I like that they pointed out the hunter numbers are the same. The deer numbers are down.
http://www.kcci.com/news/30234675/detail.html
http://www.kcci.com/news/30234675/detail.html
jw_wildfire
New Member
Here is the official press release from the DNR. Note the last sentence.
Regular Deer Seasons End
The final regular deer season ended Jan. 10 when the late season muzzleloader and the archery season closed. Deer hunters had reported taking nearly 113,000 deer at the end of the season which is about 4 percent lower than was reported last year at this time and about 21 percent below the reported harvest in 2006.
While the harvest is lower, the number of deer licenses issued during the regular seasons has stayed about the same since 2006.
“The reduced kill is a result of the reduced deer population,” said Dale Garner, chief of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Bureau. “Deer numbers in many areas are near the established goal. We continue to hear complaints from hunters that they did not see the number of deer that they had in the past and some are voicing their concerns that the herd reduction may have gone too far.”
Hunts for antlerless deer continue until Jan. 29, in select counties and urban areas. Even though licenses may be available, not all areas in these counties need the extra harvest, Garner said. Hunters need to work with the landowner where they hunt to determine if extra does need to be taken.
The DNR will review the harvest and population surveys after the seasons are complete in January and make proposals to reduce the deer kill and stabilize deer numbers. Reductions in the harvest were proposed in 2011 but not adopted.
Media Contact: Dale Garner, Chief, Wildlife Bureau, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, 515-281-6156.
Regular Deer Seasons End
The final regular deer season ended Jan. 10 when the late season muzzleloader and the archery season closed. Deer hunters had reported taking nearly 113,000 deer at the end of the season which is about 4 percent lower than was reported last year at this time and about 21 percent below the reported harvest in 2006.
While the harvest is lower, the number of deer licenses issued during the regular seasons has stayed about the same since 2006.
“The reduced kill is a result of the reduced deer population,” said Dale Garner, chief of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Bureau. “Deer numbers in many areas are near the established goal. We continue to hear complaints from hunters that they did not see the number of deer that they had in the past and some are voicing their concerns that the herd reduction may have gone too far.”
Hunts for antlerless deer continue until Jan. 29, in select counties and urban areas. Even though licenses may be available, not all areas in these counties need the extra harvest, Garner said. Hunters need to work with the landowner where they hunt to determine if extra does need to be taken.
The DNR will review the harvest and population surveys after the seasons are complete in January and make proposals to reduce the deer kill and stabilize deer numbers. Reductions in the harvest were proposed in 2011 but not adopted.
Media Contact: Dale Garner, Chief, Wildlife Bureau, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, 515-281-6156.
turtlshell
PMA Member
two things stick out to me.
1st - they're not taking into account the lack of sucess of the reporting harvest. We all know plenty of guys (primarily shotgun hunter) who "whack and stack" and don't report chit! Seems to me that if they weren't worried about the population or Farm Bureau was actually getting their way, they'd have this included to skew the harvest totals upward in order to give the idea the deer numbers aren't down as much as they are. To me, this is a good thing.
2nd - they don't need to propose reduced tags to get their results. You can't kill as many when there aren't as many to kill:way:
I'll go ahead and play nostordomus and predict next years harvest numbers will be down further from this years...even if we maintain the same number of hunters (which I doubt we do because some people will say why hunt when there's nothing to shoot)
1st - they're not taking into account the lack of sucess of the reporting harvest. We all know plenty of guys (primarily shotgun hunter) who "whack and stack" and don't report chit! Seems to me that if they weren't worried about the population or Farm Bureau was actually getting their way, they'd have this included to skew the harvest totals upward in order to give the idea the deer numbers aren't down as much as they are. To me, this is a good thing.
2nd - they don't need to propose reduced tags to get their results. You can't kill as many when there aren't as many to kill:way:
I'll go ahead and play nostordomus and predict next years harvest numbers will be down further from this years...even if we maintain the same number of hunters (which I doubt we do because some people will say why hunt when there's nothing to shoot)
Lwadzie
Lwadzie
Yes i agree, but the deer numbers are down, alot of guys are reporting more bucks than does in many areas. Down where we hunt, were used to seeing 20 - 30 deer come out of one timber, the last 2 years have been 3 - sometimes 4 out of a timber. I think the dnr needs to cut down on doe tags, but still keep them. Like each hunter gets one gun/bow buck tag per year just like now, but why not do 2 does tags in the same way? each season, no matter what, every hunter gets a limit of two doe tags! It will boost deer numbers while keeping meat in the freezer.
loneranger
Well-Known Member
Nothing will change on the seasons or tags until there is a noticeable drop in incoming $$ to the IDNR, then they will just increase fee's. IMO..