|
Post by pigeonflier on Oct 15, 2006 21:11:31 GMT -5
You want bigger and better bucks? Pro-obr or anti-obr, does not matter, there are a couple things that have to happen regardless if we have a 1 buck, 2 buck, or 10 buck system. First .... STOP SHOOTING SMALL BUCKS. Second .... The shotgun season would have to be shortened and moved to the very end of November/first of December. Possible Third .... Shorten muzzle loader season. Those first two things would definitely have to happen. The third would help it. I'm not proposing this. I feel OBR has divided us enough and such a radical proposal of reducing gun opportunity would send shock waves through the community. But if the DNR stepped up to the table and proposed this, I'd be all it. Actually, you could get away with not touching the gun season, if ... PEOPLE WOULD STOP SHOOTING LITTLE BUCKS. It is not rocket science. Hit the nail on the head DEC!!!! Stop shooting small bucks. 7 day split gun season--3 day ML season,, and 3 day hand-gun season.... That will take care of all the YA-HOO small buck killers!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Oct 15, 2006 21:36:31 GMT -5
You mentioned all the ways that it benefits me and those like myself, do you honestly believe that it wouldn't benefit you at all? You also stand correct, antler restrictions doesn't benefit the health of the herd, but i don't seeing it hurt it any either, do you? You are claiming that AR restricts your hunting opprotunities, and once again you stand correct. But if you flip your comment around, and your restricting the way i want to hunt, but i suppose thats just too bad correct? I suppose i'm the selfish one. My selfish gain, or your selfish gain? You and other like you killing the young bucks are restricting my hunting opprotunities, true or false? [/quote] And i'm glad that you do, at the very least your passionate about your hunting, nothing wrong with that at all. I just don't understand why YOUR way of hunting is best for everyone, just cause its the way YOU hunt. If we, the hunters, can't or aren't willing to find a happy median, than issues such as this one and the many others such as this one will always divide us. In this thread i've given some ideas, along with DEC, but their are 3 pages of posts that aren't willing to give ideas, or suggestions, just members saying that i'm "shoving QDM down their throats"! Seems like some members are more willing to start a in' match than to give some contribution or effort in finding that happy median! BTW, if i feel like argueing, i've got a teenager that loves to argue with me, i don't need or search for a way to get a in match started on my quiet time on here. Just FYI for ya!
|
|
|
Post by RiverJim on Oct 15, 2006 21:38:57 GMT -5
This trophey stuff is getting WAY out of hand. I don't trophey hunt, I deer hunt. And my BIGGEST fear is we will become a great trophey state. Leasing will get way out of hand and we'll be flooded with nr's every year. And even public ground will be bumper to bumper with trucks from everywhere. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Oct 15, 2006 21:39:56 GMT -5
You want bigger and better bucks? Pro-obr or anti-obr, does not matter, there are a couple things that have to happen regardless if we have a 1 buck, 2 buck, or 10 buck system. First .... STOP SHOOTING SMALL BUCKS. Second .... The shotgun season would have to be shortened and moved to the very end of November/first of December. Possible Third .... Shorten muzzle loader season. Those first two things would definitely have to happen. The third would help it. I'm not proposing this. I feel OBR has divided us enough and such a radical proposal of reducing gun opportunity would send shock waves through the community. But if the DNR stepped up to the table and proposed this, I'd be all it. Actually, you could get away with not touching the gun season, if ... PEOPLE WOULD STOP SHOOTING LITTLE BUCKS. It is not rocket science. Hit the nail on the head DEC!!!! Stop shooting small bucks. 7 day split gun season--3 day ML season,, and 3 day hand-gun season.... That will take care of all the YA-HOO small buck killers!!!!! WOW! I usefull suggestion!
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Oct 16, 2006 6:09:59 GMT -5
lugnutz,
No one is restricting the way that you hunt when they kill a button buck or year and a half old buck.
Listen very carefully - there are PLENTY of deer out there now to choose from, even some "trophy bucks". You want a trophy buck now? Just go hunt it.
There is plenty of room for all kinds of deer hunters to hunt whatever that they want and it affects no one else but them.
You hunt what you want and let others hunt what they want.
The deer management in this state was never broken and contrary some people's beliefs did not need fixing before the OBR or even now.
So, let's give this "trophy" crap a rest and just go hunt deer -whichever deer satisfies the person hunting it.
PF,
A shorter season would just mean that deer hunters would just kill them quicker. Less time in the woods would also mean they would drop the hammer on a lesser deer.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 16, 2006 7:03:12 GMT -5
Indiana is currently 10th in the US for deer put into the record books. All the states ahead of us have a much bigger deer herd and a much higher harvest. We cannot make the trophy antler hunting any better here than it already is without making everything worse for everybody.
Antler point and width restrictions do not work. There was a good article in Deer and Deer Hunting a couple months ago about them. It was a caution to the east not to make the same mistakes as the west. It said the illegal kill was almost double the legal kill because some hunters will always make mistakes. It also protects inferior bucks by taking the best young deer out of the herd. What do you do about a 6-year-old spike? He is protected and passing on those outstanding genetics.
For the last time antler point, width, and OBR restrictions are NOT QDM. QDM is a management plan that tries to put the herd in balance with the land. It suggests a high antlerless harvest and letting bucks reach maturity. It tries to create a healthy herd that is at or below the carrying capacity with a balanced age and sex structure. One of the side effects is deer with big antlers it is not the goal. Much like a medicine that causes nausea it is a side effect not the goal.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 16, 2006 7:46:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by semisneak on Oct 16, 2006 8:09:22 GMT -5
These numbers are kind of misleading. If Indiana had as many deer hunters and deer killed as the other states our book bucks number would probably be better then most of the other states.Look at how many hunters and deer killed michigan has yet they barely beat Indiana in book bucks.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 16, 2006 8:15:26 GMT -5
That's my point. Indiana cannot get any better without screwing everything up.
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Oct 16, 2006 8:16:26 GMT -5
Good graph. Thanks.
Reading between the lines and comparing our entries versus number of hunters and the yearly harvest we stack up a lot better than 10th place.
If you get inside the numbers of Illinois and Wisconsin you will see a good portion of thes record book bucks are taken in just certain counties. Most in the mineral rich soils counties close to a couple of river bottoms.
Aren't Wisconsin and Illinois multiple buck limit states? You bet they are.
|
|
|
Post by semisneak on Oct 16, 2006 8:42:07 GMT -5
This needs to be done in "trophy" bucks per hunters. Then see how Indiana stacks up. If this chart is right 2 out of a thousand hunters in Indiana kill a book buck. 0.7 out a 1000 in IL. Kill a book buck. Statistically Indiana is better at producing trophy bucks. .............Is my math correct ?
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 16, 2006 9:05:44 GMT -5
I think a lot of people do not know how great deer hunting already is in Idiana. They see these videos and think everyone kills giant deer everywhere but here.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Oct 16, 2006 10:39:37 GMT -5
Once again I am going to say that according to a biologist from Deer and Deer hunting with out resorting to year around feeding (like texas), food plots, we as a state do not have the minerals in our soil that lead to really large antlers.
Secondly 90% of the shows on television are filmed in a high fence environment with pen fed deer. Pay attention to the Canadian hunts especially where they start the show with no high fence here. Big bodied deer, decent antlers, but when you compare to one from say Illinois the antlers are much smaller compared to body size. The Illinois deer has a much smaller body and much larger set of antlers, the Illinois deer weighs maybe 200 lbs and scores 180 while the Canacian deer will weigh 325 and score 130.
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 16, 2006 11:33:20 GMT -5
Once again I am going to say that according to a biologist from Deer and Deer hunting with out resorting to year around feeding (like texas), food plots, we as a state do not have the minerals in our soil that lead to really large antlers. I'm not sure that I agree with the assessment from that biologist you reference. I think we have the minerals in our soil that do lead to really large antlers. Otherwise, would we be in the top 10 states in the country if we didn't? If we don't have the minerals, what then would you say leads to us being in the top 10? Do we have the best in the country? Probably not, however, that biologist from Deer and Deer Hunting better come up for a reason why we're in the top 10. It isn't based on happenstance and it isn't purely genetics. You can have the best genetics but without the proper minerals, genetics will only do so much.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Oct 16, 2006 12:26:47 GMT -5
Once again I am going to say that according to a biologist from Deer and Deer hunting with out resorting to year around feeding (like texas), food plots, we as a state do not have the minerals in our soil that lead to really large antlers. Secondly 90% of the shows on television are filmed in a high fence environment with pen fed deer. Pay attention to the Canadian hunts especially where they start the show with no high fence here. Big bodied deer, decent antlers, but when you compare to one from say Illinois the antlers are much smaller compared to body size. The Illinois deer has a much smaller body and much larger set of antlers, the Illinois deer weighs maybe 200 lbs and scores 180 while the Canacian deer will weigh 325 and score 130.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Oct 16, 2006 18:17:27 GMT -5
Hoyt I am a meat hunter primarily, I have killed more does 3/4 to 1 than bucks, I beleive that we have enough restrictions as is. If you have paid attention to the states that have tried antler restriction you have noticed that they do not really work. What I am saying is that yes we do have good bucks, not real giants but good bucks, without extra feeding, We all know that Texas allows supplemental feeding and scores those deer. How many of the other states ahead of us do I do not know nor really care, I do not hunt there. But by looking at that map posted by Racktracker and then the State chart by JS2397 it looks to me like all of the states ahead of us are darker and are in the first nine. Which I would take to believe that the biologist is exactly correct.
As for antler restrictions- again Deer and Deer hunting published an article several years ago about antlers and antler genetics. It followed a buck that lived its entire life inside a fence (was not a hunting pen) When the deer got its first set of antlers it was a fork horn, its second set was a six point, at age 5 it was still a 6 point, at 8 it acheived its largest set of 6 point antlers, at its death at age 14 it had a small 6. There was enough feed to sustain the herd, lots of red and white acorns along with wild prairie grasses, including clovers. In other words if a buck starts out as a 6 he will end up a six and by not takeing him you let his genes continue in the herd.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Oct 16, 2006 19:47:49 GMT -5
That notion that Indiana does not have the right soil or nutrients is plum crazy. If this is the case, please why Ohio harvests more book bucks than us. According to the map, they have less of those good soils than Indiana.
The top ten rankings chart also points out something that should be quite obvious. The states north, east and west (three out of four sides) of us all put more bucks in the book. This points out we are smack in the middle of good deer growing country and should be able to do the same or better.
The problem is, we don't let our bucks age. Our firearms seasons are simply too long, and too much of it occurs during the rut. We may never equal Illinois or Iowa, but we could do a lot better. We are picking the fruit before it gets ripe.
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 16, 2006 20:58:30 GMT -5
Hoyt I am a meat hunter primarily, I have killed more does 3/4 to 1 than bucks, I beleive that we have enough restrictions as is. If you have paid attention to the states that have tried antler restriction you have noticed that they do not really work. What I am saying is that yes we do have good bucks, not real giants but good bucks, without extra feeding, We all know that Texas allows supplemental feeding and scores those deer. How many of the other states ahead of us do I do not know nor really care, I do not hunt there. But by looking at that map posted by Racktracker and then the State chart by JS2397 it looks to me like all of the states ahead of us are darker and are in the first nine. Which I would take to believe that the biologist is exactly correct. As for antler restrictions- again Deer and Deer hunting published an article several years ago about antlers and antler genetics. It followed a buck that lived its entire life inside a fence (was not a hunting pen) When the deer got its first set of antlers it was a fork horn, its second set was a six point, at age 5 it was still a 6 point, at 8 it acheived its largest set of 6 point antlers, at its death at age 14 it had a small 6. There was enough feed to sustain the herd, lots of red and white acorns along with wild prairie grasses, including clovers. In other words if a buck starts out as a 6 he will end up a six and by not takeing him you let his genes continue in the herd. Utilizing your argument, North Dakota should be near the top of the country. I think you have me confused with someone else. I never advocated or disagreed with antler restrictions. I personally don't like antler restrictions solely because we have a multitude of hunters who shoot first and ask questions later. If we had antler restrictions, you'd find a lot of dead deer lying around because someone goofed up. I think maybe you put too much stock in what's written in deer and deer hunting magazine. Remember this first and foremost: they are in business to make money first. Not saying that everything they say in untrue but I usually use a filter with magazines because I realize their first responsibility is to make money. I don't take anything from the last part of your post except that the buck didn't have the genetics to be a big buck. That's why it takes more than minerals to make a big buck. It takes minerals and genetics; both of which Indiana has. Steiny also brings up a good point in Ohio. How do you describe the anomoly of Ohio utilizing the graph that was presented? Think about it: We have huge bucks in Illinois and huge bucks in Ohio. Did the land change that much that we are smack dab in the middle of both states and somehow got left out? I don't think so. We have the same opportunities as far as minerals are concerned as Illinois and Ohio. These are just my thoughts; take them for what their worth (which usually isn't much) ;D
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Oct 16, 2006 21:49:27 GMT -5
My AR proposition would be as follows:
1.) Make the firearm tag either sex. 2.) Return to the Two buck system. 3.) No AR on Youth Hunters. 4.) No AR during the Archery Seasons. 5.) 5 or 6 Point Minimum During Firearm Seasons. 6.) Shorten the Firearm Season 7.) Add a weekend of Muzz on last weekend in October.
Just my thoughts
Lug
|
|
|
Post by dec on Oct 17, 2006 6:57:32 GMT -5
I'm not an antler restriction proponent. I was at one time, but since have changed my mind. I just don't see it working, especially with the weekend gun hunter. There are a lot of guys that go out to just shoot "a deer" and do so by unloading their gun at a buck at 100 yards. Not that I'm advocating that, but I don't see them sizing a deer up before shooting it. Heck, as primarily a bow hunter there are times I have trouble sizing a deer up as he's approaching through brush at under 30 yards. There will be a lot of illegal bucks shot under an antler restriction, both intentionally and unintentionally. Now, before the meat hunters jump on me, I'm not bashing you guys. If that is how you want to hunt that is great. But the focus of this thread was State implemented change to produce more mature bucks and ultimately larger racks in general. So, don't attack me for being an antler hunter. Here goes, if you want to focus on antler growth. I said this before, and I'll say it again. 1) Stop shooting small bucks. I agree that most on this website and the others, are not in general intentionally shooting small bucks, but there are a lot of hunters out there that do shoot the small ones and then whine that they never see big ones. Ask them why the shot it and they will tell you that if they did not, the neighbor would. But, it still holds true, if you shoot small bucks, you don't get big bucks. That does not take the State to tell us to do this. 2) Move the gun season to the last week of Nov. and shorten the season to one week, not two. 3) Shorten the muzzleloader season to a one week season, not 2. OBR or TBR, this is what has to be done to increase the number of mature bucks and increase the general antler size. Again, I'm not proposing we do this, though I would like it. Such a proposal will go over like a lead balloon, IMO. The weekend warriors of gun season will not stand for cutting their 3 weekends down to 2. And they won't stand for not being able to shoot at rut crazed bucks. You watch, they will whine this year because gun season opens so late in comparison to other years. Bow hunters are going to get the prime hunting time this year and the gun boys will cry about it. I'm done.
|
|