Question about OBR when it passed years back?

I'm not sure where he got the "25%" figure from as I don't know of any survey that was ever taken on it before it was implemented. I'm sure that he got that number the same place he gets a lot of numbers.



As I understand it...

The original OBR was a shoot from the hip answer to two groups that petitioned the DNR. These two groups had representatives at every NRC and DNR meeting that they could. Back then the administrative rules process was basically a couple meetings in which these groups and a few of their members showed up and usually got their way. The DNR and NRC perception was these groups represented all Indiana deer hunters.The NRC did not have in place any method to collect actual hunter input except letters or personal appearance at the meetings.. The very best thing that the DNR and NRC did was to put in place an online method of collecting hunter input.

One group was all for the OBR. The second group conducted a survey of their members and received very few responses. I've been told it was less than 30 out of over 300 members. Of that 30 there was a very slight preference for the OBR.

Again as I was told, the representative of the second group could not make the meeting so he told the representative of the first group to say the second group was for the OBR, even though there was such a small majority of a very small sampling of the actual members AND the second group's board did not OK that.

Jim Mitchell (DNR F AND W Deer Biologist) OKed the OBR as he said it would not make any difference in the herd as it was a "social issue" and said that "the bowhunters shot themselves in the foot on the OBR"..Of course for the Pro-OBR guy this was all about growing trophy bucks, so it really was biological.

More Jim Mitchell..

Deer biologist Jim Mitchell said that the one-buck rule is just mandating what was already starting to happen over the last 10 years. While the state doesn't look at the size of antlers, it does keep track of age structure. The most recent trend shows that hunters are passing on the smaller bucks more so than in previous years.

"They want a bigger buck," Mitchell said. "The rule is getting the same effect. We have not seen major changes other than the distribution of when the bucks are killed. As the deer hunter gets more experience, he becomes more selective. What we find is that a smaller percentage of the antlered bucks are 1 1/2 years old. A larger percentage is older than 1 1/2."

So a very slight majority of 30 members of the second group allowed the OBR trial to come into effect.

The second group lost quite q few members when the word got out that they supported the OBR.. When the OBR was to be discussed again 5 years later the same group conducted another survey and did not receive enough responses to make it a valid survey either way so they took a "no position". If that group had taken that position the first survey then we would not have the OBR at all.

Basically the decisions used to be more "good old boy, you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours network" than they are now.. by a long shot.. if you can believe that.

The world has changed a lot since the OBR passed....information and feedback from and to the masses is instantly available. Would the OBR pass in today's world? Would xbows?

Yes to both...IMO

Both are now set in stone. Right or wrong 70 % of the hunters now surveyed think the OBR has grown bigger bucks, if that question had been asked prior to adopting it I don't think there would have been a majority. This was in 2001.

7 or 8 years ago the DNR did survey and asked about crossbows in archery season. More were for it than against it. That was the catalyst.

The OBR passed way before there was any "instant available information or feedback." The first time that an overwhelming bulk of deer hunters knew about it was when the next year's regulation book came out.

The crossbows were OKed when information , feedback and input was what it is today.

2012..same as the crossbows..

You are correct in there was a lot of input But if there had never been any 10 year (extended from 5 years) trial then I personally doubt that there would have been a majority wanting to give up the second buck. Like I said, right or wrong some hunters believe that the OBR is Responsible for big bucks.. I think it has more to do with the aging more experienced deer hunter that takes no pleasure in killing a yearling buck. Then we have the "hunting videos" pushing big buck$... Today's young hunters are being told to wait on Mr Big..

My opinion...


.

At this point in time there no way to prove the OBR is not responsible for larger or Bigger bucks!!!

it's all in what you believe or wanna believe..

Over the last several years, just about every hunting magazine, TV show, and deer hunting blog (with a never ending parade of "experts") seemed to focus on three things....

1. Killing does....

2. Passing young bucks while killing does......

3. Killing more does after you had filled your tag with one of the trophy bucks from the "hit list" you had compiled with the help of running cameras 24/7/365 (while in many cases) placed over your food plots or mineral sites.......

Throw in the fact that many states were/are pushing high doe harvests (with seemingly unlimited doe tags) and it didn't take long for a lot of hunters to adopt the attitude that does were an unlimited commodity good only for filling their freezer....

Now (just a few short years later) the "experts" from the organizations, magazines, TV shows and blogs have replaced the call to "Kill more does" with variations on titles such as "How do we rebuild our herds?".....

OBR - One Buck Rule