The Natural Resources Advisory Council will be meeting on January 11th to discuss a proposal from the Division of Fish & Game which will increase license fees for many licences. The increases are needed to help fund the Division.

www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_5_ac_jan_2017.pdf

Jack

I hope the youth bundle price remains low!

they need to increase substantially the Non-res Deer licenses ...make then equal to what ever their home state is or a min. of $200 which ever is higher ...

And get rid of the reciprocity with Ohio at the same time

Why would they need to do that if the Deer Hunting really sucks as some are saying in this thread?

Wouldn't that problem fix its self?? Just saying...

SMH ....

My Exact thoughts also..... :rolleyes:

Just home from the Advisory Council mtg. Here are my notes:

1. No issues with high power rifles. Approximately 20% of the deer taken were with an HPR. No one knows if the legislature will revisit the statue this session.
2. No Law Enforcement @ mtg so I couldn't ask about injuries etc. from this season. I'll find out next week.
3. TB update: 3 cattle herds have been affected. 2 of those herds have been depopulated and negotiations are on-going on the 3rd. 1 whitetail and 1 raccoon were found to have TB. 2000 hunters submitted samples in the management/surveillence zones. DNR staff stated that the strain being found is from captive cervid high fence outbreak. Costs to DNR were approx $200k in manpower and $100k in testing. Because of the public response supplying TB samples the sharpshooters have been called off. Could have cost upwards of $1,000,000 if they had been used.
4. Extensive discussion on new fee increases. Short term fix until a new funding plan can be designed. New 3 year licenses seem to be a large part of this initiative. Since the fee increase is not a rule change but a non-rule policy change it doesn't have to go through a public hearing. If you wish to make comments on this change either attend next week's NRC meeting or contact one of the Commission members with your comments. Advisory Council passed the fee increase forward with a favorable reccomendation. Fees would become effective on April 1, 2017.
5. Discussions going on about bobcat season.
6. John Davis spoke about Goose Pond Shooting Range possiblity and about trail funding.
7. Chris Smith mentioned the legislature and the upcoming forestry bills which will inhibit the existing forestry plan; also mentioned the DNR omnibus bill which has mainly corrections the DNR usually makes.


Jack

Thanks for update..

TB update: 3 cattle herds have been affected. 2 of those herds have been depopulated and negotiations are on-going on the 3rd. 1 whitetail and 1 raccoon were found to have TB. 2000 hunters submitted samples in the management/surveillence zones. DNR staff stated that the strain being found is from captive cervid high fence outbreak. Costs to DNR were approx $200k in manpower and $100k in testing. Because of the public response supplying TB samples the sharpshooters have been called off. Could have cost upwards of $1,000,000 if they had been used.


Well now we know where all the TB is coming from.... "HIGH FENCE".... SMH

This should make the FB trolls happy!!! Lol

Thanks for the update.

Yaz posted back in August, that the coon had tested positive. The resident genius disputed it.

http://www.hoosierhunting.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/6/692.html

Question: Would anyone support an increase to the waterfowl stamp, gamebird habitat stamp and trout stamp?

Jack

A small increase, sure. I gotta have it to do the fun stuff.

Sorry guys.....

At that current time the DNR was reporting it as not positive.... Per there information! Looks like the final test returned positive if it was the same coon.

Guess the real question is why not?

Hatchetjack I wonder where the 20% figure came from? When I checked my doe in that I killed with a pcr, there were no separate spots on the online form for pcrs and hprs, it was just rifle.

Is has been suggested that perhaps the 20% figure is a combined hpr/pcr figure and that very well may be correct, but it's a bit confusing for sure.

It's my understanding that the 20% figure was 20% of the total harvest and both pcr and hpr figures are included in that percentage.

According to the "2015 Indiana Deer Season Summary" p. 10, 19% of deer were killed with rifles.

You are correct. In 2015 the % of the harvest by hunters using rifles was 19%.

My understanding is that the 20% figure referenced above was for this past season (2016) and relayed during the meeting this week.

Yep, it looks like “rifles” (PCR) accounted for 19 percent of the 2015 deer harvest. And, preliminary information looks like “rifles” (PCR and HPR combined) accounted for about 20 percent of the 2016 deer harvest. So, a terribly devastating additional slaughter due to allowing HPRs simply did not happen. The sky did not fall. I do not know how many deer were taken with HPRs in 2016. However, it could very well be that nearly the same number of deer would have been taken anyway by the same hunters using PCR rifles, shotguns, or other legal equipment allowed in 2015 and before.

IDNR can still easily make adjustments to overall deer population by county by changing the number of bonus antlerless deer that hunters may take in any given county. Also, if that number is 3 or less then the Late Antlerless Firearm Season would not be open in that county. And, IDNR does not have to go to the General Assembly or through the time-consuming, rule-making process to make those adjustments.

Yes, I know. That happens a lot

How many folks do you think switched from PCR to HPR?

Also hearing gun season was up 2K on kills!

I have no idea how many people switched from pcrs to hprs, but if the percentage of total harvest with a firearm only rose by 1%, it obviously didn't have a major impact.

If the firearms season total did indeed rise by 2,000 deer, IMO that can be attributed to the early start of the season (the 12th) and the good weather for many as much as anything else.

or the HPRs, no way of telling ...

Exactly....NO way of telling....

But even if if those numbers verify, and that increase was able to be tied directly to hpr use, I hardly think that means the sky is falling....

Regardless, I look forward to reading the harvest report when it comes out.

In rough numbers, the Firearms (shotgun+handgun+rifle) harvest:

'09: 71K

'10: 72K

'11: 65K

'12: 70K

'13: 66K

'14: 62K

'15: 67K

A 2,000 deer change is on the low end of variability and is easily used as argument that the introduction of HPRs had no effect on harvest.

it also can be said that if it wasnt for the HPR's, the kill would only be in the 117K range ... or less. How many AL's were killed using those during the late season "kill all Does you can" gun season ? ...

How many of those could ONLY have been killed with HPRs?

I'd wager only a miniscule amount of them

Based on the preliminary information passed along, the percentage of the total harvest with rifles (both pcr and hpr) for 2016 was 20%.

20% of 120,000 deer (the rough figure for this season) = 24,000 deer.

In 2015, the percentage of the total harvest taken with rifles was 19%.

19% of 123,664 deer = 23,496 deer.

So...based on the rough data we have now and the 20% figure passed along by the DNR for the 2016 season, it appears that the use of both pcrs AND hprs contributed to a whopping increase in the total number of deer killed with a rifle of roughly 504 deer.....

And while I'm sure there were more deer than that harvested with an hpr, due to the way that the data was collected, to hazard a guess about how many were actually taken with an hpr or how many were killed that wouldn't have been if hprs had not been allowed is impossible to say with any level of accuracy...

I killed a doe with a HPR in the late season. I took 4 days off and hunted, hoping to get to hunt in the snow. Had I not had that option, I would have taken those same 4 days off and killed one in the earlier gun season with my shotgun. The doe I killed was at 40 yards and would have been killed with my shotgun if I had to use it.

Everyone duck, the sky is falling. No way to convince some that the HPRs had no ill effect on the harvest. Sure there were some that were killed with them that wouldn't have been killed with the other firearms options, but it seems that is the minority of them. Some will be convinced the herd is being decimated until their little piece of hunting ground is back to where they believe it should be.

Looks like there is a delay with this proposal. NRC likely won't address this issue tomorrow.

Jack

I wish they would allow the use of HPR in hoosier natl forest in southern Indiana. Mostly Hilly terrian and dense woods. Be nice to have that option someday.

Check back in about 4 more years...

Costs to DNR were approx $200k in manpower and $100k in testing. Because of the public response supplying TB samples, the sharpshooters have been called off. Could have cost upwards of $1,000,000 if they had been used.