Dept of Wildlife meeting - Part 3

Discussion in 'LOCAL OKLAHOMA TALK' started by AwShucks, Jan 9, 2007.

  1. AwShucks

    AwShucks New Member

    Messages:
    4,532
    State:
    Guthrie, Oklaho
    this starts the area on hunting.

    1.Change the number of antlered deer a hunter may harvest from three to two. This raised the most ire of any of the proposed changes. The hunters seemed to feel they were entitled to kill 3 antlered deer each year, and was quite upset the Dept wanted to reduce this limit. The biologist stated that the majority of bucks harvested was the 1 1/2 year old spike or pronghorn bucks. By reducing the number of bucks, it was hoped that bucks in this generation would be available to impregnate the does during the rut. The hunters wanted to kill more bucks, and were opposed to reducing their limits. Kinda confused me, as I thought we were talking about meat hunters and sportsmen. This reduction would not reduce the overall number of deer each hunter could take, it would just limit the antlered deer to two a year. Even the meat hunters were against this - although I can't tell why. It sounded to me like the hunters were talking about harvesting an animal just for bragging rights....yeah, i got a ten pointer. Geez, come on fellers, you need to get envolved a little more with ou football and leave the deer alone for a while.

    2. Reduce the number of antlered deer taken in an experimental deer managemnt area from two to one. I hope, based on my feelings as to what was being said, that this provision was shot clean out of the sky. They wanted to establish an area in SW Oklahoma for Trophy bucks. Sounds good, until you stop to realize that the people who benefit from the expermental management area are the property owners who all ready price the lease of their land for deer hunting well above that the average hunter can pay, the outfitters who could and would double or tripple their rates for a hunt in this area, and all the expense would be born by the state whereas the profit went to landowners and outfitters. This needs to be buried deep where it can't surface again. An example by one of the disgrutled hunters were a 5 day quail hunt was now $4600.00. Who wins in this senario.

    3. Allow the youth deer hunters to take 1 antlered and 1 non-antlered deer per year. The genaral feeling was a young adult should be allowed to take either 1 antlered deer or 1 non-antlered deer, but not two deer. I go along with this.

    4. Add the river otter to a list of animals that can be harvested in Oklahoma and set guidlines as to how, when, were, what, etc. Good legislation.

    5. Remove a mountain lion from the list of endangered sepecies in Oklahoma and allow it to be harvested if it is committing or about to commit depredation or it presence may constitue a hazaard. I think this provision is in the book due to some political influence someone has within the state. The lion doesn't even have to attack livestock...just be in the vicinity of live stock. This needs to be burried with some of the other BS this state gets into.

    The remainder of the proposals were pretty much as stated and did not require any discussion.

    If you agree with these rules, do nothing. If there are any that you in particular do not want to see enacted, you must have a letter addressed to the Commisioner, Oklahoma Department of Wildlife, PO Box 53465, OKC, OK 73152 with your name, address and phone number stating which particular paragraph you object to. If you do desire to protest any of their findings, e-mail me and I'll try to get you the correct number for the proposal.

    THESE MUST BE RECEIVED IN OKC BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS, FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2007. They have a deadline they have to meet about getting the new regulations printed.
     
  2. Katmandeux

    Katmandeux New Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    State:
    Checotah, Oklahoma
    I have a problem with any kind of trophy deer management imposed by a regulatory agency: most deer hunters are meat hunters, and tdm constrains that majority, so that a minority can "hunt horns".
     

  3. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    AWSHUCKS- I must correct you on 1 point of your discussion on last nights meeting. I was there sitting a couple of rows behind you. You made me chuckle a couple of times when you commented about crappie fishing. I am the hunter who mentioned a 5 day hunt for $4,600.00. The hunt was a deer hunt not a quail hunt.The hunt and outfitter are located in the Freedom/Waynoka area not SW Okla. To explain further, the hunters were all from out of state and had come to Okla to experience some of our huge deer that are known to live in NW Okla. The hunters,primarily from Georgia and Louisiana, do not have the same subspecies of deer that inhabit NW okla. in their area. These deer that were harvested were in the 140-165 class range. The hunters were here for several reasons,in my opinion, 1) They loved to deer hunt, 2) different area of the country to hunt 3) big deer that they could not hunt in their state, 3) low non resident license fees, 4) they could afford it. The outfitters raised his fee from 2006 of $2,600.00 to $4,500.00 in 2007 because he has a limited amount of hunters and he was going to expand his operation and construct a new lodge to help streamline his operation and make his hunters more comfortable and reduce his impact on the town where he bases his operation . The out fitter is a caring and concerned individual who wants to do everything he can to help his clients achieve their goal and enjoy their experience. I was there as a guest and had accompanied a paying customer.
    The QDMA experiment in SW Okla is just that an experiment. If a person or agency does not try new ideas they do not learn or grow. When this happens the person or agency becomes a dinosaur, and we all know what happens then. Remember, this topic last night, was not and is not in stone. It is just an idea that is open for discussion. I,personally, do not feel that if the idea is approved by the Wildlife Commision that too much will change in SW Okla. Yes some ranchers may change what they do regarding hunting, but I suspect, most will not.
     
  4. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    too continue......

    The department,IF the idea of QDMA is approved for SW Okla, will evaluate over a period of years the result of the experiment and then come back to public hearings to provide hunters with the results. The Department is continually changing the way they do things based on scientific data not emotions. Case in point, all the recomendations that were mentioned last night for fishing. These changes or improvements were based on research by their staff.

    I am getting a wee bit carried away here,sorry y'all.
    BTW I talked with Greg Duffy last night, after the general discussion, about collecting perch in traps for use as bait for personal use. He said that trapping of perch was illegal because perch are considered game fish.

    AWSHUCKS, I am sorry I did not get an opportunity to visit with you before you left. I had wanted to share some ideas with you. Maybe next time.

    catman george
     
  5. Katmandeux

    Katmandeux New Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    State:
    Checotah, Oklahoma
    I talked with Greg Duffy last night, after the general discussion, about collecting perch in traps for use as bait for personal use. He said that trapping of perch was illegal because perch are considered game fish.

    If that's an accurate quote, Duffy needs to read his own regs.:roll_eyes:
     
  6. catfishcentral

    catfishcentral New Member

    Messages:
    1,497
    State:
    OK

    It's kind hard to believe sometimes how many "experts" don't even know the own rules they are enforcing. How many different answers has this question had? Unbelieveable!!!! If THEY can't get it straight how do they think they can enforce rules. When somebody says a perch is a gamefish, I know there a idoit.
     
  7. AwShucks

    AwShucks New Member

    Messages:
    4,532
    State:
    Guthrie, Oklaho
    George, I appreciate the input. The one thing I'd like to have truthfull is anything to do with fishing and hunting. I will admit to not doing a good job in the texplanation of some of the topics listed, but I tried and with corrections as you made, I am sure the fishermen and hunters reading the thread got the appropriate information.

    I don't know if you have a copy of the 2006 fishing regs available. But on page 38, in the Glossary, Right column, it defines "Non-game fish as bluegill, redear, green sunfish, warmouth, rock bass, carp, buffalo, flathead catfish, drum, river carpsucker, paddlefish and all species not listed as game fish". Therefore, Perch is not a gamefish in Oklahoma. That is in writing. I would appreciate it you or chris would bring this information to Mr Duffy and see what his response is.
     
  8. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    AWSHUCKS- Hey, I thought you did a great job of reporting the meeting. I will bring the regs to Greg's attention and see what he says. I will report back to you.

    Be good

    catman george
     
  9. derbycitycatman

    derbycitycatman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    State:
    Kentucky
    Name:
    your first name
    If I lived in OK I would be thrilled they wanted to reduce the number of antlered deer a person could harvest. Its done wonders here in KY for trophy buck hunters, though you can still take more than one buck through quota hunts.

    Ive noticed that alot of states that complain about antler size can take more than one buck statewide, kinda connects for me. But if they are just wanting to shoot buck after buck and dont care the antler size I guess thats different.

    Another thing I dont agree with is not letting the youths take more than one deer? To me thats crazy especially since many places are experiencing dropping hunter numbers. Let the youths hunt or are all the old men scared they are going to kill all their deer?

    Thanks for listening to an out of stater.
     
  10. AwShucks

    AwShucks New Member

    Messages:
    4,532
    State:
    Guthrie, Oklaho
    I believe the concern with the youth deer hunts is that it is a program designed to get youth interested in hunting. To allow them to kill two deer on a youth hunt would be kinda irresponsible. There is not a law that prohibits a 12 year old from purchasing a regular deer tag and hunting with the big boys.... far as I know, that is.
     
  11. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    AWSHUCKS and Derbycitycatman-

    I
     
  12. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    Awshucks And Derbycitycatman-

    I
     
  13. derbycitycatman

    derbycitycatman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    State:
    Kentucky
    Name:
    your first name
    What is irresponsible about letting youths take 2 deer instead of 1? Isnt there an adult with them as well. Not a big thing or anything just dont see any harm in it. Thanks for clearing it up a little.
     
  14. catman george

    catman george New Member

    Messages:
    440
    State:
    Oklahoma
    AWSHUCKS AND DERBYCITYCATMAN- I appreciate your comments as an out of stater. The intent of the youth hunt is to get more children interested in hunting and the outdoors. I will probably out of the gene pool in 25 years and there needs to be a replacement. I personally am building 2 elevated blinds that will be heated in order to have children come to my farm, that is managed for whitetail deer, and let them attempt to harvest their first deer. Some of the children that have come are ill equipped and without warm insulated clothing. One child in particular proudly told me he had his insulated clothes to wear. It turned out he had a sweat shirt, flannel shirt and camo overalls. I dropped him and his Dad off at 6:00Am and the temp was 30 degs. I shook my head and knew i would see them at the cabin soon. At 8:30 AM they were back at the cabin thoroughly chilled. They left shortly afterwards, it was a 3 day hunt. I vowed never to see that happen again. They saw an 8 point and a nice doe but did not take a shot and the range was only 35 yards.
    Landowners and hunters must participate in helping the next generation enter and enjoy the outdoor experience. I am investing several hundred dollars in materials to make something wonderful happen for kids.

    catman george
     
  15. derbycitycatman

    derbycitycatman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    State:
    Kentucky
    Name:
    your first name
    Here in KY we also have a youth hunt but dont know the particulars. I just didnt like youths only getting one deer out of a possible 3 day hunt, it could be that way here too. It seems like its you got your deer now go home. Anyways thats enough of my ramblings as I dont want to interfere with any progress you guys might make because your arguing with me.

    George, just an idea but maybe having some old sleeping bags to let them borrow so those unprepared may be able to hunt a little longer. But heated stands would probably work better.
     
  16. Larry Collier

    Larry Collier New Member

    Messages:
    149
    State:
    Wagoner, Oklahoma
    I have responded to the previous posts three times now and each time I deleted my comments before posting. Once I read them I thought better of the words I chose and felt others may be offended.

    Let me just say that I question the "experiment" in the SW part of the state. Why does Oklahoma need the experiment when there is so much valuable data already available from other states? Maybe I'm being paranoid but this thing sounds a little fishy to me. Of course if I were an outfitter and the state wanted to do an experiment where I would reap the majority of profits I might already be expanding my operation and raising my rates, especially if I was assured in advance it would be done!

    Laws and regulations that contradict each other (the bluegill question) will continue as long as the leadership remains ignorant of the contradictions. If the contradictions are pointed out to the leadership and they choose to ignore the contradiction they are supporting bad law. If you have any law that is contradicted by another you have two bad laws! One or the other must be either ammended or eliminated to result in good law. You cannot prosecute bad law!!

    An example would be the pvc limbline question. It is illegal to use pvc as a limbline, but you can hang a yoyo on that piece of pvc and now it's legal. Sounds contradictoray but "it is what it is." At least there is a definitive physical difference in the two which is obvious and enforcable! Well sorta. In my opinion the difference between the two is merely technical. Another situation where lawmakers probably have no idea what either one actually is or how they work.

    I gotta stop there before I get back to embarrassing myself and offending some people.
     
  17. jlingle

    jlingle New Member

    Messages:
    1,036
    State:
    Altus, Okl
    Well, here I sit in SW Oklahoma and I'm looking at being cut from a 3 buck limit down to 1 buck per year.

    Why, I might ask would they be doing this and who will benefit? Well, eventually I am going to "benefit" if conventional wisdom holds true and more bucks are actually out there for the taking. Let me tell you what "will" happen though, not what the state thinks will happen. What will happen is the same guys who kill bucks every year will continue to do so, regardless of method taken, they will get their bucks. Notice I said "bucks" not buck. They just won't check them in. It's a no-brainer for the average poacher. The new regs are gonna provide ample opportunity for poachers and outfitters to both continue to do what they do and reap the rewards, while everybody else tries to actually follow the rules and only take one buck. The average sportsman will get the shaft again.

    Don't believe me? Come down to SW Oklahoma during rifle season, and I'll show you where the road hunters drive their tires off. They'll shoot 4-6 bucks a year (just during rifle season,) and the game wardens don't do a damn thing about it. It's stupid. If I can spot a poacher after his 3rd lap around my section, don't you think a warden oughta be able to do the same? We have one game warden per county, and I admit that they're probably worked to the bone during rifle season...... but this year during the 16 day gun season I never saw a single warden. Guys, I hunted my hump off for 16 days and never saw one, isn't that weird?

    I guarantee you that this "quality deer management" crap is gonna pass and be implemented in my county (jackson). Why? The reason we have such big bucks here in SW Oklahoma is because our deer herd is WAY below the land's carrying capacity. Why screw that up? Makes no sense to me. I'm all for a 2 buck per year quota. Who would want to shoot more than 2 bucks anyway? But to cut it all the way down to 1 buck per year just stinks of greed to me. I'd like to see them implement a "shoot a doe first" system. Before you're allowed to take a single buck, you've got to check in a doe. Heck, make people check in 2 does I don't care. If they wanna do something to improve the hunting, there it is. Implement that one and reduce our buck limit to 2 bucks per year. I guarantee you that we'd see more big bucks every year if we did that because the big boys would have to work their tails off to find estrous does during the rut. If there's a tub of estrous does to pick from, then they don't have to go far to find one. Makes sense to me.

    In case you're wondering, I've shot 1 buck in the last 2 years. Why do I care if it passes? Because I love to hunt, and I'd love the opportunity to take 2 good bucks if I saw them during the same season.

    Jerrod
     
  18. Katmandeux

    Katmandeux New Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    State:
    Checotah, Oklahoma
    I'm 59 years old.

    The last time I was checked by an Oklahoma Game Warden, I was 14.
     
  19. AwShucks

    AwShucks New Member

    Messages:
    4,532
    State:
    Guthrie, Oklaho
    I was checked twice just last year. Once at a lake in Logan County and once at the tailwaters of Kaw dam. I don't know how it works now, but it used to be during rifle season, wardens from areas of the state with low deer populations were sent to areas of high deer density. I TRY to see the good in everyone, but I firmly believe it is like Jared has said. I, unfortunately, just do not beleive that most hunters are the law abiding citizens we would like them to be. When the doors of pickup trucks are modified to hold the two hind legs of a deer, there is not much honesty being displayed. Unlike George, I do not know of any land owner which has basically said, come out and hunt my place. The most of them say, sorry, I've leased my land out to a group from the city. We as sportsmen, are losing out.
     
  20. Larry Collier

    Larry Collier New Member

    Messages:
    149
    State:
    Wagoner, Oklahoma
    One of the old time game wardens, Tabor Myers who is now retired, loved to tell a story about catching a poacher. In his story he told about how in the middle of the night he and another game warden watched a poacher head into the woods toward where he (Tabor) was watching so he lay down alongside an old fallen tree. The poacher got closer and closer as Tabor listened to the footsteps and the next thing he knew the poacher was on the log and stepped off right on Tabors back! Tabor said the guy was peacefully arrested (he had deer in his pickup) and appologized for stepping on Tabor.
    I would say that we need more men like Tabor, but he would be the first to say that he didn't do anything that others hadn't done and aren't still doing today.
    The next time a fish and game warden happens along keep in mind these guys are doing all they can, and more!