What is the deal with all of the small bucks???

[ironjaw]

IMO, as far as QDM goes, I pass up on anything less than an 8pt, don't even give them a second look. I like taking 2-4 does a yr to feed my family thru the winter months. I work construction, and work gets slow thru the winter months and the deer meat helps offset the grocery bill.....having said all that, if I only have 1, or 2 in the freezer, come the last day of firearm/muzzy season. "If it's brown, it's down!"

 

[Ashkelon]

We have property that overlap Indiana and Ohio. Last year a 205 score buck taken. (not by me!) But I have taken many 130-150 class deer. This year I have been out bow and taken 2 does but after Sat and Sun shotgun season only took a small 6 point with a screwed up rack. Otherwise he walks. Problem is nobody lets the little ones walk.
Too many people putting down bucks. We need to take more does and less bucks

 

[jbwhttail]

Sad to see that Firehawk supports the means used to take sound wildlife management from the proffesional deer biologists within IDNR! I'm sure if it was congress taking away a 2nd amendment right, he would be screaming!

Different issue that benifits his idea of hunting, so the use of "elected government officials" is acceptable.................

Blackoak, you are incorrect in your belief in what happens on the property next to you. It DOES affect you! That is unless you have a deer proof fence seperating you. do you really think deer know fence or road boundaries?

You justify your actions by validating others.......

 

[philagothon]

Blackoak, you are incorrect in your belief in what happens on the property next to you. It DOES affect you! That is unless you have a deer proof fence seperating you. do you really think deer know fence or road boundaries?

You justify your actions by validating others.......

Yes, and a butterfly flapping its wings in Japan can cause a hurricane here. At some point you have to draw a line. You do as you like on your side of the fence and I'll do as I like on my side. Don't go crying to the Nanny (state) and asking for dark of night regulations just because you don't like what I am doing.

IDNR was told to reduce the herd. Their plan did not have anything to do with reducing the herd. It had everything to do with catering to a select few by forcing more regulations on everyone. When the BS regulations were brought into the light most people disapproved and the legislators went with the will of the people instead of the special interest groups, who woulda thunk it.

My personal opinion on QDMA? I think it's great on a personal level and even better when the approach is shared amongst several neighboring landowners. But we have no right to force our will on someone else's property.

ETA: If you have never disagreed with an "expert", you've led a pretty boring life. Experts are everywhere and many of them disagree with each other. This ain't about experts, it's about the will of the people.

 

[blackoak]

Sad to see that Firehawk supports the means used to take sound wildlife management from the proffesional deer biologists within IDNR! I'm sure if it was congress taking away a 2nd amendment right, he would be screaming!

Different issue that benifits his idea of hunting, so the use of "elected government officials" is acceptable.................

Blackoak, you are incorrect in your belief in what happens on the property next to you. It DOES affect you! That is unless you have a deer proof fence seperating you. do you really think deer know fence or road boundaries?

You justify your actions by validating others.......

JB, I hate to break it to you, but you sure as hell don't own the deer in the state of Indiana as you seem to insinuate. How other manage deer on their property is really no concern of yours, or the IDA, or any other "stake holder" as long as it is legal. "When science meets tradition there will be sparks"..... Well the sparks flew didn't they.

 

[philagothon]

The premise behind the proposed changes was solid. Reduce the number of does and the herd will shrink. It was the ridiculously biased changes that were a problem. Like it or not, the Orange Army takes far more deer than the bowhunters. Rather than alienating them a proper approach would utilize them.

Instead of taking a week from the firearms guys, give them a week. This will give them the time to wait for a buck to be proud of and reduce the Brown 'n Down mentality. It is also likely to reduce the volley of fire heard on opening morning.

2nd. If you want more does taken, make them cheaper. Meat hunters don't care as much about the rack, but if the price of admission is the same, eh might as well get the buck tag. Make the 1st tag (and all subsequent tags as well) $5 each. Meat hunters will be happy to save a few dollars and QDM guys will be happy to save a few bucks.

While they are at it, they can get the outta state guys in on the antlerless harvest as well. Charge them $20 each. My father-in-law lives in WV. Both of our states are so hostile to out of state hunters that it is cheaper for us to meet in KY and both of us buy out of state licenses there.

Of course, while we are in KY, we can use any centerfire rifle. While I certainly would not advocate for taking a Hi Point 9mm carbine into the field, why can't we use a .243 (after all, it's safe enough to use in a handgun). Allowing the use of lighter recoiling centerfire rifles would encourage greater participation amongst women and youth. For those too flat areas, allow it on a county by county basis (of course a .243 handgun will still be legal there).

I've gone on long enough, but any of my ideas would likely be as, if not more, effective as the now defunct proposal, without pi$$ing off near as many people.

 

[selinoid44]

Sounds to me like a few of you are not seeing bigger and older mature bucks in your counties. Our county and the neighboring counties from what I know and hear from friends and neighbors, is that the one buck rule has GREATLY benefited the buck herd. Doe populations are a little heavy and we would all benefit by taking our quota of does. However that being said, the price of the tags are definetly an issue with most people. Deer meat is basically all that my family eats, other than pork and chicken. Everyone that I know is in favor of keeping the one buck rule. Just my

 

[Dukshead]

Just like others before me, I am in favor of the one buck rule. My property has greatly benefitted from it and I really believe we have a better deer herd in IN because of it. I get to see most of the deer mature and turn into bigger deer. Yes, some of them get taken away from my property, but it gives me a real fighting chance to take a big deer year after year (along with some good property mgmt)Yes, I too am seeing tons of young bucks this year in Johnson Co. alone. I bet I have seen at least 15 different bucks from age 1-3. I think I have only seen 4 bucks older than that and took one of them (in another thread). I love seeing deer in the woods. I would also be in favor of cheaper doe tags. IN is really screwed up when it come to deer hunting. Anyone ever look at the regs for other states arounfd IN? Some states have 2 or 3 buck rules and up to 6 or 7 does without purchaseing extra tags (specifically talking about TN here because I hunt there as well). But back to the OP, yes I am seeing young bucks this year as well and I can't wait for some of them to mature in the next couple of years.

 

[blackoak]

Did you guys know that since the incorporation of the OBR Indiana's buck harvest over all has increased every year and NOT decreased. Firearms season has always and forever been one buck. The OBR did curtail the bow hunter from killing one during archery season and then tagging one during firearms.

 

[Jack Ryan]

The premise behind the proposed changes was solid. Reduce the number of does and the herd will shrink. It was the ridiculously biased changes that were a problem. Like it or not, the Orange Army takes far more deer than the bowhunters. Rather than alienating them a proper approach would utilize them.

They don't want to admit the goal is to reduce the size of the herd (your opportunity to hunt) until they have enough people convinced it is for your own good.

Think of it this way and see if it fits WHAT IS DONE, regardless of what is said. Reduce the deer herd pacifying insurance companies who want to collect premiums not pay damages. Reduce the deer herd to pacify farmers complaining of crop losses. INCREASE the value of land leases offering deer hunting on private land beyond the control of DNR.

Add up that list of "stake holders" and put them in to win / loss columns and see which heading you fit under.

 

[blackoak]

Just like others before me, I am in favor of the one buck rule. My property has greatly benefitted from it and I really believe we have a better deer herd in IN because of it. I get to see most of the deer mature and turn into bigger deer. Yes, some of them get taken away from my property, but it gives me a real fighting chance to take a big deer year after year (along with some good property mgmt)Yes, I too am seeing tons of young bucks this year in Johnson Co. alone. I bet I have seen at least 15 different bucks from age 1-3. I think I have only seen 4 bucks older than that and took one of them (in another thread). I love seeing deer in the woods. I would also be in favor of cheaper doe tags. IN is really screwed up when it come to deer hunting. Anyone ever look at the regs for other states arounfd IN? Some states have 2 or 3 buck rules and up to 6 or 7 does without purchaseing extra tags (specifically talking about TN here because I hunt there as well). But back to the OP, yes I am seeing young bucks this year as well and I can't wait for some of them to mature in the next couple of years.

Did your property that you hunt have several bow hunters taking a buck with a bow and also tagging one with a gun prior the OBR? I hope your answer is yes, because that is the only way you are seeing results of the OBR. Indiana has always and forever been one buck limit during firearms season. That is one reason Indiana has seen an increase in mature bucks being tagged during the archery season. It takes a pretty nice deer for certain types of archers to pull the trigger on a buck now.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Did you guys know that since the incorporation of the OBR Indiana's buck harvest over all has increased every year and NOT decreased. Firearms season has always and forever been one buck. The OBR did curtail the bow hunter from killing one during archery season and then tagging one during firearms.

Seemed kind of dumb to think it would make more than a point something difference in the total number of bucks killed before it passed.

Seems even dumber to think it's made even that much difference in the total number of bucks killed or left alive now.

Don't you think?

What it has accomplished it to pacify the envious many out the skills to kill a trophy deer who's blood boils watching people, with the skills, kill more than one.

What it has done is take away something PAID for by hunters who purchased lifetime licenses allowing them to kill ONE buck with ARCHERY EQUIPMENT and to still hunt for ONE more BUCK with a firearm. He just might kill a few does while he's out there hunting bucks that he won't kill if he considers himself done after archery.

It's had no affective change in the buck population in the general deer herd in Indiana. I can see how it my have a large affect on a deer herd you hunt from a little shooting houses on a deer farm where they are raised like jumping cattle with feeders and mineral blocks training them for 9 months of the year. Now at that point they may need to go out and solicit a few gimme hunters to come and whack does for them. If would probably go over better if they invite kids and noobies over to the shooting house first to clear out a shooting lane through the dumbest farm deer first. Just don't shoot the "trophy".

 

[Dukshead]

Answer is no. The property I hunt on has 4 hunters who each take one buck per year usually with a bow. 2 out of the last 4 years we have allowed one of our children to shoot a larger buck with a gun. I have been on said property for 9 years now and it seems to get better each year. Granted we do a lot of work with a couple food plots and water holes and it sure seems to pay off. Seems like the 4 of us being a litle more picky on our one buck has allowed other deer to mature to a higher level year after year. I don't know if the OBR has made a difference or not. I don't claim to be a trophy hunter or "antler hunter" so it really doesn't bothr me that I can only shoot one buck. Now ask me that again when i am in the stand with my "one" already in the freezer and a little larger or better one comes by and I might change my answer then.

 

[firehawk1]

Sad to see that Firehawk supports the means used to take sound wildlife management from the proffesional deer biologists within IDNR! I'm sure if it was congress taking away a 2nd amendment right, he would be screaming!

Different issue that benifits his idea of hunting, so the use of "elected government officials" is acceptable.................

Blackoak, you are incorrect in your belief in what happens on the property next to you. It DOES affect you! That is unless you have a deer proof fence seperating you. do you really think deer know fence or road boundaries?

You justify your actions by validating others.......

Nice try on skewing what I was saying. I have NO desire to take away the ability of "professional" deer biologists to make decisions. (Not exactly sure what a "professional" deer biologist is though.) I am simply wanting ALL hunters in the state to have the ability to be involved AT THE SAME LEVEL as the IDHA, etc... in IDNR's decision making, not just small organizations who "claim" to speak for me/us. How dare ANYONE claim to speak for me. Unless I'm personally asked, no one knows exactly what my desires are.

There were no sound decisions being made with the proposed rule changes. How can the state expect to reduce the size of the deer herd if they reduce the amount of time the majority of deer hunters can be in the woods? And by majority I mean gun hunters. Firearms take more deer than archery every year don't they? So I suppose the correct decision would have been to reduce the archery season, and INCREASE the firearm seasons. Hell bow hunters already have 3 months to hunt. But again this had nothing to do with reducing the size of the herd in the state, but everything to do with catering to trophy bow hunters. Again they have 3 months to hunt, they want the rut etc... where does it stop?

As far as what happens on any adjoining property I/anyone hunts on.... it's none of my/your, or anyone elses business. I've said it many times, the deer herd in Indiana belongs to ALL of us. Simply because someone see's a large mature buck on their property dosen't mean it's "their" deer. If it wanders (as deer are known to do) onto someone elses property, and they take it so what. It wasn't "your" deer to begin with. Same thing with a smaller less mature buck, it's the hunter decision whether to take the animal or not.

As far as OBR IMO, there have always been PLENTY of large mature bucks in Indiana. The hunter simply had to put forth the effort to go out and "get them". Some hunters want to walk 50 yards from their truck, sit down and take a large mature buck. It isn't supposed to happen that way IMO. To me that is simply being a lazy hunter. For something as special as a trophy buck, you need to put a little effort into it, and scouting and food plots aren't it.

 

[blackoak]

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-2009_Deer_Season_Summary.pdf
Here's last years deer harvest report if anyone interested.

 

[jbwhttail]

Blackoak;

Why don't you get your facts straight before posting? At one time a deer hunter in Indiana could take four(4) bucks not counting any special hunt! So your comment that gun hunters could only take one is not correct.

Archery 2 deer EITHER sex

General firearm 1 antlered deer

Muzzleloader 1 deer either sex

It took a couple decades to get to one buck.

I know where you get your info and you really need to quit drinking the Kool Aid from Woody.

 

[AZ Hunter]

Answer is no. The property I hunt on has 4 hunters who each take one buck per year usually with a bow. 2 out of the last 4 years we have allowed one of our children to shoot a larger buck with a gun. I have been on said property for 9 years now and it seems to get better each year. Granted we do a lot of work with a couple food plots and water holes and it sure seems to pay off. Seems like the 4 of us being a litle more picky on our one buck has allowed other deer to mature to a higher level year after year. I don't know if the OBR has made a difference or not. I don't claim to be a trophy hunter or "antler hunter" so it really doesn't bothr me that I can only shoot one buck. Now ask me that again when i am in the stand with my "one" already in the freezer and a little larger or better one comes by and I might change my answer then.

Maybe I am reading this wrong but are you somehow implying that you would take more than one buck if your hunting party agreed to it? If thats the case, how do you do that legally? hmmmm....

 

[jbwhttail]

FireHawk:

It was VERY sound reasoning on how fewer days gun hunting would kill more deer.........With fewer days it would force hunters to shoot the deer in front of them rather than trophy hunt and go home empty handed after pushing them around for two weeks. the early antlerless season would have taken does from the herd and made the bucks search harder during the gun season. Moving the season a week later would have made it easier for a guy to take a week vacation using only 3 vacation days.........

I could go on and on but you seem to know more than our proffesional deer biologist. AGAIN this was the IDNR plan not the IDHA or the IBA, you are posting false statements.

But again that is how some people operate...........

 

[firehawk1]

FireHawk:

It was VERY sound reasoning on how fewer days gun hunting would kill more deer.........With fewer days it would force hunters to shoot the deer in front of them rather than trophy hunt and go home empty handed after pushing them around for two weeks. the early antlerless season would have taken does from the herd and made the bucks search harder during the gun season. Moving the season a week later would have made it easier for a guy to take a week vacation using only 3 vacation days.........

I could go on and on but you seem to know more than our proffesional deer biologist. AGAIN this was the IDNR plan not the IDHA or the IBA, you are posting false statements.

But again that is how some people operate...........

No... it's not how I operate. I NEVER said/posted ANYWHERE it was the IDHA, or IBA's plan. All I EVER said was I KNEW those two organizations were involved. And I was right, those two organizations are "stakeholders" with FAR more influence than I, OR most hunters have.

EDIT: I should not have used the word "influence". INPUT would be a better term. Apparently the majority of hunters that responded had more influence..... THIS TIME.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Wonder how many of our "professional" biologist are doing their own deer whacking on depredation permits with rifles before the rest of mere ordinary stake holders battle the orange army? ROTFL.