katy
Ballagh
WJS - I personally want to applaud you for joining up with some of the most law abiding, dedicated, management practicing hunters in the country. It is pretty awesome that you came on here to help out with the discussions. Not every forum has the quality of educated, informative contributors like this site does. Again, thank you for joining up with us, and I look foward to your comments and input!
Chad
Chad
150 Class
Well-Known Member
wjs - I have a lot of respect for who you are along with your passion for wanting to do the right thing for this renewable resource that all of us here are addicted too. It's great to have you here and I hope that you stick around and help us in, or learn from, our discussions. I will say that I think the proposal is too drastic and does not include enough thought to other possible options. I feel it is unfair that it get presented to the people that it will be presented to without more chances for people like us to propose other solutions to the "alleged" problem areas (natural resources commission members will probably see this as the silver bullet). All I can say is that it is probably too late to try and sway your thinking (its the middle of the 11th hour). I am sure some of the many very smart folks on here can help with more ideas but right now the damage is done and some quick action by any of us who disagree with these proposals must be a top priority. You did provide some good advice about contacting the natural resources commission members and I will hope that others heed that advice.
katy
Ballagh
CYBALL - Here is your contact info!!!!
Remember – please be polite!
Garst, Elizabeth
1313 Fig Ave.
Coon Rapids, IA 50058
712-684-2862
Duncan, Randy - Secretary
4240 Foster Drive
Des Moines, IA 50312
515-279-5602
Francisco, Richard (Kim)
47753 – 127th Ave.
Lucas, Iowa 50151
641-766-6749
Mr. Francisco was very pleasant to talk to. He is a fellow hunter, and hunter ed instructor.
Kramer, Carol
1304 S. 4th Avenue W.
Newton, Iowa 50208
641-792-1617
Marcantonio, Janice – Chairperson
61 Lakewood Lane
Council Bluffs, Iowa 51501
712-366-2678
Schneider, Joan – Vice-Chairperson
P.O. Box 289
2813 Lake Shore Drive
Okoboji, Iowa 51355
UNLISTED
Moore, Lennis L.
803 North Lincoln St.
Mt. Pleasant, IA 52641
319-385-8238
Try this number during the week:
319-385-8937
Please remember to be polite when contacting these people. Remember to let them know that land access is the major problem right now. And how the bow hunters are doing our part with increased harvest each year. Give the HUSH program a chance, with lots of increased funding this year, we should see a lot more doe’s being harvested and turned in to the Food Bank of Iowa. Shot gunners, you really would'nt want a antlerless season one weekend before opening season would you? Don’t sit idle on this, now is the time to act!
Remember – please be polite!
Garst, Elizabeth
1313 Fig Ave.
Coon Rapids, IA 50058
712-684-2862
Duncan, Randy - Secretary
4240 Foster Drive
Des Moines, IA 50312
515-279-5602
Francisco, Richard (Kim)
47753 – 127th Ave.
Lucas, Iowa 50151
641-766-6749
Mr. Francisco was very pleasant to talk to. He is a fellow hunter, and hunter ed instructor.
Kramer, Carol
1304 S. 4th Avenue W.
Newton, Iowa 50208
641-792-1617
Marcantonio, Janice – Chairperson
61 Lakewood Lane
Council Bluffs, Iowa 51501
712-366-2678
Schneider, Joan – Vice-Chairperson
P.O. Box 289
2813 Lake Shore Drive
Okoboji, Iowa 51355
UNLISTED
Moore, Lennis L.
803 North Lincoln St.
Mt. Pleasant, IA 52641
319-385-8238
Try this number during the week:
319-385-8937
Please remember to be polite when contacting these people. Remember to let them know that land access is the major problem right now. And how the bow hunters are doing our part with increased harvest each year. Give the HUSH program a chance, with lots of increased funding this year, we should see a lot more doe’s being harvested and turned in to the Food Bank of Iowa. Shot gunners, you really would'nt want a antlerless season one weekend before opening season would you? Don’t sit idle on this, now is the time to act!
buckshotxx
New Member
The only problem i see with this is that in those 3 days its going to educate the deer and cause them to move to land where they know they are protected. Which i thinks will cause low harvest numbers for opening day of the shot gunner season. Just my 2 cents. Anyways welcome to the site and hopefully you stick around for the long haul.
katy
Ballagh
Call the commission members and let them know your thoughts! I agree with you, I think the 1st season shotgun is going to be a little harder in those places that are going to have the special Nov season. I would think the added pressure might get them on the run a little bit early? Safety is my biggest concern! Keep em coming!
Rackaddict
Life Member
We have some idiotic over lapping seasons here as well. They keep adding more gun seasons and require hunter orange to be worn by ALL hunters, bow and other during the over lap. Last year we only had 6 weekends to hunt with our bows undisturbed by a gun season of one type or another.
The stupid thing like you guys have mentioned is a guy can be hunting during a doe only weekend carrying a gun and a bow wearing his orange and see a nice buck and shoot with a gun and then tag it with his bow tag. Sure he runs the risk of getting in trouble if he gets caught but then who usually gets caught....not many. So people can and do take the risk.
The big risk you run letting this get started is you won't get it out after it's in force.
If that rifle season gets started and they have good success with it, don't think for a minute that it'll end anytime soon. They WILL allow it it to continue and even expand on it.
I hate to see Iowa heading in that direction.
<font color="red">DON'T WAIT FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO MAKE A CALL!!!! DO YOUR PART A.S.A.P. IT'S YOUR HUNTING FUTURE AT STAKE. </font>
The stupid thing like you guys have mentioned is a guy can be hunting during a doe only weekend carrying a gun and a bow wearing his orange and see a nice buck and shoot with a gun and then tag it with his bow tag. Sure he runs the risk of getting in trouble if he gets caught but then who usually gets caught....not many. So people can and do take the risk.
The big risk you run letting this get started is you won't get it out after it's in force.
If that rifle season gets started and they have good success with it, don't think for a minute that it'll end anytime soon. They WILL allow it it to continue and even expand on it.
I hate to see Iowa heading in that direction.
<font color="red">DON'T WAIT FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO MAKE A CALL!!!! DO YOUR PART A.S.A.P. IT'S YOUR HUNTING FUTURE AT STAKE. </font>
wjs- Like others, I really appreciate and respect that you took the time to make a post here explaining some of the decision process on this. For some reason some really wild rumors have always circulated about topics related to the IA DNR and it is very nice to hear first hand from someone who really knows what goes on. (I dont mean rumors on this site, just in general)Thank you, and I hope you stick around.
That said, I cant say I'm wild about the proposed changes. I just dont think that their is a crisis level problem in most areas like people perceive, at least not around here (Powesiek county). Four of us killed 20 does last year alone in hopes of avoiding things like this. How many do we have to kill to make people happy? All of them? I know your not suggesting that but I am afraid we are really going to crash the population in some areas that dont need it with all these extra tags. In the square mile I live in I know of at least 22 deer killed there last year and there is less than 80 acres timber total. How long can that go on before there is a reduction of alot more than 25%?
I do understand the pressures folks in your position face, and thanks again for the post.
That said, I cant say I'm wild about the proposed changes. I just dont think that their is a crisis level problem in most areas like people perceive, at least not around here (Powesiek county). Four of us killed 20 does last year alone in hopes of avoiding things like this. How many do we have to kill to make people happy? All of them? I know your not suggesting that but I am afraid we are really going to crash the population in some areas that dont need it with all these extra tags. In the square mile I live in I know of at least 22 deer killed there last year and there is less than 80 acres timber total. How long can that go on before there is a reduction of alot more than 25%?
I do understand the pressures folks in your position face, and thanks again for the post.
tracker
Life Member
I'd rather see them set up an earn a buck method. A few years ago you recived a buck tag through a drawing, at least this way you could somewhat control your own outcome.
To me it would be less complicated to have the electronic issue stations check in you deer, than to overwork the conservation officers and county sheriffs with the can of worms they they are about to receive. Add another dollar for the tag issue stations to write down the info per deer. You would definately have better information on your harvest numbers.
Are the people that are on the committee willing to walk through some public hunting during these seasons and check and see how their system is working?
Another question that I have always had is what was the creation of the free land owner tags for? If they were meant for depredation, then they should be antlerless. Only makes sense. I know some people aren't going to like that suggestion, but hey, the tag is free. Take away the landowner any sex tag and give them 2 antlerless tags instead, maybe more. Landowners can still get 2 anysex tags just like the general public and also reduce their herd at no cost to them.
To me it would be less complicated to have the electronic issue stations check in you deer, than to overwork the conservation officers and county sheriffs with the can of worms they they are about to receive. Add another dollar for the tag issue stations to write down the info per deer. You would definately have better information on your harvest numbers.
Are the people that are on the committee willing to walk through some public hunting during these seasons and check and see how their system is working?
Another question that I have always had is what was the creation of the free land owner tags for? If they were meant for depredation, then they should be antlerless. Only makes sense. I know some people aren't going to like that suggestion, but hey, the tag is free. Take away the landowner any sex tag and give them 2 antlerless tags instead, maybe more. Landowners can still get 2 anysex tags just like the general public and also reduce their herd at no cost to them.
Palmated
Member
WJS- I applaud you for coming on this site and giving us a heads up. It is a little late though. We need to do something about lease land. This will do more for doe harvesting than what is already purposed. I my county that I hunt a lot of land is being gobbled up by outfitters. They could careless about shooting does all they want is bucks. I have nothing against outfitters except there needs to be a law that you can't run an outfitting business on leased ground. If you own the land great have your outfitting busisness. Not really the topic but I think there would be a lot less does if more land was available.
bjkpharmd
New Member
WJS- Welcome!
Hero one day, bum the next? Well at least you didn't say you supported Kerry.
You came to right place to hear all kinds of opinions, I'm glad to see your post with some numbers and goals- I never thought this was being done by the seat of the pants method. I'm on record against the high power for safety reasons but disagree with several of the above posts. More mature deer will be educated prior to opening day of shotgun season, I think this is good overall. I also think that more anterless taken early will reduce the complaint of shed antler bucks going down in January. The % in late season will likely stay around 5% but if many of the tags are used early- there won't be as many late tags and the actual number of shed bucks shot should decrease.
Anyway- Thanks for weighing in.
Hero one day, bum the next? Well at least you didn't say you supported Kerry.
You came to right place to hear all kinds of opinions, I'm glad to see your post with some numbers and goals- I never thought this was being done by the seat of the pants method. I'm on record against the high power for safety reasons but disagree with several of the above posts. More mature deer will be educated prior to opening day of shotgun season, I think this is good overall. I also think that more anterless taken early will reduce the complaint of shed antler bucks going down in January. The % in late season will likely stay around 5% but if many of the tags are used early- there won't be as many late tags and the actual number of shed bucks shot should decrease.
Anyway- Thanks for weighing in.
Critter
Life Member
wjs,
Well......where do I begin?
First off, I'll commend you on having enough nerve to post and take credit for something that you know is probably going to tick a-lot of people off, especially on a "local" site such as this one. If you've been on this site very much, you'll know that there's a-lot of members who take the recent population issues very seriously, and that we are intent on not letting things get out of control. We as hunters can only do what we can do to try and persuade the law-makers of the state to see things as clearly as possible without the influence of money and big business. As hard as some of us try, it seems at times are voices and opinions fall on deaf ears, and that the monetary value of deer hunting in the state wins out over common sense and positive corrective actions.
Can you please tell me exactly what are the criteria for an overpopulated deer herd in our state? Is it a certain number of deer per square mile in a given county or number of road kills documented in a certain time frame? Are you getting your numbers based on mathematical calculations, or from farmers who are complaining about crop damage? My point being, never have I been asked by the IADNR for information regarding the outcome of my hunting seasons or wether or not I think I live in an area that is overpoopulated with deer, and to be totally honest with you, I have yet to see a DNR officer of any sort driving, glassing, or spotlighting anywhere near the area I live in. So, again I'll ask, if you're not getting any information from the locals in a given area, and the locals don't see you in a given area, how do you aquire the number of deer in a given area? You guys have thousands upon thousands of wonderful resources at your fingertips, yet I don't think you utilize them the way you should.
You say that controlling the population can be done two ways: Making people shoot does, or opening up other opportunities. How can the positives from the use of high power rifles in southern counties possibly out-weigh the negatives that can and will be associated with it? Who exactly is this an opportunity for? Will the IADNR provide added patrolling and policeing of these counties when season rolls around, or is everyone going to close their eyes and hope for the best. Who exactly benefits from an added early gun season at the end of November? Who is this an opportunity for? Does an overpopulated deer herd out-weigh the safety concerns that will arise when mixing gun hunters with bow hunters?
It seems to me that if the IADNR was really concerned about our ability to control the population in the state, they would of stopped charging for doe tags three of four years ago. If it was really a concern based on numbers, and not numbers of dollars, then why charge for something you're having problems getting rid of in the first place?
In my opinion, your goals can't be met by merely throwing out some more shotgun tags and placing high power rifles into the mix. If the IADNR and the legislators of this state are truely concerned with the number of deer in this state, they need to start working with the number one controlling factor that they already have available to them. Seems to me at times most of them do more talking then they do listening.
Hopefully Mr. Suchy, you haven't taken this too personally as it was not intended that way. Part of the problem is that some of us, myself included, aren't always informed completely about some of the issues. Thankfully for the members of this site the IBA plays a big part in trying to keep everyone informed of changes that are occuring annually, but the fact of the matter is, they can't be everywhere at once, even though they try to be. Hopefully you won't take some of our reply's to heart, mine included, but they come from a building frustration and sense of lack of teamwork that we all should be working on together to fulfill the goals of everyone, not just the ones who look at things from one side.
Once again, I hope you continue to remain an active member on this site, I'm sure there's a-lot we can learn from you, and maybe there's even a few things you can learn from us.
Thanks again,
CRITR
Well......where do I begin?
Can you please tell me exactly what are the criteria for an overpopulated deer herd in our state? Is it a certain number of deer per square mile in a given county or number of road kills documented in a certain time frame? Are you getting your numbers based on mathematical calculations, or from farmers who are complaining about crop damage? My point being, never have I been asked by the IADNR for information regarding the outcome of my hunting seasons or wether or not I think I live in an area that is overpoopulated with deer, and to be totally honest with you, I have yet to see a DNR officer of any sort driving, glassing, or spotlighting anywhere near the area I live in. So, again I'll ask, if you're not getting any information from the locals in a given area, and the locals don't see you in a given area, how do you aquire the number of deer in a given area? You guys have thousands upon thousands of wonderful resources at your fingertips, yet I don't think you utilize them the way you should.
You say that controlling the population can be done two ways: Making people shoot does, or opening up other opportunities. How can the positives from the use of high power rifles in southern counties possibly out-weigh the negatives that can and will be associated with it? Who exactly is this an opportunity for? Will the IADNR provide added patrolling and policeing of these counties when season rolls around, or is everyone going to close their eyes and hope for the best. Who exactly benefits from an added early gun season at the end of November? Who is this an opportunity for? Does an overpopulated deer herd out-weigh the safety concerns that will arise when mixing gun hunters with bow hunters?
It seems to me that if the IADNR was really concerned about our ability to control the population in the state, they would of stopped charging for doe tags three of four years ago. If it was really a concern based on numbers, and not numbers of dollars, then why charge for something you're having problems getting rid of in the first place?
In my opinion, your goals can't be met by merely throwing out some more shotgun tags and placing high power rifles into the mix. If the IADNR and the legislators of this state are truely concerned with the number of deer in this state, they need to start working with the number one controlling factor that they already have available to them. Seems to me at times most of them do more talking then they do listening.
Hopefully Mr. Suchy, you haven't taken this too personally as it was not intended that way. Part of the problem is that some of us, myself included, aren't always informed completely about some of the issues. Thankfully for the members of this site the IBA plays a big part in trying to keep everyone informed of changes that are occuring annually, but the fact of the matter is, they can't be everywhere at once, even though they try to be. Hopefully you won't take some of our reply's to heart, mine included, but they come from a building frustration and sense of lack of teamwork that we all should be working on together to fulfill the goals of everyone, not just the ones who look at things from one side.
Once again, I hope you continue to remain an active member on this site, I'm sure there's a-lot we can learn from you, and maybe there's even a few things you can learn from us.
Thanks again,
CRITR
R
Ruben
Guest
One thing that is really missing here is the land access problem. Good luck getting onto a farm to hunt “does” in Southern Iowa the last weekend in November. I have an acquaintance with a family that owns 1,500 acres (mostly timber and CRP) in Southern Iowa and he and his brother are the only ones that hunt it. They won’t let anybody step foot on the place. Even if they shoot 20 does a piece that would not be enough. The problem is, everyone around them is the same way. That is why you go down there in late Dec and early Jan and there are fields full of deer (literally hundreds).
What ever happened to your “match making” idea? I put my information in for several counties, but did not hear a thing. In fact, I did not talk to anyone who was contacted through this service.
Why not ask the hunters what can be done? We are the ones that want to preserve the sport not decimate it!
What ever happened to your “match making” idea? I put my information in for several counties, but did not hear a thing. In fact, I did not talk to anyone who was contacted through this service.
Why not ask the hunters what can be done? We are the ones that want to preserve the sport not decimate it!
teeroy
Life Member
the only contact i had (from the DNR site, linking hunters to land) was from a person trying to get me to pay to hunt their land.
how about opening all the existing seasons we have to residents? we should be able to hunt early muzzle, late muzzle and either of the shotgun seasons, if we choose.
in the real world, if you have a huge surplus (that isn't selling) you drop the price. in the counties where tag allotment is high, and sales aren't, cut the price. $26 for the first antlerless tag is rediculous. if the does are less desirable, why charge the same as a buck? i know many people that would buy more doe tags, but refuse to pay $26 for a anysex tag, $26 for a doe tag, then $11 for each additional tag
how about opening all the existing seasons we have to residents? we should be able to hunt early muzzle, late muzzle and either of the shotgun seasons, if we choose.
in the real world, if you have a huge surplus (that isn't selling) you drop the price. in the counties where tag allotment is high, and sales aren't, cut the price. $26 for the first antlerless tag is rediculous. if the does are less desirable, why charge the same as a buck? i know many people that would buy more doe tags, but refuse to pay $26 for a anysex tag, $26 for a doe tag, then $11 for each additional tag
WJS
I want to echo others and say thank you for what you do and for trying to make things a little clearer. You said you would try to answer any questions, so here goes.
First you say that we need to reduce the deer by 25% or back to 1997 levels, why? I know that we have a lot of deer in certain areas, but I'm not real happy with the prospects of only getting 2 deer licenses per year again. I try to buy extra tags for each season and can hunt deer from Oct 1st until Jan 20 except for a week of one gun season. I enjoy it and try to take as many does as I can and will use, usually 5 to seven along with a buck or two. How do we strike a balance between our desire to hunt and falling back to 2 opprotunities per year? Also who says we need to go back to these levels? I don't think it is the deer hunters either resident or none resident. If we fall back to these levels what happens to all the extra money for the DNR and all the local economies that every one touts when they talk about raising the numbers for NR tags? Wouldn't this reduction make Iowa a much less likley destination for NR dollars?
Next issue is when you say that the November season would give every gun hunter the opprotunity to take a doe reguardless of the season they hunt. Why can't they do that now just by buying an extra doe tag for their choosen season. I usually buy doe tags for bow, muzzle loader, shotgun, late muzzle loader, and the Jan antlerless season totatling upto 8 tags. Why do I need an extra season in Nov to shoot a doe? I believe that your doe harvest could easilly go way down for the 1sr shotgun season and proabally total less even with the extra Nov season, because normal habits will be altered and the 1st season hunters wouldn't find deer in their usual places. They could even become very nocturnal by the 2nd gun season further lowering the harvest. This is all beside the access and safty factors others spoken of.
The last thing for now is the high power rifle issue. What makes your committe think that this will draw more hunters to hunt does in the coldest part of January? Also how would a hunter benefit from the use of a rifle over a shotgun or muzzle loader? Centerfires have a little more range but in southern Iowa that isn't really a factor as most shots are less than 150 yards and the vast majority are less than 100 yards, if people can judge range correctly. We already have a certain number of accidents with shotguns, won't that escalate by going to a rifle with 5 times the potential killing range. People will say that rifles are used for coyote and fox hunting already and that there aren't problems, but there isn't the concentration of hunters in both time and area that deer hunting would generate. Bottom line I think that it is a dangerous situation with very small benifits, and if it does draw extra hunters to my neck of the woods will they be familar with the terain and population density of southern Iowa. Really easy to shoot at a skylined doe and kill some one miles away.
Again thanks for what you do and are trying to do, and these comments aren't meant to pick on you. I just really like to hear some answers rather than everyone just saying what a bad idea this all is.
I want to echo others and say thank you for what you do and for trying to make things a little clearer. You said you would try to answer any questions, so here goes.
First you say that we need to reduce the deer by 25% or back to 1997 levels, why? I know that we have a lot of deer in certain areas, but I'm not real happy with the prospects of only getting 2 deer licenses per year again. I try to buy extra tags for each season and can hunt deer from Oct 1st until Jan 20 except for a week of one gun season. I enjoy it and try to take as many does as I can and will use, usually 5 to seven along with a buck or two. How do we strike a balance between our desire to hunt and falling back to 2 opprotunities per year? Also who says we need to go back to these levels? I don't think it is the deer hunters either resident or none resident. If we fall back to these levels what happens to all the extra money for the DNR and all the local economies that every one touts when they talk about raising the numbers for NR tags? Wouldn't this reduction make Iowa a much less likley destination for NR dollars?
Next issue is when you say that the November season would give every gun hunter the opprotunity to take a doe reguardless of the season they hunt. Why can't they do that now just by buying an extra doe tag for their choosen season. I usually buy doe tags for bow, muzzle loader, shotgun, late muzzle loader, and the Jan antlerless season totatling upto 8 tags. Why do I need an extra season in Nov to shoot a doe? I believe that your doe harvest could easilly go way down for the 1sr shotgun season and proabally total less even with the extra Nov season, because normal habits will be altered and the 1st season hunters wouldn't find deer in their usual places. They could even become very nocturnal by the 2nd gun season further lowering the harvest. This is all beside the access and safty factors others spoken of.
The last thing for now is the high power rifle issue. What makes your committe think that this will draw more hunters to hunt does in the coldest part of January? Also how would a hunter benefit from the use of a rifle over a shotgun or muzzle loader? Centerfires have a little more range but in southern Iowa that isn't really a factor as most shots are less than 150 yards and the vast majority are less than 100 yards, if people can judge range correctly. We already have a certain number of accidents with shotguns, won't that escalate by going to a rifle with 5 times the potential killing range. People will say that rifles are used for coyote and fox hunting already and that there aren't problems, but there isn't the concentration of hunters in both time and area that deer hunting would generate. Bottom line I think that it is a dangerous situation with very small benifits, and if it does draw extra hunters to my neck of the woods will they be familar with the terain and population density of southern Iowa. Really easy to shoot at a skylined doe and kill some one miles away.
Again thanks for what you do and are trying to do, and these comments aren't meant to pick on you. I just really like to hear some answers rather than everyone just saying what a bad idea this all is.
teeroy
Life Member
why not make some changes to up hunters' odds? make CB's legal for deerseason.
NO, WAIT...make CB's legal, scrap the gun case/unloaded weapon law, and let us shoot from our trucks on gravel roads durring shotgun seasons. that would kill ALOT more deer.
coyote season will be pretty interesting. "no coyotes in that section, but i kicked out a deer"...."SHOOT IT, I HAVE A TAG"
NO, WAIT...make CB's legal, scrap the gun case/unloaded weapon law, and let us shoot from our trucks on gravel roads durring shotgun seasons. that would kill ALOT more deer.
coyote season will be pretty interesting. "no coyotes in that section, but i kicked out a deer"...."SHOOT IT, I HAVE A TAG"
OneCam
Well-Known Member
Willie, thanks for joining the site – it’s about time
. I’m sure you and the DNR are in a tight spot right now, as it seems you are accountable for coming up with yet another solution to keep our herd in check.
These measures are somewhat of a surprise though as a new bill (SF206) to significantly reduce the number of deer has been approved and is awaiting the Governor’s signature. With the depredation tag options (free tags) we should be able to concentrate on the problem areas. Also in the past two years the DNR has asked hunters to purchase and harvest more does – and from my understanding hunters have stepped up and significantly increased our doe harvest.
These new seasons may appease the Conservation Committee but will they really have an impact on the deer herd numbers? I know I’m preaching to the choir here but isn’t the key to educate hunters and land owners to shoot more does and open up hunting access in the problem areas.
These measures are somewhat of a surprise though as a new bill (SF206) to significantly reduce the number of deer has been approved and is awaiting the Governor’s signature. With the depredation tag options (free tags) we should be able to concentrate on the problem areas. Also in the past two years the DNR has asked hunters to purchase and harvest more does – and from my understanding hunters have stepped up and significantly increased our doe harvest.
These new seasons may appease the Conservation Committee but will they really have an impact on the deer herd numbers? I know I’m preaching to the choir here but isn’t the key to educate hunters and land owners to shoot more does and open up hunting access in the problem areas.
S
sstevens
Guest
I would like to see the DNR drop the price on the doe tags and drastically increase the number of lockers participating in the HUSH program especially in the "problem" areas. It also seems fairly obvious that land availability is the largest factor here. The DNR needs to purchase land for public hunting use in these problem areas. Also allowing shotgun hunters in the woods at the same time as bowhunters seems like a really bad idea to me. I don't know about you guys, but I do not shotgun hunt because I know some of the people that are running around during these seasons(scary). Either make it shotgun only that weekend or nix that idea all together in my opinion.