See....
NRC: Current Rule Proposals
My input....
The DNR surveyed 25,000 Indiana deer hunters. Of that total 36% (9,000) were single season deer hunters that the OBR has not had and will never will have any effect on their deer hunting and would undoubtedly vote to keep the OBR. So if less than half of the remaining Indiana deer hunters surveyed (45% or 7,200) voted for the OBR they would end up with the 65% that they now claim to be in favor of the OBR. In my opinion, the survey is flawed.
The DNR proposal states - “Harvest data indicates that we have accelerated our harvest of more mature male deer (older than 1.5 years old) since the “one buck rule” has been established and decreased the number of 1.5 year old males in our harvest (see graph below). Whether this trend is specifically due to the one buck rule is difficult to ascertain due to a number of factors (increased license price at the onset of the one buck rule, continuing evolving hunting regulations, aging hunters, changed expectations, etc).
We really don’t know, and will never know, if we were successful at changing the age structure of males on the landscape, but we are certain that our male harvest has changed drastically since the inception of the one buck rule, and with our current set of regulations, have balanced our male: female harvest ratio for the first time since approximately 2006 and have maintained that course in subsequent years.”
Both the present and past Indiana deer biologists have stated that returning to a two buck trial would give them the information to tell if the OBR had anything to do with the change in the age structure. Let’s let our biologist have that opportunity.
Jim Mitchell stated, “The OBR would appear to have slightly accelerated the increase in older bucks, but we will not know whether such is the case without a trial return to the two-buck rule “
Chad Stewart said, “………we will never truly know the impact of the One Buck Rule without returning to a two buck limit for a duration of 2-4 years.”
What does the Indiana deer hunter think about the 3 year two buck trial?
From the 2011 DNR deer survey –
http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/IN_Deer_Report.pdf
56% are in favor of it as opposed to just 50% saying no “changing the One Buck Rule at all”.
59% support an Earn A Buck on the second buck.
70% of the respondents indicated that an Earn a Buck would make them very or somewhat likely to harvest an additional antlerless deer in
Indiana.
“ Five potential actions regarding the One Buck Rule were read to respondents, and they were asked if they supported or opposed each action (one of the actions was the “no action” option). The most support was for allowing hunters to earn the privilege to harvest a second buck if they have already harvested an antlerless deer (59% support) and for conducting a 3-year pilot study that removes the One Buck Rule and returns to a Two Buck Rule that allows one antlered deer to be taken during Archery Season and one antlered deer to be taken during the Firearms or Muzzleloader Season combined (56%). Just half support not changing the One Buck Rule at all (50%). ”
Before we add this one buck restriction, loss of hunter opportunities and loss of revenues I ask that the DNR allow Chad Stewart to conduct a two buck trial for the 3 years. The information gathered would be immeasurable to not only Indiana, but any state considering any change in buck limits
As you might know, the OBR trial was originally pushed through by two organized hunting groups to try and grow more “trophy bucks” in Indiana. Never mind that Indiana was getting their fair share of trophy bucks already. No doubt that we have experiencing an age shift in our bucks but according to Jim Mitchell, the Indiana Deer Biologist at that time, that trend had already started prior to the OBR coming into effect. Chad Stewart has echoed Jim’s statement.
Are some hunters seeing bigger and more bucks in 2011 than they did in 2001 (pre-OBR)? Without a doubt. But, claiming that it was the OBR that did it is a giant leap.
Did we not see more and bigger bucks in 2001 than we did in 1991? Again, without a doubt.
It is a NATURAL progression in a growing herd and maturing deer hunters.
More and bigger bucks occuring is happening nationwide in just about every whitetail producing state- even multiple buck limit states.
Why is this happening? Because we, as hunters, are getting older, more experienced and more selective in what we will shoot.
I don't know of anyone, who after they have a few years deer hunting under their belt, that doesn't hold out for "more and bigger bucks".
The OBR is getting all the credit for something that is happening naturally. We are all starting to practice the QDM logo of - "Let him go, so he can grow".
I see that most of the hunters for the OBR are younger and do not know how far the Indiana herd has come. We are 6th place in total record book bucks. Nothing to sneeze at
Buck age shifts are occurring all over the country and according to the Quality Deer Management Association this is due to “A significant indication of the spread of the QDM philosophy..”
See … http://www.qdma.com/media/WhitetailReport09.pdf
Yearling Buck Harvest Trends 1999 - 2005
“ A significant indication of the spread of the QDM philosophy, the percentage of yearlings (1½-year-olds) in the nationwide buck harvest declined from an average of 51 percent in 1999 to 45 percent in 2005. During this same period the percentage of 2½-year-olds increased from 28 to 32percent and 3½-year-olds or older increased from 19 to 23 percent.”
Midwest Age Structure of the Buck Harvest in 2009
In 2009, the average percentage of the antlered buck harvest that was 1½ years old was 41 percent, equal to the percentage in 2008. The data below shows how the yearling percentage of the antlered buck harvest in the U.S. has changed during the past two decades. In 2009, Arkansas averaged the fewest yearlings (10 percent of antlered buck harvest) and South Carolina averaged the most (65 percent of antlered buck harvest).
Other notables included Mississippi (14 percent), Louisiana (16 percent from DMAP areas) and Missouri (19 percent in antler point restriction counties) averaging fewer than one yearling per five harvested antlered bucks.
QDMA - Percentage of Yearling Bucks in the U.S. Buck Harvest
1989 - 62%
1994 - 57%
1999 - 51%
2001 - 48%
2003 - 47%
2005 - 45%
2007 - 43%
2009 - 41%
2010 - 38%
Indiana’s 2010 yearling buck harvest percentage was 40%. That is 2 percentage points above the average.
Our two buck limit neighboring state of Illinois had a 39.1 % yearling buck take in 2010.
What this means is this age shift is occurring in every whitetail producing state and is not just an Indiana OBR phenomenon. The only thing that is consistent among these states is that deer hunters are aging, getting more experienced, becoming more selective and QDM has caught on. No doubt that OBR proponents lay claim that this age shift is due to the OBR, but age data from other states proves otherwise. We are not alone in “growing trophy bucks”.
Adopting a One Buck Rule when the data clearly shows that it we are about average for all whitetail producing states is reducing a lot of opportunity and revenue producing for a totally unproven theory.
Notable quotes on the OBR -
Dr. Jim Mitchell had stated,” This rule will not appreciably change the antlered age structure because very few hunters take two antlered deer in a given season," DNR deer biologist
Chad Stewart, deer research biologist for the DNR, explained, “The Division has always maintained that the OBR is more of a social issue than a biological issue. Prior to 2002, approximately 15 percent of hunters took two bucks in a year, so the actual impact of decreasing the limit to one buck is minimal."
Some Indiana antlered deer harvest statistics.
Early Archery Buck Kills…
1999 - 9,067
2000 - 10,935
2001 - 12,016
Pre-OBR Average - 10,673
2002 - 7,397
2003 - 9,084
2004 - 7,985
2005 - 8,845
2006 - 9,390
2007 - 9,715
2008 - 9,193
2009 –10,076
2010 – 8,930
Post OBR Average - 8,801
Difference – minus 1,872 ( - 17.5%)
Jim Mitchell said that “the bowhunters shot themselves in the foot supporting the OBR” and he was right.
Firearm (Shotgun and MZ) Buck Kills
1999 – 37,075
2000 – 33,500
2001 – 36,082
Pre OBR Average- 35,552
2002 – 39,560
2003 – 46,488
2004 - 43,107
2005 – 43,393
2006 – 39,438
2007 – 39,394
2008 – 41,431
2009 – 42,596
2010 – 43,057
Post OBR Average – 42,052
Difference – Plus 6,500 (+ 18.2%)
Jim Mitchell also said that the OBR would only transfer some of the early archery harvest to later firearm and muzzleloader seasons. Looking at the harvest data I would say that he was right again.
We are killing more bucks under the one-buck rule that we did under the two-buck rule. Where are the “buck savings”?
Personally I believe that the second buck tags (either as a trial or an Earn A Buck) will help on the control of antlerless deer as the successful early archery buck hunters would have a better reason to get back out there in the firearm season, where they could take more antlerless deer at the same time. One can not kill deer sitting on the couch at home.
Throw in the Earn a Buck on the second buck and that would further entice one to go harvest more antlerless deer.
The purchase of the second buck tag would also help make up any monetary shortfalls the IDNR might be experiencing.
I would ask that the DNR Fish and Widlife and the NRC that in order to really evaluate the OBR that we do return to a 2 to 3 year two buck trial period so that Chad Stewart, our Indiana deer biologist, can ascertain for certain whether the opportunities that we are giving up is worth any possible gain in age from an OBR.
Let’s make the resource decisions on good deer biology and not on social whims.
.
NRC: Current Rule Proposals
My input....
The OBR (one buck rule)
The DNR surveyed 25,000 Indiana deer hunters. Of that total 36% (9,000) were single season deer hunters that the OBR has not had and will never will have any effect on their deer hunting and would undoubtedly vote to keep the OBR. So if less than half of the remaining Indiana deer hunters surveyed (45% or 7,200) voted for the OBR they would end up with the 65% that they now claim to be in favor of the OBR. In my opinion, the survey is flawed.
The DNR proposal states - “Harvest data indicates that we have accelerated our harvest of more mature male deer (older than 1.5 years old) since the “one buck rule” has been established and decreased the number of 1.5 year old males in our harvest (see graph below). Whether this trend is specifically due to the one buck rule is difficult to ascertain due to a number of factors (increased license price at the onset of the one buck rule, continuing evolving hunting regulations, aging hunters, changed expectations, etc).
We really don’t know, and will never know, if we were successful at changing the age structure of males on the landscape, but we are certain that our male harvest has changed drastically since the inception of the one buck rule, and with our current set of regulations, have balanced our male: female harvest ratio for the first time since approximately 2006 and have maintained that course in subsequent years.”
Both the present and past Indiana deer biologists have stated that returning to a two buck trial would give them the information to tell if the OBR had anything to do with the change in the age structure. Let’s let our biologist have that opportunity.
Jim Mitchell stated, “The OBR would appear to have slightly accelerated the increase in older bucks, but we will not know whether such is the case without a trial return to the two-buck rule “
Chad Stewart said, “………we will never truly know the impact of the One Buck Rule without returning to a two buck limit for a duration of 2-4 years.”
What does the Indiana deer hunter think about the 3 year two buck trial?
From the 2011 DNR deer survey –
http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/IN_Deer_Report.pdf
56% are in favor of it as opposed to just 50% saying no “changing the One Buck Rule at all”.
59% support an Earn A Buck on the second buck.
70% of the respondents indicated that an Earn a Buck would make them very or somewhat likely to harvest an additional antlerless deer in
Indiana.
“ Five potential actions regarding the One Buck Rule were read to respondents, and they were asked if they supported or opposed each action (one of the actions was the “no action” option). The most support was for allowing hunters to earn the privilege to harvest a second buck if they have already harvested an antlerless deer (59% support) and for conducting a 3-year pilot study that removes the One Buck Rule and returns to a Two Buck Rule that allows one antlered deer to be taken during Archery Season and one antlered deer to be taken during the Firearms or Muzzleloader Season combined (56%). Just half support not changing the One Buck Rule at all (50%). ”
Before we add this one buck restriction, loss of hunter opportunities and loss of revenues I ask that the DNR allow Chad Stewart to conduct a two buck trial for the 3 years. The information gathered would be immeasurable to not only Indiana, but any state considering any change in buck limits
As you might know, the OBR trial was originally pushed through by two organized hunting groups to try and grow more “trophy bucks” in Indiana. Never mind that Indiana was getting their fair share of trophy bucks already. No doubt that we have experiencing an age shift in our bucks but according to Jim Mitchell, the Indiana Deer Biologist at that time, that trend had already started prior to the OBR coming into effect. Chad Stewart has echoed Jim’s statement.
Are some hunters seeing bigger and more bucks in 2011 than they did in 2001 (pre-OBR)? Without a doubt. But, claiming that it was the OBR that did it is a giant leap.
Did we not see more and bigger bucks in 2001 than we did in 1991? Again, without a doubt.
It is a NATURAL progression in a growing herd and maturing deer hunters.
More and bigger bucks occuring is happening nationwide in just about every whitetail producing state- even multiple buck limit states.
Why is this happening? Because we, as hunters, are getting older, more experienced and more selective in what we will shoot.
I don't know of anyone, who after they have a few years deer hunting under their belt, that doesn't hold out for "more and bigger bucks".
The OBR is getting all the credit for something that is happening naturally. We are all starting to practice the QDM logo of - "Let him go, so he can grow".
I see that most of the hunters for the OBR are younger and do not know how far the Indiana herd has come. We are 6th place in total record book bucks. Nothing to sneeze at
Buck age shifts are occurring all over the country and according to the Quality Deer Management Association this is due to “A significant indication of the spread of the QDM philosophy..”
See … http://www.qdma.com/media/WhitetailReport09.pdf
Yearling Buck Harvest Trends 1999 - 2005
“ A significant indication of the spread of the QDM philosophy, the percentage of yearlings (1½-year-olds) in the nationwide buck harvest declined from an average of 51 percent in 1999 to 45 percent in 2005. During this same period the percentage of 2½-year-olds increased from 28 to 32percent and 3½-year-olds or older increased from 19 to 23 percent.”
Midwest Age Structure of the Buck Harvest in 2009
In 2009, the average percentage of the antlered buck harvest that was 1½ years old was 41 percent, equal to the percentage in 2008. The data below shows how the yearling percentage of the antlered buck harvest in the U.S. has changed during the past two decades. In 2009, Arkansas averaged the fewest yearlings (10 percent of antlered buck harvest) and South Carolina averaged the most (65 percent of antlered buck harvest).
Other notables included Mississippi (14 percent), Louisiana (16 percent from DMAP areas) and Missouri (19 percent in antler point restriction counties) averaging fewer than one yearling per five harvested antlered bucks.
QDMA - Percentage of Yearling Bucks in the U.S. Buck Harvest
1989 - 62%
1994 - 57%
1999 - 51%
2001 - 48%
2003 - 47%
2005 - 45%
2007 - 43%
2009 - 41%
2010 - 38%
Indiana’s 2010 yearling buck harvest percentage was 40%. That is 2 percentage points above the average.
Our two buck limit neighboring state of Illinois had a 39.1 % yearling buck take in 2010.
What this means is this age shift is occurring in every whitetail producing state and is not just an Indiana OBR phenomenon. The only thing that is consistent among these states is that deer hunters are aging, getting more experienced, becoming more selective and QDM has caught on. No doubt that OBR proponents lay claim that this age shift is due to the OBR, but age data from other states proves otherwise. We are not alone in “growing trophy bucks”.
Adopting a One Buck Rule when the data clearly shows that it we are about average for all whitetail producing states is reducing a lot of opportunity and revenue producing for a totally unproven theory.
Notable quotes on the OBR -
Dr. Jim Mitchell had stated,” This rule will not appreciably change the antlered age structure because very few hunters take two antlered deer in a given season," DNR deer biologist
Chad Stewart, deer research biologist for the DNR, explained, “The Division has always maintained that the OBR is more of a social issue than a biological issue. Prior to 2002, approximately 15 percent of hunters took two bucks in a year, so the actual impact of decreasing the limit to one buck is minimal."
Some Indiana antlered deer harvest statistics.
Early Archery Buck Kills…
1999 - 9,067
2000 - 10,935
2001 - 12,016
Pre-OBR Average - 10,673
2002 - 7,397
2003 - 9,084
2004 - 7,985
2005 - 8,845
2006 - 9,390
2007 - 9,715
2008 - 9,193
2009 –10,076
2010 – 8,930
Post OBR Average - 8,801
Difference – minus 1,872 ( - 17.5%)
Jim Mitchell said that “the bowhunters shot themselves in the foot supporting the OBR” and he was right.
Firearm (Shotgun and MZ) Buck Kills
1999 – 37,075
2000 – 33,500
2001 – 36,082
Pre OBR Average- 35,552
2002 – 39,560
2003 – 46,488
2004 - 43,107
2005 – 43,393
2006 – 39,438
2007 – 39,394
2008 – 41,431
2009 – 42,596
2010 – 43,057
Post OBR Average – 42,052
Difference – Plus 6,500 (+ 18.2%)
Jim Mitchell also said that the OBR would only transfer some of the early archery harvest to later firearm and muzzleloader seasons. Looking at the harvest data I would say that he was right again.
We are killing more bucks under the one-buck rule that we did under the two-buck rule. Where are the “buck savings”?
Personally I believe that the second buck tags (either as a trial or an Earn A Buck) will help on the control of antlerless deer as the successful early archery buck hunters would have a better reason to get back out there in the firearm season, where they could take more antlerless deer at the same time. One can not kill deer sitting on the couch at home.
Throw in the Earn a Buck on the second buck and that would further entice one to go harvest more antlerless deer.
The purchase of the second buck tag would also help make up any monetary shortfalls the IDNR might be experiencing.
I would ask that the DNR Fish and Widlife and the NRC that in order to really evaluate the OBR that we do return to a 2 to 3 year two buck trial period so that Chad Stewart, our Indiana deer biologist, can ascertain for certain whether the opportunities that we are giving up is worth any possible gain in age from an OBR.
Let’s make the resource decisions on good deer biology and not on social whims.
.
