New deer guns for 09' Season

[fireball168]

Double Tap.

 

[Jack Ryan]

The problem with the public resource that you speak of, is damaging someone's private property. And On his private property, he could let anyone and his brother hunt there, and still have the RIGHT to refuse you because he didn't like the color of your truck. You will forgive me if I am misunderstood, I hope, but from your earlier posts, it doesn't seem as if you understand that. He has the right to allow or not allow anyone access to his land for any reason.

I don't have a problem with him allowing who ever he wants to enter his property or make use of it in any manner he choses.

I have a problem with a resource that belongs to all the citizens of the state being abused and destroyed by one citizen for the benefit of one citizen. The owner ship of wild game animals in the state of Indiana is well established.

His property they are affecting is well subsidised by all the citizens of this state regardless of any game animal's affect on it.

The depredation permits are perfectly legal. I acknowledge that. I am saying if I could change that status, I would. I out lined my reasoning for that position. That's all.
It's no different than some one lobbying the government for increased subsidies for ethanol when corn is already subsidised and subsidise low interest loans are already available for established farmer and no one else.

If I could eliminate depredation permits, I would.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Jack,

Based on your comments here, I've provided a few scenarios for your consideration.


There's a recent law school graduate down the street. He took out subsidized student loans.

I need a trust done. Since WE are subsidizing his interest rate - think he ought to do it for free?

I think he should be putting any income above minimum wage toward repaying his debt to the taxpayers. Many of whom are subsidising his education on their burger flipping level wages.

That's not the law, but it would be if I made the law.

That beautiful Getrag transmission building in Tipton is sitting uncompleted and empty.

It would make a great indoor range - I keep thinking of the warehouse in Texas those fellows did all the benchrest experimentation in. Since WE threw out all the tax abatements to get them to build it - think they ought to let us in? The backstop I've got planned really doesn't take up that much room, if I just had a 20' wide strip down one side - I'd be quite happy.

I think it belongs to the people they made the deal with. That building along with any other assets of the company should belong to the people they are indebted to.

That's not the law but it would be if I made the laws.

Last week I was at the grocery store, the bill came to $5 more than the cash I had in my wallet. The customer right beside me had their welfare debit card in their hand.

Since WE have been paying for their food, figure they should show the common courtesy to pick up a little of our grocery bills when we're a bit short every now and again?

We wouldn't be paying welfare if I made the law. Any one who did get any type of public assistance would be obligated to wait until every customer paying their own bill had finished business and exited the store if I made the laws.

Every now and again, I could use a little labor help. At least once I month, I'll get a call from someone wanting to use me as an unemployment "job contact" - not wanting a job, just a name for a "contact".

Since those that are working are paying into that fund, figure they should give me a couple of hours every now and again for the "common good"? I mean, isn't labor a public resource? What else are they doing with their time - clearly all of them are doing the same thing the bozo's that call me are doing?

No one get's unemployment unless they have worked and as a result EARNED IT. Unemployment is not welfare. They earned it as a part of their agreement to pay taxes and work in the state legally. You have no right to their repayment of what they earned for their labor.

If you are a part of an unethical arrangement for them to defraud the states employment agency then may be you should look in to black mailing them. You have no ethical claim on it.

I really like blackberry pie. One of my parents neighbors makes the best blackberry pie I've ever tasted. She lives entirely off of Social Security, and a coal miners pension that had to be absorbed by the government.

Since she couldn't live without the money that's being paid by US to support her, I want a pie every now and again. What else could she possibly be doing with her time? I deserve a pie - any resource that can make something that good, ought to be available to the public.


Last year was a pretty rough year for a lot of folks with hobby farms. Many didn't, or couldn't pay the going rate for their livestock. Already this year, the weather has prevented a lot of hay production. Right next door to your hobby farm is a REAL FARMER'S hay field that has alfalfa getting pretty weedy, and is better than 3' tall.

Since it's an eyesore, and your horses really wouldn't eat that much, its getting stemmy anyway - and you KNOW that greedy farmer driving that 10 year old pickup, 40 year old tractor with a 25 year old mower/conditioner is making money hand over fist. I mean, he received over $2500 in the last 10 years from the government. He's too damn cheap to buy a new baler, so he even has to hire it done! Probably just another way of screwing the taxpayer. So what the hell, string a couple lines of high tensile and let the horses at it.


I'm taking a vacation later this month. I really hate paying $2.68 a gallon for gas. Another neighbor right down the road bought this cute little hybrid. He gets 48 MPG. He received a tax credit of $1500 for purchasing it.

I'm only driving about 800 miles, and want to drive that car. It would save about $60 in fuel. Since WE helped pay for that subsidy to build the "green car" business for the manufacturer's that chose to participate - think you're entitled to use it every now and again?





Over the last few years, I've started something new with the folks that call for permission to hunt or fish.

I give them a date where I'll be cleaning a fence row, moving some fallen trees, or cleaning out the creek. I give them a start time and a finish time for their "interview". Its generally 2-3 hours.

I haven't had one show up yet.

Oddly enough, I've run several off in this same time frame. Especially the fishermen(women). Every one of them has said - "That water and those fish are a public resource". Never mind its fairly deep onto private property, dredged/opened/deepened and maintained with my labor at my expense, and stocked at my expense.

But hey, they DESERVE IT for paying taxes.

I'm not goint through every scheme you can dream up to rationalise your behaviour which would be classified as "wanton waste" or poaching if not for a depredation permit. It's the main human behaviour for justifying what they want. It's the reason the country is nothing but a dump of lazy morons with no honor what so ever. They've learned for generations at the knee of their fathers to justify what ever behaviour satisfies them at the time. Doesn't matter if it's theft of you wages by the government, street gangs, or murder and pillaging of the entire economy by Citi Bank, GM, or the corner low life.

Work don't pay. When enough people get screwed enough that enough people refuse to work and the low lifes no longer can be pacified you'll see revolution. I think it's close. I'll be quitting soon.

 

[cosermann]

If the state were divided into regions based on terrain and geographical features, they could allow various types of firearms in the various regions within certain safety/risk parameters. That's how a number of other states do it - Michigan for one. Flat, open, more populated areas are shotgun only while woodier, hillier, less populated areas can be hunted with a rifle.

 

[CountryBoy19]

Jack, with the resentment you have towards farmers I wouldn't blame them for not allowing you on their land.

The reason that the depredation hunts are allowed outside of season is rather simple to understand. It is practically impossible to do so in season. Sure a hunter may still hunt in season, but often in localized areas he/she is still restricted by bag limits. So if the county's population is low enough to warrant a low bag limit, but the problem is very localized, the hunter would still be prevented from effectively controlling the problem.
Maybe the area is too small to safely concentrate enough hunters in the area to effectively control the population in such a short time (of a season).
It may even be possible that the deer are only present on the land in large numbers during the time that they're eating crops and so a person couldn't manage the population during any other time besides when the problem is actually happening.
Also, during seasons (especially firearms) the deer catch on very quickly and its gets tough to hunt them.

Therefore, it is necessary to allow people with such problems to effectively control the population outside of season when the problem is being caused, and when the deer can be safely harvested. To force them the manage the problem in season, when everyone else is also allowed to do so would certainly make the entire depredation system ineffective, and that persons agricultural business would fail.

With all subsidy controversy aside, if you were making $60k a year and some guy didn't like the way you were doing it, even if it was completely legal, would it be acceptable to you for that guy to effectively reduce your income? I guess what I'm getting at is, do you think it is ok for somebody (who probably doesn't even fully understand the situation) to complain to your employer and instantly your salary gets cut to $15k?

That is essentially what you're requesting/arguing for. You'd rather let deer destroy someone's crops, income, and life just because you feel entitled to being allowed to hunt that deer in the fall.

Or what if we were all just allowed to freely and openly damage one another's property to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars every year and there wasn't anything to be done about it? Would you think it was ok for somebody to come to your house and spray your lawn, trees, and landscaping with herbicides so that you were out many thousands of dollers in repair? What about breaking your windows and lighting your car on fire?

Basically what you're proposing is to allow deer to do tens of thousands of dollars worth of damage to somebody else's property. Why can't we do it to yours?

Honestly, I think that is rather selfish of you and shows a lack of concern for others.


And to relieve some concern about wanton waste, you do not shoot the deer and leave it lay. You may keep the meat of any deer harvested, and I believe you can gift it to friends, or some of the charities that provide game meat for needy families. You must keep a record of all killings. To prevent "trophy hunting" you must surrender half of the antlers of any deer with more than 7 total points. So people aren't out there blasting deer and leaving them lay, or shooting trophy deer to hang in their living room. They're out there making an honest, legal attempt at controlling a major problem with damage to personal property.


BTW, back on topic, I have a 458 Socom I'll be taking to the field this fall. Regarding the one comment about ammo cost, yes, commercial ammo is pretty expensive because of the limited popularity of it. Reloaded ammo however is much much cheaper. I can load up so good hunting rounds for around $.40/each. That really isn't any more that many other true rifle calibers, I can't load .308 for any less than $.35 each, so really the price point is only because of the lack of commercial suppliers. If you seriously want a excellent gun for the woods, get a .458 and reload.

 

[jtmarine1911]

That's not the law, but it would be if I made the law.

I thin k you should run for a Senator or Congressmans position, Obama would like you, you could be his Lefthand Man!

Subsidized my ass! My uncle applies for permits because he has two choices, use the permits to take deer and slightly reduce head count of the deer destroying crops or turn it in on insurance to get back money that he already paid in and watch his premiums go up.

Sounds like a simple choice to me!

I have hunted our famliy farm for better than 20 years and don't recall one time that I have seen less than 40 different deer in a day. So I really don't see how taking and consuming 10 deer in June and July is abusing OUR resource as you put it.


Wanting to make something a law because you don't approve of it, yeah, I'm glad you don't make the law.


It is people like you with that kind of thinking that is making it such a concerning time for US Gun Owners! Sounds like a bit of Hypocracy to me!

 

[Ashkelon]

I hope they don't allow the 30-30 for deer season. That is all I need is another excuse to take another day off work or away from my family to pursue my hobbies and interests and go get a new gun!
Sheesh between bow season, shotgun, fishing, "scouting", camping. Hmmm. Life is good isn't it?

 

[kwalls]

30-30

I really hope they pass this 30-30 deal on the 14th just so this thread will quit haha

 

[hotfarmboy1]

I just called to apply for the depredation permits today for a couple of reasons. We own a woods and pond with a creek running t hrough the woods. All of this is on the south side of a 40 acre field we own, along with another 20 acre field just north of that on the other side of the road. We see crops trampled, and eaten by deer and other animals every year. The raccoons we allow people to go back there and take them by dogs, and any I find around our farm less than a mile away I take care of myself. Groundhogs haven't seen many of but dispose of them on sight as well. The deer I have hunted during the season the past few years. But both me and other relatives that hunt our woods, along with a guy that I've been hunting with that hunts another woods on the east side of a field that belongs to a relative of ours and is across the road from our woods. And we haven't had much luck the last couple of seasons due to the fact that there is another small wooded area just across road (to the east) of our pond with a heavy thicket to the south of it where there is no hunting allowed. So when gun season comes in, all the deer are smart and hide in there. So we can't decrease the number damaging our crops. So this year I'm getting the permit to take some out off season to save us some money, esp since the soybeans planted in that field of ours this year are under contract with a company that he's growing for, and they are food quality soybeans. We are not big farmers, have old equipment, our tractors are from the 70's and 80's, and combine early 90's. We farm a little under 700 acres total from Summitville to Middletown, yes we drive the equip that far. Let alone dad had to pay over $20k in taxes this year on just the farm income. The first good profit we get in a long time cause dad did stuff right and was responsible and we pay out the ass on taxes. Do I want to risk us losing more income from the farm? NO! Do I want to risk our crops being damaged? NO!! Do we turn away other hunters from our small 7 acre woods? yes cause we already have family hunting it. Don't go getting all high and mighty as if you are one of the only ones paying into taxes. Cause we are paying plenty into them too. Yes dad gets operating loans to fund him in the spring. But they are paid back every fall as soon as he can. That's why he contracts seed when prices are up, so he can pay those off. He did good this year on contracting his crops at the right prices that's part of why we did good. Now hopefully the state government doesn't shut down this week and I get those depredation permits on Thursday as planned. Then I'm going after the 7 deer I've seen around our property in the past 2 days. I'm gonna try to keep with using the normal firearms that are legal during the season though. Only if I have a shot that is too long for my muzzleloader will I use something bigger and I will make sure I have a good backstop.

 

[roughthumbs]

Yes some new cailbers would be nice so I can be like my golfing neighbor and carry a bag with 13 guns for different distances. HMMMMM.... What would be my driver? Putter?

 

[Rlee]

Any update on this?

 

[wmitchell]

Where do I look to get the info on the meeting last night? Need to know if I need to go to the gun store.

 

[mwilson]

deer guns

just use the 270 youve been using every year

 

[singlestacksig]

Folks, I attended the meeting last night.. It is part of a long proccess for a rules change.. it would be a year or more before there is a change..

Some info I learned..
Last year the deer harvest during deer season was 148,000 + ..
Last year there were less than 18,000 deer taken on reduction permits.

Rifles were removed from allowed hunting years ago, not just for safety, but because they were to effective and the deer herd was almost wiped out..

Reduction permit limits are up to the district that issues them.. but there is a push to limit them to doe only..

There is a HUGE push to move firearms season & reduce it to only 9 days..

If you hunt for meat, you might want to voice a view on this..

There did not seem to be much support for allowing 30/30 ..
I for one think we should wait a few years and see how the PCR works out..

 

[jsn_mooney]

When you can take 8 bonus deer in some counties- I don't see how the season needs to be reduced to 9 days, if anything it seems there are too many deer.

 

[singlestacksig]

the bow hunter lobby wants firearm season reduced...
and /or moved from rut.
I personally think it needs to be extended, to reduce crowding..

 

[jtmarine1911]

the bow hunter lobby wants firearm season reduced...
and /or moved from rut.
I personally think it needs to be extended, to reduce crowding..

The Bow Hunter Lobby is just like the darn Motorcyclists! They think there special when in reality they are just a bunch of hypocrites!

That's why I have to wear a damn seat belt in my truck and take it off and put it back on when checking fields and stuff because I have to be safe inside my vehicle. But if I go get me a motor scooter and ride around like I was the founder of the Hells Angels or something I am not required to were my helmet.

They (bowhunters) already get almost 3 full months, and people that hunt with firearms get what, 2 weeks. Don't get me wrong here because I do bowhunt and do enjoy it, but in my opinion these bow hunters that are always pushing for shorter firearms seasons and to have firearm seasoned move(rescheduled around the rut) are just ANTI-GUN Outdoorsman Lobbyists!

So what exactly is their reasoning for moving and shorting firearms season, and don't give me that it has the deer all spooked and you can't get one in shooting range of a bow BS. I take atleast 5 deer a year in firearm season and 80% of my encounters are under 30yds.


EDIT: Before I am hung up and crucified I would like to clarify that my comment of "are just ANTI-GUN Outdoorsman Lobbyists!" was meant in a semi-sarcastic way. Semi-sarcastic in the reasoning that I know many bow hunters who are avid sportsmen/sportswomen and are just as prominent gun enthusiasts as we are, but on the other hand I know a few that would rather see firearms banned from hunting sports than live another day. I respect all our brother bow hunters that support us in our cause to keep our firearms to persue our passion and way of life of hunting.

 

[singlestacksig]

I did not hear any reasons for shortening it, just statements that "group xx" supports this..
there were at least 2 serious lobby groups who had "information" packets that they gave to the comittee, but did not hand out to others, and did not read..

One group had a rep who suggested a early doe only , firearms, season and I like that idea also..

 

[JBob77]

Early firearms season, doe only? Why not, It would allow the people who would rather hunt for meat, and not horns, a better opportunity to harvest an animal.

 

[jtmarine1911]

I did not hear any reasons for shortening it, just statements that "group xx" supports this..
there were at least 2 serious lobby groups who had "information" packets that they gave to the comittee, but did not hand out to others, and did not read..

One group had a rep who suggested a early doe only , firearms, season and I like that idea also..

How early were they suggesting a early doe only firearm season? Was it suggested that you could only take does period with a firearm? Or was that information discussed?

I personally prefer to take does later in the season to avoid taking one with a late fawn. I also prefer to take deer later in the year(normal firearms season) because the deer have eatin a lot more grain, acorn, etc. and the meat reflects this in texture, tone, and flavor as well as later in the year the temperature is more accomadating for tracking that occasional paunch shot deer. I have taken many deer on reduction permits and can tell you that I much prefer a fall/winter deer for food than a summer or early fall deer.

You are still only allowed one Antlered deer among both seasons and I fear a shorter firearm season will only lead to more genetically deficent bucks breeding with does. I know some people believe that they have shot nice bucks or that what they have shot is the biggest in the area, but I always see a lot of larger body bucks with small racks or genetically deformed racks and know that this is a good thing. It is a good thing because this allows the better/nicer bucks to breed more does and drop better bucks in the future. My father, cousin, and I have practice this type of culling for the past 10yrs or so and the past few yrs we have seen many nice full/proportioned rack bucks. Like I said, I feel a shorter season will leave more of these bucks to contaminate the gene pool.