Oklahoma Bill Reducing Antlered Harvest to 1

[Ohiobucks]

For those of you that think a state going to a 1 buck a year program will help bucks get bigger, you're wrong. There are hunters out there killing anything with horns, even here in Ohio.

Trust me.

And Kyle, if you think that certain hunters will still continue to doe hunt after the buck tag is filled, you're wrong. Again, trust me..... :yes:

Better insert one of these , because the hunter in question will think I'm just joking then......

[huntinsonovagun]

That by itself could result in a free for all. Some have no regard for the deer herd.

Really??? A free for all?? I know most, if not all, guides know how many bucks and does to take off their property. Some leases even set their own regulations within those of state requirements.

Kyle, I aint mad at you at all. The thing is there is no "vote"....except by our beaurocrats. Anyway, I could debate every single reply you had, and I admit I had some poorly worded statements, but that would be useless at this point.

[The_Kat]

Ya I forget that theres no vote, but you can get involved and let your opinion be known. Isn't there an OK Bowhunters Council that is supposed to be the voice of BH's in OK?

[Gator]

I don't dislike the way things are now at all, but I'm all for a one buck limit or earn a buck. If it doesn't pass that is just fine.

Why is it people ( and I'm not saying you are ) seem to get pissy when it comes to stuff like this? You and Ryan both kind of come acrossed that if this thing passes it's my fault and I'm pushing this on you both....again thats just how it comes acrossed to me. I'm not pushing anything, I'm just stating my beliefs on it, and if you notice I continually say if you don't agree....Vote No! It's that simple.:yes:

Guess my biggest gripe is how some people think that just because they wanna grow the heard so THEY can shoot bigger deer then EVERYONE should feel the same way, and to me, that is NOT what hunting is about. But then I amNOT a trophy hunter myself, so I wouldn't understand that thought process.

[wtnhunt]

Have a 3 buck statewide limit here and it would not hurt my feelings a bit for Tennessee to get more aggressive and also adopt a one buck limit. I don't even mind skipping a year of not killing a buck if I think there might be a chance for better quality. Sure there would still be the cheats who have other people check in deer for them, but would help get better age class on the bucks.

[MCH]

Just because someone is for QDM doesn't make them wrong

Just because someone is against a one buck limit doesn't make them against QDM.

[The_Kat]

Just because someone is against a one buck limit doesn't make them against QDM.

k Mr. literal :boxing:

[ruttinbuc]

Really??? A free for all?? I know most, if not all, guides know how many bucks and does to take off their property. Some leases even set their own regulations within those of state requirements.

Not talking about guides and managed properties. I am talking about the public in general. Rules are made for people to follow. Let people do what they want and you will be doing something else in deer season. I'd be all for a 1 buck limit anywhere.

[Dawg]

Why so much hype over buck restrictions? Why not raise cane over making sure the deer herd has proper nutrition throughout the year and doe control? Those two things are a very important factor in growing bigger bucks also, yet this whole "buck restriction" thing gets more attention.

My opinion is, you can't expect bucks to get bigger just by putting restrictions on the amount of harvests or antler size. OK is given six doe tags, correct? Apparently the buck to doe ratio is out of whack. So why not worry about that also? Why not raise cane when only one or two does per hunter are harvested? The state gives you six tags for a reason. Don't need that much meat? Donate it to Hunters for the Hungry or to a local needy family in your community.

Why focus so much attention to just one aspect?

Just my ramblings/opinions. Carry on. :turned: