Out of season Deer slaughter

[jbwhttail]

I've stayed out of the debate here, but here was my reply on HH.com:

The IDHA and IBA argued against using out of season permits during fawning season. They just shrugged and siad "yes that will happen". We argued about high power rifles, again whatever the landowner wants. Then it was .22 rifles, still no answer other in the "right hands it is effective". We asked about 14 year old kids using it, more shrugs.

The big worry is if they don't keep the vocal landowner happy he will call his legislator and the legislature will call the shots on management.

Seems the legislature is already calling the shots........ by threat.

Now why would they care about the landowner who bought property to hunt and recreate on? Remember he is the guy they depend on to provide habitat. The farmer who plants beans and corn provides plenty of cover in the winter right? The landowner who works to enhance his property for more wildlife, spends his money and possibly state or Federal monies to assist him........ The same landowner they want to make buy a license now.

What do I think of the out of season permits?

They are being ABUSED !!!!!!!

I can tell you of a landowner in the southeast portion of the State who leases his property out to out of season shooters. Gets permits each year.

Complain and you'll just get a shrug.

Starve a litter of pups and you would get arrested.

Shoot a stray cat and get arrested

but starve fawns............ shhhhh....... (whispers) not a problem.


The above is my opinon and what happened when comments have been made to the DNR through the DAC.

What I see here is a person who is only interested inhunting opportunity. Not a woed has been said about a fawn in the woods starving because "mom" caught a bullet.

Nothing about shooting with centerfires, no one heard about the night time shooting under lights, did they?

How about .22 rim fire rifles being used? and used by kids under 16 years old to boot?

No opinions on the "farmer" who leases his land to folks to do the shooting during the "off season" then leases it again during season.

Nor is a word said or permits pulled when 5 bucks are shot in one evening and nary a doe.

Abused? Yes the system is abused by landowners and IDNR. IDNR abuse is let them kill them if it keeps them quiet with their legislator.

starve a litter of kittens or pups get arrested, starve fawns.......... ssssssssssshhhhhh

[Woody Williams]

Far be it for me to get in between you two guys..

I'd like to see it that hunters can take care of the "deer problem" but that is not likely to happen given the current set up.

The IDNR should manage deer and give every opportunity they can to hunters to take care of the problem. I think they are trying that with the basically unlimited amount of antlerless permits available this year. That wont work and we pretty well know it. Most folks will kill the same amount of deer that they always did - on opening weekend. Oh, we'll kill a few more, but we've been killing a few more every year for awhile.

The first year or two bowhunters will jump on the bonus permits in early archery because it is something new. We will have another transfer of the harvest again. Only instead of the buck harvest being transferred out of early archery it will be the doe harvest transferred in. After awhile the newness will wear off for them.

I can see a bowhunter tagging out on his one buck and his county's limit of bonus permits and sitting out firearm season with a full freezer.

Like it or not deer management will take precedence over "social issues" in the future..

Then they will have to do something about those $24 antlerless permit tags..

Nothing will work at that price...

I too believe that farmers shouldn't be allowed to kill does until after the fawns are weaned. But, I guess they (IDNR and the farmers) think 3 with one shot....

I would think maybe the IN DNR might follow the ILL DNR's lead on a January firearm antlerless hunt. Some freezers might be half empty by then.

I don’t care what they kill them with as long as it is humane. IMO - a .22 doesn't qualify unless in the right hands and up close and personal.

[cambygsp]

Whats wrong with being "pro-opportunity"?

[jackc99]

Camby - what if that "opportunity is" behind a fence?

Like a lot of others I've been lurking here watching the debate. You know I remember when we were only allowed to kill bucks with shotguns about 40 years ago. Through good management our herd has grown to allow us to increase our seasons, weapons, and sex of deer.

Everyone needs to take a step back and ask if we aren't in a really good situation already. If you agree that we have it pretty good and that IDNR has done a good job of extending us plenty of opportunities to pursue whitetails in a variety of ways then you really need to count your blessings and let them do the job they were hired to do.

Jack (steps off the soapbox)

[cambygsp]

jackc99 said:

Camby - what if that "opportunity is" behind a fence?

Like a lot of others I've been lurking here watching the debate. You know I remember when we were only allowed to kill bucks with shotguns about 40 years ago. Through good management our herd has grown to allow us to increase our seasons, weapons, and sex of deer.

Everyone needs to take a step back and ask if we aren't in a really good situation already. If you agree that we have it pretty good and that IDNR has done a good job of extending us plenty of opportunities to pursue whitetails in a variety of ways then you really need to count your blessings and let them do the job they were hired to do.

Jack (steps off the soapbox)

The job the IDNR has been placed with..... is to manage the resource for *maximum* opportunity!

I'm lost as to your "behind the fence" comment....I don't think the IDNR is looking to expand on that, nor should they be.

The slaughter of out of season deer should only be conducted as a last resort.....I have seen where the deer belong to the state and the state is responsible for their damage, I strongly feel that the deer are Gods creatures, and any damage that results is an "act of God"....It's nice that the IDNR is there to help the farmer, but it sure don't seem like they do much educating on the acceptable ways to control the problem.

I recently had some birds get up under my soffit and do some damage by nesting there.....WHO DO I BLAME??....The state?.... or my wife for putting out the bird feeder?

Your point is right on!!!! We are enjoying one of the best deer herds in the history of time, we probably have more deer today, than when Christopher Columbus stepped foot on this great land.

We still have a ton of restrictions during the regular hunting seasons....it don't make much since to restrict folks during the regular seasons, then allow farming landowners unlimited and unrestricted opportunities to slaughter these deer out of the normal deer season.

[Woody Williams]

I've deleted two posts in this thread..

As most posters on here know I REALLY hate to do that as I like to see some free wheeling honest debate but you fellers started making the personal attacks again.

Take it to PM or email...

[jackc99]

Camby - FYI for the past year the high fence operators have been selling their business as another "opportunity" to hunters.

I firmly believe that more deer are killed by poaching than through the depradation permits. However, if you feel differently why not take your proposal to IDNR and have them end the practice? I'll bet it won't happen.

Jack

[Woody Williams]

jackc99 said:

Camby - FYI for the past year the high fence operators have been selling their business as another "opportunity" to hunters.

Yes, we've seen that. What we and the IDNR has to do is seperate REAL hunter opportunity from "opportunity" for a few to get rich by selling "hunts".

I firmly believe that more deer are killed by poaching than through the depradation permits.

WW - More than likely you are right. The poaching is not as higly visable though. Hard to put a number on them.

Niether practice is good for hunters.

However, if you feel differently why not take your proposal to IDNR and have them end the practice? I'll bet it won't happen.

That wouldn't even be a "bet". That would be just taking Camby's money.

No, it wont happen and I'm not so sure it should happen.

Like I said earlier - the whitetail deer to hunters is a magnificent game animal and to some farmers they are hooved rats. I don't blame farmers for wanting to control them.

We hunters need to do a better job of controlling the herd so this "depredation" problem goes away. If taht is at all possible..

[cambygsp]

""We hunters need to do a better job of controlling the herd so this "depredation" problem goes away. If taht is at all possible..""

How can hunters do a better job if they are not allowed access into these problem areas?

Here is something to think about as far as the deer population goes...........

Don't you think that the "amature management" that so many folks seem to want to take part in is having an effect on the over population problem?

Suplemental feeding and food plots, IN MY OPINION, interfere with the natural disbursment of the deer herd. Why do they need to roam if you have a buffet set out for them???

[kevin1]

Don't you think that the "amature management" that so many folks seem to want to take part in is having an effect on the over population problem?

That's called "social pressure , Camby , and apparently it does in Kentucky ...
Probably does to some degree here too .

With regard to supplemenatal feeding and food plots , wouldn't both make a hunter a more efficient predator and therefore help control the herd population better during the season ?

On the subject of access , I rarely hear a "No ." , and I'm not a real social butterfly . This tells me that some folks are spending far more time whining about access than they are trying to get some . An average actor hears the word "no" thousands of times each year , yet they persevere . Are they more resolute in their quest for "access" than we are ?

[multidigits]

Speaking of amatures, you guys do a good job yourself. The real problem is that hunters want a large number of deer so that their satisfaction remains high while they are hunting. Farmers want a low number of deer so that they can sell as much of their crop as possible. The DNR wants a balance. When they decide how many deer can be taken in each area factors include road kills, farmer complaints, etc.

You want to change the system, work on getting involved with the DNR on NEEDED changes. Public comment is important, but actual hands on interaction takes over and plays a part. Get involved. Work on the problem, don't create more. Find out why it's a problem and work on the problem. The problem may be as simple as teaching the farmer he can market his hunting property and make up the 3% lose he has from the deer eating his corn. The 3% is from JB from another site. 3% doesn't sound like much, but would each of you throw 3% of your gross pay away without moaning about it? I doubt it.

[jbwhttail]

Camby:

I refuse to take the bait on "Amateur management"

Try learning to spell "amature"..........LMAO.

Without private landowners and wildlife managers, you have no wildlife, that is a fact!

Get over it, I own land and "I" determine who hunts and how much hunting. You in turn hunt over hunted Public land and take antlerless deer that should be protected. All to give a perception that hunters are killing deer.

Switzerland county has a 4+4 limit on antlerless. But I along with my food plots will determine what management occurs in my area. that along with Mr Lynch(who would still like to talk with you) and Mike Mascari, we will manage as we please.

By the way, Mike just purchased the property that the SLOB KENTUCKY hunters had. Those days are past.

Delete away Woody................ I am tired of the crap. I have been VERY civil here, but, I wont take it from either of these jokers.

[cambygsp]

WOW!

I was not even thinking about JB when I made that post.......sorry if I struck a nerve.

[mbogo]

This article is yet another example of a hunter with a "me first"attitude. He is so worried about himself that the consequences of his actions apparently never cross his mind.

I can't say the farmer is a whole lot better though. In my experience, the majority of "crop damage" to standing corn is primarily due to squirrels and raccoons. Most of the corn deer consume is the waste corn left behind after harvest. They seem to prefer to eat corn off the ground, not the stock. Deer tend to feed much more heavily on beans throughout the growing season than on corn, but most of that feeding is done on the leaves and not the pods. They seem to prefer the leaves while the plant is green or the pod once it is dead but prefer other food sources in between when the plant is dieing but the pod is not fully ripe.

The biggest problem I have with the current system is the lack of wanton waste clause to go with these permits. If the farmers were required to ensure the deer that were shot were used and this was strictly enforced I would be less opposed to this system. Anyway, I have little doubt that the "3 S's" are practiced more frequently than permits are issued and judges seem reluctant to punish poachers to the full extent.

[Woody Williams]

mbogo,

I agree with your assessment.

I've hunted close to cornfields and see the squirrels hitting it hard. I've found corn cobs and shucks a hundred yards or better back in the woods. Deer certainly don't pick an ear and take it back in the woods to eat it. But squirrels do..

I'm not a farmer, and don't play one on TV, but one once told me that deer 'cropping' the tops of the soy beans three times will basically put that that particular plant out of production. I don’t know if that is true or not. Maybe one of the farmers on here can clarify that for us.

I also believe that number of permits that is issued is the tip of the iceberg. As you said, I also believe that there is a lot of S - S - S going on..

I talked to one of the farmers in my area that gets 20 permits year and he said he doesn't stop there. He also said that he likes to leave them lay where they fall as that will keep other deer out of that area for a few weeks. He does not discriminate on buck or doe as to what he will shoot. Brown is down..

Of course it does no good to go to the CO as it would be my word against his on his statements.

The clause about turning in the antlers is a joke too as some "hunters" in my area did just the opposite. They "trophy hunted" in July..

Not sure what the answer is as we have hunters against a livelihood here.. The IDNR has it's hands full trying to satisfy all..

[mbogo]

A group of farmers I know were considering donating money to pay the fines of some poachers that were caught near one of the areas I hunt. The bottom line I guess is that some farmers love the land and the wildlife and tolerate the little damage that is done. To the others, the ones that support these kinds of things, the land is simply a source of income.

[duff]

The browse line on some beans that Iwas just walking through on Tuesday showed that in fact the deer were limiting the production of the plants they were eating. They didn't eat them to the ground but munching on the tops with no visible pod or many blossoms compaired to an ungrazed plant. BTW I bumped 3 out of there as I was walking 2 bucks (nice little 6 pointer and a spike, third was a doe I assume, it left early. The two guys I got within 50 yrds of)

Look at how the state handles nusance geese. You have to either burn or bury any goose shot under a nusance permit. Kind of strange I thought.

[jajwrigh]

cambygsp said:

My comment is........

No landowner or farmer should be granted out of season permits until they can prove that their efforts to reduce the herd population DURING THE REGULAR DEER SEASONS have failed!

I find it REAL hard to beleive that you can kill 60+ out of season deer when you allow hunting pressure during the deer season.

I agree that hunting during the season should definately be the first attempt to control a local deer population!!