Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Midwest
New Indiana deer regs. >

New Indiana deer regs.

Midwest OH, IN, IL, WI, MI, MN, IA, MO, KS, ND, SD, NE Remember the Regional Forums are for Hunting Topics only.

New Indiana deer regs.

Old 12-04-2010, 12:08 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
PastorJim08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,372
Default New Indiana deer regs.

I'd like to know what you Hoosier hunters think of the proposed deer regs for 2011. Personally I am in favor of them. I have thought for a long time that our firearms/muzzleloader seasons are to long. There is no reason that we cannot produce the same amount and quality of trophy bucks on a year to year basis as our neighbors in Illinois and Ohio. I think the greatest factor that is preventing this is the length of our gun seasons. You look at states such as Wisconsin, who have more than 3x the number of deer we do, and their gun season is only nine days, the same as the proposal here. These are my opinions only, I'd like to hear yours.

Blessings.....Pastorjim
PastorJim08 is offline  
Old 12-04-2010, 07:30 PM
  #2  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 222
Default

The proposal was taken off the table at the Meeting on the 16th of Nov. They are working on a new proposal now. My opinion though the original proposal was fine minus they were trying to reduce the number of deer dramatically but with the other goals they were trying to achieve this was necessary. In order for this state to become a trophy deer state like they are wanting we would need to reduce the number of does by quite a bit then continue taking a large number of does for a while until the buck to doe population was properly in check which would result in more bucks available than currently and result in more deer making it into higher age classes. Most hunters however felt like the state was tryign to screw them so they voiced their opinions and the proposal was eliminated.
ACutting is offline  
Old 12-05-2010, 01:33 AM
  #3  
Typical Buck
 
Roger46982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 667
Default

In a lot of areas in the state {mine} the doe population is down to early seventies numbers, and still it is a eight bonus tag area.
Roger46982 is offline  
Old 12-05-2010, 01:41 AM
  #4  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
PastorJim08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,372
Default

Originally Posted by ACutting View Post
The proposal was taken off the table at the Meeting on the 16th of Nov. They are working on a new proposal now. My opinion though the original proposal was fine minus they were trying to reduce the number of deer dramatically but with the other goals they were trying to achieve this was necessary. In order for this state to become a trophy deer state like they are wanting we would need to reduce the number of does by quite a bit then continue taking a large number of does for a while until the buck to doe population was properly in check which would result in more bucks available than currently and result in more deer making it into higher age classes. Most hunters however felt like the state was tryign to screw them so they voiced their opinions and the proposal was eliminated.
Thanks for the update. I kinda had my doubts about it when I started seeing so much opposition on some of the forums. I really don't think alot of hunters understand what it could mean in the long run if we shorten those gun seasons. I believe if that takes place, it will make for a better hunting experience for everyone. One thing is for sure, if the DNR doesn't come up with a plan in response to the insurance companies, the state legislature will and that won't be a good thing.

Blessings.....Pastorjim

Last edited by PastorJim08; 12-05-2010 at 01:43 AM.
PastorJim08 is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 07:20 AM
  #5  
Fork Horn
 
onion721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: So. Indiana
Posts: 288
Default

IMO Indiana is doing just fine as a trophy deer state.

2001-2006 Indiana ranks 6th in B&C/P&Y entries per square mile, pretty darn good. I haven't seen an updated figure, but I can't imagine it getting any worse.

What needs to be done instead of the proposed shortening of firearms season, move the start back 1 week, get it out of the chase/peak rut.

A lot of the reason Il, OH and a couple of other states harvest more book bucks is because they have 2-3 times more hunters than Indiana.

I just don't want it to become difficult as a resident hunter to find prime hunting ground, or have to jump through hoops to get a tag like some of these "trophy" states.
onion721 is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 10:07 AM
  #6  
Zim
Nontypical Buck
 
Zim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LaPorte, IN
Posts: 1,111
Default

Haha. This never ending battle is why I am glad I moved to Illinois 4 years ago and picked up a LL.

After living 45 years in Indiana and hunting in 12 different states, I gave up on Indiana. Bottom line is it is near impossible to retract entitlements (for anything) once they are handed out for free. The reason Iowa, Illinois & Kansas have superior trophy hunting is because they never allowed firearms in the peak deer rut to begin with. There are far more firearm hunters than bowhunters, and they raise holy hell any time their opportunity is reduced. Politicians and conservation departments don't want to fight the battle necessary for change. Why game management is put in the hands of public opinion instead of wildlife professionals is beyond me to begin with!?

Crappily managed states are slowly recognizing their faults, but they are stuck with trying to fix things via less desirable options that step on the fewest toes. Several examples in the last 10 years:

Indiana - Went to one buck rule about 6 years ago. You see they got this through (barely) because this rule did not infringe on the majority of gun hunters. They were only allowed one buck via gun anyway, and most did not bowhunt. Thus it did not affect them personally other than benefit, and only took opportunity from dual weapon hunters. But that is why it passed.

Missouri - Went to antler restrictions on a very gradual county-by-county basis, each year adding 5-10. You see, the amount of people objecting to it in any one year was kept very low.

Pennsylvania - Went to antler restrictions statewide in one year but I believe it cost the conservation director his job due to too many hunters objecting all in one year.

There are a few others I can't remember now.........Arkansas tried.

It will take an act of god to reduce the ~32 gun days in Indiana.............or move the gun season out of peak rut. Any possible imrovement will have to be done with less than optimum effectiveness options.

I think the thing most people fail to realize is it really only comes down to about 5 days per year...........the absolute peak rut. I bowhunt Illinois public land and I can't tell you how many truly monster bucks I have seen going bonkers during those 5 days, which I could have easly shot if guns were allowed during those prime dates. I am very glad for the statewide seasons we have, even though I have not gotten to harvest one of those toads. With Illinois' management at least I get to see B&C's every year! And eventurally I will get lucky and arrow one, likely during one of those 5 days.

Onion is right about moving the IN gun opener back one week (it currently includes those 5 magic days I refer to) but it will never happen due to public gunhunter outcry.

At one point in time some in IDHA asked me to spearhead an effort to change, but I recognized a lost cause when I saw it. I had even gone to one public meeting where two CO's believed moving guns from the rut would not improve age class distribution. They even had the opinion older age class bucks were not a necessary component of a "healthy' deer herd!!! Who the hell would want to take on mentality like that!

Indiana was the last state in the nation to phase out single class HS basketball and almost daylight savings time. Why beat my head against a wall?!?!?!

Last edited by Zim; 12-10-2010 at 04:07 AM.
Zim is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 10:33 AM
  #7  
Zim
Nontypical Buck
 
Zim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LaPorte, IN
Posts: 1,111
Default

"2001-2006 Indiana ranks 6th in B&C/P&Y entries per square mile, pretty darn good. I haven't seen an updated figure, but I can't imagine it getting any worse."

VERY deceptive stat. During those years Indiana was not even close to the top 2 states, Iowa and Kansas, in that statistic. It barely topped Michigan which is pitiful and dead last in the midwest. The midwest has everything a buck needs to grow a big rack, so you really need to compare it among other MIDWEST states.

In my 10 years of hunting Indiana public land and premium private land in NW Indiana, I harvested a total of zero P&Y bucks. This year I took my 5th P&Y buck in Illinois, in only 6 years, all off public land. I even passed on a 2nd one this year, gambling for one of the booners in the area we saw.

Last edited by Zim; 12-09-2010 at 10:38 AM.
Zim is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 01:30 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
PastorJim08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,372
Default

Zim, very well written and thought-out opinion. I agree with most of what you said but I must disagree with you and onion on pushing back the gun season opener by one week unless you were going to make that the only week of firearms. But there again, you would be reducing the firearms season by almost half. So I don't see how that would be much different than the proposed changes that are drawing so much flack. The stated purpose of the rule changes were to reduce the deer herd due to pressure from the insurance companies. I believe the proposed changes would have done little to accomplish this. The proposed mid-October doe only season would serve to cause room for abuse from those who would take that opportunity to kill a buck with a firearm and then claim it as a bow-kill. The proposed second doe only season would be nearly useless as most guys are not going to brave the cold of the late season with only the oportunity to take a doe. Is this right...maybe not but it is reality. I hope the DNR can come up with solutions because if they fail to address this issue, the insurance companies will begin pressuring the state lawmakers for a solution and I don't think any of us want that. One more thing. When it comes to class basketball, lay off. lol. We had the greatest most watched high school tournament in the US until the eggheads got ahold of it. One thing we all need to remember is that we are not each others enemy. We need to bind together and work with the state game agencies to work out the issues that we as hunters and game managers are facing. Thank you for your responses.

Blessings.....Pastorjim
PastorJim08 is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 03:16 PM
  #9  
Giant Nontypical
 
salukipv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
Default

I feel like a long season vs. a short one doesn't mean much, it's rather rifle season covers the rut, or both ruts.

Although maybe I'm wrong, and guys just hunt until they can't anymore, ie give a resident a week, and he'll hunt a week, give him 6 weeks, and he'll hunt 6 weeks.

I bow hunt and have over 3 months to hunt, I don't hunt 3 months....maybe 2 weeks total in general.

I believe IA gun season misses the rut, not sure about KS, but know both IA and KS do some great managing.

IL and IA also are slug states which I heard lends to growing bigger bucks as guys aren't taking 500yd shots on deer. Not sure what the IN rifle regs are etc...? pistol cartridge only?

Also a state I feel can only do so much, unless they really got specific on regs, even then a state can only do so much. You'll always have poachers, etc...or guys not caring about antler size, or just guys cheating the system, sharing tags, etc...doing some shady stuff maybe not full on poaching but alot goes on out there.

I feel like big bucks come when enough land is locked up by quality land owners and they get a system going. A small landowner can only do so much.

But nice to see IN sounds like it's trying to improve the quality of it's heard!
salukipv1 is offline  
Old 12-09-2010, 05:28 PM
  #10  
Fork Horn
 
onion721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: So. Indiana
Posts: 288
Default

Originally Posted by Zim View Post
"2001-2006 Indiana ranks 6th in B&C/P&Y entries per square mile, pretty darn good. I haven't seen an updated figure, but I can't imagine it getting any worse."

VERY deceptive stat. During those years Indiana was not even close to the top 2 states, Iowa and Kansas, in that statistic. It barely topped Michigan which is pitiful and dead last in the midwest. The midwest has everything a buck needs to grow a big rack, so you really need to compare it among other MIDWEST states.

In my 10 years of hunting Indiana public land and premium private land in NW Indiana, I harvested a total of zero P&Y bucks. This year I took my 5th P&Y buck in Illinois, in only 6 years, all off public land. I even passed on a 2nd one this year, gambling for one of the booners in the area we saw.
In what statistic, book bucks per square mile?

Here is the top ten during that time period.
  1. Illinois
  2. Kentucky
  3. Wisconsin
  4. Ohio
  5. Iowa
  6. Indiana
  7. Missouri
  8. Kansas
  9. Maryland
  10. Minnesota

Here are the top ten typical P&Y states.

1. Wisconsin
2. Illinois
3. Iowa
4. Minnesota
5. Ohio
6. Kansas
7. Michigan
8. Missouri
9. Indiana
10. Texas

Top ten non typical

1 Illinois
2 Wisconsin
3 Iowa
4 Kansas
5 Minnesota
6 Ohio
7 Missouri
8 Indiana
9 Nebraska
10 Kentucky

Now this is Indiana with a total deer hunter count that is a fraction of what some of these other states have.
How can this not be a good thing?
Could it be better, sure give Indiana 250,000 more hunters a year and book buck entries are sure to increase.

BTW in the same time period you were skunked, I killed 3 P&Y bucks.
onion721 is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.