Buck limit rule shot down
A proposed hunting regulation that would have limited deer hunters to one buck during the muzzleloader and gun seasons combined failed to pass the Oklahoma Wildlife Commission on Monday.
Apparently, the conventional wisdom that “if it’s brown, it’s down” still prevails in Oklahoma.
On Monday, the Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Commission decided against the proposed hunting regulation that would have reduced the buck limit to one for the combined gun and muzzleloader seasons.
Commissioners didn’t vote on the proposal, but instead voted unanimously to withdraw it from consideration.
Deer hunters will still be able to harvest a buck in both the muzzleloader and rifle season if they choose.
Commissioner John Zelbst of Lawton, chairman of the Wildlife Commission’s rule committee, said that the one buck limit proposal is dead for this year. It could be reintroduced next year but, “I do not believe it will come up again for maybe two or three years,” Zelbst said.
The proposal to reduce the buck limit for gun hunters was very controversial and the majority of Oklahoma deer hunters didn’t support it, Zelbst said.
Based on feedback that the Wildlife Department received, about 60 percent of the deer hunters were against it, he said.
“We want to look at it a little longer and see if we have good science,” Zelbst said.
Even though all eight wildlife commissioners voted unanimously to withdraw the proposal from consideration, Commissioner Dan Robbins of Altus expressed disappointment. Robbins said 22 states have laws that protect yearling bucks, but not Oklahoma.
“We protect young fish with slot limits, but we do not offer that for our deer herd,” he said. “Why don’t we do the same with the deer herd? It makes biological sense.”
Robbins said even though the majority of Oklahoma deer hunters did not specifically support the one buck limit, the majority did support some type of restrictions to improve the age structure of the state’s deer herd, either by reducing the buck limit, antler restrictions or requiring hunters to harvest a doe before using their buck tag.
Of the 1,809 public comments received by the Wildlife Department, 744 people favored the one buck proposal, 702 were against it and 363 people were against it but supported and suggested other regulations for stricter management to increase the number of older bucks.
“Everybody gets hung up on the trophy stuff,” Robbins said. “But it’s about improving the health and age structure of the deer herd. Antler size is just a byproduct.”
But Oklahoma hunters who don’t regularly kill two bucks in the gun hunting seasons still want the opportunity to do so, said Alan Peoples, head of the wildlife division for the Wildlife Department.
Most Oklahoma deer hunters don’t get excited about shooting does, he said.
“I heard a lot about it (the buck limit proposal). Yesterday in church they were on me out in the lobby,” Peoples said. “It tugs at the heartstrings of a lot of deer hunters. It shows to us that people take their hunting and fishing very seriously. They are passionate about it.”
In other action Monday, the Wildlife Commission unanimously approved a rule that would prohibit the transfer of shad from any body of water in Oklahoma that has been identified as being infested with Bighead or Silver carp.
Shad and tiny carp are similar in appearance and state wildlife officials are trying to prevent the spread of the Asian carp in Oklahoma.
The original proposal would have made it illegal to transfer shad from any lake or river in Oklahoma to another public body of water, but it was modified Monday to only waters that are infested with Bighead or Silver carp.
The Wildlife Department will list those bodies of infested waters in the Oklahoma Fishing Guide.
Oklahoma waters where Asian carp have been discovered are the Red River and its tributaries below Denison Dam downstream to the Arkansas state line; Grand Lake; The Spring and Neosho rivers from Grand Lake upstream to the Kansas state line; Hudson Lake and the Grand River and its tributaries upstream to Grand Lake.
Wildlife commissioners also passed a rule that hunters who take feral hogs on wildlife managements areas during deer or turkey seasons must use a method of harvest that is legal for those hunting seasons.
Also approved was a measure allowing hunters during the youth deer gun season to shoot a turkey in counties that are open to fall turkey hunting.
The proposal to lower the age limit for youth deer and turkey seasons was rejected.
Thank you for joining our conversation on Outdoors. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
Ed, “Shot Down” does not accurately describe an idea that was tabled until next year. It was not voted on, so how was it “shot down”? The media is supposed to be unbiased and provide the facts… Headlines like this lead me to believe you yourself are against new and progressive deer hunting ideas.
Looks like the majority of the feedback ODWC received was either for this idea or for more progressive regulations in general. 744+363 want better deer hunting regulations of some sort in our state so open your eyes ODWC! The “other” 702 complainers must want their cake and eat it to (we all know that works great).
Oklahoma will continue to be the state our residents leave to hunt older bucks in states like Kansas and one where few non-resident hunters want to travel to.
Most of our Commissioners are old-school, their way of thinking is stagnated, and most of them only care about coons and quail. Our current deer hunting rules (rifle hunting peak rut, muzzleloader peak pre-rut, 2 buck limit, and no apr or eab’s in place) are stuck in 1985 and it is disheartening and disappointing. It is a shame you have to travel to Kansas, Arkansas, Texas, Missouri or Iowa just to hunt an older-age buck.
Since 22 other states already have guidelines in place to protect young bucks, it is only a matter of time before we have these rules in place. It is not a matter of if, but when… Glad they tabled this idea and plan to re-look again next winter.
“Shot Down” is a play of words on the hunting theme but I think it is an accurate description of what happened. Commissioners would not even vote on it, which is curious, and it has not been tabled until next year. It was withdrawn. It could be reintroduced next year but there is no intention to do so, based on what Commissioner John Zelbst told me afterward. He thinks it will be at least two or three years before it would come up again.
[...] Buck limit rule shot downNewsOK.com (blog)A proposed hunting regulation that would have limited deer hunters to one buck during the muzzleloader and gun seasons combined failed to pass the Oklahoma Wildlife Commission on Monday. Apparently, the conventional wisdom that “if it's brown, … [...]
Brad I agree. Shot down may have been a play on words but it sends a biased message to the public. If it had been voted down “shot down” would have applied, but not since it was withdrawn. Sounds like Ed himself does not agree with innovative ideas designed to benefit the deer herd and hunters in our state. What a shame.
I heard one particular part of the state was complaining about this progressive idea. They always seem the group against anything new or better that is designed to improve our deer and deer hunting. One corner of the state should not carry more weight than the sum of the rest. What a joke.
Seems as though our antiquated, “coon/quail” Commission needs a renovation.
So dozens of other states will continue to progress with conservative buck limits, post-rut gun seasons, and antler point restrictions to protect young bucks while Oklahoma is stuck in a rut with a bunch of good ol’ boys making the decisions.
Funny that people think I am against it when I wrote the column suggesting it in the first place. We are dealing with semantics. I can argue the measure was “shot down” in the rules committee before it even made it to a vote. I don’t see how that sends a biased message. That’s what happened. The bottom line is it didn’t pass and nothing changed.
Thanks Ed for suggesting our state consider more progressive deer hunting regulations. Appreciate your coverage of this very important subject that has not been given the attention it deserved since 2007 and before then, I do not know! Our state has been stagnant regarding deer management for a very long time.
My part of the state is extremely disappointed with this outcome and most people we know were/are for it all the way! Everyone in my area supported it and so did our local biologists, wardens and Commissioner. Sadly, most of the Commission is stagnated; not all of them, but most and nothing will improve until a few new members are appointed.
Such a shame the miss-informed hunters who were against this will not take the time to learn about proper deer management. We have a state full of ill-informed deer hunters and this is largely the fault of the ODWC for not doing a better job educating our state on proper deer management. I will be glad when people finally understand these rules are designed to improve deer hunting/buck age structure and help them, not hurt them! Everyone was talking “trophy” this and “trophy” that; I’ve got news for them. This rule was nowhere close to making our state a trophy-hunting state like Kansas and shame on them for putting this great idea in that category. Remember, the buck limit was going to stay 2 with the same OLD rifle season during peak rut and muzzleloader during peak pre-rut just like always.
We will not be a “trophy” hunting state until we go to aprs, eabs, move gun season to December, primitive to September, and reduce the buck limit to 1!
Looking forward to them re-evaluating this in the next year or two and passing it! The state is ready. IN FACT, 1,065 hunters are ready for some sort of change to our outdated deer hunting regulations. That number outweighs the 702 simply “against” the rule and not willing to provide at least a better alternative. Because obviously with skewed ratios, trickle rut, and a young buck age structure across much of the state, everything is out of balance. This is a biological fact no one can argue. So the ODWC needs to give hunters more incentive to shoot does, pass young bucks, and be progressive.
If hunters would stop shooting young bucks on their own and not feel the need to trip an ego switch every time they hunt to say they “got their buck” and shoot a doe for meat instead, we would not need rules like this. There is so much scientific information out there today people have no excuse to say they don’t know mature bucks are important to deer herd dynamics, breeding times, and fawn saturation/recruitment. People need to shoot more does across much of the state because our doe to buck ratios are way out of balance and this is also a big problem.
I would like to see our state move to a 1 buck limit across the board and most of the people I know agree. This would simplify everything. It is proven in several other states and their hunters love it.
Funny I hear all these hunters dreaming of hunting states like Iowa, Illinois, or Kansas, and then complaining about Oklahoma’s “bad genetics”, “poor soil”, or lack of “cropland”. YET they fight the very ideas that will give them bucks like those in Iowa etc., in their home state, on their very own property. Our bucks have the very same potential and anywhere else, they just need 3 or 4 years to grow up.
I think too many deer hunters out there worry way to much about becoming a THROPHY state. I think its appropriate to remind all hunters that are jobs are to conserve our natural resources,which means we are out there to control the population, not just to shoot a big rack. I think alot of people have forgotten that.I want to shoot a big buck just like everyone but how many hunters out there shoot there big bucks only without taking does? I think a better idea to control our deer herd would be to earn a buck tag by takin a doe. Im certain the “ego of just shooting any buck” applies to those who only go after big bucks too.
I was one of many folks not willing to seccumb to the trophy hunting craze and who spoke out against this change in buck hunting my home state. Despite some of the sentiment that only “uneducated” hunters oppose trophy rules, many of my friends and co-workers who do not support QDM style managment are wildlife/natural resource majors like myself, who have a wealth of experience in hunting and/or managing deer herds.
3 1/2+ year old bucks are not what is targeted in natural settings by non-human predators, disease, and other natural fatal events. The very young and old are the age classes that suffer most in nature. Since Oklahoma is 98% private land, those who wish to trophy hunt only can do so, or join leases with like minded folks. Those of us who want to shoot both bucks and does, and not worry about antler size or bringing in out of state hunters and watch our tag fees go through the roof, are pleased with this restraint.
There is no science to justify turning management on its head, and impacting the average hunter in place of those who want to only shoot “big bucks”. Oklahoma is already considered an up and coming, destination state, and has seen great harvests and trophies taken, despite its “backwards” harvest rules. The number of bucks and does allowed to be harvested in the eastern counties I hunt seems adequate and sustainable, despite heavy pressure.
I have also hunted in Arkansas the past 7 years and their three point rule is largely a joke. I have seen and shot the smallest and youngest age class of buck there despite this rule that dates back to the mid-90′s, and largely costs hunters opportunities at shooting a buck because of having to try and count points through dense woods or at a distance. Lots of ground checks and wasted bucks are the result in a lot of the state.
The hard hunted deer on the small acreages I hunt in Oklahoma have bigger deer and older age classes, hands down than the places I hunt in Arkansas, and no one within a couple of miles of these holdings have management plans. QDM is a strategy that promotes high-grading, and strongly favors bow hunters at the expense of rifle and muzzleloaders. This is the hunting equivilent of the way fly fishermen have skewed trout fishing regulations in the west, to the detriment of the average fisherman.
By saturating the media with pseudo-science, and an unhealthy obsession with trophy bucks, the average hunter is being squeezed out of their oppotunity to take what they consider trophy deer (any buck they consider big enough to shoot), and being forced to pay higher lease and tag fees, and compete with out of state hunters in these trophy crazy states.
I have no desire to have to pass on bucks for several years and harvest only does, so that the egos of some can be messaged, and where I might have a chance at a slightly larger buck later on. Having hunted Arkansas 3 point rule for 7 years, I know this program does not guarantee bigger deer. I hope Oklahoma does not seccumb to this self-serving QDM mindset.
Mark you said you have “NO desire to HAVE TO pass on bucks and only harvest does” (which has sound biological backing and is an excepted practice throughout the WT’s range) and then you talk about the qdm guys wanting THEIR egos messaged. Did you even think before you wrote that? Who has the ego here? Who is self-serving? Not willing to take does when our sex ratios and herd densities are out of whack across much of OK and many herds exceed the habitat’s carrying capacity? Not willing to pass young bucks? You contradict yourself completely. I find it hard to believe you have a degree in natural resources/wildlife. All the experts would disagree with your comments.
I know hundreds of hunters who were in support of this rule because it would have improved our deer and deer hunting and it is a shame people fought it. Most did not understand it was designed to help them (obviously).
This rule was not even close to being a “trophy” rule and anyone who says it was does not know much about deer hunting, deer management etc. So you are saying a rut rifle and pre-rut, single-shot RIFLE (muzzleloader) + a 2 buck limit with no apr or eab’s is suddenly a TROPHY state because one of those bucks would be archery. Really?
So disappointing that hunters in our state are clueless when it comes to deer management.
I go several years without shooting 1 buck and take several does every year. When I see a mature buck, whether he is 120″ or 150″, he is mature and THAT is what matters to me. I could care less about his rack. So you cannot paint everyone with a broad brush. I supported the idea for the balance and health of our deer herd, not big antlers. I go years without killing a single buck, take does, and I am the one that needs my ego massaged? I am self-serving because I want to see intense rut action like I have seen in Kansas but never seen here? I have an ego because I hate seeing recently-born, small fawns in September because we have 10 to 1 sex ratios, few mature bucks and a trickle rut that is boring to hunt?
No, its the guys that think they have to go back to work on Monday to brag to their ego-maniac buddies and say they “shot their buck”. Who has the ego here? I am still a man if I go home after having passed several young bucks with a fat doe in my truck. I am more proud of that than I have ever been of shooting a young buck.
This rule or other rules like it will pass, soon, just like so many other states. It is called progression.
Pseudo-science? There are so many biological reasons mature bucks are important to a deer herd none of which have anything to do with big antlers. Read a book.
I AGREE with Phillip A above in that this is an extremely disappointing outcome. I am ready for some new, young minds on the Commission and in the ODWC.
Thanks for suggesting this idea and covering it all Ed.
Thanks Ed. Appreciate the coverage.
I agree with the guys here who have purveyed their disappointment that this did not pass. Everyone I know was for it. I was shocked to see anyone oppositional to such a great idea. I guess our deer hunting will stay in the stone age another year!
I agree with Grant that often-times qdm guys like us are lumped into the antler-nut crowd and that is not fair. I am not an antler maniac, but I have hunted in states with better regs like Iowa and I can tell you it is a whole different hunting experience when you have mature bucks on the landscape. It is far better than the hunting in our state. So you oppositional guys out there are going up against better deer hunting.
I also agree that it is not me or most qdm guys I know with an “ego”. Its the guys that go against anything new and fight “the man” just to fight without really knowing what they are fighting. The buck-only guys are the ones with the “egos” and this is certainly the case when you read comments like M Eddings above. I thought buck-only guys were all over 80 years old by now and did not know how to use PC’s?
Passing on does and only hunting antlers puts you squarely in the antler-ego category. How in the world can they say a qdm guy has an ego when he shoots a doe instead of a young buck?
This is what we are up against in our backwards state. With all the information out there online and in print on deer studies and biology, you would think hunters would be smarter by now.
Sad to see our state fall further and further behind the curve when so many states are or have passed rules to increase their buck age structure.
I bet most of the hunters who was so against this great idea, are probably not even thinking about deer management or deer hunting anymore. They are drinking, fishing or watching NASCAR and could care less that the rule they fought was going to help them have better deer hunting!
I live deer management and it is a year-long thing for me and all my friends. Everyone in my county was for this and we are ashamed of our old Commissioners who tabled this biologically sound and progressive idea. Some of them did, and some did not and I hope the others are about to term out. It is 2013 and our state has the chance to move into the next century with our deer hunting; then all the idiots come out of the woodwork complaining about something they probably didn’t even take the time to learn about. They have probably never hunted in Iowa or Kentucky to see what real deer hunting is like.
I am not an antler crazy and neither are my friends or family. We shoot does every year and some years we never shoot a buck. I hate that people made this into some kind of trophy rule when that is the not even close to being what it really it. Hunters in Oklahoma are biting off their noses to feed their face. Like the guy said above, they want their cake (yearling buck antlers in a dusty box in the garage) and eat it too (big, mature bucks like Kansas has). News Flash; can’t have both!
Why do you think Kansas became such an awesome state to deer hunt? 1-Buck limit and December Rifle season. Get a clue- guys like M Eddings above are the problem. They do not know what they want, what is good or bad, or what is going to make things better. They just want to fight the “man”; whoever that is.?
The ignorance in this state will continue to keep our deer herd from reaching its potential. What a joke.
Ready for a big turnover and some young ODWC biologists and Commissioners to freshen our state’s deer regs.
BTW, M. Eddings I also highly doubt you have a degree in “wildlife/natural resources” and I am glad to see Grant above call you out. Everything you said was the opposite of what biologists and qualified deer managers promote. You should have done some research before you typed all that bologna of shooting young bucks and passing does.
If you had a degree in wildlife, you would have been for this 1&1 idea. Not against it.
[...] Buck limit rule shot downNewsOK.com (blog)A proposed hunting regulation that would have limited deer hunters to one buck during the muzzleloader and gun seasons combined failed to pass the Oklahoma Wildlife Commission on Monday. Apparently, the conventional wisdom that “if it's brown, … [...]