|
Post by dec on Dec 6, 2006 7:35:39 GMT -5
The goose hunting was HOTTER then this debate! Two bird limit and worked probably 200 more. Life is so good. ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Dec 6, 2006 7:36:15 GMT -5
Sounds like fun!
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 6, 2006 12:12:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 6, 2006 12:19:50 GMT -5
I don't think that QDM is in question. But there is a lot more to QDM than Antler Restrictions.
The question posed was: Which Biologists specifically support an OBR (with data). We know which ones oppose it (with data), but who supports it specifically.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 6, 2006 12:24:06 GMT -5
The OBR is not QDM, it is an attempt at forced trophy management. Both Dr. Kroll and Mr. Weisuhn promote voluntary QDM not mandatory trophy management.
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 6, 2006 12:26:59 GMT -5
Read his articles QDM involves managing deer herds to produce quality deer, hence the word Quality Deer Management( ie, QDM). OBR is managing a deer herd for the quality of the overall herd. Let's not try and split hairs here to re-direct, read his articles. He does his study based on States individual deer herds and I think you'll see what he emphasizes is QDM, which can be any number of sollutions based specifically on a given deer herd. The 2 buck rule is a far cry from QDM, our regulations in the past have advocated two weeks of a slaughter fest during gun season, and allowing a hunter to jepordize the quality of our deer just to sell more tags regardless of the impact..OBR is a step in the right direction..
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 6, 2006 12:36:41 GMT -5
Nowhere on the QDMA website does the words One Buck Rule appear.
Nowhere on the QDMA website does the words "antler restrictions"appear.
No where on the QDMA website does the words statewide QDM appear.
The gist of QDM is to pass ALL yearling bucks, except for a first time youngster, and some 2 1/2 year olds.Plus reduce the number of does in a given area.
It is a great program for private grounds on a voluntary basis and that is where it belongs.
Yearling bucks are NOT protected by the OBR, are they?
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Dec 6, 2006 12:47:21 GMT -5
Why does everyone always confuse antler restictions and the OBR with QDM?
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 6, 2006 12:49:37 GMT -5
No yearling are not protected, but i think the thought is that more guys/archers will pass yearling being they can only shoot one buck. I understand what you're saying Woody. Obr is not the final sollution IMO, but I feel at least the State is making an effort to improve the quality of deer, and to me thats a step in the right direction. Personally I think we need more, like a shorter gun season and a season out of the rut. Illinois has the firearms season like we need, that would help a bunch. I do agree that us archey guys are making the only sacrafice here and gun hunter need to give up something also...
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Dec 6, 2006 13:07:47 GMT -5
How much difference would it really make? Fifty percent of the harvest occurs in the first three days then the next weekend accounts for twenty percent of the harvest. It looks to me like twenty percent of the bucks are havested during the rest of the time. I would assume most of those are harvested by serious trophy hunters not the ones that are meat or weekend hunters. Also more people would be less selective. Finally it seems like all the OBR people really want to limit others opportunities in a time when we need more opportunity to add new hunters.
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Dec 6, 2006 13:12:20 GMT -5
The talk among Hoosier deer hunters late in the summer revolves around new regulations which will install a season limit of one antlered deer.
Two antlered deer--one with bow and one with gun--have been allowed for several years.
The burning questions: "What will this new setup do to the harvest of antlered deer? What will it do to the total deer bag? Will it impact on the deer herd one way or another?
A segment of the deer-hunting community (probably about half) has lobbied the DFW for the last few years to change the annual limit on antlered deer from two to one--the idea being that this would bring about more and larger trophy bucks.
Dr. James "Jim" Mitchell, deer biologist for the Division of Fish and Wildlife, puts those questions into perspective in three paragraphs of a statement issued by the DFW:
"The 'one buck' rule change was not initiated by DNR officials. The change has been proposed by deer hunters and DNR wildlife managers have responded to that request . . .
"I believe that this rule will not appreciably change the antlered age structure, but also will not appreciably reduce hunting opportunity (very few hunters currently take two antlered deer.
"The primary effect of the one buck rule will not be to change the antlered age structure of the antlered harvest, but rather to spread the antlered harvest across more hunters. Where the previous bag limit system resulted in some hunters taking two antlered bucks and others taking none, the one buck system will have fewer hunters taking no antlered bucks and more taking one antlered buck."
Frankly, I do not know a hunter who took two antlered deer in any recent year, nor do I feel any sufferance from the slight. From the catbird seat I have occupied for some 50 years of outdoors columning, it seems to me that that the aforementioned Mitchell hit the nail squarely on its head a few years back when he told me " . . . any deer you bag is a trophy."
With the above assemblage of fact, fiction and fuzzy thinking at hand, we can but conclude that the five-year trial-and-error one-buck-per-year plan (and the proponents thereof) have their work cut out for them if they are to produce more and heftier racks on Hoosierland's corn-fed deer.
................Now if you care to read the paragraph starting with "THE ONE BUCK RULE" and then read the two following paragraphs I think you'll see that the DNR DID NOT PROPOSE THIS RULING AND ALL THOSE THAT WERE FOR THE SAID RULING WHERE LOOKING TO KILL A BUCK FOR THEMSELVES...BOO HOO!!!!!!!! SO WHAT I READ IS THE GUYS WHO AREN'T ABLE TO TAKE A BUCK ON THEIR OWN BEHALF NEED THE STATES HELP IN DOING SO........BOO HOO!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 6, 2006 13:16:41 GMT -5
No yearling are not protected, but i think the thought is that more guys/archers will pass yearling being they can only shoot one buck. I understand what you're saying Woody. Obr is not the final sollution IMO, but I feel at least the State is making an effort to improve the quality of deer, and to me thats a step in the right direction. Personally I think we need more, like a shorter gun season and a season out of the rut. Illinois has the firearms season like we need, that would help a bunch. I do agree that us archey guys are making the only sacrafice here and gun hunter need to give up something also... One more time.. There were ONLY 6,000 double dippers before the OBR. We found out the first year that the archers were passing them up an d the gun hunters were shooting them. It has NOT changed since then. I've got the numbers on my home PC. The state is not doing this for the benefit of the herd. It is doing it because more hunters are asking for it than are not. It is a popular social issue ONLY. Illinois gun season came in a day earlier than ours did this year. Are you aware that an Illinois deer hunter can kill two bucks with a gun? One with a muzzle loader and one with slug gun. residents can kill two bucks with a bow. Funny that you say each state should makes it's own management decisions and then you say we should be like Illinois???
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Dec 6, 2006 13:29:46 GMT -5
I do agree that us archey guys are making the only sacrafice here and gun hunter need to give up something also... Why do any of us need to make sacrifices when our deer herd has expanded so much to allow a hunter the option to harvest 300+ does in a single season? This issue is [glow=red,4,300]strictly[/glow] about bigger antlers. No more, no less.
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Dec 6, 2006 13:41:52 GMT -5
It is a popular social issue ONLY......
Oh Woody how right you are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Dec 6, 2006 14:27:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Dec 6, 2006 14:27:45 GMT -5
Question for everyone apposed to the OBR ...... what would you suggest?
Do you think the state should implement some sort of real QDM?
Imagine every hunter having to learn to accurately field judge the age of a deer and only kill animals 3.5 or older.
Imagine every hunter being forced to kill at least 1 doe a year (and kill their doe before they can even think about shooting a buck).
Would you all be on board with a system like that?
Would you support a real QDM system?
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Dec 6, 2006 14:38:10 GMT -5
Question for everyone apposed to the OBR ...... what would you suggest? Do you think the state should implement some sort of real QDM? Imagine every hunter having to learn to accurately field judge the age of a deer and only kill animals 3.5 or older. Imagine every hunter being forced to kill at least 1 doe a year (and kill their doe before they can even think about shooting a buck). Would you all be on board with a system like that? Would you support a real QDM system? How about just letting us "No OBR" guys make our own choices on the bucks we choose to take since we are just a small majority, many of which don't have "exclusive" private property, or it's use for "true QDM". No, we do not need more restrictions on taking bucks.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Dec 6, 2006 14:40:24 GMT -5
Ok. So there is one vote against doing what is best for the quality and health of Indiana's deer herd. Anymore?
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 6, 2006 14:44:25 GMT -5
Question for everyone apposed to the OBR ...... what would you suggest? Not having hunted Indiana before, I am neither in support of, nor opposed to the OBR. But to answer your question(s). No. The state should not be implementing anything that has to do with "Quality" (a subjective term at best) Their job is to maintain only Herd Health and deal with Depredation issues. That would be silly. Even if possible, the population would explode and overall herd health would suffer. Yes. There IS good biological data showing that it is almost MORE important to kill does than bucks. It's all about the ratios. Define "real". But, in general, as imposed by Government, No.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Dec 6, 2006 14:45:41 GMT -5
I would like to see an earn a second buck program. Where you would have to kill four does in a four or more doe county then you could get another buck in that county. I killed my buck opening day and I am still out there managing the herd on my property. How many people just kill one buck and let the rest of us do all the real managment work. We need to be rewarded somehow.
|
|