Welcome to TheOhioOutdoors
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Login or sign up today!
Login / Join

Antler Point Restrictions

#21
They are trying to do that in Michigan. Some areas like the UP and NW lower peninsula have had them for many years. The UP they get a lot of flack from the locals who still have the brown it's down mentality. The NW lower is where the proof is in the pudding on how well they work. They have a lot of the locals convinced how well they have improved the quality of the herd and the hunt. Elsewhere they are looking at the Thumb area which is where I live. I would love to see it happen as that is a large reason I stopped hunting Michigan. Not just the fact of less good bucks but more in the fact that with 2 buck licenses everyone shoots the first buck that shows up and then the second (under an APR) is usually barely a legal buck to finish out their season. Noting wrong with it but I would love to see people have to slow down and think for just a moment before killing every buck that seems to go by.

JMHO Ohio has done it right with the one buck tag and education. So many hunters these days in Ohio would rather pass the small buck and extend their season.
 
Likes: Sgt Fury

Fletch

Active Member
Supporting Member
1,910
1,076
45
#22
Best thing ever happened to the Pa. deer herd is when Gary Alt implemented antler restrictions... A lot of decent bucks now being harvested in Pa. yearly... Even in Jersey some zones have antler restrictions to 3 on one side and nicer bucks are coming out of these zones... Would it be good in Ohio??? Not sure as Ohio is a one buck state and a lot of the hunters already practice QDM... Except for the Amish... Here in Jersey we allow way too many bucks to be killed... I would really love to see a reg passed that if you harvest a button buck you MUST TAG IT WITH A BUCK TAG...
 

Outside

Junior Member
42
69
12
#23
Having lived & hunted in NY (with it’s strict rules on harvesting deer) I’m not sure how more regulation would matter (other than providing for additional fines). More deer are shot in NY than Ohio year over year, even with excessive regulation.

My thoughts aren’t well reasoned, but they are mine, nonetheless. FWIW.
 

bowhunter1023

Administrator
Staff member
Site Admin
40,644
3,024
177
Appalachia
#24
I just think it would be beneficial to the kids.
Do you mind elaborating on this? Is there some intrinsic "reward" awaiting the kids that is not already present in the opportunities this state provides?

Thankfully, Ohio avoided the cultural issues that plagued PA and WV for generations when it came to "brown and down" and "gotta fill every buck tag" and "only pussies shoot does" and so on. You see that mentality ingrained in many a hunter from those two states and that's why (among other genetic and habitat issues) the trophy potential was non-existent in both states for decades. Ohio is blessed with more fertile soil, Canadian genetics, one buck per season and generally speaking, a hunting culture that differs in many ways from our neighboring states. There is absolutely no reason to implement antler restrictions in Ohio other than ego and selfishness in my opinion.

Start with why, right? So I welcome someone to pitch me a convincing "why"...

 

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#25
Do you mind elaborating on this? Is there some intrinsic "reward" awaiting the kids that is not already present in the opportunities this state provides?

Thankfully, Ohio avoided the cultural issues that plagued PA and WV for generations when it came to "brown and down" and "gotta fill every buck tag" and "only pussies shoot does" and so on. You see that mentality ingrained in many a hunter from those two states and that's why (among other genetic and habitat issues) the trophy potential was non-existent in both states for decades. Ohio is blessed with more fertile soil, Canadian genetics, one buck per season and generally speaking, a hunting culture that differs in many ways from our neighboring states. There is absolutely no reason to implement antler restrictions in Ohio other than ego and selfishness in my opinion.

Start with why, right? So I welcome someone to pitch me a convincing "why"...

Well if you have a bunch of neighbors with the it’s brown it’s down attitude. Letting a few of these bucks live may present a better opportunity for kids.

Just the same as letting some of these bucks get an extra year of life in may make them smarter.

I’m not against anyone killing what they want. I’m not saying that what so ever. Heck in one of my last posts different thread, I told my guys shoot a small buck if you see it over a doe.

I’m also not against trying new things to make things better. I would like to some one to convince me, that this wouldn’t help. Obviously it would. Cause a dead deer you never see the following year. Agin tho, it could just be certain months of season. I’m open to new ideas.
 

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#26
Then you would probably be in favor of a point restriction that only allowed kids to shoot bucks with antlers in excess of 8 points. No harvest of bucks over 8 points by adults by any means or seasons?
No not at all. Kids should be able to shoot what ever they want. As far as adults maybe 8 points or outside of its ears. Either or. Maybe as I stated just certain months of season. I dunno. I’m open to new ideas.
 

bowhunter1023

Administrator
Staff member
Site Admin
40,644
3,024
177
Appalachia
#27
I can grasp that logic a little better than I could the original statement. I'd be curious to see the research (if it exists) that show how antler restrictions impact buck mortality. I would imagine it would be a net positive, but you never know.
 
Likes: Floki

bowhunter1023

Administrator
Staff member
Site Admin
40,644
3,024
177
Appalachia
#28
I guess my counter to that logic would be this: If less bucks are killed as a result of restrictions, is there an increase in doe harvests that offsets the net increase in bucks? And if so, the increased doe harvests should have a net negative effect on herd numbers, so we actually robbed the youth of opportunity, particularly in the most killable part of the herd.
 

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#30
I guess my counter to that logic would be this: If less bucks are killed as a result of restrictions, is there an increase in doe harvests that offsets the net increase in bucks? And if so, the increased doe harvests should have a net negative effect on herd numbers, so we actually robbed the youth of opportunity, particularly in the most killable part of the herd.
True ,very,very true. Guess it would only work if you were only allowed one doe. I’m sure tho there are many people who pass the small bucks and shoot a doe anyhow. It’s a double edged sword.
 
Likes: bowhunter1023

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#31
I also think depending on where a fella hunts.How things are in their neck of the woods. Ultimately makes up their mind on issues like these.

I think places and they do exist that have been pounded out harder than a Vegas hooker. They would agree with antler restrictions. Versus places where things are good.
 

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#33
It’s all fubard, When you look at the numbers and the Dow says well 80 percent of people only kill one deer. Or what ever it is. It makes it hard to get anywhere with those numbers. I personally find it hard to believe.
 
#34
I guess my counter to that logic would be this: If less bucks are killed as a result of restrictions, is there an increase in doe harvests that offsets the net increase in bucks? And if so, the increased doe harvests should have a net negative effect on herd numbers, so we actually robbed the youth of opportunity, particularly in the most killable part of the herd.
Pa has more of a control on the doe harvest than Ohio. THey have a allocation of tags each year for each WMU.
 
#35
LIke I said in my original post I have mixed feelings about the antler restrictions. I was curious about what people from another state without would have opinions about it. Just some facts about PA's.

1. About 2/3 of hunters like/approve of having AR's. Wasn't that way when they implemented it, but after a few years alot of people like it.
2. Success rates before and after AR have remained about the same. This makes sense since the segment of the population that wasn't legal last year is most likely legal this year.
3. AR's really aren't about making trophy whitetails. PA produces some good bucks, but it hasn't turned the state into a Stark County yet with a B&C buck behind every tree.
4. I agree that PA with our high hunter density needed AR probably more than Ohio does.
5. PA has been a 1 buck per hunter state forever that I can remember.
 
#36
Do you mind elaborating on this? Is there some intrinsic "reward" awaiting the kids that is not already present in the opportunities this state provides?

Thankfully, Ohio avoided the cultural issues that plagued PA and WV for generations when it came to "brown and down" and "gotta fill every buck tag" and "only pussies shoot does" and so on. You see that mentality ingrained in many a hunter from those two states and that's why (among other genetic and habitat issues) the trophy potential was non-existent in both states for decades. Ohio is blessed with more fertile soil, Canadian genetics, one buck per season and generally speaking, a hunting culture that differs in many ways from our neighboring states. There is absolutely no reason to implement antler restrictions in Ohio other than ego and selfishness in my opinion.

Start with why, right? So I welcome someone to pitch me a convincing "why"...


I didn't know that Ohio hunters were so high class. Hmm. That isn't exactly what I have seen in my part of Washington County. :ROFLMAO:
 
#37
It’s all fubard, When you look at the numbers and the Dow says well 80 percent of people only kill one deer. Or what ever it is. It makes it hard to get anywhere with those numbers. I personally find it hard to believe.
I'll buy it, just for the pure fact that there a alot of guys who only gun hunt. If you only have 12 days to kill a deer, and you're on a heavily pressured spot, I can see the lack of deer harvest. Plus, same with bow, if you don't have the time, you don't kill. I think this group is about as a pretty hardcore dedicated group of hunters. Maybe not your usual hunter demographic. We're the odd balls as far as hunting time & ability. Just my shithouse opinion though.
 

hickslawns

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
31,387
1,819
148
NW Ohio
#38
No not at all. Kids should be able to shoot what ever they want. As far as adults maybe 8 points or outside of its ears. Either or. Maybe as I stated just certain months of season. I dunno. I’m open to new ideas.
My 153" 14pt wasn't outside the ears? The 5-6yr old 6-7pts I've seen in the past may not qualify. The 1.5-2.5yr old my cousin shot this year WOULD have made your standards because it had 8pts. I'm happy as heck he took some meat home and had a good hunt. Honestly though it had the genes to be a 150" 8pt in a couple years. Guess I see too many exceptions to the rule to stand behind it. Kids can shoot whatever they want now. We eat 2 deer a year. If I couldn't find a buck meeting the regulations I would be in a quandry as to whether to shoot a second doe or not every year. I don't know. I'm not seeing AR helping us. Just my opinion.
 

Floki

Junior Member
446
516
26
#40
I'll buy it, just for the pure fact that there a alot of guys who only gun hunt. If you only have 12 days to kill a deer, and you're on a heavily pressured spot, I can see the lack of deer harvest. Plus, same with bow, if you don't have the time, you don't kill. I think this group is about as a pretty hardcore dedicated group of hunters. Maybe not your usual hunter demographic. We're the odd balls as far as hunting time & ability. Just my shithouse opinion though.
Well if that’s a fact, then there’s no solution to fixing the decling herd.

Yet when it was one buck one doe for so many years before the 6 tag limit. Things were thriving. How did that happen? If people were only taking one deer? Why is it not happening now?