Illinois Outdoors at
RulesIllinois Outdoors at

Prairie State Outdoors Categories

Top Story :: Opinion :: Illinois Outdoor News :: Fishing News :: Hunting News :: Birding News :: Nature Stories :: Miscellaneous News :: Fishing :: Big Fish Fridays :: Big Fish Stories :: State Fishing Reports :: Other Fishing Reports :: Fishing Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Fish :: Fishing Calendar :: Hunting :: Hunting Reports :: Hunting Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Hunt :: Tales from the Timber :: Turkey Tales :: Hunting Calendar :: Big Game Stories :: Nature and Birding :: Birding Bits :: Nature Newsbits :: Critter Corner :: Birding Calendar :: Stargazing :: In the Wild :: Miscellaneous Reports and Shorts :: Links :: Hunting Links :: Birding Links :: Video ::

Big Buck Stories

1960s :: 1980s :: 1991-92 :: 1992-93 :: 1993-94 :: 1994-95 :: 1995-96 :: 1997-98 :: 1998-99 :: 1999-2000 :: 2000-01 :: 2001-02 :: 2003-04 :: 2004-05 :: 2005-06 :: 2006-07 :: 2007-08 :: 2008-09 :: 2009-10 :: 2010-11 :: 2011-12 :: 2012-13 ::


Flathead's Picture of the Week :: Big bucks :: Birdwatching :: Cougars :: Dogs :: Critters :: Fishing :: Asian carp :: Bass :: Catfish :: Crappie :: Ice :: Muskie :: Humor :: Hunting :: Deer :: Ducks :: Geese :: Turkey :: Upland game :: Misc. :: Mushrooms :: Open Blog Thursday :: Picture A Day 2010 :: Plants and trees :: Politics :: Prairie :: Scattershooting :: Tales from the Trail Cams :: Wild Things ::


Deer rule changes announced

May 04, 2009 at 03:41 PM

SPRINGFIELD, IL – The Illinois Department of Natural Resources today announced deer hunting season dates and a series of regulations changes for the upcoming 2009-2010 seasons that were recommended by hunters, landowners, and other members of the state’s Joint Deer Population Task Force.

“Our deer season plans and the implementation of changes in deer regulations should enhance deer hunting opportunities and improve deer management in Illinois,” said IDNR Director Marc Miller. “The regulations were developed with extensive input from deer hunters and hunting organizations, landowners, wildlife management professionals, the deer task force, and other citizens interested in our state’s deer herd.”

The seven-day Illinois Firearm Deer Season will be Nov. 20 - 22, 2009 and Dec. 3 - 6, 2009, while the Muzzleloader-only season will be Dec. 11 - 13, 2009. The Youth Deer Hunting Season will be Oct. 10 – 11, 2009, and permits for the youth hunt will be available over the counter through DNR Direct license and permit agents. 

The Late-Winter Deer Antlerless Only Hunting Season will be expanded to a seven-day season on Dec. 31, 2009 - Jan. 3, 2010 and Jan. 15 - 17, 2010. Permits for the Late-Winter season will be issued in two categories, based on deer management needs in individual counties.  In select counties with a need for significant increases in deer harvest, hunters will be able to purchase Late-Winter permits without limit. In other counties, hunters will be limited to purchasing one Late-Winter deer permit. Permits will also be sold over the counter for the first time. As in the past, unused permits from the firearm, muzzleloader, and youth seasons can be used during the late winter season only if the unused permit is from a participating late winter season county. Only Antlerless deer may be taken with any valid unused permit.

The Special CWD Deer Hunting Season in select northern Illinois counties will also be expanded to a seven-day season on the same dates as the expanded Late-Winter season. 

The Illinois Archery Deer Hunting Season will be Oct. 1, 2009 – Jan. 17, 2010. The archery season is being extended by three days to close on the same date as the Late-Winter and Special CWD seasons. 

The IDNR will also expand the availability of deer hunting permits. Unsold Firearm and Muzzleloader-only deer permits will be made available over the counter through DNR Direct license and permit agents.

In the last several months, the IDNR reviewed originally proposed changes and sought additional input from hunting groups. As a result, the Late Winter season was altered to an earlier split season.

“We hope all hunters find these changes to be in their benefit during the coming seasons. The agency will continue to make a concerted effort to balance science based decision making with input and perspective from our constituents,” added Miller.  “Constituent input and involvement are critical to the success this agency and its programs.  By re-energizing NRAB and building a component for constituent input, the public will have a greater opportunity to have their voices heard.”

Deer seasons and regulations have changed a lot in recent years.  How does deer hunting in Illinois stack up when compared with just 10 years ago?

During the 1999 Illinois deer seasons, hunters harvested 136,534 deer. At that time, those results ranked second only to the then-record harvest in the 1995 season. The harvest of does comprised 42 percent of the total harvest with bucks at 58 percent. In 1999, yearling bucks made up about 54 percent of the antlered-buck harvest, with older bucks making up the remaining 46 percent. That was considered good, particularly when compared with other states.

What about today? During the 2008 season, hunters in Illinois harvested a preliminary total of 188,425 deer, an increase of more than 51,000 deer and a boost of 38 percent compared with 1999.  Buck-to-doe ratios in the harvest last year were very balanced with about 50 percent of each. Although IDNR has not yet completed analysis of the buck age structure for 2008, it has hovered at about 40 percent yearlings/60 percent older bucks during each of the last three years. That is a significant improvement over years past. 

The changes in Illinois deer regulations are detailed in amendments to state administrative rules, which will be posted for a 45-day public comment period on May 8. Click here to review the amendments to 17 Ill. Adm. Code 650, 660, 670, 675, 680, and 685.

For more details and perspective on the regulations please visit the IDNR Web site.

Your CommentsComments :: Terms :: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Let the slaughter begin! More seasons and endless permits! Input from hunters, hunting groups,??? Which groups and which hunters? It wasn’t input from any of the hunting groups I’m aware of. It should read: Input from politicians, people who have an agenda and companies that need their profits a bit higher, like Insurance co’s, etc.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/04 at 03:54 PM

PUKE!!!!!!! Another propoganda release from the same ole dirty crooked DNR. Anyone else notice how they went back 10 years to 1999 to find some stats that would serve their warped agenda? Can you say Pat Quinovich? The same ole dirty Illinois politics that we have all grown to hate ...


“Marc Miller - he put the final nail in the coffin of Illinois quality deer herd.” Thanks Marc.



I appologize to all of you hunters whom I personally told to have faith in Marc Miller. My optimism was without merit and I am sorry that I tried to rein in some of you who were never convinced of his good intentions. Lets work togetehr to make “proper deer management” a voting issue in the next governors election. At this point Quinn obviously has to go.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 05:05 PM

Oh yeah, the kill numbers are higher than 1999 because THEY SOLD TWICE AS MANY NR PERMITS last year as they did in 1999. My apologies also to everyone. I feel like a rape victim! Although I shouldn’t apologize for the misleading DNR, I do feel I need to take some responsibility for asking everyone to support these clowns. I should have realized in the meeting when they talked about not getting data, more pressure from the FB, etc. that we were going to take another year of political swindling.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/04 at 05:18 PM

Well… i never had any faith in an imcompotent politician to manage the herd or even understand the passion of the people they met with.  The best this idiot could come up with was to make unlimited tags in some areas while limitting others.  Nice job… Now find a way to get these unlimited tags on properties that are actually over populated ya idiot.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 05:22 PM

MAKES ME SICK! Yearling Bucks should be considered into Illinois Whitetail Quality! Without Quality most hunters in Illinois will be disapointed in DNR and OUR hunting of the Whiteail deer!

The areas that do need ‘population control’ on Private Lands and State and Federal Lands that receive limited hunting or NO HUNTING will still be a “so called” problem of over population. Late Winter Hunting does nothing for the true problem areas in general! (We don’t have too many deer anyway)!

The Deer Task FARCE is/was a “JOKE”! The Farm Bureau/Country Companies should of been ‘put in their place’! THEY do not ‘run’ DNR! DNR works for “We the People”....the citizens of Illinois! Not the corporations/business in Illinois! Any leaning in that direction by OUR DNR is Not Acceptable!

Most of Illinois is Private Land! Private Land Owners will and have in the past, as needed, taken care of deer populations upon their property as they seen needed. If a land owner didn’t mind all the deer using his land…..that is/was their choice as to how many (if any) needed to be removed.

A lot of State and Federal Lands is NO HUNTING. Roads go thru many of these properties and the deer herd DOES NEED THINNED! They should have hunting of some sort to control THEIR problems on OUR Properties we all own! “WE” own these lands….The State and Fed’s work for “US”!

Illinois is a cesspool of corruption and Things Are Going To Change! Get out and VOTE people….remove all incumbants and Vote In New Blood! The Political Circus Arena needs overhauled and we better all stick together and get it done and done right!

Politics needs overhauled Nation Wide! 2 Term limits and no Lifetime Salary and Health Care! They pay into Soc.Sec. and their own 401K and their own health care…...“WE” are not a BLANK CHECK for government!

Protecting “Our Wildlife and Lands” is something we must do for us and for our future generations.

JMHO…..Herm -}}}}}}}}}}———————>

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 06:14 PM

This doesnt suprise me one bit…..IL. still sux.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 07:05 PM

For how long has the DNR been considering the staggered LWS (Dec 31-Jan 3; then Jan 15-Jan 17)???  Have they been considering that all along or have I missed it. They did trim it down by 2 days…whoopty-doo.
It also states that “In select counties with a need for significant increases in deer harvest, hunters will be able to purchase Late-Winter permits without limit”.  Does anyone know which counties are included for ‘unlimited’ antlerless permits? I feel sorry for the die-hard ethical hunters in those counties concerned about herd quality. I’m sure the links to the regulation ammendments give more details but I’m too busy to do much digging right now.  I’m hoping someone can make it easy for me wink
There will come a day where the brainiacs in the state and DNR look back and regret this decision (and many others). Or maybe they won’t…you have to have a conscience to feel regret.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 07:08 PM

FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST BIDDING LOBBIST GROUP:  ILLINOIS DEER HERD:  Very well used and unmanaged deer herd.  Highest bidder will also receive two hacks who consider themselves biologist.  Payment must be receieved in full with checks payable to Marc Miller and Governor Quinn.  What a joke these two have turned out to be.  Let the slaughter begin.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:09 PM

What am I missing here? They are adding four days to the LWS season, well before most bucks are shedding antlers. Right? Why is that the end of the deer herd? Seriously? Somebody tell me why so I can ask the right questions. Because right now I don’t understand the total fear of this as an answer. I also would like to see a list of which counties will have unlimited permits and we will post that ASAP. But somebody out there who fears the worst, tell me why this is the worst.

Posted by Jeff Lampe on 05/04 at 08:13 PM

The percentage of 1 1/2 old buck taken has went down recently, because thousands & thousands of antlerless bucks ( Button Bucks) have been taken in the IDNR’s ever increasing war on the ‘Antlerless deer’ over the last several years.
More & more of our bucks are not even making it to 1 1/2 old.
More & more of our button bucks are taken every year, because our IDNR is selling more & more antlerless tags, making more & more antlerless season & wanting more & more ‘antlerless deer’ killed.
Lets just assume that this new earlier 4 day Dec antlerless season kills 15-20,000 more antlerless deer. By IDNR’s own numbers 20-25% of those kills will be button bucks.
So 3,000- 4,000 more button bucks will be killed in our IDNR’s new antlerless season.
3,000-4,000 MORE button bucks ???????
IS this what IL herd needs ??????
Then the IDNR tries to say they can’t explain why our 2008 harvest was down by 12,000 buck last year alone.  ??????
Will our IDNR ever figure out that they need to stop focusing their herd reduction efforts on ‘antlerless deer’ ????
Will our IDNR ever figure out that a proper way to have a herd reduction program is to focus on ‘does’ & to help hunters focus on ‘does’ ??????
Reducing the quantity of our deerherd is one thing BUT reducing the quality of it at the same time is just totally unacceptable to a huge percentage of our IL deerhunters.
Will Marc Miller ever start making our current IDNR do a full & proper job of managing every aspect of our IL deerherd ?????????
Will this IDNR ever do ANYTHING to manage our Deerherd from ANY quality aspect ???????
It is time, that more & more deerhunters START DEMANDING, that our IDNR starts managing our IL deerherd for quality too !!!!
They can no longer blatantly ignore what IL deerhunters want !!!!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:16 PM

Jeff, I’ll put this in outline form as not to waste your time in reading my opinions!

1. More people home during Christmas break = more dead dear.

2. The Sept. season request would have solved almost every management situation we needed which is why 20+ states went to it. Our DNR denied it because of inside motives. Plus, none of them really hunt, so they don’t care.

3. Illinois is riddled with lobbyist who could care less about the future of this deer herd. Sell more permits = more money. None of them hunt, so none of them care.

4. The deer quantity in this state has been on steady decline for years and no one gives a XXXX.

5. Think I’m nuts? When is the last time you went pheasant hunting? Il. now only has limited places to hunt pheasants. In the early 90’s a person could hunt them everywhere except the western part of the state where they didn’t thrive. No one cared about them and now the deer are going to end up like the pheasants.

6. The unlimited permits in needed counties are a joke because those are the counties where outfitting is taking place and no one will kill the does there. The other counties, they DON’T NEED thinning out. It’s quite the contrary. I’ll stop here for now.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/04 at 08:25 PM

I and a lot of other very knowledgeable deerhunters who understand most of these aspects of proper deer management will gladly meet with you to show you what we are all asking for.
Jeff I will e-mail you my cell number & will gladly explain, talk to you & anyone else, at great length, as to why we are so upset.
Is some kind of quality deer management to much to ask for from our own states deer biologist ????

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:26 PM

alot of you guys are overblowing this.
i’m driving around and looking in fields seeing 10, 20, and 30 deer. and thats JUST what i’m seeing. a little extra late season hunt isnt gonna make or break anything. you guys act like every deer is gonna get slaughtered. relax relax. its not gonna amount to many more kills. you will see.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:36 PM

Jeff, how many more antlerless deer do you think need to be killed in your hunting area?  4 more days of banging away puts more and more stress on a deer herd and it doesn’t only affect the does and you think if that booner walks out during this antlerless only season its not going to get shot? Mr I killed “26” deer last year may be able to hit 40 this year.  Is that proper management?  Kill em all so the farmers happy.  I don’t think so. Thats just killing.

Tell me what the DNR’s explanation of why we are down 12,000 bucks last year.  Standing corn, weather, swine flu, too much snow?  These guys can’t answer these questions because they have no clue why.  What if this trend continues?  Whats the plan for that?  7 more days a field….?  You wonder why this upsets me?  Theres a few reasons. 

Also, what hunting groups are the IDNR talking about? Illinois Farm Bureau, State Farm, Country Insurance? Politicians. Last time I checked these weren’t hunting groups.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:43 PM

Read paragraph 9 well.  In English it means BS.  Marc must have taken a class or two from Rod.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 08:58 PM


Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 09:12 PM

Jeff, I’ll add this. How many chances have you had at a big buck where you hunt? How many have you seen? Do you ever want a big head on your wall? If so, your chances are dwindling!

Last year, I had to hunt harder than I ever had just to find what I was looking for. In one of those places, I saw the same 2 does for the last 2 years! None other. Now that’s pathetic. This is in an area where they should be thriving. I used to take does out but I refrained from doing so the last 2 years because I’m only seeing the same 2 does. In fact, those same does keep busting me and I would love to harvest them for that reason alone but they’re too valuable to the breeding in my area so I let them live. I know you told me you see a ton of deer in your area but do you really see anything that gets your blood going? I know there’s more to hunting than shooting big bucks (did I really say that?) but it is fun to shoot a big monster that was allowed to live for years instead of being needlessly killed at age 1.5. Remember, Teddy Roosevelt put in place the first conservation plan in the U.S. for the very reason of letting the younger deer grow older and the harvesting of older deer, thus known as the Boone and Crockett club. Our DNR is carelessly and haphazardly destroying years of well managed deer for a reason that they are too embarrassed to tell us. That reason is political and for the sake of $$$.

We need quantity, quality and we need a specialized plan for each region not statewide. 

This decision alone I believe will be enough to drive thousands of hunters to the polls next election. There is not one hunter who loves the IL. deer herd that will forget this one!

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/04 at 09:12 PM

The LWS is not going to kill more 1.5 yr old bucks. I think that the December season is probably the best time for the extended hunt. I think DNR listened when everyone was concerned with bucks shedding antlers in Late January. I will agree that there are areas that don’t need more deer killed, but there are a lot of areas that do. I really don’t see that many more deer being taken with the extra days. I for one can only eat so many deer, and usually have all I need by the time December rolls around. I think a lot of people will be the same way. Some will kill more just for the sake of killing but not a significant ammount overall.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 09:42 PM

hahahahha…... you guys are crazy. seriously. you aint gonna kill a big buck every year and you arent gonna see monsters every year either. ya’ll are falling into the “need it now” thinking of society. if you arent seeing/killing the kind of big bucks you see at the hunting shows you think something is wrong. from a lot of what i read it seems more like you guys are ticked that “hunters expert opinions” weren’t taken into consideration when this decision was made. 
Facts dont lie- and the fact is more archery deer were killed last year than any other year!!!!! I am no EXPERT but that tells me the deer heard is just fine. relax people. the deer will still be there. the only people that truly care about this are the rack hunters who only shoot big bucks to show them off because they are over-compensating for something else.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 09:49 PM

?The regulations were developed with extensive input from deer hunters and hunting organizations, landowners, wildlife management professionals, the deer task force, and other citizens interested in our state?s deer herd.?

?...The agency will continue to make a concerted effort to balance science based decision making with input and perspective from our constituents,? added Miller.  ?Constituent input and involvement are critical to the success this agency and its programs.  By re-energizing NRAB and building a component for constituent input, the public will have a greater opportunity to have their voices heard.?

How can he say this with a straight faces???  What is the NRAB, btw?  Natural Resources Abuse Board???

  Jeff, have you read ANY of the discussions on this website regarding this topic in the last six months???  Please go back and read your site to find the answers to your naive questions.

  The earlier season in itself if ok, BUT ONLY IF THE LATE SEASON WAS ELIMINATED.  I like to bow hunt over the Christmas and New Years holidays, but now I’ll find something else to do… Probably patrolling my properties to keep the slaughterers away.

  If I were a guessing man, I would expect to see the current LWS counties to get the unlimited class and additional counties added for the single permit.  That is the most unscientific, illogical answer I could come up with, so it makes a perfect fit for the “New Era” deer management plan.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 10:18 PM

Jeff, you are so far off base that you dont even realize it. Many of the people posting here have met with folks from DNR including director Miller. Jeff Lampe was called in to meet with him because of the bad rap that DNR gets on this site from people posting comments. Miller has made it very clear on multiple occassions that he doesnt care for negative talk about DNR. After that meeting Lampe has been mysteriously more pro-DNR. Hmmmmm This is just one of a long list of examples where you and a couple of others are talking to people who happen to be aware of a lot of things that have happened that you are unaware of. It doesnt make any of us any smarter than you just more informed on the topic at hand. YOU and a couple of others are the ones whose statements make no sense whatsoever, for example- (your quote) “I suspect that the only problem with an extra December gun season is that it cuts into archery season.” The December gun season is not cutting into the archery season as bowhunting is allowed during this season and in fact if you would just read the article, the new regulations actually give bowhunters MORE time in the woods. I realize it might be tough for some to comprehend but to some of us a quality herd is more important than more days in the woods.


lungbuster says (quote) -“Facts dont lie- and the fact is more archery deer were killed last year than any other year!!!!! I am no EXPERT but that tells me the deer heard is just fine” Do you work for the DNR in data collection? Your reasoning fits right in line with theirs. You ignore the FACT that the total harvest was down by 11,000 deer and substitute some other figure to prove your point. The DNR did the same thing in their press release by going back 10 years to use harvest figures to support their position of killing more deer rather than using last years drop of 11,000 in the total harvest. As you said “I am no expert” .... I guess we agree on one thing.



You guys just need to keep in mind that some people posting here have a lot more sources of information than a website or a newspaper. Some of us were fighting to make Illinois deer herd better before some of you were even hunting at all

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 10:30 PM

Jeff2020, I understand your frustrations on the question “Why is a Sept season better than Dec-Jan Season”. I would like to know why our biologists think a December/January season is better?  These are questions that NEVER get answered. What we need is some transparency when it come to deer management issues.  They claim these decesions were made by hunter groups, landowners, JDTF and other concerned citizens.  Look at the data that is quoted in this story. 1999 and 1995.  Come on, we live in a society where statistics are used on a hourly basis.  We can’t have current data?  Why is it so hard for Shelton to produce numbers for us?  I am concerned about the overall health of our herd. Doesn’t matter if its a doe or a buck.  What if next year they find out our harvest numbers are significantly down?  Then what is their game plan?  Our herd management is being influenced by Political hacks that have the Farm Bureau and Insurance Companies breathing down their backs.  I want transparency. What I don’t want is smoke and mirrors and that seems to be what us deer hunters are subjected to.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 11:03 PM

higgins… I think you should stick to actual meetings with the DNR and stop wasting your time on here.  I dont post on here much anymore because when you try to have a brain storming discussion with people who are short the brain you end up just upset. 

Jeff why are we upset?  1.  Why isnt anything focused on getting more land out of outfitter control?  If there is a problem with the herd that needs urgent attention why isnt anything done with the NR cap?  Bringing that down to 8000 instantly will result in a larger kill and a herd more equality distributed in the state.  2.  When can we expect more government land open?  All of this VAST data saying we want more deer killed… this land own or atleast managed by the state… why cant we hunt it?  we pay the taxes… and wardens to watch much of it… why cant we hunt it when the majority of the state would surely be in favor of this sense we have a huge over abundance of this animal on these lands.  3.  I really really like 3… why were the hunter surveys mostly conducted in person at meetings where the land owner surveys were mostly over the phone?  ThIS ISNT HOW RESEARCH IS CONDUCTED!!!!!!!!! This method or data collection would likely get caught in highschool and tossed out but when your just trying to fool deer hunters its ok. 

HEre is my problem… there is a HUGE amount of pressure on the citizens of this state to kill off the deer that they have access to.  But nothing is being done on properties where the gov has control or non resident control.  its basically BS. 

Seriously you could take this problem in front of a room of 5th graders and explain it out and they could come up with the exact same management plan…. More seasons more tags.  Do you think the DNR would have gotten different responses from the public if the DNR hadnt been telling the public for the past 20 years that our deer herd was out of control when IN FACT our herd is likely smaller per sq mile than any herd east of the mississippi?  I could go on forever…

I would LOVE to know how you get hired to be in charge of something politically… like the dnr?  I mean do you just go up to the gov and say hey i want to be in charge of that for 100k a year… I once killed a scragally 6 and fished for trout once on vacation?  And the governor looks at says your qualified??  I mean how does this work?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/04 at 11:04 PM

the first thing i’m going to do is no more hunting on my property…i started bowhunting in 1974..quit gun hunting in 1976..let my neighbors and a few close friends hunt during gun season and was happy to let them .....NOMORE…it’s time to hunker down….

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 06:27 AM

If this 7-day LWS was a separate isolated decision that the DNR made, then I wouldn’t have much of a problem with it. I would question the rationale for flying against what so many other states have done, but I wouldn’t be so upset. The reason why I’m concerned is that this LWS decision is following numerous other unscientific, money-driven decisions that our DNR has made. They have such a history for repeatedly ignoring science/logic/common sense. (Think about the increase in NR permits issued over the same 10-yr period this article mentions and tell me that wasn’t a money-driven decision). The quality of the deer herd is not the #1 priority. That’s what concerns me.
They want more deer shot, but in suburbia and other areas where they receive a lot of their DVC input, you simply can’t hunt. I live in suburbia and see deer everyday (sometimes 20+ at once). Yes, there’s an overpopulation problem in the Chicago-area forest preserves, but hunters will never be able to do anything about that in the backyards of PETA, Shark, and HSUS. Even if the preserves were opened to archery, bowhunters would have to carry PETA-spray to keep the vegans away. (For that reason, I still wouldn’t hunt those areas) That’s one example of the mistake the DNR is making. The ‘data’ they are using is biased in most cases and does not represent the rest of the state.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 06:40 AM

Your right, lets let the fact do the talking.
I challenge the IDNR to show us ALL the buck numbers for 1999 & 2008. NOT just the ‘antlered buck’ totals. That is only half the story & the half that works for the IDNR’s agenda.
Lets see what ALL the buck kill stats were for 1999 vs 2008. That will tell everyone the real story.
With hundreds of thousands of antlerless permits added into the system, in the last 10 years & 20-25% (DNR’s own numbers) of those were filled with antlerless buck.
More & more of our buck population is killed before they ever grow a rack & at a higher percentage then ever.
The IDNR does not want hunters to see ALL those numbers compared.
The IDNR is up to their smoke & mirror games again. BUT more & more hunters are seeing through the haze now.
*** IDNR **** please show hunter, the real buck harvest numbers of 1999 vs 2008 !!!!!
Show us the percentage of antlerless, yearling & mature bucks killed comparably
Tell us the real truth. Show us all the numbers for once.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 06:40 AM

jeff2020, you said: “So, Marc, in one post you seem to support a September antlerless season, and in a latter you suggest that we need to stop killing does.  Which is it?”

Are you for real??? Where have you been for the last year? I’ll read it to you like a bedtime story. Does need only to be killed in areas of high density. Other areas don’t need the slaughter. I’ll also throw in that the DNR wasted our time and tried to “silence” us for their own agenda. If you don’t want to believe that, that’s your choice. Watch and see what happens to our diminishing deer herd in the next few years, not to mention the quality.

Lungbuster, I don’t even care to respond to your posts anymore as you are a phony. You post under different screen names and then you post opposing opinions. You even counter post your own statements! You know, there is something called IP addresses and your IP shows up under all of those screen names, so please don’t waste our time here. Some of us take this issue seriously.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/05 at 07:03 AM

I can add something to clear up the “quality” issue. Think about this: If the bucks aren’t managed correctly, then the slaughter of immature bucks will not allow them to achieve trophy status. If most of Illinois hunters don’t care, then Illinois bucks will be no different than lets say, Alabama’s bucks because the racks will be the same size. I guess that may make out-of-state hunters go elsewhere for trophies. Now the fact is that Illinois CAN grow world class racks, so why would anyone purposely destroy that gift? Not too many states have the combination of ingredients that can produce such beauty. States like Virginia are managing for big racks and they’re doing a great job but they don’t have a fraction of the quality that Illinois is blessed with. As popular as “catch and release” is with fish, why wouldn’t anyone see that we need to take care of our own blessed Illinois deer herd? For the DNR to turn their head and over-sell NR permits, over-sell local permits and turn their head against the people of Illinois, is beyond me.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/05 at 07:40 AM

No contradiction jeff2020. Everyone else but you can understand it. You should be careful what you post when you haven’t taken the time to research it.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/05 at 07:42 AM

Actually Don, I spent as much time at my meeting with Marc Miller discussing fishing below the Bernadotte Dam as I did discussing trophy deer management. Unlike you, I can’t afford to be a one-issue person, though there’s no question deer management is THE issue facing the DNR. And yes, at our meeting there was a discussion of negative comments about the DNR on this Web site. I told Marc we aren’t about to start censoring people. As for being pro-DNR, I still believe things are on a better track now than they have been for years. And I believe moving the LWS into December was a direct concession to your meeting with the Director. Not the concession you wanted, maybe, but still a concession.

Posted by Jeff Lampe on 05/05 at 07:54 AM

One other thing, there is a press conference this morning about deer issues. I appreciate your input to my earlier question. I will raise some of the issues mentioned above. Thanks.

Posted by Jeff Lampe on 05/05 at 08:11 AM

There has been a lot of hand-waving for the past 20+ years regarding the management of our deer herd. It’s been a domino-effect that has cascaded down from the upper echelons in the DNR to all concerned stakeholder groups. One required confounding factor is that the DNR must also consider the concerns of non-hunting stakeholders (e.g. Farm Bureau, etc). As a result, the DNR decisions have not always been 100% biologically-supported. I can accept this to a certain extent. However, the DNR has not been exactly forthcoming to the public about the data that supported some of these decisions. Thus, the hand-waving and conjecturing continues (on both sides).
This problem creates an important opportunity for concerned hunters to build a foundation for some substantive arguments (rather than just conjecture or what you see on your back 40). I don’t know if this has already been done to some degree, but we really would benefit from a single source document that shows a timeline (up to >20 years ago) that documents FACTS that have occurred to deer hunting and deer management. Simple facts like regulation changes, annual DVCs, annual harvest, annual permits issued (archery, firearm, NR, etc) would go a long way to support our arguments. It would be quite a task for one individual to accomplish, and it would undoubtedly require some DNR cooperation - how likely would that be?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 08:17 AM

i believe it varies greatly county by county, here in Mclean county more land is unavailable to hunt every year. we see literally hundreds of does to a handful of bucks. it used to be 20-30 hunters in each township shot a buck and a doe there are about 5 hunters in each township that shoot 5-6 does and 1 or less bucks are taken by each hunter…..(this is in the eastern half)
as a result we are seeing bigger bucks each year….which is good. but the doe numbers are staggering. the problem is hundreds live in a square mile where there is no hunting. so we hunt the fringes and thin the does…. at the local sportsmans club less small bucks are brought in each year…..THAT IS PROGRESS. i don’t think 3-4 more days will flatten out the heard here in Mclean but thats not to say it won’t have ill effects on your county….. its really about hunter education regardless of what the state does…... pass young bucks, if you need some meat, shoot a doe and let the big boys spread some great genetics…..if you get that big one, enjoy it…... it is still a rare event…
QDM is living amongst the critters and do what is right by what you observe over a large area to make a difference for the good of the heard
this shouldn’t divide hunters so badly….PETA is eatin’it up the way we squable

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 08:43 AM

If we had a DNR that had someone that really knew.It would and should be by Co. by Co. But it’s allot easier too blast away and do some killin and then if its messed up and it’s going to be then they will make some changes. I know we all sound like experts but just a little common sense. But we just got too keep fighting city hall or we will just be able to tell our kids and grand kids about the good ole days.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 08:51 AM

Jeff2020- a properly managed deer herd is one where buck/doe ratios are considered and kept at levels that are healthy for the herd, not where does outnumber bucks 20 to 1. Also age structure is addressed. I am sure you have heard about states like Pennsylvania where a very high percentage of the buck harvest is yearlings. In a properly managed and healthy herd, steps are taken to ensure that more bucks make it to older age classes. The beenfits are twofold, first Mother Natures plan of the strongest animals doing the breeding and passing on their genes is played out and there are more older bucks for the hunters to pursue. The steps the current DNR is taking are ignoring the “quality” aspect and just indiscriminately killing deer by numbers. A herd can be managed for a certain level and still done so with quality assuring measures. In other words, we can manage for 10 deer per square mile (or any other number) and end up with a healthy balanced herd of 10 deer per square mile or have an unbalanced mess with 10 deer per square mile.

Jeff Lampe- our meeting with Miller and other DNR personel was nothing more than an appeasement meeting to silence critics. We knew going in that we were going to be offered a compromise to the 9-day January season to silence us and we knew exactly what that compromise would be. Sure enough, out comes the expected compromise ... which wasnt much of one at all. A host of possible ideas were discussed including the late December season. This season was only thrown out for discussion by our group and was soon shot down by our group after some possible negatives were brought to light. This idea was thrown on the table as a REPLACEMENT for the January season, NOT AS AN ADDITION to the January season. Marc Miller took an idea that hunters brought up and that hunters shot down and ADDED it to an already bad idea to make it even worse than what was originally proposed. Then he had the gall to call it an idea brought forth by hunters!!!! This whole thing hangs on Millers head. The ad rules clearly states that “the director sets season dates”, it says nothing about politicians, the farm bureau or anyone else. There were no politicians in the room when this idea was first brought to light or a few minutes later when it was unanomously shot down by the group of hunters. This one is Millers baby all the way. He invited us in to silence us and instead kicked us in the teeth. Marc Anthonys article on “Who’s the Chump” is spot on. I believe that in light of last years decrease in harvest, the DNR is doing everything possible to make sure this isnt a trend that they have to answer for.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 09:24 AM

Squabble squabble!  All I read out here anymore!

Jeff, 23-25% of deer killed in the late winter “antlerless only” are actually bucks.  Why should we extend this further into the year when clearly, it has it’s flaws.  September just makes sense.  Does and Fawns are easily distinguishable.  There are years in which bucks will lose their antlers early, so why put hunters into that position…why not Sept start date?

lungbuster - there are people on here who do kill mature bucks every year and see mature bucks every year.  It is not because we follow the IDNR deer practices, but manage our own land as we see fit, without breaking the rules.  Example, we choose not to take part in the late winter kill, we will kill our does (if we feel we need to) early in the year or throughout the year.

The most dissapointing piece I read was they say they took advice from hunters and groups, well, the hunters and groups I heard from (same ones voicing opinions out here several times) were obviously not heard nor did they take that advice.  They simply asked the questions for political reasons (just so they can say they asked us and got our input).

Lastly, is it ironic that they didn’t list out the counties that will have limitless tags, etc…?  I bet they have no clue what they will do!  Will Cook county be part of it…will they hide them and a couple others like they did in the car/collisions data?

Dissapointment in the fact that they lied to us.  Just tell me you are letting my opinions fly in one ear and out the other, then at least I wont expect you to listen, then I will lose my willingness to care.  So, again, I will follow my own guidelines and once again protect my does in order to increase my population of deer!  That is right, our population is hurting in all the areas I hunt.  To the guys who see 10 / 20 and 30 deer in a field eating….good for you and feel lucky!  In my county, you couldn’t drive 30 miles and count 30 deer!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 09:35 AM

Illinois is just out to sell more tags. Theres a simple solution to their problem that we all can benefit from. EARN A BUCK SYSTEM. This would require every hunter to take a doe before they can harvest a buck. The down fall is the greed state would not sell as many tags. Also I think they should change archery season to Oct-Nov. Then give the gun hunters the entire month of Dec.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 10:01 AM

hunt4life… the downfall with that is simple… the state is too damn lazy to monitor any system of management.  All they can do with their current state of laziness is throw out more tags in areas where you can see a deer on a regular basis.  real good management there let me tell you…A 4th grader could have done better…

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 10:49 AM

Jeff, read three books:  “Producing Quality whitetails,” “Quality Deer Management” and Don’s book, entitled: “Hunting Quality Whitetails in the Real World.”  All three are excellent references on the questions that you have asked.  Send me an e-mail and I’ll tell you how to get them.  Don is too timid to hawk his book on here! Pardon the pun.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 02:12 PM

O.K.  Miller,Lampe,DNR,Farm Bureau,Insurance Companies, or whoever is in favor of the LWS.  It will be interesting to see what counties these permits are for.  Lets see Western Il. is either outfitters or ground leased, the central part of the state populations are limited, southern part of the state saw declining #‘s, and the northern part of the state where they are obtaining their DVC numbers is state controlled parks.  So in reality it is all about selling more permits and roll the dice and hope we either have bad weather or hunters just do not get lucky so are natural resource of deer is not eliminated.  The LWS was originally pistol only now it has turned into greed and a reason for the deer drive slaughter to take place.  The NR tags have not been addressed at all MILLER if you want more does killed you simply need to free up more ground.  IOWA just stated that by making more NR permits available will not address the deer heard issues.  WAKE UP AND GET OUT OF THE PURPLE HAZE THAT IS LINGERING OVER THE DNR!!!!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 02:39 PM

Dog and Pony Show, Smoke and Mirrors, call it what ever you want. The information the IDNR gives us in reference to deer management is pure unadulterated BS.  Censorship is what Marc Miller wants?  I am afraid he has unleashed a fury and the voices of the Illinois deer hunters will be heard.  I wonder what they would think if we camp out on the IDNR headquarters lawn till we get answers to some of these questions.  If I were Marc Miller and Governor Quinn I wouldn’t get comfortable in my new environment because in a year both will be gone.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 02:42 PM

ya know its kinda odd too.  I mean there is a small but meaningful number of people who will vote for the new governor in accordance with how the dnr is ran.  I can name several.  For instance if the deer herd is well managed people like myself,don and others would likely vote to keep that over other issues.  There is no one who will give their vote just because they wipe out the deer…

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 03:11 PM

I would love to hear the perspective from one of the 100,000 outfitters here in Illinois on how these changes will affect them and what are they going to do to help reduce the does in areas they control. This is one area that has not been properly addressed by Marc Miller and his biologists.  Here is another unanswered question the IDNR fails to clarify.  By the way, has anyone found those 12,000 bucks that were lost last year?  Are they still in the standing corn?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 04:05 PM

Some folks on here talk about there not being many doe’s in there area.Some guys want an earn a buck program. Would earn a buck program work good in area’s that some of you guys claim is low doe populations?That would make everybody out there trying to shoot doe’s. What would that do to a already low doe population?Now in my neck of IL. earn a buck wouldn’t be any problem.I see bunches of doe’s pretty often, but how long would it be before earn a buck put us in the same vote some of you are with low doe population?I don’t know what the soloution is that works good for the whole state and maybe there’s not ONE solution that works for all parts of IL. In my opinion we need to take some of this extra money the DNR will be getting from fee increases in the next few years and hire some experts that are educated in managing deer herds and let THEM do their job and make decision’s that are best for the deer.Not what’s best for hunter’s,outfitters,insurance companies,what makes the state the most money,but what’s best for the deer herd.If they do what’s best for the deer herd,then i’d imagine the hunters would be pretty much satisfied.Bad thing is,it doesn’t look like this DNR dept. has any intentions of trying to get REAL experts that will do the right thing or will be allowed to do the right thing.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 04:09 PM

backwoods.  thats interesting you think things should be done thats best for the deer herd.  If that were the case… 2/3s of the area of the state would be shut down to hunting…. outfitting would be virtually outlawed….. and no land would be off limits to hunting.  Most of the state is significantly under whats biologically desirable for the herd ironically.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 05:39 PM

Well, I dont know about anybody else. But I take what ever deer that walks in front of me. My family hunts for the meat and the chance to teach our children it does not matter what you get. Any deer to us is a trophey. Some hunters should ask the older generation how the deer hunting was before. You was lucky to get a permit and was really lucky to bring a deer home. Now everybody is so consumed with getting that BIG buck with the BIG antlers. All for bragging rights. That is not how hunting should be. What are we teaching the future hunters? That all that matters are those BIG antler deer. Shame on us for doing that to them. We need to teach them the joy of getting out of the house and into the woods. To see all that nature has to offer.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 06:00 PM

Seems to me that the all mighty dollar is the driving force behind DNR decisions. The actual changes announced by the DNR don’t really bother me as much as the apparent motivation behind the decissions. We now have more available permits and next year look for that 100% price increase (from $15 to $30 per permit). I expect the 5 day turkey permits to be next in line for increases. Perhaps the seasons will be lowered to 3 days and the number of seasons (and permits) increased as well.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 06:19 PM

Jeff2020, As noted by experts on this site, you best BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU TYPE TILL YOU DO RESEARCH. If you don’t, the KGB will be after you.

A few people on this site are indeed experts. Too bad they are only experts on their own opinion.

you guys are seriously pms’ing over an 11,000 deer harvest drop. its 11,000 deer. CHILL OUT!  CORN WAS STANDING THROUGH MID-NOVEMBER ALL OVER.

get off lampe’s butt and honestly jeff2020 is right. He called an expert out on his place of expertise and got attacked for it. 

It is funny that the folks who think these dnr proposals are messed up are the same people who just want bragging rights from big deer they kill. i know a few humble hunters that would blow the experts on this site out of the water. its just they dont talk about it and show off big bucks to everyone and their brother.

in your perfect world we would have 200inch deer walking around every oak tree, but even then you’d be b*itching that there aren’t as many of them as their was before.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 08:07 PM

lungbuster, you kill me! Or is it RockyMtnSnipers, Gut Shot, End it now, Hunter, Jeff is naive, heartshot, “B”, Brandon, or any of the other numerous names you’ve posted on. You know, where you’ve slammed jeff2020 for being a liberal under one name and then turn around and slam yourself from another name? They make drugs that can cure that illness.

You sound like a little kid stating that ” i know a few humble hunters that would blow the experts on this site out of the water.” Sure you do. We believe you, really! You’re so convincing. FYI, no one here claims to have the final answer but through intelligent argument, we’ll come up with logical solutions. If you don’t wish to be part of it, then please go elsewhere. No one here has EVER bragged about their deer killed here either. You may want to do some reasearch of your own.

Why even bother to post here?  They make a site that may be of interest for you, it’s called club penguin.

Posted by Marc Anthony on 05/05 at 08:47 PM

Jeff2020, the benefit of balanced sex ratios within a whitetail herd is that breeding takes place as mother nature planned with bucks competing for breeding rights. I am sure you have heard the term “survival of the fittest”. In whitetail terms this simply means that the bucks who are able to survive the local conditions then compete for the right to breed. This is in contrast to a poorly managed herd where any ole buck gets to breed. With a herd that has does outnumbering bucks by a wide margin this often happens.

Lets look at 20 does in a balanced herd with a ratio of 2-1 or 10 bucks to go along with the 20 does. At any one time there will likely never be more than a couple of those does in the actual breeding phase of the estrous cycle. For arguements sake lets say that 3 of the 20 does happen to be in heat at 1 particular time. There will then be 10 bucks competing for 3 chances to breed, so in a sense the top 30% of the buck herd actually gets to breed and pass on their genes. Keep in mind that it will be very rare for more than 2 of these does to be in the actual breeding phase at any one time. The result is that the dominant bucks are doing the vast majority of the breeding. Now lets look at a herd with a sex ratio of 5-1 or 4 bucks for those 20 does. In the same example as above we now have 75% of the bucks passing on their genes in a situation where 3 does happen to be in the breeding phase of their estrous cycle at the same time. Dominance and heirarchy now means nothing and the gene pool gets polluted by lesser animals passing on their inferior traits. To compound the problem even further throw in a messed up age structure due to an overharvest of young bucks. Now it is possible that 3 of those 4 bucks vying to breed the 20 does are yearlings and not even mature enough to have established dominanance in the herd. The ramifications of a poorly managed herd go way beyond antler size, it is about health and survival. When an older dominant buck in a properly managed herd finally earns the right to breed, he has clearly established and proven himself to be a survivor. Not only has he survived hunting seasons, but also possibly other situations such as disease outbreaks, droughts, extreme winter conditions etc etc etc. His offspring are better suited to survive the environment they are born into. Rarely are the negative affects instant, instead over time the problems with a poorly manged herd compound themselves.


This is the condensed version and I could have went into greater detail with more real life examples but I think you get the idea. A well managed herd is in everyones best interest. What I find really interesting here is that the guys calling for proper management and who are upset with the DNR for their management approach are not at all bringing up anything about big antlers or trophy bucks. It is the feeble minded pea-brains who are legends in their own minds and have absolutely no idea what topic is even being discussed here that bring up such things. In fact, in a properly managed herd the most dominant buck that does the majority of the breeding is often NOT the buck with the largest antlers. Most of the time the dominant buck is a hog-bodied 8-pointer. Furthermore, managing whitetails for QUALITY has nothing to do with forcing other hunters to conform to anothers view of a “trophy”. It is about designing seasons and regulations in such a way that the end result is a well balanced herd, all the while considering that each hunter is an individual with different goals. In other words, with the proper regulations we can all continue to hunt as we like but be hunting a well balanced herd instead of a “mismanaged-disaster-in-waiting”.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/05 at 09:24 PM

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

Comment Area Pool Rules

  1. Read our Terms of Service.
  2. You must be a member. :: Register here :: Log In
  3. Keep it clean.
  4. Stay on topic.
  5. Be civil, honest and accurate.
  6. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Log In

Register as a new member

Next entry: Pekin anglers find missing body

Previous entry: Grinding carp into something useful

Log Out

RSS & Atom Feeds

Prairie State Outdoors
PSO on Facebook
Promote Your Page Too

News Archives

February 2020
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Copyright © 2007-2014 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Some Rights Reserved
Original content available for non-commercial use
under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
Creative Commons