Hunters took advantage of new equipment regulations and extra hunting dates to harvest a record 136,248 deer during the 2012 season, according to data the DNR gathered from designated check stations and from a recently implemented online and phone reporting system.

The total harvest represented a 6 percent increase over the 2011 season’s harvest and topped the previous record of 134,004 deer set in 2010.

“We started down the path to strategically reduce the deer herd in order to balance the ecological, recreational, and economic needs of all Indiana citizens,” said Mitch Marcus, wildlife chief for the DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife. “To meet that strategy, we initiated several regulation changes to make it easier to take antlerless deer. It appears the regulations may be working.”

Key regulation changes implemented in 2012 included making crossbows legal equipment for all licensed hunters during archery season; adding a special late antlerless season in designated counties from Dec. 26 to Jan. 6; extending the urban zone season to run continuously from Sept. 15 to the end of January; and allowing youth hunters in the two-day youth season to take whatever the bonus antlerless quota was in the county where they hunted. Archery season also increased by seven days with elimination of the traditional one-week break between early and late segments.

Crossbow hunters took 8,452 deer, or 6 percent of the overall total. That was an increase from 1,091 deer, or 1 percent, reported in 2011 when crossbows could be used in early archery season only by persons with a disabilities permit or by any licensed hunter in late archery season.

Hunters using archery equipment tagged more deer in 2012 (27,580) than they did in 2011 (26,715) or 2010 (27,186).

Youth hunters bagged 3,587 deer, up 55 percent from 2011, and the new special late antlerless season accounted for 10,091 deer.

It also was the first year of a license bundle, which allowed the buyer to hunt in all segments of deer season—except in urban zones—for a total of one antlered and two antlerless deer. More than 56,600 license bundles were purchased in 2012, second only to the resident firearm license.

“In previous years, five or six at the most, resident license holders accounted for 42 percent of the harvest,” said Chad Stewart, DNR deer management biologist. “This year, resident license holders accounted for 47 percent of the total harvest. That’s only a couple percentage points, but to move it even that much is pretty significant. That’s probably attributed to the bundle license. We don’t know that for sure, but that’s where we’re leaning because it’s the one thing in the rules that only affected resident hunters.”

The total harvest was made up of 45,936 antlered deer and 90,312 antlerless deer. The proportion of reported antlered deer in the harvest (34 percent) is the lowest in Indiana’s history while the antlerless total was the highest.

“Despite the record harvest, trends within the harvest data showed that deer numbers were down this year,” Marcus said. “The number of antlered deer in the harvest was at its lowest point since 2000, an indicator of a reduced deer herd.”

Stewart said the antlered deer harvest tracks the total population about as well as anything because there are fewer variables to consider.

“Year-to-year hunter efforts don’t change much, so people aren’t all of a sudden taking three bucks or eight bucks; they’re locked into one buck,” he said, noting the one-buck limit in Indiana. “If there are fewer bucks to kill with the same amount of hunter effort, not as many bucks get killed, which tells us the overall population is down.”

Additionally, an outbreak of epizootic hemorrhagic disease affected deer in nearly 60 counties. EHD is a viral disease transmitted by biting flies that is often fatal to deer, though some deer will survive the illness.

“Whether this (population) decline is due to this year’s outbreak of EHD, recent efforts to strategically reduce the deer herd, or a combination of both factors remains to be seen, but probably varies from county to county,” Marcus said. “As we continue on the path to strategically reduce the deer herd, we will monitor the herd and harvest each year and make adjustments to ensure that hunters will have the opportunity to be successful.”

Switzerland County had the highest reported harvest at 3,506 deer, leading the state for the first time since 2004 and ending a seven-year run by Steuben as the top county. Steuben dropped to fifth with a reported harvest of 3,076 deer, the fewest for that county since 2003.

Of the total harvest, 82,151 deer were recorded at check stations, 53,389 online, and 708 by phone.

To read the complete report, go to wildlife.IN.gov and click on the Deer Harvest Summary link at the bottom of the page.

Originally posted by traditionalarcher17:
From the input I got from asking around Ive heard from people they harvested fewer deer this year. I know the group I hunt with was lower, myself included and seemed to be a standard answer I recieved from other hunters, but here we are again with a record harvest. Just doesnt seem right how we are always killing more deer, but statistcs say we lose more hunters every year.

Originally posted by jjas:

Doesn't seem to me that firearms/muzzleloader hunters were waiting too long to kill antlerless deer.....

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b]
Doesn't seem to me that firearms/muzzleloader hunters were waiting too long to kill antlerless deer.....

No question.....there are antlerless deer taken during the gun and muzzy season......but are they predominantly from those that have already taken their buck?

The other piece of data that I'd love to see is the # of hunters that get their buck in this state..........and simply quit hunting any more deer at all. One buck......and done. [/b]

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b]
Doesn't seem to me that firearms/muzzleloader hunters were waiting too long to kill antlerless deer.....

Would be interesting to see those hunters that did NOT tag a buck in the gun or muzzy season....if they also took does during the gun or muzzy season.........

........or if they waited till the late antlerless to take their does.

No question.....there are antlerless deer taken during the gun and muzzy season......but are they predominantly from those that have already taken their buck?

The other piece of data that I'd love to see is the # of hunters that get their buck in this state..........and simply quit hunting any more deer at all. One buck......and done.

Raw #'s are interesting.......but the stats "within" the stats are the more TELLING information. [/b]

Originally posted by jjas:
As to your original point that gun/muzzleloader hunters are waiting too long to kill does....where in the published data is your point supported?

Originally posted by js2397:
Doesn't seem likely that both things can happen. If the majority of does are killed by hunters that have killed bucks I don't think the majority of hunters can stop hunting after killing their buck. These has to be especially true since there are more does than bucks killed.

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b] As to your original point that gun/muzzleloader hunters are waiting too long to kill does....where in the published data is your point supported?

Woody......that is the point of my second post. There is data INSIDE the data that could give us more answers. Just because it isn't "published"......doesn't make it "points not worth pondering or discovering"........

........unless that would reveal something that you would not want others to see, or want them to consider as it relates to hunter behavior trends. [/b]

Originally posted by jjas:

If you want more detailed information, why not just ask the DNR for it.....? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b]
If you want more detailed information, why not just ask the DNR for it.....? :rolleyes:

I would have never thought of that.....LOL!!

Just making a point......."if it's not published", as you typed.......does not mean it's a "dead end" for more information inside the data. [/b]

Originally posted by jjas:
So then quit calling people names, being nasty and trying to derail yet another thread

Originally posted by jjas:
The bottom line is this report shows 2/3 of the deer killed this past season were antlerless deer and killing more antlerless deer was the DNR's goal...wasn't it?

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b] The bottom line is this report shows 2/3 of the deer killed this past season were antlerless deer and killing more antlerless deer was the DNR's goal...wasn't it?

Bottom line shows that we have been on a free fall in deer population before this year.......our buck #'s show it.....The IDNR even admits it in this current press release........

.........and I know EXACTLY where this is headed for future regs.

No skin off my teeth when those new regs come out to make up for our SEVERELY cut to the bone deer population is at that point.........we will THEN have what I/we/alot of us want.

........and you'll still have what you wanted........The Crossbow.

Just remember that, when that day comes. [/b]

Originally posted by Scarlett Dew:

Quote

Originally posted by jjas:
[b] So then quit calling people names, being nasty and trying to derail yet another thread

Please copy and paste where I was calling people names, and being nasty to derail this thread.

Or is this the same tactic you use when YOU want good questions and good points to ponder to look like something they are NOT.

And who is then derailing the thread........???

Lemmeee tell ya somethin' Woody.......you don't like it we know jjas is Woody here on this Forum. Yep...eats you to the absolute core. Not only does it cast light on you what you do......but it also casts light that you post to yourself on your own Forum as jjas to help "shore up" some idea or logic you need some "help" on......so in comes Woody, posting as jjas...... even on your own site to "shore up the wall".

If you don't like your handle here as jjas.....then for God's sake just change it to Woody.

But don't throw "dung" on those that simply post the truth here that drives you nuts.

There has been NO name calling on my end........there has been no "nastiness"........there simply has been concepts tossed out you don't like others to consider, or identity thrown out you don't want them to know.

Difficult to "derail" the truth Woody......Please stay on topic, Please quit throwing dung on others as you cloak yourself with an "alias" identity........and stick to the friggin topic. [/b]

Originally posted by delaney:
As mentioned in my previous thread, lets leave the name Woody out of the conversation regardless of who is who unless someone starts posting under "Woody".

I know I fear the day when our regs are closer to proposal 1. According to those that supported it they said it would reduce the deer herd far more effectively than proposal 2. If the numbers drop and they bring back prop 1 the deer will be extinct.

Originally posted by delaney:
As mentioned in my previous thread, lets leave the name Woody out of the conversation regardless of who is who unless someone starts posting under "Woody".

Originally posted by traditionalarcher17:
Ask around if ya wanna know what hunters do after they shoot their bucks

Originally posted by delaney:
As mentioned in my previous thread, lets leave the name Woody out of the conversation regardless of who is who unless someone starts posting under "Woody".

Originally posted by ParkerBow:
Have any of you ever watched the Woody Woodpecker show?? OOPs my bad, I used the name Woody on here. Sorry if that offended anyone.

Originally posted by SHINGLE MONKEY:
What, more deer killed this year than last?

SO the herd is continuing to grow?

Originally posted by jkd:
Saw 4 does opening day of gun. Never saw them again until all seasons were over. Never saw any bucks in daylight entire season. Never had a shot opportunity. No deer taken by me, two buddies that hunted with me, or guy hunting the adjacent property.

Guys I know who hunt the Deming and Sheridan areas had basically the same type of season.

Yet Hamilton County's bonus number has been pushed from 2 to 3 to 4 during the past several years.

Starting to remind me of the 70's... when you never saw any deer at all....

Originally posted by Jeff Valovich:
Complaints from farmers and accident reports and Ive heard say some input from the local CO's and region biologist....Heck, the only time the regions biologist was around here was back during the deer wars of the late '90's and early 2000's when he visited Beverly Shores....and to lower the #'s I have no Idea...do they really backtrack on the bonus numbers ??

Originally posted by SHINGLE MONKEY:
You guys do realize that some hunters actually hunt to eat and not care about horns right?

I killed 3 does and a buck this year and 3 more does were taken off the property.....those 7 deer are feeding several families.

Originally posted by jjas:

Quote

Originally posted by Jeff Valovich:
[b] Complaints from farmers and accident reports and Ive heard say some input from the local CO's and region biologist....Heck, the only time the regions biologist was around here was back during the deer wars of the late '90's and early 2000's when he visited Beverly Shores....and to lower the #'s I have no Idea...do they really backtrack on the bonus numbers ??

I can't think of counties that were lowered...but I can't say with absolute certainty that it's never happened.

I know the DNR wanted to lower herd numbers and as noted by the kill numbers it's obviously working. [/b]

Originally posted by trapperDave:
to those that think a declining herd wont affect them because they have x acres under lease and can control the harvest on their land...I remind you. Mother Nature hates a vaccuum. Deer will disperse from your property and go to areas of lesser density, no matter how good your ground is