|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 13, 2006 11:16:10 GMT -5
Button buck recruitment and the One Buck Restriction…My contention during this One Buck Restriction trial is that a major portion of the improvement we are seeing is due to an aging deer hunter population becoming more experienced and thus more selective on what they will and will not shoot. While some folks ballyhoo and point to the One Buck Restriction as the sole determining factor for any and all improvement. In looking at past Indiana deer harvest data it is very clear that the hunters are becoming more selective and are passing up not only 1 ½ year old bucks but fawn does and fawn bucks (button bucks). There is a shift to killing mature deer, bucks and does that began before the One Buck restriction came into effect. Comparing 1996 to 2005 – two record setting years. Adult males – 1996 was 47,315 (38% of the harvest) and in 2005 the results were 52,488 (42% of the harvest) for a GAIN of 5,173 and 4% of the harvest. Adult females – 1996 was 39,913 (32% of the harvest) and in 2005 the results were 44,286 (35% of the harvest) for a GAIN of 4,373 and 3% of the harvest. Fawns female – 1996 was 18,551 (15% of the harvest) and in 2005 the results were 15,772 (13% of the harvest) for a DECLINE of 2,829 and a DECLINE of 2% of the harvest. Fawns males – 1996 was 17,307 (14% of the harvest) and in 2005 the results were 13,030 (10% of the harvest) for a DECLINE of 4,277 and a DECLINE of 4% of the harvest. The fawn harvest is DECLINING and the adult harvest is INCREASING since 1996. How can anyone say that we are not becoming more selective in what we will shoot? The shift has been to take older deer and pass the button bucks and even the doe fawns. Oh yes… a MAJOR portion of that shift was prior to the One Buck Restriction.. Granville Hayworth hit on this a LONG time ago that the reason we are seeing and taking more bucks is that we are RECRUITING MORE BUTTON BUCKS into adulthood. See his charts below…. Why are we recruiting more button bucks into adulthood? Because deer hunters are becoming older, more mature, and more selective. Remember - Let him go, so he can grow"?? The two season bowhunter is paying a terrible price for something that is happening naturally. Adult male to Male Fawn (Button Bucks) Notice as the male fawn harvest decreases the male adult line goes up. Ten year Male Fawn (Button Buck) Harvest Trend line for Male Fawn (Button Buck Harvest) Again… we are seeing a decreasing number of button bucks being killed. That translates into recruiting bucks into higher age brackets.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jul 13, 2006 11:51:55 GMT -5
OBR is not the reason, it is the cause. A large number of hunters annually, will pass on younger, smaller racked bucks since they can only take one legally.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 13, 2006 12:01:12 GMT -5
The number of 1.5 year old bucks I've seen the past 3-4 years would tend to support that theory. Throughout October I have been seeing as many young bucks as I have does. Of course the OBR will probably get credit for that too.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Jul 13, 2006 12:26:03 GMT -5
Good data Woodie. I'm sure the other side of the coin can spin it their way as well.
I don't know and don't really care what the cause of more mature bucks is. All I know is that since OBR, I and the majority of the hunters that I know have all seen more and better mature bucks than prior to OBR. That is a fact that I can not deny. My thought is that it is probably due to a combination of things, such as OBR, maturing hunters, better habitat, etc.
I'm 100000000000% for OBR to stay.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 13, 2006 13:23:17 GMT -5
.............. All I know is that since OBR, I and the majority of the hunters that I know have all seen more and better mature bucks than prior to OBR........... I would say for certain there are more big bucks in 2005 than there was in 2001. I can also say for certain that there are more big bucks in 2001 than there was in 1996. I can say for certain that there were more big bucks in 1996 than there was in 1991.. We've have had an expanding heard since 1997 and with that comes more deer - big bucks and all. I doubt that anyone can look at those fawn harvest rate decline numbers and not say that we are recruiting more buck fawns into adulthood. the more adult bucks we have the more big bucks we will have. The two season bowhunter is paying a VERY stiff price for something that is already happening.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jul 13, 2006 14:16:31 GMT -5
That says it all , and it was most definitely occuring well before the OBR . More buttons surviving automatically translates into more bucks period , doesn't take an Einstein to figure that out .
|
|
|
Post by dec on Jul 13, 2006 14:23:01 GMT -5
The two season bowhunter is paying a VERY stiff price for something that is already happening. As a 2 season bowhunter, I don't think it is a price to pay at all. I'm content on one buck. Hopefully he falls to my bow, but I'm fine with it if I take him with my muzzleloader. One buck is all I think a guy needs to shoot in the general hunting seasons. It is all personal choice. I could have taken many NICE deer (120 to 130's) last year on many occassions, but I passed. OBR or not, I'd have passed. Instead I was holding out for the 150 class that my buddy shot with his bow. No buck for me and I'm cool with that. I shot pleanty of does. I figure if I'm happy eating a tag for one buck, then why in the world do I need to shoot 2 bucks? Just because we used to get 2 buck tags is not a good excuse to me. Again, it is all personal choice. I'm just a single vote, so dissagree with me if you want. Let the feedback to INDR do the speaking for us as a hunting communtity. I just see no need for 2 bucks, and I'm a guy that loves to hunt whitetail bucks as much if not more than most hunters do.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 13, 2006 17:49:29 GMT -5
OBR = Lost Opportunity = Less Hunters = Less Licenses = Less Money for the DNR..... No matter how many doe you can kill the OBR took away hunter opportunity. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Jul 13, 2006 18:17:22 GMT -5
OBR is a great way to see more bucks, while hunting if you need the meat kill a doe why not leave the small bucks to get big? If you claim anler worship then kill a small one it's your tag use it any way you want, I'll use mine on what I want. JMHO
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 13, 2006 21:07:44 GMT -5
Has anyone ever, knowingly, shot a button buck? ?? OBR boils down to one thing for me: In bow season i WILL shoot a smaller buck, due to the fact that i KNOW i can take bigger during gun season. Now, i have to decided whether or not i want to take that smaller buck, cause thats all that i will get for this season. Once upon a time i got 2 bucks a year, now i only get one. I suppose someone else will shoot that other buck that i no longer get. But it makes everyone, mature (older), and newer hunters more selective, on what they kill. Another note, how do you know how many button bucks are killed each year, due to they are tagged as does? If more doe tags are given out, then aren't the odds of button bucks getting killed even higher? Lug
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jul 13, 2006 22:08:07 GMT -5
If the shot was more than 15-20 yards, I doubt it... I've been hunting for almost 15 years and still can't tell a difference. Other than my first deer, I haven't shot a yearling of either sex. Maybe I'm just not looking hard enough, I dunno. The DNR takes representative samples at selected checkstations to determine what the harvest breakdown is. This is normally done on opening weekend of shotgun season, when the highest percentage of deer are killed. I still don't understand how some of you are still whining about "lost hunting opportunity" when last year you could have killed something like 68 deer! And if you REALLY, REALLY feel the need to shoot that second buck, go to an urban zone! One of my hunting spots is in Tippecanoe County in the urban zone. A second buck isn't a problem for me, should I choose to take it.... I'll quit beating the horse now, it passed away a long, long time ago..................................
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 14, 2006 4:49:04 GMT -5
Some of you should go back and read the article Woody posted and then you might understand what we "whiners" are whining about. You are trying to give credit to the OBR for something that was already happening, more mature bucks and thats according to our state wildlife biologist.
If you think the OBR works so good then why don't our neighboring states have it? I'm always hearing how we should be like Illinois, how many bucks are you allowed there? h.h.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 14, 2006 5:37:18 GMT -5
I've said that TOO Woody!
But I think $24.00 tags have some part in deer hunters NOT shooting 60lb deer.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Jul 14, 2006 6:22:07 GMT -5
I never "lost oportunity" with OBR. I hunt as hard, if not harder, than I ever did before OBR. I'm out in the woods a lot before and after I've tagged my buck. I never lost oportunity to hunt.
True story. The first year of OBR, I shot a great 8 pointer with my bow in late October. Fast forward to the shot gun opener. I'm sitting in my stand with a muzzleloader wanting to take a doe or two home. Daylight just breaks and I hear the guns in the distance. I look out across the field and see the figure of a deer walking at me through the low light of day break. As the deer approaches it is a good buck. As he approaches closer, it is a REAL GOOD buck. He was a 150's class 10 pointer. I simply smiled knowing that I had to let him walk. I picked up my video camera and filmed him for several minutes. At one point he was 30 yards broad side. It was one of my most enjoyable mornings in a tree stand. Yet, by many of the comments about OBR on here, I should have been pi$$ed at the IDNR for taking my "oportunity" away to shoot that deer. Nothing about that morning or similar ones since then have upset me. It is what it is folks, one buck and one buck only, get over it. There is more to "hunting oportunity" than simply being able to drop the trigger on a second buck.
"TWACK" the dead horse is being beaten again.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 14, 2006 15:22:16 GMT -5
Please pardon the length of this post..
WW – And there are a good number of folks that think that they don’t “need” to kill a second buck, but sure would like the opportunity to “hunt” that second buck.
When I feel that I "need" to kill anything to make a hunt out of it, I'll quit hunting
WW – That is all well and good that you pass what you want to, but in the meantime the One Buck Restriction is putting up an artificial barrier to what other people woul like to shoot. No one is telling you what to hold out for , why should we enforce that on others?
WW - Believe it or not lots of folks hunt for the pure challenge of the hunt and find very little challenge in shooting does.
WW – It is for me when we changed for no good reason. Also when I bought my lifetime license it was three bucks...then two bucks... and now one. What's next? Draw for a buck tag? very other year? When do we say enough?
WW – Not any more. This restriction, if it sticks, will change all of that.
WW – The problem with that is most deer hunters don’t get involved in the making of rules and regulations. I doubt if 75% of them even know how the rules and regulations are made. Most changes are pushed through by an activist minority
In this case the number of people that are not affected by a One Buck Restriction are in a majority. Hope fully they will not vote “what’s in it for me”.
WW – Me too.. I don’t know if anyone who hunts harder than I do.
WW – Have you looked at the Tennessee thread? Explain to me how they can get lower 1 ½ year old percentages than we do with a three buck limit.
Undoubtedly we are seeing more bigger bucks in 2005 than we did in 2001.. But that same statement holds true for 2001 over 1996 and so on and on..
WW – it is not about “need the meat” it is about the challenge of the hunt.
WW - I’ve seen some killed, but not as many as years gone by when it was more “brown is down”.. That is my contention is that people are finally looking them over a little closer now.
WW – that is your choice. But for everyone that says that they would kill small in archery seasons and wait for a big one in gun seoasn there are two season hunters out there that will wait on big ones for both seasons. There is NO challenge in killing a 1 ½ year old buck.
WW - yep..
WW – that ‘might’ be true if every deer hunter was a two or three season hunter, but the overwhelming majority of deer hunters hunt firearm season only. The majority of those hunt the opening weekend only.
I think 65% of all buck killed during the year (all season) are killed on opening weekend. Not a whole lot of selectivity going on for a two day hunt. As Jim Mitchel said,” ..a shift of harvest from one season to another..”
?
WW – the IDNR tracks them and does a good job of estimating the toatl kill
?
WW –Yep..the number of button bucks killed was up in 2005 over 2004. The percentage of harvest was still at 10%.
WW – Who said we wanted to hunt 68 deer in 100 counties?
Danf - And if you REALLY, REALLY feel the need to shoot that second buck, go to an urban zone! One of my hunting spots is in Tippecanoe County in the urban zone. A second buck isn't a problem for me, should I choose to take it....
WW – No, what we REALLY, REALLY feel the need to do is HUNT that second buck. Go to an “urban zone”? Have you priced a lease in an “urban zone” lately?
Are you aware that the IDNR wanted to take that away too? The two organized hunting groups didn’t act like they cared or didn't want to put up a fight with the IDNR...
WW - Not dead at all. That is why this discussion is being resurrected. The IDNR will be making a decision very soon about a one buck restriction or staying with a two buck limit. It is far from “dead”.
WW – Some of us feel that hunting does is not all that difficult and appreciate the challenge of hunting a mature buck, whether we get one or not.
This has cost the IDNR untold amount of MUCH needed money and no telling how much the economy has suffered. Hunters sitting home watching football don’t spend a whole lot of money on hunting stuff or get any reurn of PR monies..
Not dead at all. That is why this discussion is being resurrected. The IDNR will be making a decision very soon about a one buck restriction or staying with a two buck limit. It is far from “dead”.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 14, 2006 16:05:56 GMT -5
Excellent points woody!
Now which is it? Are hunters being more selective, or aren't they?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 14, 2006 16:27:43 GMT -5
Excellent points woody! Now which is it? Are hunters being more selective, or aren't they? Yes and no. The people that hunt hard AND long are more selective. That number of folks is growing. You still have the folks that hunt opening weekend and quite a few of them want to put something on the ground - anything n the ground.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 14, 2006 22:42:26 GMT -5
Woody, am i gettin' to ya yet? ;D
You seen the report, 50% of bucks taken in '05 were yearlings. According to the report you posted. BTW doesn't that mean its also 50% of the hunters are killing yearlings each year?
Their is a reason, other states are light years ahead of us. Do you have the answere? Seems odd that every state that borders us, has better deer hunting.
For those of you not wanting to change something in our system are the ones that are killing the system.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 15, 2006 6:38:10 GMT -5
Woody, am i gettin' to ya yet? ;D You seen the report, 50% of bucks taken in '05 were yearlings. According to the report you posted. BTW doesn't that mean its also 50% of the hunters are killing yearlings each year? No. Not every deer hunter kills a deer. . Not "light years". We are number 5 or 6 in record n book deer of all the whiettail states. In my career I saw a LOT of changes just for changes sake and a lot were disastrous. We are getting there... pataience..
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jul 15, 2006 14:41:39 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I'd rather not be like Illinios or Kansas, or _________..... I definately don't want this to be the state that has the top spot in book entries. Look at what that's done to Illinios, Pike County especially. The average Joe hunter has been priced out of hunting any land other than public. And personally, I would be VERY hesitant to hunt any public land in or around Pike County, simply because it's most likely overrun with other hunters.
Our DNR isn't doing a bad job at all. Yes, there are changes that everyone would like to see made, but all in all we can't complain too much....
|
|