If you had a degree in wildlife, you would have been for this 1&1 idea. Not against it.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.