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.