dgibson
New member
We've debated this topic endlessly here in the past, so I'll leave that alone and just say that Hoosiers will soon have a chance to voice their opinions on the subject. Via email from the IN DNR:
Hoosiers: Fenced hunting for Indiana?
- Thread starter dgibson
- Start date
Washington Hunter
Well-known member
Why are they wasting their time? Why not outlaw FENCED DEER??? |oo
That is what need to be to outlawed. Once they are fenced in, who cares how they are killed? Just don't call it hunting.
That is what need to be to outlawed. Once they are fenced in, who cares how they are killed? Just don't call it hunting.
Tom
New member
The whitetails can do well there, I would think, they don't migrate, its pretty crowded in some places there. The fence will make a clean management border.
They want to consider its benefits, it sounds like, and set it up well, with all concerned. They put together a good group there to work on doing it well, it looks like. It doesn't sound like they think it needs to be outlawed, it sounds like they are more concerned with doing it well. They have double 8 ft fences or a single 10 foot fence in the proposals now. I'm betting they'll think double 8 foot is better, its more likely to prevent disease coming into the property or going out of the property, maybe. A property in nearby Michigan solved some issues that way. But is it necessary? There are states with the double fence and states without it, so there may be data to support the double or single approach as better, I don't know. Double fence does not seem necessary at all to make it work down here, neither does 10 ft height.
They want to consider its benefits, it sounds like, and set it up well, with all concerned. They put together a good group there to work on doing it well, it looks like. It doesn't sound like they think it needs to be outlawed, it sounds like they are more concerned with doing it well. They have double 8 ft fences or a single 10 foot fence in the proposals now. I'm betting they'll think double 8 foot is better, its more likely to prevent disease coming into the property or going out of the property, maybe. A property in nearby Michigan solved some issues that way. But is it necessary? There are states with the double fence and states without it, so there may be data to support the double or single approach as better, I don't know. Double fence does not seem necessary at all to make it work down here, neither does 10 ft height.
dgibson
New member
I guess they don't make epic journeys as a rule, but they do move around over time. I'm sure that poor feeding conditions would hasten that. They certainly move in more than a 300-acre circle, depending on conditions.
Isn't that one of the big complaints regarding mule deer habitat...that the "white tailed rat deer" are crowding them out of their traditional ranges? By your logic the whitetails are going to stay put anyway, so the fences wouldn't make a big difference. I don't get it.
Bambistew
Well-known member
I say go for it... that way Indiana will get CWD, no sence in some states not having it!
What it boils down to IMO is that people are so stuck on killing a monster buck or just any buck, that they are willing to fence one in to make it that much easier for them to kill, and if justifying it by saying that its good for management makes them feel like more of a hunter then by all means... Be a real hunter and hunt there...
What it boils down to IMO is that people are so stuck on killing a monster buck or just any buck, that they are willing to fence one in to make it that much easier for them to kill, and if justifying it by saying that its good for management makes them feel like more of a hunter then by all means... Be a real hunter and hunt there...
Tom
New member
The 300 is arbitrary, but that Iowa whitetail B&C world record stayed on the 300 acre place in Iowa where he was hunted hard for the last 3 years of his life.
1 deer/acre, I wonder how they came up with that figure? I guess they think they'll have a big market? Or, else, people there already have that, feed the hell out of them, and don't want to cut back?
It doesn't follow that they will get CWD, the double fence may be the way to help prevent it from getting in there area. You can have a fence right next to a road, it protects the road use and the deer, that's good for people and deer.
Did mule deer used to be in Indiana and Kaintuckee, dgibson? It looks like they are going to end the hunting from this, so what are they for, raising deer?
"These rules would
sunset as of February 1, 2015, at which time there would be a complete
prohibition on the hunting of deer behind fences in Indiana."
1 deer/acre, I wonder how they came up with that figure? I guess they think they'll have a big market? Or, else, people there already have that, feed the hell out of them, and don't want to cut back?
It doesn't follow that they will get CWD, the double fence may be the way to help prevent it from getting in there area. You can have a fence right next to a road, it protects the road use and the deer, that's good for people and deer.
Did mule deer used to be in Indiana and Kaintuckee, dgibson? It looks like they are going to end the hunting from this, so what are they for, raising deer?
"These rules would
sunset as of February 1, 2015, at which time there would be a complete
prohibition on the hunting of deer behind fences in Indiana."
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Tom,
CWD is rampant in the game farm animals that are bought and sold. Since the only way to test to date is to kill the animal first, it's kind of hard to prove that the animals you purchase are CWD free. The double fence is to protect the wild deer outside the fence from nose to nose contact and escape from fence #1, not the other way around. Double fences should be manditory for game farms, if they are allowed at all.
CWD and game farms go hand in hand. Not something I would want to take a chance on.
CWD is rampant in the game farm animals that are bought and sold. Since the only way to test to date is to kill the animal first, it's kind of hard to prove that the animals you purchase are CWD free. The double fence is to protect the wild deer outside the fence from nose to nose contact and escape from fence #1, not the other way around. Double fences should be manditory for game farms, if they are allowed at all.
CWD and game farms go hand in hand. Not something I would want to take a chance on.
Tom
New member
BHR,
If a guy buys a bunch of deer that are CWD free/disease free from a lot of diseases, from a heard that has been for years, he doesn't want the wild deer to infect his deer with anything. The fence protects the deer inside, it stops them from getting run over on streets, from being poached so easily, from outside disease exposure, from outside invasion of their good habitat inside. Its more to protect the deer inside than it is to protect those outside, lots of people call them and outclosure down here, not an inclosure like some think.
I don't think you should take a chance on CWD either, good idea.
If a guy buys a bunch of deer that are CWD free/disease free from a lot of diseases, from a heard that has been for years, he doesn't want the wild deer to infect his deer with anything. The fence protects the deer inside, it stops them from getting run over on streets, from being poached so easily, from outside disease exposure, from outside invasion of their good habitat inside. Its more to protect the deer inside than it is to protect those outside, lots of people call them and outclosure down here, not an inclosure like some think.
I don't think you should take a chance on CWD either, good idea.
dgibson
New member
Tom, no, there never were mule deer in IN or KY. But there weren't always as many whitetails out west, either...how'd they get there?
As I understand it, the sunset date is intended just like any other similar legislative sunset: it gives the DNR & the state an "out" if things go badly. If these rules are enacted but aren't renewed before 2/1/2015, then fenced hunting ceases to exist. It follows that, if sufficient interest isn't there by 2015, why continue it? At any rate, they're all "talking points" right now...there's not even any legislation on the table.
I thought the implanted radio ID requirement was interesting...is that common in game farms these days? Sounds expensive.
But there weren't always as many whitetails out west, either...how'd they get there?As I understand it, the sunset date is intended just like any other similar legislative sunset: it gives the DNR & the state an "out" if things go badly. If these rules are enacted but aren't renewed before 2/1/2015, then fenced hunting ceases to exist. It follows that, if sufficient interest isn't there by 2015, why continue it? At any rate, they're all "talking points" right now...there's not even any legislation on the table.
I thought the implanted radio ID requirement was interesting...is that common in game farms these days? Sounds expensive.
Tom
New member
I don't know about radio implants, I've just heard a few comments. It does sound expensive, but the deer are thousands of dollars each for some of these places. If they had a big breeder, I guess it would be worth the cost to some of the places to put in those radio implants. It might be worth it to the outside people to know they could find a run away, in case it was diseased, too. Pretty amazing stuff, high tech deer tracking.
So, you're thinking maybe the whitetail in the west are pushing the mule deer out, i.e. out competing them? I don't know that, either. I know west Texas mule deer are moving east some. I've hunted places over the last 10 years where they even crossbreed, they say, and it looks that way too, looking at some of them.
So, you're thinking maybe the whitetail in the west are pushing the mule deer out, i.e. out competing them? I don't know that, either. I know west Texas mule deer are moving east some. I've hunted places over the last 10 years where they even crossbreed, they say, and it looks that way too, looking at some of them.
dgibson
New member
Yeah, I've read a couple of theories on that. Some say that the mule deer move out because of development and so forth and the whitetails move in because they're better able to adapt to fragmented habitat. But I've also seen some people who seem to believe that the muleys move out because of active, direct encroachment of territory by whitetails. Maybe 1_pointer has some sagacious knowledge on the subject....
JoseCuervo
New member
Tom,
Where on earth did you ever get the idea that Whitetails don't migrate??? Maybe they won't migrate if they have some Texan's high fence, but Whitetails are great migrators.
A few years back, the UofIdaho did a study on Whitetail migration in the Clearwater drainages. The leading cause of the start of migration was 5cm of snow, which would then begin a 70+ mile migration to the Camas Prairie.
Where on earth did you ever get the idea that Whitetails don't migrate??? Maybe they won't migrate if they have some Texan's high fence, but Whitetails are great migrators.
A few years back, the UofIdaho did a study on Whitetail migration in the Clearwater drainages. The leading cause of the start of migration was 5cm of snow, which would then begin a 70+ mile migration to the Camas Prairie.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I saw 3 whitetails a couple weeks ago bear hunting in a place I would have never thought whitetails would be. Their habitat is definately expanding in the west.
Tom
New member
I guess migration has to do with the snow and the mountains then, did they say that? The whitetail studies here have them living their whole life within a square mile, if there's food, cover, and water there. West Texas, they'll move farther, but they don't migrate around here, they just travel a little farther for food, water, and cover.
Similar threads
