Deer numbers have been declining, especially in the Midwest.

Deer numbers have been declining, especially in the Midwest.
Here are the Top-5 reasons why. http://t.co/jnPuedQkbi

Well written article.

RE #4 QDMA has cited many studies which shows how destructive coyotes are to fawns and deer populations.

https://www.qdma.com/articles/who-controls-your-fawn-supply

Let’s look at some studies:
(Blanton et al. 1989) found, “MS, AL, KY and TN, fawning deer were the most frequent (74%) major food of coyotes”.
(Wooding et al. 1984) found, “MS, AL (71.4%) fawn deer are the major food of coyotes, predation could potentially impact white-tail deer recruitment.”
(Bartush et al. 1981) “Fawn loss by predators commonly exceeded 70%”
(Cook et al. 1971) found, “coyote predation accounted for 79% of fawn mortalities”
(Epstein et al. Roberts 2007) found, “bobcats were responsible for 57%-82% of fawn mortalities”
(Stout et al. 1982) found, “154% increase in fawn recruitment following 2 years of predator control”
(Bartush & Lewis 1981) “fawn mortality of 90% has been reported, due to coyote predation”

I agree, the lack of fawn recruitment can be a factor of coyotes for sure....I also agree on the over use of antlerless tags....and EHD took its toll in many areas a few years back..... I did see signs of a heavier winter kill two winters back, esp. up in the Nat. Lakeshore and surrounding areas when we had that really nasty winter...we'll see what this season brings...

Hit it on the head Valovich, some things we can change and some we can't. We working on the things we can. Come help us, you seem to get it brother.

Gary IWDHM Group.

I just can't believe coyotes are that big a problem if they killed the deer some seem to believe there would be NODeer no.s just dont add up .. You loose x no. Deer depridation permits so many from harvest so many from cats so many from poaching things just dont make sense to me there's a lot more deer than people think to be able to sustain all those losses and still see deer

You are correct..... And notice the articles in the info Brew puts up are from the 1970's - 1980's. We grew deer herds all over the Midwest during and after those articles. And today the finger pointing is still at Coyotes???? LOL!!

In all fairness, there seems to be a lot of areas that habitat loss is fairly significant and for not only fawns but also for upland production, the predator issue is probably more significant in many areas today then it was back then. Certainly not everywhere though.

Back in the '80's/'90's coyotes were scarce...fox were still plentiful as were the deer....now the deer are in low numbers and fox are almost non-existent in many places and coyotes are super plentiful....fox were never much of a problem to deer, coyotes are..... so is the over abundance of antlerless tags ;0)..... habitat was also more plentiful....developers and farmers have taken much of that now... CRP ?...whats that ...lol......fence rows are a dirty word to many farmers now as are CRP fields.....

And it isn't just loss of habitat as the only big factor that is habitat. Far too much maturity occurring in a lot of woods...people no longer log timber in a plan...park like woods with no understory provide very little food for deer.

Interesting that there is actually quite a bit of cutting the last couple of years on public lands in my area. Selective timber harvest, cutting out pines planted by the ccc long ago, controlled burns, etc. And Jeff, I had a red fox run across in front of the truck while on evening deer cruise last night!

Double B that is great news! More public and parks should do it more.

Back on topic, do bobcats have much of an impact on deer? My hunch is they are munching turkey poults right and left down here and maybe they are increasingly taking a slice of the (fawn) pie too. I know they are very efficient hunters and are increasing in numbers.

Here is what coyotes doing to newborns.

https://www.facebook.com/gawalters1/posts/10153519409119233

One of does on farm lost fawn this week. At feeder I got for my elderly neighbors to see we border them on two sides. Doe and fawn coming in every evening and also eating leaves off her chinease maple 20 yards out their window with hummingbird feeders. The fawn has stopped coming for a week. ? What happened but appears it gone for good.

Yotes aren't dumb, feeders can become like drive thru's for them.

reminds me of a peta add IMO

I assure you throback I am far from PETA AND WILL CONTEND killed more animals all over this country than most on this forum. However, my love for the resource has never wained for a moment. Nor doing what is right and humane.

Throbak, because I care about the resource and its future and being humane does not make me an endorser of PETA. I VENTURE TO DAY I have killed more animals humanely all over this great country than most on this forum.

However, the mine bigger than yours does not matter. Fact is I as well as our most primitive ansestors worked to ensure they had food to hunt another day after today. Because I teach my grandchildren to care as well is a fact any HUNTER should be proud of.

Sorry thought first one did not post. Apologize for redundency.

Its just playing on emotions and most will agree very Peta like. Killing a female coyote with a den full of pups is not something I want to be a part of any more than depridation hunts they are the same and again IMO .they both leave suffering young

Gary, you are though fairly consistent in any discussion good at bringing up how you're "better" "more accomplished" or "done more" than others....kinda creates disharmony in a discussion.

Don't disagree with him you will be banned from posting on the FB page.lol

I wouldn't bother replying to him.

Gary:

You will quickly find out that "bravado" wont gain you any friends here or on other sites, the "i'm a better hunter than you" doesn't work. Killing more critters "all over the country" just means you had more opportunity than others. What people would be interested in was where and how your hunt went in another state.Now to my points..........

1. you will get no further resistance from the IDHA. Just remember that when an anti hunting Facebook page wants a seat at the table, you can't oppose.

2. You will find that IDNR really does not react to your comments at the FWCC, they are there to TELL you what they are doing. The Natural Resource Department is run by the Governor's office. It has been that way for 10 years and will not change as long as there is a Republican in that office, and yes I have voted for the past two Governors.

3. Your premise that Facebook matters is flawed, questions can be manipulated to get a response the poster wants,example......"Would you like to see more deer where you hunt?" Who as a deer hunter is going to say less? Ask a farmer who depends on his crop if he wants more deer? Or a guy who just totaled his vehicle on a deer.

4. You want folks to contact their legislators. GOOD LUCK WITH THAT! I saw where you typed a letter and urged people to copy and paste it to legislators......you might as well used a poll, they value both equally........lol. Next time ask your Facebook members to go to their district town hall meeting and ask their legislators face to face why can't IDNR have our license fees to spend. No one will go.....except maybe your Board of Directors. Been there done that.

5. You blast IDNR for THEIR deer management plan yet you want to be on the FWCC and work with them? Gary they have a person who reads ALL of these sites and reports to the administration, after beating them up do you really believe they are going to work with/for you?

6.After 30 plus years of working with IDNR and several times against them I know my place. You will soon get a taste of it. IDNR is part of government and as such it NEVER has enough money.It needs more of the citizen dollar,it perpetuates itself at our expense.There is no difference between any of our elected politicians in Indiana today except for the (R) or (D) after their names. The Governor appoints IDNR leadership, we don't elect them. So WHO do you think they listen to??

7. IDNR had nothing to do with your lack of deer or anyone else's! YOU and every other legal deer hunter did it to yourself. You did it as conservation, you did it as food for your family, you did it to donate to needy people. when I was saying that this would lead to a drastic reduction in some areas I was told by a Indiana Deer Biologist, "we built a deer herd once we can do it again". Looks like one day they will have to do it again..... Not going to be my problem, been there done that and know the support of sportsmen is not there.

Enjoy your time here and on the FWCC, it wont be long.....you don't have the patience.

Interesting points....

Certainly sportsman engagement has always been an issue and "keeping it going" can and will wear even the most dedicated person down. I certainly hope that influence for sportsmen can be gained somehow. It's been a downhill slide for a few years now.

Joe,

Was that an apology, what? Seem to say you won't resist us any longer, then go on to do just that? That is one of the most divisive discouraging letters I ever read. Very too little, way too late. Guess the history of talking out both sides of your mouth continues. As far as friends, and BRAVADO, I am not attempting to make friends, or lead anything, rather to expand a movement that is already going strong that feels we are overharvesting deer. I have no agenda for personal recognition or power. Nor do I have an agenda to limit any voice from any citizen.

I was only responding to a post that basically was stating my post was a PETA advertisement. What hunter would promote a practice that starves fawns to death. I was clarifying I do not qualify for membership in PETA. Never said I was a better hunter than anyone. I will say though, the opportunities you speak of come from hard back breaking work year round freeing up time in the fall and winter to travel and hunt, as well as back breaking work on education, sacrifice, discomfort, and teamwork in the actual hunting process. All things the "FAMILY" as you call us do to be successful. Not on the backs of others, as some do; I as well have a memory. That is the beauty of being an American, if you want it bad enough you can have it. Karma also has a way for rewarding those that work for it, and not so much those that take advantage of others for it.

In response to your bullet points:

1. This post in itself is resistance and personal attacks. No professionalism at all. And yes we welcome anyone at the table. I would rather look my enemy in the eye and debate them with science, than ignore them, and let them go to the legislature behind our back and push their agenda. Just as Farm Bureau has for the thirty years under your watch. All while you argue really insignificant meaningless issues that really do nothing to protect the resource or our hunting heritage in the big picture.
The model we are promoting for a Deer Advisory Council does just that, brings all stakeholders to the table, and releases legislative demands allowing the biologists and trained scientist to do their job.

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/cdac.html

Look at the map on Wisconsin's plan. Almost all counties are at a maintain or increase level. They are reacting to the council in big ways.

2. I agree after attending a year's worth of meetings, that the FWCC is a defunct committee that obviously has run its course. Not one wild deer issue was brought up. But another thing we noticed is that issues that would benefit deer and deer hunters were not even commented on by the DEER GROUPS, let alone supported. For example asking the legislature to look into dispersement of funding, we paid for, for the DNR to manage our resources. Not one deer group signature on that petition. Or attempting to gain more public land, or access. Resources we just let go, because the deer groups and others wouldn't get on board. Specifically, Newport, grant programs, etc. Resources that were already owned by the citizen's. My goodness.

If you have the negative attitude it will not change, then it won't. One can have a positive attitude and raise enough heck that something will change and give. One way to do that is not get bogged down in the BS divisive issues and concentrate on the elephant in the room, habitat, hunter access, resource research and PROPER management. That is across the board, because the waterways, forests, grouse, deer, and all other natural resources are not an entity in themselves but part of the circle.

3. This just doesn't make any sense. Any political issue is going to have manipulations, opinions, facts pointed out that promote a cause being represented. A Presidential campaign, a local school board redistricting plan, a deer herd management plan. I would not make sense for a PRO LIFE group to not use the video's that are currently in the media, which play on emotion, but at the heart reveal a problem that exists. The crops and the car accidents are a fact of life. If not deer, will be and is caused by many other factors. Life is not in a vacuum.

The problem here is bigger than just a crossbow, or cwd, or whatever. The problem is budgets that play shell games with our money to hamstring agencies from doing their job to show a false surplus. Start revealing those things and see how things change. Then it not just a deer issue, but one every non consumptive user can agree on and get involved in as well. Facebook does promote spreading all these ideas, and gaining support in a quick an efficient manner. That is why it is popular not only as social media, but in business, and in the government as well. Why would the agency use it if not a beneficial tool?

4. Again negativity. Of course, apathy is human nature. Until we lose something, most don't bother with it. The whole point of a movement is awareness. When people become aware of losses, aware of the shell game, then they will lose their apathy, then it becomes personal. Some say their area is still in good shape. Great, but lets make them aware, a large part of people thoughout the state said the same thing before the excessive harvests and EHD, not to mention hundreds of other environmental factors.

The great conservationists of the past, had the foresight, to see what was being lost, prior to it all being gone. Then had the desire to motivate apathetic people to realize what they were losing.

5. I am glad the DNR has someone reading all our posts and this page as well. We will keep raising heck until someone reading them will take them seriously. We have made perfectly clear we believe the everyday DNR employee's perform their job out of love for the resources, not for the pay or fame. That is obvious. However, politicians, and leadership is hamstringing their efforts. If we do not complain, how will anything ever change.

You are forgetting an important aspect to this picture. The Government and their agencies work for us. In this case, they are mandated by law to conserve, research, and protect the citizen's resources. We have no obligation to mince words, or to talk them into working with us as citizens. It is their responsibility and duty under law. This is not a good old boys club. That is the problem, the hunting groups have become complacent in pleasing the DNR to work on their PET issues, instead of insisting they manage the resources for us as citizen's. That has left a bad taste in everyone's mouth and lost you all your credibility an influence. That is why we do not stand for or against these statistically insignificant issues, and are advocating for the resource, not just as hunters, but as non consumptive users, uniting all for the common purpose, that benefits the resource and all citizens.

That is why our government is set up in three different branches. Government 101, if the agencies of the executive branches are not fulfilling the execution of legislative mandate, and the citizen's interests are not followed, there is a Judicial Branch to call them on it, and also the legislative branch to oversee spending and so forth. See you have to fight the big picture. No one really cares about a crossbow, just for one example.

6. The above addresses that. However, if you are familiar the rules of a non for profit agency, as an officer you cannot mention partisan politics as you did here and in #2 of your post.

7. Of course every hunter pulled the trigger or released the arrow; however, they were given misleading information by the very agency that is mandated by law to research, and protect the resource for all citizens. The average hunter is not a biologist. Most assume, their biologists are setting these limits for a reason. Hard to do, when there is not even a proper number of biologists to do the job, because of the shell game of budgeting and appropriations, for a false sense of surplus.`

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF OUR EXISTENCE IS TO RAISE AWARENESS AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

The DNR DFW continues to promote this idea of the whitetail deer being an unlimited natural resource with the liberalized bag limits, depredation tags, end of year reduction seasons, and bag limits in State Parks. There is no such thing as an unlimited natural resource, and if not conserved, any generation can use it all up for their own needs, budgetary or otherwise. If the citizen's do not stand up, why should they (government/politicians) look past today, and the success or failure of only their term. The great ones did, but how many are considered great.

As someone posted on here, when they go fishing they catch the bag limit. Most do. Most believe if they only catch the bag limit the resource is safe. Now we all now if everyone did that would be very incorrect. With 8 doe counties, and 10 deer reduction limits, on top of what is one of the most liberal bag limits in the Midwest at the cheapest rate, the DNR is misleading the citizen's they are representing. National and regional media has picked up on the downtrend. Your own beloved QDMA has even stated Indiana is the ONLY STATE that continues to be in the reduction mode. True there was a few decreases in the bonus county system, but again statistically insignificant.

Lastly, thanks for your BLESSING, however I don't think we really need it in this divisive fashion. And will go on record here and now, we are a new group, we are going to make waves. We are going to raise heck, and draw awareness, to the issue of overzealous herd reduction, and more specifically the shell game of the finances behind it. We attempted to start out with common decency of just talking and getting our movement a voice. You personally in representing a great organization, attempted to circumvent that voice.

After looking over tax records and public records, it would seem your interference was really hypocritical as well. You continue to state criteria that don't exist, and continue to maybe even believe the illusion that we need your permission. According to tax records, I venture to say we exponentially exceed your membership, with our TRUE MEMBERSHIP, not just our Facebook page followers. So in a few short months the movement has had positive growth. So now instead of asking to be heard we will be. But thanks for you concern and interest. I wish the IDHA the best of luck in all their endeavors, from the bottom of my heart. What once was a buzzing hive, just trying to live and be heard, has been shaken from its slumber to an aggravated opened up hornets nest.

Am I the only one that saw little or no malice in the post that Gary responds to? Bluntly honest with all the struggles IDHA has felt/been through sure, but don't see the "attacks" as they seemingly were taken as.

And just for the record I followed and was even going to join the IWDHM before they banned me for some bull "disharmony" thing for simply discussions. I am not a member of the IDHA...so I have no biasness towards either side.

Good Luck Gary............

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/cdac.html

Thank you.

Was the EAB program part of herd reduction?

The stakeholder groups represented on these councils include:
•a hunting and/or sporting group;
•agriculture;
•forestry;
•local government;
•transportation;
•tourism; and
•the Deer Management Assistance Program.


EAB? Educational Approval Board

GaryWalters EAB....earn a buck....

Was the earn a buck program part of herd reduction?

If so, do you know when it started and do you also know when Wisconsin upped their antler less permit numbers?

History of deer hunting in Wisconsin...not sure what they miss though:

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/assembly/bernier/pressreleases/Pages/Deer%20Hunt%20History.aspx

1987 first year with bonus antlerless permits


1996 - EAB start if I interpretted it right.

IWDHM does not know that IDNR has its own plan for deer management, it does not follow any other state. IDNR had meetings for hunter input on quotas before, now they don't feel the need to include our input.

IWDHM probably will be getting the Legislature involved in deer management, our Legislators are all experts in this field also.

I'm going to enjoy watching this side show!

+1....

Me too Joe

Which 2 board members resigned Gary? How many does that leave?

Ok, before we all get cranked up again, is it possible to focus on deer issues, management issues and not one organization vs. another organization. S_wilk, is it possible to private message Gary and ask that question? There is no relevance to this topic.

If IWDHM can make a difference, good for them. Will it be difficult, yes. Impossible, I don't know. The IDHA tried to make a difference and for a while, under different DNR management and government attitude, might have made some difference. Is there apathy in the existing groups and those who have beat their heads against the wall for year, yes. Does that mean they don't care any longer, no. But, does that mean the IWDHM or any other new group doesn't have a chance to change the course of things, no. So, why this constant discourse? Hey, whichever the new group is or how many there may be, give them a chance and leave the rhetoric behind. Maybe, sooner or later, some new group will somehow find a way to have an affect and help the DNR. This is ridiculous.

Delaney the pause or nature in which some of us respond to Gary is from the blatant abuse and mistreatment many of us received from IWDHM.

Funny thing is Swilk and I many a times have both stated to eachother that we agree with their overall mission and most of their major points. However, there is a lot of misleading and unprofessional management which attempts to shut up ANYONE which doesn't close their mouth with any doubts and merely follow like a blind sheep.

I wanted to join the IWDHM, I was one of the few that stayed active and posted frequently about topics/posts they would do on Facebook...no longer due to being banned for the excuse of the "disharmony" I caused. I never swore, never discredited anyone's opinion and most of all I simply cared enough to not blindly follow.

So while I get it, it does get redundant at times and yes most of this probably could be taken up by PMs however when you care so much about hunting (as I, Swilk and bet my bottom dollar everyone HERE) it gets your blood boiling to see wool being pulled over the eyes of some.

The funniest thing though Delaney? Is despite being banned, despite being ignored...I still wish them well and support their overall mission and that will never change!

I've said my piece for now, blessings Gary and the IWDHM on their endeavors...blessings to all hunters here who enjoy this lifestyle as much as Gary and all at the IWDHM...and blessings to those who continue to do ALL they can for their own localized herds whether by organizing co-ops, trigger control or supporting groups like IWDHM.

Less than 60 days fellas!!!

+1...Well said and straight to the point!

The Board of the IWDHM does not comment on the resignation of members or individuals that have been banned from our Facebook page. We feel that is a privacy issue. It is not our intent, nor does it serve our purpose to cause embarrassment to anyone.

As much as I would like to comment on some issues for clarification, as some go around the internet, leaving information on more sites than I can mention about their banishment. It would not be good business, and something we feel is just wrong.

Our site will not tolerate constant heckling, or promotion of disharmony for the cause. The "cause", or the resource being available to future generations, is greater than any one individual or group.

I have only attempted to answer mostly Joe on this forum, as he directly used his influence with the IDHA, to directly cause divide, between sportspersons groups just attempting to have a voice. Hence, I believe in the IDHA, and felt it is was necessary to attempt to bridge that divide he caused, for the sake of the majority of IDHA members that have like minded goals as the IWDHM Group.

Does this promote any harmony for the resource? Is this professional? Is this just some chest puffing for ones own satisfaction? I would suggest we acknowledge personal dissatisfaction with each other, and leave the groups and the resource out of it, for the betterment of our environment and resources. I would hope we can at least agree on that!

Gary - someone posted on your FB page (using the IWDHM credentials) about the board members resigning; surely that person must be aware that you do not comment on such things?? If not, you might want to make them aware.

The only reason I asked was because of that post .... I was curious to know who it might be.

That's a BS statement if I every seen one...

The IWDHM started the "DIVIDE" on there FB page after the first attendance of a FWCC meeting with there "Constant Heckling" about what other Deer groups DIDN'T say while attending a meeting!!

You need to get your facts in order Gary before you start pointing the FINGER of "DIVIDE"......SMH

Here are the current IWDHM Group Board Members:

IWDHM Group Staff and Board of Directors

Matt Barton, Wabash
Gary Walters, RN, Indianapolis, Mansfield
Kevin Barr, Wabash
John Adkins, Lagro
Tim Moore, Mooresville
David Hutchinson, Underwood
Weston Pavey, Whitestown

Due to privacy agreements, my previous statement stands. Here are the current Board of Directors, I hope that will answer your questions.

Greg, I would just ask what would you like from us? What would be your suggestion of how we change to meet your needs? Would that meet the needs of the thousands that state we are overharvesting the deer in their areas? Would that promote the health of the herd and the hunting heritage per our mission statement? What are your goals with the deer herd? How would you go about accomplishing these goals? Maybe you have found a better way? Thank you.

I would also like to clarify some misinformation that is going around. You all know our mission statement:

IWDHM is committed to advocating for the health of our deer herd and the preservation of our hunting heritage for future generations.

With that said: it really is that simple.
1. We believe in many areas the herd is being overharvested and simply bag limits need to be adjusted accordingly.

2. We believe the practice of using depredation permits in the summer is unethical and inhumane. We believe this puts hunting in a terrible perspective, and is truly not hunting. We also believe this shuts off many thousands of acres to hunters, that would otherwise need to be opened up to control populations using the management tool of hunting within the seasons. The only tool that has proven effective for decades now, despite new advances in technology.

3. We believe in starting a county deer advisory council similar to Wisconsin's whereas: local stakeholders have a say in the management of the local herds. People that will have a more accurate grasp as to what is going on in their area's with their herds. Then moderation can be attained from both sides of the fence when setting annual bag limits, and these recommendations can be given first hand to the BI
OLOGISTS setting the final bag limits.

4. We believe in working with other groups, where our goals and missions intersect, such as hunter access, habitat issues, clean air and water, etc.

4. Educating hunters to take more ownership in their local deer herds and exercise restraint in harvest when needed d/t overharvest, EHD, fawn recruitment. Also, when needed as management tools to do their part in harvesting those excess deer. However, in most areas that is done, now, we need to just back off for awhile.

What we do not promote.

1. Getting involved in divisive issues that have historically hamstringed the hunting community and groups from being properly recognized and heard due to in-fighting.

2. We do not promote drastic changes to the tradition of season structures, weapons, or other divisive issues that will remain divisive, and basically have already been settled through the processes of the past.

3. We do not promote the total discontinuation of bonus county permits. We believe this is a scientific management tool. We believe; however that the numbers should be more reflective of the area's deer herd population. If nothing more than to promote a sense of the state of the herd in the area. Currently a person could look at the bonus county map from out of state, and look at say Parke County and assume with an educated guess there is a deer behind every tree, come to the state and lease ground and kill 8 does thinking they are doing us a favor. This perception of overpopulation is just not the case any longer in most areas and it is up to us and other groups to change that perception.

I would pray, this would clarify our stances. I also would apologize if there has ever been any fault on our part to make this perfectly clear. We have always attempted to keep this as clear and simple as possible. Of course we are all human, therefore; not perfect. Doing our best to make a difference in legitimate problems we recognize facing the herd. We also suggest if this is either to simple, or complex; please, start a group, focus on the herd, and make the hunter's voice respected once again.

This site doesn't have a like button so I quoted it. All of these major points are why I support IWDHM albeit from the status I am! I do pray you guys make headway in these things Gary!!

Gary,

That's all I was asking for a week or so ago...

jjas, I honestly believed that all this information was given repeatedly, on here, on Facebook, on other forums. I felt like I just kept repeating it and was becoming redundant. Do believe this has been well published, but again, hey, I am human, hence imperfection. If anything to the contrary was/ or has been published, it is NOT THE IWDHM STANCE, period.

What if you don't have/use facebook? A quick google search only lets me see facebook affiliation. DO you have a website?

Cody.Query, no, that is one of our goals. However, with that said, we want to keep the focus on Facebook. While we realize this is a social experiment; we see the potential, that is already being captured in all fields, social, personal, business, non for profit, fund raising, awareness, entertainment. Why not uniting hunters in a simple and easy way to express their voices. Then as staff/directors, we present this information, that is readily accessible to all parties via the internet night or day. So be believe keeping our focus and resources there for continuity is beneficial.

We are working on website, to at least give one other option for those that do not use Facebook. However, again, we are just working guys attempting to organize something for the health of the herd, and operating out of our own pockets, no dues charged, no funds received whatsoever. So some growth such as web site development may be slower than expected.

Gary should you guys want help on the website side of things I can and would be willing to assist ya!

Not nearly as hard as it once was to do it...do not hire a web designer for what you guys want that would be overkill and would cost WAY too much!

How do you join your membership without facebook I guess was the question? I seem to agree with the things you mentioned.

Oh sorry.

Just email to IWDHMGROUP@yahoo.com

Name
Address
Phone

Email


County of Residence
County Hunted

Type of membership: Youth (with parent permission), Individual, Family, and if family names and ages of family members.

Then from that we send out emails to all members as to daily changes, ideas, responses from DNR, legislators, just whatever comes up, keeping all informed best we can.

Thanks for the support Brother

OH Date of Birth Cody

From my view point in working with organizations for 25 years where vision/mission statements are a norm, I have learned that when "repeating it becomes redundant" that is when people just "START" to get it.

Thanks...

Trust me I at all times will always remain respectful no matter what is being discussed. Appreciated your comments and I know exactly what you mean and are getting at and to an extent it is very warranted!

Delaney - curious if you are a moderator or just a member stating an opinion? No disrespect with the question just needing to know so I can more carefully weigh the words.

All moderaters are listed on main page.....Delaney is the voice of reason in many ways!!

Got it. Like I said...no disrespect meant. The question was answered anyway so its a null point.

Not a moderator but as a long member of the IDHA I take interest in how this site reflects upon the organization as well as how all of us interact with each other.

Sorry I old sometimes hit reply button on accident before ready. But anyway was just touching base with Greg. Usually quick to respond to my posts. Seems delayed and I was just curious to what his viewpoint is on my questions?

Can't let it lay,,,can ya?

Well seems he can bad mouth everything I say and stand for, which is his right. Just asking for his opinion on problems and his solution. He has commented since I asked on this exact thread, but provided no real answers or response. I am pointing out what we are up against with this infighting. Calling some people out. It is about time someone does. Lets just start looking at the real picture and quit being politically correct. Those heckling, cannot or will not, provide even their own opinion on the real issues. Everyone should see that. When we all do, then we can move on to solutions and awareness of the real issues. Thanks for your comments weedhopper.

Read that back to yourself a few times, and see if you don't get it.

I get what you are saying weedhopper. Just have a different approach. Have to say for most part working on getting people to focus on real issues, just painful getting there sometimes. We all have our approaches. Think in general, people are tired of the political correctness that has empowered bullies on the net and otherwise. Thanks though.

So back to my questions. What answers, solutions, recommendations, opinions (on the issues) does anyone have? Lets get to the point. Maybe someone has an idea that will blow the lid off everything. Looking for those ideas.

Gary,

-The biggest point I would support and push the DNR to attempt to do is fill the vacant biologist spots. This in my opinion at least could have the biggest impact felt by hunters. Some claim the herd is decimated, others it is surging...neither is wrong probably when you consider their location and localized herds. However, positioning a group of biologists capable of analyzing nature far better than any of us may result in further division of areas which need population control, reduction or increase. This obviously could be easily manipulated by bonus numbers but harvest records show the number of bonus tags actually used wouldn't possibly be enough...perhaps the biologists would find it warranted in some areas to deny depredation permits and bonus tags...who knows.

-Second thing I feel needs to be done is the state to realize regulation changes of harvest totals, late season doe harvests, bonus quotas and all are a tool to manipulate the overall population but EDUCATION of the hunter base is truly what needs accomplished. If the DNR could ever get the amount of money raised from our tags/licenses like they should I would love to see some kind of management education program/campaign pushed across the state. Educate hunters to rely upon their scouting, sightings, trail cameras and browse research to determine how their localized herds are doing...abandon the idea some hold that "if the state says I can take 5 in my county...well than I should 5." This kind of concept or mindset is degrading to hunters and makes us appear morons when you step back and look at the whole picture. Granted this would have to be gone about in a way to not scare those weekend warriors and gun opener only kind of guys/gals that surge the total licenses sold so much, but I'd love to have a state that worries less about how many licenses they sell than how well managed the herd is and how well managed the minds of the hunters in the state are.

-Speaking of the minds of hunters, I think many also need to realize habitat changes can have HUGE impacts on the deer herd around them. A park like mature woods with no under-foilage isn't going to hold the number of deer any hunter desires to see...

-Further on the mindset of hunters is the concept of area co-operatives. Whether they be QDMA based (I know some hate QDMA) or simply a group of hunters from an area coming together to discuss and implement management plans. This can be as simple as communicating doe/buck sightings and harvests as to keep a tab on the harvest figures throughout the year in a great localized area than one hunters back 40 acres...collaboration between hunters is a good thing.

-Depredation tags. A lot of fuss is made of these things...and a lot of it is warranted. I believe filling the biologist positions is how you have this re-evaluated...not evaluated first than the positions. Either way we all know of cases where these are abused...and some of us know where they are honestly needed.

Blessings. Just a few thoughts as I had time to share.

Gary.... Please contact me via PM so we can trade phone #'s. I will discuss with you what works and what doesn't...... And where things are headed. Not going to type that here since there are known trolls on this and other sites that just are living life to treat others as pariah, smear and disrupt good intentions. Not posting what we are doing is a tactic we have had to resort to in the past few years.

Thanks,

Tim

Weedy, Some time ago a wise old member on here gave me some very good advise......remember..??? h.h.

Yep...gotcha.

Gary?????????

Can you explain the following post on your site?

YOU posted a picture and said it WAS a out of season/depradation kill with a fawn left to die.Very compelling picture!



then my son finds the REAL picture that is a ROAD KILL.........and you revise the post to.....



You deceived your members and anyone else looking at the photo! You stole the photo from another site without permission!

And you want to be creditable???????

I now have to original REAL photo do I need to post it?????? Sounds to me you have alot of "Brian Williams" in ya........... "I was there......."LOL.

ROFLMAO

Funny thing about the picture that Joe posted is that you can see the blacktop in the photo...

The original photo was used as an ANTI Hunting photo, it was confirmed as a road kill on www. AR15.com.

Now it has been used to degrade a VERY difficult balancing job by our paid professionals at IDNR.

If Gary and his buddies want to post crap.... we will expose it.

The use of out of season permits result in about 2000 dead deer per year, not a drop in the bucket in over all deer management numbers.

Seems to me if a person or group is always needing to "clear things up" or explain "what they mean" maybe they should just try simple honesty in the first place.

Credibility is not something a man can take from another man....it must be given up. Once given its nearly impossible to get back.

Again Peta like play on emotions tactic that stuff needs to be dropped imo

You can say that again

Well, it just can never end can it. Why is it that this site seems to be all about the new organization? Hey, let the new organization be what it wants to be or say what it wants to say. So what! Leave their stuff to their site. Leave their debate to their site.

Seriously, what is wrong with people. This sounds like some grade school recess stuff. If folks don't like what another organization is saying, simply ignore them. I think HS was pretty much on spot with his post earlier. Can no one see how pathetic all of this sounds and is? Does no one understand how the DNR and others who monitor all these sites laugh at all of this and how they then pretty much discredit the individuals involved with these threads? And you think there is value in all of this?! I never understand how very good people end up acting like this. I guess it's just one of the benefits of social media.

Hey, if you can't post on another organization's website or facebook, you can likely send a private message. If you want to "Call another organization out", can you do it either somewhere else or privately? Geez, enough is enough. Maybe we need new moderating guidelines that suggest that any post relative to the initial topic be removed immediately or the individual be given a time out. Every darn topic recently has almost immediately become so far off topic that is beyond explanation.

Delaney there are BIG frogs everywhere. Going back after em this weekend.....

So the attack continues. Really LOL. I posted legitimate questions to this forum and not a response, except one person, although all those that been spreading hate have been posting. GUESS I FIGURED OUT HOW TO SHUT UP AT LEAST SOME ANTAGONISTIC HECKLING. So I have to believe they just don't want discussion, only their views and need to argue and promote infighting. Continue with fighting and made up crisis. The very thing they accuse us of. They only can exist with constant infighting, and disharmony. Discussion of the issues must be beyond the scope of this forum, or more accurately the few that seem to keep spouting hate, and taking over the forum as some attempted to do on our Facebook page and we do not allow per our policy. Like most examples of hate; they are out of fear they may be losing something, or are just uneducated and fall back to fear as their only reserve. Glass half empty instead of half full. Instead of looking at another group as an asset, they feel threatened in losing their "Power" or what they have; whatever that really is anyway.

I explained the picture on our Facebook page. Though of the 3840 people that viewed the post, less than ten seem to have a problem with it. I would venture to say, just my opinion, that the biggest part of those same <10 are the ones that have a problem with us, either personally or as a group. You are correct, we shouldn't have to clarify every single little detail, to these handful of people that get wrapped up in details. However, in the attempt to be transparent as possible, we do clarify for those handful of people, same ones over and over and over, does get frustrating, and tiring. So if we clarify details for these few, they state we shouldn't have too. If we don't, they state we are not including them in discussion, or hiding something, or lying. You can follow this very thread and see where some are asking for more details, and other saying we shouldn't have to justify, sometimes one in the same person, lol. See the impossibility in pleasing this one heckler, let alone the other 5-9. It is impossible to win this antagonistic back and forth game. Over time it is proven, the issues don't matter, the fighting does. I believe, by not responding to the issues, a rational individual can see what these divisive individuals are really about. THIS IS WHAT HAS TAKEN AWAY THE HUNTER'S VOICE IN ALL ISSUES THAT MATTER, PERIOD. THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN THE DOWNFALL AND RUIN OF WHAT ONCE WERE GREAT GROUPS OF PEOPLE, BECAUSE THEIR LEADERSHIP CANNOT GIVE UP THEIR PERSONAL AGENDAS FOR WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE WHOLE AND THE RESOURCES.

It does seem that these same ones could care about nothing more than to promote infighting, all at the expense of the resource they state to care so much about. That is why we don't allow this disharmony on our FACEBOOK page, counter productive to any reasonable progress, and quit frankly has become tiring to attempt to communicate and bring hunters together on this site, because these handful cannot get over themselves long enough to see the forest for the trees, or the bigger picture. That is sad, especially when it comes from their so called leader.

Even most elementary students, know when they read a book, or watch the news, that the pictures are used as an illustration. This is not misleading in the least. Books, magazines, and all forms of media, would get pretty boring sometimes with out illustration. Pictures that are on Facebook, per their policy, can be shared, and the poster gives up ownership in that regards. This picture went viral, and was common property on Facebook. Using it to illustrate a point was not misleading. The text of the post, I challenge anyone to dispute those facts. Joe, as your leader, seems to simply state that he wants to EXPOSE us, and believes the dep tag issue is just a drop in the bucket. By his own post, he is showing he prefers to promote discourse, disharmony, and promote infighting, even over the issue. It doesn't appear to me by his post the issue has any need for concern. Even though, on this forum he has stated if we become organized he would support us or any organization. "The IDHA will support ANY group that has filed as a group with the State of Indiana or the Federal Government and meets tax recording requirements...... At this time the IDWHM does not meet the standard required for membership in the FWCC." We have, and have MEMBERS exponentially more so than the IDHA already. Though Joe's statement of criteria was completely false, and I can post the exact criteria if anyone would like to see that. We have received advise from the Secretary of State and the IRS, and have acted accordingly. He then subsequently posted,"1. you will get no further resistance from the IDHA." Yet here he is going to EXPOSE our crap???? Seems to be opposite ends of the rainbow to me?

To ILLUSTRATE for those that are having a problem. Do you believe with every hunting article you read, that the pictures that accompany those articles, where taken on the exact farm or woods mentioned in the article, or the hunter in the tree stand is the exact author in his personal hunting location actually hunting. Do you believe all those big bucks with the person in the back ground tree stand at full draw are really in real world situations, or rather TAME deer in fenced areas??? Do you really believe, that when the DNR posts about nuisance deer in it's Facebook post, that the deer eating in the bird feeder is the exact nuisance deer mentioned in the article, or a stock photo in their archives taken by a photographer probably at a state park,?, to illustrate their point on the supposedly thousands of nuisance deer. To be credible should they have an exact picture of each culprit deer they are talking about. Or when they post a picture of an eagle with a post about eagles, that it is the exact eagle and only that one they are talking about. When Channel 13 does a story about deer, and they use stock video of practically tame deer at Eagle Creek park, when doing a story on high deer kill along the highways are they misleading? Shouldn't they be showing a actual deer getting smashed by a semi and exploding in a million pieces. Heck no. They fill up the screen with a deer illustration to grab attention and go along with their story, though the body of the story is accurate, and is researched beyond reproach. Is this something that is taken for granted by the bulk of rational American individuals today; would say just common sense? Yes, and we shouldn't have to explain; however, again for the few we do.

Here is our post today, just for anyone that has any question to the validity of our statements yesterday:


For those that had questions on the depredation tag numbers from the post yesterday please refer to the link below and then look under Deer Pages 30-32. Per the 2014 Wildlife Science Report there were 479 complaints, and permits were issued for up to 6566 deer to be taken. Of these, 2419 deer were REPORTED as being taken under the depredation permit system, of which 77 % were female, mostly of which during this time frame would have had fawns that were un-weaned. So if we just say each had one fawn, when in reality, the norm would have been twins, this took out at least 1862-3725 fawns, of which likely inhumanely starved to death. This writer was told directly first hand from a DNR Deer biologist that that is "the plan, to get 2-3 deer for the price of one, more bang for your buck."

Anytime any follower, or visitor to our page questions our sources or validity of statements, feel free to let us know. We will be happy to supply sources, other than in privacy cases, to substantiate our reports or "claims". In fact we encourage all followers to educate their selves first hand, with education we all become better conservationists.

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-2014WildlifeScienceReport.pdf


But again, as most rational people can see, the haters, search and search, and twist and twist to attempt to discredit us. For what, we not getting one dime out of this. Actually costing us thousands out of our own pocket. We are not getting a free farm to hunt on for nothing at the expense of our members. Not one red cent. What we do get, is constant unrelenting grief and hate from these few that seem to do nothing but promote infighting. So why do we do it? Because go to my personal Facebook page. See my young grandkids, that I love with all my heart, and I fear they will not be able to enjoy the outdoors and wild places and things like I have if we don't stand up, and at least attempt to make a difference.

Historically, this constant infighting has not accomplished on single thing, ever. Never did one thing for the resource, habitat, or environment we all share and live in.
Actually has had quit the opposite affect, causing hunting groups to lose all credibility in this state. So lets just say we are total liars, we have some hidden agenda, out to get the world. What is all this antagonism going to prove or solve. Is it going to save one single resource for the future?

So I don't want to EXPOSE anyone or hurt any group, or even the appearance of any group, that is. As long as they are for the resource, however, if their only intent is to promote infighting and accusations, they should clean up their own hypocritical plate first. I would suggest Joe, you explain, how you resigned your group from the FWCC per two sources, and did not repetition as per their guidelines. Also in your hypocrisy of us, claiming we are not organized enough for you to ALLOW us just to sit at a table and talk about our concerns for the future of the resource, yet the Secretary of State of Indiana reports Administrative Dissolution of the IDHA 01/14/1998 in their current information: https://secure.in.gov/sos/online_corps/view_details_ppv.aspx So Joe clean up your own plate first before you come after us to expose us. However, nothing to expose, not one cent passed through our hands except our own. We have no hidden agenda, and you can see in this thread, the most detail we can give all from this site our agenda, and what we DO NOT promote.

I would suggest you spend this energy EXPOSING what has happened to our hunting dollars and programs due to the shell game politicians are playing with OUR money.

So this most current attack on our credibility is some misguided attempt to piece apart every single thing we do and say, and even they if nothing can be found, attempt to twist the use of an illustration that is universally accepted into something it just frankly is not, and rational individuals see that.

Gary, the State issue is being addressed and that comment should be directed at me, not Joe. The IDHA is current will all tax filing requirements and such and the State is aware of that.

The true POWER of a few words.......

I don't think you can suggest it's not an honest approach. Maybe the message or such needs to be stated simpler or such so folks can process it easier. But you also have to remember, some folks will continue to ask for explanation when there really isn't any further explanation than what might have been stated.

The instance of this thread is a great example. It started with a simple comment/question. And then, folks took it to a different level for whatever reason.

Here is why. https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/videos/1038803079464707/

delaney - there have been several instances pointed out where simple truth is not what was used. From a FB post that claimed there were 4500 depredation permits filled last year to the latest photograph that originally claimed to be the result of depredation tag use.

Its not a processing thing ... its a "when trying to accomplish change your every word will be scrutinized so it is best to just be honest as you can be" thing.

Hi Greg, you are back, hi buddy. Sent you some questions earlier, in case your overlooked then:

" I would just ask what would you like from us? What would be your suggestion of how we change to meet your needs? Would that meet the needs of the thousands that state we are overharvesting the deer in their areas? Would that promote the health of the herd and the hunting heritage per our mission statement? What are your goals with the deer herd? How would you go about accomplishing these goals? Maybe you have found a better way? Thank you."

Love to hear your answers.

Dave, understand you are or have fixed it to some respects tax wise after years of neglect. However as president his duty to oversee all officers to make sure it is done, sure that will be in your bylaws.

Understand others took over on FWCC when Joe resigned the group to prevent that from happening.

That being said the Secretary of State's current information listed states, "This business entity is not eligible to receive a Certificate of Existence or Authorization " The very thing Joe used against us in blocking membership in FWCC. We have contacted them and the IRS, and we have every bit the standing of an organization that the IDHA has.

Joe then states: He would be for us, then in different post, he would offer no resistance, then just today posts the unprofessional stuff about us again. Quoted specifics in earlier post today. Talking out of both sides of his mouth.

I don't care about specifics of IDHA, as long as they doing something for the deer and deer hunter, which I believe they do. However don't use manipulation and twisted truths/half truths to slam us every chance you get to prevent us from doing the same. Because I dang will call him out on it, when he threatens the very thing we all profess to believe in.

This in fighting has to stop, we all have to work together, or we will, maybe already have lost it all. Including the DNR, how much more they going to lose if we don't stand up and get their money released to do their job and fill vacancies.

S-wilk, again dang it twisting freaking our words to fit your dang needs. We posted the correct numbers as in the report 2419, we then stated at the time, I believe, if you take 77%, which was the percentage of does that was cited that number is 1862 does and 557 males. We stated if you add the number of fawns that will starve from the lost females, depending on how you figure 1862-3725 fawns. So average that. 2793 and add that back to the reported harvest, if you call it that, then dep tags most likely took out 5212, so depending which one posted the story may have done the math a little differently, more conservative to be fair and came up with around 4500. I remember the post. The point was then to figure that out exponentially over just a few years from just that one summer's loss and the numbers do become significant in the big picture.

See so now s-wilk you twisted that to say we reported a hard 4500 deer taken by dep tags in a given year as fact from DNR, actually based on their plan for management of deer using dep tags that is a very conservative real number. We did not say that 4500 does or does and bucks were taken with the gun, but secondary to the guns, we did in fact lose between 4500-5500 deer being conservative, maybe more.

I personally, am sick and tired of being called a liar, over and over again, when such as in Joe's case today, and your example both s-wilk, I have proven that to just not be the case. I would say we will have the same results with any example one brings. We will back it up with documentation or sources. The flippin point is, why we even talking about this other than for a few of you to get some kind of cheap thrill to prove whatever misguided point you trying to prove to save whatever it is you are imagining you are losing. Fact of the matter is, you internet bullying is hurting the herd, from all kinds of perspectives, and you are going to cause us to lose whatever voice the hunter has left, because frankly, anyone that used to listen is saying, **** I don't even know what they want, they can't agree themselves. We will just do whatever Farm Bureau wants. So I am calling many of you out, you need to grow up, quit trying to prove who is smarter, tougher, whatever, and unite for whatever we can agree upon and just do it. I am not a politician, don't ever expect to be, don't have to be politically correct. However, to fight for the herd I am willing to call out a few internet bullies.

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/videos/1038803079464707/

Check it out, tired of fighting, maybe those that care for something bigger than oneself may get a smile, a ray of sunshine, in this freakin hurricane.

I'm right there with ya Gary on the depredation tags, I would however not state with certainty the unknown number of fawns which starved to death.

I've seen as you and many others have though, it DOES happen no one can convince me otherwise...but I've also seen fawns as early as June lose their mothers to vehicles and survive. Crazy hardy little boogers they can be at times.

Keep fighting for the causes you listed brother, it is worth it...just use caution and only ever state facts, that in the end will be the only way to strengthen your case...as will always acting professional. Good luck and God bless as always.

Here is why. https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/videos/1038803079464707/

Gary -

The conversation was relatively simple ... although I did think it was Ed I was talking to and not you. We were discussing the permits and someone using the IWDHM credentials posted that 4500 were filled in 2014. I mentioned that only 2500 or so had been filled in recent years and that 4500, if accurate, was a big increase. We could go back and look but I suspect that the post has long been deleted even though you claim that does not happen.

Anyway, its relatively simple .... if you are tired of some folks questioning your honesty just tell the truth. Thats all there is to it. Let your cause stand on its own.

On the subject of fawns. Learned of another hazard this year. Good to always be opening to learning new things. Found this out through my son's goats after he lost several this year.

On years such as these, when we have non stop rain, the parasites that usually live in the earth, tend to migrate further up plants that animals eat to get out of the water. Hence grazing/browsing animals tend to ingest more, and are more prone to anemia, infection, bowel issues. Having good minerals is one of the things we can do to distress the animals from this parasite. Make sure they are at full potential for producing red blood cells lost or immunity up to fight infection, caused by parasites.

Nice post. It might be well remembered that unless a person posts and states that their comment is specifically on behalf of an organization, that comment is an individual's own comment. The issue of acting professional and respectful includes no name calling, inappropriate insinuations and such.

I do tell the truth S-wilk, and you are indeed making this a personal matter. If Ed misspoke, I cannot vouch for him one way or another, I am sure it was an accident, and he was referring to the numbers above; however, you have no right or reason to call me a liar. So if you feel you have to bully others behind a keyboard I suggest you take it elsewhere. Bully's exist all over, but it is usually their own shortcomings as to why they believe they must bully others. Maybe you should seek some help brother.

Moderators, maybe time to consider shutting this thread down also? I had a comment today from someone that monitors the various hunting sites, you should be able to guess where from, who asked me what is wrong with these folks and whether "they" realized the damage this stuff is causing. I suggested to him that he reach and ask that question to many on here.

Gary - I am not bullying you. Sorry you feel that way .....

Gary did you ban the people that had a problem with the photo? I'm guessing so

I politely disagree with delaney moderators. Discussions must occur. Some have been mistreated by IWDHM (not necessarily Gary personally though to be fair) and yet still have concerns and some of us even still align with their mission statements and therefore things for lack of a better term need "hashed out".

And with a lot of distrust between some of the parties a public way is the best. Deleting or hiding of old posts on forums or elsewhere does neither side good and transparency is best.

I just wanted to state that, mods do what you will and honestly I'd understand either way.

Well said....... It's not just the World against Gary!!!

Gary is not even the founder of that FB page....

To get it back online with the topic........


The out of season permits are a tool IDNR came up with to quiet landowners who have damage from deer(and other critters), the deer are the one animal most farmers see eating a given crop. By having out of season permits IDNR can tell legislators that farmers DO have a means to mitigate damage on their property owned or leased. Now,science tells us that after a few weeks a fawn will survive on its own, not all fawns die because mom is gone. How about fawns that were taken by coyotes earlier than mom's demise?

You want farmers to have no out of season permits then open their property(forced by no alternative method)to anyone who wants to deer hunt? Then that should apply to all property owners, because the deer belong to everyone correct?

While the practice of shooting does during the fawning season is something I have never done nor will ever do "I" understand the theory and need.Now to a different concern of IWDHM,leasing.

As a landowner I have every right to make as much profit from my land as legally possible, it is called capitalism.There is no law against leasing, I don't have to get permission from neighbors, I do have a responsibility to have my borders properly marked and instruct my hunters where those lines are.

Hunters coming from other states ARE NOT coming to Indiana to kill does! Parke county became famous for big antlered bucks thus came the demand for hunting rights in the county. It is not IDNR's responsibility to protect Indiana's deer herd from leasing or out of state deer hunters. I would say that before "I" purchased any property for deer hunting "I" would have done due diligence in knowing what was happening around me.

Finally the EHD issue, when it first arrived in Indiana there was one strain and while bad it was not a strain on the resource. Today I believe it has morphed into 6 different strains. What Indiana does not have is a plan to alter season length or antlerless permits once they are established in early spring(antlerless permits). If you want to make a difference work to change that.

Gentlemen. I do feel this back and forth is hurting our very mission. As with our own site we do not tolerate this type of interactions; whereas the opinions or actions of such a few hurt the overall mission of the whole. I regret to say, I feel we have reached that impasse here as well. I pray that those that have been visiting and watching, that feel the way we do, will come visit us on Facebook at Indiana Whitetail Deer Herd Management, and/or join us by emailing IWDHMGroup@yahoo.com I believe as our 11,300+ followers and members do, that the herd and resources in general need advocates right now. So will be continuing to advocate for those issues. So for those that care, and can see the forest for the trees, come visit or join us. God Bless and Good Hunting Gentlemen.

Have to clarify that one again. The IWDHM Group has never once mentioned changing property rights or leasing. That is a private property issue, period. That is not in the scope of our interests. So again don't want those visiting this page to be mislead by Joe's comments. Thank you, hope to see you on Facebook. Another example of taking something out of context to hinder the advancement of working for the HERD. Gary Out fellas.

Once again, when presented with facts, "he's out".

I am not allowed to post on their site, makes it kind of one sided.....

I'll post later on the financial problems perceived by IWDHM and the real nuts and bolts. What must be said up front is.... OUR license fees are safe! They are in dedicated funds that at this time CAN NOT be raided by the legislature.

Deer Damage report.....

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-MR_2003_2013_Deer_Damage_Control_Program.pdf

I have a Question about this Statement Posted By JBWHITETAIL As a landowner I have every right to make as much profit from my land as legally possible, it is called capitalism. Am I reading this Correct ?? Then Why did the IDHA go after Deer Farmers? NOT CAN HUNTING I get that part. Is this not capitalism at it's Finest a guy wants to study or make Deer Attractants I am just Curious to where the LINE IN THE SAND IS DRAWN?

I've said it before....and I'll say it again..... When Patrick Early went into that room with the 10 stakeholders and said "the NRC was throwing out Prop #1".......And IDNR Brass (without NRC Brass present) said in a Senators Office "we did not want Prop #1 thrown out, it was our first choice"..........

boyz and girls....all Hades was released, and a divide amongst deer hunters and distrust of those that govern that resource was SCORCHED EARTH!!

.....and in just a few years they can go back and fix that mess they made. I hope Patrick and Bryan saw/see their errant past choices.....and don't dig their heels deeper.

Quincy Hunter, Your Tim More ...board member with IWDHM correct??

Just trying to understand who standing up for Can Hunting/Deer farming......

I think the question posed was not addressed to canned hunting but more so commercial farming.

Brew you are correct in who I am. You I do not know or think we have even met sir??? I did ask as Quincy Hunter and member of this Forum where the line is Drawn From the IDHA President that he has many times said in a Post here that is who he is. Not sure i said i was for or againist anything I said I got it in a kind a sort way Understood it. I just wonder where the LINE IS DRAWN? I wonder what is and is not okay.. Kind like this whole back and forth not sure WHERE the DEER HUNTERS WIN IN IT AT ALL. So Brew do you BUY DEER ATTRACTANTS? Tim Moore

Yes Delaney that is my Question where is the LINE DRAWN?

One more Question to Mr Bacon But First a Statement I have never been unruley on here never will be! To my Question before you answer Dedicated Funds.is it true if Our License Fees are Dedicated as you say and can not be Touched which I believe to be a TRUE STATEMENT. What happens to our Federal Pitman Robertson Monies that are matched by Federal Funds if we dont use said Dedicated Funds.

I'm not speaking for Joe or the club, but I just thought I'd give my thoughts Tim. In regard to the Federal Funds, I don't think those can be used by another agency but I may stand corrected by Joe or others. I think the issue is that the Governors office can control the Fish and Wildlife budget approval process, which then ties up those dollars. Then, if those dollars are sitting in a fund, even though they can't be "taken" by the governor or other state agencies, they can be a credit towards a government surplus, which of course makes whomever the sitting governor look good. Taking this one step further though, outside the federal matching funds, I would never put it past the legislature or the possibly any sitting governor making an effort to get to those funds and use them for other purposes. Maybe they can't now, but as we all know, times can change.

My thought on the farming issue is that it is more of a privatization of wildlife issue. Of course, the argument is that these animals are no longer wild if they are farmed and bought commercially. Then the issue comes, and I've had an issue with this for many years, if farm animals must be destroyed due to disease, often the citizen have to pay a replacement fee for those animals. The risk of the prions in dense populations is certainly well stated and it seems that any attempt to policing these operations have been terribly inadequate. When the risk then creates an issue for wildlife, real wildlife, it becomes an even more difficult situation. So for me, it's a privatization issue and many would then say, "well you must be against put and take birds", which I will admit does present a difficult argument unless I say yes I'm against that.

Now, your comment about deer attractants is also a fair comment. For those who say yes (And I am one of those from time to time), then is seems like if one is against the farming issue then they are almost creating a double standard. So, if the country is to allow this type of activity, it seems to suggest that the activity might need to be highly regulated, at a minimum, to protect the wildlife. New Zealand is a good example where I believe they don't allow any import of deer because of the risk of disease. The current environment seems to both the enforcement aspect and the penalty aspect for violations that risk disease spread and the wild resource.

I think your question is fair and not out of line. If we say privatization is ok, then where is the line drawn on other wild species. This is the problem that the DNR and the legislature then faces. To me, it's not just about deer, but about a much bigger picture.

Deer farms Are the Origin OF CWD why would any deer hunter concerned with the resource want them

Was it deer farms or was it research of deer that were in a captive environment? Not really sure but have been told differently a few times. The prions though are apparently present in nature otherwise but become more active in high density controlled areas?

Dave again I am not here trying to argue I just want to know DO WE LOSE Pitman Robertson DOLLARS ??? Which I do believe we do if tied up in a SLUSH FUND or WHATEVERE THEY CALL IT. So the State of Indiana Goverment is throwing away Federal Matched Dollars Earned by Sportsmen that could Pay for Employees and Land Purchases if I am correct in this Statement? Also Dave I have some of the Same thoughts as you on Put and Take Birds and Attractants not sure where I stand on of it don't really have one for or againist.

I'm just not up to speed on the Pitman funds like some others are so I'm kind of afraid of stating something wrong. I do know though that there has been some issues in the past about possibly losing matching funds over various license structures or such. But again, I've gotta leave that to others who followed it more closely.

And Delaney wins. Research kuru, scrapie, cwd, bse, cjd, vcjd and follow were it takes you. Journals not popular fiction. Why on the map of outbreaks is colorado so densly marked? Many dilemas. Across complicated arenas. Unwinnable fight. Thats why we stay out of it. WE STAND ON NO PART OF THIS ISSUE BEFORE ANYONE SUGGESTS IT.

But was told about Joe Bacon again spreading false information. He is not nor never has been banned from our site. Nor is his son, in fact Tony posted comments several times. He and Tony are welcome on our page to comment away. I do have to come back and defend ourselves against these outright slanderous statements just to harm our progress towards the cause and mission. However we do not tolerate this back and forth by one or two individuals when it promotes disharmony and threatens our mission of advocating for tbe resource.

Pittman Robertson funds can and have been lost or recalled. They have to be spent in a certain fashion and timeframe. Bottom line if politicians using funds for shell game, funds are not being used. Wildlife and wild places cant wait. Things deteriorate then because of negligence cost even more dollars just to play catchup. The funds are provided by sportsmen to manage out wildlife not put a feather in a politicians hat by tricky accounting.

Joe it is obvious we cannot tolerate one another, however I thought deep down you always cared about the resource and surely would put that above this childish petty crap. I left for same reason I left IDHA, no good can come from this constant antagonism. Especially when by such a small minority that is perpetuating such. I am sorry though you said you would, but cannot stop this petty crap for the good of the resource.

I have not stopped advocating for the resource rather will expend my limited respurces where it will have some impact. Not going to spin my wheels in this eternal fight over nothing with such a few that seem to not care as much about THE resource as the do their own egos. That is not leadership MR BACON.

I know this guys. IF you guys, Joe and Gary, can find a way to work together and find a way to move the back and forth to a totally productive level, sportsmen will win. It seems very clear that both of you can bring a lot of knowledge and energy and DNR history to the table, more than most who post on here can do, certainly including me. I'm not suggesting that everyone agree on everything, that someone always has to be right vs. wrong, but instead I'm suggesting that you guys move to a different level, forgetting even the organizations themselves, and put your minds together. At the end of that day, I can guarantee that the resource would likely be the big winner, and possibly even the DNR.

Forget these issues are they are divisive and will limit, if not eliminate, any possibility of progress.

- The canned hunting and deer farming issue.
- Any season changes or weapons issues.
- Any total overhaul of current deer regulations.

Instead find a way to get a foot in the door on behalf of the DNR and it's financial and staffing issues. Try to get some logic and further explanation into the deer determination numbers and how they then relate to bonus permits and depredation tags. Heck, look at how the depredation tags are issued, which hasn't changed for a long time, and see if there is an opportunity to have that reassessed. The back and forth over technical details while good and informing at times diminishes the real global issues. And again, leave the two organizations out of it but instead simply open a dialogue and even see if you can engage Gene and a few others. Every day that energy is spent on the squabbling is a day that the resource loses. And honestly, that goes for all of us, including me, that spends too little time on engaging and way to much time typing.

Can you all cone together to get behind this. https://www.facebook.com/gawalters1/posts/10153544973149233

[QUOTE]Originally posted by delaney:
Moderators, maybe time to consider shutting this thread down also? I had a comment today from someone that monitors the various hunting sites, you should be able to guess where from, who asked me what is wrong with these folks and whether "they" realized the damage this stuff is causing. I suggested to him that he reach and ask that question to many on here. [/QUOTE

I think most folks don't want to post because they just don't want to deal with the negative comments that might then come their way. It's unfortunate but it is likely the typical situation of most sites. And actually, it's probably why the DNR seems to now prefer to send surveys so they can try to get the views and opinions of the silent majority. I also believe it's why so any shy away from joining hunting groups because they don't want anything to do with the drama that usually comes with it. So then it creates the small vocal groups that really don't represent enough people to be meaningful in the scope of influence and then those small groups fight amongst themselves further alienating the groups from most of the hunters. Now, that's not to suggest that groups don't do good things, because they do. But often those goods things are overshadowed by the perceived drama.

Amen...+1

Sometimes it's not the issues it the people and there past history that are trying to represent the issues is where the problem is.... IMO

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1039692686042413:0

PR monies..........

15% of your purchase of various hunting related gear goes as a tax to the Federal Government and place directly into the PR fund.

Each state is given a percentage of the fund dependent on two things.

1 Land mass of the state

2 The number of hunters in the state

In the last six years the PR monies have soared due to the present national administration and its view on guns. American citizens as you know are buying guns and ammo like never before! Indiana has been using the majority of their share to purchase property for hunting and fishing. Good use for the money as we as sportsmen can never have enough public land.

We are limited by the rules on disbursement, our land mass is smaller than a lot of other states. Then, what seems to be a misconception, each hunter can only be counted once. It IS NOT every license purchased. So when Gary waants people to hurt IDNR's PR money by not purchasing a antleress license it doesn't work that way. ANY single type of license and IDNR gets paid.

Now when IDNR gets the money it must be spent and it can not be held or moved to a "slush fund". Rules are VERY Specific and fines are large if misused. Only license fees are moved to state accounting and held hostage by the legislature.

A few years ago the FWCC looked at creating a user fee for Fish & Wildlife areas so we could capture some money for the non consumptive users, hikers, bird watchers ect... We were told if PR monies were used in any way on the property if a user fee was established ALL PR money used on those properties would have to be refunded.

I hope this helps for those who wanted to know more.

Gary...........

You only need to click once.....lol

No more double posts!

If you do double post click on the pencil to edit and you can remove the 2nd post.

Hope this helps.

Where did you find Indiana funds sitting in limbo data?

Here is sonething we should care about. Possible EHD breakout. We are working hard to confirm.

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1041047119240303:0

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1040662459278769

Deer farmers are reporting with pics, say BOAH BEING NOTIFIED. As we know the vector midge does not recognize fences or property lines. Gary

Here is sonething we should care about. Possible EHD breakout. We are working hard to confirm.

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1041047119240303:0

https://www.facebook.com/Indianadeerherdmanagement/posts/1040662459278769

Deer farmers are reporting with pics, say BOAH BEING NOTIFIED. As we know the vector midge does not recognize fences or property lines. Gary

Are these reports cencerning wild deer or deer raised on farms?

BTW, I read the part about fences....I'm just curious......

I don't fully understand this stuff, but with all the mud this year from the rains, it would seem that these midges, along with the rest of the bugs, should be overwhelming.

The midges does not know Property Lines!!!!!!

I understand that, but my question remains. Are these reports of EHD affecting captive, wild deer or both @ this time?


GaryWalters That's all I wanted to know. So @ this time, it's the deer farmers reporting the outbreak. Has it been confirmed by a biologist or are they awaiting the results?

BTW Gary....how about posting stuff like this in one area of the forum, one time. Doing it the other way, creates multiple threads and redundancy in questions and answers.....Just trying to save you time and energy.

Very true! However, some biologists even believe that captive deer on farms/preserves are more suceptable to illnesses (perhaps even EHD) than wild....absolutely no conclusive evidence either way from what I've read or searched for myself though.

I was spreading the word, you desire any more information look on our Facebook page for those concerned about the issues. Posting multiple places is common sense to get word out?? You all better wake up, you are losing any voice the deer hunter has left with this childish crap, yes crap. This is about the resource not any individual and if you can't get past your pettiness and childishness we will lose it all. And that does upset me, because you are hurting my grandkids chance at enjoying what you seem to take for granted, and frankly makes me sick to my stomach.

We posted these answers to all your questions several places, yet some seem not to know, then in same breath say we posting too much. My goodness. That doesn't even make sense. ]

Seems you have your own resident deer biologist as well that can dispute everything one way or another. Go back and look, different every day.

We have reports from farms currently, they supposed to be being checked by BOAH with Necropsy, DNR states they have not done any testing yet this year. However if it is positive will affect the wild herd to some extent. See you fella's.

Not to bring up old wounds, but on page 6 of this conversation several including JB brought up about a pic we posted, claiming we were misleading by using a simple illustration. Just seen the new hunting regs and inside front cover is Lee from Lee and Tiffany L. dragging out a big buck. Does he hunt in Indiana, or in Iowa on his own farms? Just thought if later is the case, you better get on the DNR for misleading if using the same criteria you used against us. Sorry couldn't pass up pointing it out.

Unless the picture was captioned with something that is not true its an apples to oranges comparison. Something along the lines of "here is lee dragging out a deer he killed in indiana" when in fact the deer was killed in another state. Since you brought it up.....

Let's hold the emotions in check if we can. It's been a couple of positive days in regard to posts and it'd be great to keep the positive going.

Sorry but I gotta draw the line if Lee is in there, lol. But seriously now, if Tiffany wants to hunt here I'd help her drag any day! Tiffany if you're on here, PM me for some good hunting spots that have plenty of free range non-EHD deer. You can even bring Lee. How bout that for a positive, Delaney!

Oh my word...sometimes you read something and you seriously have to convince yourself you read that right....smh

Double B,

EXACTLY....the pic in the hunting book is a add for Under Armour clothing....

Haven't seen it yet in person but going of description sounds like an advertisement...no harm no foul.

lol ... I just looked at it. It isnt even an apples to oranges comparison. Its more like an apples to televisions comparison.

Page 2

http://www.eregulations.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/15INHD_LR.pdf

So you're telling me I got no chance of hunting w Tiffany? I stayed up all night waiting for a PM and watching meteor showers and all I got was more energy drink infused ramblings. Story of my life.

Okay well that is settled...back to the original discussion then because this shouldn't garner any attention.

I've seen quite a few folks posting it would seem larger than normal fawn survival occurred this year due to reports on forums and just myself talking to people...now granted there are pockets still in BIG need of help numbers wise...but you gotta think this year's lush green spring definitely help kick start fawn development and lesson mother doe stress levels (encourages better milk/lactation).

Time will tell but hopefully those areas that were low in numbers, with proper harvest trigger control when needed I bet some may be shocked what a year difference makes next year. Would love to get another spring next year like this one (maybe a little more spread out rain wise though...I know many a farmer that lost crops).

Nice...

Double B If you look @ the ad, it appears that the huge deer Lee and his pal are dragging out doesn't have a body...

Maybe you could offer to help Lee drag some more mounts out of the wilds of Iowa and work your way up to hunting buddy. Do all that and perhaps.... you'll get a chance to hunt with Tiffany someday.

After all, a man needs goals.....

So you're telling me there's a chance!

You never know....

This wet spring, per reports has had actually a bad effect on fawns d/t pneumonia.