I know that as I have said that I harp on the numbers aspect of this issue along with what I personally observe. If you take the time to look over the IDNR http://www.iowadnr.gov/wildlife/files/files/logbook_08log.pdf I hope that you will see the same things that I do, and that is that our deer hunting is regressing rapidly. Here are just a few of the thing I observed.
Year HARVEST #of Licenses Percentage
1996 107632 202834 53%
1997 118404 211118 56%
1998 112608 223419 50%
1999 121635 233690 52%
2000 126535 229800 55%
2008 142194 406169 35%
How many deer hunters thought we had way too many deer in 1996 to 2000. I don't ever remember hearing that statement made any where or any time during that time frame, do you? Did you also know that in 1996 only 35 counties were any sex during the 1st shotgun season, and that 26 counties were bucks only for the first 5 days of the 2nd shotgun season. Also in the year 2000 17 counties were bucks only for the first 3 days of the 1st shotgun season. Can you imagine that, the single most productive 3 days of the entire year and in 17 counties you could only shot bucks? Were there way too many does then?
Next is some info that should take the wind out of the insurance company's sails. In 2008 there were 10961 deer killed on the highways. In 1994 there were 10438 deer killed on the highways. Every year in between, the highway kill numbers were higher. The other number in this category is deer killed per billion miles driven. Guess what in 2008 that number was 602 and to get any lower number we go clear back to 1986 which was 593, with one exception, in1991 the number was 590. Still pretty close. So that means that there is much less chance of hitting a deer today than in, every year except one ,any year since 1986, again when no one uttered the words "Too many deer". The sad thing is none of our insurance rates are the same as in 1986 are they? Why would that be if the insurance companies are promoting killing more deer and especially more does when it can be proven that the deer killed per billion miles drives is at a 22 year low?
If we continue at the current rate of harvest we will end this season with a harvest of a little over 130,000 deer and this with around 400,000 licenses sold. This will give us the lowest success ratio since the IDNR has kept records on their website. That is based on 1987 to present data. Were there too many deer in 1987 when that success ratio was 49.5 percent (75,758 with 153,295 licenses sold)?
All this leads me to the conclusion that we actually have fewer deer in the State right now than we did in 1996, and that is based on the IDNR's own information. Think about this please in 1996 we harvested 107,632 deer but more importantly we had a success ratio of 53%. Now this year we will probably do a little over 130,000 deer. This year we have continuous seasons from September 15th to the end of January( the most hunting days than ever before in our recent history). This year we have around 400,000 licenses sold with almost 23,000 antler less tags still unsold. These licenses represent a record, or nearly so, number of deer hunters, who are way more educated and knowledgeable in the ways of deer. They also are the very best equipped in history, with better guns, ammo, sights and scopes, far better blinds and stands, superior clothing and boots and cold weather gear. Did you ever hear of any one in 1996 bragging about 2 inch groups at 150 yards from any muzzle loader or shotgun? Now we even allow rifles from .243 to .300 Winchester magnum to .458 if you want, capable of making killing shots on deer at 200 or 300 or even 400 yards. All of this but yet we are harvesting fewer and fewer deer each year. We either have a lot smaller deer herd or we have over half of our current deer hunters who are very stupid and inept at deer hunting. When no one complained about too many deer we had a success ratio of over 50%, but now that we are told we have too many deer we have dropped that ratio to only maybe 35%. How can that be?
I know that I complain a lot about this subject, both on here and to my legislators and to the IDNR. I send them lots of this stuff and a copy of this will go to Mr. Litchfield at the IDNR and I am still in hopes of getting a positive response. The way I see this issue is I am 60 years old now and at best I will maybe have another 10 years to hunt deer. You guys who are 30 or 40 now have lots of years left. My son is 36 and my pseudo grand children are 14 to 10 so this is very much an issue that they must face, so I am trying my best to help them. The deer hunting will not be able to rebound in my remaining 10 years, because we have taken it to far down hill, but I hope that my loved ones and all of you younger hunters on here have the chance to enjoy what I have had for 30 or so years. It took from 1954 until 2000 to get the harvest numbers up to 126,000, but only 4 years to drop it by 75,000. What will the next 4 years bring? As usual I will challenge any one to prove my theory and numbers wrong, and believe me I wish you would. I would much rather be wrong on this than have to go back to trying to draw any kind of a deer license in a draw lottery system so that I can enjoy hunting for one more year. I know that there are a growing number of you who are agreeing with me but those that do we need to express ourselves politely and articulately to those who can actually do something about this crisis that is looming on the horizon. As always thanks for listening. :way:
Year HARVEST #of Licenses Percentage
1996 107632 202834 53%
1997 118404 211118 56%
1998 112608 223419 50%
1999 121635 233690 52%
2000 126535 229800 55%
2008 142194 406169 35%
How many deer hunters thought we had way too many deer in 1996 to 2000. I don't ever remember hearing that statement made any where or any time during that time frame, do you? Did you also know that in 1996 only 35 counties were any sex during the 1st shotgun season, and that 26 counties were bucks only for the first 5 days of the 2nd shotgun season. Also in the year 2000 17 counties were bucks only for the first 3 days of the 1st shotgun season. Can you imagine that, the single most productive 3 days of the entire year and in 17 counties you could only shot bucks? Were there way too many does then?
Next is some info that should take the wind out of the insurance company's sails. In 2008 there were 10961 deer killed on the highways. In 1994 there were 10438 deer killed on the highways. Every year in between, the highway kill numbers were higher. The other number in this category is deer killed per billion miles driven. Guess what in 2008 that number was 602 and to get any lower number we go clear back to 1986 which was 593, with one exception, in1991 the number was 590. Still pretty close. So that means that there is much less chance of hitting a deer today than in, every year except one ,any year since 1986, again when no one uttered the words "Too many deer". The sad thing is none of our insurance rates are the same as in 1986 are they? Why would that be if the insurance companies are promoting killing more deer and especially more does when it can be proven that the deer killed per billion miles drives is at a 22 year low?
If we continue at the current rate of harvest we will end this season with a harvest of a little over 130,000 deer and this with around 400,000 licenses sold. This will give us the lowest success ratio since the IDNR has kept records on their website. That is based on 1987 to present data. Were there too many deer in 1987 when that success ratio was 49.5 percent (75,758 with 153,295 licenses sold)?
All this leads me to the conclusion that we actually have fewer deer in the State right now than we did in 1996, and that is based on the IDNR's own information. Think about this please in 1996 we harvested 107,632 deer but more importantly we had a success ratio of 53%. Now this year we will probably do a little over 130,000 deer. This year we have continuous seasons from September 15th to the end of January( the most hunting days than ever before in our recent history). This year we have around 400,000 licenses sold with almost 23,000 antler less tags still unsold. These licenses represent a record, or nearly so, number of deer hunters, who are way more educated and knowledgeable in the ways of deer. They also are the very best equipped in history, with better guns, ammo, sights and scopes, far better blinds and stands, superior clothing and boots and cold weather gear. Did you ever hear of any one in 1996 bragging about 2 inch groups at 150 yards from any muzzle loader or shotgun? Now we even allow rifles from .243 to .300 Winchester magnum to .458 if you want, capable of making killing shots on deer at 200 or 300 or even 400 yards. All of this but yet we are harvesting fewer and fewer deer each year. We either have a lot smaller deer herd or we have over half of our current deer hunters who are very stupid and inept at deer hunting. When no one complained about too many deer we had a success ratio of over 50%, but now that we are told we have too many deer we have dropped that ratio to only maybe 35%. How can that be?
I know that I complain a lot about this subject, both on here and to my legislators and to the IDNR. I send them lots of this stuff and a copy of this will go to Mr. Litchfield at the IDNR and I am still in hopes of getting a positive response. The way I see this issue is I am 60 years old now and at best I will maybe have another 10 years to hunt deer. You guys who are 30 or 40 now have lots of years left. My son is 36 and my pseudo grand children are 14 to 10 so this is very much an issue that they must face, so I am trying my best to help them. The deer hunting will not be able to rebound in my remaining 10 years, because we have taken it to far down hill, but I hope that my loved ones and all of you younger hunters on here have the chance to enjoy what I have had for 30 or so years. It took from 1954 until 2000 to get the harvest numbers up to 126,000, but only 4 years to drop it by 75,000. What will the next 4 years bring? As usual I will challenge any one to prove my theory and numbers wrong, and believe me I wish you would. I would much rather be wrong on this than have to go back to trying to draw any kind of a deer license in a draw lottery system so that I can enjoy hunting for one more year. I know that there are a growing number of you who are agreeing with me but those that do we need to express ourselves politely and articulately to those who can actually do something about this crisis that is looming on the horizon. As always thanks for listening. :way:
. For what ever reason they went unfilled, but not because hunters just bought them to buy them all up. If you just use the 344,327 hunter numbers to show the harvest of 142,194 that still only yields success of 41 percent. That would mean the 59 percent of the best most well equipped hunters could not fill even 1 any sex tag in Iowa. That is 6 out of every 10 deer hunters could not get it done. I just have to think that represents a deer herd that is shrinking at an alarming rate.