|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 5, 2006 7:23:12 GMT -5
Without trying to be a smart a$$, what conclusive proof do you have that the OBR has or has not had any effect? To come on here and make a statement that it has not had an effect (you aren't the only one) is as reckless as those who say it has had an effect. NOBODY CAN SAY IF IT HAS OR HASN'T HAD AN EFFECT. The trial period is not over and data going either way cannot be determined until all of the data is in. I cannot speak for what Kyle Hupfer has planned but will be disappointed if the trial period is not carried out to the 5 year plan, the data is analyzed and then an informed decision made. If a decision is made on the permanancy of the OBR prior to that, I would think that I would fight that decision on principle alone. Of course, I carry absolutely no weight but would gladly add my voice to the masses. Here is an article in the Indiana Game and Fish magazine where they are interviewing a state Biologist named Lange. Game & Fish: As biologists expected, the one-buck rule seems to be having minimal impact during its first three years. What would need to happen in the last two years of the program to make it permanent? And is five years really long enough to see if it may be working? Lange: We'd need to see that the age of the antlered bucks is actually increasing. That's the measured goal. But deer hunters are evenly split on this issue. We're running an experiment to see what happens. But so far, we've not seen any change. You normally see some ups and downs each year, and I think five years is enough. That's really the minimum amount of time. Some folks wanted us to look at it for only a few years. When five years is up, we'll bring the figures to the public and see what the public thinks. I agree it would be nice to have all five years of data but we also need to have the facts from the state biologist. Here is an article in the Indiana Game and Fish magazine where they are interviewing a state Biologist named Lange. Not seen any changes is a bit misleading. Look at the number of HRBP entries. The increase shown over the time of the OBR has to account from something. Whether you think they're because of hunters being more selective or whatever reason, they can't say changes aren't being seen. Additionally, I can think of 5 local check in stations in my area in which there are never any DNR personnel around for check in. How can they possibly know the age of the deer being checked in when they probably don't have any coverage at 90% of the check-in stations? You might say that a small percentage is plenty of proof in gauging the age of deer for the state as a whole. But then, you'd be having to make the same argument for the poll they sent out. Now, getting back to the HRBP entries. Something has to be causing the increase. Is it more and better food available? Genetics? One possibility is that the deer that are coming in could be older than what they've seen in the past. For someone to point blank deny that that is happening would be reckless at best. I don't think anyone can say with any certainty at this point what is at the heart of the increase. And, whether anyone likes it or not, the majority support OBR. Additionally, I would (without scientific data to back me up; just a lot of conversation with many hunters) say that the majority of deer hunters would like to kill a very large buck. Usually, majority rules in a lot of cases like these because their voices are heard more. Additionally, no one can show me any data where the taking of only one buck has hurt the deer population. There is no data available today that shows me where it has helped the deer population (other than more, bigger bucks being taken now than before) either. Will it come down to the HRBP entries to determine the course of OBR or not? I'm not sure but a blanket statement at this point from anyone on the effect or lack of effect of OBR is not a statement I'd be willing to make. Some biologist might make that statement, but there are a lot of hunters who obviously disagree with him. I guess the question comes down to who do you believe? And, before you make up your mind, realize that both groups have an agenda.
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 5, 2006 7:33:40 GMT -5
It doesn't really matter all that much if the polls are skewed or not, people will believe any ridiculous thing regardless of fact, and this poll does bear that out. The truth is the average hunter does well to have a chance to get one buck let alone a second one so they had nothing to lose by believing the fairy tales. With nothing to lose either way there is no point wasting time or energy thinking about it. Isn't what you believe based on feeling rather than fact? Or, is it a case where the majority are just flat wrong and the minority have it right? I'm not so sure about what you say based on my past hunting experiences. Every year that I hunted in a state where it was legal to take 2 bucks, I never had a problem scoring on two bucks. In fact, last year (in a very minimal time to hunt) I could easily have taken two very nice bucks. My experience is different than yours apparently. Does that make my experience wrong or make my experience ridiculous? I'm sorry but your statement saying people will buy any ridiculous thing is just flat wrong in my opinion. You may disagree with the stance that the majority have taken but to write it off as ridiculous is haphazard. It's minimalizing the feelings of people who have the same vested interest as you and who may be every bit the outdoorsman that those against the OBR are.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 5, 2006 7:46:33 GMT -5
The majority liked the one buck rule 63% and the majority wanted to go back to two bucks 54%. That's why I said before that the questions were bad questions. I don't know how you can have the majority on both sides of an issue. Sounds like the state will do what they want and have the numbers to show the majority thought it was a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Oct 5, 2006 7:55:26 GMT -5
That was Glenn Lange who was demoted when Kyle took over and started chopping heads.
Why the increase in numbers in the Hoosier Record Book?
Because people have went nuts over trying to be like Michael Waddel, Myles Keller, Stan Potts , etc, etc, etc. re-read teh portion of the survey summary where the writer is talking about this very same subject. If that is not telling, I do not know what is.
Record book entries tells us one thing - more people wanted to see their name in a book. The "sport" of deer hunting has changed drastically and not for the better.
Look at the increase and see that the biggest yearly jump was in 2002. How can that be if the qualifiers weren't already in the herd? They didn't grow those 140+ antlers in one year. That has to tell us that the two buck rule was working just fine in producing record book bucks. All a deer hunter had to do was hold out for them.
That might entail eating a buck tag more years than naught, but that is why it is called trophy hunting.
Any biologist worth his salt can tell you that we have more bucks now than ever before and how did that happen? Button buck recruitment into adulthood.
The more bucks we have the better chance more will live to be a trophy.
By the way - look for that button buck percentage kill to increase as we kill more "antlerless'.
The bad part about the survey is that the IDNR did not lay out any data facts so that people could make up their minds on it. This issue is pure emotion driven.
If the IDNR wants to to do the proper thing they would do a 5 year two buck trial on top of this OBR to really compare honest data. Then issue the data results to all media outlets so that the deer hunters in this state can see them. This anedocal data of seeing a big buck or your neighbor killed a big buck or the Hoosier Record Book entries went up is misleading the populace.
Someone said that 97%of the deer hunters only killed one buck a year so what did they have to lose by saying yes to the OBR?? Yes, the survey was skewed big time.
If only 3% were killing two bucks where can a big increase come from?
The pro-OBR people are using fuzzy math and pure emotion to get this passed.
We also really need to watch that % increase in leased ground and outfitters coming in. The number one problem in deer hunting is finding a place to hunt. It wont get any better.
A wise old man once told me -" Be very careful what you ask for as you might just get it".
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Oct 5, 2006 8:05:49 GMT -5
I got this in an email directly from the IDNR concerning this thread......" There are several folks who are correctly pointing out that we will only have 3 years of data at the start of the rule process. The piece I thought would be worth passing along and you can pass along as well if you like is that we are starting the process at this point exactly to avoid having to do this by emergency rule next year. As you know hunting guide will be out around state fair. If a decision is to be made through the rule making process, we have to start now to have it done by the hunting guide and next hunting season. The last thing we want to do was have to do OBR by emergency rule. Only option other than to start now and use three years would be to extend by one year and go through the process next year to have 4 years of data. I did not get the sense anyone wanted that either." That sounds like it is straight from the horse's mouth and we will be stuck with the OBR. Too bad. Managing deer by a majority vote of deer hunters is wrong. I would say the same thing if the survey came out in favor of keeping the two buck rule. People, including hunters, tend to vote what they perceive as best for them and not look at the big picture. The very best person to manage our deer is the person we hired to do the job. It shouldn't be done by a vote or survey. Everyone needs to be forewarned that this is not the end of trophy growing in this state. They will be back for more and more.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Oct 5, 2006 8:20:16 GMT -5
Speaking of Hoosier Record Book entries a couple of other things come to mind that could possibly influence those numbers.
Are the keepers of the books doing a better job of measuring and recording deer than before?
Are there more official measurers spread throughout the state than before?
In statistics you do not just look at final numbers you also have to be sure that the data gathered is gathered the same way.
If not, it is GIGO. Garbage In and Garbage Out.
I have seen the numbers of entries for 2002 to 2004. Where are the entry numbers for 2005? Surely they have a good count by now.
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Oct 5, 2006 8:22:24 GMT -5
I started deer hunting in 1964..42 plus years ago,since that time I've taken only 3 does and that is with a bow or gun,but I have also taken a buck EVERY YEAR and these were not fork horns or spikes but descent sized bucks.I think to do this first you've got to put in your time,you've got to scout,be there when the deer are moving then you must be able to make the shot.Don't pay any attention to t.v. sport shows showing how to take a buck,because these guys are doing these shows to make a BUCK..it's something that you've got to learn and do for yourself.So go out scout a lot,put your stands in good areas and be able to make the shot when it counts,if it's the meat only that your after then shoot the first doe that comes within range and then go home and leave the buck hunting to guys that don't mind setting there day after day waiting for that one shot at a deer that everybody wishes they'd killed!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Oct 5, 2006 8:23:19 GMT -5
"Everyone needs to be forewarned that this is not the end of trophy growing in this state. They will be back for more and more".Just think of the day when all the out-of-state hunters start leasing alot of good property we hunt.What good does the OBR do then?Just my opinion,but something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Oct 5, 2006 8:40:13 GMT -5
I started deer hunting in 1964..42 plus years ago,since that time I've taken only 3 does and that is with a bow or gun,but I have also taken a buck EVERY YEAR and these were not fork horns or spikes but descent sized bucks.I think to do this first you've got to put in your time,you've got to scout,be there when the deer are moving then you must be able to make the shot.Don't pay any attention to t.v. sport shows showing how to take a buck,because these guys are doing these shows to make a BUCK..it's something that you've got to learn and do for yourself.So go out scout a lot,put your stands in good areas and be able to make the shot when it counts,if it's the meat only that your after then shoot the first doe that comes within range and then go home and leave the buck hunting to guys that don't mind setting there day after day waiting for that one shot at a deer that everybody wishes they'd killed!!!!!!!!!!! LCB, All I can say is - DITTO. Only I haven't deer hunted quite that long. This is my 24th season. You have to understand that we are in the age of instant gratification. We want it NOW. None of this earning it stuff..Even though earning it is a lot more gratifying. To you and I, the value of the trophy, deer or anything else, is in direct proportion to the amount of effort put in to get it. To some it is the end that counts, not how they got there. I agree with racktracker. Let's have a 5 year two buck trial so we can get good honest evaluation instead of going on hyperbole and wishes. Let the data speak for itself and not the "what's in it for me" bunch.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Oct 5, 2006 9:04:23 GMT -5
I started deer hunting in 1964..42 plus years ago,since that time I've taken only 3 does and that is with a bow or gun,but I have also taken a buck EVERY YEAR and these were not fork horns or spikes but descent sized bucks.I think to do this first you've got to put in your time,you've got to scout,be there when the deer are moving then you must be able to make the shot.Don't pay any attention to t.v. sport shows showing how to take a buck,because these guys are doing these shows to make a BUCK..it's something that you've got to learn and do for yourself.So go out scout a lot,put your stands in good areas and be able to make the shot when it counts,if it's the meat only that your after then shoot the first doe that comes within range and then go home and leave the buck hunting to guys that don't mind setting there day after day waiting for that one shot at a deer that everybody wishes they'd killed!!!!!!!!!!! LCB, All I can say is - DITTO. Only I haven't deer hunted quite that long. This is my 24th season. You have to understand that we are in the age of instant gratification. We want it NOW. None of this earning it stuff..Even though earning it is a lot more gratifying. To you and I, the value of the trophy, deer or anything else, is in direct proportion to the amount of effort put in to get it. To some it is the end that counts, not how they got there. I agree with racktracker. Let's have a 5 year two buck trial so we can get good honest evaluation instead of going on hyperbole and wishes. Let the data speak for itself and not the "what's in it for me" bunch. Ditto, and very well put.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 5, 2006 9:13:09 GMT -5
No Hoyt, you have that wrong, there is only one thing I believe without question and without facts being neccessary and that is not the obr. If you think I am minimalizing the opinions of people that would rather believe than think for themselves you are absolutely right and I'm sorry if that bothers you but I stand with the facts. Public opinion has nothing to do with the truth of whether or not the obr is working.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 5, 2006 9:56:54 GMT -5
No Hoyt, you have that wrong, there is only one thing I believe without question and without facts being neccessary and that is not the obr. If you think I am minimalizing the opinions of people that would rather believe than think for themselves you are absolutely right and I'm sorry if that bothers you but I stand with the facts. Public opinion has nothing to do with the truth of whether or not the obr is working. Thats your OPINION....LOL
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 5, 2006 11:12:57 GMT -5
The 5 Stages of a Hunter Hunters change through the years. Factors used to determine "successful hunting" change as well for each hunter. A hunter's age, role models, and his years of hunting experience affect his ideas of "success." Many hunters may fit into one of the following five groups. In 1975-1980, groups of over 1,000 hunters in Wisconsin were studied, surveyed, and written about by Professors Robert Jackson and Robert Norton, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. The results of their studies form a widely accepted theory of hunter behavior and development. Where are you now? Where would you like to be? SHOOTER STAGE The hunter talks about satisfaction with hunting being closely tied to being able to "get shooting." Often the beginning duck hunter will relate he had an excellent day if he got in a lot of shooting. The beginning deer hunter will talk about the number of shooting opportunities. Missing game means little to hunters in this phase. A beginning hunter wants to pull the trigger and test the capability of his firearm. A hunter in this stage may be a dangerous hunting partner. LIMITING OUT STAGE A hunter still talks about satisfaction gained from shooting. But what seems more important is measuring success through the killing of game and the number of birds or animals shot. Limiting out, or filling a tag, is the absolute measure. Do not let your desire to limit out be stronger than the need for safe behavior at all times. TROPHY STAGE Satisfaction is described in terms of selectivity of game. A duck hunter might take only greenheads. A deer hunter looks for one special deer. A hunter might travel far to find a real trophy animal. Shooting opportunity and skills become less important. METHOD STAGE This hunter has all the special equipment. Hunting has become one of the most important things in his life. Satisfaction comes from the method that enables the hunter to take game. Taking game is important, but second to how it is taken. This hunter will study long and hard how best to pick a blind site, lay out decoys, and call in waterfowl. A deer hunter will go one on one with a white-tailed deer, studying sign, tracking, and the life habits of the deer. Often, the hunter will handicap himself by hunting only with black powder firearms or bow and arrow. Bagging game, or limiting, still is understood as being a necessary part of the hunt during this phase.
SPORTSMAN STAGE As a hunter ages and after many years of hunting, he "mellows out." Satisfaction now can be found in the total hunting experience. Being in the field, enjoying the company of friends and family, and seeing nature outweigh the need for taking game. Not all hunters go through all the stages, or go through them in that particular order. It is also possible for hunters who pursue several species of game to be in different stages with regard to each species. Some hunters feel that role models of good sportsmen, training, or reading books or magazines helped them pass more quickly through some stages. ________________________________________ California Department of Fish and Game. "California Hunter Education Manual". 1995 (revised edition). Sacramento, California. [p.8]
This gives the five stages of a hunter. Since the average hunter in Indiana is middle aged and has, a few seasons under their belt I would think most are in stages 3-5. That can account for all the bucks entered in the record books lately. There are also many deer that never are entered because the hunter does not even know a record book exist. My dad has three deer that would score over 140 only one was taken during the OBR. Until last year, he and I did not even know there was a Hoosier record book. If they went back to more than one buck and next year the hundreds of deer that have been shot and never measured were brought forth would that mean the multiple buck rule grows bigger deer. Everything needs to be looked at in the context to which it applies. I do not think based on all the information I have seen that the OBR has had any effect. So my stance is if the state takes it or leaves that is their choice. I would prefer they base their decision on sound biology though.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Oct 5, 2006 12:24:39 GMT -5
pbr said: You have to understand that we are in the age of instant gratification.
We want it NOW.
None of this earning it stuff..Even though earning it is a lot more gratifying.
To you and I, the value of the trophy, deer or anything else, is in direct proportion to the amount of effort put in to get it. To some it is the end that counts, not how they got there.
Very well put!
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Oct 5, 2006 13:00:44 GMT -5
To some it is the end that counts, not how they got there.
I say how you got there counts,how you got there means one hell of a lot more than just buying a license,finding a gun that'll shoot half way descent and then heading out not knowing a damn thing about deer,their ways of travel,like when does the bucks move etc.,size that the woods you hunt may or may not hold the deer as that depends on many things. I say that a man or woman that puts in the time,effort,sweat, does the work to try and kill the big bucks will have a much more meaningful hunt when it's all done in the end and they'll be more likely to take deer year after year than the guy that goes out one time kills a nice buck and becomes Mr. Know It All....I know more than one person that way and they have yet to take a buck or for that matter another deer since........
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Oct 5, 2006 18:57:03 GMT -5
Here it is folks-crunch the numbers anyway you like-if you`re presenting FACTUAL data-the silly obr has changed NOTHING. Read this slowly-the SAME number of bucks, and/or MORE bucks are being killed now than before the stupid rule. The only thing that has changed is the distribution-so, NOT opinion, but the FACTS are: 1) obr was foisted upon us by a very vocal, very organized MINORITY. 2) The only intent of the obr is to grow trophy bucks, i.e. trophy management. 3) Obr could not possibly have had any effect since the same, or greater number of bucks are being killed each year. 4) It was a very small number of hunters who “double dipped” each year anyway, but many more hunters bought the second buck tag, in hopes of doubling up. Now-my opinions: 1) Frank and Bubba`s huntin` club should NOT have the ear of the DNR-“those” people ARE NOT any more knowledgeable than any of us about deer management, but, again, they are VERY vocal, and organized. Shame on the DNR for cowing to their wishes. 2) IF the silly obr does indeed become law, fasten your seatbelts-next, a vocal, organized minority will be screaming for antler restrictions, shorter “buck” seasons, and possibly even an “earn-a-buck” program. 3) The divisions between proponents and opponents of the obr will widen, IF this temporary, trial measure becomes law. 4) And the most chilling for me-this becoming law will fuel the MISCONCEPTION that Indiana is fast becoming a trophy buck Mecca-which will increase leasing practices, which will create a shortage of available hunting areas-which will make public land become even more crowded and pressured-making public land even LESS of a quality hunting experience than it already is. Be careful what you wish for fella`s-you`re going to pave paradise and put up a parkin` lot. Someone may need to explain to Kyle where that expression comes from.
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 5, 2006 23:12:45 GMT -5
No Hoyt, you have that wrong, there is only one thing I believe without question and without facts being neccessary and that is not the obr. If you think I am minimalizing the opinions of people that would rather believe than think for themselves you are absolutely right and I'm sorry if that bothers you but I stand with the facts. Public opinion has nothing to do with the truth of whether or not the obr is working. What facts are you talking about? Are you privy to data that no one else has seen? If so, please produce it. Otherwise, you are not standing with facts. You are standing with your opinion which is no different than the group that are for the OBR that in your words "can't think for themselves." Assuming you don't have any more data than what anyone else has, your opinion has no more to do with the truth than those who are in favor of the OBR. So, in essence, you also belong to a group that can't think for themselves as well. Either way, I could care less about one buck or two. If I shoot one buck a year or two, I don't lose any of the enjoyment I get from being out in the woods. I don't lose any less time in the woods, I don't feel cheated out of anything and best of all, I don't let politicians or state employees' decisions bother me. Life's too short to let what they want to decide affect me in a negative way. I learned a long time ago that they'll do whatever they want, whenever they want and it doesn't really matter you or I think. Even if it was a small, special interest group who was able to get OBR in place in the first place, you act like that's not the norm. That goes on every day in all different aspects of all different levels of government. I'm not sure why anyone would think the DNR would be any different.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Oct 5, 2006 23:17:05 GMT -5
What was the purpose of the OBR to begin with? And has it achieved the goals it was set out to do? My personal opinion is this: I love to bow hunt, and the OBR is fine with me . If the purpose of the OBR was to have an increasing buck herd, compared to years prior and we are still harvesting the same amount of bucks as before, i see no point in the OBR. And therefore need to make some other type of changes. I honestly think we need to find a way to take fewer bucks than, we currently are, and thats even prior to the OBR! I think the quality and the quantity of the bucks would more than please the average hunter. Their is no sure-fire way to increase button buck recruitment, i think the percentage of button bucks will stay about the same rate they are now, except for years in which antlerless tags are more abundant, such as this year. From the statistically point of the OBR, it failing badly. From an Emotional point of the majority(gun hunters), its working wonderfully. I'm sure if you ask all 250000 Indiana hunters about our harvest records over the past few years, i'm sure that less than 10% have any clue what they might be, but yet they all will have something to say about the OBR, good or bad. I suppose thats why we have the DNR to look at whats really going on, and hopefully they will use their OWN judgment, instead of the other 90% of hunters that are clueless. Lug
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Oct 6, 2006 6:25:13 GMT -5
Here it is folks-crunch the numbers anyway you like-if you`re presenting FACTUAL data-the silly obr has changed NOTHING. Read this slowly-the SAME number of bucks, and/or MORE bucks are being killed now than before the stupid rule. The only thing that has changed is the distribution-so, NOT opinion, but the FACTS are: 1) obr was foisted upon us by a very vocal, very organized MINORITY. 2) The only intent of the obr is to grow trophy bucks, i.e. trophy management. 3) Obr could not possibly have had any effect since the same, or greater number of bucks are being killed each year. 4) It was a very small number of hunters who “double dipped” each year anyway, but many more hunters bought the second buck tag, in hopes of doubling up. Now-my opinions: 1) Frank and Bubba`s huntin` club should NOT have the ear of the DNR-“those” people ARE NOT any more knowledgeable than any of us about deer management, but, again, they are VERY vocal, and organized. Shame on the DNR for cowing to their wishes. 2) IF the silly obr does indeed become law, fasten your seatbelts-next, a vocal, organized minority will be screaming for antler restrictions, shorter “buck” seasons, and possibly even an “earn-a-buck” program. 3) The divisions between proponents and opponents of the obr will widen, IF this temporary, trial measure becomes law. 4) And the most chilling for me-this becoming law will fuel the MISCONCEPTION that Indiana is fast becoming a trophy buck Mecca-which will increase leasing practices, which will create a shortage of available hunting areas-which will make public land become even more crowded and pressured-making public land even LESS of a quality hunting experience than it already is. Be careful what you wish for fella`s-you`re going to pave paradise and put up a parkin` lot. Someone may need to explain to Kyle where that expression comes from. Excellent post!
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Oct 6, 2006 8:11:15 GMT -5
Question: How many guys on here actually deer hunted in the 60's,70's,80's,90's when there was not any problem at all with killing more than one buck?? I have..and I can say that without the OBR the bucks will still be out there as big as ever and some even larger,and they'll be there year after year or at least until the population growth of the Americans out number their habitat and their forced to dwindle away and if you don't think that can happen then you'd better take a good look around you!!!!
|
|