Just what the **** is next...BAITING ???

As someone hunting with both a long bow and a recurve this fall, I'd have no problem joining you on that hunt.

Enough is never enough and no it will never end. Pretty sad.

Like it or not, the above is simple truth.

Thanks for the invite but I'll be chasing Steelhead, Browns and King Salmon at that time. And for other then specific threat to the species, it's all about philosophy, and what "I" want. And frankly, most guys who hunt probably won't want to give up what they wanted even if the species was under specific threat.

I suspect the KY, WI, MN, KS, CO, WY, PA, MI, TX, etc. rifle deer hunters might feel differently.

Just because it is not your "tradition" or preferred way of doing things does not make it wrong.

Sorry, but I don't buy the slippery slope argument either.

I don't believe anyone is suggesting that it is wrong but instead that there is a reasonable distinction between how some folks view hunting. I'm not sure if it is a slippery slope or not, but if we look at the past history of deer management, weapons and such, I do think there is a definite slope to what has happened in regard to making killing a deer easier and easier, be with weapon or due to season lengths. I don't really care to debate whether that is good or bad, but it is what it is.

They are welcome to argue with me all that they want. Makes zero difference to me.

Come on down. All are welcome.

In fact we even had a [gasp] compound shooter last year on our "traditional" hunt We made him sleep in his own tent, downwind from us. In our defense, and I suppose his, he was a recent graduate (from Trine as a matter of fact) and was working diligently to start his career with little time to maintain his trad archery skills. Not that shooting a compound doesn't require skills. Oh crap, let's not go there

I'd make a Trine grad sleep down wind too.

It is only a matter of time before we change the name of the town to Trine.

if you research the facts, hpr are safer than slugs from a 12 ga.

the kill will not increase, just the different means by which to harvest a deer. Nobody will kill any MORE deer than they already do.

That same wore out argument was used against compounds, then inlines, then pistol rounds in lever guns, then crossbows.....


If YOU personally want a greater deer hunting challenge then i invite you to pick up a recurve, longbow, selfbow, flintlock, caplock....whatever trips YOUR trigger. AND QUIT WORRYING ABOUT WHAT YOUR NEIGHBOR HUNTS WITH OR WHAT HE/SHE DECIDES TO HARVEST.

MY .02

I don't hunt with HPR or slugs...so maybe there is something I'm missing with that safety comment?

There is ALOT of big game killed regularly at a 1/4 mile with HPRs, yet I wouldn't expect the flight range of a 12ga slug to be anywhere near that distance?

I always thought the HPRs were excluded in Indiana due to human population density versus the amount of relatively flat ground in this state? i.e. for safety reasons. How can a 12ga slug be more dangerous than a HPR if both are fired across flat ground in the direction of a housing addition some 500 yards away?

I don't understand?...but then again, I know what the word "ballistics" means...and that's about it.

ARE SHOTGUNS SAFER THAN RIFLES?
This commonly held belief is why some states ban rifles for hunting; But the facts might surprise them.
By Jeff Johnston (RSS)
August 23, 2012
By Jeff Johnston
The Myth: Shotguns Are Safer than Rifles for Hunting
The Reasoning: Because shotgun slugs have lower velocities than modern centerfire rounds, they are less powerful and cannot travel as far, and therefore there is less chance that an errant shot could injure or kill a bystander. This is why states like Iowa and Illinois ban rifles for deer hunting and only allow shotgun slugs or ballistically similar muzzleloaders, right?
The Investigation: I called the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and asked for verification—after all, few people dispute that modern rifles are more accurate and have a greater maximum range on game than shotguns, so it could be that state departments are simply afraid that legalizing a more efficient arm will result in too many deer being killed. But I was promptly told by a customer service representative that “There are too many [human] populated areas [to use rifles]” and that "It's absolutely a safety issue.”
But something smells like a deer gut pile in the Alabama woods.
First off, it’s established that hunting is one of the safest sports. It is safer than bowling. Football, wrestling, swimming and all the contact sports aren’t even close. See here for complete stats provided by NSSF. Most of the accidents in hunting are attributed to tree stand falls and failure to identify the target. It doesn't matter how "safe" your firearm is if you fall out of a tree or mistake your target. So the only logical reason why states think rifles are more dangerous than shotguns is that if the target is missed and a bullet ricochets, rifle bullets go farther making more people potentially vulnerable to an unintentional shooting.
But ponder this question first asked by Todd S. Bacastow, Ph.D. in his study, “Do shotguns and Muzzleloaders Pose Less Risk Than Centerfire Rifles for Hunting Deer in Pennsylvania?"
The Question: If held three feet off the ground and fired parallel to the ground (and assuming no obstacle blocks it) what travels farther, a 150-grain, .30-06 bullet fired at 2910 fps, or a 385-grain slug shot at 1900 fps?
It’s the .30-06, because, although the two bullets would hit the ground at the same time, the .30-06 would travel farther because it's traveling faster, right?
The Data: As Bacastow’s data, taken from the Armaments Engineering and Technology Center at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., indicates, there is a 100 percent chance that both projectiles will ricochet when they hit the ground if shot at a zero degree angle. And when they ricochet, something strange happens. Because the heavier-constructed, slower traveling slug retains “95 percent of its energy and excellent ballistic characteristics after initially hitting the ground” on average it travels farther in total distance than the .30-06. Check out the graphs in the study for the precise numbers. So if you said .30-06—under the specified shot angle conditions—you are wrong. Shotgun slugs tend to ricochet further. (Keep in mind, of course, that as shot angle is increased, the before-ricochet distance increases as ricochet distance decreases, and therefore the .30-06 travels farther when shot angles increase past about 5 degrees.)
The Anti-Spin: While anti-gunners might use this counter-intuitive information to simply say, "OK then, shotguns are just as dangerous as rifles” and try to ban both for hunting, the reality is, both are statistically extremely safe. The anti's hate hunting and are scared of a hunter's tools, so they will always spin it. Meanwhile, I’m calling 1-800 BullShooters on Iowa and Illinois and the handful of other states that cite rifles are more dangerous than shotguns as a reason to ban them for hunting. If hunters follow the NRA’s rules of safe gun handling, there would never be an accident, regardless of the arm used. Also, many hunters hunt from elevated treestands, which dramatically decreases the chance of ricochet.
The Conclusion: Rifles are just as safe as shotguns. Facts, ballistic data and state-injury statistics prove it.

link to the study

http://www.ihea.com/_assets/documents/AFWA_Presentation_9-18-07.pdf

Pav:

Studies have shown two distinct things on centerfire rifles vs shotgun slugs.....

1. There is no difference in accidents between the two. Now that doesn't say anything on buildings being hit, just human bodies.

2. Shotgun slugs will deflect more readily than a centerfire round. Most likely that is because of size of the round, and they were comparing the "pumpkin ball round".

Again this is an "opportunity" proposal, give people more choices. It wins on a possible two fronts for IDNR....... more license sales and more PR monies from gun and ammo sales.

Again, I told Wayne Fatz many years ago that allowing the pistols for deer was opening the door to more and more changes, he assured me it was limited to very few people. Then we had a assistant deer biologist who wanted to hunt with his Contender pistol in .243 caliber and the rule was changed. Modern muzzleloaders with ballistics matching or exceeding the 30-06 are allowed, then you get PCR's, add in the immeadiate wildcat rounds that match cenerfire rounds Ballistics. Why should we not allow centerfires?

Deer hunting has lost its' tradition here in Indiana and many other States, it is about the quick kill, no need to hone skills and practice. Kill the number of deer you want/need, be it for the table or to meet your ego, then just move on to your other hobbies......

When the rule is passed(and it will)I'll use my .300wsm on occasion, I'll still hunt with my muzzleloader, and my bow. What wont change is my passion to be in the woods every day possible.

Now I guess it is time for me to get scorched again over what a REAL deer hunter is.........

It is the person who has "passion", that person doesn't wait on the season but, makes the season last 24/7 365. It's more about the hunt than the kill, the hunt is dictated by ethics, not the rule of law. The person who "pulls the rope" rather than pushing the rope.

Pav, you and I are getting older/wiser, I don't see many of our next generation that have "tradition" in their vocabulary, it is about me and "now". Enjoy every hunt,GunDude proved we never know when............He would say "hunt on".

for some of us, "tradition" goes back over a century....and includes HPRs

Who is the real hunter? Read your post JB....it's you....and you talk about egos.....and I'll take a clean quick kill any day!

LMAO...............

What is a "quick clean kill"?
Is it the deer I shot with a recurve that never made it 50 yards? How about the muzzleloader kills that never took another step? A muzzleloader to the head, ZERO blood trail!125 yard shot on mature buck with the muzzy?

Ego......... that's when the need to kill over- rides the passion. Yep that is me...........and I will never apologize! I HUNT deer I don't KILL deer......

Again... you are the Real Hunter... lmao

TrapperDave:

Don't show us a photo from some other State, show the tradition in Indiana. This aint about what was tradition in Michigan or Wisconsin........ What is our heritage? Guess by your standards we should be baiting deer Like Michigan? How about running deer with dogs like Mississippi? 8 point limit like Mississippi? A buck per day in Lousisiana?

What you want is in line with OBAMA........ "let the government supply you with all your needs." I want.........I want.......I want.......... Those in power who give you what you want.........own you!

Who says tradition is dead??

It's alive and well with me and those I hunt with.

Not a thing wrong with someone going out hunting for meat, filling the freezer with fresh venison, then going trapping, waterfowl hunting, ice fishing, upland hunting... etc.

If a fellow hunter is following the wildlife laws, I support them.

+1 Chevy. I, myself, am trying to "do it all". I was brought up that way. I try my hardest to keep my kids involved as much as possible & to keep the traditions alive so that they may pass it on. As far as the legalization of center fire rifles goes.........I'm with it!! A clean kill is what I'm after with minimal tracking. With that being said, safety is a great concern of mine. I can't control what people will do, but I will preach safety to "ANYONE" who is looking to get involved in the sport of hunting or shooting. I feel this is our responsibility as hunters. As far as some idiot firing a round towards a barn or worse, a person.......Well the idiot would probably do the same with a muzzleloader or a shotgun. We should all know to look beyond at your target. If not start!

jbwhttail:

I don't believe OBAMA would like us to have a high powered rifle...........H**L, he would probably take my kids sling shot away.

Lot's of tradition has been built on 30/30 and 30-06's in Kentucky. I like variety and I do not have a problem with rifles as long as it isn't arbitrary and restrictive. 243 and up is fine with me. Makes the regs uniform with pistols now too. We are all at different points in our hunting careers and may or may not use all legal options. Choose how you like to do it and enjoy your time afield.

All I want to know is when can I buy my new deer rifle?

you're a funny man Joe. Pathetically narcissistic but funny just the same. Youre "traditions" are just that....yours.

Remind me when the first deer season was in Indiana......

Now define how many decades it takes to make "tradition"


Its all fairly new in the grand scheme....and has been evolving since day one. And will continue to do so.

Resistance is Futile


LOL


new traditions are being formed every day. Im sorry they all dont fall in line with YOUR belief. Nobody is forcing YOU to change

I think the fundamental aspect of "hunting" has a long, long tradition that dates back decades in history. It has taken different forms over time, but at its core, I think the tradition is deeply based in the effort, understanding of the chase and study of the wild game pursued. As time has marched on and the new tradition being constantly reshaped, much of the historical core tradition of hunting is being lost.

Time to throw some stones....

I grew up in WV which was/is a rifle state. My grandparents own a 200 acre farm and I pretty much lived out there. Killed my 2nd buck with a 30-30 lever action at 5 feet on that farm. Yes, 5 feet. I hunted with rifles for years for deer AND turkeys. My uncles owned 2 acres next to a paper company that had 100,000's of thousands of huntable acres. We would go hunting every Fall at their place. I would see guys shoot deer 200, 300, 400, 500 yards away on an opposite ridge while sitting on a bucket eating lunch. Pretty impressive shooting at times but really nothing much to the hunting aspect. I remember guys sitting on ridge tops looking over bottoms or fields with their 22-250's looking to pop a turkey at 100, 200, 300 yards. Calling? Who needed that?

I consider my uncles and cousins to be pretty good hunters as they worked hard at bow hunting and gun hunting, stand placements, ect., had great ethics, but they were not the norm - at least when I was there.

After college I moved to Indiana and hated it. Too dang flat, smelled like pig crap everywhere, and was terribly ugly during the Winter time. HOWEVER, I fell in love with the deer hunting. I liked the close range, up close and personal culture the regs had developed over the years. Slug gun and bow - throw in a muzzleloader and I was good to go. Shots all under 100 yards or less. Learned the habits and nature of the animal better. I had to scout harder and work year round (not just opening day) at my new "disorder". I had been doing this for several years THEN I went back home to hunt on 2 occasions: 1 for turkey and 1 for deer. We shotgunned for turkeys but left 2 days early because of the rifle hunters walking the ridge tops. Scared the crap out of us. The hunting for deer was not the same for me - I had changed. I did shoot a doe at over 200 yards, but it was not the same.

Now that I have bored you with all that background to say this: hunt with whatever you want that is legal. Your preference and your right. Matters nothing to me. If the DNR decides to add HPR's I think over time hunting in Indiana will change. I am with Joe, Pav, and Dave, on this one. I think it will not change for the better. My opinion. My statements are nothing personal to anyone on this board. Where does this "more opportunity" end. Will we now legalize HPR for turkeys next?

Good post, Brian.

Interesting opinion thanks for sharing......

"OLD SCHOOL" is hard to find now days!!!

Thanks for the responses on ballistics guys.

Unfortunately, the article does not really alleviate my concerns. The author talks about firing the weapon three feet off and parallel to the ground....and follows with ricochet discussion.

I'm more concerned about the travel distance of the HPR bullet fired at a target 400+ yards across a field. The shooter is not holding parallel to the ground...and I have to believe that bullet offers accuracy capability well beyond the ricochet potential of any 12ga slug.

To be clear, I live and hunt in the southern half of the state. My concerns are more relative to the flat expanses which exist in the northern half.

I don't know about "tradition" as it applies on an individual basis...but I am very confident in saying "woodsmanship" is a dying art across the board. Offering weapons of greater distance is simply another nail in that coffin.

We are slowly but surely removing the "hunt" from "hunting".

+1000 to what Pav just said.

I have to agree with pav as well. But it's a slippery slope in saying that. What I mean is I love hunting with a recurve that's all I've known. Honestly I never even shot a compound or a crossbow but at the same time every gun opener I'm there slug gun in hand. So now since I limit myself with a 15-20 yard shot tops in bow season but open it up to 150+ with a gun does that take woodsman ship away? I won't knock a guy for using a hpr if it is legalized but at the same time you can't say it'll be hard to get within 400 yards of a mature buck. That's shooting in my opinion not hunting at that point.

I'll tell you what is contributing more to the loss of woodsmanship and removing the "hunt" from hunting (more than anything else) is the game camera. Nothing has changed deer hunting as much in the last 10 years. Not a rifle, not a crossbow, not a high tech bow....Nothing.

The early cameras were a joke. They used film, the batteries didn't last very long, they flashed when a pic was taken and they spooked as many deer as they probably actually helped pattern. Advantage...deer.

Not now. Today's cameras will capture tons of images on a single set of batteries. It's a matter of "set and forget" to pattern that deer 24/7/365, and increase your odds exponentially of killing him. The only "woodsmanship" required is to be able to find the cameras when they need a battery change or you wish to move them.

Want to take it the next level? Then use one of the newer cameras that call your cell phone in "real time" and getting that recent info can really increase your odds of killing that buck.

Hunting for tradition, for self-enlightenment, for sport, for challenge, or, dare-I-say, fair chase is a relatively new thing in the human experience. Those things have become glorious side effects.

Since we were formed we have hunted for food. That is ingrained in our being. Expecting that the glorious side effects of that basic act are the prime reason for why we do what we do is a fallacy.

The modern conservation effort was designed to mitigate one of our other basic acts, that of developing technology. When our technology overwhelms the resources, restrictions are necessary.

Ever since the modern conservation effort began, high powered rifles have been considered a part of the fair chase ensemble of technology allowed. They are part of the modern hunting ethic.

Your choice not to use these accepted tools is simply that, your choice. To describe your choice as somehow more ethical, more fair, more skilled is arrogant and degrades the community of hunters.

well said John.

I read through lots of complaining about the loss of woodsman-ship, negativity about the direction hunting is going, etc.

It's going to be 49 degrees on sat morning, squirrel season is open, who's taking a kid hunting??

+1.......

You've got to be kidding...but considering the source, probably not.

Would love to take my son Saturday morning but we have a football game.