Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Arkansas Deer Management Plan' started by Gooch, Jan 17, 2008.
The only thing I see is there will be a lot of dog hunters that will be upset in the lower Arkansas counties. The only other question is like for say for instance why was the Gulf Costal Plain not include in the first buck of choice? I know it was suggested that a width requirement instead.
The "first buck of choice" option would basically result in the exact same outcome as removing ALL antler restrictions and stepping back to shooting any buck you choose.
Not a very wise choice to those that are trying to advance/improve the buck age structure or at least, hold it steady at the point it is now.
That move is only a personal choice that has no sound biological advantage. The majority of the harvested antlered bucks would be the yearlings...same as it was thirty years ago. That is not good.
If the rest of the state wants to deplete the age line of their bucks, that is their choice. I would hate for our area to follow suit, as we are just now realizing some advancement in the age of our bucks.
Now going with first buck a "4-on-one-side", second a "buck of choice"...I could live with.:wink:
Yes I do agree it is a personal choice but like around the house there has been nothing but scrub bucks. There are a a few that has been taken but not all that many. I also know poachers account for a lot of decient bucks. I know everyone can't have it the way they want it and compromise have to be the order of bussiness. But what ever the rules I still plan on enjoying myself in the woods and do what I am asked. When the three point rule started it was doing good around here but in the last three years it seems to be a decline in this area can't speak for other places.
More BS from the Arkansas Game and Fish (New and Improved Deer Management Plan)
WHY was a majority of this meetings "dots" results placed after "eliminate 3-point rule" and "stop baiting" in order to arrive at what the Deer Team wanted to show as "Highlights"in their report.
Just proves that the meetings were a farce...period....as were the "dot" thingy...and as was said previously..."they will not care what the public wants".:censored:
Just 114 dots for "dog hunting" that were relegated to third spot...kinda proves the point on "dots".
The dots were from a group of dog runners at the meeting. I would not figure a determination would come from their actions. AGFC posted the actual results of where the dots landed but it was clear that most of group stood right in front of the posted and put their dots on all at once.
The deer plan is not going to please everyone. Some people would gripe even if they wrote the plan and the AGFC accepted it word for word.
Right...just like most of the "shorten gun season", "move gun season" dots were almost all placed by bow hunters who want the woods to themselves.:wink:
Game and Fish could tell some of you that a fresh cow patty floating in a their punch bowl is really a large brown marshmallow and you would drink right up...:fit: :fit:
Guess that is why about two out of three of the hand picked "advisers" no longer are participating...
Could be.....I wasn't one of the advisory members. I'm not whining about what I want or what they "should" do on a message board. I'm not the one that gets the if my name gets mentioned.
By the way, you got marshmallow on your lip.
You will never whine about "what they do"...that is the point...you will wait until it is too late...then ***** about it..
It is an open forum and Cory reads it. He is welcome to debate and give his views....as are we all.
You are a real comic...if you think I DRINK THEIR PUNCH...as you and a few others seem inclined to do.
Do you know what happened at the Ozark meeting where the one table of "shoot-em-all" hunters put their dots on the "remove all antler restrictions" thingy. Real valid management thing, them dots...:smack:
Post a few Management Plan facts and we will discuss them.
CP, you have never and will never hear me. Everybody hears you and nobody really cares. I'm not real sure why I even got in this post. I'm just someone else for you to disagree with. Don't compare me to others when you don't know where I stand.
By the way, Yes, I was at the Ozark meeting.:wink:
He stands for two Buick limits, I do know that.. :wink: :biggrin:
I never even have a one Buick limit...:thumb:
And puddle..as far as you saying.
I think you included this comment in your first post where you attempted to refute all my previous posts on this thread and "compared" me...kinda..turn about.
Now, would someone wish to discuss the actual issues of this thread.
Theres no way in hell a width requirement would work in south Arkansas. Just not enough time when a deer is walking between a fire lane in a pine thicket to figure out how wide he is
I'm thinking a first buck of choice will not do as much damage as some think. We are at a place now where the majority of serious hunters realize that waiting is the most productive angle there is for harvesting a mature buck. Having said that, someone has to take a few of the young bucks out of the equation too....otherwise you are building an imbalance in favor of young bucks. You have to think about the whole deer herd[family]. When you concentrate only on one aspect of that family for harvest, you push forward and incorrect imbalance by letting all the immature deer go free. Now....we do have a youth hunt that could resolve part of that mistake, but for some reason, the kids are all harvesting B&C 8s and 10s......when you would surmize that "buck of choice" would naturally mean they are taking spikes and scrub bucks. But who's doing the picking? The kid or his mentor?? Anyway....it's just my opinion.~john
I agree with alot of that John.
I have said it before and say it again, the delta did not need the 3 point rule when it was put in place. We had big bucks before it and we're now seeing smaller bucks in some areas.
We were doing like it was intended, we were killing a few young bucks, a few middle age bucks and a few older bucks before the 3 point rule, and now we are left with big cow horn spikes and big 4 points, even the 6 point I killed this year is what we have left to breed the does.
Yeap we have high graded our buck herd.
Oh yea I forgot "they" say you can't do that. Bull butter.
:highfive: Couldn't of said it better myself :thumb:
What they don't realize is the amount of hunters we had 20 yrs ago compared to today. It's not that the three point rule has hurt anything genetically it is the fact that some places are just over hunted. Make a 4 on one side rule and the harvest will go down (which is a good thing concerning bucks). The second buck of choice will hopefully put the culling in the more knowledgable hunters hands. This in return should result in smart choices being made concerning cull bucks. 99%of bucks people think are genitically challenged are just young deer or have some sort of injury in which they will recover from the following year.
As far as the presentation :thumb: It is very well put together and easy to comprehend.
Dodgie...count me as one of the leaders of that "they" group. Not in the few years that the APR's have been going on. You may need to cull the doe with "bad" genetics for a few years to balance things out...
Maybe you over hunted your habitat. That could make more sense...available quality food sources will have much more to do with antlers (in AR) than genetics.(any one of the three factors, when missing, can change antler status))
Like I said...your area does not concern me as far as deer management goes. South Arkansas does.
Well said MB...:up: