how do you feel about earn a buck?

[GreyGoose]

I agree with LKH - landowners often suffer crop/land damage from too many deer, and taking YOUNG does is the most effective way to help them - and give them incentive to let us hunt.  Bowhunters may have "earned their right" to take a buck in our OWN eyes.  The only thing I question about EAB is hunters who game the system by checking in "doe kills" online before they've harvested any deer.

[Buckeye Trad Hunter]

What if it was implimented only during the firearms season?

[buckeye_hunter]

I like Ohio's rule of only 1 buck per season. I have seen plenty of good ones on public ground with this rule in place. Earn a buck might be ok, but I don't think Ohio needs it.

[Lemont]

i will put in my 2 cents on this whole issue here where i live in sc we can purchase doe tags for 5 bucks a piece for 3 years ive hunted with my longbow praying for a shot on any deer buck or doe i have yet to have a shot on either this is an area that bow season starts on sept1 and gun season starts on sept 15 and both go out on jan 1 when gun hunting i shot all my deer in a bow situation no more than 30 yards granted im still learning buthere is the issue we can get tags for does but they are not valid until sept 15 when gun season starts also they are not valid on any game management areas in our county also there is no limit on bucks in our county this is a place where good hunters will have their freezer full by early rut by full i mean 4 to 5 deer taken with some hunters killing more than 20 deer per season i just dont understand the ethics i went more than 30 times this year bow in hand and saw 6 deer a doe and 2 yearlings the six is the same set seen twice we dont have eab here but we need something because i dont hunt racks i hunt food and enjoyment and respect the animals i am hunting but why not let the bowhunters use the tags the first two weeks and on public land i just dont understand it makes no sense id love to be able to see deer 15 out of 30 trips

[Lemont]

but we can only purchase a total of 4 tags and are not required to fill any of them

[leatherneck]

Not sure what part in Ohio your from but where we live it' swould be suicide! Our deer numbers have drastically fell over the last 3-4 years and this would only contribute to it. I'm actually hoping that the state drops our doe tags this year to only one. My opinion that is.

[arrowlauncherdj]

I think it is a stupid law/rule.  To ask a hunter, especially one shooting the kinds of equipment we tend to prefer to turn down what could potentially be the buck of a lifetime on opening day because he hasnt killed his quota of does is beyond dumb.  I know of no hunter who would turn down a doe after he shoots his buck if the shot presented, especially when they eat so much better than a rank, tough old warrior full of sinew. At least I wouldnt!

[Cyclic-Rivers]

Earn a buck is good at reducing numbers. Its a great tool and the number of hunters that actually have to turn down a  good buck is few, very, very few.


I like this tool the government is using right now.

Drought!  it will make weak fawns who will starve this winter.          

If hunters cannot regulate the population from good hunting practice the government will always step in, whether they're right or wrong, doesn't matter, they will do it anyway.

I agree with Chuck C 100% of course he and I hunt similar areas in WI. and see the same Idiocy.

[Ty-bone727]

I hate the earn a buck rule! They had this law on a few game reserves here in Mississippi a few years ago. Herd population went down quick and there were lots of button bucks taken as result of this law. People shot the first thing that resembled a doe jus so they could have a chance at harvesting a buck. There was even a few people that had really nice bucks taken away from them by game wardens because they had not killed a doe yet.

[arrowlauncherdj]

IMHO, if even one person has to let a buck walk that they would be proud of shooting archery tackle of any sort, then it is an injustice in my eyes.  If they wanted to impact the deer herd and thin the does out a bit, they'd issue several doe tags, like 5-7 tags for each licensed hunter.  If he didnt fill the max number of tags, then the next year it gets cut by 2 tags each year he doesnt meet his quota til all they get is 1 buck and 1 doe.  

If a person refuses to shoot even 1 doe, then they dont get a buck tag the next year... instead 3 doe tags, and they'd have to fill at least 2 doe tags during the season to apply for their buck tag.

This would incentivize folks to shoot does to get the numbers where the DNR wants them.  You'd still have all season to fill them, not turn down a lifetime deer to shoot a floppy ear.

Dave

[ChuckC]

Oh,  it has happened Dave.  Several times to me.  The only reason I killed a buck last year is cause they relaxed the rule, and when the number of does goes down to the point that you don't even see a deer for a dozen evenings worth of hunting, it gets pretty frustrating.

So, folks leave the area or stop hunting.  That works really well too I guess.  Then nobody kills any deer in the area.

Used to be during gun season the area sounded like a war zone and even getting a parking spot in the site parking area was tough, with spillover all along the road.  Last year there was plenty of room and very few shots at all where I hunt. My son sat in a good funnel area all day and never saw a deer, although one was shot 100 or so yards away.  

Good thing is. . .  less crowded.

ChuckC

[Cyclic-Rivers]

I agree Chuck.

Dave, by your standards, if a guy Does not have a chance to kill a doe for 3 years and then a buck of a lifetime walks past, he's again in the same situation and by law must let it walk. It's the same thing.      

At our farm in southern wisconsin after several years of "deer reduction" and "earn a buck", all I would see is 2-3 deer per season. All Bucks! when before the norm was 100-200 deer per season. (often the same deer many times over)

There always has to be a law, and there will always be shortcomings.  The problem is, if hunters do not take the opportunity to practice responsible herd management, someone else will IE government. The problem is, when someone else tells you how to do something, then we have a beef because its not the way we "want it".  The problem is there are too many "trophy hunters" and populations get out of control.

The problem is, once the state cuts adequate funding for a proper census, they use old, outdated and incorrect numbers.

If they think the population is higher than it is, and give out as many free tags as you want, well then you have guys who kill, for the sake of killing and you get dismal deer numbers.

Now that their herd is practically extinct, hunters would rather spend the same amount of Money and go on an out of state trip for the same week, rather than sit at home and see nothing.

Earn a buck, is  a great program when used properly but the state needs to cut it when it has done its job.  In wisconsin, you could carry your doe tag from the previous year. So sure, the first year it is in operation, you may have to pass the buck of a lifetime but theoretically, you have the rest of the season to make sure it doesn't happen again.

There will never be a management law that will sit well across the populous. 2 years ago, an Old timer chastised me for shooting a doe, because "I only shoots bucks", he said.

He was dumbfounded when I told him I had passed on 12 different spike bucks that year. he is stuck in an old way of thinking and will take it to his grave. Without proper education, these hunters will make up the masses. Maybe another decade or two will change things, but changing a commonly held belief is difficult.

[arrowlauncherdj]

Cyclic, my little layout there was for an area that was overpopulated... in other words, that should be the purpose for the earn-a-buck program to even be instituted... if there are no does to be shot, then it shouldnt be there in the first place.

Hey look, I frankly dont believe in the earn-a-buck system at all, and it should be left up to hunting clubs or landowners to regulate who can shoot what on the properties they lease out. Not that they own the animals, but they can at least set limits on what folks can shoot on their land access.  I believe that farmer or club membership knows better what's on their cameras, fields, and food plots than the state.  Also,no one with any common sense would shoot all the does bc you'd eventually have no deer at all but if a law states that's all you can shoot, then that's what'll get shot.

But, if the state is gonna get involved, I at least think it ought to be fair to the occasional hunters, and in 3 years, in an over-crowded area, most could connect with at least one doe and still get their trophy buck.

I agree no system is fair to all but that is the price we pay for the state owning the animals... just like in England when the nobles owned them; that caused all sorts of problems too. King's deer, lol.

Dave

[Cyclic-Rivers]

Dave,

I agree with you, I'm just burnt out from a state who cannot get it right.  

The Government could get involved without getting involved. they could hold seminars and clinics. teach hunters and landowners, but then again that would take an effort.

When I first heard of earn a buck I hated the idea. then came the next 3 years of earn a buck, which brought more and bigger bucks than I have ever seen in my life.  After that became the "I cannot see a deer to save my Life". Most hunters were frustrated. Many took the laws into their own hands by taking illegal bucks, due to wanting meat.

I think all state programs should be monitored and adjusted. In WI DNR case, it was but their premises for decision making were way off.  All they had to do was talk with sportsmen and the deer check stations from around the state. could have been much easier and less costly.

Funny how saving money can cost more, isn't it?

[arrowlauncherdj]

I hear ya man.  Alabama is overrun with does in some areas and if folks dont stop shooting 4 points, we will never have anything.  I agree that it can be very frustrating no matter where you are.

[Cory Mattson]

I support 'earn a buck' BUT I do think ALL bowhunters should be able to count a doe harvested any time within the previous year so the hunter can hunt without having to pass on a really good buck first. Forcing hunters to pass bucks so they can harvest a doe can be frustrating. And I think other weapons seasons should be held to the same standard.

[Buckeye Trad Hunter]

There are some really good points made here.  Dave, you say that you don't know any hunter that would pass on a doe after shooting a buck.  Well, you don't know some of the guys that I know.  The ones that wait until opening day of firearms season, trespass on someone elses land, set in another guy's stand then shoot a buck that someone else has been watching all year.  Then they're either done for the year or they illegally take more bucks and have other people tag them or don't tag them at all.

The problem is, you have to have these kinds of laws because you can't counbt on people to do what's right anymore.  

I'm not saying we need this rule in Ohio, I just wanderd how people elt about it.

[arrowlauncherdj]

Buckeye those are the guys who'd find their tires flat at the end of a hunt... Not to mention be kicked outa the club, at least any club i have ever been in.

[arrowlauncherdj]

Buckeye my dad has a saying... "laws and locks are for honest people"... Those folks are gonna do that no matter how many laws are set in place.  So while you are earning your buck, theyve killed 3. Deer are still dead just not on your wall.

Dave