|
Post by indianahick on Aug 14, 2009 18:56:24 GMT -5
OBR-SmoBR. How about the simple fact that we have more deer now than 5 years ago. 30 years ago big bucks were few and far between. As the herd has increased so has the amount of big boned deer. Now we have what 400,000 deer in the state. Lets say that out of that 400k 150k of them are bucks. Out of that amount there is more than likely one out of every 1000 that attains major antler size. Sorry you can just call me Doubting Thomas as to how well the OBR works. But then again I am not one of the majority that fell for that Scam either. But then again I am not a bow only hunter. Bow hunting is fun but it is not the end all of hunting.
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Aug 14, 2009 19:41:18 GMT -5
Another OBR thread.......lord help us
|
|
|
Post by whitetaildave24 on Aug 14, 2009 20:24:53 GMT -5
It's popcorn time!!!
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Aug 14, 2009 20:34:25 GMT -5
OBR - what is that? LOL
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Aug 14, 2009 20:43:40 GMT -5
The One Buck Rule......... Things that "others" are saying and why.... 1) An age shift was evident prior to the OBR. No kidding...When surplus does are harvested this pulls the sex ratios closer, causing the average age of bucks to slowly increase. Couple this with the fact that more bucks escaped harvesting because hunters were able to satisfy their need for venison with does. Pretty simple. If more hunters harvested does; beginning prior to the OBR, it only stands to reason that an age shift had started. Since the institution of the OBR this age structure shift has become even more so pronounced. Very simple stuff..... 2) There is no discernible decrease in numbers of bucks killed annually since OBR. No kidding......As more bucks became present in the overall herd (see above) their availability increased. Folks, there are more bucks present in the overall statewide herd (as a % of the herd itself) now than ever before. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of bucks killed increased from here on out. Why??? Because there are so many more of them available in the herd. Also, lets not forget that more fawns and 1.5 year old yearlings are being recruited into the herd every year. Again, very simple stuff.....If more bucks are present in the herd then people will have better opportunities to harvest ONE. 3) The One Buck Rule isn't having any effect on the age structure of bucks in Indiana. This one slays me!!!!! I've never, ever stated that hunters haven't become more selective in recent years. Mature buck management is more popular now than ever before. But, if anyone for even one second doesn't think that part of the reason that the age shift has improved even faster, and more visibly since its inception is just plain blind. It's really common sense. The OBR is working directly and indirectly. 4) The deer hunters are changing as a result of maturity. I don't know anyone who is getting any younger, do you? Could we not say this about deer hunters in Indiana since 1951. Haven't hunters always been getting older annually? Despite all the doom and gloom from various individuals out there, kids are still taking up hunting. I hear countless times that hunters are losing numbers at an alarming rate. Sure wish someone would show me hard factual evidence to prove this..... 5) Leasing will overtake our state if we become a "big buck" state. O.K. so leasing has its cons (as well as pros). Don't look now everyone, but Indiana is becoming a "big buck" state. But, don't forget that there are thousands upon thousands of acres that are NOT being leased here. And also, not all of Iowa and Illinois are (contrary to what others are saying) currently being leased. 6) Going back to a two buck limit won't change this age structure improvement. Please tell me that you don't really believe this. The thing that bothers me the most on this is that those who state this obvious falsity are some of the same ones who don't want to shoot does. "Being able to kill two bucks will help in herd management". Please also tell me that you don't believe this B.S. Again, common sense...or lack thereof. They say that the herd is growing fast now (but don't "survey" the herd any longer so how do we really know how many are out there?)...so how will being able to harvest a second buck do anything long term to herd management? This is backwards!!!!! Remember, proper, long term management of a deer herd is done through a sustained and continuing DOE harvest, not buck harvest. 7) Indiana has always had big, mature bucks within its borders. Sure, there have always no doubt been some big bucks. But, why didn't large numbers of them turn up for the Hoosier Record Buck Program over the years? This is simple...they weren't there in any numbers, otherwise we would have seen more of them. Again, very simple, common sense stuff. The whitetail herd is in the best shape that it ever has been in the history of deer hunting in Indiana ever. We have plenty of deer with many more mature bucks to harvest; we're recruiting more button buck fawns than ever before, the buck:doe ratio is closer now than ever. Why can't people understand this and just accept this and realize that all these management changes are what brought this about? Long Live the "OBR".........
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Aug 14, 2009 21:01:12 GMT -5
As a "buck" hunter since back in 1964 I can say one thing about the OBR and then I'm not saying another word on it...IT SUCKS!!!!!!!!! Good bye!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Aug 14, 2009 21:02:36 GMT -5
Hmmmm, I thought that I'd rather shoot as many does as possible, to help in herd control, and mainly to keep the idiotic legislatures out of the management picture.
|
|
|
Post by mullis56 on Aug 14, 2009 21:05:50 GMT -5
Movie theater butter microwave popcorn just finished popping...
|
|
|
Post by duff on Aug 14, 2009 21:50:43 GMT -5
It's a re-run, where's the remote.
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Aug 14, 2009 22:09:02 GMT -5
Where's that horse that needs beating? How far out is bow season? ... another month and a half I think. Who cares it's not changing this year or next just deal with it, and if it comes up in 2012 make a stand then your just wasting your breath and energy griping about it now.
|
|
dsg69
Full Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by dsg69 on Aug 14, 2009 22:19:10 GMT -5
I second that the OBR SUCKS!!! Most people after they kill their one buck just don't go out anymore that year. It's first grade math if you want to kill more does. If someone is bow hunting they kill a doe or two then their buck, most are done for the year. Now if they get a second buck with a gun they are back in the woods and most will take more doe's. Maybe some need help adding!!
|
|
|
Post by mullis56 on Aug 14, 2009 22:21:18 GMT -5
butter is good...
|
|
|
Post by danf on Aug 14, 2009 23:03:27 GMT -5
Where's that horse that needs beating? You mean this one? I was going to pull it out earlier today when thread first got started, but didn't since the "discussion" hadn't really gotten going. Step away from the computer for a few hours and it's time to pull out the horse. ;D
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Aug 14, 2009 23:48:43 GMT -5
The One Buck Rule......... Things that "others" are saying and why.... 1) An age shift was evident prior to the OBR. No kidding...When surplus does are harvested this pulls the sex ratios closer, causing the average age of bucks to slowly increase. Couple this with the fact that more bucks escaped harvesting because hunters were able to satisfy their need for venison with does. Pretty simple. If more hunters harvested does; beginning prior to the OBR, it only stands to reason that an age shift had started. Since the institution of the OBR this age structure shift has become even more so pronounced. Very simple stuff..... 2) There is no discernible decrease in numbers of bucks killed annually since OBR. No kidding......As more bucks became present in the overall herd (see above) their availability increased. Folks, there are more bucks present in the overall statewide herd (as a % of the herd itself) now than ever before. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of bucks killed increased from here on out. Why??? Because there are so many more of them available in the herd. Also, lets not forget that more fawns and 1.5 year old yearlings are being recruited into the herd every year. Again, very simple stuff.....If more bucks are present in the herd then people will have better opportunities to harvest ONE. 3) The One Buck Rule isn't having any effect on the age structure of bucks in Indiana. This one slays me!!!!! I've never, ever stated that hunters haven't become more selective in recent years. Mature buck management is more popular now than ever before. But, if anyone for even one second doesn't think that part of the reason that the age shift has improved even faster, and more visibly since its inception is just plain blind. It's really common sense. The OBR is working directly and indirectly. 4) The deer hunters are changing as a result of maturity. I don't know anyone who is getting any younger, do you? Could we not say this about deer hunters in Indiana since 1951. Haven't hunters always been getting older annually? Despite all the doom and gloom from various individuals out there, kids are still taking up hunting. I hear countless times that hunters are losing numbers at an alarming rate. Sure wish someone would show me hard factual evidence to prove this..... 5) Leasing will overtake our state if we become a "big buck" state. O.K. so leasing has its cons (as well as pros). Don't look now everyone, but Indiana is becoming a "big buck" state. But, don't forget that there are thousands upon thousands of acres that are NOT being leased here. And also, not all of Iowa and Illinois are (contrary to what others are saying) currently being leased. 6) Going back to a two buck limit won't change this age structure improvement. Please tell me that you don't really believe this. The thing that bothers me the most on this is that those who state this obvious falsity are some of the same ones who don't want to shoot does. "Being able to kill two bucks will help in herd management". Please also tell me that you don't believe this B.S. Again, common sense...or lack thereof. They say that the herd is growing fast now (but don't "survey" the herd any longer so how do we really know how many are out there?)...so how will being able to harvest a second buck do anything long term to herd management? This is backwards!!!!! Remember, proper, long term management of a deer herd is done through a sustained and continuing DOE harvest, not buck harvest. 7) Indiana has always had big, mature bucks within its borders. Sure, there have always no doubt been some big bucks. But, why didn't large numbers of them turn up for the Hoosier Record Buck Program over the years? This is simple...they weren't there in any numbers, otherwise we would have seen more of them. Again, very simple, common sense stuff. The whitetail herd is in the best shape that it ever has been in the history of deer hunting in Indiana ever. We have plenty of deer with many more mature bucks to harvest; we're recruiting more button buck fawns than ever before, the buck:doe ratio is closer now than ever. Why can't people understand this and just accept this and realize that all these management changes are what brought this about? Long Live the "OBR"......... The one buck rule according to Mr. Greghopper. LoL these logical conclusions were thought up by you all by yourself ! Well lets see c compared to the deer herd numbers of thirty years ago the deer herd had no where to go but up yearly in buck and doe numbers the OBR had nothing at all to do with this that is a fact . Also with only 217,000 deer hunting licenses sold in India last year there was no way to even cut the deer herd in half let alone dent the buck herd and that has not changed by percentage of hunters compared to deer over the last 30 years. You have convinced yourself that you have killed some or a big buck because of the OBR .I however would guess that it was due to the fact that you got older and learned to buck hunt better . Lets face it you're side of this OBR argument have now been proven wrong by the very DNR studies and biologists that were duped and pushed into a program that the majority never wanted to enter and never saw a need for .But hay they get payed by the state and have a boss like most everyone else does. You simply just do not want to allow fellow hunters the freedom to take more than one buck and hope that by limiting hunting freedoms you will get more antler for your wall per kill . At what cost to hunting in the long run ? I say to heck with that thought pattern and I would say by the study and financial state of the DNR the OBR may be on its way out . I say its about darn time because you guys had your chance and it was a flop in management terms it was not huge gains as promoted and touted by the pro OBR crowd ,in any category of big buck lore.Now it will some be time to hunt without the stress of oh is this the right buck and what if its not weighing on every hunters mind that takes a shot at a buck before the ground shrinkage happens. Sorry but your argument has been proven by the powers that implemented it to have no real merit or basis in scientific proof. I believe that you may find that your ideas will get little or no warm reception from multi seasonal hunters or those who knew the whole truth from the start that all it was was a pacifier for those who wanted someone to legislate them a big buck .
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Aug 15, 2009 7:02:32 GMT -5
Yeah deerman and you want someone to legislate you two bucks...You could always buy an Illinois tag if you want two bucks..That's what alot of us do.I shoot three bucks every year...Two in Illinois and one in Indiana...Maybe if we structured our firearms season like Illinois we could sustain decent deer in the State instead of the slaughter fest in November during peak rut..
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 15, 2009 10:39:35 GMT -5
Food for thought....What? No mention of Indiana? How do these multiple buck limit states get such an age shift? Yearling Buck Harvest TrendsA significant indication of the spread of the QDM philosophy, the percentage of yearlings (1½- year-olds) in the nationwide buck harvest declined from an average of 51 percent in 1999 to 45 percent in 2005. During this same period the percentage of 2½-year-olds increased from 28 to 32 percent and 3½-year-olds or older increased from 19 to 23 percent. Some states made tremendous advances such as Pennsylvania dropping from 80 to 52 percent yearling bucks. Wisconsin dropped from 68 to 51 percent and Mississippi dropped from 50 percent to a nationwide low of 12 percent yearlings. Arkansas followed a close second with 20 percent yearlings. Pennsylvania used to lead this undesirable category but is now around the national average with at least six other states harvesting a higher percentage of yearlings, including neighbors Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Ohio (data not provided by Delaware or West Virginia). Michigan, New Jersey and New York now tie for the national lead with 63 percent of bucks harvested being 1½ years old. Two states regressed in this statistic with South Carolina and New Hampshire both harvesting a higher percentage of yearlings in 2005 than in 1999. South Carolina increased from 48 to 55 percent and New Hampshire from 46 to 51 percent yearlings. In fairness to South Carolina, it was ahead of the curve in 1999 and is still doing well today, especially considering that more than half of the state has a four-and-a-half-month season with no buck limit. Also, New Hampshire has already established a procedure to reduce their yearling harvest rate. In 2005 the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department published their 2006-2015 Big Game Management Plan and Objective 2-1 of that plan states, “Manage regional deer populations to ensure that yearling males don’t exceed 50 percent of the adult male population.” From 2004 to 2006 the percentage of yearling bucks had exceeded 50 percent of the buck harvest in one of the state’s wildlife management units (WMU). Therefore, the Department organized an ad-hoc deer advisory committee to determine the preferred strategies for reducing the yearling harvest rate in that WMU, and they implemented the chosen strategy in 2007. This component of their deer management plan is arguably one of the most progressive QDM procedures implemented by any state agency, and since its implementation the percentage of yearlings in the buck harvest has dropped to 24 percent in that WMU and 45 percent statewide. Overall, Texas leads the nation in buck harvest by harvesting nearly 250,000 bucks and fortunately only 28 percent of them are yearlings. Michigan is second with nearly 220,000 bucks, but unfortunately 63 percent of them are yearlings. Alabama and Wisconsin are next with approximately 183,000 bucks. Only 51 percent of bucks harvested in Wisconsin are yearlings, and age-class data wasn’t provided by Alabama. Given Alabama’s unlimited buck harvest regulations and season length in 2005, it is likely the percentage of yearlings was quite high. However, in 2007 the state took action and restricted the buck bag limit to three per year (one of which must have at least four points on one antler) in an effort to reduce their yearling harvest rate. Older Bucks in the Harvest With respect to 2½-year-old bucks, Maryland doubled their percentage in the harvest from 23 percent in 1999 to 46 percent in 2005. Nebraska increased from 29 to 56 percent and Indiana increased from 25 to 35 percent. Pennsylvania only separates their buck harvest into yearlings and 2½ years and older, and the Keystone state improved from 20 to 48 percent bucks that were at least 2½ years old. In actual numbers, these percentages represent an increase from nearly 39,000 to 58,000 bucks. With respect to bucks 3½ years old and older, Mississippi leads the nation with 60 percent of their buck harvest reaching this age category. This percentage has tripled in Mississippi since 1999. Texas is second with 49 percent, and Arkansas is third with 38 percent. Other notables include Rhode Island with 37 percent, North Carolina with 28 percent, and Wisconsin jumped to 20 percent (double their percentage in 1999). "As the number of yearling bucks in the harvest has declined in recent years, hunters across the country have reported seeing and harvesting more bucks in older age classes." www.qdma.com/media/WhitetailReport09.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Aug 15, 2009 10:42:43 GMT -5
Why doesn't anybody ever mention that results of the OBR, positive or negative, are virtually impossible to prove? Someone shoots a big buck... Was it on a large tightly controlled tract? A heavily hunted small property? A suburb? All these things have a lot bigger effect on how likely a deer is to survive that any harvest rules or restrictions. None of these charts and graphs even take poaching into account, and CO's tell me they are convinced that poachers take a large percentage of the biggest bucks. There is no way to prove if a deer reached a certain size due to the OBR. Years ago, if you shot a big buck, it's luck, and if some dude shoots a big buck these days, everybody says, "See! the OBR is working!" It's just a matter of time before we have point restrictions and spread requirements. People swallow every BS article and video that comes out promising magical deer management solutions, never realizing it's all baloney aimed at selling special seeds and every other stupid hunting product out there. If I ever do shoot a really big deer, I hope I'm going to be smart enough to realize it was at least 50% luck, and not get the big head about it.
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Aug 15, 2009 11:45:26 GMT -5
Yeah deerman and you want someone to legislate you two bucks...You could always buy an Illinois tag if you want two bucks..That's what alot of us do.I shoot three bucks every year...Two in Illinois and one in Indiana...Maybe if we structured our firearms season like Illinois we could sustain decent deer in the State instead of the slaughter fest in November during peak rut.. I do not believe that I want two bucks legislated for me as the fact is they were already legislated for all hunters prior to the OBR. Secondly I do not believe that 52,000 up to 55,000 total buck harvest in the state of Indiana is any where conceivably concluded as a "SLAUGHTER FEST" as a matter of a fact it is one of the lowest per hunter/per herd size buck harvests in the country . Another little fact is the state includes the bucks taken on the many special hunts and urban zones in our total take annually .That in its self speaks woefully poor of the hunters buck taking skills here in our state. I say if you want to spend $1000,00 for deer licenses in IL. have at it I will just take my second buck here in regular season in just a few years . Finances and a huge buck and doe herd will soon enough dictate that Indiana start at least a two buck a season period because we as a state are idling our most successful hunters here early instead of giving them an incentive to stay at it and take more does while pursuing bucks.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 15, 2009 12:07:40 GMT -5
Yeah deerman and you want someone to legislate you two bucks...You could always buy an Illinois tag if you want two bucks..That's what alot of us do.I shoot three bucks every year...Two in Illinois and one in Indiana...Maybe if we structured our firearms season like Illinois we could sustain decent deer in the State instead of the slaughter fest in November during peak rut.. I do not believe that I want two bucks legislated for me as the fact is they were already legislated for all hunters prior to the OBR. One more time - The OBR is a TRIAL. No sense in "debating" it until at least the end of the 2010 seasons.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Aug 15, 2009 13:11:32 GMT -5
I don't think it will make the full trial period before the legislation steps in and adds the archery buck back. What is a better way to increase shrinking DNR revenues and address herd reduction then add the archery buck back?
You guys sitting back and applauding your selfs for the getting the OBR better come up with a better plan than the one being proposed to the legislation now of increasing the does harvest X2 each year in each of the highest deer/car accident counties. h.h.
|
|