|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Nov 23, 2014 16:23:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by chubwub on Nov 23, 2014 16:47:06 GMT -5
Yay for lifetime licences!!!! I support this hehe. Can someone explain to me why OBR is bad though? Thought it was a positive change but wouldn't mind hearing what people don't like about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Nov 23, 2014 17:04:00 GMT -5
Yay for lifetime licences!!!! I support this hehe. Can someone explain to me why OBR is bad though? Thought it was a positive change but wouldn't mind hearing what people don't like about it. At what point was the loss of the ability to take a second buck if a hunter so wished a good thing when in fact all the hunters had to do was hold out for big bucks if they wanted or take what they wanted .FYI only about 4000 to 6000 hunters took two bucks anyways so it did not save much to begin with and its never positive to take away any sort of established buck hunting . The bucks are damaging car wrecking animals just as much or more than any doe !1 Just saying .All it was is a rule developed to placate would be trophy hunters who cried like little girls when someone else shoots any buck not just a second on and that is the truth .But at this point hunters are tired of the argument about it and frankly most are too young to know the difference now and were too young when the rule was adopted and think thats rule is why they are killing bigger bucks now .Truth is hunters are aging and with age and time in the woods it becomes easier to take older / bigger antlered bucks .That is the one truth of it all . Lets be real most young hunters and kids have issues killing any buck and this law played right into thier court and was an easy sell as to why we have big buck now .FYI we had just as many big bucks then too lol. |
|
|
|
Post by hunthard4 on Nov 23, 2014 17:21:12 GMT -5
I'm young (just turned 21). I just don't see what the big deal is on shooting just one buck and a couple does. I have never sat on stand after killing my buck thinking "man I'd sure like to be able to kill another buck." While time and age may better your odds, I would also think that more guys passing younger ones in hopes of a bigger one would also better the odds of seeing more bucks. I guess I just don't see the big deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Nov 23, 2014 17:29:27 GMT -5
Yay for lifetime licences!!!! I support this hehe. Can someone explain to me why OBR is bad though? Thought it was a positive change but wouldn't mind hearing what people don't like about it. It is a positive change. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 23, 2014 17:30:51 GMT -5
The thing was that you could kill one with a bow and one with a firearm (it used to be more than two, but we'll stick with the long-running two buck time frame.) Some bowhunters would take a "marginal" buck with a bow (since it's more challenging), then hold out for a big one with a firearm. I believe that the DNR has stated that perhaps only 6000 hunters annually "double-dipped" on bucks.
I agree with shouldernuke that bigger bucks being killed now has more to do with people holding out for "trophy" bucks due to television shows rather than the one-buck rule. I, myself, don't think that the OBR has had much influence on the size of bucks being killed today.
|
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Nov 23, 2014 17:31:35 GMT -5
Yay for lifetime licences!!!! I support this hehe. Can someone explain to me why OBR is bad though? Thought it was a positive change but wouldn't mind hearing what people don't like about it. It (OBR) is a positive change. You can kill anywhere from 4-8 doe for meat depending on the county, can't eat antlers. One buck is plenty and it teaches patience to hunters...hold out for the ONE you want. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 23, 2014 17:46:05 GMT -5
I used to be strongly against the one-buck rule, but with the legalization of crossbows, I'm sure that it's in our best interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by onebentarrow on Nov 23, 2014 18:46:50 GMT -5
It (OBR) is a positive change. You can kill anywhere from 4-8 doe for meat depending on the county, can't eat antlers. One buck is plenty and it teaches patience to hunters...hold out for the ONE you want. That is easy for u to say I have not had a shot at a buck archery or gun this year I only saw 2 both during archery. If u live where u have numbers to choose from good for u. I would rather kill two bucks for meat (remember u cannot eat the horns and more meat per kill) and leave does for seed. U kill a doe it takes 3 deer from the herd next year.. I have patience as I have to wate and wate just to get a shot. Please don't try to force YOUR management practices on me when u do not have to hunt the 15 acres I do Sincerely onebentarrow |
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Nov 23, 2014 18:52:56 GMT -5
That is easy for u to say I have not had a shot at a buck archery or gun this year I only saw 2 both during archery. If u live where u have numbers to choose from good for u. I would rather kill two bucks for meat (remember u cannot eat the horns and more meat per kill) and leave does for seed. U kill a doe it takes 3 deer from the herd next year.. I have patience as I have to wate and wate just to get a shot. Please don't try to force YOUR management practices on me when u do not have to hunt the 15 acres I do Sincerely onebentarrow Too late the State of Indiana already did force these management practices on all of us...as you put it. I haven't shot a deer all year, haven't saw but one mature buck..still hunting, still remain hopeful, I'll be hunting until the very last day, or until I fill my tag...still holding out for that ONE buck. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 23, 2014 19:16:12 GMT -5
If we could still take two bucks, I would have already shot a 130-class buck with my bow and be holding out for a whopper with my muzzleloader. LOL! But, be as it may, I chose to pass on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecommissioner on Nov 23, 2014 19:44:13 GMT -5
Maybe it is coincidence, but since the OBR was established, I am seeing more trophy bucks than before. I don't think my skill as a deer hunter increased appreciably in that time frame.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunthard4 on Nov 23, 2014 19:49:40 GMT -5
Thecommissioner I agree. This is the first year I have noticed though. My dad and I have passed young bucks for years even in late seasons. The neighbors can't kill every young buck every year and we are starting to see results.
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 24, 2014 16:45:36 GMT -5
My dad and I have passed young bucks for years even in late seasons. The neighbors can't kill every young buck every year and we are starting to see results. You have to understand that the one-buck rule and being selective about what buck you kill don't necessarily go hand in hand. You can still hold out for a good one under a two-buck system. There weren't enough bowhunters killing two bucks to have made much difference. I attribute sightings of bigger bucks today more to many wanting to emulate famous hunters and hold out for a good one than to the one-buck rule. The rule may have contributed some, but certainly isn't the major reason in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by shouldernuke on Nov 24, 2014 16:52:26 GMT -5
My dad and I have passed young bucks for years even in late seasons. The neighbors can't kill every young buck every year and we are starting to see results. You have to understand that the one-buck rule and being selective about what buck you kill don't necessarily go hand in hand. You can still hold out for a good one under a two-buck system. There weren't enough bowhunters killing two bucks to have made much difference. I attribute sightings of bigger bucks today more to many wanting to emulate famous hunters and hold out for a good one than to the one-buck rule. The rule may have contributed some, but certainly isn't the major reason in my opinion. Exactly now its all about peer pressure and TV hunters and those who think they understand QDM. If we went back to two buck rule it would not applicably change the average age of bucks living in this state or being killed . After all the average age as of last check of bucks taken went up a whopping month and a few days .And yes that is in the DNR public records for anyone who wants too take a peek at em .Also FYI buck harvest is still running at about the same level as all those years we had a two buck rule and exceed the two years we were abole to take more than 2 bucks a season. And those are facts so to claim the OBR is saveing bucks by the numbers is inaccurate at best and not arguable . One other fact that will slowly appear in areas of massive der reduction will be a lack of older mature bucks .So hunters in a few years or even now be seeing less big bucks .Itts about the numbers less deer means less Mature deer that means less Big racked bucks and lots less deer will mean lots less big bucks its all in the pesky numbers game that many will want to over look or not mention in just a few years .IMO |
|
|
|
Post by hunthard4 on Nov 24, 2014 18:35:03 GMT -5
Well it was said that only 6000 hunters doubled up so in return there are 6000 extra bucks roaming every year after OBR came into effect. So over 10 years 60000 more bucks were roaming. Again I'm not on any side but I don't have a problem with it. I'm seeing more big deer.
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Nov 24, 2014 18:45:44 GMT -5
Not really but it is pointless to debate effectiveness, impacts or pure stats involving obr. Its been here and likely to stick around for a long time to come, like it or not!
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 24, 2014 19:22:24 GMT -5
Well it was said that only 6000 hunters doubled up so in return there are 6000 extra bucks roaming every year after OBR came into effect. So over 10 years 60000 more bucks were roaming. That would be the case except that the buck harvest actually INCREASED after the one buck rule was instituted in 2002: www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-2013deerseasonsummary.pdf#12All but the last two years show more bucks being killed per year than pre-OBR. The decrease in the buck harvest indicates a declining herd. What the OBR did was spread the buck harvest over more hunters, not save bucks. So, instead of someone getting two bucks, one of the bucks they would have gotten went to another hunter who normally didn't get one. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Nov 24, 2014 19:25:30 GMT -5
Again, I'm not denying that people are seeing more big bucks than they did in the past. I just don't attribute it to the OBR.
|
|
|
|
Post by ms660 on Nov 24, 2014 19:50:50 GMT -5
Well it was said that only 6000 hunters doubled up so in return there are 6000 extra bucks roaming every year after OBR came into effect. So over 10 years 60000 more bucks were roaming. That would be the case except that the buck harvest actually INCREASED after the one buck rule was instituted in 2002: www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-2013deerseasonsummary.pdf#12All but the last two years show more bucks being killed per year than pre-OBR. The decrease in the buck harvest indicates a declining herd. What the OBR did was spread the buck harvest over more hunters, not save bucks. So, instead of someone getting two bucks, one of the bucks they would have gotten went to another hunter who normally didn't get one. You hit the nail on the head. People are claiming more and bigger bucks because of the OBR and in reality it has had nothing to do with it. The main reason in my area I'm seeing more mature bucks is because of lack of hunting opportunity. Land being leased to a few that in the past had 10 times the pressure it now is getting. 20 years ago a no trespassing sign was unheard of, now days every roadside tree has one plastered to it. |
|
