Who would be in favor or APR in Managed or IH areas? Why?

[96trigger]

I would because there are plenty of deer for us meat hunters. The hunting could be even better with more mature bucks running around.

Not bragging about my area, but I live in an area and hunt private land where the deer are pretty populated. When I go out, its not if I see a deer, its when. These are the areas I would like to see some changes.

[InTheNorthwoods]

I would welcome any changes meant to better manage the deer herd for natural age class ratios (and consequently bigger bucks).

APR's would not be my first choice as I think that it would create logistical problems (especially if it is not statewide) and cause an uproar with many hunters. Antler point restrictions also are not necessarily the best way of developing a natural herd, but it would help protect yearling bucks.

However, In my opinion I think we could have a similar effect by moving the season dates slightly (switching regular firearms season with Muzzleloader season maybe?) and by eliminating party hunting for bucks - and without telling people what they can or can't shoot with their tag.

But for me personally, APR's would have no effect on the way I hunt and I would appreciate any change the state implemented to try and develop a more natural herd composition. As it is right now, our state is managed for the opportunity to kill as many animals as possible and I don't think that is the best management approach for our states deer herd.

[Musky Buck]

I'd love to see AR, but I'm against it because of the young hunters as young as is it 10 years old now ? And I'd hate to have my grandpa's pass up their last chance at a buck, tomorrow isn't guaranteed for them. Our group of 20 some hunters hunt by AR standards somewhat, no yearling bucks and we've yet to shoot a buck with less than 4 on a side in the last many years as we haven't had new or young hunters join us so it's easier to do. Why, I guess because we were intensive for years, now quickly it went to a 1 deer area. In my area deer are for meat more than for the horns, I agree 90% of the bucks taken are yearlings in my area and that is frustrating somewhat, but while they are scenting up there area cleaning does,fawns, etc. my hope is the few mature bucks might like where I'm at better and move in if they're not there already. I would want to see the AR outline and how it would look before a quality judgement could be made.

[InTheNorthwoods]

For purposes of this discussion, I think it is fair to assume any APR's would follow what is already in place in certain state parks, etc. in MN.

That is a minimum number of points on at least one side (either 3 or 4 depending on location). That could mean that a buck has 3 legal 1" points and a spike on the other side and be legal in some areas. That only protects yearlings for the most part.

I would be in favor of a minimum of 4 points on at least one side. That should protect most yearling bucks.

[mabr]

I am in favor of "AR" not "APR". I dont like the points idea. To many small 8's taken if you ask me. I have seen way to many 1.5 year old 8 pointers. I may be wrong in what I believe, but isnt the purpose of this whole idea is to increase the trophy potential of our bucks as well as the age structure?

How about spread as the gauge? If its outside their ears it would be legal. Just a thought.

I know GA did this in Dooley county and after 3 years the counties around all adopted the same regulations after they seen the results. Im trying to search for what they did down there but havent found much yet. Their regulations werent to hard to follow. There was the occasional mistake by some younger hunters, but it worked for them the last I remember.

[Musky Buck]

There are so many ways to get around proper tagging of our deer. How do other states do it ? If we went to you tag your own buck so your buck tag is gone would help some. But, then you can't stop someone from finding a tag or getting one for the wife or non-hunter. If that was cleaned up AR might not be as big a topic. I agree that way to many yearlings bite the dust and many are dusted because someone saw "horns", but I don't think that chance should be taken away from young, new, or elderly hunters. Thing is so many in my area let them go but we haven't seen much of any increase in the size of bucks we are seeing, but they are also much smarter and heavily pressured and when you do finally score it's many thanks to the guys around for not taking him as a buck fawn or yearling. You share the wealth. Some years your number is called other years it's neighboring hunters. How is AR working in the Itasca State Park ? Any news on the age/herd structure ?

[BRULEDRIFTER]

I would NOT be in favor. I hunt in a once intensive gone mgmt area (180) and there is still ZERO guarentee that you will even see A deer, let alone be able to pick and choose from a herd.

Also, I feel that by going down this road you turn deer hunting into more of a sporting event then what it truely should be about..... harvesting game to feed yourself and family & living off the land. What a great way to help preserve our heritage, eh? Turning deer hunting into a complete trophy hunt sure won't sit well with the folks that are on the fence. Suddenly the antis get a lot more powerful!

Being the area I hunt is so large and the are so many thick deep swamps for deer to hide and never been shot at, I know there are no shortages of trophy bucks. HUNTING them and getting one the "old fashioned" way are the way it should ALWAYS be done.

Generally speeking, If you are in an area where you have the option of picking and choosing what you can shoot, consider yourself extremely fortunate and don't push for legislation that will take away from others. I hunt with a few old timers and you never know when there last hunt will be... I sure would hate to see them have to pass on any deer that would make their year, just so others can pursue their trophy buck eutopia agenda.

For those in favor, get proactive on other fronts! Don't go and push on legislators to change laws, get out and educate! Set up town/county meetings with other hunters. Invite both sides...hash out the differences, change opinions, open eyes, find some middle ground. By going this route I feel you would be much more successful and gain a lot more support then screaming to the law makers to make it mandatory.

[96trigger]

I like AR also, but I don't know how you would gauge it. I really don't like spread. I think most of us would agree that what we are really trying to do is keep the forks and baskets from being shot.

Wouldn't it be nice to just say, don't shoot forks or baskets and be done with it?

I am also concerned about APR resulting in some morphodite bucks getting big. Like having a large number of big 6 pointers running around. Whe have shot a few deer in the area that are missing browtines. There racks were impressive but they just didn't have them for some reason.

I don't know what the best route would be. I truly don't. I do know that there has already been a push for it down here, and that there will be more changes coming after this past seasons zone 3 change fiasco.

Thanks for your your input BRULE, I can see your points.

[Musky Buck]

I do hear what everyone is saying, the biggest change I've noticed for things going south a bit is when zone 4 went to the 9 day season, I easily had better hunting meaning more deer sightings in the 2 day season vs. the 9, I now hear similar reports from many hunting in the area. We do appreciate having more opportunity, but it's just different. The all-season tag to now anyone can muzzleload has changed things some to. We used to be able to pressure the herd for 2 days, that was it until multi zone came along, then all-season, then a 9 day season, then everyone can muzzy. 2 days of pressure to now a possible 25 days of gun pressure is a huge difference. I think the AR jury is still out until we clean up other avenues first.

[Bear55]

For those in favor, get proactive on other fronts! Don't go and push on legislators to change laws, get out and educate! Set up town/county meetings with other hunters. Invite both sides...hash out the differences, change opinions, open eyes, find some middle ground. By going this route I feel you would be much more successful and gain a lot more support then screaming to the law makers to make it mandatory.

Brule many of us have been doing this for many years now with mixed to poor results. Its not alwasy easy to teach people, especially when they are set in their ways and stubborn to no end. Sometimes you have to show people first hand what happens. There is so much evidence out there that shows us that QDM works and works well but sometimes people need a little extra push to see the benefits first hand. Other states have shown that over time approval has skyrocketed. It really only takes 1 year of sacrifice for those little spikes and forks to turn into 8 pointers. Every year after that the age class of the bucks grows a little. If people want meat there are usually plenty of does in the IH and managed areas. Again lets be clear on this, this would only be meant for IH and some Managed areas. There are plenty of Managed areas that are borderline lotto areas that should probably not be included in any APR program.

[TimR]

I've argued this every year with countless QDM proponents. I'll leave it to what BRULEDRIFTER said very well below:

I would NOT be in favor.

<SNIP>

Also, I feel that by going down this road you turn deer hunting into more of a sporting event then what it truely should be about..... harvesting game to feed yourself and family & living off the land. What a great way to help preserve our heritage, eh? Turning deer hunting into a complete trophy hunt sure won't sit well with the folks that are on the fence. Suddenly the antis get a lot more powerful!

<SNIP>

[mabr]

Looks like its going to be another winter of all of us stating our opinions again.

AR yes, AR yes, AR yes!!!!

[BRULEDRIFTER]

I see what you're saying, Bear55. I know it's tough trying to promote a complete paradigm shift to the masses. But so goes life..... with enough education and proof the change in thinking and behavior will happen.

I'm to the point on this topic, that it just don't matter to me that much. You won't find me kicking and screaming either way.

I will remain mostly against it though for these 2 reasons, however.

1) Hunting to me will always be about the traditional reason for harvesting game... food! Sure, I guess that makes me an evil meat hunter, but I find life much more satisfying to know that I have a freezer full of organically grown wild game/fish that hasn't been subject to all kinds of hormones and chemicals like the meat we buy at the grocery store.

Now, I will totally take a doe over a small buck, however, like I have stated many times, even if you hunt an intensive mgmt zone, there is NO guarentee you will see anything. I know that's the case where I rifle hunt up north. Therefore, if a deer comes around, it's gonna get shot. I would love to wait for a big guy, or a doe, but there's no guarentee that will present itself and I want the meat.

To add to the "traditional" viewpoint I have, I also have stated that making point restrictions is turning into a completely competative, bragging rights sport. It becomes a hunt for antlers! NOT a good thing to try and promote, IMO. The downward spiral goes on forever...... Being a public land hunter like I, I would think you would be a little hesitant towrds this as well. Afterall, look at the ammount of public land available in all the "trophy buck" areas in the country.... NOT MUCH! Land suddenly will be a very hot commodity and us public land hunters get squeezed even tighter, if not completely out of the game!

2)Restricting one's right to choose how THEY want to hunt and what they want from thier hunt! Everyone has THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE!

[deerminator]

I would not be in favor of them in any permit area. I would rather the DNR manage for a healthy deer population and then let me decide what buck I want to take if I am so fortunate. Pennsylvania, which has been touted as glowing success for APRS originally set out with the goal of managing its population, not to create big bucks. That was a wonderful side effect. They encouraged hunters to shoot more does through new antlerless regulations and imposed the APRs along with them. Shoot more does and less bucks so the habitat isn't so overbrowsed and destroyed, etc.

BTW, Pennsylvania hunters appear to be happy according to their game commission so if want to see a real life, detailed example of how APRs work, go to Google. Next type "antler point restrictions Pennsylvania" and go to the PDF the commission put out evaluating the success of the program. It gives a lot of detail on how it works and has impacted hunting in Pennsylvania.

I also noticed the fines for taking an illegal buck there, if its determined to be a mistake, is very minor. A few Web sites said $25 and you forfeit the deer. Couldn't determine if you burn your tag but I'd imagine you do. Still, that's a slap on the wrist for a mistake. I tried to check this out on their Web site but their hunting regs for whitetail deer are so sparse and few that its basically the bag limit, season date and legal weapon types!

Anyway, I am still not in favor of APRs but check out the document from Pennsylvania if you want a little bit more information about how APRs work in the real world.

[honker23]

I hunt 349b, I'd love to see 4 pt min. I'd like to see a 4 day buck season (3a) and a 4 day doe/buck season (3b) with 10-11 days off in-between. These deer get so much pressure with youth antlerless days, land owner permits, 9 day buck and doe with no restictions another week or more of 3b, followed by weeks of muzzys. They don't have break and too many end up in sanctuaries making it more difficult to get a deer.

APR would encourage more does taken and less immature bucks in these areas.

This should only be done in IH areas in my opinion.

[BLACKJACK]

I would NOT be in favor. I hunt in a once intensive gone mgmt area (180) and there is still ZERO guarentee that you will even see A deer, let alone be able to pick and choose from a herd.

Also, I feel that by going down this road you turn deer hunting into more of a sporting event then what it truely should be about..... harvesting game to feed yourself and family & living off the land. What a great way to help preserve our heritage, eh? Turning deer hunting into a complete trophy hunt sure won't sit well with the folks that are on the fence. Suddenly the antis get a lot more powerful!

Being the area I hunt is so large and the are so many thick deep swamps for deer to hide and never been shot at, I know there are no shortages of trophy bucks. HUNTING them and getting one the "old fashioned" way are the way it should ALWAYS be done.

Generally speeking, If you are in an area where you have the option of picking and choosing what you can shoot, consider yourself extremely fortunate and don't push for legislation that will take away from others. I hunt with a few old timers and you never know when there last hunt will be... I sure would hate to see them have to pass on any deer that would make their year, just so others can pursue their trophy buck eutopia agenda.

For those in favor, get proactive on other fronts! Don't go and push on legislators to change laws, get out and educate! Set up town/county meetings with other hunters. Invite both sides...hash out the differences, change opinions, open eyes, find some middle ground. By going this route I feel you would be much more successful and gain a lot more support then screaming to the law makers to make it mandatory.

Good post Brule. My concern is that a vocal minority will influence the DNR. Ask any deer hunter, would you like bigger bucks? And of course the answer would be yes. But then when they get the details and find out that they may only be able to shoot a deer 3 out of every 5 years, they would change their tune.

Another concern I have with antler point restrictions is the number of small bucks that would get shot and left to lay if they were mistakenly shot and didn't have the 4 point side. Some of the states out west have had that problem. In a state park hunt that is heavily monitored, people will be extra careful, but if a hunter is in the middle of nowhere and accidently shoots a 'too small buck', how many will call a Conservation officer, get a fine, and possibly lose hunting privleages??? My guess is that the majority of hunters will leave them lay.

[BLACKJACK]

I am also concerned about APR resulting in some morphodite bucks getting big. Like having a large number of big 6 pointers running around. Whe have shot a few deer in the area that are missing browtines. There racks were impressive but they just didn't have them for some reason.

The last issue of Deer and Deer Hunting had an article about this, they called it 'high grading'. Its where an APR has been imposed, lots of nice, but small 8-10 pointers were shot but the heavy, scruffy sixes remained.

[Musky Buck]

That is sticky but the first thing we all likely were told at gun safety class is to identify your target. Told yes, but deer fever that so many catch and some lose their state of rationality when a deer comes out, gun safety class doesn't prepare people for adrenaline. I think most hunters don't want to have to clearly identify the target meaning running deer or clearly checking the headgear of a buck when most bucks don't pose for you, they are in the rut and sneaking along etc. Some see 3 deer and simply just down the biggest of them. So it's the shooter type of person that will drop a non-legal deer. I still kinda think the goal could be reached even if quite a few aren't legal bucks because what's happening now is those yearlings are all killed anyway. Let's say 3 out of 100 are left to lay bucks below the AR, without AR probably 75 out of 100 would be killed. I've been on both sides of this one, I'll be a reader and not a typer.

[96trigger]

Blackjack, first, I don't know if its the minority anymore. Lou just posted on here a while back, that its getting to the 50:50 mark for hunters in zone 3.

2nd, I would hope, again, hope, )(as was also mentioned in an earlier post about Pennsylvania), that the penalty would be very minimal, mainly monetary (a fine), and not punitive (losing licnese guns, etc..).

[96trigger]

Quote:

I've been on both sides of this one, I'll be a reader and not a typer.

Yeah right

[vister]

why not just make it so you have to apply for a buck tag? and if drawn, then that tag is valid only on a buck 3" or more. instead of buying a license, and getting to shoot whatever you want, unless in a lottery zone. this way, it would appear your intentions are on shooting a buck. which would eliminate pure meat hunters. and if you're hunting for horns, you'd probably be more selective.

i just feel we should have to apply for sexed tags, or buy them individually, instead of buying an either sex tag.

dont beat me with bricks, it just my opinion

[deerminator]

Exactly, in Pennsylvania, it would appear on its face that most guys will call it in and apologize, paying their $25, giving the deer to a food shelf or whatever the game commission does with it there. Assuming wherever the APRs are enforced that you could take more than one deer, the hunter then likely learns his lesson and moves on to hunt another day. Again, not supporting APRs : ), just saying I don't think it would lead to WIDESPREAD wanton waste at least.

[96trigger]

Vister, its brainstorming, no problem with that. I am just about 99% sure that zone 3 is going to see some more changes. I will not comment on the rest of the state. But the vibes I am getting are that there is going to be changes again in zone 3. How significant, I really have no idea.

[InTheNorthwoods]

I've argued this every year with countless QDM proponents. I'll leave it to what BRULEDRIFTER said very well below:

Originally Posted By: BRULEDRIFTER

I would NOT be in favor.

Also, I feel that by going down this road you turn deer hunting into more of a sporting event then what it truely should be about..... harvesting game to feed yourself and family & living off the land. What a great way to help preserve our heritage, eh? Turning deer hunting into a complete trophy hunt sure won't sit well with the folks that are on the fence. Suddenly the antis get a lot more powerful!

Hunting as a means to feed your family is all but a thing of the past. The cost of hunting has gotten to the point that you are better off taking that money and buying meat at the grocery store. Hunting is now a supplemental food source, and a by product of the sport and recreational activity of hunting. Besides, people who feel that they truly need the meat would still be able to shoot does and qualifying bucks.

I think that the argument that people will lose opportunity is short sighted and overblown (and usually made by people who value the kill and punching their tag more than the hunt). Because after the initial "catch up" period of a year or two, there should be a significantly greater number of qualifying bucks that are available for harvest. APR is meant to protect a small portion of the herd for a short period of their life. A byproduct that many overlook or don't realize, is that more mature bucks means more competition for does and a more intense pre rut, rut, and post rut - consequently increasing buck movement. This would provide, arguably, more opportunity to harvest a buck once the herd has balanced. Currently, the mature bucks don't have to compete for does in much of the state, and the young bucks are running around led by their you know whats leading to the annual slaughter of much of the buck population.

In the end, the idea of APR's is not to lessen the number of deer, but rather to increase the number of adult bucks and balance the natural herd ratio.

[InTheNorthwoods]

why not just make it so you have to apply for a buck tag? and if drawn, then that tag is valid only on a buck 3" or more. instead of buying a license, and getting to shoot whatever you want, unless in a lottery zone. this way, it would appear your intentions are on shooting a buck. which would eliminate pure meat hunters. and if you're hunting for horns, you'd probably be more selective.

i just feel we should have to apply for sexed tags, or buy them individually, instead of buying an either sex tag.

dont beat me with bricks, it just my opinion

I think this is a great idea. Apply for a buck tag and eliminate party hunting. IMO this would be an easy way of pleasing everyone (or of upsetting everyone the least).