|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 8:42:58 GMT -5
We have an April 1 deadline to submit our ideas and wants to the NRC Advisory Council, the NRC, the IDNR and the Summer Study Committee.
This is short notice so we really did not have the time to logically finish the project by soliciting positive input from all members on the top items.
We've pared the initial list of 46 items down to 10 with the latest poll. These are the items that we will submit. Just presenting these items by themselves carries very little weight unless accompanied by a write up as to the benefits of the proposal and how they would be best obtained.
So, I have a request of all of you. Please write up a couple paragraphs about whatever, and how ever many, of these items that you want to. The debate and selection process is over, so all we want are POSITIVES about our selected items.
In your write up remember that you are making a request so the old adage " you can get more flies with honey than vinegar" applies. If you have data to back up any claims by all means include it.
I will attempt to combine any duplicates and only send one write up per proposal. I might also edit them for brevity.
Please do this as soon as possible and PM them to me here.
The top ten vote getters:
1) Improve Hunter Access (22 votes, 9.2%)
2) Eliminate OBR (one buck rule) (21 votes, 8.8%)
3) Go to a tele-check system (20 votes, 8.4%)
4) Move the gun season out of the main rut (18 votes, 7.5%)
5) Program to donate venison to the hungry no cost (16 votes, 6.7%)
6) Keep OBR (one buck rule) (15 votes, 6.3%)
7) Allow crossbows during all archery seasons (13 votes, 5.4%)
8) Re-instate the Two Buck Rule with a premium price 2nd buck (13 votes, 5.4%)
9) General firearm tag to be either sex (12 votes, 5%)
10) NR bonus tags same price as resident’s (11 votes, 4.6%)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2009 9:02:54 GMT -5
I like 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 all of them would be an improvement over what you have in place today
1. Every State wants more and better public access, but it's a tough nut to crack. It's very tough without a fund in place to help pay for it.
3. Would provide quicker, better and cheaper data for the DNA to work with.
5. Will help increase the doe harvest and keeping the herd in check. won't be easy to fund, though.
6. OBR is QDM and should be retained. One is enough, kill more does if you want meat.
7. Needed to increase the antlerless harvest, plus it offers a new challange and a popular choise today.
9. Great change, use it how you need to balance your areas herd.
10. Bonus tags are under used, this change will accomplish several goals at once.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Mar 27, 2009 10:07:43 GMT -5
1,2,3,7,&,9 would be cost effective improvements to what we currently use.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Mar 27, 2009 10:16:44 GMT -5
I think Woody is looking for a write up of legitimate reasons as to why we need these changes to present to the powers that be.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 10:28:22 GMT -5
I think Woody is looking for a write up of legitimate reasons as to why we need these changes to present to the powers that be. Yes, I am. We've already done the selection process. and now we need to have a short blurb with each of the top ten items.. I'm sure that there are a number of people on here that originally put forth these items. I've seen some [pretty good discussion on some of them. Time to put it in words for the NRC and DNR. PLEASE PM ME your write ups....
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 27, 2009 10:53:43 GMT -5
I think that the hunters of this state had a good sample poll of what is actually echos of what the deer hunters of the the state of Indiana believe to be beneficial and what will give greater hunter satisfaction and better experiences with good management to go along side it.
So that all said this was a poll and since a few of these topics were diametrical opposed and connected I think that majority rules on this poll shows what the hunters actually want and feel time has come for change also some of this will increase revenue to the state DNR coffers in a big way helping many programs succeed!!So in fact the keeping of the OBR should not be up for disscuaaion as it was defeated soundly here and would lend no creadance to this or any other poll held here in the future I am sorry but this is they way votes work for those that feel let down over the outcome.
1--Tele-check ---> will be a huge over all yearly savings and be a catalyst to hunters to take more deer in the middle of the week as time constraints and check stations open or closed keeps many hunters from shooting Does.
"I very strongly support this "
2 OBR to be eliminated --->The poll showed clearly that the OBR has lost its appeal to 2/3 of this states hunters are becoming or are unhappy with it and was shot down on this poll by 1/4 more votes than to keep the OBR .Its time to get back to hunter recruitment and happiness there other management means and should be Left up to the hunting individuals to impose on themselves.The TBR simply get more hunters back into the woods to be there and kill the occasional opportunistic doe that shows up ,which is what the second buck will do more than lead to a second buck down this was proven by our own past records if looked into .Lets face it we only took 3000 to 5000 more bucks a year in the TBR years and this savings was swallowed up quickly by the higher gun kill numbers in just a season or two after the OBR in-statement.
"I very strongly support this "
3 TBR at a higher price .---> This would be a real good idea and make for another windfall for funds for the DNR and is programs .I personally would charge $40.00 for the purchase of the second buck tag this will go along ways in hunter satisfaction and program funding.This all said only one buck should be allowed per hunter during our states gun season per hunter ,The second buck could be taken in one of the other yearly seasons .this will keep management at a higher level as well.
"I very strongly support this "
4-Move gun season out of the main rut ---This is great management tool and could easily surpass the OBR rule in oldest age class buck recruitment for those who care for that instead of the OBR to see its real benefits just look to IL. I don't believe I need post their trophy buck standings do I as well as other states who are back just one or two weeks from our traditional start time .As an added bonus the Doe herd will be more stable an likely to be herded in larger groups lending themselves to be more predictable with more targets per hunter as they will likely be in larger undisturbed groups !
" I Support this "
5-Crossbows --They should be added to all the same time frame as traditional archery season as they and the top of the line compound bows have virtually the same performance levels .I also think that those setting on the fence to archery hunt will likely jump on over as well as recruit more women ,children and those who are not willing to be classified as handicapped into the woods the entire season without excessive and tedious costly DR. visits and paper work .
" I Strongly support this "
6-Hunter access--This is a very important issue and could be helped along by the state and power ,timber co.s and and mining operations coming together working on hunter access as well as the purchases of new hunting lands and making certain sections of state properties open to either bow hunt or gun hunt or both that are currently not open to it !! Other ideas should be tabled and discussed as well.
"I support the descusions and exchange of Ideas while we have the ear of the NRC"
7--General tag --Great Idea for those who want to hunt but are very limited in funds and want to take the first deer that walks by them .IE a meat hunter should have access to this type tag and I see many hunting more with this type tag as well that will help reduce the deer numbers in many areas.
" I support this "
8-Donating deer program--This I feel is in affect now and I do not beleive any state organization will or should reimburse for a charitable act if you burn a tag on a deer to give away its charity plain and simple .End of story I would not persue this as it has the laest chance of any further looks or state support.JMHO
"Sorry I do not support this at this time" {I do support the IDEA but not in this particular instance at this tiem bigger fish to fry here}
9- I am not a big fan of giveing cuts to NR hunters sorry I dislike the outtfitting bussiness for deer it has runed many areas of good deer states .I feel NRs should pay the price to hunt anywhere other than their home state!Sorry NRs lead to land leaseing and loss to in state hunters .We must look out for our own numbers first thus passing this would likely lead to loss of instters access wouldn't it if we made it more affordable for NRs to hunt here.
"Sorry but I do not support this"
10-- Keep OBR - This was shot down by the poll and Eliminate the OBR selection .Yes it had several votes "but" the Eliminate the OBR had way more votes by percentage here and this should not be in the disscussion here now" period" as it was defeated soundly and will simply confuse things that are not oppsed by other poll options that need to get passed into hunting law soon as possable for all hunters JMHO majority rules here.Had the eliminate the OBR side of the poll been defeated so soundly, I would not expect to be disscusing it as an option here and eventhough I would of been dissapointed but I would of accepted that on this poll at this time there is always a latter date to revisit things like this !
"I do not support this at all"
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 14:58:28 GMT -5
I need more positive write ups on the following:
1) Go to a tele-check system
2) Move the gun season out of the main rut
3) Program to donate venison to the hungry no cost
4) Keep OBR (one buck rule)
Please PM me your write ups..
|
|
|
Post by throbak on Mar 27, 2009 15:32:36 GMT -5
this may not be positive but talking to the small store owners in SE In. they appreciate the business the check system brings them because of this I had to change my mind I hate seeing the small stores closing if going to them helps that not to happen well keep it like it is
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Mar 27, 2009 15:56:16 GMT -5
If checking in deer is keeping them alive, they have serious problems! I know at the Sportsman's Lodge in Decatur, that people checking in deer are anxious to get the deer processed and don't hang around or spend much money, if any.
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 27, 2009 16:01:21 GMT -5
this may not be positive but talking to the small store owners in SE In. they appreciate the business the check system brings them because of this I had to change my mind I hate seeing the small stores closing if going to them helps that not to happen well keep it like it is Your post makes me wonder though if the store needs this check station business to stay in business if there isn't truly other issues that stand against them .Because I don't really think that much business can really be attributed to just having a check station at any store .Some business sure you bet! but not not that much business saving numbers of sales and customers. I doubt that is what is behind it and if it is his shop is likely doomed to fall anyways despite being a sad situation they are in it happens especially to the not so popular ones .We lost 3 here in this area just in the last two years .And they were just not that popular among local hunters from the git go . He has my sympathy though for his slow business.
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Mar 27, 2009 16:11:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 16:22:16 GMT -5
Kirk, You are looking at the first poll of the first two polls where we were just paring down the proposals into a more manageable number. Because of the poll number limitations of the site I could not do all 46 proposals in one poll. The top dogs in each poll where them lumped together in the final poll. See - huntingindiana.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=deerhunting&action=display&thread=25390To get the members to really think about which ones they want instead of just clicking on this one and that one the choices was narrowed to 4 choices. With different choices (basically two polls butting heads) to make and one less vote, some things did not get as many votes as they did in the original polls.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 17:50:14 GMT -5
OK.. I am now down to needing just two writeups...
5) Program to donate venison to the hungry no cost
6) Keep OBR (one buck rule)
Anyone want to take a stab at them?
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Mar 27, 2009 20:20:17 GMT -5
This is probably a good time to remind everyone that public comments are currently being received by the Natural Resources Commission on the deer "housekeeping" rule and the youth deer season (adding antlered deer to the season). Comments can be made at: www.in.gov/nrc/2377.htmJack
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 27, 2009 20:32:36 GMT -5
This is probably a good time to remind everyone that public comments are currently being received by the Natural Resources Commission on the deer "housekeeping" rule and the youth deer season (adding antlered deer to the season). Comments can be made at: www.in.gov/nrc/2377.htmJack Thanks for the reminder Jack. April 1 is the last day, so get them in folks.
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Mar 30, 2009 19:42:35 GMT -5
Feed the Hungry - This would give the state an opportunity to feed the hungry especially in this economic crisis. Any business or person can write off charitable donations on their taxes.
Proposal:
Any hunter legally taking checking in a deer can donate the meat participating deer proccers at no cost to the hunter.
Processor would then process the meat giving to food banks etc determined by the state.
Processor could then write off the processing as a charitable donation for all aspects of the processing, but no more than $2,000 per year. Processor would have to provide receipt for tax purposes.
Pro: helps fee Indiana's hungry, more deer harvested each year
Con: Paper work for taxes
I personally would shoot more deer each year if I could donate the meet to the hungry at no cost.
OBR - I strongly support OBR, but I'm starting to lean toward a second buck at a higher tag price. I would say $50 for a second buck, and everyone must buy one. Yes even a lifetime license holder.
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 21:04:13 GMT -5
OBR - I strongly support OBR, but I'm starting to lean toward a second buck at a higher tag price. I would say $50 for a second buck, and everyone must buy one. Yes even a lifetime license holder. No way pal !!!!! You wouldn't of dared to post that had you payed for one while they were for sale LOL ::)we already paid the price for the second tag sorry that would be double dipping and a real Fight as the wording of the Lifetime license contract law would be binding in court !
|
|
|
Post by duff on Mar 31, 2009 22:31:03 GMT -5
Feed the Hungry - This would give the state an opportunity to feed the hungry especially in this economic crisis. Any business or person can write off charitable donations on their taxes. Proposal: Any hunter legally taking checking in a deer can donate the meat participating deer proccers at no cost to the hunter. Processor would then process the meat giving to food banks etc determined by the state. Processor could then write off the processing as a charitable donation for all aspects of the processing, but no more than $2,000 per year. Processor would have to provide receipt for tax purposes. Pro: helps fee Indiana's hungry, more deer harvested each year Con: Paper work for taxes I personally would shoot more deer each year if I could donate the meet to the hungry at no cost. OBR - I strongly support OBR, but I'm starting to lean toward a second buck at a higher tag price. I would say $50 for a second buck, and everyone must buy one. Yes even a lifetime license holder. Why limit the tax write off to the processors? Could it be set up so that the hunter pays the processor and when you donate the meat to the food bank or non-profit org and get a tax write off for these donations? We get to claim donations to Good Will if you want so I am not sure why you couldn't take credit for the food donations. I think providing some type of incentive for donated deer to either processors or hunters will be the best way to increase the donations. Just thinking out loud I guess. To get additional fees out of the LTL holders it will take some creative thinking. That is why they got rid of them
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 1, 2009 6:59:29 GMT -5
Guys,
You CAN claim a tax write off for the donation of the meat to a recognized food pantry.
Most just claim the amount of thE processing , but I know of some that claims the amount of meat times what it would sell for a pound IF it was ground beef.
Pound of ground beef at Kroger = $2 a pound, 50 pounds of ground deer donated = $100 deduction.
Ask your tax man....
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Apr 1, 2009 19:42:48 GMT -5
Anyone can claim up to $300 for charitable donations without receipts etc on their taxes.
The Federal and State Governments would put a limit the amount the can be claimed for the processors so why not set one for them. If your processing fee is $100 then that would be 200 deer per processor. I think that is more than fair.
A lifetime license is a lifetime license, but pay for a second buck wouldn't make sense. You might want to check the fine print on the lifetime agreement they may have slipped a few things in their to allow them to change things. I do wish I would have bought one when the sale happned...LOL
|
|