|
|
Post by jackc99 on Oct 11, 2006 13:03:43 GMT -5
Meeting was held today, October 11, 2006 at Ft. Harrison State Park. Major topic was the One Buck Rule. Several interesting statements:
1. Approximately 40% of the surveys sent out were returned.
2. DNR needs to make a decision soon whether to continue the OBR. Reasoning is the publication of the Hunting Guide will be finalized this spring so now is the time to get a rule before the Natural Resources Commissio.
3. Support for the OBR is ~ 70%.
4. The Director of DNR personally is a 2 buck man, however the agency will most likely forward a recommendation to continue the OBR for another 5 years.
5. IBA and QDMA both suport the OBR.
6. 4 speakers from the audience favored continuing the OBR, One opposed, one just wants closure.
7. 5 emails in favor of the OBR and 1 against.
8. Dr. Mitchell said it best - the decision is not a biological decison, it is a societal decision.
Jack
|
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Oct 11, 2006 13:09:01 GMT -5
"Societal decision!" OK, that means we can look forward to rifles & crossbows in the regular seasons. Right!
|
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Oct 11, 2006 13:48:03 GMT -5
And therein lies the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 11, 2006 14:34:30 GMT -5
Meeting was held today, October 11, 2006 at Ft. Harrison State Park. Major topic was the One Buck Rule. Several interesting statements: 1. Approximately 40% of the surveys sent out were returned. 2. DNR needs to make a decision soon whether to continue the OBR. Reasoning is the publication of the Hunting Guide will be finalized this spring so now is the time to get a rule before the Natural Resources Commission. 3. Support for the OBR is ~ 70%. 4. The Director of DNR personally is a 2 buck man, however the agency will most likely forward a recommendation to continue the OBR for another 5 years. 5. IBA and QDMA both suport the OBR. 6. 4 speakers from the audience favored continuing the OBR, One opposed, one just wants closure. 7. 5 emails in favor of the OBR and 1 against. 8. Dr. Mitchell said it best - the decision is not a biological decison, it is a societal decision. Jack The time to email and send letters will be after the DNR proposal. That is during the Administrative Rules Process. My opinion - It's a done deal. Jack, I was told that the IBA would take "no official position" on the OBR. Per Paul Vice on Bowsite.. "Yes, the IBA will be represented at the meeting and we will present our member survey data concerning this issue at that time. It was decided, this issue does not warrant an official position statement from the organization." That is exactly what was told to me by the IDNR. That it would not have mattered if it had been two bucks or one buck the last 4 years. The number of kills and age classes would have been the same. They also stated that the age shift began 10 years ago after the antlerless kill off in the mid-90s. We anti-OBR people were right all along, but the Pro-Guys won the battle because people want to believe in something that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE might get them a few more inches of bone. Good luck to them.... . |
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 11, 2006 15:26:04 GMT -5
WAITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT a minute Woody. Lets not draw conclusions so quickly here!. I planned to be at that meeting today but I was held up in Bedford on business.
I have seen this subject beat into the ground over and over and over again! It has now come to a point of divide and oneupmanship among various Orgs. (Well that my opinion anyway!)
What really caught my attention here is that there only 6 yep count them 6 emails sent in!!!!!!!
So how big a deal is it really on either side among the average " Joe Hunter"?..
Is this issue really worth the big Whizzing match that has been played out in every gun shop, barber shop and INTERNET hunting site?
For the Record, I'm PRO OBR but I wouldn't lose much sleep over this issue either way........
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 11, 2006 15:46:44 GMT -5
Alot of Whining :-[and Crying :'(For 1 email....Just my thought
|
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Oct 11, 2006 16:29:59 GMT -5
Woody - the IBA did preface their comments by saying they had no "official" position. Then they recited the data from their poll showing approximately 63% in favor of the OBR.
Gundude - I'm guessing that the small number of emails is probably because this is the "Natural Resources Advisory Council". I'm guessing the Natural Resources Commission has received many more. Still doesn't explain the 4 to 1 in speaker ratio.
FYI - I'm a brown-and-down deer hunter so this issue doesn't affect me one way or the other. Also note that only 40% returned the survey so Gundude's point about Joe Average Hunter is right on...they don't care.
Jack
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 11, 2006 16:33:38 GMT -5
WAITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT a minute Woody. Lets not draw conclusions so quickly here!. I planned to be at that meeting today but I was held up in Bedford on business. I have seen this subject beat into the ground over and over and over again! It has now come to a point of divide and oneupmanship among various Orgs. (Well that my opinion anyway!) What really caught my attention here is that there only 6 yep count them 6 emails sent in!!!!!!! So how big a deal is it really on either side among the average " Joe Hunter"?.. Is this issue really worth the big Whizzing match that has been played out in every gun shop, barber shop and INTERNET hunting site? For the Record, I'm PRO OBR but I wouldn't lose much sleep over this issue either way........ I'm not drawing conclusions. I am repeating what an official at the IDNR told me. Straight forward and no punches pulled. I would have been there too, but had a deer to take care of this morning.  This is not where emails and public input counts. That is through the Administrative Rules Process which will follow in November.. BUT.. as I said ... in my opinion - It's a done deal.. With that said I'm off to Vanderburgh County OR spending my second buck money down in Kentucky.. . . |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 11, 2006 16:39:44 GMT -5
..................Still doesn't explain the 4 to 1 in speaker ratio. Workday and deerseason. 8 hour round trip plus meeting time for someone from the far corners of the state Bingo.. Most folks just want to go hunting and do not worry about the where fors and how rules are decided. Whatever the DNR comes up with the folks still just go deer hunting. One buck or two bucks does not impact them in the least. As you said -"I'm a brown-and-down deer hunter so this issue doesn't affect me one way or the other." . |
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Oct 11, 2006 16:53:24 GMT -5
..................Still doesn't explain the 4 to 1 in speaker ratio. Workday and deerseason. 8 hour round trip plus meeting time for someone from the far corners of the state Bingo.. Most folks just want to go hunting and do not worry about the where fors and how rules are decided. Whatever the DNR comes up with the folks still just go deer hunting. One buck or two bucks does not impact them in the least. As you said -"I'm a brown-and-down deer hunter so this issue doesn't affect me one way or the other." . And that`s a shame-letting a group of folks decide they`re hunting regs and not caring what gets done to them.  I`m a brown and down hunter too Jack-however-I very STRONGLY resent the obr being made a permanent regulation, as it`s not for the good of the herd, as I`ve said scores of times, it`s simply someone else`s deer management being shoved down our throats. And I meant what I said-I doubt you`ll have to wait very long before you hear the chatter about AR`s. |
|
|
|
Post by semisneak on Oct 11, 2006 19:25:58 GMT -5
6 emails total. Who were we supposed to e mail?  I believe this has turned into kind of a personal war . I visited another Indiana forum where I couldnt believe the derogatory comments that were being made about the people on this forum. Lots of name calling and bashing. I have to commend Woody on his class while posting his arguments against obr. All his comments were backed by statistics and facts.......not name calling and hype. When its all said and done I will be glad when this crap is over. |
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Oct 11, 2006 20:01:08 GMT -5
Like Gundude said..... I'm not going to loose sleep either way. I'm for it, and haven't been called any names (at least on THIS topic...LOL), nor have I cast any stones. It's just another ingredient in the pie, but when it comes out of the oven we all want to eat a piece. I doubt that whatever side wins or looses, those hunters wont enter the woods "bitter" or "chest puffed out" more so than their rival on this issue. From the report that Jack gave, I agree more so with the 1 fella that spoke that just wants closure.......
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 12, 2006 4:07:48 GMT -5
What a fiasco.......... The IBA? Wasnt they one of the groups that pushed for and supported the original one buck 5 year trial? NOW THEY DON'T HAVE A POSITION? Seems kind of weak kneed to me. Do you think we would of even had the 5 year trial without the IBA support?..... So will all future deer regulations be decided by popular vote?....You think gun hunters want more time? Every deer regulation change spurrs another. The IDNR is proposing another 5 years.......5 years so they don't have to address the license structure. Indiana deer hunters are being robbed with our current license structure under a OBR....I can support a OBR ..**IF** the IDNR only required deer hunters to purchase ONE BUCK TAG PER DEER SEASON!!!!! LET'S START A SURVEY! |
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 12, 2006 5:14:05 GMT -5
Any time oppurtunity is lost, (perhaps thrown away would be more accurate), it should concern everyone. However, most people hunt only one season and had nothing to lose, which in part explains the low response rate.
|
|
