pav
Quote
Actually, the data you provided only works *IF* you consider buck fawns as female deer. The pre-2012 harvest ratio was pretty consistently in the 50/50 range......female/male.

The changes implemented in 2012 cut the gap to almost 55/45....so the ratio did improve. But my point is...at what cost? Are we being too aggressive, too fast?

The antlered kill dropped 5,000 animals in spite of more antlered opportunity being introduced. This would seem to indicate a herd in decline, correct? Yet we killed 12,000 more antlerless deer than the year before. How long can this go on?

What if the 1.0 reg had been in place in 2012? What would the antlered harvest number been? Minus 6,000?....minus 8,000?....minus 10,000? Hard to say for sure, but removing 14 days from GF and ML season lengths would have surely made a significant dent.

The lower the antlered kill....the fewer dead does it takes to improve the ratio. This is the point I'm trying to make. We could have gone with a much less aggressive approach, proposed by the DNR...but deer hunters did not let that happen. Yes, 2.0 was a DNR proposal too...but it wasn't what they wanted...and their hands were tied by the NRC.
First of all, antlerless deer are factored into the data as that is how the state counts buttons and always has. But even with buttons counted as bucks, the numbers are still better that the 50/50 ratio in the past @ 46% bucks and 54% does.

Next..we could play the "what if" game all day. I wanted the firearms tags made either sex (like the archery and m/l tags) and wonder what would have happened if that had been implemented. But...it didn't happen. So while "what iffing" may be interesting, it truly serves no constructive point @ this point as the regs are what the regs are.

While I share your concerns about the numbers of antler less deer being taken, until the data shows the herd numbers lowered, I doubt we see much change. It (the bonus antlerless season) will likely be adjusted by lowering bonus antler less quota permits to 3 or under in some counties), but I don't see the DNR permanently giving up a management tool by doing away with the season. Especially since the season has only been in place two years. And as I've stated (along with many others) countless times..herd reduction isn't just an Indiana thing. It's happening in many states.

Finally, just how did 2.0 pass?

Is it the "fault" of deer hunters who didn't want 1.0? Is it the NRC's "fault"? Representative Friend's "fault"? Is it the DNR's "fault"? A combination of all of the above? I've heard all of these opinions from people who supported 1.0. Perhaps it's no one's "fault". Perhaps it's just the result of the process of negotiation. You start with one plan and it morphs into something else. And just like 2.0 ultimately was adopted, it too will morph into something else in a few years.

Now onto your second post.....

pav
Quote
Actually, the fact we introduced more antlered opportunity and the antlered harvest actually fell in the very first year....would indicate the herd was already in decline. Yes?
Let's look @ antlered harvest data. From 2004/2011 the average antlered harvest was 51,000 antlered bucks. During the three seasons prior to the reg change season of 2012, the antlered harvest averaged 52,000 antlered bucks.

So using your own yardstick of antlered buck harvest numbers as an indicator of herd decline, the numbers don't show that over the previous 8 years. It's only in 2012 after the regs changes occurred that antlered harvest numbers dropped.

BTW, I fully expect harvest numbers to drop for this season. Between higher numbers of does killed in 2012, EHD and lousy weather for many the opening weekend of gun, I don't see how they couldn't drop. How much totals drop (if they do) remains to be seen and IMHO that figure doesn't matter as much as if they continue to drop or level out over the next couple of years.

Then and only then, can you see the true impact of the new regs.