|
Post by swilk on Jun 30, 2014 7:09:39 GMT -5
The hardest part to get "court usable" evidence is the "wanton" part of wanton waste. While it is a waste, proving that the person deliberately left the meat to go to waste "beyond a reasonable doubt" is extremely difficult. The way it was explained to me is that if the hunter included it in their bag, they can do with the meat what they want. They can use if all to fertilize the garden if they wanted to. That is the way I read it.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 30, 2014 14:59:53 GMT -5
DNR said that the Bonus Antlerless County Map is final... The map was generated some time back and they don't know why the "proposed" wasn't changed.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 30, 2014 17:16:05 GMT -5
Here's a link to a survey taken in 2010. www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/IN_Deer_Report.pdf The chart is on page 28. It's the only source I could find for hunter success rates. Hunter success rates for 2010 Percentage of Hunters who killed.... 0 deer - 43.5 % 1 deer - 30.00 % 2 deer - 12.2 % 3 deer - 5.6 % 4 deer - 2.4 % 5 deer - .9 % 6 deer - .5 % 7 deer - .2 % 8+deer - .6 % Looking @ the data, I have to ask, do we really have a problem with individual hunters taking too many deer or do we just have a lot of hunters in this state taking very few deer? I know this data is from 2010 and I'd love to find a source from the seasons in 2012/13 and 2013/14 to see if these numbers have changed significantly. Word from the DNR... "The survey we recently sent out at the end of last year is still in the process of being entered/analyzed, so hopefully we'll be able to update these figures in several months."
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Jun 30, 2014 18:48:31 GMT -5
Woody Williams
Looking forward to reading the data to see what percentage of hunter is killing more than one or two deer a year.
While I'm not a fan of the late antler less season, I really don't think if the entire season was done away with, it would lower harvest totals by much.
Ultimately, if hunter "A" has a goal of killing a buck and two does for the season, there is plenty of time and equipment choices to accomplish that goal before the late antler less season occurs.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 30, 2014 18:59:56 GMT -5
Woody Williams Looking forward to reading the data to see what percentage of hunter is killing more than one or two deer a year. While I'm not a fan of the late antler less season, I really don't think if the entire season was done away with, it would lower harvest totals by much. Ultimately, if hunter "A" has a goal of killing a buck and two does for the season, there is plenty of time and equipment choices to accomplish that goal before the late antler less season occurs. A full freezer is a full freezer.. Although some like late season hunting...
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jul 5, 2014 7:44:01 GMT -5
As I suspected they reduced my county from a 8 to a 3 and its about time ..Thank god we were suffering .Now we are safe from the late gun season . Between The guys who been over doing it here for years and the EHD that crushed the local deer herd here ,now they pay the price as we all do here . This makes several counties now taken out of the late gun season up here in north central IN. A little bit about White Tail Dear Biology that I learned in my Wildlife Biology Class at Purdue University. This is the very same class that the Director of Indiana DNR F&W took.
WTD does will produce more eggs when the population gets lower. With less deer to feed the browse grows back and this triggers more food for the remaining deer. These better fed females will produce more eggs and thus have the potential to produce more fawns. Nature has a way of replenishing itself. Wildlife Biologist know this and much more about how to manage the population of White Tail Deer.
I would assume that they do surveys by talking to hunter and gathering data on each areas deer population before they make recommendation on how many deer can be harvested each year in each area of the State. Some areas hold more habitat and therefore can host larger populations.
We studied what the deer ate and how each area's deer's teeth aged (worn down molars etc) according to the type of food they ate. We took the contents of the deer's stomach and preserved it for later study. Later the students examined the contents under a binocular microscope with supplemental lighting in order to identify the plants that the deer were feeding on each area of the State. We learned to age the deer by examining their teeth wear patterns. I loved going to this class. It was great to learn this stuff. I at one time wanted to be a Veterinarian so my first two years of classes were geared to being an animal doctor. I changed my mine and switched my major to Environmental Science and Conservation of Natural Resources instead.
I saw what these guys in the Wildlife Biology Mayor had to study as I was friends with a lot of them my Senior Year. Several of us took the very same classes together. Classes like Introduction to Statistics and Wildlife Biology Senior Level Classes. I already studied Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Zoology and had classes in Oceanography, Geology, Ecology,Microbiology, Biochemistry, Organic Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry with Qualitative Analysis as well as Computer Programming and Genetics. They study much of the same things to become a Biologist. I was in a program where I could actually pick and choose classes that were of interest to me. I took Classes in Wildlife Biology as well as Evolution and Anthropology along with Political Science and a lot of Nutrition classes. I was in the School of Agriculture at Purdue when I was there. I also took some of the Bio-neuclonics classes which is what the Industrial Hygienists take to get to be a Certified Industrial Hygienist and work in the Industry Areas. These guys study indoor air pollution. They study the radio active stuff that industry and the medical business uses every day. They over see the health of the people working in industrial complexes and Government Facilities as well.
Believe me when I say that these guys working for IDNR at Wildlife Biologist have the best training to do this job. That plus they work with more experienced Biologist that have been doing this job for 30 years. Many were doing this work before some of you reading this were born. They do a pretty good job given the lack of funding that they have to put up with.
Well a bunch of Collage level education does not make them or anyone immune to making poor choices or assumptions . BTW I was hunting before most of these guys you talk about were born that now do the state biologist work just like Woody and some others on this site were .There are very few old guard left in the state DNR .JMHO the old guard Deer Herd managers in this state did far more than just read generated reports and make political calls to manage this herd. They IMO were far better herd managers than those who just mostly set behind desks and read results off of a computer screen .They acted and reacted far quicker to deer herd changes than those today do . Sorry those guys did a fine job growing this herd .This generation had done a great job wrecking the herd and driving hunters out the sport.The and convoluted tag sales and requirements as well as the OBR did more to drive hunters away than any one factor .The year they introduced the OBR and raised the tag price from $14,95 to the current price in 2001 our deer hunter numbers dropped by almost 100,000 .So they had to do damage control in an attempt to sell more tags and the doe herd and hunter greed fixed that by driving up revenue something other states already knew . That fact is still floating around here somewhere from a old "Biologist report " pre current administration .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2014 7:54:43 GMT -5
Amazing that you have the figures of how big a drop in deer numbers happened the first year after the OBR (almost 100,000)!
Given the fact that the state never even releases guesstimates on how big our deer herd is, the "fact" that you can so closely pinpoint the numbers drop in the herd is most impressive!
|
|
|
Post by chubwub on Jul 5, 2014 8:40:22 GMT -5
The biologists have a lot more than just deer to consider when they are managing state ground. Of course this DNR generation is younger and prone to a few mistakes but one thing I see that I feel is good is that they are willing to make changes and adjust former rules in a timely manner. The feedback/customer service has been excellent when I have had the need and the CO response time was very good. I know not all COs are the same and some can be just plain awful but at least in the areas I hunt I feel that they strike the right balance between law enforcement and respecting privacy. Unlike a lot of police, it seems that in general the indiana COs are much more personable and respectful and more involved in their communities.
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jul 5, 2014 18:40:42 GMT -5
Amazing that you have the figures of how big a drop in deer numbers happened the first year after the OBR (almost 100,000)! Given the fact that the state never even releases guesstimates on how big our deer herd is, the "fact" that you can so closely pinpoint the numbers drop in the herd is most impressive! No no no that was licensed hunter numbers we went from around 350,000 + thousand to less than 250,000 that year .It was not a deer herd estimate read it again . And as you touched on it until the state owns a true herd estimate their regs and deer managemnt is nothing more than political wrangling and money grabbing in my book .True numbers starting with deer herd estimates would give them much more respect in my book to start with .
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 5, 2014 19:00:39 GMT -5
Amazing that you have the figures of how big a drop in deer numbers happened the first year after the OBR (almost 100,000)! Given the fact that the state never even releases guesstimates on how big our deer herd is, the "fact" that you can so closely pinpoint the numbers drop in the herd is most impressive! No no no that was licensed hunter numbers we went from around 350,000 + thousand to less than 250,000 that year .It was not a deer herd estimate read it again . And as you touched on it until the state owns a true herd estimate their regs and deer managemnt is nothing more than political wrangling and money grabbing in my book .True numbers starting with deer herd estimates would give them much more respect in my book to start with . You sure that was not licensed sales drop and not hunter number drops? Two different things.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 5, 2014 19:15:20 GMT -5
Yes, OTC deer license sales dropped from 2001 to 2002 by 89,270. In 2001 (which I think in 2002 there was going to be a big increase in cost of the lifetime licenses)there were 16,253 lifetime licenses sold. That would make a huge impact on the 2002 sales.
Undoubtedly the DNR lost sales on a second buck tag too.
LIFETIME LICENSES
BASIC HUNTING (NO DEER & TURKEY)
1999 - 10 2000 - 11 2001 - 189 2002 - 13 2003 - 5 Total- 228
COMPREHENSIVE HUNTING 1999 - 466 2000 - 703 2001 - 9922 2002 - 175 2003 - 101 Total -11367
COMPREHENSIVE HUNT & FISH 1999 - 374 2000 - 468 2001 - 6142 2002 - 174 2003 - 92 Total- 7250
GRAND TOTALS
1999 - 850 2000 - 1182 2001 - 16253 2002 - 362 2003 - 198 TOTAL -18845
Resident Deer Non-Resident Deer Total
2000 - 328,686.... 5,684... 334370 2001 - 306,460... 5,690.... 312150 2002 - 218,175... 4,705.... 222880
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jul 5, 2014 19:20:39 GMT -5
Well its out here in cyberspace somewhere as I recall it was hunters ..Also I think it was a report by our old Biologist or DNR head .Cant remember exactly who but it was official in nature .It was also as I remember the report before the one that proclaimed no tangible age change in the bucks in herd after the OBR came into effect .Been many years go now .
I know at one point in the early 1990s late 1980s IN had as I recall 1,000,000 licensed hunters and on the order of 375,000 deer hunters but that was on hard copy back then .That would take some work to find I am sure the DNR has those numbers if they cared to find or release them .
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 5, 2014 19:23:10 GMT -5
Well its out here in cyberspace somewhere as I recall it was hunters ..Also I think it was a report by our old Biologist or DNR head .Cant remember exactly who but it was official in nature .It was also as I remember the report before the one that proclaimed no tangible age change in the bucks in herd after the OBR came into effect .Been many years go now . I know at one point in the early 1990s late 1980s IN had as I recall 1,000,000 licensed hunters and on the order of 375,000 deer hunters but that was on hard copy back then .That would take some work to find I am sure the DNR has those numbers if they cared to find or release them . Those numbers I posted ARE from the DNR...
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Jul 5, 2014 19:24:46 GMT -5
Well its out here in cyberspace somewhere as I recall it was hunters ..Also I think it was a report by our old Biologist or DNR head .Cant remember exactly who but it was official in nature .It was also as I remember the report before the one that proclaimed no tangible age change in the bucks in herd after the OBR came into effect .Been many years go now . I know at one point in the early 1990s late 1980s IN had as I recall 1,000,000 licensed hunters and on the order of 375,000 deer hunters but that was on hard copy back then .That would take some work to find I am sure the DNR has those numbers if they cared to find or release them . Those numbers I posted ARE from the DNR... OK we posted almost the seme time it takes me a bit type .
|
|
|
Post by moose1am on Jul 5, 2014 22:05:03 GMT -5
Well a bunch of Collage level education does not make them or anyone immune to making poor choices or assumptions . BTW I was hunting before most of these guys you talk about were born that now do the state biologist work just like Woody and some others on this site were .There are very few old guard left in the state DNR .JMHO the old guard Deer Herd managers in this state did far more than just read generated reports and make political calls to manage this herd. They IMO were far better herd managers than those who just mostly set behind desks and read results off of a computer screen .They acted and reacted far quicker to deer herd changes than those today do . Sorry those guys did a fine job growing this herd .This generation had done a great job wrecking the herd and driving hunters out the sport.The and convoluted tag sales and requirements as well as the OBR did more to drive hunters away than any one factor .The year they introduced the OBR and raised the tag price from $14,95 to the current price in 2001 our deer hunter numbers dropped by almost 100,000 .So they had to do damage control in an attempt to sell more tags and the doe herd and hunter greed fixed that by driving up revenue something other states already knew . That fact is still floating around here somewhere from a old "Biologist report " pre current administration . .I'm not a deer hunter. I'm not out in the woods when too many other hunters are out there shooting at anything that moves.I'll put my faith in the modern biologist who not only took the time to learn and study about wildlife biology but also get out in the woods and hunt and fish. I know for a fact that the leader of these guys is a true hunter and fisherman who's grandfather was also a true hunter and outdoors man. He's a lot smarter than you give him credit. You don't even know him. Their job is the manage the animals first and the humans second. I'd much rather manage the deer herd than people like you without any wildlife biology formal education and still think that they know how to manage the State's deer heard for everyone. I'll follow the recommendations of the Professionals and not someone like you. BTW I didn't fall of the turnip truck yesterday and neither did Mark. He's been around at IDNR for the last 30 years or more. He started back in 1976 as the Property Manager of Glendale F&W area. I remember him calling me and telling me that he was stationed there back in 1976. Unfortunately I was sound asleep at the time as I had been out on a fire run and didn't have any sleep until after that run was over. I was sound asleep when he called me that night and my mom didn't get his name right as she took the phone call. It was not until later that I figured how who it was that called me and I didn't know how to call him back as she didn't have his phone number or remember where he called from Back then we didn't have Caller ID on the phone. You are not the only old timer in here. I've been hunting for over 50 years. I started hunting when I was around 7 or 8 years old back in the 1950s. And the Professor that taught the modern Biologist don't just lecture from the class room. They take their students out in the field all the time at Purdue. So its not just classroom work. It's hand one work out in the field. I know this because I also took several classes in Wildlife Biology and Fishery Science. My interest was in protecting the wildlife and fauna which is why I studied Environmental Science and Conservation as a major. But I was also very interested in wildlife biology as I studied Pre-veternary Medicine my first two years at Purdue. While I didn't major in Wildlife Biology I know several guys that did. One owns about 40 acres of ground with lots of deer on it and someday maybe I'll get to go hunting with him on that property when he retires. As I said I don't hunt deer. But I see them all over the place down here in Warrick County. Hell last night I almost ran over one. That's a common ocurance for me as I like to drive around the County and observing Wildlife. I go out often as I'm retired and enjoy taking photographs of the wildlife. Just the other day I got some good photographs of a Red Fox. And just yesterday evening I saw two Red Fox playing in a yard out in my old neighborhood. The Fox populations are doing well as ar the deer populations. When you get to be half as smart as the Biologist get back with me. For I doubt most what you say. You don't have the training to manage our wildlife in Indiana. It's a science these days and that hopefully is how they make their decisions about managing the deer population. With the above said I can tell you from my experience as a Scientist who worked for Government that we work under the Politicians. Governors and Mayors are the guys that decide who gets hired and who gets to stay. And they don't pay the scientists jack. These guys work for little pay because they love the job. But their budget is set by the Politicians that guys like you and I vote to elect. And you know how that goes. We don't have much of a choice in who we vote for. There are normally only two choices for each elected office. You either vote for the Democrat or the Republican Candidate. Who you vote for makes a difference in how the IDNR gets funded. The problem is that neither of the Political Parties pay much attention to our wildlife or us. IMHO they are all for themselves. Both parties that is. And we really don't have anyway to knowing which members vote to support our wildlife. I could not tell you which party is the best for our wildlife. BTW: I took a poll yesterday and it labeled me as more Republican than Democrat. Image that! A lot of my believes about immigration are more like the GOP stance while my environmental ideas are more like the Green Party. And my social values are more like the Dems. But I'm was rated as about 70% GOP. Which surprised the Heck out of me. LOL But then again I'm pro gun and would deport most of the illegal aliens that have entered this country illegally over the past 30 years. And I'm all for taking those kids from South American and putting them on a slow boat back to where they came from. Sorry but American is Full. We have no vacancies. We have too many people in this country now. We don't need more people. The gates should be closed until our population declines enough to allow more new people to come here again. That won't happen anytime soon unless the Black Plague visits us again
|
|
|
Post by steve46511 on Jul 6, 2014 2:07:38 GMT -5
Yes, OTC deer license sales dropped from 2001 to 2002 by 89,270. In 2001 ( which I think in 2002 there was going to be a big increase in cost of the lifetime licenses)there were 16,253 lifetime licenses sold. That would make a huge impact on the 2002 sales. Undoubtedly the DNR lost sales on a second buck tag too. LIFETIME LICENSES BASIC HUNTING (NO DEER & TURKEY) 1999 - 10 2000 - 11 2001 - 189 2002 - 13 2003 - 5 Total- 228 COMPREHENSIVE HUNTING 1999 - 466 2000 - 703 2001 - 9922 2002 - 175 2003 - 101 Total -11367 COMPREHENSIVE HUNT & FISH 1999 - 374 2000 - 468 2001 - 6142 2002 - 174 2003 - 92 Total- 7250 GRAND TOTALS 1999 - 850 2000 - 1182 2001 - 16253 2002 - 362 2003 - 198 TOTAL -18845 Resident Deer Non-Resident Deer Total 2000 - 328,686.... 5,684... 334370 2001 - 306,460... 5,690.... 312150 2002 - 218,175... 4,705.... 222880 WOW! I don't recall but the increase in 2002 must have been a WHOPPER!! I think, unless ALL my brain cells have abandoned ship, that an increase in reg deer tags and also in lifetime licenses projected for 1988 was the reason I bought mine in 87. MAN, I have to wonder how many LTL's were sold per year in the 80s looking at these numbers. (WHOOAAAAAA! This is going to be my 28th season using it?? Egads!! I do NOT like getting old FAST. LOL) Anyone happen to know what the history of deer tag cost is and what years tags took a jump? I THINK I recall that in 87 they were 10 bucks and 14 bucks was reported as to what they would be in 88....or something close, and the LTL was also going to increase accordingly. A 40 percent jump is engraved in my head at least. Maybe it's accurate. Just "historic information" but perhaps today's and tomorrow's hunters would find such interesting should such records be available somehow on this great site. God Bless
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 6, 2014 6:54:34 GMT -5
IIRC the jump was from $14 and change to the present $25?
The lifetime license goes up accordingly.
I got mine back in 1987 when the price jump was $5 to $14..
Another big jump was the year before they cut out the LTL.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jul 6, 2014 8:31:21 GMT -5
2002 Comp.LTL increase was from $708 to over $1200. The only reason I know this is I bought my wife hers before the increase and ended up getting divorced the same year.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 6, 2014 8:59:35 GMT -5
Ouch.
|
|
|
Post by steve46511 on Jul 6, 2014 9:31:04 GMT -5
2002 Comp.LTL increase was from $708 to over $1200. The only reason I know this is I bought my wife hers before the increase and ended up getting divorced the same year. DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANG!! We "DID GOOD" Woody by buying them in 87. OUCH is right! God Bless
|
|