Here are some emails I received in response to Sunday’s column suggesting that the overall buck limit be reduced from two to one for the deer hunting seasons.
I think the one buck limit would encourage poaching and/or deer not getting checked in. I hunt mostly archery, which is a long season. With the (one buck) limit, if I tag a buck early in the season, that limits the rest of the season to does only.
That would reduce my desire to hunt, especially in inclement weather. I always harvest a doe first anyway. I think the limit would keep honest hunters out of the woods if they couldn’t shoot another buck all season long.
Dave Cameron, Oklahoma City
I think going to the one buck limit would be ideal. In just a few years, I think you would really see it pay off. There are plenty of does for people to harvest.
Colby Wiss, Mulhall
I like to have a second chance to shoot a bigger buck if I happen to see one throughout the deer season. So therefore, I don’t like the idea of having a one buck limit.
Tim Phan, Oklahoma City
As a hunter who hunts all three deer seasons, I believe that the two buck limit is restrictive enough. A one buck limit would only result in less hunting opportunities and people shooting more than one buck and not checking it.
Mike Buerger, Mustang
I favor a one buck limit. At the very least, a three to five year trial period would give hunters the opportunity to witness the benefits of a reduced buck harvest.
If hunters are truly interested in hunting opportunities, get into the woods and control the population by harvesting more does.
The only way to truly manage the herd, and assure that a good number of bucks reach maturity before being harvested, is to lower statewide or at least region-wide, limits on bucks.
Gerald McMullin, Kingfisher
Keep it a two buck limit but to shoot a second buck, you have to shoot a doe first.
You should still allow youth to harvest a buck and doe in youth season. I believe you need to make a second week for muzzleloader season just to shoot a doe.
The other thing that has always inhibited me from killing a doe or two is the time it takes to clean a deer and having to much meat in the freezer.
We need more places to take deer donations to “Hunters Against Hunger.” I have to drive almost an hour to donate a deer.
Gary Strong, Duncan
I hunt all three seasons and frankly it makes me mad that I have to let a deer walk early in the season hoping that a bigger one will appear later in the season, only not to get a second chance.
I get no satisfaction shooting a doe. With a one buck limit, if I harvest a buck then my reasons for getting up early and going deer hunting are over.
Steve St. Cyr
Many guys where I hunt talk proudly about taking a buck in each season and they never shoot does.
I think a one buck limit is a great idea, for maybe a couple of years to see how it effects the buck population.
Yes, one buck and possibly increasing an additional doe to the total limit.
V.A. Holmes, Oklahoma City
Put me down on the side of the one buck per hunter. When I was a lad, there were no deer in central Oklahoma.
Moving back to this area in 1998, I find that we are overrun with deer. Each year we see many 4- and 6-point bucks with an occasional 8- or 9-pointer in our area of central Logan County, between the Cimarron Riverand Skeleton Creek. We are literally overrun with does.
The last two years, while pheasant hunting in north-central Kansas, the largest whitetail bucks I’d ever seen appeared frequently. Had our shotguns been rifles and deer season open, we could have had what appeared to be many trophy bucks.