Heartland Outdoors :: Guest Blog :: Why ask for a 1-buck limit? Another great article from Don Higgins. It was great to meet him at the deer classic this year. Anyone know when changes will take place? It seems to me I usually get firearm permit applications mailed to me at the beginning of April. If we are going to see changes I would think they would have to do this fast?
I like Don and a lot of what he writes but that article felt like a lot of "fluff" to me. It could have been summed up as saying "At first I didn't agree with the 1 buck limit because I wanted to hunt late season, but they I realized I was being selfish and now I agree with a 1 buck limit. This, along with the rest of the suggestions made by the IWA are to better the health of our deer herd." I don't disagree with any of that, but I didn't need 15 paragraphs to get the point. As for regulation changes I don't foresee the IDNR simply adopting the IWA's changes because they think they're good ideas. My best guess is we see a small fraction of their proposed changes in implemented in different ways. IMO the simplest way for the IDNR to regulate harvest in various counties is going to be with the amount of firearms permits they issue in those areas. I would expect a pretty steep cutback in many areas. I remember when I was a kid and it wasn't a given that if you applied for a firearms tag you were going to get one, unlike the last few years when so many tags are issued that there are leftovers after the draw. At this point I haven't heard or seen any indication that the IDNR is going to make any major changes to archery regulations. If anything big comes down the pipe I'd be a bit surprised.
I don't agree with one buck limit because of common sense and simple Ecology. If population control us the issue the number of does counts as more of a priority. Populations are up we thin them down and if they are down logic tells us to not shoot as many does. Makes sense that more buck harvests would be warranted just like in the old days. Cutting down firearm permits? Problem is economically the DNR will never limit the amount of doe and firearm tags cause the state depends on that revenue. The only logical way to do it is we need to cut out all these extra firearm seasons.
If it makes people more selective, then I'm all for it. Realistically, I don't think it will ever happen, but i would be ok w/ it if it passed. Generally only kill 1 buck a year anyway.
I think something will be done. Changes will have to take place with the amount of attention the Illinois deer herd received this year. I would think the changes would almost have to be known by now with gun tags needing to be in by the end of April.
I hunt in Illinois and Indiana and personally I like the OBR. It makes me and the other hunters on our property take a second look at every buck and be a little more selective when it comes to harvesting a buck. This OBR rule should allow more bucks to live longer and mature in body size and antler size. I know guys that will see a young buck and decide to take it early in the season because they know they can always fall back on that second tag. If IL had a OBR alot of deer like that probably get a pass for another year at least. If your a meat hunter that same 2.5 year old buck that was passed last year because of the OBR is now bigger with more meat for your freezer the next year. bowhunter_IL_BT IMO if you allow more bucks to live and cut down on the doe harvest that will allow the population to bounce back faster because there will be more bucks to breed the does. Right now if the buck population is indeed low then you also run the risk of not every doe being bred because of lack of bucks in certain areas.
I feel like it is. At least in my area of southern Indiana. But I say that and there will be other people that say no it hasn't helped. I think alot of it really depends on your area.
Henson I'm not encouraging to shoot all bucks but to just keep it at 2 per year. I think most bowhunters are selective when it comes to buck harvests anyway. I see the logic in what your saying. I think in reality every hunter who buys a permit has every intention of filling it. Unfortunately it's not feasable to cut doe tags even though it's the right thing to do. Remember the amount of revenue that is made by selling permits will always take precedence. Last year I passed up 9 different bucks during the rut and hardly saw a doe. DNR could minimize over the counter permits but we will see. In reality I see cutting seasons as happening than cutting down permits
I agree. Since it is the state of Illinois we are talking about its hard telling what direction they will go.
It won't be the way everyone wants. It'll be from one extreme to the other just so they can say they changed something.
I don't think there is any way around it, having a one buck limit WILL keep some bucks alive. Its just that simple. I know if I had a second buck tag in my pocket I probably would have shot a buck last year. KY is a one buck state(well, its supposed to be) and there is a lot of guys that let little bucks walk because they don't wont to burn their buck tag on the first decent buck they see. I have no doubt it would be the same in IL. Sure, you'll still have guys that will drop the first buck they see and don't care how big the rack is but those guys can only shoot one little buck and not two with a one buck limit.
I have lost so much faith in everything that is State of IL...I'm sure this will be a mess for a few years also. Personally - I do not want to see a One buck limit. It has little impact on me as I have shot 2 bucks in a season Twice ever I believe...and even though I like to trophy hunt, I do not like a state deciding that everyone should be doing that. If the biology of the herd suggests its best for deer numbers, then lets talk about it, but we all know a 1 buck limit really has no factor in reducing herd numbers...the does control the herd, both to increase and decrease. The logical approach would be to reduce the extra gun weekends or even reduce days of hunting. The state would still sell all the same tags(revenue), but the reduced days should have the desired impact of less harvest and more bucks making it through season. I like to look at it through the eyes of new hunters now (and my 4 kids)...if they love hunting as much as I did at age 16, and have the time, land, resources to hunt like crazy - I do not want to see them limited to one buck per season. At the same time, if they actually took 2 bucks two or three years in a row I'm confident they would begin to understand self control and the trophy approach with my help. Plus, one buck limit could drive land prices back up if we get too many mature bucks again...sure don't want to see that
The OBR in Indiana has helped a little but a bigger help would be to shorten our firearms seasons. 16 days of shotgun and 16 days of muzzleloader is way too much pressure. Blessings.........Pastorjim
I believe it's been a great success. I use to take the fist buck I saw with a bow and then concentrate on a nice one with my gun tag. Since OBR was put into place that has all changed-- And I feel our buck age structure has improved because of it...
