|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 21, 2006 5:30:11 GMT -5
Man, the reasons for a OBR are NOW all over the place.
I just seen where it is now "well, it don't hurt the herd".
LOL LOL
FIRST it was to grow bigger antlers, then it was to increase the age of bucks harvested.....now it's "well, it don't hurt the herd".
There has to be a solid reason for a OBR....and then we need to look and see if it accomplished the goal.
Your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Jul 21, 2006 6:09:43 GMT -5
The reason for the OBR is none of the above. All it is and all it was ever intended to be is a stepping stone toward more restrictive regulations aimed at producing bigger antlered bucks. While it is true that bigger antlers are the end that justifies all the means, the OBR was not meant to reach that goal but merely to start the process.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Jul 21, 2006 6:25:38 GMT -5
Better yet, Camby, is that there has not been one "solid reason" to go back to a two buck limit other than "it was that way before and it was fine".
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jul 21, 2006 6:39:14 GMT -5
Eventually, all of this antler worshipping will ruin deer hunting. The WHA is a prime example of how losing site of what deer hunting is, will ruin this sport. And what is the driving force behind the WHA? Antler worship! We should just be happy with the fact that there are deer to hunt, and consider a big rack a bonus to the whole experience.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 21, 2006 6:58:54 GMT -5
No doubt the goal posts have been moved and as mbogo pointed out they will continue to be moved.
The ink will not have dried on Kyle Hupfer's signature on the One Buck Restriction and they will be asking for more and more.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jul 21, 2006 10:49:18 GMT -5
No doubt the goal posts have been moved and as mbogo pointed out they will continue to be moved. The ink will not have dried on Kyle Hupfer's signature on the One Buck Restriction and they will be asking for more and more. Well said.
|
|
|
Post by cedararrow on Jul 21, 2006 11:15:28 GMT -5
No doubt the goal posts have been moved and as mbogo pointed out they will continue to be moved. The ink will not have dried on Kyle Hupfer's signature on the One Buck Restriction and they will be asking for more and more. Isnt that what you anti OBR guys did the minute it got signed in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by woodmaster on Jul 21, 2006 11:16:45 GMT -5
If I've said once I've said it a million times....it's like most of the major manufactures do. They want Toyota's quality so they try to copy what Toyota does. If Indiana hunters want the big bucks like other states have then they need to copy what other states do. Sure we will have big bucks no matter what. Just not as many as states like Illinois, Iowa and Kansas.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 21, 2006 11:17:22 GMT -5
No doubt the goal posts have been moved and as mbogo pointed out they will continue to be moved. The ink will not have dried on Kyle Hupfer's signature on the One Buck Restriction and they will be asking for more and more. Isnt that what you anti OBR guys did the minute it got signed in the first place? No. .
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 21, 2006 11:48:29 GMT -5
I don't care if we have a OBR or not. I just want to know what the goals were to begin with and have we reached those goals or made major inroads toward them with the OBR test......... Of course it's pretty hard to judge given all the other factors that has taken place since the OBR started. I was discussing this issue with a couple fellas the other day at the bait store down in Morresville. One fella felt that it was a trade off so that the organizations didn't protest the price increase when that happened.... ?? ( You Think !! ) (Give us a OBR and we will look the other way when you double the price of tags) One thing I think we can count on is that if we stay with a OBR, we will see some other changes in season structure. Kentucky has proven that adding lots of opportunity with a OBR is a GOOD THING!
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Jul 21, 2006 12:35:38 GMT -5
I thought that the obr came into existance mainly because a vocal group wanted Indiana bucks to compare to Ill bucks. But since our herd is smaller than theirs we will always have less. Well unless we allow the high fence pen places to count or flourish. I also thought that it was because someone wanted to entice out of staters to come in and purchase licenses, motels, food, gas, etc. Bottom line money. Like Mbogo says if they think that what is done is working look for more.
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 21, 2006 12:41:50 GMT -5
Eventually, all of this antler worshipping will ruin deer hunting. Antler worship! I just want to take ONE deer with antlers on his head during the course of all of the hunting seasons...not two or three or more. The fact that I support OBR does NOT make me an antler "worshipper." We should just be happy with the fact that there are deer to hunt, and consider a big rack a bonus to the whole experience. Agreed!
|
|
|
Post by jameslyon on Jul 21, 2006 12:44:55 GMT -5
If the DNR's purpose prior to 2002 was to increase antler size of the deer taken in IN, why wouldn't they shorten the firearms season and move it out of the rut to achieve this goal? Seems to make more sense to me as a starting point than the OBR.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 21, 2006 14:29:12 GMT -5
If the DNR's purpose prior to 2002 was to increase antler size of the deer taken in IN, why wouldn't they shorten the firearms season and move it out of the rut to achieve this goal? Seems to make more sense to me as a starting point than the OBR. Mainly because the OBR wasnt the IDNR's idea. The IDNR didnt want it at all. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by solohunter on Jul 21, 2006 16:09:21 GMT -5
OBR and the 2 bonus antlerless restriction here in Noble county will be the end of hunting in IN.......... Solohunter
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jul 21, 2006 19:56:43 GMT -5
Food for thought fellas:
Today I was talking with a trucker I was preparing to load , he happened to live about 45 minutes west of Peoria , Illinois . He related a tale about a dude from Chicago coming down to his area looking for some land for himself and 3-4 of his friends to hunt . All they were interested in was the first week of the shotgun season . The trucker's land was wooded , and only about 130 acres . He was flabbergasted when the guy produced a cashier's check for $11,000 and asked for permission for him and his buds to hunt . The trucker laid down minimum conditions , but acquiesced . He moved his horses and cattle to the front 12 acres and let them hunt . For reference those Chicago yahoos paid $92.22 per acre to hunt for a single week , that's how bad things can get when antler worship is allowed to fester . The trucker in question is an avid deer hunter , and he gave up a week on his own property to accommodate those deep pocket dumbasses . It could happen here too , don't think for one second that it can't .
We all know that our state holds some impressive bucks , all you need to do is know the lay of the land and find them . Do we really want that secret to get out ? If you strive for a booner behind every tree you'll probably achieve that goal , but at what price ? Even if you do achieve it will the pride still be there ? At best you'll have to top yourself the next year , but by that time our sweet little honey hole of a state will be overrun by the same type of deep pocket scumbags who will bid you out of the land you've hunted since your childhood . Where will you hunt then ? Be careful what you wish for fellas , you may get it .
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 21, 2006 21:46:01 GMT -5
kevin1,
this thing will only get worse. as someone said earlier the blue collar guys will get pushed out by people willing to pay these kind of prices and all for a pair of horns. its sad this is the trend these days buy we only have our selfs to blame. no wonder less kids are getting involved in hunting today. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 21, 2006 22:30:35 GMT -5
Food for thought fellas: Today I was talking with a trucker I was preparing to load , he happened to live about 45 minutes west of Peoria , Illinois . He related a tale about a dude from Chicago coming down to his area looking for some land for himself and 3-4 of his friends to hunt . All they were interested in was the first week of the shotgun season . The trucker's land was wooded , and only about 130 acres . He was flabbergasted when the guy produced a cashier's check for $11,000 and asked for permission for him and his buds to hunt . The trucker laid down minimum conditions , but acquiesced . He moved his horses and cattle to the front 12 acres and let them hunt . For reference those Chicago yahoos paid $92.22 per acre to hunt for a single week , that's how bad things can get when antler worship is allowed to fester . The trucker in question is an avid deer hunter , and he gave up a week on his own property to accommodate those deep pocket dumbasses . It could happen here too , don't think for one second that it can't . We all know that our state holds some impressive bucks , all you need to do is know the lay of the land and find them . Do we really want that secret to get out ? If you strive for a booner behind every tree you'll probably achieve that goal , but at what price ? Even if you do achieve it will the pride still be there ? At best you'll have to top yourself the next year , but by that time our sweet little honey hole of a state will be overrun by the same type of deep pocket scumbags who will bid you out of the land you've hunted since your childhood . Where will you hunt then ? Be careful what you wish for fellas , you may get it . Then what do you expect the DNR to do then? Keep things going the way they used to, and go even farther into debt? We are already selling off public property, more and more every year, the money spent on public grounds keeps decreasing each year. We need to find a happy median between a "booner behind every tree" and a booner behinds several trees! Lug
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jul 21, 2006 22:40:44 GMT -5
kevin1, this thing will only get worse. as someone said earlier the blue collar guys will get pushed out by people willing to pay these kind of prices and all for a pair of horns. its sad this is the trend these days buy we only have our selfs to blame. no wonder less kids are getting involved in hunting today. h.h. Are these the same blue collar guys that spend 1000$ just on their archery equipment? Odd people can spend thousands of dollars on their set-up, but won't squeez a nickel out their cheeks for a place to hunt. That is, if this individual had to do so, since the public property that he once hunted, got sold cause of lack of funds to keep the property. Less kids are less involved cause the state doesn't push that situation like other states do. Sad, but true! Lug
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 21, 2006 22:53:11 GMT -5
lug, tell me what public hunting ground got sold here in Indiana? h.h.
|
|