- 25,422
- 261
I wouldn't rule out some of the bigger name "Brands" in the industry either, ie Cabelas, Bass Pro, Realtree, Mossy Oak, Trial camera companies, mineral companies, food plot companies, bow companies, as well as tv sponsored shows. There's a lot of video documentation in the outdoor world and its failing "attempt" to lure new hunters into the sport when in reality it makes it very hard bc there's less game to seek. If all else fails just give Uncle Ted a call! :smiley_crocodile:[/QUOTE
I would have too say a lot the TV publicity has not been for the best in our hunting heritage and tradition. I would be interested in some of those answers. And how many of those free range deer are truly free range.
This move isn't going to make me many friends in high places. But those of you who know me well know that I'm not afraid to ask uncomfortable questions and call BS if they give me a PR answer.
Each organizations response and efforts will be graded A-F. I'll send out a site wide newsletter after the results are compiled. They'll also be posted here in their individual threads as well as on the front page. I will also be purchasing advertising space on other hunting related sites to further disseminate the results.
One month later, how is the progress coming on this.
Work has had me slammed with a large customer go live and hasn't left much time for family life. I've got to get a website to get off the ground for TripleA88 too. I should have some cycles free in the next couple weeks to work on this though.
To my knowledge not a single organization has taken on a state farm bureau head on. They have the run of the place and have infiltrated DNRs to achieve their agenda across many states in the Midwest. Their impact on our sport is undeniable, blatant, and real. The real enemy is not outside the gates. It's amongst us. And doing quite well.
A noble effort.
However you will need to find a way to leverage dollars, (economic impact) spent by hunters against the fact that the members of the farm bureau have a larger stake and say in the management for a pretty simple reason. They OWN the majority of the land that hunters use to hunt the deer. That fact provides them, and rightfully so, to a bigger stick in the game.
Now compound that by the fact that there is no unified voice from hunters. The vocal minority will have great difficulty even being heard, muss less taken seriously when the vast majority of hunters either don't care or don't care enough to ever voice their concerns.
The fact remains that the ODNR, the insurance companies, or the Farm Bureau did not kill the deer to reduce the populations from its high point a few years ago, hunters did, some right here participated fully.
Then you will have the other segment of fully engaged hunters that believe strongly in QDM that will voice quality over quantity and may be happy with the reduced populations.
Good luck in your efforts.
Then you will have the other segment of fully engaged hunters that believe strongly in QDM that will voice quality over quantity and may be happy with the reduced populations.
I don't think that's necessarily the case. QDM is a management philosophy about overall herd quality. Killing too many deer (bucks or does) does not promote that philosophy.
. But hunters are waking up. Reading the DNRs Facebook page recently when they talked about deer goes to show that. It's not good. The last time they posted a video about the deer population I read through 100 comments in a row before finding a single positive one.