|
Post by racktracker on Jul 23, 2006 7:53:18 GMT -5
Roger,
YOU DA MAN!
Just like James here. If you ask these guys if they ever VOLUNTARILY just hunted one buck a year before the answer is ,"Well, uh, uh,uh, gee, no."
He killed two bucks in 2001 and surely he knew that the OBR was coming in 2002. Why did he not do what he supported before it became law?
Somehow thay want their neighbors to do something they would never be willing to do in the first place. Its a "Do as I say, not as I do."
All this does is punish hunters that put in their time and effort getting good with all types of weapons and being good deer hunters so that someone that doesn't want to do all that can drop a big buck on the opening day of gun season.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jul 23, 2006 8:30:49 GMT -5
[quote
There is no reason to shoot a second buck beyond pure antler fascination. Plain and simple. You want meat, shoot does. You want a hunting challenge, crawl out of your tree stand and actually "hunt" something. But don't tell me that taking a second buck is not about antlers ... it is..[/quote] ...................................... Shoot 2 Bucks....must be "Antler Worshiping" ;D
|
|
|
Post by dec on Jul 23, 2006 11:27:42 GMT -5
Hey Racktracker. I've been hunting for 20+ years and I have NEVER shot two bucks in a single year. NEVER. I'm an antler worshipper hands down, but I see no need to shoot two in one year. I've had opportunities under a two buck system to take two good bucks, but I've always talked myself out of that second buck. Every time. I've had PLEANTY of opportunities to take two good bucks. I'm not saying that if it went back to a two buck system that there might not be an occasional year that I would not shoot two bucks. I might if the situation was right and it was the right two bucks. But 99% of the time one buck is enough.
Don't sit here and type away that us that feel that one buck is enough, need OBR to force us to make harvest decisions. I have voluntarily passed on bucks year in and year out that 90% of hunters would take without a second thought.
A two buck system is antler worshipping at its finest.
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 23, 2006 11:37:36 GMT -5
Just like James here. If you ask these guys if they ever VOLUNTARILY just hunted one buck a year before the answer is ,"Well, uh, uh,uh, gee, no." He killed two bucks in 2001 and surely he knew that the OBR was coming in 2002. Why did he not do what he supported before it became law? Sure, I shot those two bucks in 2001 before OBR. That was BEFORE I realized how the OBR could help me. I've become a much more selective hunter since then (the OBR has helped in that regard), and if we go back to a two buck rule, I will certainly hunt only one buck per year.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Jul 23, 2006 13:37:44 GMT -5
I've never had a rack measured or even tried to have one measured. I had my first shotgun buck and my first bow buck mounted. The bow buck weighed in at 240 field dressed. The rack was not all that impressive. I shot him because of his body size. The shotgun buck was way way back in 1980 and it was actually the first buck that I had come within range for a smoothbore and pumpkin balls. It weighed 190 field dressed. What did the 128 deer weigh?
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Jul 23, 2006 15:22:49 GMT -5
dec,
You're certainly an exception to the rule. Not many hunters out there like you and me anymore.
Good hunting to you.
James,
So what you are saying is it took a law to get you to understand that the only way to kill a big one is to pass the little ones? Is that right?
Are you now saying that if we went back to a two buck limit that you would not drop that hammer on a second buck if it was a booner?
Come on, be honest like dec.
Not too many hunters will pass a legal big old buck no matter what the numbers are.
P.S.
How much longer are we goin to waste bandwidth on ths?
|
|
|
Post by cedararrow on Jul 23, 2006 18:41:32 GMT -5
What a waste of bandwidth.If you guys want a big buck to kill, just go hunt them. You don't need to get Indiana to grow you some. Or do you?[/u
My opinion is that this was put into law because some people can't kill one good buck, much less two.
It's a deer welfare system.
HMM... if i want a big buck to kill just go hunt them?? It's hard to hunt something that doesnt exist. Ive spent my whole life trying to kill a big buck. The fact is that hunting pressure stopped most bucks from growing past two and half. If the obr has done anything and i think it has done much more than just this, it has educated people on selectivity. It has taught people the concept behind age structure and herd size. It has made people AWARE. Unlike you mentioned earlier the OBR did not make big bucks DUMMER. It has not made them any easier to hunt and it has not made them into a welfare system. If it has done anything it has put more of them in the state of Indiana. And to think i was under the impression that just because they were out there they were getting dummer and easier to kill.
|
|
|
Post by cedararrow on Jul 23, 2006 18:46:27 GMT -5
It took a law to make people aware that killing everything that moved would eventually wipe out the herd. Remember the days of commercial hunting, it affected deer, geese, and the buffalo. All three were on the brink of destruction before laws regulating bag limits were introduced. Ill bet back then people went through the same struggle. But was it good for everyone in the long run. Youll be your bottom dollar its because of those laws that you have your "big" deer to hunt. Heck its because of those laws that we have any deer at all to hunt.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Jul 23, 2006 20:34:12 GMT -5
What a waste of bandwidth.If you guys want a big buck to kill, just go hunt them. You don't need to get Indiana to grow you some. Or do you?[/u
My opinion is that this was put into law because some people can't kill one good buck, much less two.
It's a deer welfare system.
HMM... if i want a big buck to kill just go hunt them?? It's hard to hunt something that doesnt exist. Ive spent my whole life trying to kill a big buck. The fact is that hunting pressure stopped most bucks from growing past two and half. If the obr has done anything and i think it has done much more than just this, it has educated people on selectivity. It has taught people the concept behind age structure and herd size. It has made people AWARE. Unlike you mentioned earlier the OBR did not make big bucks DUMMER. It has not made them any easier to hunt and it has not made them into a welfare system. If it has done anything it has put more of them in the state of Indiana. And to think i was under the impression that just because they were out there they were getting dummer and easier to kill. You think that the OBR is manna from Heaven and I think it's a gimmick thrust on us. A difference of opinion. Indiana has big bucks. Some REAL monstors. Always have had. Maybe not in your little neck of the woods cause not all deer habitat is the same. No getting around that. But there is big ones killed every year and were killed every year before the OBR was even a wet dream. No deer don't get no dumber, but IF there were more bucks there would be a better chance at getting one, right? I mean a blind sow will nose up an nut once in awhile. This ain't got a dang thing to do with market hunting. That's a very poor example. We've had regulated hunting for a long, long time. Why is the wildlife in as good of a shape as it is today? OUR DNR biologists did it for us. That is why we hired them. Now you want to shrug off what they say and listen to the non-pros. Cedararrow, You seem like a nice fellow, as most trads are. I shoot a stick sometimes myself. But you ain't changing anyone's mind on here. You've been on a mission since day on here and even put up a poll on the OBR. Have you even posted on a hunting topic at all? This ain't goin to be decided on some internet board. The IDNR will decide this as it should be. So lets all quit wasting bandwidth and typing our fingers to the bone and hang it up and let the DNR make the decision OK? Can't we just talk huntin?? That is a lot more fun than squabbling about whether or not the bowhunters are losing out and the gun hunters are killing them all and the OBR is a savior of our deer herd and no it's not and if we only moved the gun season or shortened it or, or , or.... Git my drift? It just aint fun arguing all the time..
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 23, 2006 20:47:15 GMT -5
Where are the outfitters? If this is such a great state to hunt, where are the outfitters? Are the outfitters just to ignorant to realize that we are an excellent state in which to hunt whitetails? Hell no, they aint, their is a reason theres no outfitters in our state,,,,,what do you think they are? Some people's ignorance makes my dumbass look really good at times!
Lug
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 23, 2006 20:49:48 GMT -5
They are all over in Illinois..
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 23, 2006 22:53:17 GMT -5
James, So what you are saying is it took a law to get you to understand that the only way to kill a big one is to pass the little ones? Is that right? It certainly helped. Are you now saying that if we went back to a two buck limit that you would not drop that hammer on a second buck if it was a booner? Come on, be honest like dec. Not too many hunters will pass a legal big old buck no matter what the numbers are. I would probably hunt just one buck per year, but thanks to the OBR, I think I've now got more of those big bucks to choose from. P.S. How much longer are we goin to waste bandwidth on ths? As long as you keep posting.
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 23, 2006 23:05:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 24, 2006 6:34:39 GMT -5
The OBR hasn't had any effect so as I said, it wouldn't be devalued yet. However, if I killed a 200" buck I wouldn't feel any more "rewarded" than with any other nice buck I happen to take. I've seen bucks that would barely make 170" that I would rather have taken than almost any 200" buck ever killed. Frankly, I really do not base my success on what any buck I take scores. I'm not in a competition with anyone else and I certainly don't need the state trying to purposely grow bigger bucks in order for me to enjoy hunting.
I get a good chuckle the way some people talk about 130" bucks. The truth is the majority of hunters wouldn't know the difference between a 120" buck and 130" buck let alone pass one of the latter up.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 24, 2006 6:37:02 GMT -5
Racktracker, in 8 pages worth of debate that is by far the best post I have read.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 24, 2006 6:47:58 GMT -5
Unlike the mythical Buck That the OBR Saved they did and still do exist, just check out Woody's trophy room for proof. ;D Cedararrow, you seem like a nice guy and I look forward to your posts on other topics but you said it all right there when you said it.
|
|
|
Post by cedararrow on Jul 24, 2006 6:50:58 GMT -5
The comparison that I made was not a comparison between commercial hunting and killing two bucks in one season. It was not a comparison to promote the OBR. It was just simply a comparison to your laws and regulations theories that keep getting thrown out here. For centuries new laws and regulations have passed and been added on through generations of hunters. Some of those laws that saved hunting for us today were the bag limit laws that made hunters accountable for the numbers that they killed. If it werent for those we wouldnt have anything to hunt today. You cant dispute that either. The fact is that laws and regulations (NOT CALLED LAWS AND RESTRICTIONS) change all the time and most times are for the benefit of those that are directly involved with them. I dont understand why this whole law thing keeps gettting thrown out there.
Lets look at Illinois for a minute and find out why in the world there are so many outfitters in that state? Because the Illinois DNR does a great job of limiting the number of mature deer killed through the manipulation of their seasons. I believe that they have shortened gun seasons. The gun hunters get to hunt the end of the rut for 3 days. Then they get four days in December. The Illinois DNR has that state set up to succeed and they have been doing so far in advance. To use someone elses terminology. They were practicing quality deer management for their residents since before the OBR was a wet dream in the minds of our quantity over quality IDNR. They have a head start on us. Thats why the outfitters are in Illinois. Common sense really.
|
|
|
Post by cedararrow on Jul 24, 2006 8:58:44 GMT -5
mbogo You think you can judge the type of hunter I am based solely on the words that I type on here. Wrong brother.
I dont have the money to lease land, I dont have the access to great hunting land, I have access to small wood lot parcels that are often times 5-6 acres butted up against land this is often times traversed by more people during the first weekend of shotgun season than the rest of the year combined. For your information im putting my third deer on the wall in a few short weeks when pick him up from the taxi. Two of which are pope and young deer, the other was shot pre obr and was the first "nice" buck i had seen on the land i hunt. In all my years i have killed one 1.5 year old deer and that was my first deer ever at age 12 with a bow. I cant count how many little deer i have passed since i started hunting with my bow, and killing a big buck is not because I havent put in the time, study, or effort. You have no place to judge me at all, I am simply making points based on a rule that is in effect, based on the majority of local hunters that dont have the funds to lease, the access to private property, or the availability to local public land. Hell like someone said even a blind sow can rustle up an acorn every now and then. Especially if that sow is digging in an oak flat. Put me in Iowa or hell Southern Indiana give me a 1000 acres of private land and a summer to scout it. Ill get my big deer, but the fact is I dont have God's green acre to hunt I dont have a lot of land to hunt and I dont the money to lease. Its not about what kind of hunter I am, and to be completely honest judging someone and their ability to hunt has nothing to do with the obr and its effects on age structure. A bad hunter is a bad hunter and will not kill a big buck no matter how many out there. Only dumb luck will get a bad hunter a big buck. We both know it. A great hunter can hunt the worst land ever and he still wont kill a big buck if they arent there. But im sure you knew that right. Being the expert hunter that you are.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jul 24, 2006 9:02:33 GMT -5
The outfitters can stay over in Illinois with my blessings , we don't want or need them here driving up the cost of a day's hunt to the point that nobody can afford it . When only the rich can afford it , and all they will pay to shoot are mature bucks , what will happen to the overall management plan ? Nobody will pay top dollar to shoot does , that's a fact .
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 24, 2006 9:42:09 GMT -5
I hope someone will answer one question for me without bashing or judging. How will returning to a two-bucks-per-year rule in Indiana help our state's deer herd? I'm not antogonizing here, just would like to see an answer to this question. Thanks.
|
|