Quote
Originally posted by jjas:
Quote
Originally posted by pav:
[b] This is exactly where the argument of 1.0 versus 2.0 falls apart. Stewards of the resource will tell you proposal 1.0 was indeed the more reasonable approach...and proposal 2.0 was/is entirely too aggressive.

---------------------------------------------
What if the late antlerless season had replaced the last seven days of general firearms season? We don't know for sure, but we do know more firearms days equals more dead deer, right?

Last year's numbers look like this:

Last seven days of general firearms: nearly 16,800 total deer harvested, 11,700 of which were antlerless

Late antlerless season: Less than 4,200 deer harvested.

That's roughly 21,000 total animals. Would the late antlerless season have produced such numbers if combined with seven fewer days in November? Count me as skeptical on that....

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

As for weapons, there are two choices on the rise despite declining harvest totals...those being rifle and crossbow.

The rifle percentage is basically replacing a shrinking shotgun percentage. The combination of the two percentages are holding steady since 2009 (three years before 2.0 and three years after).

The crossbow percentage is climbing quickly, but the archery percentage is holding relatively firm.
The combination of those two percentages from the same time frame results in roughly a 50% harvest increase...more than 10,000 animals...all crossbow.

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

I don't have any data on bundle licensing, but would be shocked if bundle licenses do not represent the majority of license sales. This means more tags in more pockets. I'll leave it at that.

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

Deer hunting generates millions of dollars in this state, yet money spent on deer research is a joke. We can't even keep a deer biologist. Chad was not the first professional to bail on Indiana. Like it or not, politicians are running the IDNR. Our deer herd is ultimately being "managed" by people that care more about money and votes than the resource. Not a good recipe for success if you ask me....

Going to climb off the soapbox now. Right now, I consider myself very fortunate to be hunting a large tract of land in the company of... and surrounded by... like minded individuals. If that ever changes, I'll find somewhere else to spend November vacation time....probably beyond the state lines.
As far as the firearms season goes, let's look @ numbers...

In 2009, the firearms and muzzleloader seasons accounted for 77% of the total deer harvest.

In 2014, the firearms, muzzleloader AND the late antlerless season accounted for 69% of the total harvest.

So even including the late season, the firearms harvest accounts for 8% less of the total harvest when compared to 2009.


Now let's look @ crossbow numbers.....

In 2009, crossbows accounted for 1% of the total harvest.

In 2014, crossbows accounted for 10% of the total harvest.

Where did the 9% increase come from? Is it in addition to, or did it replace kills from different equipment?

In 2009, vertical archery accounted for 21% of the total harvest.

In 2014, vertical archery accounted for 19% of the total harvest.

In 2009, muzzleloader hunters accounted for 25% of the total harvest.

In 2014, muzzleloader hunters accounted for 20% of the total harvest.

So 7% of the 9% increase in crossbows kills can be accounted for in the drop of vertical archery and muzzleloader percentages.


Now let's look @ archery totals as a whole.....

In 2009, vertical archery hunters accounted for 21% of the total harvest and crossbow hunters accounted for 1% of the total harvest for a total of 22%.

In 2014, vertical archery hunters accounted for 19% of the total harvest and crossbow hunters accounted for 10% of the total harvest for a total of 29%.


So what does that tell us.....

Archery hunters took a larger share of the total harvest (29%), while firearms hunters (even with the addition of the late antlerless season) took a smaller percentage (69%) of the total harvest when comparing 2009 to 2014. BTW, the other 2% is the youth season percentage.

So what is happening is what many predicted would happen....

Archery is becoming more of a management tool while firearms hunters are taking a lower share of the total harvest. [/b]
Interesting data/numbers...

In 2009, the firearms and muzzleloader seasons accounted for 77% of the total deer harvest.

In 2014, the firearms, muzzleloader AND the late antlerless season accounted for 69% of the total harvest.

So even including the late season, the firearms harvest accounts for 8% less of the total harvest when compared to 2009.

Seems all this "panic" so many of them (1.0 guys) are pushing now is nothing more than another attempt to convince hunters that the gun and muzzleloader seasons should be shortened/moved. This time to "save" the herd from the evil DNR....and Woody.

That's all they want again it appears ......


Guardian Of The One Buck Rule & Gunseason
"Some people just need a good *** whoopin. It keeps the planets aligned"