyone does the survey like they should...

Hopefully Joe can glean some good info, and perhaps include it in the harvest report this year.

The only person I know that shoots 4 or more is doing it on his intensely managed lease. He told me once he considers shooting does a chore. I get that intellectually but it still makes me a little sad emotionally.

You make a very good point.

While it's popular to generalize...not all hunters who are shooting multiple does are doing so with little (or no) regard to the overall number of does they are seeing. Some are actually trying to manage the herd on their land.

My point is, statistically you can't make an apples to apples comparison of harvest percentages (harvest numbers mean squat as the the harvest varies annually) unless the weapon opportunity is directly comparable.

Think of the total harvest as a whole pie. The more slices you cut into a whole pie, the smaller the slices become. The crossbow added a slice that didn't exist before. That difference cannot be accounted for pre-2012.

The difference in the archery percentage of total antlerless harvest can be compared pre/post crossbow inclusion.

From 2009/2011 (pre-crossbow inclusion) that number was 24% of the total antlerless harvest. From 2012/2016 (post crossbow inclusion) that number was 28% of the total antlerless harvest for a difference of 4%.

And as such, the firearms percentage of total antlerless harvest dropped in the 2012/16 time frame as I said earlier...

Perhaps I should have made that clearer...

I’m one of the four or mor have been as long as I can remember
Thing is it’s Park hunts, at one time BOK, Ohio Co, Switzerland co, Jefferson co, and state park hunts I live here and have more places to hunt than I can get to I own two farms here miles apart , and very rarely will I kill two deer on the same farm and spots I hunt are miles apart so just because a guy Killed 4 or more doesn’t really tell the whole story

what was the total kill this year of all the park reductions ?... they are now being added to the total kill ... dont think they were doing this before.. did they do that last year ?.. previous years ? ... no tags are used in the reductions, but yet the the kill numbers are in the final totals ....... the 2016 summary shows graphs from the park kills, but were they always included in the total ?? I found the answer... no, not until 2016 were they included, but the totals were adjusted ..

2016-2017 DEER HUNTING SEASON
Deer Harvested by Season
Previous summaries of Indiana deer hunting seasons
did not include harvest numbers from Indiana State Park
Reduction Hunts because those deer were checked in at
the properties and reported separately by the Division of
State Parks and Reservoirs. Now that the deer check-in
process is online for all hunters and hunts, deer harvested
during State Park Reduction Hunts are included
in the check-in database and can be reported with the
statewide totals. Therefore, the 2016 summary includes
harvest numbers from this year’s State Park Reduction
Hunts. Additionally, harvest totals from 1993 to 2015 have
been adjusted to include deer harvested during these
hunts (Figures 1 and 2).

The park hunt summary from 2016 showed 1219 deer being taken.....

Here are the state park numbers...


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...MRR.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0s0kbcYgeaOLFXb9I39seo

Thanks for the info on the park hunts. Interesting. Maybe I should consider doing one again. I had a bad experience last time down at Versailles State Park. A little yearling buck showed up about an hour after daylight. Being small, I chose to let him go and try and take a doe since that was the goal to reduce the herd. Bubba, the guy next to me decides to shoot. I'm fine with that, good luck. He misses. The deer runs right between us. Bubba keeps shooting three more times. I was grateful that I was in a stand. After that, I got down and went home. No park hunt is worth getting shot.

Deleted double post. Oops.

ending with 113,585
-1000 aprox from the park reductions
--------
112,585 for 2017 or there about's....

Why would you subtract the park bucks when every year prior includes them in the harvest?

they only started to include them ... plus there are not any "tags" used for the reductions... why should they be included

This is the statement about the harvest totals as it relates to the reduction hunts.


Additionally, harvest totals from 1993 to 2015 have
been adjusted to include deer harvested during these hunts.

Personally I didnt realize the park hunts are now part of the online check-in process for all hunters and hunts.

But as stated 2016 summary includes harvest numbers from this year’s State Park Reduction Hunts. Additionally, harvest totals from 1993 to 2015 have been adjusted to include deer harvested during these hunts (per the report)

I wrote that many posts back .....

So what's the confusion? All the prior years have already adjusted per the information.